3 ms·

The eHang 184 looks like a device to decapitate many people quickly, or capping kneecaps while on the ground. The Volocopter (with 18 rotors above instead of 8

by FabHK 7y ago

The eHang 184 looks like a device to decapitate many people quickly, or capping kneecaps while on the ground. The Volocopter (with 18 rotors above instead of 8 below) looks like a much more reasonable and fault tolerant concept (that has actually had manned flights for years). EDIT to add: lazy journalists - "World’s First Passenger Drone Unveiled In China" in 2018, while the Volocopter had its first manned flight in 2016 [1] and been flying around in Dubai 2017 [2]... Ignorance is excusable, but not doing even a cursory internet check isn't really. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OazFiIhwAEs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OazFiIhwAEs [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROJ76foyihs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROJ76foyihs

coliveira 7y ago
Propeller airplanes are not different, in fact real accidents happen with these airplanes. This didn't stop such airplanes from being widely used. Given a well controlled situation, vehicles such as the eHang can very well be used.
- onemoresoop 7y ago
  I am horrified by eHang's propellers. Can't they add some sort of guard around them or move them above the cabin? I can't stop thinking that even passengers would run into them frequently when stepping on or off the thing, not to mention loss of control situations..
- FabHK 7y ago
  Well yes, and airplanes only operate on airfields with generally carefully controlled access, and still those accidents happen. Now, with airplanes there is really no other option, but with a drone one can easily place the rotors above, rather than below, the passenger cabin (which also gives better stability). The eHang 184 is truly a horrendous design in my opinion, and I am puzzled why it is seriously reported about.
  - wereHamster 7y ago
    > one can easily place the rotors above […] (which also gives better stability). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pendulum_rocket_fallacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pendulum_rocket_fallacy
    - FabHK 7y ago
      Very interesting. I’m not sure whether that fallacy applies. Hard to find authoritative statements on it. There is a thread on aviationexchange where some say that an underslung helicopter is actually more stable than a conventional one, but I haven’t been able to verify this. With a multicopter, the situation might be different still.

by FabHK 7y ago

coliveira 7y ago

Propeller airplanes are not different, in fact real accidents happen with these airplanes. This didn't stop such airplanes from being widely used. Given a well controlled situation, vehicles such as the eHang can very well be used.

onemoresoop 7y ago
I am horrified by eHang's propellers. Can't they add some sort of guard around them or move them above the cabin? I can't stop thinking that even passengers would run into them frequently when stepping on or off the thing, not to mention loss of control situations..
FabHK 7y ago
Well yes, and airplanes only operate on airfields with generally carefully controlled access, and still those accidents happen. Now, with airplanes there is really no other option, but with a drone one can easily place the rotors above, rather than below, the passenger cabin (which also gives better stability). The eHang 184 is truly a horrendous design in my opinion, and I am puzzled why it is seriously reported about.
- wereHamster 7y ago
  > one can easily place the rotors above […] (which also gives better stability). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pendulum_rocket_fallacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pendulum_rocket_fallacy
  - FabHK 7y ago
    Very interesting. I’m not sure whether that fallacy applies. Hard to find authoritative statements on it. There is a thread on aviationexchange where some say that an underslung helicopter is actually more stable than a conventional one, but I haven’t been able to verify this. With a multicopter, the situation might be different still.