We swear to all that is good and holy that we will not leave the mortal shackles of this terrestrial plane until we see flying cars become a reality. Perhaps the LaBische FSC-1TM will be the flying car that allows us to die in peace. If so, by the time we expire the skies will be filled with the FSC-1TM that features wings and a rear propeller that both fold up and disappear inside the car when driving on the street. When airborne the craft can reach speeds up to 275 mph, a figure based on calculations garnered from scale model prototypes being tested by LaBische. While we were hoping flying cars of the future would be powered by scramjet technology, if it's got to be prop-driven, then so be it. While a full-scale functioning prototype of the FSC-1TM has yet to be produced, the company is accepting deposits for build-it-yourself kits that will set you back $175,000 upon delivery. Upon delivery... we're waiting.
[Source: LaBische via Engadget]
2010 Chevrolet Camaro priced: LS $22,995, SS $30,995
BREAKING: GM and Chrysler talking about merger
Spy Shots: Nissan 370Z again, with interior shots
2010 Mazda3 unveiled ahead of LA Auto Show
Spy Shots: Nissan 370Z caught undisguised
Knight Rider: The Liveblog -- Season 1, Episode 3
In the Autoblog Garage: 2009 Mazda RX-8 R3, return of the "hummer"
In the Autoblog Garage: 2008 Chevy Corvette Z06
Autoline on Autoblog with John McElroy
Paris 2008: Le Day 1 Wrapup
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Chris @ Jul 7th 2006 4:12PM
And you thought filling your 17gal tank was expensive. The cost of fuel alone will keep the "flying car" otherwise known as planes from ever taking off.
DKB_SATX @ Jul 7th 2006 4:30PM
Actually the fuel consumption of a 4-place prop plane isn't too bad. For a Mooney 201 (a high-performance single-engine light aircraft) the fuel consumption at a 160-knot (184 mph) cruise works out to about 17.5 mpg. Now, if you buy that fuel at the FBO at your local airport, you'll pay lots more per gallon than you do for Super down at the QuickyMart, but there are also aircraft that have lower fuel consumption and I think you'd be hard-pressed to find a 4-seat car that can cruise 184 mph at all, much less while returning 17.5 mpg.
The real barrier to flying cars is the fact that you actually have to prove you have a clue about the operation of an aircraft to get a pilot's license, unlike the US driver's licenses you can get off the rack at Wal-Mart. Aircraft also need to be more carefully maintained, since you can't pull over to the next cloud and park when something goes wrong.
I think the new Light Sport category of aircraft may get lots more Americans flying, but I think most people on our highways should only fly if they're strapped in a passenger seat FAR from the controls.
Jared @ Jul 7th 2006 4:36PM
This is a pipe dream, and a scary one at that. I'll install AA cannons on the top of my house the day these become legal. Most people, with the exception of my fine fellow Autoblog readers, can't drive worth a s---. My sister has trouble filling up the gas tank! I doubt the driving population would be able to pass the FAA licensing tests. Small craft, instrumentation, etc... Then you have to register flight plans, maintain radio contact, follow landing pattern commands, etc... Oh yeah, all wrecks in the future will have to go not only through the convening local authority, but also the FAA and NTSB for investigation.
glacia00 @ Jul 7th 2006 4:37PM
While a great fantasy the flying car is simply that a fantasy. While you can concoct all types of flying cars, widespread implimentation is impossible.
If everyone drove (or rather flew) a flying car right now we would still have all of the same problems we have with terrestrial cars and more.
You would still be restricted to a road it simply wouldn't be on the ground. You wouldn't find car lanes passing over houses building or anything else they might fall on or have to make an emergency landing on. So what you would have are aerial lanes with a safety zone under them or basicly cars flying over a road.
You also couldn't have the stacked lanes that often acompany this fantasy. Who would want the car accident above them dropping on top them?
And the nail in the flying car coffin is that you would have the same morons behind the wheel that we have now only with a much more dangerous and annoying vehicle. Watch drivers for more than 10 minutes and you will see why flying cars will never be more than fantasy.
Woody @ Jul 7th 2006 4:53PM
And how do you drive this on the road? Unless those wings come off this is just a plane that looks like its been made out of a car.
CJ @ Jul 7th 2006 5:06PM
#5... the wings fold up... visit the site before you comment!
http://www.labicheaerospace.com/videos/FSC-1_convert.wmv
glacia00 @ Jul 7th 2006 5:36PM
I'll give them credit for not deluding themselves too much. At least they don't claim it will change how we commute or that soon everyone will fly instead of drive.
It's more like "Do you have $175,000 and a pilot’s license and like to build kit cars and are quirky enough to want a car that could also fly for short distances between airports. If so we are now accepting “limited term” non-refundable deposits for initial production slots."
Lionel Gump @ Jul 7th 2006 6:05PM
My grampaw bought stock in this company. I have got to get me one of these. I hope they make a version with pontoons. Maybe the inflatable kind like on rubber boats. That way I can take my car/plane/boat fishing. The guy with the AA gun better look out for me dropping fish-it on him. I am going lawn mower racing now. bye bye
El Norte @ Jul 7th 2006 6:56PM
Hey, everyone... I photoshopped some wings and a big propellar on the back of a Miata! It'll revolutionize transportation for uh, like... $99,000.48 (US)!
Seriously, the Australians have had a Top Secret Flying Car Program for years: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/01/23/flying_car/
Seriously.
glacia00 @ Jul 7th 2006 7:44PM
"Seriously, the Australians have had a Top Secret Flying Car Program for years:"
You can easily see 2 vertical supports in the lower right corners. They should have come to me I could have photoshopped out those poles and the thing that looks like a picnic table under it.
Aki @ Jul 7th 2006 7:57PM
People can't even go 35mph without ramming into something, much less 175mph. Watching countless moronic fender benders in the morning commute is reason enough for there to never be flying cars. At least on the ground, most would survive a fender bender from a bozo not looking at the road while staring at his cell phone address book. Two planes colliding = instant death. I sincerely hope this never becomes a reality--that or a strict test that serves as an idiot filter.
ericthered @ Jul 7th 2006 8:09PM
Of course not everybody will be able to afford one these! That's what makes the concept attractive! You won't have the congestion problems #4 is saying will strangle the concept. These cars will be like a Corvette; a fairly common sight but by no means the most common car on the road or sky. Also #4 was worried about these aircraft falling out of the sky onto houses and other traffic and saying that they would have to be routed around all of that. The FAA is not going to allow any aircraft in sky that's not airworthy. All aircraft are subject to annual inspections and scheduled maintenance, if you don't comply you don't fly. But beside the point I think the Moller concept is much better.
RacetrackOwner @ Jul 7th 2006 8:10PM
How many frickin' times do we have to read about this ridiculous contraption???
Silver @ Jul 8th 2006 3:35AM
We'll have teleporters before flying cars are feasible.
glacia00 @ Jul 8th 2006 6:30AM
ericthered, I'm not sure what you're argueing since I was saying the notion of widespread implimentaion of flying cars will never happen and you seem to be agreeing with that.
I do think you're being highly optimistic about this car. At $175,000 and a pilot’s license required I would be impressed if they sell 10. But lets say that by some chance with lower prices you someday replace just half a percent of the cars in America with a flying car. That would be well over 1Mil flying cars in the air. For a sanity check O'hare handles less than 1Mil flights per year.
carbuzzard @ Jul 8th 2006 10:57AM
Gives a whole new meaning to "airbags" however.
El Norte @ Jul 9th 2006 11:53AM
"You can easily see 2 vertical supports in the lower right corners. They should have come to me I could have photoshopped out those poles and the thing that looks like a picnic table under it."
Killjoy.