Google boss ploughs £70m into building flying cars

FROM to

and the idea of a flying car has so far been confined to the big and small screens.

But the wait for an “aerocar” may soon be over after Google co-founder Larry Page secretly spent more than £70 million developing one.

The Silicon Valley mogul has kept his dream project under wraps for six years, but reportedly has two firms competing to be first to launch their designs.

Recent breakthroughs with electric cars have fast-tracked possibilities for a vehicle that can take off and land vertically.

Google is already developing self-driving cars while plans for drone-powered deliveries by firms like Amazon are in the prototype stage.

And other cutting edge projects by web entrepreneurs are paying dividends.

PayPal founder Elon Musk’s private firm, SpaceX, is already delivering cargo loads to the International Space Station and has pioneered reusable launch rocket vehicles. Meanwhile Page, 43, is funding two companies dedicated to car flight in Northern California.

Witnesses describe the latest version of the Zee.Aero flying cars as having a narrow body with a bulbous cockpit (not unlike the car) with enough room for one person upfront and a wing at the back. The “aerocars” are said to be “pushers” with two propellers situated at the rear.

When the craft takes off at the Hollister Municipal Airport test base, say Bloomberg, they sound like air raid sirens. About a dozen firms around the world are said to be working on prototypes but Page’s research is said to be most advanced.

“Over the past five years, there have been these tremendous advances in the underlying technology,” said Nasa aeronautical engineer Mark Moore. “What appears in the next five to 10 years will be incredible.”

Paul Moller, an engineering professor at California University who has pioneered several flying car attempts, added: “Self-flying aircraft is so much easier than what the auto companies are trying to do with self-driving cars.”

Electric motors are quieter and safer and have far fewer moving parts than internal combustion engines or conventional turbines.

They are also cheaper and more secure. – Daily Mail