Last Sky Commuter For Sale On eBay

DeltaV900 writes to alert us to an auction on eBay of the last Sky Commuter concept car. About 7 hours remain in the auction and the top bid at this writing is $55,100. The seller (with some help from posters in the auction forum) makes clear that the thing won't actually fly, and in fact never did. Other Sky Commuters may have hovered. This one traveled around to air shows and trade fairs.

I can remember...

[Bin_jammin (684517)]

way back to junior high school when he was hawking these things, then every year or three they'd pop up again, "the wave of the future" blah, blah, blah... I had a roommate that was gonzo over them when he first heard of the concept about 4 years ago. "Oh man, it's going to be so cool, you'll be able to fly to work." etc... He never quite got the reasoning of all the skeptics of the idea, like what happens when you run out of gas or have an accident in the air? Maybe we can finally put these disasters-in-the-making to rest, until the technology is available to make them something more than a stupid sci-fi pipe dream...

Re:I can remember...

[Mantaar (1139339)]

I totally agree with you. Pilots have to be 100% sober, have no criminal records, good sight (without the use of glasses), and pass a billion other tests. Flying around in mid-air is not quite like driving on the road. You have to keep track of wind, other flying vehicles, obstacles - and you have virtually no guidance (like roads). And when you make a mistake, you loose hard. Not only you, in fact, but everyone around you, too.

Flying vehicles are too much of a risk to let them be guided by humans - you have to have some kind of computer controlled system that will mostly operate this thing for you while also keeping track of other vehicles.

There are ideas to bring this kind of design to the road, but they've not matured yet. When we're able to control conventional traffic fully via computer systems, we may start thinking of inventing something flyable. I imagine that, just like with the transition from horses to cars, those flying cars would initially be using conventional roads (perhaps adding another layer on top of them - so we could stack highways instead of ruining the landscape with 6 or 8 lanes of asphalt) and only later have some special 'air-roads' for themselves, when the idea becomes more dominant.

I don't think I'll ever be driving such a thing, but perhaps my kids?

Re:

[owlnation (858981)]

Pilots have to be 100% sober, have no criminal records, good sight (without the use of glasses), and pass a billion other tests. Flying around in mid-air is not quite like driving on the road. You have to keep track of wind, other flying vehicles, obstacles - and you have virtually no guidance (like roads). And when you make a mistake, you loose hard. Not only you, in fact, but everyone around you, too.

You're right. But... during my entire private pilot's license test I was thinking, "why isn't this the s

Re:

[Lumpy (12016)]

good sight (without the use of glasses),

really? then how do I have a pilots license? I need glasses I am nearsighted so without them I might as well be flying in zero visibility.

Lots of people that need glasses to see have their pilots license, I suggest you update your information.

Yeah right, your an idiot

[SmallFurryCreature (593017)]

Watch those same shows and see the ones where the pilots still managed to land the aircraft, like the one over Iraq that got shot at, or the several cases of where an airliner lost all engine power etc etc. Plenty of cases where real airmanship and seat of the pants flying were called for that could not be delivered by an auto-pilot or a button pusher.

Only a complete and utter moron looks at a routine job when everything is normal and judges how difficult a job is based on that. The entire point of using real humans with serious training as pilots is NOT for when everything is normal but for when the shit hits the fan and all of sudden an airline pilot you think is just a button pusher is in control of a giant glider.

An autopilot can take off, cruise and land, but it can't deal with an emergency and as was shown during an airshow in europe autopilots will happily try to land an airliner in a forest.

Re:

[QuantumG (50515)]

That's just cause no-one has bothered to make an autopilot system that can.

Re:

[JasterBobaMereel (1102861)]

The "Autopilot" that landed in a forest was not an autopilot at all, it was the fly-by-wire computer system that overrulled the pilot by decending when he was trying to pull up....

The reason we have pilots in aircraft is for the emergencies most commercial flights the autopilot flies the plane for most of the journey and can usually take off and land as well if required, but the pilots are needed to cope with situations the autopilot was not designed for (but this does not mean they can't be designed for th

Re:

[Richard_at_work (517087)]

The "Autopilot" that landed in a forest was not an autopilot at all, it was the fly-by-wire computer system that overrulled the pilot by decending when he was trying to pull up....

Not even that - the Habsheim A320 crash was caused primarily by pilot error, as he both changed his plan of action at the last minute, reduced height to below that of the surrounding obstacles, reduced power below that he would require so he maintained a descent angle, and basically left it too late to do anything about it before he hit the trees. There has never been any evidence to show that the A320s systems caused the accident, despite many conspiracy theories surrounding the case.

Re:

[houghi (78078)]

Watch those same shows and see the ones where the pilots still managed to land the aircraft, like the one over Iraq that got shot at, or the several cases of where an airliner lost all engine power etc etc.

The one that got shot down over Iraq could have landed much easier if it had a computer system that helped them to fly without hydrolics.

This does NOT mean I think flying cars are a good idea. Holding something in the air requires more fuel then not doing so and alone for that it is a bad idea.

Another re

Re:

[icebrain (944107)]

Well, we know you've never actually flown an airplane before, because you wouldn't be making inane statements like this. Those restrictions aren't there because we're a bunch of snobs trying to hog all the fun; they have them because it's very easy to fuck up flying a plane, and if you do fuck up the consequences are a lot more severe than they would be in a car. Ground controllers don't fly the aircraft; in essence, their job is to make sure planes don't hit each other, which is actually a much bigger ch

Re:

[Billosaur (927319)]

Having gone up in a small plane for a lesson as a birthday present, I can honestly say that there is absolutely nothing automatic about flying a plane, especially a small. You're talk thousand, perhaps tens-of-thousands of people flying the equivalent of small planes without any idea how they work or how to handle them in an emergency. System of the damned, indeed! I wouldn't get in a flying car if the sky was the equivalent of the New Jersey Turnpike.

Re:

[QuantumG (50515)]

As a pilot, you would say that.

If you were an ex-pilot, then we'd get a different story.. as I do from most ex-pilots I know.. and some active pilots I know who are mature enough to know how little important they are in the normal operation of the aircraft.

Re:

[QuantumG (50515)]

Uh huh. And the morse test had nothing to do with trying to keep Ham exclusive. Seriously, for recreational flying there is absolutely no reason to require pilots to have 20-20 vision or any of the other crap. How could I possibly know? Because I know three pilots who have told me that they didn't have 20-20 vision the day they went for their exams, they just faked it. I've met a half dozen pilots who are colour blind and faked their way through the test.

As you might have guessed, I don't think I know

Re:

[Hognoxious (631665)]

what happens when you run out of gas

There are at least two options, the better of which is probably gliding [wikipedia.org].

Re:I can remember...

[QuantumG (50515)]

The other option is the one that I practice with my current ground car.. I keep my eye on the fuel gauge and fill up when it gets low.

Seriously, can't we assume just a *little* bit of intelligence on behalf of the driver? Oh, wait, we're talking about Americans aren't we.

Re:

[jamesh (87723)]

My last car (Holden Commodore ~2002 model) had a problem where the fuel level sender unit would fail in such a way that you'd be out of fuel when the gauge said 1/4 full. Obviously you'd learn to take that into account. The second time.

There is a reason that aircraft are subject to slightly stricter rules than ground based vehicles.

Re:

[QuantumG (50515)]

Yeah, in Australia, such a vehicle would be considered unroadworthy.. seeing as most no-one drives Holdens except Australians, I gotta ask, where'd you get your bodgy roadworthy from? :)

Re:

[CastrTroy (595695)]

So my sibling poster mentions that your car is not roadworthy. And whether or not it is, it brings up a good point. Many people drive around in very mechanically unsound vehicles. Now just imagine if all those cars were flying. It would be insane. They'd be dropping out of the sky left right and centre.

Re:

[MichaelSmith (789609)]

Thanks for the link. I love the bit about the engineers van running out of fuel. My dad is a glider pilot and has long insisted that this makes him a better powered plane pilot as well.

Re: No, that is Moller

[scsirob (246572)]

You are confusing this with the Moller SkyCrap. This was closer to the real deal 18 years ago then Moller will ever be.

Re:

[CastrTroy (595695)]

It seems like a lot of trouble to go through, when you could solve 99% of the worlds traffic problem with a small sensor on the front of each vehicle to allow the vehicle to sense the movement of the car directly in front of them. This would be useful at red lights. The red light turns green, and all the cars that were stopped at the light, start to move at once. Instead of waiting 10 seconds for the one 10 cars back to start moving, they all start moving instantly, or within a second.

Re:

[ishmaelflood (643277)]

Oddly enough that's what they do in the UK. The lights go green, everyone who can see the traffic light hits the loud pedal, and at least starts to roll. I was slightly astonished to find that Australian drivers don't do this. There again they are so unskillful that they'd probably crash into each other. On the other hand Australians d at least treat the amber light with the contempt it deserves. ObStarman.

Re:

[Hognoxious (631665)]

Oddly enough that's what they do in the UK. The lights go green, everyone who can see the traffic light hits the loud pedal

It's probably because of the sequencing; it goes from red to red-and-yellow-together for around 1 to 2 seconds before turning green. It's enough time for most competent drivers to get in gear and drop the handbrake.

In Belgium for instance it doesn't work like that, so you basically have to hold it on the clutch and footbrake unless you want some dick to run into you (or at least, hoot

Re:

[Tony Hoyle (11698)]

There would still be a delay because the safe distance at 30mph is totally different to the safe distance when stopped. Within a second is completely unrealistic. All it would stop is the idiot who takes 30 seconds to realize that the car in front has gone... but you can get pretty close to optimal already if the queue is seasoned drivers (eg. evenings after work, when the drive once a week crowd aren't usually out).

Such systems as you describe are in commercial deployment btw. - it's called adaptive crui

Modern personal-flying-car equivalents

[compumike (454538)]

This is a neat concept car. Out of everything I've heard about, the most likely to actually make it to the market is the Terrafugia Transition [terrafugia.com], which is aimed at people who have both drivers' and pilots' licenses. Not VTOL, but more realistic too.

--
Educational microcontroller kits for the digital generation. [nerdkits.com]

I can't find the VIN number...

[ForestGrump (644805)]

I looked over the fleabay posting and can't find the VIN for the car. If someone found it could you PLEASE reply to this so I can do a quick carfax report?

Thanks
Grump

PS Does anyone have a carfax account to run the check for me?

Re:I can't find the VIN number...

[iamdrscience (541136)]

Why bother? He's clearly selling it as a parts car for people trying to repair their regular flying car.

Belongs in a museum

[user24 (854467)]

I really think this belongs in a museum.

Thank you Indiana Jones

[QuantumG (50515)]

we'll take it under advisement.

A-- WILL NOT BUY AGAIN

[by Anonymous Coward]

Will not buy again! Flying car did not fly as advertised! A--!

Re:A-- WILL NOT BUY AGAIN

[jamesh (87723)]

No... an A-- is what you give when the package you receive from eBay only contains a bobcat [xkcd.com].

Re:

[Oktober Sunset (838224)]

Ha, a flying car is a pretty lame thing to buy on eBay, there are waaay cooler thing you can get. I got a time machine arriving this week, I hope it works better than the teleporter I bought last week tho.

d'uh

[habbi (991628)]

someone please edit the tag, it should read !transportation

Analogy Search

[hyades1 (1149581)]

Duke Nukem Forever is to Vapourware as Skycar is to......

Interesting configuration.

[jcr (53032)]

With modern computer control, it should be possible to stabilize a three-fan system like that. What I would wonder though, is how efficient it could be in forward flight, having very little in the way of effective wing area.

-jcr

Re:

[cmat (152027)]

One I noted when I looked at the 3-fan design, is that if you have problems with any of th fans, you're in alot of trouble as there is no redundancy (especially for the front fan, but I'd bet it would be extremely unlikely that loss of a rear fan could be compensated for by the other rear fan). Very bad failure mode...

Owner builds aircraft mockups.

[by Anonymous Coward]

The guy who's selling it, Steven Stull, makes aircraft mock ups. See the pages here [airwolf.tv] and here [wordunspoken.com] for a full size model of the Airwolf he build for a museum.

Can't wait.

[fastest fascist (1086001)]

I can't wait to see widespread adoption of flying commuter vehicles. Then we'll get to see public buildings protected from suicide bombers not just by concrete walls or metal fences, but giant cages covering them completely. Or maybe they'll just install flak cannons.

Copyrights included?

[PhilHibbs (4537)]

From the ebay listing:

This Sky Commuter and all it's R&D and any copyrights go with this aircraft.

I doubt that that is true. Surely Boeing own the "copyrights" to their research, and I wouldn't expect to see that kind of thing go on ebay.

Idiots exists; thus, no flying cars for us

[hipsterdufus (42989)]

Have you ever seen:

A car accident?
A broken-down car beside the road?
Aggressive driving?
Drunk driving?
Cars with the left blinker on endlessly?
Cars with broken head/tail lights?
Cars doing 60+ mph on the space-saver spare?

Now, can imagine all this happening even 20 feet in the air? Disaster.

The flying car already exists and it is called a helicopter. If you think you can fly a helicopter without weeks upon weeks of training, then go buy one and start commuting.

The trouble with flying cars.

[Animats (122034)]

There are two fundamental problems with flying cars. First, reciprocating engines aren't quite powerful enough, and small turbojets cost too much. Second, they're unstable. Both problems could be solved, yielding an expensive but workable flying car.

The engine is the big problem. People have been trying to downsize jet engines for decades. Small ones can be built, but once you get below small bizjet size, they don't get much cheaper. That's why general aviation is still running on pistons. A flying car in the $2 million range is probably feasible, but the market is limited and the engineering costs are high.

Stability is partly a control system problem and partly an actuator problem. How do you exert attitude control in hover? Adjusting the fan speed of multiple fans is too slow. Adjusting blade pitch cyclically, like a helicopter, requires cramming all the machinery of a helicopter hub into each fan hub. VTOL jet fighters have been successful, sort of. The Harrier diverts about 10% of its jet thrust to attitude jets in hover, which yields quick control, but the Harrier has plenty of jet thrust to play with. The F-35 fighter has a steerable nozzle in the tail, a lift fan in the middle, slats under the fan, pitch nozzles in the wings, roll nozzles in the nose, doors to cover all this gear, and enough computer power to manage it. Even with all that, it's a marginal VTOL craft. The USSR tried several VTOL fighter designs over the years, but none of them worked very well. The Harrier variants are the only real success to date.

The Sky Commuter was an exercise in weight reduction; it weighs about 400 pounds. That's one approach, but it didn't work.

Re:

[houghi (78078)]

For Auction is For Sale. For Sale is not For Auction.

Re:

[IBBoard (1128019)]

Or, to put it mathematically (without the aid of mathematical symbols or a safety net), auctions are a subset of sales where the price is determined by the highest bidder as opposed to determined before advertising, but sales are not a subset of auctions.

Re:

[CastrTroy (595695)]

I'm not too up-to-date on my set theory, but are there any weird mathematical instances where A is a subset of B, and B is a subset of A? It seems like it would be impossible, unless A and B are equal sets (and therefore not subsets).

Re:Who would want this?

[wish bot (265150)]

Well, a museum would probably like it, and then every dreamer could go and gawk at it (or in your case - opt for crucifixion - ouch!).

I find it really strange that the seller didn't start by contacting various institutions rather than putting it on ebay. There's something quite fishy about his descriptions - he first tries to suggest that it does actually fly, then tries to say "well, it will hover", and then adds another correction saying HE installed some electric motors and the thing will not generate any lift what-so-ever. He also admits to messing with other parts of the machine (like he was trying to restore it, but doesn't give any real details as to what qualities he was trying to restore to/against).

I know this will sound really harsh - but judging by the guys atrocious writing, the car is better of with ANYBODY else as he's a complete nut.

Obligatory Airplane Quotation...

[Chordonblue (585047)]

Sounds like:

"He's a menace to himself and everything else in the air... Yes, birds too."

Re:

[calyphus (646665)]

these "kitcars" or "custom things" are actually very poorly built or delicate

This isn't a kit, or your average startup concept project. This is a Boeing working prototype. It's much different from a simple kit or customized project.

However, it's interesting that Boeing's Museum of Flight has another mfr's prop driven commuter carplane in it's collection rather than this.

Re:

[Professor_UNIX (867045)]

Probably the same type of person that changes his fonts in a web forum post.

Re:On Ebay...

[secretwhistle (1116881)]

Yet another item from the bitter Jetson divorce.

Re:

[PhilHibbs (4537)]

When it was 55,000 I could have bid 55,100 and been the highest bidder.

Probably not. l***i [ebay.com] might have set a maximum bid of $1,000,000 and what you see on ebay is the second-highest bid. As soon as you bid $55,100 then all you do is bump up the person who has already outbid you to a slightly higher amount.