www.flyingmag.com
Edited to align with my prediction.
It depends on the company. Lilium never recieved or attracted the top-tiered partnerships or large focused investment base like Joby or Archer did. Some say it was their design which was the downfall of a few other programs.
Preach
Not really. Helicopter based UAM is hardly new and was quite popular in a few large cities in the US during the late 60s to mid-70s. But helicopters were/are very limited in what they could provide so that’s the main reason you don’t see “R-44s” all over the place. Even in the largest helicopter UAM system in the world in Sao Paolo it too is very limited and it supports 400+ helicopters and 250+ heliports.
I respectfully disagree.
Yes. Joby and a couple proof-of-concept prototypes. You?
A few, but more "not running" than running.
They may be a decent idea to move a (relative) few people, but they are not a mass transit solution and the battery technology isn’t there yet. I just don’t think the concept is widely practical without better batteries.
So am I. All my UAM experience was strictly helicopter based. However, several years ago got involved in some hybrid-propulsion work which was linked to an e-prototype. Then I saw the Joby in action. Combine that with my previous UAM knowledge/experience, and yes, not only do I think it is a good idea, but I think it will work where helicopters failed on a number of levels. This isn’t going away anytime soon.
FYI: the existing battery tech is more than enough to meet the current UAM requirements and the reason they started the certification process. For future requirements or other variants like RAM, not so much, which is driving development of smaller turbo-generators to offset the lack of current battery capacity.
UAM is one of the applications where current batteries can work. They don't have to go long distances, so capacity isn't as big of a deal as it would be if they were trying to replace applications where we use airplanes today. They're definitely going to spend a fair amount of time charging, and I think they're gonna be a pretty expensive ride.
A complete assumption: their operating costs will be much smaller than helis, similar to EVs compared to ICEs.
I do think that is true. Helicopters have outrageous maintenance requirements, life limited parts, and engines that need overhaul.
Are you comparing similar capabilities? Range being the biggest. Any $25k econo-box can do 450 miles easy. At $70k a Silverado EV is about the only reasonably priced one I can find with a +400 mile range... An ICE low end $37k Silverado can do 432. For the $30-40k price difference you are not saving any money over a 10 year period.
I did not compare the range, because it does not apply here. eVTOLs will not have the same range as helis, and their initial business plan does not require it. The real use case is Manhattan-JFK and other short, but busy commutes.
The main issues why conventional helicopters did not monopolize UAM were they produced too much noise and couldn’t provide street-level access within the goals of the UAM concept. And this was further verified in several real-world studies over the last 25 years or so.
No clue. But need to keep it in context. The UAM concept is to publicly move people in a high density, urban environment and not a non-urban private means of transport. So from what I understand the costs are handled differently. Plus you’ll find, in general, eVTOLs have little in common with conventional aircraft. Which is the reason the FAA abandoned their Part 23 certification route for a separate CFR to certify powered-lift aircraft and is similar to EASA process.
Not really. As implied above, the intent of an eVTOL is not to replace a helicopter, merely to operate in UAM areas and routes a helicopter is not permitted/capable of for various reasons. Technically, its really a new aviation market as the only real competition are buses, taxis, and uber.
Interesting. It costs me about $35-40 to fill up my Hyundai Elantra, which is fuel efficient and has about a 12gal tank.
I don’t disagree. There are cases like Brightline where $$$ is being invested in rail Problem is, in most cases, money is only part of the problem; acquiring land, passing the environmental assessment and dealing unhappy neighbors are unquantifiable problems.
Yes, this would be much better for the society, but my understanding is that building new rail lines is nearly impossible due to having to go through land whose owners do not want it.
Depends. That was actually one of the 1st questions I had many years ago. And the answer I got was eye-opening. However, in general, its very subjective to the urban location what makes monetary sense or not.
EVs are purposely not being built with 400+ mile range, with a few exceptions, because there are very few people who want to drive that long without stopping, and the weight of the batteries means that your performance, range, and efficiency are all negatively affected by the increased battery pack size. It simply doesn't make sense to build an EV with 600-mile range. In fact, the only one that's been announced is the next-gen Tesla Roadster, and I expect they will change that spec before delivery because they're trying to maximize acceleration. They'll probably do what they have to do to smash records at Laguna Seca, the Nurburgring, etc and no more.
Probably because you weren't looking for a charger.
Not that there would be one where you were going, but there'd be one along the way somewhere, and thus along the way back... Plus you can plug into whatever random electrical outlet you can find while you're there.It also allows for a level of propulsion/control redundancy unheard of in conventional aircraft.
Unless they have figured out rapid charging, more capable batteries, and/or battery swapping, won't the eVTOL's be limited to a handful of trips in the morning and another surge in the evening ('cause they need a 4 hour charge between their hour long duty cycle)? They absolutely have to figure something out there, because it'll be ridiculously expensive if an expensive asset can only operate 2-3-4 hours a day.