
Cars and commercial jets aren't the getaway craft they once were. Every year, Americans spend $78 billion dealing with traffic alone. Meanwhile, the "friendly skies" don't seem so nice anymore. Commercial aviation is so crowded that NASA is already researching ways to restructure air traffic on a point-to-point model using small regional airports. Compare that with the current state of the private airplane. Gas efficiency is already on the order of cars -- the new Icon A5, a light-sport aircraft on sale next year, will get 25 miles per gallon. And learning to fly has never been easier. A typical pilot's license costs about $10,000 and requires 40 hours of training. But in 2004 the FAA created a new designation for light-sport planes: those with one engine, a flight ceiling below 10,000 feet and a top speed of less than 138 mph. Light-sport certification takes half as long as usual. In response, entrepreneurs are rushing forward with intriguing ideas and options.
Sarus
Few cities or suburbs can fit the long runways that even light aircraft require. So, the thinking goes, you need either a flying car or a hovercraft to make personal flight truly convenient. One of the most novel ideas out there is the Sarus [left]. Designed by Boston-based firm AeroCopter, the plane is ringed by a 21-foot rotor, which lifts it off the ground. In flight, the rotor tilts 87 degrees and then switches power to the rear rotors to propel it forward. Inventor Siamak Yassini has built a scale model and is now seeking funding for a full-scale prototype.
Hy-Bird Solar
LISA, a French manufacturer of sport planes, has paired with solar-cell maker Trina Solar to create an electric airplane, dubbed the Hy-Bird, whose 65-foot wings will be covered in flexible solar panels. Stocked with the sun's energy, batteries will power the plane during takeoffs and charge all the instruments. Once aloft, the plane's electric motor will run on a hydrogen fuel cell stored behind the pilot's seat. The company has built a scale model of the plane and hopes to have a full-scale model ready for flight by the end of the year.
MS-1
If you can't afford one of the fancier planes, you can always buy a kit and build a single-engine puddle jumper for about $60,000. But an extra $50,000 gets you a big upgrade: MySky's new MS-1, a sleek two-seater with a single 120-horsepower motor set to debut in August. Like the light-sport Icon A5, it's easy to fly, with two sticks for steering and throttle, and a top speed of 138 mph. It's about $30,000 cheaper, though, and boasts better views -- an enormous bubble canopy lets pilots see straight down and all around.
Thinking about booking a ticket to space? Check out our guide to the leading carriers.
single pageThe incredible innovations, like drone swarms and perpetual flight, bringing aviation into the world of tomorrow. Plus: today's greatest sci-fi writers predict the future, the science behind the summer's biggest blockbusters, a Doctor Who-themed DIY 'bot, the organs you can do without, and much more.


Online Content Director: Suzanne LaBarre | Email
Senior Editor: Paul Adams | Email
Associate Editor: Dan Nosowitz | Email
Assistant Editor: Colin Lecher | Email
Assistant Editor: Rose Pastore | Email
Contributing Writers:
Kelsey D. Atherton | Email
Francie Diep | Email
Shaunacy Ferro | Email
I have a copy of popular mechanics from the late 50's that has a picture of a 'space plane' that looks uncannily similar to the one on page 2, with a similar claim of speed. They said we would have one by the late 1960's.
People will undoubtedly look at this article in 2015 and laugh, as they sit in the airport lounge waiting to be crammed into a 747.
Wasn't it aboout 1954 that AT&T boasted that within a decade most people would have a video-phone? I have yet to meet anyone who actually has ever had a video-phone... And I remember reading about the aborted Dyno-soar program that NASA seems to have forgotten about.
Science has promised me so much! Maybe by the year 2000 I'll have my robot butler, flying car, and vacation on the Moon.
Sorry if I seem a bit disillusioned. I really do want to believe! I want to live in a world where Heinlein and Clarke and Niven and others have imagined. :(
For the passenger-less bus, how do they figure that there is 600-some grams of carbon for passenger mile? There are no passengers.
so let down #56: Megaplane #57: Videophone
How difficult would it be to provide a website address to the manufacturers of the products featured in your articles?
extremely difficult.
"The blended wing's widened fuselage will make for amphitheater-like seating, with long, wide rows. Of course, there will be fewer window seats..." and fewer easy accessible exits, also! Imagine this amphiteater being evacuated after a ditching, a belly landing or an aborted takeoff. For this reason, Boeing reported two years ago: "While a commercial passenger application for the BWB concept is not in Boeing's current 20-year market outlook, the Advanced Systems organization of Boeing Integrated Defense Systems' (IDS) is closely monitoring the research based on the BWB's potential as a flexible, long-range, high-capacity military aircraft". Did they changed their minds? Waiting for an official announcement from Boeing...
not everyhing on ps is real. it not a promise, it a pridiction
Okay first of all - to those of you who poo poo science and the future let's all just look at where the hell we are right now...commenting on a computer that processes information millions of times faster than anything we envisioned 50 years ago...let along 10 years ago.
Second - you are right - planes not traveling at mach 10 to deliver people to tokyo not so much but I can call someone in Tokyo via my voip and it won't cost me much of anything. I can also see Tokyo via sat photo.
Third - as for video phone - 30 bucks x 2 for cams and a headset...no we didn't shrink it to cell phone size but we also didn't anticipate having handheld devices that could detect what song is playing then allow us to buy that song via our iphone.
Fourth - I doubt we figured we'd know EXACTLY where we all were via GPS to the foot through our cell phones 20 years ago.
Fifth - did someone just milk a goat and come up with a material 7x as strong as steel. Did someone write about "buckyballs" 20 years ago?
Ease up on the world of science...and remember that the Russians used a pencil in space while the Americans invented a material which helps keep my swim trunks shut and the military just used pig intestines to stop bleeding soldiers.
No one knows where science will lead. It takes an idea, a moment of opportunity and someone from left field to think out of the box.
Boeing's BWB is a better design than the tubes we fly today with 20% of the lift from the body and 25% better fuel economy per passenger. They say they can have it operational by 2020 but with the current 787 already years behind schedule, I don't see how they can make that claim. It is a totally untested design and will be at least 15 years if not 20 before one of these rolls out of the production line. There is a design waiting in the wings that could meet or beat that 2020 target production date.
Check out this plane www.burnelli.com/Welcome.html . This is the design of Vincent Justus Burnelli, a first generation Italian - American who strived to do great things for America.
This plane is the last design of over 40 years of the creativity of this one man. This design has a history of 9 fully functional planes, exemplary NASA wind tunnel tests and proven safety and crash worthiness. With this design's proven history, I believe test models could be built and tested, proven and ready for world-wide production and distribution within 7 years. As beantown179 says, "It takes an idea, a moment of opportunity and someone from left field to think out of the box."
I found this to be true with the company SpaceDev who's rocket design put SpaceShipOne into the history books. In that case it was Jim Benson, who built SpaceDev around this unconventional hybrid rocket motor design. He was the man with the money, the vision and the opportunity to take this rocket where no one had taken it before. SpaceDev has now been asked to join the SpaceShipTwo program to ensure its success.
The Burnelli 1964 design's potential needs the same type or person or group with the money and the vision. The opportunity is already there, with the airline industry living on the edge, charging us for baggage and soon for our weight. This plane's expectations far exceed Boeing's BWB design.
Boeing claims 20% lift from the body.
Burnelli's potential could be 50% or more.
Boeing claims 25% better fuel economy.
Burnelli's potential is 50% or more.
Costs and production time would be 1/2 or less.
Fares would be reduced from all these savings.
Take off and landing speeds as low as 100mph.
Shortened runways = reduced terminal costs.
Safety in emergency landings would increase 85% or more.
The majority I've spoken to in the 3 years I've been involved with this have recognized the qualities above intuitively. A few sceptics have shot this design down on their viewpoint alone. They claim that because no one built it, it wasn't worth building. Only testing will make it clear if this design is all that it looks and is claimed to be. So, why not test it and find out for sure?
I'm workin' on it.
My home built, 1964 Burnelli design, successful maiden flight, Dec. 20, 2008... and it flew really well.
aerodromedia.blogspot.com/ (http only no www, Toward the bottom, the white one) It flew "really" well. The yellow prop, bush plane is by another supporter out in California.
This is what we need...a plane w bars/lounges/spas...that's what I'm talkin about...i am tired of being herded into pencil shaped crammed airplanes that can go 19 hrs w/out refueling.
When are we going to find a way to make air travel just a little more 'civilized'?
There are always challenges to address, however, this is a step in the right direction.