6 votes

PAL - V: Flying Car, The Ultimate Freedom

PAL - V: Flying Car, The Ultimate Freedom

WOW!! I want one of these


Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Naw, this is better

I don't trust a rotor based system with cyclic and collective control. If your engine fails in a paramotor you would safely glide to the ground. If your engine fails in a rotor based system you are a falling rock. A para motor is cheaper and safer, watch the video below. My fiance and I are getting about 40 acres and we are getting 3 of these:


You are wrong about that ...

... helicopter falls to the ground when the motor quits because the motor is what drives the rotor. No motor, no rotor = fall to ground = ouch!

But a gyroplane does NOT have a powered rotor. Instead, the rotor is free-floating and only turns due to forward thrust, which is powered by an engine, same as a plane.

If the motor quits in a gyroplane, the forward thrust keeps the rotor rotating and the craft glides and can be piloted to the ground, where it can make a near-zero landing.

Your paramotor is probably cheaper, but it is not scalable to larger size and speed (try doing 500 MPH with a parachute setup). Both are cool, and the parachute deal is probably cheap, but the gyroplane has much more upside potential.

But both are cool.

Not sure how wrong I am

Not sure how wrong I am Tommy, I used to be an aircraft mechanic. What background do you have in aviation? BTW, you would not catch me dead in a gyroplane. They don't go 500 mph either, that is a crazy exaggeration! Those pratt and whitney helicopter engines max out around 200 mph. If you don't believe me, DAFS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AgustaWestland_AW139) ... A paramotor is more economical and reliable (45 mpg). In a WROL situation, do you really care about how cool and fast you can move around? I would rather go for short take offs, low maintenance, versatility, range, and availability of fuel (that gyrocopter probably takes a synthetic blend of avgas).

Quick question, if your 'gyroplane' has an altitude of 10,000 feet and moving forward with a thrust of 130mph, what is the glide ratio if you have bird strike engine failure? How much altitude would you lose before you stopped having forward thrust? Once again, it would eventually become a falling rock after 5,000 feet.... With a paramotor, you have a glide ratio of 1 mile for every 500 feet of altitude (even with the engine off). The only thing rotor based systems have going for them, is that they can feather the blades at a certain altitude to create thrust to prevent a complete catastrophe. But this is still a worse case scenario, it does not always work and you would also experience a 'hard landing' which could cause damage to the aircraft and injury to its passengers.

That's a gyroplane or gyrocopter ...

... looks like a helicopter, but helicopters have power direct to the rotors and gyroplanes have their rotors free-floating, with power from a forward-thrust engine, like a plane.

They are safer than either helicopters or airplanes. They can be built to be as large and fast as a Boeing 767, yet they can take off and land like a helicopter.

If we had a free market for the past 100 years, I am convinced we would all be flying these, as well as driving them on the streets, and airports as we know them would not exist.

Check out the video on this website:

Price tag?

Price tag?

Flying cars are still up in the air.


Daily Paul cured my abibliophobia.