wasp 1974

[michel123456]

This flying machine comes from 1974. I first thought it was a hoax. It is not, it is abandonned technology. Why?

 

 

My link

[insane_alien]

because it was only a novelty it served no practical purpose that would encourage financial investment.

 

I know nobody likes to think of it in terms of money but developing single person flying machines is difficult and costly and there doesn't tend to be a lot of demand for them outside a novelty market. nobody wants to invest millions in perfecting one only to have it cost as much as a house, be very few in existance and then the owners won't be able to actually fly them to to aviation regulations.

[Brainteaserfan]

This flying machine comes from 1974. I first thought it was a hoax. It is not, it is abandonned technology. Why?

 

 

My link

My guess

 

-too expensive

-too noisy

-too dangerous (tippy?)

-too hard to fly

-gas eater

Edited June 12, 2011 by Brainteaserfan

[Hal.]

Maybe , there were restrictions on information available to the public and as more is made widely available , somebody with enough money to burn will take that idea and make a very modern toy .

 

 

[J.C.MacSwell]

Maybe , there were restrictions on information available to the public and as more is made widely available , somebody with enough money to burn will take that idea and make a very modern toy .

 

Like this?

 

http://www.tecaeromex.com/ingles/RB-i.htm

[Hal.]

I was quite young in 1984 but did see the olympics then . I thought the actual flying done was a hollywood trick like the A-Team .

[Dekan]

No company would dare sell one. In case the buyer fell off it, or crashed into something - then engaged a lawyer, who'd sue the company to beggary.

 

For a similar reason, we can't have "flying wing" airliners. Even though they'd be much more efficient.

A "flying wing" would be a radical design change. This change would be blamed, by the lawyers, for causing any subsequent crash.

So the aircraft companies keep on making the existing crude design: a tube body, with two wings stuck on it. Which is no advance from the Boeing-707 of the late 1950's.

 

Further progress in civil aviation, would require the suppression of the lawyers, but aren't they too powerful, especially in America?

[baxtrom]

This flying machine comes from 1974. I first thought it was a hoax. It is not, it is abandonned technology. Why?

My link

 

My guess is that it probably lacks in range. A soda can with a jet engine, not too much space for fuel!

I bet the military evaluated an attack version with a minigun and hellfire missiles, though!

 

 

Further progress in civil aviation, would require the suppression of the lawyers, but aren't they too powerful, especially in America?

 

Rule of lawsuit!