Messages are arranged chronologically, by date, with newest first and oldest last.

In a message dated 4/4/2010 3:06:17 P.M. EDT, specialprojectengineer@hotmail.com writes:
Concerning your website, in it you state that at the 2005 Airventure that about a hundred people
 picked up applications, however, as of summer 2009 no one had joined. Considering how much 
advertising and showing of the concept, and interest of various universities and groups, 
why do you think further interest, such as financial aid or manufacture has not taken place?

Additionally, are you stating on your website that the info is public domain, with credit to you?
Please le me know. Thanks, Tim
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Posted 4/5/2010

Tim -

Well, I think that further interest, such as financial aid or manufacture has not taken place 
because investors and manufacturers are currently leery of the feasibility of the designs 
and the market potential for profit, given other relatively secure investment alternatives.
Aircraft sales in 2009 were "absolutely horrid, dismal", according to an authoritative service.
I feel that most of the potential manufacturers are simply too busy with their old products to
be interested in doing anything different. Buggy whips.
It seems that there is a possibility of someone with a passion for doing something 
really different and resources for making a custom automobile who partners with
someone with resources for making experimental aircraft decides to make a StrongMobile. 
I am stating on my website that the info is offered gratis, that is, in the public domain, 
with credit to the website.

Rich

=========================================================================================


12/01/2009:
An e-mail was received from a CNN contributing writer asking for my opinions; 
an article was published on the CNN Money website about roadable airplane projects,
with the general view expressed in its title, "Where's my flying car?"
The article contained several inaccuracies, without any mention about the StrongMobile project. 
My response that was not included follows.

Maggie - 
 
Your e-mail has made me review my project in some depths. As I read it again and again, 
it seems to lead to some in-depth analysis of "the flying car industry".

I obviously believe that it has a bright future. 
I should clarify that it began as a purely personal design before I realized the potential 
for business travel.  I am convinced that the market for StrongMobiles will be robust. 
 My personal estimate is for about 10,000 units per year, worldwide, by several manufacturers.  
My estimate for "when" hovers around a 60-40 chance of serial production within five years.
 
Carpe Diem,  Rich
=====================================================
2009/10/08

Thanks for sharing Rich.  It's always great to see creativity in this business.

Appreciatively,

Brian Foley, President, Brian Foley Associates

49 Seneca Trail, Suite One , Sparta, NJ  07871

=====================================================

Hello Mr. Strong,

My name is Tim Hansen and I am a Private Pilot and a long time flying car enthusiast. I have followed your 
extensive contributions to the world of flying cars for many years. I realize that this is short notice and will 
understand if you are not available, but I am traveling through the Dayton area this weekend and would like to 
visit, see the mock up if possible, and buy your informational cd, as well as photograph the mock up if lighting 
allows. I could be there anytime after noon on Friday the 6th or anytime after 6pm on Sunday the 8th. Obviously, 
Friday would be better for pictures, but anything would be great. If a brief visit would be possible either of these 
dates and times, please email me at this address. If not, again I realize this is short notice and can try to come 
some other time. Thanks for reading, 


Tim Hansen, Orient, OH                                              


We missed Tim due to a conflict with a family wedding, but met with him later and showed him the mockup.
=====================================================
The following was posted on the Roadable Aircraft net.

Message: 1
   Date: Sat, 09 Dec 2000 09:11:50 -0000
   From: "Andrew Stagg" 
Subject: The quest for practicality....

This is a very quiet group for such a powerful concept!  The problem 
seems to be that, although it's a wonderful dream, very few people 
seem to be willing to come out with practical solutions for a daily 
use transport.  Several thousand question abound which no one design 
appears to have addressed.  If we, as would-be providers, can't 
discuss them then who will (until the potential customer laughs in 
our face for failing to consider something very obvious)?


Here's a few questions I'd like to see aircar designers actually 
address comprehensively.  Please toss in your 10 cents worth.


I doubt there's anyone out there who can't see a way to meet the 
aerodynamics but how do you propose to avoid forcing the operator to 
carry a scale if they want to stop for groceries near the office 
before flying home from work?  How do you propose to ensure that 
weight and balance restrictions are met prior to flight?

What about log books?  The FAA won't relax it's logging requirements 
but there's basically none for automobiles (other then the odometer 
which has no operator actions required).  How would you log things if 
your son drives to high school but tosses in a 2 minute 'hop' to 
impress potential girl friends on the way home?  Would it be logged?

How would you propose to allow licensed drivers to operate the 
vehicle without being allowed to engage the flight mode?

One of the site claimed a future radio conversation would involve 
requesting a "right turn on Elm and climb to 1500' after passing the 
city limits".  Does any pilot honestly expect that the air traffic 
control system would be able to take over control of city street 
traffic? (Or that the FAA would accept a take-off and landing from a 
highway as legal?)

Finally (for now), why should an operator have to learn two 
completely different foot co-ordinations?  And which would be used 
during take off and/or landing sequences when the design evolves to 
an integrated propulsion system for both modes and there's no stop 
between the two modes?  I.e.:  Lift off of the highway without 
stopping when cleared or touchdown on the highway and continue on at 
the speed of traffic.  For a utility transport, both of these 
operations should be within the operations envelope.

Andrew
=====================================================================
Andrew raises several questions that are addressed, to some degree, 
in the Magic Dragon operational concepts. [www.strongware.com/dragon]
This will address them in the order that they were raised.

1. Weight and balance: It is not necessary to _avoid_ carrying a scale, 
since it's quite simple to do so and to use it. The FAA standards are 
quite simple on this matter and common practice is to use judgment. 
The catch-all requirement is that the operator must use all available 
information to ensure a safe flight. In my mind, a simple bathroom scale 
would suffice. The standard Pilot's Operating Handbook weight and balance 
table would presumably be used for pre-flight calculations.

2. Log Books: All flying would be logged, as is standard practice. 
A simple stopwatch would be useful.

3. Engaging flight mode: Simple key-locks for the flight conversion 
controls are provided.

4. Road takeoffs: There are currently no plans for Magic Dragons 
taking off from public roads. During a meeting with representatives from 
government agencies many years ago, it was suggested that certain 
adequate freeway medians be designated. Personally, I would aver 
distracting other drivers by presenting a spectacle. However, it 
is envisioned that approved airfields and/or private or commercial 
areas be designated and used. I know of noone who seriously proposes 
the Hollywood-style use of roads for takeoff or landing, except in 
emergencies, as is the current case. As is the case now, an operator 
may  contact FAA Air Traffic Control for clearance or flight-following 
by radio or telephone and then takeoff from a private field or road. 

5. Foot coordination: The Magic Dragon design envisions standard pedals 
for engine acceleration and braking, with optional rudder pedals. 
The steering wheel is for driving and the center flight control stick 
is for flying. The engine control for flight is mounted on the 
driver-side door. An optional design incorporates an integrated flight 
and road steering wheel. The question about learning two completely 
different foot coordinations does not appear to apply.

Road transitions: The premise that these operations should be within 
the operations envelope seems highly questionable to me. As an example, 
there are many airfields around the vast majority of cities and towns 
that will provide for practical transitions without the need for 
resorting to road transitions. Even if one were to use cellular 
telephones for required weather briefings and flight plan filing, 
there are many practical considerations such as wind direction, 
availability of fuel, and the need for a reasonably straight and 
flat surface without obstructions such as roadside signs and
power or telephone lines and poles to be considered and, of course, traffic. 
Personally, although I live nearby the "Crossroads of America" 
at the intersection of I-70 and I-75, I am not aware of any local 
roadways I would choose to use for either takeoff or landing, 
given the availability of existing nearby airfields, 
of which there are about a hundred within fifty miles of Dayton.

I hope this will help clarify and answer your questions.

Rich Strong