10 ms·
Very skeptical of any claims until I hear some hands-on opinions by individuals far smarter than I am. They didn't show anything about the inside of the aircra
by gooseus 10y ago
Very skeptical of any claims until I hear some hands-on opinions by individuals far smarter than I am. They didn't show anything about the inside of the aircraft or the controls.
However, to speculate for a moment. If it is possible to create a vehicle such as this, then this is what I would love to see as the real direction of all those self-driving car companies (Google,Lyft,Apple,Uber,etc).
I trust humans in land-craft far more than I trust humans in aircraft, and I might even consider the problems to solve by AI in shuttling humans from point A to point B through the air might actually easier than those you have to solve navigating the roads and ground-based hazards... way less human-driven vehicles and dumb animals (including humans) up in the air and a lot more ways to maneuver and avoid them.
I think a much better future is the one where our tech companies use their AI to control these air taxis and have them pickup and dropoff between tons of mini-airstrips (including the tops of apt buildings?) and we get a new ubiquitous form of fast public transportation which takes the load off of the rest of the transportation infrastructure without creating a weird human/AI dynamic on the roads.
But, as has been said... probably too good to be true for right now.
- TylerE 10y agoTheir useful range is almost nil. 300km cruise speed with 300km range = 1 hour endurance. General flight planning guidelines call for at least 45 minutes of reserve fuel in case of things like weather or landing holds. So really the useful range is more like 50km.
- jacquesm 10y ago50 km fully loaded in that thing would be amazing with present day technology. I don't think it can be done.
- corey_moncure 10y agoGeneral flight planning guidelines do not take into account VTOL capability!
- vkou 10y agoIn the case of helicopters, they most certainly do.
- corey_moncure 10y agoGood point!
- steego 10y agoReal world policy aside, if you're taking off and landing vertically, would the 45 minutes of reserve fuel really be necessary if you're not constrained to use an airfield? Also, if they could magically double it, would it then be useful for a high-end taxi service? Don't get me wrong, even with a working prototype, I see this moving really slowly unless the company is commanded by an exceedingly talented team that understands how to influence governments to update policies.
- vacri 10y agoAs a taxi service, the unit would have to travel to the client, do the client's run (repeat those two steps if possible), then return to base where the batteries can be swapped out, all while maintaining some degree of emergency reserve. I'm not sure how useful it would be for a taxi service if it only had an hour or two's endurance. If the batteries can't be easily swapped out, then there's quite a bit of downtime in charging as well.
- Robotbeat 10y ago5-10 minute charge time is just as good as swap out without the overhead. It's difficult with current tech, but is indeed possible.
- falcolas 10y ago> would the 45 minutes of reserve fuel really be necessary if you're not constrained to use an airfield? Yup. High winds in an area would make it unsafe to land anywhere in that area. Ditto for low cloud cover (need a minimum of 1000') or low visibility (need more than 2 miles). From an overview of the differences in regulations that cover Helicopters (which are likely more maneuverable at low speeds than this aircraft): >>> Helicopters must complete the flight to the first airport of intended landing, then fly from that airport to the alternate airport; and then fly after that for 30 minutes at normal cruising speed. Normally, other aircraft are required to have 45 minutes. <<< http://www.cfidarren.com/hpart91.htm http://www.cfidarren.com/hpart91.htm Long story short, batteries are heavy, heavy beasts. Generally available electric vehicles have trouble going much over 300 miles on a single charge; aircraft are going to have even more problems.
- clueless123 10y agoFAA Minimum reserve requirement is 30 minutes. 50 ~ 150 Km is plenty to avoid most cities heavy traffic.
- nradov 10y agoFAA allows helicopters to operate with only 20 minutes fuel reserve under VFR conditions.
- elmar 10y agothe current airtime with current power/weight battery technology should be around 10-15 minutes with 1 passenger. fixed wing required reserve is 30min, rotorcrafts 20min depends how this vehicle is classified, nevertheless current total airtime is less than reserva.
- jacquesm 10y agoLevel flight or in VTOL mode? Level flight you're probably right (assuming it is even capable of the transition and level flight, I'm not convinced of that, those forward pods add a lot of drag), depending on how much energy you'd lose just from the take-off, landing and the transition. This will give range anxiety a whole new (third) dimension.
- headcanon 10y agoHowever that would make it very useful in urban environments, where people can move between high-rises without having to move through traffic, and can charge in-between. This would likely be their first market.
- nradov 10y agoThe vast majority of urban high rises are incapable of accommodating landing pads.
- FabHK 10y agoInteresting. Why is that? Seems like a fairly obvious extension to keep in mind, at least at this stage.
- nradov 10y agoRoofs aren't flat, aren't designed to support extra weight, and/or filled with antennas and HVAC equipment. If you want a building to have a helipad the architect usually has to plan for that from the start; retrofitting existing high rises would be extremely expensive. Plus upper floor occupants will complain about the noise.
- FabHK 10y agoThanks. Hoping architects start planning for it then :-)
- SJC1 10y agoManhattan outlawed rooftop landings and takeoffs after 9/11.
- walrus01 10y agoIt would be interesting to see if they have "solved" the software and design engineering problem of VTOL, transition from vertical to forward flight, and GPS+Glonass guided drone like operation, but the bottleneck to implementing it is the problem of the batteries. In which case the whole design will need to sit on a shelf for 5 to 10 years until some radical change in Wh stored per kilogram of battery comes along. The density of 92 octane petrol, aviation fuel or diesel fuel in terms of kilojoules (or watt hours) per kilogram is still ridiculously higher than the best batteries.
- pdelbarba 10y agoI'll preface this by saying that humans are terrible pilots[1], but the reality of the problem is much worse than just navigating a quadcopter around on GPS coordinates. Pilots are responsible for a complex decision making chain way before the flight happens. Is the weather safe to fly in (no thunder storms, winds low enough, density altitude, etc. which is not trivial when you're running such a small aircraft)? Is the aircraft in good condition and safe to fly? Is the cargo weight and position within the operating envelope? [1]: https://app.ntsb.gov/pdfgenerator/ReportGeneratorFile.ashx?EventID=20001212X18632&AKey=1&RType=Final&IType=FA https://app.ntsb.gov/pdfgenerator/ReportGeneratorFile.ashx?E...
- neeleshs 10y agoI'm no aviation expert, but that sounds like a checklist that can potentially checked by a computer.
- Justin_K 10y agoIt's really not. Weather is such a dynamic factor that if you went by forecasts alone or a wx briefer, you'd never be able to go. Computers can't also do preflight inspections where you physically inspect the condition of the aircraft, sump fuel, etc.
- elmar 10y agowhat you see flying it's an empty shell.