Ford Pinto Airplane - Are You Kidding?

VWGhiaBob

VWGhiaBob

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Mar 17, 2013
Messages
884
Display Name
Display name:
VWGhiaBob
Since someone else posted about car planes, am I the only one who remembers the Mizar - A flying Ford Pinto in the early 70's? No I'm not kidding, and yes it really flew. Below is a link to the TV Commercial and here's a picture. Don't believe me? Google Mizar.



The extended TV Infomercial (Galpin Motors near LA): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rzv4q5EEy1k
 
Yeah, I remember it. It really flew -- until it came apart in the air and killed its designer. Galpin Ford's owner Bert Boeckmann is a great guy and outstanding philanthropist, but the Mizar project was one enterprise he should have avoided. :(
 
Right you are, Pilawt! I'm also a member of the Ford Pinto club (www.fordpinto.com). I own a Pinto Squire. Recently, one of our members found the other Pinto Mizar...the one that didn't crash. I don't think they will be flying it anytime soon.

:yes: I remember thinking this was the coolest thing EVER when I was 17. Ahh youth....
 
Speaking of flying Pintos, apparently the one in the Blues Brothers driven by the Illinois Nazis had to be "certified" as "un-airworthy" by the FAA. They dropped an identical car somewhere in nowhereland to see how far from vertical it would fall/fly before dropping the actual car during the filming.
 
MAKG1 said:
The Trimotor was a very pretty airplane, at least, though I've never seen one airborne.
Click to expand...


:eek:

You have never been to OSH and ridden in the Trimotor? :yikes:

:eek:


Turn in your pilot's cert and man card. Dude, you need to get out more. :yes: :lol:
 
Last edited:
Geico266 said:
:eek:

You have never been to OSH and ridden in the Trimotor? :yikes:
Click to expand...
You don't even have to go to Airventure; it tours the country every summer.
And for about twice the cost of the usual ride, you can sit up front in the right seat... and fly it. So much bang for the buck!!
I have driven a Pinto, and flown the Tri-Motor, and my guess is the Tri-Motor flies better. :D
 
Nope, Wisconsin is pretty far from here, and I haven't made it out there. It's good to know there is still an airworthy Trimotor around. I see a few touring historical aircraft -- I work at a low-traffic airport with big runways -- but I haven't seen that one. Usually old warbirds like B25s and P51s.
 
MAKG1 said:
Nope, Wisconsin is pretty far from here, and I haven't made it out there. It's good to know there is still an airworthy Trimotor around. I see a few touring historical aircraft -- I work at a low-traffic airport with big runways -- but I haven't seen that one. Usually old warbirds like B25s and P51s.
Click to expand...

EAA is dedicated to keeping the "old iron" flying too. Every year our local EAA Chapter brings in the Trimotor or B-17 to give rides to the public. I try and work both events. They are very expensive to keep flying, but they make money over expenses every year. It's a good deal for all. The public loves it.
 
Geico266 - Real men don't need man cards. Back at you...get out more often...:D

In defense of the lowly Pinto (and its counterpart...the flying Pinto):

* By sales figures, it was one of the most popular cars of all time

* The "exploding" fuel tanks turned out to be false statistically; studies after the Ford PR crisis (caused by a leaked memo) later showed that the Pinto tank exploded no more frequently than similar cars of the era

* There's now a large and growing nationwide Pinto group, actively involved in charities and keeping these "fun little cars" (Ford's slogan) alive (they turned out to be extremely durable).

Try finding a car that elicits more smiles and great memories. That it has its place in aviation history is only more icing on the cake. There probably never will be again a top selling car that flies!

I'll end with a picture of my car, which recently "starred" on a 48 Hour Mystery show. OK...Back to "real" airplanes!

 
"Extremely durable." Not an expression I would ever use. The first brand new car I ever bought was a Pinto. Bright yellow. It rusted away to oblivion in the Chicago winters.
 
Well...mine is 40 years old, no rust, and runs like a clock. All cars of that era rusted severely, unlike cars of today. The worst was my first car: The Chevrolet Vega!
 
I had both a Pinto and a Vega. The Pinto was a few std deviations better than the Vega.

Nice looking squire. I almost bought a Pinto last month when I was looking for an econobox. Then I got smart and found a Corvair.
 
rottydaddy said:
.....I have driven a Pinto, and flown the Tri-Motor, and my guess is the Tri-Motor flies better. :D
Click to expand...
.


I have neither driven a Pinto or flown in a Tri Motor.... But.. I have 500 hours flying behind a V-8 Ford....:eek:;)
 
Corvair! Nice choice docmirror! Now there's a road warrior.
 
VWGhiaBob said:
Corvair! Nice choice docmirror! Now there's a road warrior.
Click to expand...

Just don't try a high speed corner in one....though they were better with the camber corrector.

I learned to drive in a Mustang II hatchback, which really wasn't all that different from a Pinto.
 
I saw a later interpretation of this that was going to use a Honda CRX but I don't think it was ever built. To be honest, the concept of mating a small compact car to a Skymaster airframe seems to make sense to me. A lot more sense than something like the Terrafugia where you drive two hundred thousand dollars worth of fragile aircraft structure around the Safeway parking lot :yikes:
 
Silvaire - There's this little problem of weight. In the case of the Pinto, after the fact studies on its crash showed that it was far over gross, even with only a single passenger. Any passenger car is heavier by far than an equivalent plane, so much so that this model will never work. It was a nice dream, though!
 
This film just illustrates how far we have not advanced in aviation. We face the same exact issues today! But they had over 1 million pilots back then, now we are down to 600K or so. Sad state of affairs if you ask me.
 
Our family of four made the trip from Dayton to Palo Alto for Grad School back in the 70's in a Pinto Squire. The return trip was solo as the wife and two daughters chose to fly.

No clue why. ;)

Cheers
 
I used to be a snob, and had the Mercury Bobcat. An "upscale" Pinto. It wasn't a bad little car.

As far as flying cars, I don't believe that we'll see a sensible flying car anytime soon. Any attempt I've ever seen had to make so many compromises that it was a lousy car and a lousy airplane. Any car light enough to fly will be a handful to drive in strong crosswinds.

Then there was the Amphicar: a floating automobile.

ITALY09-2%20114.JPG


Neither a good car nor boat.

Dan
 
VWGhiaBob said:
Silvaire - There's this little problem of weight. In the case of the Pinto, after the fact studies on its crash showed that it was far over gross, even with only a single passenger. Any passenger car is heavier by far than an equivalent plane, so much so that this model will never work. It was a nice dream, though!
Click to expand...

I'm curious how the determination of "far over gross" was made, since the vehicle was an experimental and thus any numbers using Cessna specifications would not apply. The empty weight of a Pinto is around 2,200 lbs., the empty weight of a Cessna 337 is 2,655 lbs. A Google search turns up a maximum gross weight for the 337 as 4,400 lbs.

I imagine the weight of the Pinto configured as the aircraft didn't change much from its weight as a car, I'll guess the weight of the Skymaster structure and rear engine was around 1,500 lbs.

Using napkin math it appears that the car and airplane structure must have been close to the MTOW of an unmodified Cessna, but it's difficult to say what the figures should have been without engineering information.

It's interesting that the NTSB report says a right wing strut separation and successful off airport emergency landing occurred before the fatal flight, with the same problem causing the crash. The report mentions a faulty weld between the strut attachment and the Pinto body panel; surely they didn't just weld the attachment point to the sheet metal?
 
Yes, the Pinto weighed about a ton and even a Honda CRX is only a couple hundred pounds lighter but the concept of a small car strapping on an appendage to make it into an, albeit clunky, flying machine seems to make more sense than one that tries to fold all of that apparatus up and carry it around town.

But that's if we believe any of it makes any sense at all. Is the convenience of being able to drive your flying machine home on the streets and park it in your garage worth having to contend with a miserable experience both driving and flying it?

I think it's pretty obviously not.
 
VWGhiaBob said:
Well...mine is 40 years old, no rust, and runs like a clock. All cars of that era rusted severely, unlike cars of today. The worst was my first car: The Chevrolet Vega!
Click to expand...

How about the AMC Pacer! We had one, like an upside down fish bowl on wheels. :)
 
3393RP said:
.... The report mentions a faulty weld between the strut attachment and the Pinto body panel; surely they didn't just weld the attachment point to the sheet metal?
Click to expand...

I would like to think they anchored the strut to the frame and not any sheetmetal....

I wonder if there are any close up pics of that attachment, either before the crash or after..:dunno::dunno:
 
I am still trying to forget about the Pinto, about the Mizar, about the GM 4 cyl entry that had dissimilar metals corrosion betwen the head and the block- so they always sounded like motorboats...oh yeah, the "VEGA!".

Just more entries in the Annals of "Horrible Engineering".
 
N801BH said:
I would like to think they anchored the strut to the frame and not any sheetmetal....

I wonder if there are any close up pics of that attachment, either before the crash or after..:dunno::dunno:
Click to expand...

There wasn't any frame in a Pinto, IIRC. It was the typical unibody car. You'd have to create hard points that would spread the loads, and they likely came up short in that area.

How did they manage to make a successful off-airport landing after a wing strut separation? Got me puzzled.

Dan
 
ColoPilot said:
How about the AMC Pacer! We had one, like an upside down fish bowl on wheels. :)
Click to expand...

I had a Pacer. Two Pintos, also. Along with at least 100 other cars, trucks, motorcyles over the years. Heck, I had 18 of them at one time in 1996. LOL

As far as little oddball POS', I had a Honda AN600 sedan also.
 
This brings up an interesting question - which is older the airplane you fly (own or rent) or the car you drive?

I fly late 70s early 80s airplanes and have one car newer, and several cars older (some much much older).
 
Dan Thomas said:
As far as flying cars, I don't believe that we'll see a sensible flying car anytime soon. Any attempt I've ever seen had to make so many compromises that it was a lousy car and a lousy airplane. Any car light enough to fly will be a handful to drive in strong crosswinds.
Click to expand...

YES. I'm so tired of hearing about the new technological "marvel." Even the new one that just came on TED talks. I can't imagine EVER using something that expensive as a daily driver, and if I didn't, what's the point!?

The only cross-over that I think is really, really cool is the Icon
http://www.iconaircraft.com

5.jpg
 
That Flying Pinto crashed near my house when I was growing up in Oxnard.
 
To answer the many questions, my understanding based on conversations and lots of reading is that the prototype Mizar indeed had the wings welded on. They never finished the "snap on" wings. The crash was caused by the wings separating from the car body.

And regarding being over gross, remember the Cessna had props on the back and front. So the Pinto had only one engine instead of two.

I have exhausted my knowledge here, and I'm sure others have more. But thanks everyone for the lively discussion on this post! I still think, after all these years, that this was a very cool idea. If you haven't watched the YouTube video at the top, it's a MUST SEE for pilots!!!
 
Remember Dr. Bruce that the great mind that brought you the Vega also designed the GTO and Stingray Vette. That just tells me if you succeed keep trying and you will fail, or do I have that backwards?
 
bbchien said:
the GM 4 cyl entry that had dissimilar metals corrosion betwen the head and the block- so they always sounded like motorboats...oh yeah, the "VEGA!".

Just more entries in the Annals of "Horrible Engineering".
Click to expand...
Here was my '72, with two-speed Powerglide transmission. I actually enjoyed driving it -- except for the part about the blown head gasket at 35,000 miles ... :dunno:

vega_01.jpg
 
I get the prize for weirdest car on this web board. Google 'Matra Bagheera'. Yes, it really is French.
 
My vote for the ugliest mass production car is the Citroen 2CV. Reasonable cheap transport but usually drawing comments like "What IS that?"

Cheers
 
Cool looking Vega, Pilawt! I also had a '72, and here she is. At 20K miles she needed engine rebuild, new tires, new clutch, new brakes, etc. Basically, she wore out in her first year. But she was a looker! :D

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top