A story over at Popular Science tells about how they flew Icon's A5 "The Affordable-ish Personal Airplane For Everyone". Could this finally be my flying car?
Icon has spent seven years developing a two-seat light sport aircraft simple and safe enough that anyone can learn to fly it. The A5 is that aircraft, and to test the hypothesis Hawkins gives me control of the airplane in one of the busiest airspaces in America.
The A5 is a departure from what most people would typically think of as a small, propeller-driven airplane. Able to take off and land from both runway and water, it looks more like a winged jet ski than a Cessna. The rear-mounted propeller makes for an unobstructed forward view. The wings fold and sweep rearward, allowing the A5 to sit on a trailer for towing and fit through a garage door. Its 100-horsepower engine runs on regular automotive fuel. Perhaps most importantly, the A5 is packed with a number of innovative safety features that make it a very forgiving aircraft for pilots of all skill levels.
The A5 can trace its roots directly back to an Federal Aviation Administration rule change in 2004 that created a new classification of pilot's license and aircraft. The Light Sport Aircraft rule and associated Sport Pilot License created the regulatory space for a new type of recreational airplane meeting certain weight and performance requirements. It also created a lower barrier to entry for pilots wanting to fly these slow-moving, lightweight, fair-weather-only aircraft.
Weighing just 1,000 pounds empty, the A5 tops out just above 100 miles per hour but only needs to be moving 40 to 50 miles per hour at takeoff (a low stall speed is among the FAA's light sport aircraft requirements). It requires less than 900 feet for takeoff and landing on water and less than 650 feet on a runway. It can travel 427 nautical miles on a tank of gas.
At roughly $200,000 for the most basic model, the A5 isn't aimed at everyone. But Hawkins is banking on the idea that there are a whole lot of people out there that see a $200,000 personal airplane as a more rewarding investment than a boat or sports car. Icon delivered its first A5 to a customer in July and has deposits for 1,500 more.
Related Stories
Uber Aims to Make its Flying Car Service Cheaper Than Ground Car Ownership
At Uber's Elevate conference, the company revealed some price targets for its upcoming vertical takeoff and landing flying taxi service:
The passenger cost per mile, [Uber Head of Elevate Eric] Allison said, needs to be competitive with the variable cost of car ownership. Car ownership, on a per mile basis, costs between $0.464 to $0.608, according to AAA.
However, uberAIR will not be cheaper on a cost per passenger mile at launch. Initially, uberAIR will cost $5.73 per passenger mile. In the near-term, Uber says it will get the cost down to $1.86 per passenger mile before ideally getting to $0.44 per passenger mile. At that point, it would actually be cheaper to use uberAIR.
uberAIR is scheduled to begin testing in 2020, with the first official passenger trip in 2023.
Additionally, Uber will collaborate with NASA and the U.S. Army on its uberAIR plans:
(Score: 2) by isostatic on Tuesday October 13 2015, @11:13AM
I leave my $30k (when new) car on the driveway for weeks at a time without using it. It gets a service and MOT once a year which costs about £200.
A $100k car would cost a bit more, but still people leave them on driveways.
What are the ongoing costs of a $200k car? In the order of a sports car? I'm thinking maintenence, certification, and hangering.
(Score: 3, Informative) by scruffybeard on Tuesday October 13 2015, @12:28PM
This site [secretentourage.com] describes $2000 oil changes and $4000 spark plugs for some exotic cars. My quick look at the price of a new single piston plane suggests that you could buy something decent for $150k-$300k. So just about the same price as the Icon A5. This site [gnjpc.com] says you can get used planes much cheaper, $15-$35k. Total annual costs are around $3k for fuel, maintenance, insurance, and a place to park it.
(Score: 2) by isostatic on Tuesday October 13 2015, @01:03PM
Total annual costs are around $3k for fuel, maintenance, insurance, and a place to park it.
That's really not bad, you could easilly spend that much on a car even if you have somewhere to park it.
Obviously that depends how much you're going to use it, and how much maintenence you do yourself.
(Score: 2) by scruffybeard on Tuesday October 13 2015, @01:39PM
That was my thought too. I have friends who own RVs who put out about the same amount of money. I am not sure that I see the Icon A5 catching on in a big way as the article suggests, but it is definitely a contender for this class of hobbyists.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Tuesday October 13 2015, @09:33PM
Total annual costs are around $3k for fuel, maintenance, insurance, and a place to park it.
That's really not bad, you could easilly spend that much on a car even if you have somewhere to park it.
Obviously that depends how much you're going to use it, and how much maintenence you do yourself.
No, that's not even close to realistic.
You only get away with 3K per year if you DON'T fly it much, strictly recreationally, a few times a month. There is no way
you can compare that to the typical car and a commuting situation.
Having owned one in the past, an Airplane is similar to a large boat: Its a hole in sky into which you throw money.
Lots of money.
You are NOT going to do maintenance yourself. Earning an AP license is expensive and time consuming.
If if you live on rural route 27 in west texas you might have enough land to put in a grass strip, but just about
anywhere else you will be restricted to the airport, with fees.
You will never have your flying car. Get over it.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 3, Informative) by zimluura on Tuesday October 13 2015, @01:04PM
So why get *that* airplane, when for the same price i could get something sportier
http://www.internationaljets.com/jetaircraft.html [internationaljets.com]
(Score: 2) by joshuajon on Tuesday October 13 2015, @03:54PM
I believe the article suggested that ease of use, and ease of licensing is what makes this a promising hobbyist vehicle. As compared to the fighter-jet you linked which would probably require significantly more training.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 13 2015, @05:22PM
Given you can get one of those jets for USD90k I'm sure you can buy a fair bit of training and practice with the difference.
Heck USD200k buys you a fair number of flights in a MIG29: http://www.flymigsokol.com/prices_flight_mig29 [flymigsokol.com]
(Score: 4, Funny) by wonkey_monkey on Tuesday October 13 2015, @11:20AM
sweep rearward
I remember him from such films as Hands Off My Horse and The Calico Kid.
the A5 isn't aimed at everyone.
I'd hope it isn't aimed at anyone.
But Hawkins is banking
I spoke too soon. Ruuuun!
systemd is Roko's Basilisk
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Tuesday October 13 2015, @11:31AM
We're supposed to have flying cars in a little over a week, according to Back to the Future.
Oh, and hoverboards that are common toys for small children.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2) by isostatic on Tuesday October 13 2015, @11:51AM
Hoverboards: http://www.hitfix.com/the-dartboard/happy-2015-heres-your-first-hoverboard-commercial [hitfix.com]
Already banned, 50 years before BTTF3: http://www.legalcheek.com/2015/10/the-law-from-1835-that-bans-hoverboards/ [legalcheek.com]
(Score: 4, Funny) by takyon on Tuesday October 13 2015, @11:52AM
Submit stories bemoaning that, and we'll merge them into a megapost on October 21, 2015.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by takyon on Tuesday October 13 2015, @12:57PM
It's true; this submission [soylentnews.org] is waiting to be merged with other BTTF stories.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by SrLnclt on Tuesday October 13 2015, @01:32PM
There were actually some things Back to the Future 2 did predict. Like Doc telling Marty not to bend the brim of his new hat if he wants to blend in with the current style.
The jury is still out on the Chicago Cubs, even though the date of the World Series is likely off by a couple weeks.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Magic Oddball on Tuesday October 13 2015, @01:38PM
Considering how horrible a lot of people are at driving on normal roads, the idea of having them flying is seriously disturbing. Just imagine the number of crashes & innovative ways to run people down while texting or taking photos of themselves — does that really sound like a good idea?
I admit that I'm torn between, "hey, flying would make it easier to quickly change lanes in the MacArthur Maze From Hell when I'm trying to reach Kaiser Oakland and realize at the last minute that I'm heading for the SF Bay Bridge again" and, of course, "holy shit, people will be making kamikaze lane-changes in places like the Maze upon realizing they're in the wrong one at the very last minute!"
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 13 2015, @04:47PM
> Because people don't crash normal cars enough...
Personal flying cars will never take off until they can be fully automated. That might actually be easier than automated road cars since there are so many less obstacles to worry about in the air. But landing will still be a bitch.
(Score: 2) by subs on Tuesday October 13 2015, @05:38PM
This is an aircraft, not a car. It requires a fully-licensed pilot with all of the training that that entails. They don't just expect Joe Blow from the street to be able to control the aircraft. If you'd like to know the gory details of what a minimal private pilot's license entails, it's all helpfully laid out in FAR Part 61 Subpart E [ecfr.gov] (FAR applies if you're in the States; other countries have their own equivalent regulatory language, all conforming to common ICAO annexes). If you'd like to see just the oral portion of the final exams, here you go [youtube.com].
(Score: 2) by fnj on Tuesday October 13 2015, @07:33PM
First of all, you are absolutely correct that Dudley Doright is not legally allowed to wake up one morning, jump into this thing and fly it on a whim. However ...
Did you read TFS? The whole point of this particular aircraft is that it conforms to the Light Sport Aircraft rule and associated Sport Pilot License. The quick summary is that a Light Sport Aircraft is limited to 2 seats, 600 kg MTOW, unpressurized, fixed landing gear, 120 knots max CAS at sea level at max continuous power, 45 knots max CAS stall speed without lift enhancement.
They are NOT type certificated; just CoC. Surprisingly, you are not only allowed to charge your passenger a share of true operating expenses, but you can fly for hire or as a business. There are legal requirements for approved maintenance.
The Sport Pilot License is no joke, but the requirements are relaxed from Private Pilot. You need ground training, aeronautical knowledge instruction, 20 hours of flight time including 5 hours of solo, 10 takeoffs and landings, one 75 nautical mile cross-country flight with 2 intermediate landings. There is some verbiage that is not altogether clear to me that indicates that maybe you could be allowed to pilot without an FAA medical certificate, but just a driver's license in addition to your Sport Pilot License.
The regime is not by any means as wide open libre as microlight, but requirements are considerably relaxed from general aviation.
Refs.: [1] [wikipedia.org], [2] [aopa.org]
(Score: 2) by subs on Tuesday October 13 2015, @07:55PM
Yes, I know, that's why they classed it as an LSA (bigger potential market). Personally, I find LSA to be too restrictive, hence why I got a PPL. The general Light category (up to 12,500 lbs, IIRC) also don't require type certification, only a class certificate, which everybody gets with a PPL (in the EU we call this the SEP(L), single engine piston (light); not sure about the US equivalent). Moreover, in the EU I'm not barred from cost-sharing a ride. Regardless, my point was not to illustrate that an LSA classification is in itself a problem. The problem is it's an LSA that costs north of $200k! That's BS. You can already get a fine LSA for less than half that and there's lots manufacturers of this class. So my problem is partly the article and partly the company hyping BS product to an uneducated audience. IOW, I hate the dishonesty.
(Score: 2) by subs on Tuesday October 13 2015, @07:59PM
Apologies, I thought you were responding to another of my comments. I understand that with this thing all you need is a sport license, but it's still a heck of a lot more than one needs for a driver's license. The reason I used the PPL as an example of a "minimal" license is because that's what I can quickly find in the FAR. Admittedly, that was inaccurate on my part.
(Score: 2) by Hyperturtle on Tuesday October 13 2015, @06:04PM
that's ok -- in the future, we'll get uber for planes. That'll keep the idiots off the road, err sky.
Those guys are licensed professionals, right?
(Score: 3, Informative) by subs on Tuesday October 13 2015, @01:44PM
$200k base price for a LSA? What the hell are these guys smoking? You can get a nicely equipped two-seater CZAW SportCruiser for ~$120k. A two-seater Diamond DA-20 also lists for around $180k. And both of these are in the light category, not just LSA. Or if you're willing to go used, a can get a four-seater DA-40 from 2006 [controller.com] with a full glass-cockpit G1000, IFR certified, autopilot and all that jazz for way less.
(Score: 2) by bzipitidoo on Tuesday October 13 2015, @02:53PM
After 100k miles without frequent enough oil changes, worn suspension that's not worth fixing, mystery rattles and squeaks, a car is more prone to breaking down. A break down can be very inconvenient but often not life threatening unless your steering linkage comes apart or a wheel comes off while on the highway, or your brakes fail at a bad moment. Even an engine fire from a ruptured gas line isn't instantly deadly. Within 15 seconds, can bring a car to a stop and get out.
To treat an aircraft like that is much more dangerous. What's the equivalent of a steering linkage failure for an aircraft? Getting stuck in a death spiral, or just falling right out of the air. An engine fire? You can't get down to the ground and out in 15 seconds, unless you fly very low. So, have a parachute, bail, and let the aircraft crash, hoping it doesn't smash into someone's home and kill people?
The flying car is a nice dream. Someday it will be reality, but this doesn't sound like the breakthrough that will do that.
(Score: 2) by subs on Tuesday October 13 2015, @08:11PM
how safe is it with minimal maintenance? After 100k miles without frequent enough oil changes, worn suspension that's not worth fixing, mystery rattles and squeaks, a car is more prone to breaking down.
Of course, breakdowns happen in aviation too, but the maintenance requirements are much higher and are strictly enforced. Every aviation authority does conduct random inspections of the maintenance records at various airports. Unless you keep your maintenance schedules and records properly, expect a nasty surprise in your mail, possibly with a grounding. OTOH, as pilots we are trained and understand that our lives depend on the aircraft being in good shape, so few pilots would willingly step into an aircraft that isn't up to snuff.
What's the equivalent of a steering linkage failure for an aircraft?
Very rarely, control failures happen, but they are not necessarily fatal. Engine failures are much more frequent and usually are quite survivable (we even practice these during training). It really depends on the details of a particular failure and pilot skill.
So, have a parachute
This isn't actually such a crazy idea and some aircraft really have whole-aircraft parachutes. OTOH, some people believe it gives a false sense of safety.
this doesn't sound like the breakthrough that will do that
Agree, it is not. All this is is a overpriced light sport aircraft of very limited utility.
(Score: 2) by seeprime on Tuesday October 13 2015, @03:30PM
It's not a flying car, but I want one anyway. Do they take Visa?
(Score: 2) by subs on Tuesday October 13 2015, @05:42PM
If you seriously want to get into private flight, there's a cheaper way. Get licensed (up to ~$10k) and buy something used [controller.com] for a lot cheaper than $200k. "Used" in aviation doesn't mean broken or breaking down. If cars were maintained like aircraft are, they'd hardly ever break down, even after 20 years of use.
(Score: 2) by Rich on Wednesday October 14 2015, @01:55AM
In two short scenes at the end of Hayao Miyazaki's "Porco Rosso", a little jet airplane with a very similar layout can be seen. The "Piccolo" plane has Catalina-style gear and foldable outer-wing floats, though, a V-tail (to not burn up in the jet flow), and decelerons (like the A-10), to allow for safe touch-and-go without spool-up delay. I must've spent hours being fascinated about all the detail and thought Miyazaki put into that concept for just a few seconds. And I think it's much more elegant than what is presented here ;)
The only thing I haven't figured out is how the openings at the rear of the float step work. I think they have some on-water-manoeuvering function. Has anyone ever made an educated guess about this?