Flying Saucer, Runs on ethonal, Stays 10 Feet Off the ground, 50 MPH

User45701

http://blog.scifi.com/tech/archives/2007/07/24/flying_saucer_i.html

only 90,000 not bad for what your getting, no traffic!
i would have put this in cars and automobiles but is it really one? its not.

Terry

Dude, seriously.
Lay off the weed.

8k2q1gfcz9s5d4

Terry wrote:

Dude, seriously.
Lay off the weed.

well said,
but 10 feet, will that get him high enough? (pun intended:p )

Kintarō Hattori

Psssst- they've been around since the late 50's:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avrocar_%28aircraft%29

Wonder why you can only get one now. And that picture is suspicous looking. The guy's hair, clothes and the colour saturation of the pic all look very 70's.

Oriel

That photo is straight from the 70s.

JIZZLORD

he looks like hitler and steve buscemi's lovechild

Dragan

Where the **** would i put my shopping/gym bag/dead hooker?

seamus

As a science teacher said to me years ago:

"How many people do you see driving down the road that you know shouldn't even be allowed hold the keys?

Do you honestly think any of these people should be allowed control something that can fly?"

User45701

Terry wrote:

Dude, seriously.
Lay off the weed.

Well there is allot of it around at the moment and weeds season 3 has the first 3 episodes out, episode 4 soon too i hope

seamus wrote:

As a science teacher said to me years ago:

"How many people do you see driving down the road that you know shouldn't even be allowed hold the keys?

Do you honestly think any of these people should be allowed control something that can fly?"

Fair point, still tho to be the first to drive one down grafton st would be quite funny.

What are the laws on drink driving, are they very vague? or do they say any transportation vehicile or mammel ?
Or are the laws precise? does it saying something like automobile which wouldnt cover this

seamus

User45701 wrote:

What are the laws on drink driving, are they very vague? or do they say any transportation vehicile or mammel ?
Or are the laws precise? does it saying something like automobile which wouldnt cover this

You could be fairly sure that most, if not all of our laws which apply to road vehicles, wouldn't apply to this vehicle.

However, you would probably fall under the jurisdiction of the Air Tranportation acts, and any other laws which pertain to air travel, which are an altogether more strict set of items

Kintarō Hattori

But would it fall under Air Transportation rules Seamus. It's not actually flying, it's just in Ground Effect. It's more or less sitting on a cushion of air.

Marksie

seamus wrote:

However, you would probably fall under the jurisdiction of the Air Tranportation acts, and any other laws which pertain to air travel, which are an altogether more strict set of items

and with the storms and high winds?

You would be off like a frisbee or flipped on your side and rolling away like a hubcap

But i see that the gardai alreaduy have the traffic corps deivision working on the case

http://www.britannica.com/eb/art-73059

seamus

eo980 wrote:

But would it fall under Air Transportation rules Seamus. It's not actually flying, it's just in Ground Effect. It's more or less sitting on a cushion of air.

But so is all air travel (effectively)

Considering though that we don't see many hovercraft shooting down our roads, I have a feeling that anything which can't rely on friction to keep it on course would be a nightmare after about half an hour (as Marksie points out).

lostexpectation

I take your flying saucer and give a submarine yacht

http://blog.scifi.com/tech/archives/2006/05/12/proteus_yacht_c.html

MooseJam

if made to pick i'd take the saucer, i'd say it would be great fun zipping down the m50 at 10 feet