MAMEWorld Forums - The Loony Bin - Re: You idiots are driving me crazy

> Patent granted in 1913. Most shipboard [fixed wing] aircraft had folding wings by the
> late 1930's. I've worked in Naval Aviation for over 20 years. I know my shit, thank
> you very much.
>
> car noun \ˈkär, dial also ˈkȯr, ˈkyär\
>
> : a vehicle that has four wheels and an engine and that is used for carrying
> passengers on roads
>
>
> 1) 4 wheels
> 2) carries passengers on ROADS
>
> give it up you bunch of twats.

Nobody is disputing the definition of a car. Edit to remove pointless banter.

...Here's where you can get into 3 styles of these types of vehicles, or Transitions.

1st incarnation: (no pun intended there). Most of the (other) people in this discussion (debate? lol) would agree that a "flying car" is being used to describe the types of vehicles commonly seen in science fiction. Numerous examples have been given already. Jetson car, Star-Wars landspeeder, Wipeout vehicles (although, these are closer to hovercraft since they can't stay airborne, or over a certain elevation), Delorean time-machine (when it had ~~levitation~~ hovering capabilities), etc. Most may have no apparent method of staying aloft, or floating while being idle. That might be the key attribute that you're not getting the gist of. Having a method of levitation. The standard of nomenclature that you'd attribute to this type of vehicle... I'm not sure what YOU would categorize it as. But the consensus seems to be that this is what we mean when we say "flying car". I'll axe you a question regarding ^this at the end of this post.

2nd incarnation: A vehicle with the body of a car, but instead of having a method of levitation, this requires speed to gain lift. Think of the car from M.A.S.K.

Or any other example that requires wings + speed to get off the ground. I, personally, would qualify this as a 'Flying Car'... maybe you would too. A more precise name could be Flyable Car. In order to FLY - this method would be an example of evolving (given, that I'm abusing that term in the sense of equating it with "improving") to a higher, more complex structure.

3rd incarnation: Roadable aircraft. These are vehicles with the BODY of an airplane, but in order to traverse roads, it conceals or 'ditches' it's wings so the wings don't come into contact with other drivers on the road. This can qualify as a 'Flying Car'. For it to take to the roads would be an example of de-evolution (again, equating it with something that is lesser, but I guess added ability wouldn't necessarily be a negative aspect).

The point is: The 1st/prime example uses a method of levitation. This can be anti-gravity, magnetism, or just vertical propulsion to get it up/away from the ground. To involve the ground in any way is to introduce an element that is foreign. Wheels aren't necessary.

2nd example: It's birth/origin... it's HOME is on the road/ground. To take to the skies is an advancement. But, it requires speed and lacks the ability to stay stationary while being aloft. They will have wheels just like a car.

3rd example: It's home or natural habitat IS the sky. For it to take it's mobility to the ground... Actually making contact with the ground!!! is to lower or lessen it's state of being. Not to mention that it needs to subtract it's wings. It's an example of condescension.

Q: So, what would you call the 1st example?

Note: there are some examples I gave that would be more of a hybrid between the 1st and 2nd example. Heck, you could even throw in a helicopter with 4 wheels into the mix.

LEVEL-4

Edited by Tomu Breidah (01/04/15 07:47 AM)