Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

TESLA Model F

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
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.

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?

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:.
Hi all,
Very good inputs to note if there is ever going to be a sensible flying car, be it TESLA or something else.
Thanks
 
Considering that a 1 mWh battery pack would be like having 12 of Tesla's 85 kWh battery packs in the vehicle, one of those battery packs would let you drive a Model S from Chicago to Anchorage without charging. It would only let you fly your plane for an hour in hover mode, though. :wink:
 
Last edited:
Considering that a 1 mWh battery pack would be like having 12 of Tesla's 85 kWh battery packs in the vehicle, one of those battery packs would let you drive a Model S from Chicago to Anchorage without charging. It would only let you fly your plane for an hour in hover mode, though. :wink:
Yeap, I guess you are right...
The Terrafugia TF-X, if I understand correctly, is not meant for hover-type flight, but uses that capability for take-off and landing through its twin tilting 600hp electric motors pods, and then cruises horizontally at 200mph propelled by its 300hp ICE for a specified 500mile range. That's a 2 and 1/2 hour flight vs how long if driving? 8 (at 60mph)? I don't think is a bad concept...
They just have to do away with the ICE for cruise and settle for all electric. I personally would prefer this to a 1MW Model S capable of non-stop trip from Chicago to Anchorage - there's just no point in that thanks to the Supercharger network being developed. All they need IMO is the TESLA touch, specially for the driving part, and for the airworthiness authorities to give it their OK.
 
If I understand the physics correctly, once you are at speed, if you overcome drag, you basically get lift for free, in terms of energy. Just like it doesn't take any energy to keep a car at a fixed altitude on ground, keeping a plane at fixed altitude in the air doesn't require energy. How fast you have to go depends on your wings, so an aircraft with large wings can achieve enough lift at low speeds.

This does not bode well for the flying car. Flying at low speeds means large wings, or hovering, which takes a lot of power. Since runways take up a lot of space, flying cars would need to be able to hover. Without some breakthroughs, I can't see a flying care being reasonably priced. A toy for the rich could happen, but I don't see it at scale.

Mechanical equilibrium with the ground is just much easier to work with than aerodynamic equilibrium with the atmosphere, at least at low speeds.