Like the old adage says ;if it first you don't succeed...keep on upping the ante; --so it seems anyway . Without first getting something working despite scads of money it looks like the idea is to 'release' a newer and glitzier model . Paul Moller has added new models from a flying Ferrari with lift fans to various other military and 'upgraded' offerings --his prototype still firmly anchored to the ground and doing nice TED talks, selling stock etc -- Jay Carter has 'released' new versions of his Cartercopter --from huge machines able to lift a tank or scores of people (bigger than the old Fairey rotodyne even) to a range of ;Personal Air Vehicles of various sizes . Same goes for several other people offering revolutionary concepts . I don't fault them for showing possible applications of their proprietary technology but it would be nice to see a WORKING proof of concept ,prototype acheiving it's design goals and meeting a market need . It definitely harms this field (roadability) to have so much claiming and still unproven technology even after being funded (just reading the story of the creation of the "Maltese Falcon' Megayacht with a new kind of sail rig built for Ted Perkins, one of the silicon valley entrepreneurs who applied his 'try it small first and don't proceed if that doesn't work out ' school of venture capital --Burt Rutan made a living from doing 'prove out' designs even though none of them found a market , the homebuilt freedoms are ideal for doing experimental investigation at low relative cost but too many non scientific (non experimental) and non working concepts are being promoted with slick CGI and ballyhoo. The single picture of the TF-X; (the name of the F 111 program actually) doesn't show enough of anything to be evaluated but looks very 'artistic' ... Incidentally, I just transcribed the radio 'talkback' program that I referred to from yesterday --it arose from a story in the newspaper about gridlock on the main north south arterial road in Melbourne and how new studies had failed to find a solution --an earlier caller texted ;'how about flying cars '; to which the host dismissively laughed it off with a few wisecracks -- I heard that and rang, as I put it, to defend the flying car but the whole thing was sandwiched between other scheduled stories and had to be done off the cuff with a very cynical presenter --hopefully it didn't come over too badly ( I intend to ask for the right to respond and might thereby get some unhurried and non snide airtime to put the case clearly. Let me know if you can open this link and get to hear the exchange , please. the website is www.abc.net.au/melbourne/programs/melbourne_mornings -- go to 8.30am mornings with jon faine and listen to the audio associated with the ";Hoddle street still a car park"; segment -- the bit where I came in is 10.04 minutes from the end and goes till about 6.50 minutes (and the 'human cannonball' quip that so amused the host is nearer the end . I didn't get his joke about the 'right calibre' of people till afterward ...very droll. Anybody who might want to phone the station in defence of the flying car concept is welcome to phone in (quite a few callers from overseas are carried on the show ....... There is something wrong with the software -every quote (inverted commas) comes out as :quote and I cannot undo it by edditting.sorry bout that.