3 ms·
It's always so fascinating to read about EVTOL outside of industry forums, especially where commenters are highly inquisitive (both in the physics/engineering
by theYipster 4y ago
It's always so fascinating to read about EVTOL outside of industry forums, especially where commenters are highly inquisitive (both in the physics/engineering of these vehicles and in their proposed business models.)
For those who've read into Lilium and their business model, some comments:
1. There are lots of very talented people at the company, including several friends of mine. They also have strong leadership and a very well connected board. However, their design has several unproven aspects to it.
2. The biggest issue Lilium has is their battery, which is predicated on technology that doesn't exist yet. Battery technology doesn't improve like the semiconductor. There is no Moore's Law. What Lilium needs is an Einstein-level breakthrough in chemistry. Who knows if and when that will happen?
3. Lilium, like several other EVTOL manufacturers, managed to SPAC itself last year. Many of its investors are now retail investors who do not understand aerospace platform development, the challenges and risks of this nascent EVTOL domain, nor the necessary timelines for development, certification, or infrastructure development (a much bigger challenge IMHO than certification.) As a result, thanks in part to the reveal about above issue #2 some months ago (which may or may not be related to a major drop in stock price,) there is now a class-action investor lawsuit against the company. Uh oh!
Btw, I do a lot of work in aerospace safety standards around emerging tech, and therefore have a lot of tentacles into this new domain of aerospace, although I do not work commercially in AAM/EVTOL/UAM. As an engineer and leader, I think broadly and connect dots. This is uncommon in the industry, which is highly siloed.
In short, there is a good deal skepticism in these comments. I think that's warranted, and I tend to agree with that skepticism. Lilium and others will have a positive and positively transformative effect on aviation--especially in the general and business aviation space (what we aerospace nerds call Part 23, even though EVTOL is now Part 21.17b--another issue to read up about!) However, I wouldn't bet a dime on the current business models of most of these EVTOL/UAM OEMS.
- audunw 4y ago> What Lilium needs is an Einstein-level breakthrough in chemistry. Do you have details for this claim? Is their needs anything more than what their supplier Zenlabs claims to have developed? If so, it doesn't seem to me that they require anything more than what has already been proven in the lab, and is somewhere in the stages of late lab development to early pilot production by several companies (Zenlab, SES, QuantumScape, Sila, etc) Nothing is guaranteed until one of these companies have actually started shipping massive amount of batteries to a finished commercial product. But seems almost inevitable now that a step improvement in energy density will be achieved in a shipping product in the next 5-10 years.
- theYipster 4y agoIt's well known in the industry that Lilium's claims on range are well outside available technology. Read up on AirCurrent, AVWeek, and other trade publications to understand what other manufacturers and 3rd parties are saying about battery tech. The only major EVTOL OEM basing their battery tech on readily available technology is Archer. They are claiming ~40 miles of useable range after reserves and loss to battery inefficiency at various stages of flight. Lilium is claiming 186 miles of range. Yes battery tech is improving, but change is very incremental. The idea that we can go from 40 usable miles to 186 useable miles in a timeframe compatible with Lilium's business plans is suspect.