Flying Cars: An Outlook Towards the Future of Philippine

Transportation

By:
Kurt Geeno D. Vencer
1736-18
 I. Introduction
Innovation, like a penny, has its two sides. On its face, it promises
prosperity and success as it hones the creative and inquisitive minds of any
individual for a solution or alternative to an existing problem or object.
Thereby, increasing the chances of economic development for Third World
Countries like us. However, on its tail hides a sinister effect and like a Trojan
horse, once deceived and fooled by its “promises”, it may self – destruct
anytime and cause an economic collapse to a country if not taken good care
of.
The success of the Wright Brothers in 1903 inspired many people to
venture into the endless possibilities of aviation which led to different
outrageous ideas and concepts such as the flying car. The said concept was
first introduced to the world by Glenn Curtiss, dubbed as the father of flying
car, he created the “Autoplane”, a four-bladed propeller with a wing span of
40 feet (12.2 meters). From then on, several attempts for the same concept
was made by different inventors/aviators such as: Arrowbile (Waldo
Waterman), Airphibian (Robert Fulton), ConvAirCar (Consolidated –
Vultee), Avrocar (Canadian and British Military), and AeroCar (Moulton
“Molt” Taylor) which ultimately failed due to financial distress and several
economic crisis. However, thanks to the rapid development and growth of
technology, the concept that was once deemed as outrageous and impossible
is slowly turning into a reality. As of today, Transition, the brainchild of
Terrafugia, is expected to be seen in the market this year for $400,000 or
₱21,104,400.00 as predicted by the company.
With the exuberant price mentioned, we are fortunate enough to have
Koncepto Milenya which was unveiled to the public last September. It is a
one-person craft with a fairly conventional drone-style layout that uses 16
electric propellers developed by Filipino inventor Kyxz Mendiola after being
frustrated with the seemingly endless traffic congestion in Metro Manila.
While this project is quite ambiguous, the said project recently drew interest
from different international companies who wants to commercialize it. With
that being said, it seems that the “car” will be visible in numerous streets in
Manila sooner than we expected.
II. Pros and Cons
As culled from various sources, the following can be seen as the
advantage of having a flying car as part of our transportation system:
1. Decongestion in EDSA
As of 2017, Business World mentioned in their article that there
are at least 367,728 vehicles traversing daily on the said road which
account for 13.6% of the average daily traffic in Metro Manila. Two
thirds of which belonged to cars and the remaining 11.4% consists of
 jeepneys, UVs, taxis and buses. What’s frightening is that in a survey
conducted Boston Consulting Group in 2017, we ranked 3rd among our
neighboring countries in Southeast Asia with the worst traffic
congestion.
With the insertion of flying cars in our transportation, there will
be a huge possibility that the numbers and percentages above would
lower down because of the distinct and flexible features of the car.
Gleaning upon the design of the Koncepto Milenya, Transition, etc. a
user or owner of said car may choose between flight or using the roads
which provides convenience as compared with the usual cars we see
and use every day.
2. Greener Philippines
In a recent study conducted by the World Health Organization,
the Philippines ranks as the third deadliest country in the Asia Pacific
Region which indicates that there are 45.3 deaths per 100,000 Filipinos
on air pollution alone. According to WHO, “Outdoor air pollution was
mainly caused by inefficient energy use in households, industries, the
agriculture and transport sectors, as well as coal – fired power plants.
With these data at hand, the adaptation of flying cars would help in
toning down the rising air pollution percentage in the Philippines since
it uses lesser fuel.
3. Shorter Travel Time
An article in Straits Times, stated that a Filipino in Manila spend
an hour and six minutes each day - or 16 days a year - stuck in traffic,
costing them about 100,000 pesos (S$2,663) a year in lost income
opportunities and this does not include the minutes or hours wasted
parking the vehicle. Aside from Manila, other cities in the country
experience the same dilemma, for instance Cebu City, the usual 10-to-
15-minute ride within the city now stretches up to an hour. With this
type of situation, the insertion of flying car in the transport system
would somehow lessen the travel time hence more opportunities for
employees or employers to be more effective which could potentially
raise our economic status.
On the contrary, the following are the pitfalls of this concept:
1. Cost of Ownership
One of the biggest concerns for this type of project. As
mentioned in the previous paragraph, owning this type of vehicle would
literally cost you and arm and a leg since it is currently worth $400,000
or a whopping ₱21,104,400.00. This is for the consumer alone, how
much more for the manufacturers who wants to venture into this type
of business. Although the price is expected to simmer down in the next
 few years or so, it is still quite expensive for third world countries like
us. In the 2015 Family Income and Expenditure Survey, it showed that
the average annual income of Filipino families was approximately
₱267,000 while the average annual family expenditure was about
₱215,000. Thus, one can only dream of having this luxurious car but
with the immersion of Koncepto Milenya, we might not spend that
much for the same car in the near future.
2. Weather
The Philippines is located along the typhoon belt in the pacific
which means that we are frequently being visited by different typhoons
every year. According to PAGASA (Philippine Atmospheric,
Geophysical Astronomical Services Administration), our country
averages 20 Tropical Cyclones per year, with about 8 or 9 of them
crossing the Philippines. In relation with the flying car, the ownership
of one especially in certain areas frequently visited by Typhoons would
not be a good investment since the materials involved in the creation of
this type of vehicle varies from light to medium. According to NASA,
“the planet's average surface temperature has risen about 1.62 degrees
Fahrenheit (0.9 degrees Celsius) since the late 19th century, a change
driven largely by increased carbon dioxide and other human-made
emissions into the atmosphere.” indicating that the average number of
cyclones per year would drastically change. Thus, the use of flying car
would not be practical.
3. Traffic in the Air
According to the Civil Aeronautics Board, domestic passenger
traffic reached 27.28 million last year, up 10 percent from 24.81
million in 2017. Also, the international passenger traffic grew 10.3
percent in 2018 to 26.86 million from 24.37 million in 2017. With the
increasing number of flights per year, a shift of transportation to
“flying” would probably decongest land traffic but a new problem
arises with this one. We may taste success in decongesting EDSA and
other major streets in Metro Manila, Cebu etc. but the next situation to
be solved would be decongesting the air traffic. Thus, the essence or
purpose of this flying car to lessen the traffic would mean nothing as
this would result in another problem.
Also, another thing to be considered is the number of runways to
be used for this vehicle. As per the 2016 Logistics of NAIA, the rental
of airport land areas would be ₱10.00 /sq.m/month for developed areas
and ₱5.00 /sq.m/month for undeveloped areas. This statistics may be
disregarded if a certain individual has enough space to cater the vehicle
but if not, a person will definitely need a plane hangar.
 III. Issue
With the pros and cons stated, the question to be answered is: Whether
or not the insertion of the flying car in the transportation system would really
be beneficial to the Filipinos?
IV. Discussion
I would answer in the negative because of the following reasons:
1. In case of accidents, the perpetrator cannot be held civilly or
criminally liable
Art. 2176. Whoever by act or omission causes damage to another, there
being fault or negligence, is obliged to pay for the damage done. Such fault or
negligence, if there is no pre-existing contractual relation between the parties, is
called a quasi-delict and is governed by the provisions of this Chapter. (1902a)
Art. 365. Imprudence and negligence. — Any person who, by reckless
imprudence, shall commit any act which, had it been intentional, would constitute
a grave felony, shall suffer the penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum period to
prision correccional in its medium period; if it would have constituted a less grave
felony, the penalty of arresto mayor in its minimum and medium periods shall be
imposed; if it would have constituted a light felony, the penalty of arresto menor in
its maximum period shall be imposed.
Any person who, by simple imprudence or negligence, shall commit an act
which would otherwise constitute a grave felony, shall suffer the penalty of arresto
mayor in its medium and maximum periods; if it would have constituted a less
serious felony, the penalty of arresto mayor in its minimum period shall be imposed.

RA 4136 defines "Motor Vehicle" as any vehicle propelled by any

power other than muscular power using the public highways, but excepting
road rollers, trolley cars, street-sweepers, sprinklers, lawn mowers,
bulldozers, graders, fork-lifts, amphibian trucks, and cranes if not used on
public highways, vehicles which run only on rails or tracks, and tractors,
trailers and traction engines of all kinds used exclusively for agricultural
purposes while RA 9497 on the other hand, defines “"Aircraft" as any
machine that can derive support in the atmosphere from the reactions of the
air other than the reactions of the air against the earth's surface. The term
"aircraft", when used in this Act or in regulations issued under this Act, shall
refer to civil aircraft only, and will not include State or public aircraft.
Based on the definition given, it can be inferred that any person who
may intentionally or unintentionally prejudice another using a flying car may
invoke the defense of nullum crimen sine lege or there is no crime if there is
no law punishing it because a flying car cannot be categorized into both land
or aviation transportation since it is defined or termed as the combination of
both land or air transportation. What our laws here provide is for automobiles
or airplanes alone not a combination of both. Hence, in order for a person to
be held civilly or criminally liable, our legislators needs to formulate new set
of rules and regulations together with a separate agency in order to strengthen
the essence of passengers’ safety and held any operators accountable for any
reckless conduct that may cause harm or prejudice to others.
Now, one may argue that according to the Sec. 2, Rule 111 of the Rules
of Court, civil action is not suspended, to wit:
Sec. 2. When separate civil action is suspended.xxx
The extinction of the penal action does not carry with it extinction of the
civil action. However, the civil action based on delict shall be deemed extinguished
if there is a finding in a final judgment in the criminal action that the act or omission
from which the civil liability may arise did not exist.

The law is clear in stating that “the civil action based on delict shall
be deemed extinguished if there is a finding in a final judgment in the
criminal action that the act or omission from which the civil liability may
arise did not exist.” Thus, going back to the legal maxim nullum crimen
sine lege, since there is still no law punishing any unlawful act involving
flying cars in our system, no one can be criminally liable and civil liability
cannot be claimed.
2. Flying Cars would not be subject to Tax
TRAIN or Tax Reform for Acceleration and Inclusion was approved by
Pres. Duterte on December 29, 2017 which aims to make the Philippine Tax
System simpler, fairer and more efficient to promote investments, create jobs
and reduce poverty. Also, it aims to raise revenues that will fund the
President’s Build, Build, Build Project that will sustain high and inclusive
growth of the country; and finance investments in our people through
enhanced education, health and social services. In line with this, excise tax
schedule were restructured by imposing ad valorem tax rates which are
applicable directly to the net manufacturer’s price/importer’s selling price.
Also, hybrid vehicles shall be subject to 50% of the applicable excise tax rates
on automobiles.
However, the problem with this is that hybrid vehicles here in the
Philippines is only limited to automobiles which means that flying cars are
non – taxable since it is a combination of both land and air transportation. If
the government decides to impose tax on both occasions then it would fall
under the direct double taxation which is objectionable because it is a violation
of the substantive due process under the Constitution since the same property
or subject matter is taxed twice when it should be taxed once; it is tantamount
to taxing the same person twice by the same jurisdiction for the same thing.
Thus, it will encourage more people to buy this vehicle since it is on its
face non – taxable which will cripple the Government as a whole.
3. Flying Cars is not covered by the Insurance Law
 Compulsory Motor Vehicle Liability Insurance (CMVLI) is a
mandatory requirement for car registration under Chapter IV of RA 10607. It
covers the death and/or bodily injury of a Third Party victim in an accident
caused by the Insured Vehicle. It only covers motor vehicles which was
defined in Section 3, paragraph (a) of RA 4136 as:
“any vehicle propelled by any power other than muscular power using the
public highways, but excepting road rollers, trolley cars, street-sweepers,
sprinklers, lawn mowers, bulldozers, graders, fork-lifts, amphibian trucks, and
cranes if not used on public highways, vehicles which run only on rails or tracks,
and tractors, trailers and traction engines of all kinds used exclusively for
agricultural purposes. Trailers having any number of wheels, when propelled or
intended to be propelled by attachment to a motor vehicle, shall be classified as
separate motor vehicle with no power rating.”

Based on the definition of the motor vehicle, flying cars is not covered.
Thus, any accident or incident involving amounting to unbearable suffering
and damages would be left unpaid, leaving thousands of potential victims
penniless.
4. Inequality in the Employment System
Gleaning upon the technicalities of flying cars, the man needed for the
job is certainly not for one who just know the A, B, C’s or the 1, 2, 3’s, it is
for those who knows the complexity of mathematics and engineering. Hence,
when the need arises to mass produce there would be a slight possibility that
these things cannot be produced due to shortage of manpower and thus would
violate par. (a), Art. 12 of the Labor Code of the Philippines which states that:
It is the policy of the State: To promote and maintain a state of full
employment t hrough improved manpower training, allocation and utilization;

5. Flying Cars is in its face unconstitutional

Sec. 10, Art. XIV of the 1987 Philippine Constitution states that:
Section 10. Science and technology are essential for national
development and progress. The State shall give priority to research and
development, invention, innovation, and their utilization; and to science and
technology education, training, and services. It shall support indigenous,
appropriate, and self-reliant scientific and technological capabilities, and
their application to the country’s productive systems and national life.

Since the flying cars concept is seen to be harmful than beneficial for
the people and the State, it is therefore unconstitutional and must be modified
in order to be reconsidered again.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, Philippines is not yet ready for the transition of our transport
system into a futuristic one. Given the location and the present economic crisis
that we are currently facing, it is improbable for one to dwell into the idea of
flying cars. Also, if we really want this to happen, we definitely need to
prepare for it not just in our legislation but also for the laws that it may require.
VI. Recommendation
With the arguments presented, I recommend the following:
1. To implement a separate agency for Flying Cars in order to establish its
own rules, regulations, penalties for any violation and damages to the
prejudiced third – party or individual; and
2. To create a new classification involving Flying Cars to be taxable in its
face;
Sources:
https://www.straitstimes.com/asia/se-asia/filipinos-spend-16-days-a-year-
stuck-in-traffic-study
https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/911001/traffic-still-a-nightmare-in-metro-
cebu
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/july2009/167546.htm
Art. 365, NPC
Art. 1756, NCC
https://www.pirainc.org/index.php/about-us/general-info/motor-vehicle-
insurance-faqs
https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2013/ra_10607_2013.html
https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/1964/06/20/republic-act-no-4136/
https://auto.howstuffworks.com/flying-car1.htm
https://terrafugia.com/transition/
https://www.mepits.com/tutorial/509/wireless/flying-car
Labor Code of the Philippines
1987 Philippine Constitution
https://www.mepits.com/tutorial/509/wireless/flying-car
https://www.online-sciences.com/robotics/future-flying-cars-advantages-
disadvantages-design-types-developments/