Are Hovering Cars the Future of Transportation?

In summary: MagLev concept is applied to cars, for example)? In summary, the conversation discusses the feasibility of using hovering cars as a means of transportation. While they may seem like a better alternative due to their lack of friction and potential for speed, there are many practical challenges to consider such as navigating hills, water, and wind, as well as the high energy requirements and complexity of building and operating them. Additionally, there may not be enough resources in the world to create a sufficient amount of maglev track and transitioning
  • #1
Abheer Parashar
4
1
TL;DR Summary
Are hovering cars actually sensible to be used ?
Hello everyone, I am Abheer and I am a high school student. I wanted to ask that in few sci-fi films I saw hovering cars and now I am wondering, are they really a better alternative than 'wheeled' cars in general (like saving energy being wasted due to friction and also being fast), or are they just good for sci-fi and will cause huge infra expenditure to set up and tough to maintain (if the MagLev concept is applied to cars, for example) ?
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
  • #2
Wheels keep trains on the track. Maglev follows a rail, but without wheels. Tyres keep cars on the road. A hover car has no rails. A hover car would need some way of not sliding sideways, down the hill.
 
  • Like
Likes Lnewqban
  • #3
You might think about how hard you would have to work to hold a car in the air. If you haven't tried it, ask a parent, teacher, or neighbor to help you jack up a car to change a flat tire. When you get thru, realize that you have raised less than half the car weight.

Unfortunately that energy is not free, it has to come from SOMEWHERE... and it is a lot more than the friction losses, which are there only during movement.

Keep up the creative thinking though! That is how progress is made.

Cheers,
Tom
 
  • Like
Likes Lnewqban
  • #4
Abheer Parashar said:
TL;DR Summary: Are hovering cars actually sensible to be used ?
Well, let's think about some of the difficulties/challenges:
  • How do they go up and down hills?
  • What happens when several of them are near each other?
  • What happens when there is a light surface of water when it's raining?
  • How do they act in a heavy rain?
  • How do they act in strong winds?
  • How do they turn corners and what effect might that have on other hovercraft around them?
  • How do they stop and what effect might that have on others around them, especially if there are a line of them at a stoplight?
I could go on, but perhaps you get the point.
 
  • Like
Likes Vanadium 50, Abheer Parashar and Lnewqban
  • #5
Tom.G said:
You might think about how hard you would have to work to hold a car in the air. If you haven't tried it, ask a parent, teacher, or neighbor to help you jack up a car to change a flat tire. When you get thru, realize that you have raised less than half the car weight.

Unfortunately that energy is not free, it has to come from SOMEWHERE... and it is a lot more than the friction losses, which are there only during movement.

Keep up the creative thinking though! That is how progress is made.

Cheers,
Tom
It means that just to escape from the effect of friction of wheeled cars, the hovering cars are stupidity bcz they require more power ?
 
  • #6
If you insist, I can go along with that. But there is no need to beat yourself up over it.

Cheers,
Tom
 
  • #7
There's a reason that helicopters and other aircraft based on similar principles aren't used to transport goods except in very special cases. They just aren't efficient enough. Hovering cars run into the same issue. As a comparison, the Bell 206 JetRanger is a 4-passenger helicopter weighing 3300 lbs at max takeoff weight. This is comparable to a Toyota Camry in weight and passenger capacity. The JetRanger uses about 115 liters of fuel (30 gallons) per hour of flying and does about 115 MPH at average cruising speed. Assuming that the best fuel efficiency occurs somewhere around cruising speed, this is a fuel efficiency of about 4 mpg, less than 1/10th of a modern Toyota Camry.

Even if this back of the envelope math is off by a factor of 2x or even 3x, a helicopter comes nowhere near the fuel efficiency of a modern car. Hovering cars suffer from the same limitations in addition to being MUCH more complicated to build and operate and much more dangerous in the event of 'driver' error or equipment malfunction compared to ground cars.
 
  • Like
Likes CalcNerd and Lnewqban
  • #8
Abheer Parashar said:
Are hovering cars actually sensible to be used ?
Depends on the application o0)
https://www.craneblogger.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/Lawn-mower-crane-hedge-trim.jpg
... Joke aside, I think they would be more like some kind of low-end helicopters than real cars: and that brings the special driving licence and lots of safety considerations. More bother than fun, in the foreseeable future.
But of course, if you have enough wealth to waste and wide grasslands to traverse then they would be a considerable option.
 
  • Like
Likes Lnewqban
  • #9
There are about 25 million km of highways in the world. Is there enough copper in the world to make the coils for that much maglev track?

1669301465523.png


Alternatively, what happens when a maglev car reaches the end of maglev track and needs to continue on conventional roads?
 
  • Like
Likes Lnewqban
  • #10
Abheer Parashar said:
TL;DR Summary: Are hovering cars actually sensible to be used ?

Hello everyone, I am Abheer and I am a high school student. I wanted to ask that in few sci-fi films I saw hovering cars and now I am wondering, are they really a better alternative than 'wheeled' cars in general (like saving energy being wasted due to friction and also being fast), or are they just good for sci-fi and will cause huge infra expenditure to set up and tough to maintain (if the MagLev concept is applied to cars, for example) ?
Welcome to PF!

A self powering hovering car the Avrocar has been built in the 1950's. Here is a short video. If it interests you you can look at some of the longer design videos that will be linked.



You can judge for yourself if it seems practical.
 
  • #11
Um yeah...it's called gravity and gravity is a big problem for flight on earth.

To the best of my knowledge the cheapest method for a single-person transit these days isn't a car but electric scooter which is even more efficient than say solar car and obviously fossil fuel cars or bikes and to give you the number an electric scooter can be 10, 15 or even 20 times more efficient than personal ultralight airplane. Example: an ultralight airplane powered by diesel fuel can burn say 2 litres of diesel per 100km which is some 76 megajoules while for 100km el. scooter can use 5 megajoules or less. Of course with an airplane you have the advantage to fly through shortcut but it's more noisy and riskier. It's also much faster.

Have a look at this fantastic explanation of how much energy would you need to deal with gravity while flying, and since you said you're highschool student just ignore the integral/parenthesis/exotic symbols and focus on the simple multiplication and division to see the real calculation:

https://www.learnthermo.com/examples/example-problem
 
  • #12
@gggnano The OP was last seen 3 weeks ago. Looks like he left 4 days after joining, so don't expect an answer.
 
  • Like
Likes gggnano
  • #13
gggnano said:
To the best of my knowledge the cheapest method for a single-person transit these days isn't a car but electric scooter which is even more efficient than say solar car and obviously fossil fuel cars or bikes and to give you the number an electric scooter can be 10, 15 or even 20 times more efficient than personal ultralight airplane.
Nope. :smile:

https://www.bicycling.com/rides/a20039883/9-ways-to-make-bike-commuting-easier/
 

Attachments

  • 1670892467183.png
    1670892467183.png
    133.3 KB · Views: 103
  • Like
Likes gggnano
  • #15
bob012345 said:
Are you answering cheapest or most efficient or both?
I bicycle for food... :smile:
 
  • Like
Likes bob012345
  • #16
berkeman said:
I bicycle for food... :smile:
In Dallas we actually have bike trails all around the city.
 
  • Like
Likes berkeman
  • #17
bob012345 said:
In Dallas we actually have bike trails all around the city.
In Shreveport we often don't even have sidewalks, let alone bike trails. I have a sidewalk in front of my house, but one of the main cross roads connected to my street does not.
 
  • #18
berkeman said:
I bicycle for food... :smile:
Sounds like a pretty low pay rate. :wink:
 
  • Like
Likes berkeman

FAQ: Are Hovering Cars the Future of Transportation?

What is the difference between hovering cars and wheeled cars?

The main difference between hovering cars and wheeled cars is the way they move. Hovering cars use a technology called magnetic levitation to float above the ground, while wheeled cars use wheels to roll on the ground. This difference in movement also affects factors such as speed, maneuverability, and energy consumption.

Which type of car is more efficient?

It depends on the specific technology and design of the car. Generally, hovering cars have the potential to be more efficient as they do not have to overcome friction from the ground. However, they also require a constant power source to maintain the magnetic levitation, which can impact their overall efficiency. Wheeled cars, on the other hand, have a more established technology and can be designed for efficient energy consumption.

Are hovering cars safer than wheeled cars?

There is no clear answer to this question as it depends on various factors such as the technology, design, and regulations. Hovering cars may have the potential to reduce accidents caused by road obstacles and traffic, but they also come with their own set of safety concerns such as potential malfunctions in the magnetic levitation system. Wheeled cars have a longer history and established safety regulations, but they are still prone to accidents on the road.

What are the limitations of hovering cars?

One of the main limitations of hovering cars is the need for a specialized infrastructure. They require specific roads or tracks with magnetic fields to operate, which can be expensive to build and maintain. Additionally, hovering cars may not be suitable for all terrains and weather conditions, making them less versatile than wheeled cars.

Will hovering cars replace wheeled cars in the future?

It is difficult to predict the future, but it is unlikely that hovering cars will completely replace wheeled cars. Both types of cars have their own advantages and limitations, and it is more likely that they will coexist and serve different purposes. However, advancements in technology and infrastructure could potentially increase the use of hovering cars in certain areas or for specific purposes.

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
8K
Replies
19
Views
11K
Replies
28
Views
8K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
4K
Replies
10
Views
4K
Back
Top