TMC is an independent, primarily volunteer organization that relies on ad revenue to cover its operating costs. Please consider whitelisting TMC on your ad blocker or making a Paypal contribution here: paypal.me/SupportTMC

TESLA Model F

Discussion in 'Future Cars' started by fjavifp, Jul 29, 2013.

  1. fjavifp

    fjavifp Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2013
    Messages:
    122
    Location:
    Madrid - Spain
    Hi all,
    Model F for?... yes you guessed it - Flying car!!

    Welcome | Terrafugia

    When do you think?
     
  2. Electric700

    Electric700 Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2013
    Messages:
    987
    Location:
    Florida, United States
    It's definitely an interesting concept! I think there are at least two things needed for a "Tesla Model F" to happen:

    1. Full automation (imagine everyone being able to pilot their own flying cars, and the potential chaos that could cause).
    2. Higher battery energy densities (lithium-air?) to support the greater amount of energy needed for liftoff.
     
  3. AnOutsider

    AnOutsider S532 # XS27

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2009
    Messages:
    11,923
    I'm going to make a thread for every letter not yet used in a Tesla vehicle or speculative thread and save us some time.

    As for this, not exactly a new concept #1, and #2, not really something Tesla should consider IMO. They're trying to go mass market, not even more niche than the Roadster.
     
  4. TXjak

    TXjak Owner/Investor/Advocate

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2011
    Messages:
    326
    Location:
    Austin, TX
  5. fjavifp

    fjavifp Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2013
    Messages:
    122
    Location:
    Madrid - Spain
    #5 fjavifp, Jul 29, 2013
    Last edited: Jul 29, 2013
    hahahahaha
    That's why electric700 was talking about full automation above... which is by the way part of Terrafugia TF-X concept
    Regards

    - - - Updated - - -

    Hi AnOutsider,
    Sorry I don't know what you mean with what you say about the thread with every letter not yet used...:confused: Like most others it is not my intention to bother or offend anyone, but only to throw topics up for discussion that I think are interesting...

    As you rightly say, this is not a new concept... however, what could be new about it if TESLA were to embrace the idea is to have an all electric mass market flying car by TESLA's standards...
    As to whether TESLA should consider it or not, Elon Musk has already talked about being perfectly placed for developing a supersonic electric plane by combining the experiences of both TESLA and SpaceX, so the "flyingcar" should equally be doable...

    In my opinion is just a matter of time for such vehicles to take to the roads and airways, and that niche market is up for grabs.
    Regards
     
  6. Soflason

    Soflason Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2013
    Messages:
    544
    Location:
    FL
    #6 Soflason, Jul 29, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 13, 2016
    Very cool, especially like their video for future transport concept flight vehicle...

     
  7. fjavifp

    fjavifp Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2013
    Messages:
    122
    Location:
    Madrid - Spain
    #7 fjavifp, Jul 29, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 13, 2016
    It is very cool indeed!!
    :wink:
     
  8. AnOutsider

    AnOutsider S532 # XS27

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2009
    Messages:
    11,923
    Sorry Javier, there was no offense taken from your post (nor did I mean any offense), I was more commenting on how many Tesla Model [Letter] threads seem to pop up. Agreed it could be doable, and MIGHT (though I doubt it) be something Elon would want to do, but you said Tesla and I don't think Tesla should be doing this.
     
  9. fjavifp

    fjavifp Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2013
    Messages:
    122
    Location:
    Madrid - Spain
    Hi AnOutsider,

    Thanks for that! :cool:

    To be honest I have no idea if it could be something worth considering by Elon... I have no market analysis or technology development timelines to be in a position to assess feasibility, profitability and all such things, but I do know there are others who are looking into it...

    Years ago I myself took part in NASA's Advanced General Aviation Transport Experiments during my Aerospace Engineering studies, the whole purpose being to make general aviation accessible, safe and sustainable to the masses, and hence that one could immediately think of the move from the general public "simply" flying, to driving and flying in the same "vehicle"...) http://www.nasa.gov/centers/langley/news/factsheets/AGATE.html

    i also don't have a clue as to whether it is or not something for TESLA to do, but if not then maybe it could be for a spinoff company that merged TESLA's and SpaceX's knowhow, much like what was argued when speaking about a the supersonic electric plane... but, who knows...

    Regards.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dfo47iAjz54
     
  10. ElSupreme

    ElSupreme Model S 03182

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2012
    Messages:
    4,279
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    Hmmm. A MegaWatt of power lifts you. That is a lot of juice.

    I honestly don't think flying cars will ever work. Beyond the logistics and crash concerns (which can be overcome) there still is the required power. I don't think we will be able to ever waste that much energy in our own atmosphere.

    True flying cars won't ever be mainstream. Maybe sometime in the distant future we will get some magnetic hovering vehicles, but I don't think there will ever be the energy production (and dissipation) needed to have true flying vehicles.
     
  11. vfx

    vfx Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Messages:
    14,792
    Location:
    CA CA
    Quote from a random blogger in 2005.

    "Hmmmm 85kWh. That is a lot of juice.

    I honestly don't think electric cars will ever work. Beyond the logistics and crash concerns (which can be overcome) there still is the required power. I don't think we will be able to ever waste that much energy in our own atmosphere.

    True electric cars won't ever be mainstream. Maybe sometime in the distant future we will get some half electric, half gasoline vehicles, but I don't think there will ever be the energy production (and dissipation) needed to have true electric vehicles."
     
  12. ElSupreme

    ElSupreme Model S 03182

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2012
    Messages:
    4,279
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    I really meant that a MW is a lot of power. Regardless if storing the energy or producing the power it is doable. Dumping that much pure heat into the atmosphere times millions of vehicles is not a good idea.

    85kWh is not a lot of energy, 1MWh is a good bit of energy. Driving a flying car for an hour would be ~1MWh, which would be well only roughly equivalent of the heat put out by burning 30 gallons of gasoline in a single hour. Or think of it as 15 times more energy than a standard vehicle.

    I don't think humanity will have that amount of spare energy for a very, very, long time.
     
  13. fjavifp

    fjavifp Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2013
    Messages:
    122
    Location:
    Madrid - Spain
    Hi all,
    Those are really interesting calculations! Thanks for sharing!

    If I understand correctly, it is then a problem a heat dissipation into the atmosphere more than anything else? Are there ways to reduce that amount of heat or to reuse it somehow (as in the case of regen breaks)?

    Regards
     
  14. ElSupreme

    ElSupreme Model S 03182

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2012
    Messages:
    4,279
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA

    Well no. I have a tendency to equate inefficient energy use with waste heat (in ends up that way). There really isn't a problem with heat. But the shear amount of energy required to move a flying car isn't something that can really be overcome. I think the world will have much much better things to do with that much energy. Like build personal mass rapid transit, build better roads, model traffic to improve the way roads are controlled, producing trashy reality tv, and managing fantasy football teams.
     
  15. fjavifp

    fjavifp Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2013
    Messages:
    122
    Location:
    Madrid - Spain
    Hahahaha!
    I guess you're right...
     
  16. deonb

    deonb Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2013
    Messages:
    3,020
    Location:
    Redmond, WA
    In other words, a third of the gasoline usage of a Bugatti Veyron when travelling at the same speed as the flying car.

    It's all about perspective... :)


    Except, this is not a rotary wing. The power to VTOL vs. cruising a fixed-wing airplane is not anywhere close to the same ballpark. Yes, you'd need the 1MW during takeoff but NOT during flight.

    Small airplanes get around 10 to 20 mpg during actual flight, so similarly you should be able to use around 40kW during straight and level flying for this craft.
     
  17. kevin99

    kevin99 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2013
    Messages:
    865
    Location:
    SF Bay Area, CA
    #17 kevin99, Aug 4, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 13, 2016
    Awesome! I hope I made enough money to get one of these! I thought with Model S, the future is already here. Now I have the future of future to look forward to...

    Should Tesla buy terrafugia then? It is a nice story to have, also practical. I see it has broader custom than the Roadster. I would buy transition or the TF-X when they morph to more regular car-looking. Anyone know when will these in production?

    It is a nice story, now nobody need to take the Model S for 300+ miles long trip, just fly one!

    Looks like I should go get the pilot license first.
     
  18. constraint

    constraint Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2012
    Messages:
    131
    Location:
    Minnesota
    I flew a piper warrior for a number of years which is a 4 passenger fixed wing with a 160 HP engine that cruised at 120 mph. And while i used full power to take off and climb, i could reach 120 mph with maybe 60 percent throttle. You don't need a lot of power to stay up in the air and cruise its just that since the speed limit below 10,000 feet is 290 mph and above 10,000 feet Mach 0.999999 aircraft designers frequently put more HP behind their aircraft to hit higher speeds. If you are traveling 200 mph of course you will burn more energy then traveling at 80 in your car by a wide margin, but for a lot of people the difference in energy is well worth increased speed.

    The real reason why no one flies in general aviation is everything is so expensive to purchase and maintain. Brand new starter aircraft are $200k, insurance is $3k-$8k a year depending on experience level and just the overhaul interval on the ICE power plant equates to $10 per flight hour (2000 hour TBO for ~$20k cost). Avgas or Jet A is a big expense line but when you go and rent an aircraft at an FBO fuel equates to maybe 40 percent of the cost of use while insurance, storage and maintenance costs take up the difference.
     
  19. Lloyd

    Lloyd Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2011
    Messages:
    4,886
    Location:
    San Luis Obispo, CA
    Try an entry level Turboprop Pilatus PC-12. New acquisition 4.5 mil. DOC's (direct operating cost) about $900 per flight hour, 3500 hour TBO (time before overhaul) costing $250,000 minimum. Insurance at 25,000 per year. Jet fuel averaging $5.25 per gallon. Why am I in this business?
     
  20. constraint

    constraint Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2012
    Messages:
    131
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Like I said the faster you want to go the more expensive it is. In this case the Pilatus PC-12 is like a 1200 HP Ford E-350 that can carry 9 passengers. Best thing i did was get out of aviation. Only thing that would get me back in is winning the lottery or if my buy order of Tesla actually executed at $38 a share:mad:.
     

Share This Page