THE FLYING CAR: A NEEDED "STEP" IN OUR TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM
By Bill Beckett and "K. P." Rice

The flying car (or alternatively, the roadable aircraft) is not just an enthusiast's toy. It puts together an old and under appreciated concept, VFR flying, and the newly developed ability to drive a quickly reconfigured airplane on the highway system. This solves the weather problem that has vastly reduced VFR flying on cross country trips and that makes a most affordable and pleasant means of travel, safe, efficient and far less costly,

The significance of this is not readily apparent, but the roadable airplane is already an exceptionally useful vehicle and, eventually, should add a much needed step improvement to our transportation system. A description of its operation and a comparison to other modes of travel will indicate its current utility. Then, an outline of the steps that made our U.S. transportation system preeminent in the world, and a discussion of current proposals to keep it competitive will show how the flying car can provide a needed step improvement to our overall system.

As amply demonstrated in the WWII era (and at the annual Oshkosh EAA convention today), literally hundreds of aircraft can operate safely in very limited airspace with only visual separation. The only significant limitation to VFR operations is weather. However, the weather problem has so limited the reliability and safety (especially through "get home-itus") of VFR in the past, that such travel has now been all but been abandoned for all but local trips and pleasure flying.

The newly developed roadable airplane solves the VFR weather problem by landing when bad weather is encountered, driving through the bad weather, and then taking off to fly again as soon as the weather permits. This ability to continue a trip without the necessity of going IFR provides decisive cost savings in equipment and pilot training for the average citizen flyer The result makes VFR travel reasonably reliable and safe for the first time and opens up the possibility of bringing low cost simplified air travel to a point of usage close to that of ground travel in the automobile.

Flying cars have been around in various forms since the '30s but have never ''taken off". This doesn't mean that the concept was bad, only that the mechanization always left much to be desired. The most prevalent deficiency was designs that left the wings or airplane portion at the airfield. These designs provided a way to get to and from the airport and a way to fly from airport to airport but they did not provide roadability to go from airport to airport on the ground, a capability necessary to avoid trying to fly through a stretch of bad weather. A normal airplane with rented automobiles at both ends of the trip was usually more effective and cheaper. Also, since they did not solve the weather problem they were still subject to the old problems with VFR. If however, like the "Volante" flying car by Rice in California, you can land, fold up the flight section into a trailer and hook it up to the automotive unit, you are no longer tied to any airfield. You can start from your garage, go to a nearby airport, reconfigure quickly and fly. Encountering bad weather, you land at the nearest convenient airport, reconfigure and drive until you get to an airport with good weather and continue the flight. This is the only way to solve the VFR weather problem and the "Volante" is the only mechanization that is currently flying that effectively addresses the problem.

Now let's take a closer look at how the roadable airplane could actually operate and compare it's performance with other modes. First let's look at a trip from Orange County to Las Vegas, roughly 235mi. The weather at O.C. is usually good except in the spring when there is a lot of morning fog. If so the advantage of the roadable aircraft is the ability to drive to Corona [35 miles] where one can almost always find sunshine. So, we back out of the garage and proceed to one airport or the other (averaging approximately 30min). At the airport it takes another 15min to reconfigure and take off. The flight to Las Vegas (235mi @150mph cruise] including take-off and landing should be less than 2hrs. Add another 45min to reconfigure and drive to destination and the total is under four hours.

The same trip by conventional automobile would be just slightly longer. About 15min at each end of the trip to and from the Interstate and about four hours on the Interstate unless you hit the 55 in the afternoon post 2:00 p.m. when it is a parking lot. The main advantage of the Volante here is a more pleasant trip - less traffic and a much better view of the scenery.

Commercial air for the same trip would require about 30min to and from the airport at each end of the trip, check in at least two hours before takeoff and about an hour in the air. This is about the same as the other modes but must put up with the necessity of conforming to airline schedules, unpleasant security procedures and a basically sterile and uncomfortable trip.

In summary, on a relatively short trip where the roads are good and the weather cooperative the flying car is comparable in speed and has the definite advantage of a more pleasant trip. Encounter heavy traffic, poor weather, or set out for a destination distant from an airline airport and the flying car truly excels.

Next, let's look at a trip that exploits a difference in flying and road distance, often a factor in travel especially on the East Coast. Our example is a trip from Norfolk to Boston. The highway distance in this case is about 670mi while the air distance is only about 480mi. In this example the Volante will require about 45min at each end of the trip to get to and from the airport and for reconfiguration. The flight itself should take about 3.5hr for a total of about five hrs.

By highway, this trip would require about 30min at each end, to and from the Interstate, and about seven hours on the highway for a total of about eight hr. The Volante, in this example beats the highway time by a significant three hrs, and again provides a more scenic trip not subject to traffic delays (a very real threat on this route).

Commercial air on this trip would again require 30min on each end to get to and from the airport, and check in at least 2hr before takeoff to handle security etc. The flight time would be on the order of an hour and a half and the total time of 4.5hr (assuming no delays), is faster, but not significantly faster than the Volante, for which, note that the schedule is still at the pilot's discretion.
. .
In summary, on a trip where the difference in flying and road distance is significant, the Volante can take only about 60% of the time required by an automobile and less than 20% more time than commercial jets. It also provides a more scenic trip and is not subject to road or airline traffic delays or scheduling.

Finally, let's look at a business trip where an executive needs to see widely dispersed clients in as short a time as possible. Let's assume that the executive is based near Cleveland and needs to see clients in Flint, Oshkosh and South Bend. Allowing 45min to get to the airport and reconfigure, the Volante should be able to get to Flint (air distance about 200mi) in another hour and a half and after reconfiguring, the executive should be able to see his client about three hr after leaving home. Spending an hour with the client he then proceeds on to Oshkosh (45min to airport and reconfigure, 200mi @150mph for another 1.5hr, and 45minmore to get to client) and can make his second contact about seven hours after leaving. After an hour with this client he leaves for South bend and sees his last client after another three hr. He will be ready to head home after a total of 12 hours, and will arrive home after a total of 15 hours. This is a very long day, but if he started at 6AM he could get home in time for dinner at nine.

By automobile, this trip would take much longer. First, from Cleveland to Flint takes about 4hr (230mi). After an hour with the first client it would then require eight to nine hr (270mi highway + 65mi ferry, or 500mi around Lake Michigan). Leaving at the same 6AM, he would arrive in Oshkosh at seven or eight PM, too late to do business. After seeing the second client at eight the next day he proceeds to South Bend where he would arrive about 1:30PM (28Omi in 4.5hr).after an hour with client number three, he heads for home which is over 300mi away at 2:30. This takes about five hours and he still arrives home ready for dinner before eight - but a full day later than by Volante.

Commercial air is similar. The first day it would take four hr to see the first client (30min to airport, two hr for check in, one hr flight and 30min to destination.). In the unlikely case that schedules permitted, the executive could see his first client around l0AM. He could then leave for Oshkosh at about 11AM where he would arrive at 3 :00PM if schedules were perfect. The trips to South Bend and home the next day would be similar and he could conceivably get home that day. It is more likely that airline schedules and delays and cancellations would add at least another day. On a trip like this commercial air is usually even slower than an automobile.

In summary, the above examples demonstrate that the roadable airplane has significant advantages in many travel situations without requiring the expensive equipment and training associated with IFR and current executive type aircraft.

Now let's look at how this new development fits into our faltering National Transportation System. For almost 400years transportation has been a key element in the success of the "American experiment". In the earliest days our coastal rivers were exploited to become the main transportation thoroughfares. As time went on canals (esp. the C&O and the Erie) were added. These provided a "step" improvement as they started opening up the West. With the advent of steamboats another step was added and a vast system of inland waterways developed. Next came the railroads facilitated by Government land grants, and American transportation became "world class". At the start of the 20th century another step was added when the national road system was built. This step facilitated the mass production of cars and trucks and revolutionized our society. In the '30s the advent of the NACA and the CAA pulled our aircraft industry out of the doldrums and added preeminence in the air to our advantages in other transport. The next step was in the' 50s when the Interstate system was implemented. The last step occurred when jet transportation became a reality, however, an average 5 hour trip across the country still consumes a whole day when all the airline delays are factored in.

These step improvements and our resulting economic advantages were major contributing factors in the rapid development of America from a series of colonial outposts to the sole world superpower. The continuing advantages of these steps, plus incremental "improvements" and synergistic inter-modal concepts like "hub and spoke operations" kept our country's transportation system competitive even if somewhat less convenient, until recently. Unfortunately, we now see our transportation advantages fading away as large airports, airways, the Interstate highway system and even our waterways approach saturation from an ever increasing volume of traffic. Both fiscal and political constraints rule out "more of the same" as a solution. We need another step improvement - and we need it now! Our country cannot afford a defacto "no growth" transportation policy.

Current developments aimed at addressing the traffic congestion problem include:

• The Intelligent Highway System which would control vehicles on Interstate type highways through central computers. This would allow closer spacing, more efficient traffic control and provide for more density with improved safety on existing highways.
• A new Air Traffic Control System aimed at tripling the density of the current system. This is an upgrade for current IFR operations which will improve airline, airfreight and executive aircraft operations by better use of the airspace between terminals. Since the terminals are currently the biggest bottleneck in the system, this is only part of the solution.
• The Small Aircraft Transportation System (SATS) which aims at allowing higher volume operations at underutilized General Aviation airports. This would be accomplished by providing more help in low visibility landings and easier access to the Air Traffic Control System. It would seem however, that the performance disparities and potential numbers of small aircraft might soon saturate even the new ATC system if more than a small percentage of General Aviation aircraft took advantage of it. The cost of aircraft equipment and the pilot training needed for IFR operations would, on the other hand likely severely limit the number of aircraft likely to try to connect with ATC. A catastrophic failure of a critical element of the system as recently happened in the L.A. area has yet to be dealt with in the real world.

All these proposals are worthwhile and should be supported, but even together they are not enough. They all depend on computer control and electronics to increase the density of traffic on already existing facilities. What is needed, desperately, is another mode of operation to supplement the existing systems and provide new capacity rather than just higher density.

The roadable airplane, by reviving VFR flying and solving the IFR weather problem can provide such needed new capacity. The ability to travel VFR allows major cost savings in equipment and pilot training and could add a lot of new traffic through the relative simplicity of VFR flight training and aircraft. This traffic would not clutter up the ATC system with large numbers of General Aviation aircraft, and would have only a minimal effect on the Interstate System. The result is a new mode or step which allows a lot more air travel with little impact on existing facilities. This new mode will usually be faster than road travel, and often be faster even than jet airliners over moderate distances. If modestly supported, or at least not opposed by the "authorities" it should be able to eventually tie into parts of the proposed SATS system that the pilot may desire and be equipped to utilize without impinging on the main ATC system. Keep in mind that it does not need the SATS system to function.

The roadable airplane is not a "pie in the sky" idea. K. P. Rice has been demonstrating a flying and driving a prototype for over a year and has been working on developing the concept for over 20yr. As the above comparisons show, it offers significant advantages to both pleasure and business flyers and it should be successful on that basis. Needless to say the success of any specific vehicle depends upon a multitude of factors including not only useful performance, but also ease of transformation between car with trailer and aircraft as well as reasonable highway speeds with safety. Only then can the interest of legislators and regulators in its potential for providing a step improvement in our faltering transportation system, be expected to develop fully, however the potential can be recognized today. Conceptually, this is a truly promising route to the next step improvement in the national transportation system and it deserves support on that basis alone. It is the only way to bring utility to VFR flying, and with this utility will come other unexpected and revolutionary benefits over time as pointed out below.

Regularly in the past there has been an attempt by NACA now NASA to start an ambitious program to put "an aircraft in every garage". The fundamental problem with such a program is usually overlooked, i.e. you need an instrument rating and an instrument rated aircraft to get any real usage out of flying. Can you imagine how many cars we would have on the road if driving required a licensing program as extensive as that required to become a reasonably proficient instrument pilot and cost as much as that training and aircraft equipment does. Solo VFR flight can, however, be achieved, on average, with as little as 10 hours instruction and a reasonably proficient pilot can take his first cross country with less than 20 hours total time. If we all flew half as much as we drive, the training time would be even less as the nation became one of accustomed flyers and the airplane was kept in the garage instead of at a distant airport at a hangar rent of 50 to 500 dollars per month. Dads would teach their kids to fly and drive the same vehicle, and flying would be as natural as driving is now. The new Light Sport Aircraft [LSA} program recently pushed into being by the Experimental Aircraft Association is a recognition of the facts stated above. The LSA Industry's own Consensus standards take the place of very expensive FAA certification for aircraft and minimal training takes the place of the extensive training to become an all around pilot. The Sport Pilot rating only allows VFR flying during daylight hours with one passenger, but that covers almost all of the province of the VFR pilot and with demonstration over time of an appropriate safety record, these limitations could be dropped. The Sport Pilot flies on a state drivers license medical requirements instead of a stringent flight physical another step toward recognizing the simplicity of VFR flight. An aircraft that can actually go someplace [i.e. be truly useful on a day to day basis as well as being fun to fly] only needs the ability to land and drive on the highway to realize the NACA or NASA dream.

Note that in previous mission analysis and comparison the general aviation aircraft has not been included. This is because, although the lighter aircraft can generally utilize airports closer to the final destination than commercial air or the jets, they still require the expensive and complex instrument qualified aircraft and pilot for reliable poor weather flight and since general aviation has been in decline for several years, obviously this is beyond the capability of the general public -something new, creative and revolutionary is needed to reverse that trend, instead of a warm-over of the ATC system. The table at the end of this paper points this out as well as including a few additional points that favor the flying car.

The last point I want to make is that this whole program can be started without having to make the huge investment that makes venture capitalists cringe. Rice intends to start with kits for the homebuilder in a burgeoning market that the EAA has built over the years. [Per Kit-planes magazine 10,000 aircraft kits will be sold in 2005]. Only after experience has built up a greater demand and more clearly defined the road ahead, will "mass produced" type certificated models of all types be produced. A survey on Rice's web site indicates there will be no shortage of builders anxious to get in on this history making introduction.

Again, of interest to legislators and those interested in our National economy, one can envision a whole new industry growing out of this experiment, a marriage of the automotive and aircraft industries producing all types of fly/drive vehicles and encouraged by the potential size of the market to preserve the pricing competitiveness of the automobile world. Personal transportation, recreational vehicles and commercial trucks, all tailored to the job, can all be envisioned in land, water and amphibious versions. There will undoubtedly also be special vehicles for the under-developed world both domestic and foreign.

A picture of this potential application of the fly/drive concept and the growth of a whole new industry to produce them will be presented in a forthcoming article.

Summary

In this paper we have alleged that the flying car and a revival of VFR Flight can produce a growth step in the transportation system of the United States and eventually the entire world. It could also result in final achievement of the aviation enthusiast's dream of an "aircraft in every garage". Besides bringing immediate benefits in simplicity, cost and reliability to today's flyer, it will spawn regulatory changes that will open reliable low cost flight to the next generation of fly/drivers to the point where learning to fly will become a family project just like the rite of passage, learning to drive. Simultaneously, a whole new industry will spring up to provide these flying cars and to expand the line into analogues of the entire recreation and commercial vehicle line of today. There will also be an exploration of the current amphibious and waterborne family of machines for application of fly/drive technology.

Solicitation for Critique
You may not agree with all of the premises in this paper however it is difficult to argue that the fly/drive vehicle has a place in the transportation system of the United States. Should you wish to agree or refute any of the claims made we would welcome your comments, positive or negative. We can be reached by email at kp@volanteaircraft.com.