Flying car. Forgetting history?

[auburnseeker]

I saw this article on Yahoo.  I guess there is something to journalists being lazy now a days and wondering why people are getting upset with their poor performance, if you can call it that , of their jobs. 

Maybe they have been hanging out with the meteorologists too long. 

Seems they don't look into history before writing articles like this 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/first-road-legal-flying-car-debut-geneva-motor-162945934.html

 

I seem to remember another car from 1949 that beat this to the punch, by decades.  

 

 

[JACK M]

My dad flew in the navy during WWII.

I remember him being very interested it the flying car when I was a kid in the 50s.

I also remember flying with him in some very small airplane that he used to rent.

[Stude Light]

I guess no different than the "all new" electric vehicle industry.

[60FlatTop]

 

[Gary_Ash]

Don't forget Waldo Waterman and his Aerobile, powered by a 1937 Studebaker Dictator 6-cylinder engine!  Here is a story I wrote back in 2007 for our Studebaker Drivers Club chapter newsletter:

 

Since the first airplanes took to the skies, pilots have wanted to be able to remove the wings from the plane and drive away from the airport.  Only a few planes have been successful at this, but this Studebaker airplane was one of them.

 

Hold on!, you say.  What could Studebaker possibly have to do with an airplane?  This story falls under the category of “strange, but true”.

In 1934, The U.S. Bureau of Air Commerce held a contest to design a light, easy-to-fly, affordable airplane.  Only two entries won awards, but the Arrowplane, designed by Waldo Waterman, was one that met all of the rigid specifications.  Encouraged by his success, Waldo formed a company and designed a version of the plane that could go on roads as well as fly.  It should be noted that Waterman was a true aviation pioneer, not a crackpot.  He built his first glider in 1909, trained with Glenn Curtiss, and later built airplanes in several of his own companies. 

Using a Studebaker engine with standard starter and generator, radiator, grille, and various interior parts, Waterman built a plane he called the Arrowbile with detachable wings.  Many of the other parts came from automotive stock bins with only the flight instruments from aircraft industry.  The 218 cu. in., 100 hp Studebaker Dictator 6 engine turned the propeller in the air and drove the wheels on the ground.

The first flight of the plane took place in February, 1937.  The Studebaker Corporation was so impressed by the result that they bought the company.  Plans were made to build five planes using Studebaker engines and parts.  Three of the planes took off from the factory in Santa Monica, California for the National Air Races in Cleveland in September, 1937.  While one was damaged during a landing in Arizona, the other two made it to Cleveland and performed well at the air show.  With the high wing and pusher propeller, the plane was very stable in flight and immune to stalls or spins.  Air speed was 120 mph, with 55 mph available on the ground.

 

Unfortunately, Waldo Waterman became ill in the summer of 1938 and the company was shut down.  Waterman bought the fourth plane (unfinished) and an engine from Studebaker in 1940, but WWII prevented its completion.  Following the war, Waterman acquired the sixth plane and rebuilt it.  While the Studebaker engine and grille were no longer used, the plane had its roots in the original design.  He installed a Tucker automobile engine, modified the wings and fuselage, and eventually got the plane registered and flying in 1957.  In 1961, the 1800 lb plane was donated to the Smithsonian Museum.  It is currently in the new Air and Space Museum near Dulles Airport in Virginia.

See https://airandspace.si.edu/collection-objects/waterman-aerobile for more information.

 

Photos below are of the Aerobile and Waldo Waterman.

 

 

Edited February 4, 2018 by Gary_Ash
Corrected bad link to Smithsonian (see edit history)

[8E45E]

I posted an Airmobile here:  http://forum.studebakerdriversclub.com/showthread.php?67649-Orphan-of-the-Day-12-16-1937-Airomobile

 

Craig

[D Yaros]

Being a former Pinto owner, I was always a fan of:

 

[1937hd45]

Maybe it is time I listed all my Fulton Airphibian literature and photos, it was built just north of me in Danbury, Ct.  In the 1960's Mr. Fulton had a P-51 Mustang based at the Danbury airport. Bob 

[auburnseeker]

Could be.  Most of my literature has been doing fairly well.  A few stand outs as well,  but then again some of the stuff is probably down right pretty scarce. 

[Wheelmang]

Really cool reading. Thanks for posting! I learned my something new for the day so off to work on the car now.  

[metalmoto]

On 2/3/2018 at 3:01 PM, D Yaros said:

Being a former Pinto owner, I was always a fan of:

 

 

[metalmoto]

Hi, I owned a 1976 Pinto for a few years, and was always fascinated about the story of the "Mizar" as it was called. And the man behind the idea/invention, that unfortunately ended his life. 

 

I have loads of pictures, and videos of this car, in flight, and much more information, if you or anyone else in interested?

 

Sure it was a bad idea, especially using a Pinto, that was also known to catch fire in a rear end collision.

But the idea was great! 

 

As an inventor myself, I can only imagine how much effort and time went into it!

I've many failures myself, and sometimes I give up. 

 

But perseverance pays sometimes, and perhaps this would have been a great invention.  

If he would of payed attention to the weak parts, and not flown it again, until they were fixed.

 

If you are interested in knowing more about this, let me know.

 

Edited February 4, 2018 by metalmoto
Want to follow this subject (see edit history)

[8E45E]

20 hours ago, metalmoto said:

 

Must have got rear-ended by a 747!!  I guess Pintos explode in mid-air, too!

 

Craig

Edited February 5, 2018 by 8E45E (see edit history)

[Tim Wolfe]

I remember seeing a car pulling airplane wings on a trailer at an airport in Indiana back in the early '50s. Dad said it was a flying car.

[capngrog]

2 hours ago, 8E45E said:

Must have got rear-ended by a 747!!  I guess Pintos explode in mid-air, too!

 

Craig

 

Actually, it was the second failure of the same wing strut attachment point.  The first failure resulted in a successful forced landing, but the second failure killed the Mizar's inventor, Henry Smolinski and his friend and company (Advanced Vehicle Engineers - AVE) co-founder Hal Blake.  The NTSB faulted the Mizar's design (among other things, it was over weight) and workmanship; however, the point was moot since the company folded after the deaths of its two principals.

 

Until recently, the most successful "flying car" and the  only one to be certified as an airplane by the CAA (the forerunner of the FAA) was the Taylor Aerocar.  This airplane could also be legally driven on public roadways.  Aerocar No.4 has a current FAA Airworthiness Certificate and is still being flown out of an airport near Lakeland, Florida.

 

Below is a post I made concerning the Taylor Aerocar last year:

 

Posted January 28, 2017

Although very rare and somewhat odd, the Fulton Airphibian (1946) and Taylor Aerocar (1949) were certainly true unibody automobiles, with the flying accessories removed of course.  Several years ago, I was lucky enough to witness the last flying Aerocar's landing at the airport at the Ocean Reef Club in Key Largo.  The aircraft was flown to Key Largo for Ocean Reef's annual "Vintage Days" weekend event featuring world class collector cars, aircraft and boats (yachts).  I watched the Aerocar owner remove the aviation bits, after which he drove the "car" to the car show venue.  Although probably not the earliest unibody "car" it is just about the most interesting.  Only six Aerocars were ever built.

 

Here are a couple of pix.

 

Cheers,

Grog

 

[metalmoto]

8 hours ago, capngrog said:

 

Actually, it was the second failure of the same wing strut attachment point.  The first failure resulted in a successful forced landing, but the second failure killed the Mizar's inventor, Henry Smolinski and his friend and company (Advanced Vehicle Engineers - AVE) co-founder Hal Blake.  The NTSB faulted the Mizar's design (among other things, it was over weight) and workmanship; however, the point was moot since the company folded after the deaths of its two principals.

 

Until recently, the most successful "flying car" and the  only one to be certified as an airplane by the CAA (the forerunner of the FAA) was the Taylor Aerocar.  This airplane could also be legally driven on public roadways.  Aerocar No.4 has a current FAA Airworthiness Certificate and is still being flown out of an airport near Lakeland, Florida.

 

Below is a post I made concerning the Taylor Aerocar last year:

 

Posted January 28, 2017

Although very rare and somewhat odd, the Fulton Airphibian (1946) and Taylor Aerocar (1949) were certainly true unibody automobiles, with the flying accessories removed of course.  Several years ago, I was lucky enough to witness the last flying Aerocar's landing at the airport at the Ocean Reef Club in Key Largo.  The aircraft was flown to Key Largo for Ocean Reef's annual "Vintage Days" weekend event featuring world class collector cars, aircraft and boats (yachts).  I watched the Aerocar owner remove the aviation bits, after which he drove the "car" to the car show venue.  Although probably not the earliest unibody "car" it is just about the most interesting.  Only six Aerocars were ever built.

 

Here are a couple of pix.

 

Cheers,

Grog

 

 

[metalmoto]

I read that somewhere, about the wing strut attachment point failing.

And the car was too heavy, I believe... 

 

It was advertised so as it could attach to almost any small car, of the time.

Just why he chose a Ford Pinto, we will never know.

 

I imagine the same thing could be attached to many compact cars of today!

But nobody wants to risk the lawsuits, when one crashes.

 

I just think the guy had a dream, a great idea/invention. But pushed the limits of his aircraft, and didn't fix the original problem, as stated above. 

 

Anyone remember John Denver? His homemade experimental plane sputtered, and it killed him.

 

The price they payed, when doing what they enjoyed. Think about race car drivers and such. 

It a risk, but they enjoy it. 

 

I used to ride motorcycles. Hit a deer once, almost killed me. But i kept on riding them for years, sure their dangerous.

Until nerve damage to my hands and arms, restricted me. 

 

Oh, they found the second Mizar, that was made. 

It didn't have any modifications done to it yet, but it had the exact same paint scheme.

 

I have a video from the Ford dealer, showing how it supposedly was easily attached to the car, at the airport.

I doubt it was ever aired, just a way to get people to invest in this invention.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[SC38dls]

FYI John Denver’s crash was do to pilot error. The original builder mounted the gas tank selection switch above the left shoulder of the pilot. They are usually  by the left knee and easy to reach. John was told the plane had gas and he took off on his inaugural flight as the new owner. The switch was set for the wing tank that was empty not the full tank. He had just gotten airborne at the end of the runway when he ran out of fuel. The theory is he reached back to change tanks and pulled the yoke back stalling the plane. At that low altitude there was not enough room to recover. 

Agin FFA Theory was he was knocked unconscious and drown. Pilot error for not filling both tanks or at least checking to be sure switch was set on proper one. Either way it was a shame he was a good singer. 

Ive heard his dad flew the Wide World of Sports tv crew in the 60’s. John would ride along and play his guitar and sing. A few of the ABC execs liked his sound and that is how he got started. Not positive how accurate that is but an interesting antidote. 

Dave S 

 

Edited February 6, 2018 by SC38DLS (see edit history)

[JACK M]

17 hours ago, capngrog said:

 

Actually, it was the second failure of the same wing strut attachment point.  The first failure resulted in a successful forced landing, but the second failure killed the Mizar's inventor, Henry Smolinski and his friend and company (Advanced Vehicle Engineers - AVE) co-founder Hal Blake.  The NTSB faulted the Mizar's design (among other things, it was over weight) and workmanship; however, the point was moot since the company folded after the deaths of its two principals.

 

Until recently, the most successful "flying car" and the  only one to be certified as an airplane by the CAA (the forerunner of the FAA) was the Taylor Aerocar.  This airplane could also be legally driven on public roadways.  Aerocar No.4 has a current FAA Airworthiness Certificate and is still being flown out of an airport near Lakeland, Florida.

 

Below is a post I made concerning the Taylor Aerocar last year:

 

Posted January 28, 2017

Although very rare and somewhat odd, the Fulton Airphibian (1946) and Taylor Aerocar (1949) were certainly true unibody automobiles, with the flying accessories removed of course.  Several years ago, I was lucky enough to witness the last flying Aerocar's landing at the airport at the Ocean Reef Club in Key Largo.  The aircraft was flown to Key Largo for Ocean Reef's annual "Vintage Days" weekend event featuring world class collector cars, aircraft and boats (yachts).  I watched the Aerocar owner remove the aviation bits, after which he drove the "car" to the car show venue.  Although probably not the earliest unibody "car" it is just about the most interesting.  Only six Aerocars were ever built.

 

Here are a couple of pix.

 

Cheers,

Grog

 

 

Yes, This is the one my dad lusted after.

He was not mechanical, but had a passion for gadgets and other off the wall stuff as well as flying.

I suspect that if these had gone into production he would have owned one.

[metalmoto]

18 hours ago, SC38DLS said:

FYI John Denver’s crash was do to pilot error. The original builder mounted the gas tank selection switch above the left shoulder of the pilot. They are usually  by the left knee and easy to reach. John was told the plane had gas and he took off on his inaugural flight as the new owner. The switch was set for the wing tank that was empty not the full tank. He had just gotten airborne at the end of the runway when he ran out of fuel. The theory is he reached back to change tanks and pulled the yoke back stalling the plane. At that low altitude there was not enough room to recover. 

Agin FFA Theory was he was knocked unconscious and drown. Pilot error for not filling both tanks or at least checking to be sure switch was set on proper one. Either way it was a shame he was a good singer. 

Ive heard his dad flew the Wide World of Sports tv crew in the 60’s. John would ride along and play his guitar and sing. A few of the ABC execs liked his sound and that is how he got started. Not positive how accurate that is but an interesting antidote. 

Dave S 

 

 

[metalmoto]

Thank You. You are correct! Now that I remember, the switch was in such a hard to reach place.

And even if he knew where it was. It would have been impossible for him to reach it, given the circumstances.

But "pilot error"? Perhaps if he had known the fuel tank was almost empty, and was aware of the placement of the switch...

What a dam shame... Great singer, beautiful voice. RIP John.

[capngrog]

10 hours ago, metalmoto said:

Thank You. You are correct! Now that I remember, the switch was in such a hard to reach place.

And even if he knew where it was. It would have been impossible for him to reach it, given the circumstances.

But "pilot error"? Perhaps if he had known the fuel tank was almost empty, and was aware of the placement of the switch...

What a dam shame... Great singer, beautiful voice. RIP John.

 

Unfortunately, the accident was indeed caused by the actions of the pilot in command.  The pilot/owner was aware of the awkward placement of the fuel tank selector valve handle and was also aware of the difficulty involved in moving the valve handle.  Just to put "the icing on the cake", the fuel tank selector valve itself, was not marked in a standard manner.  There were no fuel gauges as such installed in the accident airplane, but instead, sight glasses were installed in the rear cockpit.  These sight glasses were not linear in their indication, and the sight glasses themselves had not been marked so as to deal with (calibrate) the non-linear indications.  Determining the fuel state in the accident aircraft was not easy, but that does not relieve the pilot in command of his/her responsibility to be aware of the aircraft's fuel state, before, during and after a flight.  Just prior to the accident flight, John Denver was advised by an aircraft "technician" to top off his fuel tanks.  Mr. Denver declined to do so. 

 

For those with the time or interest in this crash, here's a link to the official NTSB report on the crash:  https://app.ntsb.gov/pdfgenerator/ReportGeneratorFile.ashx?EventID=20001208X09045&AKey=1&RType=HTML&IType=FA

 

As metalmoto said; "What a damn shame".  John Denver was one of my favorites.

 

Cheers,

Grog

[SC38dls]

I agree it was a shame for John to die this way. A lot of people don’t know he had a number of water tanks and gas tanks built on his property and caught a lot of flack for this. What people didn’t know is these were for the fire service on the mountains so they wouldn’t have to go so far to refill their trucks. He was always checking the fuel tanks to be sure it was available for the forest and fire guys but he failed to check the tanks in the plane. If a pilot doesn’t do a complete precheck he should at least do a fuel check as airplane gas gauges are known to be inaccurate. 

I still enjoy his music, it’s a shame he is gone.  

Dave S

Edited February 7, 2018 by SC38DLS (see edit history)

[metalmoto]

 

I think this is appropriate to remember him. 

Edited February 19, 2018 by metalmoto
Just to ad my thoughts (see edit history)

[DAVE A]

Grog. Didn't the Aerocar have a Crosley connection??

[1937hd45]

I need to fund the 1939 Ford Pickup project all my Airphibian stuff will be on "that auction site" this week. About 10-12 pieces if memory is correct. Bob 

 

[trimacar]

A shame about John Denver, but from a pilot perspective, it was his fault.  He should have been aware of fuel situation, aware of controls and instruments, aware of what the plane could and could not do.

 

Reminds me of the old story about the fellow doing a pre-flight check, he was an older gentleman, and the other pilots watching him couldn't figure it out.  One guy said "sheesh, he's been inspecting that plane for over an hour...what's the matter, is he scared?  Who the heck is that old guy anyway"  to which the response was "Well, that's Charles Lindbergh...."

[capngrog]

On ‎2‎/‎19‎/‎2018 at 11:52 AM, DAVE A said:

Grog. Didn't the Aerocar have a Crosley connection??

Dave,

 

Not to my knowledge.  I was able to get a pretty good look at the construction of the Aerocar fuselage when I saw it at Ocean Reef several years ago, and even though the Aerocar and the early Crosleys bear a vague resemblance, the Aero car was clearly of aircraft grade construction.

 

Below is a photo of the Aerocar without its aviation bits attached:

 

Below is a photo of a 1947 CC Crosley sedan.  They do bear a vague resemblance, but the only real similarity I can see is the hubcaps.

 

Both the Crosley and the Aerocar used 4.50 X 12 tires and may have shared the Crosley steel wheels.  The wheel base of the Aerocar is 81 inches, and the wheel base of Crosleys is 80 inches, so there is some similarity in size.  The Crosley sedans weigh in at 1363 lb. whereas, the Aerocar (automobile part only) weighs a mere 912 pounds.

 

Cheers,

Grog

[vinnietee]

MetalMoto:

 

I have a 1973 Restored Pinto Runabout, and am assembling info and pix to make a 1/24 scale model. I have the die-cast and a 3D printer and the file for the Cessna Skymaster. Also, working on the interior to duplicate the gauges full size for my actual Pinto.

 

Can you send me what you have collected? I would help tremendous. I have the names of most of the gauges and will start finding pix of them

 

Thanks

 

Vinnie

[metalmoto]

Hi Vinnie,

 

Yes, I would be glad to share with you, all that I have about the Mizar. 

I have 10 photos and 2 videos of it. However the videos show a better look at the instruments gauges.

The videos are probably to large to send through the message service. But I can mail you a CD of them, if you wish?

I will try sending the pictures here, and via a private message.

One pic is of the vehicle, after it crashed.

My second car was a 1976 Pinto.

 

Dave