3 ms·
I suspect targeting the military was not a mistake on their part. You're dead on the money about making claims that are very precise, and then leaving the door
by horsawlarway 6y ago
I suspect targeting the military was not a mistake on their part.
You're dead on the money about making claims that are very precise, and then leaving the door open for the media to generalize them to make headlines.
In this case, it may well be vaporware, but it's also possible it outperforms conventional aircraft in a way that's not particularly useful to consumers (small lifting capacity, high acceleration profiles, simple landing/takeoff requirements, etc) but might be useful for drones or military applications.
- mannykannot 6y agoI looked at some of the numbers on their website, discounting anything they did not show a photograph of. If they are actually getting 91 kg (200 lbf) static thrust with a 75 kW engine, that would be in the low-to-average range for small-airplane propellers at the same power level - quite impressive as a starting point, but such propellers are far from suitable for VTOL (small helicopters seem capable of producing ~450kg (1000 lbf) lift/thrust from that power.)