I've seen about 3 articles in as many days with segments of text hinting dissapointment that there are no flying cars or that development is slow. Just go to www.moller.com and look at the skycar design by Moller International. Quite interesting specs and much better than any of the crap NASA has come up with. They are way ahead of anyone in the development of the flying car...

I hear ya brother, I'm bored of driving my car, I want to fly it/swim it ;)

Bet they pay a fortune to T.W.A.Ts* to think up ways of cramming names into accronyms.

*Time Wasting Arty Types

Doesn't the F-22 already do Mach without burners? Although I don't know what their fuel consumption is for loiter. It's not as if the Air Force is going to publish these numbers.

Vectored thrust is an awesome thing to behold.

Moller has been touting his flying cars for well over 30 years, has raised significant amounts of capital and has still to come up with something concrete. A con? You decide.

Seen it, tell me ... where can i buy one ? Answer - you can't, a fatal flaw in your arguement.

Where my frickin flying car ! I clearly remember Tomorrows World promised me one by 2000 at the latest.

Boy you should have been in Britain in the 1960s when Rolls-Royce inveted the worlds first operation system for the Harrier! - you would have been impressed.

or even in teh 940s when we gave you Frank Whittles the Jet engine technology - ok, it was a bad ida to give it to the Soviets !

still not as stupid as cancelling the TSR-2 program!

and why have flying cars? - as Birmingham and Glasgow have shown - just build roads in the sky!!!?? (M8,M6, M5 etc)

You want the X-Hawk.

www.urbanaero.com

"Moller has been touting his flying cars for well over 30 years, has raised significant amounts of capital and has still to come up with something concrete."

Maybe he should try lighter materials...?

The F-22 P&W engines employ low bypass engine technology, blisks, and newer high temp alloys to achieve the kind of thrust needed to supercruise quite efficiently compared to pure turbojets or augmented turbofans. Afterburners really guzzle. If you really want to look at adaptive engine technology of the 1960s variety check out the data on the P&W J58 that powered the SR-71. This baby converts from a pure turbojet to just about a pure ramjet.

Arseholes Creating Really Obnoxious Names; Your Monikers Suck!

Whats the point, when their new cyberpilots can refuel better than us feeble humans. All your fuel are belong to us.

@Martin

...or even in teh 940s when we gave you Frank Whittles the Jet engine technology

Good Lord! A Thousand years ahead of the rest of the world? I knew that early Britain was a hotbed of techno-ferment, but still... :-)

Google the above, get 33,900 hits.

Alternatively, if you use the word 'crook' instead of 'fraud' Google returns 937 hits; 546 if you use 'bogus'; 165 for 'trickster'; 99 for 'huckster'; and 45 for 'shyster'.

Might be a pattern there...

The F-22 isn't alone in being able to supercruise using existing technology, nor is it a particularly recent thing - Concorde managed it 30 years ago.

Meanwhile, on the subject of this new engine, I wonder if the design teams will be using ADVENT calendars to keep track of their schedules...