This flying machine comes from 1974. I first thought it was a hoax. It is not, it is abandonned technology. Why?

 

 

My link

because it was only a novelty it served no practical purpose that would encourage financial investment.

 

I know nobody likes to think of it in terms of money but developing single person flying machines is difficult and costly and there doesn't tend to be a lot of demand for them outside a novelty market. nobody wants to invest millions in perfecting one only to have it cost as much as a house, be very few in existance and then the owners won't be able to actually fly them to to aviation regulations.

This flying machine comes from 1974. I first thought it was a hoax. It is not, it is abandonned technology. Why?

 

 

My link

My guess

 

-too expensive

-too noisy

-too dangerous (tippy?)

-too hard to fly

-gas eater

Edited June 12, 201114 yr by Brainteaserfan

Maybe , there were restrictions on information available to the public and as more is made widely available , somebody with enough money to burn will take that idea and make a very modern toy .

 

 

Maybe , there were restrictions on information available to the public and as more is made widely available , somebody with enough money to burn will take that idea and make a very modern toy .

 

Like this?

 

http://www.tecaeromex.com/ingles/RB-i.htm

I was quite young in 1984 but did see the olympics then . I thought the actual flying done was a hollywood trick like the A-Team .

No company would dare sell one. In case the buyer fell off it, or crashed into something - then engaged a lawyer, who'd sue the company to beggary.

 

For a similar reason, we can't have "flying wing" airliners. Even though they'd be much more efficient.

A "flying wing" would be a radical design change. This change would be blamed, by the lawyers, for causing any subsequent crash.

So the aircraft companies keep on making the existing crude design: a tube body, with two wings stuck on it. Which is no advance from the Boeing-707 of the late 1950's.

 

Further progress in civil aviation, would require the suppression of the lawyers, but aren't they too powerful, especially in America?

This flying machine comes from 1974. I first thought it was a hoax. It is not, it is abandonned technology. Why?

My link

 

My guess is that it probably lacks in range. A soda can with a jet engine, not too much space for fuel!

I bet the military evaluated an attack version with a minigun and hellfire missiles, though!

 

 

Further progress in civil aviation, would require the suppression of the lawyers, but aren't they too powerful, especially in America?

 

Rule of lawsuit!