VTOL On Demand Mobility

martinbayer said:
One surefire way for electric VTOL companies to shield themselves from any liability claims with respect to hawking designs with potentially risky business batteries on board - just sell them as "Batteries Not Included"...
Click to expand...
..."charging station sold separately"
 
Last edited:
The outside wing sections are folded by the force of impact while the fuselage is not ruptured or breached. Only the landing gear did fail.
While it does not bode well for the structural integrity of the wing, it could also mean that the crash demonstrates a level of survability for passengers that is interesting.
Let's see the crash report.
 
Last edited:
@alberchico Unlike the author of this article, I can understand that you first do some analysis before you are going out to the public and tell them what exactly had happened. There is nothing worse than changing to different explanations withing a short time frame. So even if the journalist are losing their patience, you need to be carful with what you say and stay to the truth.
 
https://aviationweek.com/aerospace/...-evtol-operators-face-long-road-profitability
"Eventually, he said the pilot can be removed for remote operations, which will help achieve greater scale and further reduce operating costs."

We still have a long way to go before regulators are comfortable with these big machines flying around without pilots, especially over crowded urban areas. If their business plan depends on removing the pilot to achieve profitability then they're in trouble.

"The vehicle will get more affordable with scaled manufacturing, and the cost to operate the vehicle will come down as autonomous tech gets better."

There are many aviation experts who have thoroughly debunked the idea that an aircraft can ever be assembled as cheaply and as efficiently as you build cars. It doesn't matter if companies Joby are forming partnerships with auto companies like Toyota, there are limits on how quickly you can ramp up production of a complex aircraft like an eVTOL.

"But even if he’s right, investors in the eVTOL space should still prepare for the likely possibility of an extended period of subsidized operating losses."

This is the big issue that will likely kill off many operators and manufacturers and leave only the strongest companies standing. Even if you have a second generation version of your eVTOl on the drawing board that is a vast improvement over your current product, you may not get the funding to make it a reality.

Maybe well funded companies like Embraers's Eve Air Mobility who are taking their time to build a proper aircraft well suited for commercial ops may be the big winners in the long run. On a side note, they are starting work on a final assembly facility in Brazil with the first prototype coming together by the year's end and a projected maiden flight occurring by early 2024.

https://www.flyingmag.com/embraer-eve-air-mobility-announce-first-evtol-production-plant/
 
Last edited:
This misfortune will likely re-entrench the FAA to stall and hedge in it's best bureaucratic methods, as they did following the (then) AW-609 crash. I suspect that the suits are hoping that the funding for eVTOL will collapse and the whole idea becomes a blip in aeronautical history. They can then go on with what bureaucrats know/do best; status quo.
 
yasotay said:
This misfortune will likely re-entrench the FAA to stall and hedge in it's best bureaucratic methods, as they did following the (then) AW-609 crash. I suspect that the suits are hoping that the funding for eVTOL will collapse and the whole idea becomes a blip in aeronautical history. They can then go on with what bureaucrats know/do best; status quo.
Click to expand...
I don't actually think that's the case - FAA is under a lot of political pressure to not fuck up evtol the way they regulated the drone industry out of existence. The air force money going to Joby/Archer is an explicit industrial base effort.

What will kill evtol is their business models, which requires that they both build the aircraft and operate the airline. This is needed for the both the silicon valley style 'moat' and is also the only sensible business model for a company fielding an autonomy solution.

In the human aviation world, you do a good round of circular finger pointing to diffuse the blame. But none of this is viable in a centralized business model - you either sell a product with enough safety or the customers won't pay.

And while I have no statistics on that, I do have an anecdote - I've met one gazillionaire - and for a guy who cost is no object, he (or as he implied, his wife) decided it was irresponsible to fly in a helicopter as soon as he had a family.
 
Last edited:
https://www.flyingmag.com/gama-and-...ast-shade-on-faa-powered-lift-pilot-proposal/
This article explains in great detail the rules that the FAA wants to impose regarding eVTOL aircraft that the industry is pushing back against. The fact that no one is planning to build a dual control eVTOL or the fact that designing and certifying a level C simulator is going to be a very expensive and time consuming are two big problem areas.

https://aviationweek.com/aerospace/...ased-evtol-energy-reserves-urged-industry-faa
https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-...ama-calls-performance-based-evtol-regulations
Another looming battle that could make or break many of these startups is the debate over how much energy reserves these aircraft should have. Right now, if the standard reserves needed for commercial IFR operations are imposed, some of these aircraft could have a severely restricted range. Personally, I don't think the FAA is going to budge on something critical like reserve energy. The only other electric aircraft available in the U.S. right now, the Pipistrel Electro, also has a relatively short endurance as a result of FAA reserve requirements.

https://www.avweb.com/uncategorized/pipistrel-velis-flight-trial-cool-airplane-not-for-u-s-market/
https://www.avweb.com/features/pipistrel-velis-electro-certified-electric/

​

 
Last edited:
Investors will appreciate how Beta transforms their investment:

Copy-of-Wing-Flip-20200923_0017.jpg


Same with the avionic guys working crouched on the factory floor because nobody wanted to invest 2000$ of steel for a proper work bench...
 
alberchico said:
https://www.flyingmag.com/gama-and-...ast-shade-on-faa-powered-lift-pilot-proposal/
This article explains in great detail the rules that the FAA wants to impose regarding eVTOL aircraft that the industry is pushing back against. The fact that no one is planning to build a dual control eVTOL or the fact that designing and certifying a level C simulator is going to be a very expensive and time consuming are two big problem areas.

https://aviationweek.com/aerospace/...ased-evtol-energy-reserves-urged-industry-faa
https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-...ama-calls-performance-based-evtol-regulations
Another looming battle that could make or break many of these startups is the debate over how much energy reserves these aircraft should have. Right now, if the standard reserves needed for commercial IFR operations are imposed, some of these aircraft could have a severely restricted range. Personally, I don't think the FAA is going to budge on something critical like reserve energy. The only other electric aircraft available in the U.S. right now, the Pipistrel Electro, also has a relatively short endurance as a result of FAA reserve requirements.

https://www.avweb.com/uncategorized/pipistrel-velis-flight-trial-cool-airplane-not-for-u-s-market/
https://www.avweb.com/features/pipistrel-velis-electro-certified-electric/
Click to expand...
But... aren't those exactly the kind of conundrums that AI is supposed to breezily resolve for us??? Woe betide us...
 
alberchico said:
https://verticalmag.com/features/beta-technologies-building-a-beta-future/
A good overview of how this project is going.
Click to expand...
And nearly no information on how the VTOL part of Alia-250 is going. The CTOL version will be compromised relative to other electric CTOL aircraft because it was designed as a VTOL and the VTOL part doesn't appear to work. The 2 bladed lift rotors have large airfoil cross sections at the inboard end and no flapping compliance or clearance to the airframe. These rotors are going to generate huge 1/rev and 2/rev moments and vibrations in the airframe, probably larger than Beta expected. Beta can get Vertical to do a puff piece of journalism but the company is in trouble.
 
e-Graphite said:
And nearly no information on how the VTOL part of Alia-250 is going... The 2 bladed lift rotors have large airfoil cross sections at the inboard end and no flapping compliance or clearance to the airframe. These rotors are going to generate huge 1/rev and 2/rev moments and vibrations in the airframe, probably larger than Beta expected. Beta can get Vertical to do a puff piece of journalism but the company is in trouble.
Click to expand...
Stationary hover seems to work. I saw a videoclip somewhere. But especially excessive vibrations during transition is most likely the issue. Could be solved with a delta-three hinge. However, this adds weight and will require larger clearance to the airframe, which in turn will increase drag in cruise flight... Compromises.
To their credit, they have accumulated quite a lot CTOL flying hours and are one of the few to fly with a pilot on board!
 
e-Graphite said:
https://theaircurrent.com/aviation-...ils-failure-sequence-that-preceded-vx4-crash/
Good article on VX-4 crash, article should be free from paywall.
Click to expand...

Oh how the worm has turned….

A few years back, eVTOL’s major marketing claim was it’s simplicity equaled inherent safety…. A battery, a motor and a computer, ..easy peasy.

Now they’re “very complex machines”, “ when you put them all together you have a very complex system that’s difficult to model”

I note the next VX4 will be fitted with ejection seats.

,….. despite what’s still claimed by the eVTOL techies, they haven’t even scratched the surface yet regarding a real life operational environment.

A long long way to go, more crashes to come, vast indeed staggeringly eye watering amounts of cash….. must get some pop corn while it lasts .
 
Last edited:
@Zoo Tycoon
Many of the first designs have indeed been very simply, like the Ehang or Volocopter, which were based on well proven multicopper designs. Later on, most new designs started to squeeze out more range and speed with an highly variable design which requires a real transitioning phase. Furthermore, the variable pitch propellers were introduced, retractable landing gears and so on. All this was done before the simple designs even arrived in real world operations. Elice and Lilium are good examples of what has gone wrong.

It’s all about impressing investors by promising ever higher speeds and ranges. Despite that, I still believe a simple multicopper or an electric STOL plane for short ranges could work.
 
Nicknick said:
@Zoo Tycoon
Many of the first designs have indeed been very simply, like the Ehang or Volocopter, which were based on well proven multicopper designs. Later on, most new designs started to squeeze out more range and speed with an highly variable design which requires a real transitioning phase. Furthermore, the variable pitch propellers were introduced, retractable landing gears and so on. All this was done before the simple designs even arrived in real world operations. Elice and Lilium are good examples of what has gone wrong.

It’s all about impressing investors by promising ever higher speeds and ranges. Despite that, I still believe a simple multicopper or an electric STOL plane for short ranges could work.
Click to expand...

Multicopters for people movers is fundamentally uncompetitive and an uncomfortable flight experience.

All types of electric aeroplanes, sized for people carrying, are today limited by battery energy density such that they’re impractical.

Multicopter with fixed pitch propellers are speed limited by their basic flight physics*, to about one third of the speed attainable by a conventional helicopter architecture. Not to mention because to fly at max speed, they need to fly in a dramatically pitched down attitude, it’ll be pretty unpleasant for most folks.

Should a suitable aviation energy density battery appear it’ll be used in the conventional helicopter architecture, probably with an electric tail rotor, such as to offer 3x the speed of a multicopter, a pleasant ride all at zero emission. There’s only one way this’ll end.

So my bet is the people carrying multicopter will fade into history as a techno curiosity, or maybe become a sport like ballooning, kinda fun, great veiws, certainly expensive but pretty pointless.

* combined lift/thrust vector vs blade tip speed remaining subsonic
 
Last edited:
If the flight distance is only a few kilometer, the speed is not of great importance, I believe, most people will even enjoy the longer time im the air. Nose down attitude can be compensated by seat inclination, than you just have to lean backwards a bit during take off and landing, but you can enjoy the flight in comfort.

Multicopter are not a replacement for every helicopter application, but they are good enough for short flights over well known routs, eg. from an airport with an hotel in the city center. Or from the office building to youre home settlemet, which can be the safest way to get there in towns like Sao Paolo.
 
https://aviationweek.com/aerospace/...rs-should-focus-business-case-achieve-success
Long story short, by pursuing a conservative approach including collaborating with established suppliers, hiring workers who have previous experience in both the aerospace and automotive industry, and by moving ahead on the construction of a final assembly facility , Archer is poised to be one of the first entrants to go into large scale service. The fact that they are not designing proprietary systems for their eVTOL that will require a lengthy certification process like Joby gives them an advantage. However the Joby design is more refined and is expected to have better overall performance based on what I've read. It's going to be interesting to see in the years ahead which design succeeds.
 
Last edited:
I think they are talking about Medevac and not CSAR.
The HH-60M is not an HH-60G or W. There have been discussions for long on how to replace the Medevac helo with something autonomous, quieter and more attritable for the last mile of flight.
It's then hard to see how flight trials can be seen as subsidies. Especially when most flights are overtly deemed unmanned on safety grounds...
 
Last edited:
alberchico said:
Some footage of the prototype being flown by a test pilot.
Click to expand...
After years of uncrewed flight testing it's good to see this aircraft, which is actually intended for passenger transport, finally with a human on board! Congratulations to Joby!

Who's next? ...Looking at you Lilium! :p
 

Attachments

  • 2023-CycloTech-CruiseUp-1-1536x864.jpg
    2023-CycloTech-CruiseUp-1-1536x864.jpg
    201.7 KB · Views: 28
  • 2023-CycloTech-CruiseUp-2-1536x1024.jpg
    2023-CycloTech-CruiseUp-2-1536x1024.jpg
    306.6 KB · Views: 19
  • 2023-CycloTech-CruiseUp-3-1536x1024.jpg
    2023-CycloTech-CruiseUp-3-1536x1024.jpg
    483.8 KB · Views: 26
https://www.flyingmag.com/archer-se...ng-for-worlds-largest-evtol-production-plant/
Archer finally moves ahead with their massive manufacturing facility. I don't really know if there ever will be a demand for so many of these machines to justify such a massive output.

https://investorplace.com/2023/10/kerrisdale-slams-joby-aviation-joby-stock-in-new-short-report/
In other news, a critical report of the Joby eVTOL project has surfaced. Granted, this report was prepared by a short seller so they do have an agenda, but it nonetheless make for interesting reading. A direct link to the report is below.

https://www.kerrisdalecap.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/Joby-Aviation-JOBY.pdf
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom