4 ms·
What a fantastically BS header video -- everyday people getting into what appears to be a real vehicle, using a customer tablet interface, seatbelts... and then
by Wingman4l7 4y ago
What a fantastically BS header video -- everyday people getting into what appears to be a real vehicle, using a customer tablet interface, seatbelts... and then no shots of it taking off or even spinning up. Might as well be a fiberglass mockup; maybe it is. Don't pretend that you have a commercial vehicle if you don't actually have one.
- fallingmeat 4y agoThey do have a flight test program.
- Wingman4l7 4y agoThat's encouraging to hear, but then why lead with this commercial-use-ready fantasy video instead of showing a real flight test?
- addaon 4y agoThis might be more your speed -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9nLlkLuP_mo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9nLlkLuP_mo
- fallingmeat 4y ago^ this guy knows what he is talking about :). sup man
- addaon 4y agoHeya!
- tomcam 4y agoFractional-size model though, right?
- addaon 4y agoNope, that's their full-size fifth generation aircraft, a two seater.
- jafo 4y agoMy grandfather told me shortly after Kitty Hawk, posters appeared in Manhattan claiming "Soon! New York to Paris in 15 hours by air!" with glamorous people walking toward a Concorde-like airplane. If you are going to believe the BS header video, you might as well believe this BS story.
- osrec 4y agoAre you agreeing or disagreeing with the OP?!
- jafo 4y agoYes
- midoridensha 4y ago>My grandfather told me shortly after Kitty Hawk, posters appeared in Manhattan claiming "Soon! New York to Paris in 15 hours by air!" with glamorous people walking toward a Concorde-like airplane. To be fair, the posters were absolutely correct. It was soon after Kitty Hawk that it became possible and even commonplace to fly on commercial passenger aircraft from NY to Paris in 15 hours or less. Of course, this depends on exactly how you define "soon"...
- Animats 4y agoIt is a really awful video. The same clips are repeated two and three times. And no takeoff and landing video. There's older video of a previous prototype taking off, landing, and flying around.[1] That gives a sense of how it handles. It's a reasonable design. More practical than the eHang.[2] The eHang has been around for years; it's a quadrotor drone scaled up to carry people. It has the big problem of all pure-thrust craft - no glide capability. Flies OK, but not much range. There have been a few other drone-like vehicles built like that. None seem to be deployed. Range and battery life are a huge problem. Having a wing helps. Once transition to forward flight has been made, power requirements are much lower. So the range becomes useful. And there's at least the potential to glide to a controlled crash on power failure. There's been a lot of interest lately in VTOLs that take off on electric power and then use a wing and pusher prop for cruise. There are even drones like that, with ranges of hundreds of miles. This is much simpler mechanically than tilting wing concepts, which are mechanical nightmares. Look up how the Osprey's power train works. It's also nice seeing those props above head height, rather than down at ankle and head level like the eHang. This has potential. [1] https://youtu.be/9nLlkLuP_mo https://youtu.be/9nLlkLuP_mo [2] https://www.ehang.com/ehangaav https://www.ehang.com/ehangaav
- aeontech 4y agoWhat do you think about Lilium? https://youtu.be/ywJWka1evH8 https://youtu.be/ywJWka1evH8
- zoom6628 4y agoVideos best watched muted. The script was a torrent of Bay Area BS that said nothing more than “it’s a self flying taxi”.
- kkoppenhaver 4y agoI watched this one that came out and it goes into a bit more detail of what they have currently viable: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yrEeCp5xJj8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yrEeCp5xJj8