World's first mass-produced flying car to go on sale for $1M
It might sound like something from Chitty Chitty Bang Bang - but flying cars could soon be jetting passengers around Europe by next year. Slovakia-based company Klein Vision claims its 'AirCar' – the world's first mass-produced flying car – will go on sale in early 2026. Styled like a sports coupe, the bizarre hybrid – which has four wheels and two wings – builds speed along a runway before lifting into the air.
The two-seater can release its retractable wings in less than two minutes as it prepares for take-off, before stowing them away again at its destination. Stefan Klein, founder of Klein Vision, said AirCar 'fulfills a lifelong dream' to bring passenger flight 'into the hands of everyday people'. 'With the launch of our production prototype, we are one step closer to transforming how the world moves – merging the road and the sky into a new dimension of personal mobility,' he said.
Klein Vision estimates the vehicle will go on sale in the first three months of 2026 – but it won't come cheap. A company spokesperson told MailOnline that the vehicle will start at $800,000 (£600,000) but could go up to $1 million (£750,000) depending on specs. For example, buyers would be able to choose between a 280, 320 and 340 horsepower engine.
Following successful test flights , Klein Vision said the latest version of is AirCar prototype is now being worked on and tested. But new promo images give an idea of what 'AirCar 2' will look like when it performs its first flight, due to happen in September. AirCar traverses about 980 feet (300 metres) of runway space reaching speeds up to 124mph but has a cruising speed of 155mph once in the air. It runs on regular petrol-pump fuel and can carry two people to a maximum altitude of 18,000 feet thanks to a propeller between the fuselage and tail.
Although powered by petrol, AirCar will go electric 'as soon as the energy density of the batteries is good enough', co-founder Anton Zajac told The Next Web . When it does go on sale, AirCar will be suited for leisure trips or as a commercial Uber-style taxi service, its developers say. At the touch of the button, the pilot can unfold and release two wings in preparation for take-off in the space of two minutes, which are safely refolded and stored in the body of the vehicle upon landing. The original AirCar has already successfully completed over 170 flight hours and more than 500 takeoffs and landings.
Last year, KleinVision completed the first passenger flight of AirCar with none other than French musician Jean-Michel Jarre on board. While seated in the quirky hybrid vehicle, Jarre and a pilot travelled around two miles in the space of 10 minutes over Piešťany Airport in Slovakia. Jean-Michel Jarre, a pioneer in the electronic and ambient music genres, described the experience as like being in a 'Jules Verne book' – a reference to the 19th century novelist known for sci-fi works including 'Around the World in Eighty Days'.
'One second you speak to the driver, and next, you are up there in the air – an amazing experience,' Jarre said. Also last year, James May, former host of Top Gear, visited Klein Vision and witnessed the AirCar in action at an international airport in Slovakia The broadcaster said: 'The AirCar has landed. Very rarely am I lost for words, but I am lost for words!' In its home country of Slovakia, AirCar received the Certificate of Airworthiness in January 2022, permitting commercial passengers and opening the door for mass production of the vehicle.
And in the UK, £20 million of government funding has been allocated for the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) to make flying taxis a reality. Last week, Mike Kane, the UK government's Transport Minister, said there will be flying taxis over British skies in just three years' time – with the first piloted flying taxi flight by 2026. So if you purchase the AirCar, it might not be authorised to fly in the UK by next year. According to Morgan Stanley, the global market for flying cars is expected to hit $1 trillion in 2040, before jumping to a whopping $9 trillion in 2050. Widespread adoption of flying vehicles will make use of the vast empty space in the air while greatly reducing congestion on roads.
Want more stories like this from the Daily Mail? Visit our profile page and hit the follow button above for more of the news you need.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
6 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Nine million Britons can afford to invest but lack 'emotional capacity' for risk
Britain has a problem. Millions of people are holding money in cash savings, and as a result are losing out on the potential long-term returns from investing. More than half of adults, 58 per cent, and equivalent to some 31.4million people are unwilling to face short-term losses on investments because they have low 'emotional' capacity for risk, new data from Interactive Investor reveals. Of course, watching your hard-earned cash fall in value when invested is tough to take, and for many this money is needed in case of emergencies, or simply to pay for day-to-day expenses. However, a third of those who said they didn't have the emotional capacity to take investment risk, as many as nine million people, do have the financial resilience to do so. Interactive Investor said this leads to these people 'under-investing', with 71 per cent of the 3,000 people surveyed owning no investments outside of their pension. Data from the Bank of England reveals that in May an eye-watering £280billion worth of cash was sitting in UK bank accounts earning no interest Richard Wilson, chief executive of Interactive Investor, said: 'Our research has unearthed a safety-first instinct among savers that presents a serious challenge for the UK. 'Millions of people have the financial capacity to invest, but don't believe it's worth the risk - over a lifetime that's likely to have a serious impact on their financial resilience. 'The dangers of not taking any risk are fast climbing up the political and regulatory agenda, and analysis shows that Britain has the lowest levels of equity ownership outside of pensions of any G7 country, with a disproportionate amount in cash and property.' In fact, as few as 12 per cent of people have a high emotional capacity for risk. A slightly higher proportion, 19 per cent, had a high risk tolerance. That phrase refers to how willing people are to accept the possibility of losses in favour of higher returns in the long term. Still, around 57 per cent of people still scored low for risk tolerance, meaning that they aren't willing to take risks for rewards in the long term, even when financially stable. Greg Davies, head of behavioural finance at Oxford Risk, said: 'Most people invest too little and take less risk than they could safely afford. This isn't about logic - it's about emotion. Emotional discomfort with short-term market ups and downs leads even financially resilient investors to underinvest. 'For those with high financial capacity, the emotional gap is often greatest: they could afford to aim higher, but their feelings hold them back.' Data from the Bank of England reveals that in May an eye-watering £280billion worth of cash was sitting in UK bank accounts earning no interest. The Chancellor, Rachel Reeves, has launched a campaign to promote retail investing among ordinary people, promoting investing over holding large sums of money in cash. Meanwhile, 'targeted support' reforms will come into play next year, offering tailored recommendations based on what people in similar financial circumstances are doing with their money. Along with this came fears that the Chancellor would scrap the cash Isa in a bid to push more towards investing. On the news that this wouldn't be the case - for now at least - savers breathed an audible sigh of relief. At the same time though, many resigned themselves to continuing to miss out on much higher returns. Interestingly, just three per cent said they would have a higher tolerance for investing if cash Isa tax benefits were slashed. Meanwhile, 41 per cent said they would invest if they had more money, while 16 per cent said they would do so if they understood investments better. While it Is recommended that savers only invest cash that they can afford to lose, as well as making sure that they build up an emergency pot and cash savings before doing so, many are sitting on cash pots earning no interest. Even when held in high interest accounts like cash Isas, the value of cash savings is gradually eroded as inflation outpaces the rates paid out by banks. Craig Rickman, personal finance expert at Interactive Investor, added: 'While people should only take on as much risk as is right for them, short-term emotional barriers often mean we don't take the risk that's right for our long-term needs.
BBC News
6 minutes ago
- BBC News
Fine margins: How Norris lost out to Piastri in Belgium
Oscar Piastri's victory in the Belgian Grand Prix underlined the fine margins that will likely decide the world championship battle with his team-mate Lando Australian bounced back after two consecutive victories for Norris on a weekend on which the advantage swung back and forth between the McLaren drivers almost from session to pair arrived at Spa-Francorchamps on the back of two consecutive wins for Norris, one from the front in Austria, one somewhat fortuitous after a penalty for Piastri at took a pole position each in Belgium - one for Piastri for the sprint, and one for Norris for the grand prix. And the race turned on a few key drive was from the top drawer - he took the lead from Norris at the rolling start after a few exploratory laps behind the safety car in the wet by being, by Norris' admission, a little braver through Eau Rouge on the first he managed his position with careful judgement to make his medium-compound tyres last to the end while under pressure from the closing Norris on more durable Norris may look back on a few small errors in which he could have done better. He said he "couldn't have won". He probably could not. But he could have given himself a slither of a chance, despite the difficult position he was in by leading at the start. The start Piastri had demonstrated how difficult it is for the driver on pole to lead by the end of the first lap at Spa by losing the sprint race win to Red Bull's Max Dutchman slipstreamed past Piastri up the hill to Les Combes, and then held the McLaren at bay for 15 laps, while Norris followed closely in the grand prix, it was Norris in front, with Piastri in second and Piastri had been thinking about the opportunity this presented him since losing out on pole the day team boss Andrea Stella said: "This weekend, Oscar, if anything, the only inaccuracy was in qualifying, where his laps weren't perfect."At the same time, we have to say that after the sprint qualifying, he said, 'Yeah, I'm in pole position, but maybe this is not the right place to be in pole position.'"And as a joke, after the qualifying yesterday, he said, 'That was not my best lap in Q3, but perhaps this is the best place not to have the best lap in Q3.'"Sure enough, Piastri took the lead on lap one of the grand prix, just as Verstappen had the day before."I had a good run out of Turn One," he said, "and then tried to be as brave as I could through Eau Rouge and was able to stay pretty close. After that, the slipstream did the rest for me."When I watched the onboard back, it didn't look quite as scary as it felt in the car. I knew that I had to be very committed to pull that off."But Norris could have done a better job. For a start, he failed to build himself a gap over the finish line by arguably going too early at the restart. Then he made a mistake at La Source, which allowed Piastri to be right on his tail approaching Eau Rouge."I didn't have the best Turn One," Norris said. "So it's hard to know how much that played a part. At the same time, Oscar came past me pretty easily. So even if I had a better Turn One, his run and the slipstream probably still would have got me."Stella said: "It would have always been very difficult for Lando to keep the position starting first at the safety car restart. At the same time, I think Lando didn't help himself by not having a great gap on the finish line." The pit stops The next turning point was the stops. Piastri had first choice as leader, and went for mediums with a stop on lap could have pitted Norris at the same time - the so-called double-stack - but went for another lap, and decided for hard tyres, to go to the end. Piastri was planning the same but didn't know whether the mediums would make had been just under two seconds behind when Piastri pitted, and was nine seconds back when he rejoined the seconds of that offset can be accounted for by a slower pit stop, the other five by the extra lap on worn intermediates. A double-stack would have cost less time - but then he'd have been on the mediums, and the race effectively already said: "To catch Oscar from that gap is quite an achievement. I gave it a good shot, but just not close enough."Piastri said: "It was quite a late decision to pit on the lap we did, but there's risks either way. If I was in Lando's position, I probably would have done the same thing. At that point, it seemed like the safest thing to do was go on the medium, because the hard is two steps harder here."Stella said: "We did consider double stacking. At the same time, it was possible for Lando to deviate. He opted to deviate, which would have given him the possibility to go on hard tyres, which is what he decided to do."Actually, I thought at some stage that that would have been a very good move, but I have to say that Oscar managed a very solid and strong stint on the medium tyres. Even if Lando was, on average, a little bit faster, that was not enough to attack Oscar at the end." The chase Norris now had to try to chase Piastri down. He got to within 3.4 seconds by the end of the race, but he probably lost a little more than that with three errors during his ran wide at the fast Pouhon double left-hander on lap 26, costing himself 1.3 seconds, then had lock-ups at La Source on laps 33 and 43, costing a total of just under three a perfect race might have given him a shot at Piastri on the last lap or two. But given how difficult overtaking proved at Spa in both races, the chances of him actually getting by must be considered slim in the said: "Yes, Lando had a couple of lock-ups in corner one and also a little oversteer in corner nine that cost him time. I think this, overall, prevented us from having an interesting battle, possibly, at the end."But, in fairness, even Oscar had a couple of times in corner one a little bit of a time loss."It's very difficult when you push so much in these conditions. It's very difficult to always drive within the limit of the grip, and also it's not easy to always keep the car on the racing line when you have the maximum grip, considering that, away from that, you can lose it very rapidly because of the track being still a little damp." The lessons Piastri's sixth win in 13 races extends his lead in the see-sawing battle to 15 points before the next race in Hungary this weekend, scene last year of Piastri's maiden victory, in somewhat controversial circumstances. Stella called Piastri's drive "very, very, very high quality", but added: "We have two drivers which to the standards that even myself in my career have been close to, driving with multiple World Champions, I think Lando and Oscar are operating at that level, at the level of deservedly being in contention for the drivers' world championship."This is quite the compliment considering Stella engineered both Michael Schumacher and Fernando Alonso during his Ferrari years earlier this said: "The difference will be made by the accuracy, the precision, the quality of the execution."The execution is what is going to make the main difference. We, as a team, we will try and make sure that from a reliability point of view, from a team operation point of view, we are as good as possible, such that it will be the drivers deciding their own outcome in terms of competing for the drivers' championship." Should the race have started earlier? The other main talking point at Spa was whether the race should have started earlier - either at the original start time, or a few minutes before it eventually Hamilton and Max Verstappen were of the view that it should have and that officials had been too said the decision "didn't make sense". He said that at the scheduled start time "it was not even raining" and added: "Of course between Turn One and five there was quite a bit of water, but two or three laps behind the safety car it would have been a lot more clear. And the rest of the track was anyway ready to go. It's a bit of a shame."Hamilton added: "I kept shouting, like, it's ready to go, it's ready to go. And they kept going around and around and around."However, both acknowledged that the decisions were made after the drivers had urged officials following the last race at Silverstone - in which one car rammed another unsighted at a restart in the rain - not to go too Piastri and Ferrari's Charles Leclerc both pointed out the extreme dangers of Spa, and referenced the two fatalities that have happened there in junior categories in recent said: "For that reason, I'd rather be safe than too early. It's a constant discussion, and we'll probably feed the people that made this decision back that maybe it was a little bit on the late side, but I wouldn't have changed anything."Piastri added: "The past few years, particularly here, we've given the FIA feedback that we would much rather be on the safe side than risk anything. I think that's what we did today."If you were to be picky, maybe we could have done one less formation lap. But in the grand scheme of things, if that's one lap too early, is it worth it? No."
The Independent
35 minutes ago
- The Independent
US-EU trade deal wards off further escalation but will raise costs for companies, consumers
President Donald Trump and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen have announced a sweeping trade deal that imposes 15% tariffs on most European goods, warding off Trump's threat of a 30% rate if no deal had been reached by Aug. 1. The tariffs, or import taxes, paid when Americans buy European products could raise prices for U.S. consumers and dent profits for European companies and their partners who bring goods into the country. Here are some things to know about the trade deal between the United States and the European Union: What's in the agreement? Trump and von der Leyen's announcement, made during Trump's visit to one of his golf courses in Scotland, leaves many details to be filled in. The headline figure is a 15% tariff rate on 'the vast majority' of European goods brought into the U.S., including cars, computer chips and pharmaceuticals. It's lower than the 20% Trump initially proposed, and lower than his threats of 50% and then 30%. Von der Leyen said the two sides agreed on zero tariffs on both sides for a range of 'strategic' goods: Aircraft and aircraft parts, certain chemicals, semiconductor equipment, certain agricultural products, and some natural resources and critical raw materials. Specifics were lacking. She said the two sides 'would keep working' to add more products to the list. Additionally, the EU side would purchase what Trump said was $750 billion (638 billion euros) worth of natural gas, oil and nuclear fuel to replace Russian energy supplies, and Europeans would invest an additional $600 billion (511 billion euros) in the U.S. What's not in the deal? Trump said the 50% U.S. tariff on imported steel would remain; von der Leyen said the two sides agreed to further negotiations to fight a global steel glut, reduce tariffs and establish import quotas — that is, set amounts that can be imported, often at a lower rate. Trump said pharmaceuticals were not included in the deal. Von der Leyen said the pharmaceuticals issue was 'on a separate sheet of paper' from Sunday's deal. Where the $600 billion for additional investment would come from was not specified. And von der Leyen said that when it came to farm products, the EU side made clear that 'there were tariffs that could not be lowered,' without specifying which products. What's the impact? The 15% rate removes Trump's threat of a 30% tariff. It's still much higher than the average tariff before Trump came into office of around 1%, and higher than Trump's minimum 10% baseline tariff. Higher tariffs, or import taxes, on European goods mean sellers in the U.S. would have to either increase prices for consumers — risking loss of market share — or swallow the added cost in terms of lower profits. The higher tariffs are expected to hurt export earnings for European firms and slow the economy. The 10% baseline applied while the deal was negotiated was already sufficiently high to make the European Union's executive commission cut its growth forecast for this year from 1.3% to 0.9%. Von der Leyen said the 15% rate was 'the best we could do' and credited the deal with maintaining access to the U.S. market and providing 'stability and predictability for companies on both sides.' What is some of the reaction to the deal? German Chancellor Friedrich Merz welcomed the deal which avoided 'an unnecessary escalation in transatlantic trade relations" and said that 'we were able to preserve our core interests,' while adding that 'I would have very much wished for further relief in transatlantic trade.' The Federation of German Industries was blunter. "Even a 15% tariff rate will have immense negative effects on export-oriented German industry," said Wolfgang Niedermark, a member of the federation's leadership. While the rate is lower than threatened, "the big caveat to today's deal is that there is nothing on paper, yet," said Carsten Brzeski, global chief of macro at ING bank. 'With this disclaimer in mind and at face value, today's agreement would clearly bring an end to the uncertainty of recent months. An escalation of the US-EU trade tensions would have been a severe risk for the global economy," Brzeski said. 'This risk seems to have been avoided.' What about car companies? Asked if European carmakers could still sell cars at 15%, von der Leyen said the rate was much lower than the current 27.5%. That has been the rate under Trump's 25% tariff on cars from all countries, plus the preexisting U.S. car tariff of 2.5%. The impact is likely to be substantial on some companies, given that automaker Volkswagen said it suffered a 1.3 billion euro ($1.5 billion) hit to profit in the first half of the year from the higher tariffs. Mercedes-Benz dealers in the U.S. have said they are holding the line on 2025 model year prices 'until further notice.' The German automaker has a partial tariff shield because it makes 35% of the Mercedes-Benz vehicles sold in the U.S. in Tuscaloosa, Alabama, but the company said it expects prices to undergo 'significant increases' in coming years. What were the issues dividing the two sides? Before Trump returned to office, the U.S. and the EU maintained generally low tariff levels in what is the largest bilateral trading relationship in the world, with some 1.7 trillion euros ($2 trillion) in annual trade. Together the U.S. and the EU have 44% of the global economy. The U.S. rate averaged 1.47% for European goods, while the EU's averaged 1.35% for American products, according to the Bruegel think tank in Brussels. Trump has complained about the EU's 198 billion-euro trade surplus in goods, which shows Americans buy more from European businesses than the other way around, and has said the European market is not open enough for U.S.-made cars. However, American companies fill some of the trade gap by outselling the EU when it comes to services such as cloud computing, travel bookings, and legal and financial services. And some 30% of European imports are from American-owned companies, according to the European Central Bank.
