Tyrannos flying military car concept avoids road obstacles... by flying
By Laura June 
posted July 5th 2010 11:03PM
posted July 5th 2010 11:03PM
The idea of a flying car is probably the most stereotypical emblem of "the future" anyone can possibly offer up -- but we never really tire of it regardless. Logi AeroSpace is the latest start up to revive those fantasies, and as you can see from the concept shot above, they're aiming high. Called the Tyrannos, the newest flying car to come on our radar is a four-wheeler that has four small rotary wings to get it off the ground. The car is designed to be road and air-friendly, meaning that it can take off from the road, avoiding obstacles in military situations, with a maximum height of around 1,000 feet, the car would seat four and ideally take almost no special training -- meaning you wouldn't have to be a pilot to drive / fly one. The company has pitched the idea to DARPA , where many military projects get their first breath of life, so we'll keep our eyes peeled for any developments on this one.
No need for a pilot's license; you're only a thousand feet up. In free fall, you'll have plenty of time to avoid smashing into things on the ground. Nearly nine seconds worth of leisure problem-solving...
@BuzzMega Damn strait, if the idiots on the road are flying, I'm going to stay at home, maybe also fortify it, from crashes...
@BuzzMega
Avatar is here.... Skynet is pleased....
@PavelAK
Only women will be required to take special training and licensing.
Sorry ladies, but you suck ass at driving and you know it. No no no, it's not misogyny. You truly all are worse at driving that your male counterparts.
@GeneralThade Ever notice that people who are certifiable racists always go out of their way to deny that they have a racist bone in their body?
So too with misogynists. But at least he got the spelling right.
The idea isn't impossible, but no training? Enough people have problems driving in 2 dimensions, 3 would be murder (for the masses)...
@Madcat "Military Car Concept". This isn't for the masses, its for skilled soldier types.
@Madcat Oh, and remember, it's not 'murder', it's 'manslaughter'. ;)
@NickAVV
I've always thought 'manslaughter' sounds much worse than 'murder'.
@NickAVV
Everything you use today used to be a military only product. If the military gets this, the mass public will get it 10 years after.
@NickAVV
Everything you use today used to be a military only product. If the military gets this, the mass public will get it 10 years after.
@samisax
¿really? well, then i guess my one-seat supersonic plane and my nuclear tactical submarine might be a little overdue, since their military counterparts had been around for the last 50 years.
No, not all military grade products turn out to be mass consumer products. For starters, consumer goods need to be profitable, while military goods don't (specially if you're on the other side).
@Hamaki
If you could pay for a nuclear sub and a supersonic plane, you could buy one or both. Well, nuclear technology isn't perfect yet, and the world has basically given up on it.
Most consumer products today have some sort of slightly outdated military inventions. That, my son, is undeniable.
I wouldn't trust tiny props to hold me in the sky, especially with a giant hole in my car. Where does the engine go anyways? There's no way for the powertrain to get the the big downfacing one.
@engadgetcomexcludeengadget
Could be using something like this Rim Driven Thruster:
http://www.marinelog.com/DOCS/NEWSMMV/2005nov00150.html
is al gore inventing this too?
@ipodboy61 nope, kevin costner
money pit
▄██████████████▄▐█▄▄▄▄█▌
██████▌▄▌▄▐▐▌███▌▀▀██▀▀
████▄█▌▄▌▄▐▐▌▀███▄▄█▌
▄▄▄▄▄██████████████▀
I was expecting something with rocket boosters.... but I guess this may work too.
@TenaciousJ728
They should go all the way and make Vertibirds. The Enclave RULES!
Not feasible until we have true auto-pilots. I'd give it some 30 years
@Leobons
I totally agree. I don't want anything flying over my head that isn't controlled by either a skilled trained pilot or a fancy (non skynet) computer
Cool
How many MPG does it go? Sorry, I gotta to say it...
Looks like something from a 1940's future expo.
This is what you get when you combine the worst ideas of aeronautics with the most ugly rendering I've seen for a while... I can't believe that this is supposed to be real or that anybody is investing in this.
This design has written FUGLY all over it. It crashes as soon the front propeller fails, it breaks when driving over a bumper, it gets stuck as soon as it leaves a perfect road, it can't carry significant weight and it hasn't capacity.
There are WW2 planes that would perform better on a road than this thing.
@Eli Haj He does have a point, there's no way that thing could deal with rough terrain with suspension that low. I can't think any war zones that still happen to have roads that are in good condition.
@Kabe I'm no aeronautic engineer but I can safely that design will not fly. Those 4 fans MIGHT be able to lift that craft, DOUBTFUL it would lift that craft with a passenger, and would be IMPOSSIBLE to turn those 3 fans and move forward without it crashing back to earth.
Looks like someone playing around in AutoCAD got carried away and threw physics out with the bathwater.
@Eli Haj
If I know how it performs? You bet. It has zero security if the front rotor looses power (quite contrary to a helicopter), the wheels are a joke.
Do I think that the military cares about the look? You bet... not for the sheer beauty of it, they don't care about decoration. However, they are looking for the beauty of efficiency. What I see here is the sheer ugliness of inefficiency.
@sweet greggo part deux
I am an aeronautical engineer, but don't worry, you don't have to be to know that this won't fly, and that this company won't go anywhere.
Tech blogs are notorious for jumping on press releases from these tiny companies and blowing things out of proportion, these guys probably just have a few patents on the propulsion technologies featured here and are just after a way to gain some interest by suggesting a possible use. This thing won't be built.
But still, it sure is fun to pick holes in people's CAD mock ups.
My favourite here is that, the blades of these fans do not appear to have been mounted in any way to the fan. And the wingtip fans do not appear to be mounted to the wing at all.
A single failure of any of those fans would almost certainly take the whole aircraft down. There is no sign of any powerplant at all. All the airflow downstream of the nose will be hugely disrupted thanks to a lovely great ducted fan in the nose.
Oh, and this is 4 years away. Lol.
having six fans would work better
This was drawn by an artist, not an engineer.
@SiXiam
If this is an "artist", I'm Leonardo.
we already have Air Force One and Marine One, this could be Secret Service One ...next time there is a grassy knoll ahead simplyhop over it
These fixed wing ideas are nuts.
They should be thinking auto-gyro.
@savagemike Totally agree. Moreover, autogyro rotors can be easily folded to next to nothing, as opposed wings. Wings can be folded, but not to nothing.
It says "Marines" on the top but has an Air Force logo on the side. Really? You're pitching a military project and you can't even get THAT right?
@Triscuit, not to mention the Seattle Seahawks logo on the front.
Oh wait, those are headlights?! LOL…
Seriously, I would've found this more believable if it was a Winnebago with wings.
@anonimo
"Seriously, I would've found this more believable if it was a Winnebago with wings."
At least that has prior art. This thing is stupid. What the fuck would you use this for in a military application? This looks like things I used to doodle in middle school.