RE: AeroMobil 3.0: Time For Tea?
RE: AeroMobil 3.0: Time For Tea?
Thursday 6th November 2014

AeroMobil 3.0: Time For Tea?

Cooler than Scaramanga's AMC Matador, this flying car actually looks smart in both configurations



We've run the occasional story on flying cars on PH, but pressing the 'go live' button has generally been accompanied by a bit of a wince because everything that's come out so far in this field has been either terrible looking as a car or terrible looking as a plane. Quite often they've been both at the same time, even for those possessed of three nipples and a golden gun. So it makes a pleasant change to be able to bring you the AeroMobil 3.0, arguably the first genuinely attractive dual-medium air-ground vehicle.

The Slovakian company responsible for the 3.0 is no fly-by-night operation. Development of the first AeroMobil, the 1.0, began in 1990. That was very much a plane that could sort of drive on the road, if you didn't mind a Reliant Robin wheel format and a potentially worrying absence of wings.

Rear window demist system a tad extreme
Rear window demist system a tad extreme
The AeroMobil 2.0 was a 15-year project that came much closer to motoring reality with a recognisable four-wheel chassis and more practical-looking passenger accommodations. By way of an interim 2.5 model, founder Juraj Vaculik has finally debuted the 3.0 at the Pioneers Festival in Vienna - and to our untutored eyes at least, it (she?) looks like a real goer.

Powered by the 81hp four-stroke Rotax 912 four commonly used in the light aircraft biz, the 3.0 has claimed top speeds of 124mph-plus in the air and 100mph-plus on the road. Air range is 430 miles at 15 litres of pump petrol per hour, while road range is 540 miles at eight litres per 100km, which is as near as dammit 35mpg.

As you can see from the vid, the AeroMobil certainly doesn't look out of place on public roads. Variable-angle wings give it short takeoff ability, and it's happy landing on grass strips, which should be of interest to powerfully-built PH director types. The final iteration will most likely come with handy features like autopilot and a parachute safety system. No word yet on price or availability, but the fact that it's now in a regular flight testing programme is the best hint that this is a real commercial prospect.

There's a telling Henry Ford quote on the AeroMobil site. "Mark my word: a combination airplane and motor car is coming. You may smile, but it will come." He probably didn't expect it to take 70 years, but the best things in life are usually worth waiting for.

Vid here.

[Sources: AeroMobil, JamesBondLifestyle.com]

Author
Discussion

mikeg15

Original Poster:

287 posts

217 months

Thursday 6th November 2014
quotequote all
And how many licences, permits, approvals and inspections does one need every year to operate something like this ?

rob.e

2,862 posts

295 months

Thursday 6th November 2014
quotequote all
I read that article and thought "why not just have a good aeroplane and a good car rather than trying to build something that works well as neither".

.. but then i watched the vid - it does look very cool! smile

Sway

32,326 posts

211 months

Thursday 6th November 2014
quotequote all
Saw this on Facebook.

Really like this, even if it is the preserve of the well heeled yet slightly eccentric!

Could imagine someone living on the IoW using it to commute to London!

Gorbyrev

1,170 posts

171 months

Thursday 6th November 2014
quotequote all
The world's a better place with people trying to achieve the technically challenging. Great concept. Did giggle at the James Bond lifestyle bit. In the real world the James Bond lifestyle surely means getting shot at regularly and taking occasional trips the genito-urinary medicine clinic for some anti-biotics.

vz-r_dave

3,469 posts

235 months

Thursday 6th November 2014
quotequote all
doogz said:
Always thought these were a bit pointless.

You can't land it any old place, it needs to be at an airfield.

So you may as well just have a car, and keep it there. The only benefit to one of these is that you don't have to swap vehicles, from your good little aircraft, to your nice fast car. Instead, you have to transform your not-so-great aircraft into a crap, long car, which will take longer than just hopping into something else.
Yeah because Engerwand is the owny pwace in the world........ There are places in the world where you can't park your 'nice fast car'up and leave it.

unpc

2,969 posts

230 months

Thursday 6th November 2014
quotequote all
scratchchin I commute from Essex to just outside Coventry airport regularly. This could be perfect for me if only I could find a parking space long enough. How long is this thing?

Edit: this is 6m long. Bugger!

Edited by unpc on Thursday 6th November 17:26

Streetrod

6,476 posts

223 months

Thursday 6th November 2014
quotequote all
Reminds me of this:



cool

unpc

2,969 posts

230 months

Thursday 6th November 2014
quotequote all
Just watched the vid and this thing is epic. The bit that makes this viable is that you can still get home when the weather's bad by driving there. Well maybe not 3 feet of snow bad obviously but fog etc. If it was a bit more like 5m long or less it would be perfect.

Anybody know how much?

redroadster

1,875 posts

249 months

Thursday 6th November 2014
quotequote all
Richard Branson not behind it I hope....

Renovation

1,791 posts

138 months

Thursday 6th November 2014
quotequote all
I love that people design these things but I struggle to believe there is more than a niche market for them.

Decent plane and decent car (or taxi, hire car etc) seems to be the better solution.

Finlandese

607 posts

192 months

Thursday 6th November 2014
quotequote all
I´ve always wondered about how on earth would these things ever meet the regulations required from new cars? Or even aircraft reqs. Anyone fancy taking it for a spin (a real one)?...

daytona365

1,773 posts

181 months

Thursday 6th November 2014
quotequote all
Such an idea would never work in wibble wobble UK. Heck nothing works in the UK !!

mikEsprit

849 posts

203 months

Thursday 6th November 2014
quotequote all
I don't get the 'What is the point?' criticism. The convenience of being able to land and keep moving is huge. The idea that you should just have a car sitting in a hangar is ridiculous and presumes that you only fly back and forth to the same place.

I don't know how they would go about regulating the skies for these things, but should they actually be viable at a price point that is within reach of the upper middle class, I predict success. You are looking at cutting average times between distances by almost half and increasing the fun factor by multiples.

The propeller in the back. Do any planes currently have that set up? I'm not a plane guy, but I don't think I've seen that set up before.

kambites

69,917 posts

238 months

Thursday 6th November 2014
quotequote all
mikEsprit said:
The propeller in the back. Do any planes currently have that set up? I'm not a plane guy, but I don't think I've seen that set up before.
It's called a push-prop. Not hugely common, but not unheard-of:


AnotherClarkey

3,694 posts

206 months

Thursday 6th November 2014
quotequote all
Are those Prius wheels on the front?

shoehorn

686 posts

160 months

Thursday 6th November 2014
quotequote all
These things are never pretty,even that one which I admit is one of the better ones still looks like a dolphin having a crap.
To me they seem pointless anyway as they are more or less impractical as either,like car/boat combos,they sort of work as both but not half as good as even the poorest car or boat in comparison.

I honestly feel that the flying car has more or less stagnated for 30-40 years and wont develope any further in terms of every day usability.
There have been some smaller developments here and there but most seem concerned with making them look better rather than actually making them better and more practical in relation to how they transfer from tarmac to air and vice-versa which has always been their Achilles heel,hours spent faffing around bolting on or folding up wings etc.

If you had a flying car in all honesty you would surely want the ability to seemlessly transfer from flying to driving and driving to flying.
Its highly likely that until we lose the wings and big exposed props and instead can invent a compact,practical mechanical form of providing lift they will always remain a gimmick.


When they look like some big old yank with flip down wheels and a pop out jet pod in each corner,just like the moviessmilei`ll be the first in the queue.













divetheworld

2,565 posts

152 months

Thursday 6th November 2014
quotequote all
I do 30-35k a year. I'd buy one right now.
Or a Vanquish....
This decision may take some time....

Glosphil

4,683 posts

251 months

Friday 7th November 2014
quotequote all
I assume that drive to the wheels is disconnected when in flying mode or landing could be interesting. What is the max payload? Hasn't poor weight carrying ability been a problem with earlier flying car projects?

Marwood79

215 posts

204 months

Friday 7th November 2014
quotequote all
I love this concept but millionaires or share schemes only I think. Exactly the same market who currently own and fly private aircraft.

Besides, the authorities have always shat bricks at the prospect of widespread access to the air. Unpoliceable really - and would certainly pull he plug before this ever gets close to us jonny normals. Fine over the plains of Texas or wherever it is in the vid but imagine what the Daily Mail would make of them dropping out the sky onto schools, housing estates and hospitals all over our pleasant but rather densely urbanised land!

"Sorry officer, I've only had a few ales..."

Marwood79

215 posts

204 months

Friday 7th November 2014
quotequote all
Besides people are so naturally lazy... if I had one of these bad boys at home and a 5am start. I would probably not drive to the nearest airfield. I would probably want to just give it the beans outside my house and see if I can clear the church on the way out the village - and probably whilst screaming "YEE-HA JESTERS DEAD"?...