Click above for high-res gallery of the flying car from Milner
Our environmentally-attuned brethren at AutoblogGreen pointed us into the lower hall of the Javits Center to check out something they knew we'd love. After wading through the trucks and specialty makers on hand, we reached the Milner Motors booth. To one side was the Milner Motors ElectriCar. Across from it was the Milner Motors AirCar, which was what we came to see. Essentially the same as its electric vehicle, the flying car adds a set of wings and twin engine nacelles that theoretically supply enough thrust and lift for 1,000 miles of flight at 200 MPH. When earthbound, the wing package folds up and the car's 40-hp electric motor powers it up to 85 mph thanks to its light weight and great aerodynamics (the cd is only .209). This particular one is a non-functioning prototype, but we think we'll toss it off the roof of the Empire State building to test its glide prowess. We can only guess how much fun this thing might be if we could figure out a way to use those jet engines and their extra 300 hp to power this 1,800 lb. missle on the ground.
New KITT Attack Mode revealed at Comic Con
London 2008: Honda OSM concept roadster says, "Cheerio!"
London 2008: Lotus unveils the Evora
2010 Chevy Camaro - Official Details and Images
2010 Chevy Camaro - LIVE from the reveal
In the Autoblog Garage: Aprilia RSV 1000 R
First Drive: Maserati Quattroporte S in Europe
First Drive: 2008 MINI Cooper S JCW
In the Autoblog Garage:2009 Nissan GT-R
North American Exclusive First Drive: Alfa MiTo
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
John P. @ Mar 20th 2008 3:33PM
I would love something like this. 1000mile range at 200mph. NICE!
DKB_SATX @ Mar 20th 2008 3:49PM
The "nacelles" seem to be ducted fans, not jets. Milner's site confirms this... "dual 160 hp ducted fans." http://www.milnermotors.com/aircar.htm
They also "expect it to cost about $450,000" and it looks like it's about as practical as many of the previous flying-car fantasies, but it's a nice idea if you don't think about it too seriously.
Kowell @ Mar 20th 2008 4:03PM
Can we really call this thing a car anymore?
mdesigner @ Mar 20th 2008 4:11PM
BRILLIANT. NOW I WON'T LOSE MY LUGGAGE.
THIS WILL UNDOUBTEDLY LEAD TO LONGER SLOWER LINES AT THE DMV.
Classic. The combination of two products based on utility made to ultimately produce an inferior product with lesser utility than the separates.
IE: Poor car...more than likely poorer aircraft.
Gotta love it.
PASSIONATE RANTER
DKB_SATX @ Mar 20th 2008 4:39PM
Thinking about it a little more, you can get a used Beechcraft Baron twin-engine, 6-place airplane for well under $400k, that CRUISES at 230 mph. If you didn't want a twin, you could get a 4-place airplane with similar performance for even less, and have a better airplane and plenty of change left from your $450k to buy an excellent car.
Bugz @ Mar 20th 2008 6:00PM
"We can only guess how much fun this thing might be if we could figure out a way to use those jet engines and their extra 300 hp to power this 1,800 lb. missle on the ground"
No need to do nething... Just turn the wings upside down... the AirCar will stick to the ground like an F-1 car... As simple as that....
just try if it works though... lol...
spacegravity4me @ Mar 20th 2008 11:38PM
I'm sorry but I will always have faith in and be a huge fan of flying cars, in any form. Though preferably of the fifth element variety, FTW. It's a start people, but what prehistoric start it is. Still, better than nothing. ;)
mdesigner @ Mar 21st 2008 5:30AM
On a very basic level I see a few small problems.
While I have not done any recent market analysis on the hypothetical flying car...I don't see this particular model as appealing to those who COULD afford it.
Can you imagine Donald Trump driving one of these???
Other minor logistic and practical problems remain.
Assuming PERFECT mechanical reliability:
What happens when the careless driver (any of us at one time or another) runs out of fuel...
Or even the, still prevalent, drunk driver operates one of these above your house or a preschool?
I'm as eager as anyone to see the mass flying vehicles we've been promised for decades...but, should we be careful what we wish for?
Just posing a casual question.
There are many solutions we still need in addition to the required technology. It's not gonna be easy...
DKB_SATX @ Mar 21st 2008 4:45PM
We will never see "flying cars" (or any other sort of aircraft) at the mass-consumer level until the flying part is essentially 100% automated. Punch in (or say) your destination, the computer calculates a route starting from your location as determined by GPS, you confirm that's really where you intended, the system registers that flight plan with some automated air-traffic control and off you go.
Most people can't even be bothered to learn how to drive a car well or learn traffic regulations, they're certainly not going to put the effort required into getting even the basic pilot's license (visual flight rules, single-engine fixed-wing land-plane.)
There's a simplified license (Light Sport category) that was recently put into place, but the aircraft you're allowed to operate are restricted to the point that they're mostly useful for casual flying, 2 average-sized people can't take much in the way of luggage, and 2 fat bastards like me probably couldn't take off with full fuel, so that's not going to help.