Regional Air Mobility: Why we don’t plan to operate flights under 20km • Hacker News Board

Re: Regional Air Mobility: Why we don’t plan to operate flights under 20km

#11

Post by pdelbarba » Fri, Jul 24, 2020, 8:03 PM UTC

This isn't going to be certified and allowed for part 135 operations inside at least a decade. Boeing can't keep their jets from crashing due to simple trim control software, what makes anyone think the FAA is going to go along with these flights over densely populated areas?

This feels a lot like when everyone was scrambling to start helicopter taxi services which promptly crashed and burned... Helicopters were a mature and well understood technology then, but the realities of operating in urban areas under a variety of weather conditions just doesn't allow for these services to be A) safe or B) economical.

Re: Regional Air Mobility: Why we don’t plan to operate flights under 20km

#12

Post by tschwimmer » Fri, Jul 24, 2020, 8:03 PM UTC

guidoism wrote: post #2

SF to Palo Alto by car in 35m is ummm, optimistic. It’s usually more like 2h.

It's about 35 minutes in zero traffic. During rush out it can be a few minutes on either side of an hour.

Re: Regional Air Mobility: Why we don’t plan to operate flights under 20km

#13

Post by aeternum » Fri, Jul 24, 2020, 8:03 PM UTC

giarc wrote: post #4

I can't remember who said it or on which podcast, but they basically said that VTOL is the real game changer, not autonomous driving. Sure autonomous driving might be able to shave some time off of your commute, but you are still in a car and still driving on roads. VTOL is what really allows you to experience what the ultra wealthy with access to private jets and helicopters have experienced. Getting out of the city…

The problem is a landing spot in the city and noise. Most buildings no longer have helicopter pads and neighbors are not going to appreciate the amount of dirt your VTOL kicks up whenever you leave for vacation.

Re: Regional Air Mobility: Why we don’t plan to operate flights under 20km

#14

Post by strig » Fri, Jul 24, 2020, 8:04 PM UTC

dheera wrote: post #7

> Or maybe you want to escape to Lake Tahoe for a long weekend? That would be less than an hour on a Lilium Jet, at a cost of around $250 at launch and less in the near future. Therein lies the problem with public transportation in the US. What do you do after you get to Tahoe, Santa Cruz, or wherever? Most of these places are devoid of functional public transportation, and rental car companies have long lines and ro…

Obviously you have your personal driver pick you up and bring you to your 10k sqft "cottage" /s

Re: Regional Air Mobility: Why we don’t plan to operate flights under 20km

#15

Post by CalChris » Fri, Jul 24, 2020, 8:05 PM UTC

pdelbarba wrote: post #11

This isn't going to be certified and allowed for part 135 operations inside at least a decade. Boeing can't keep their jets from crashing due to simple trim control software, what makes anyone think the FAA is going to go along with these flights over densely populated areas? This feels a lot like when everyone was scrambling to start helicopter taxi services which promptly crashed and burned... Helicopters were a ma…

Part 135 is FAA. Lilium is German/EU.

Re: Regional Air Mobility: Why we don’t plan to operate flights under 20km

#16

Post by tschwimmer » Fri, Jul 24, 2020, 8:05 PM UTC

To me this marketing just looks like a slightly less expensive helicopter. It's great that we can travel to our ski trips or vacations a bit faster but it's not going impact the mobility needs of 95% of people. Why isn't anyone working on improving commutes through dense cityscapes? It's obviously a much harder problem but it's also a more important one.

Re: Regional Air Mobility: Why we don’t plan to operate flights under 20km

#17

Post by epicureanideal » Fri, Jul 24, 2020, 8:06 PM UTC

I wish they showed estimated prices for each of the routes.

If it's $100/flight I might use it once per month to get to Santa Cruz or Lake Tahoe.

If it's $20/flight I might consider LIVING in one of those places and commuting to work.

Edit: Oops, didn't see that they did. Or maybe you want to escape to Lake Tahoe for a long weekend? That would be less than an hour on a Lilium Jet, at a cost of around $250 at launch

Ok, so this isn't going to cause me to move.

Re: Regional Air Mobility: Why we don’t plan to operate flights under 20km

#18

Post by mjlee » Fri, Jul 24, 2020, 8:07 PM UTC

epicureanideal wrote: post #17

I wish they showed estimated prices for each of the routes. If it's $100/flight I might use it once per month to get to Santa Cruz or Lake Tahoe. If it's $20/flight I might consider LIVING in one of those places and commuting to work. Edit: Oops, didn't see that they did. Or maybe you want to escape to Lake Tahoe for a long weekend? That would be less than an hour on a Lilium Jet, at a cost of around $250 at launch O…

From the article:

> If we imagine for a moment that you work in an office in Palo Alto, you could now choose to live in Hayward (5 min flight, $25), downtown San Francisco (10 min flight, $50), or even San Rafael (15 min flight, $70).

> Or maybe you want to escape to Lake Tahoe for a long weekend? That would be less than an hour on a Lilium Jet, at a cost of around $250 at launch and less in the near future. It might not be something you’d do every weekend, but saving you three hours each way might well make it worthwhile for an occasional trip.

Re: Regional Air Mobility: Why we don’t plan to operate flights under 20km

#19

Post by pdelbarba » Fri, Jul 24, 2020, 8:08 PM UTC

tschwimmer wrote: post #16

To me this marketing just looks like a slightly less expensive helicopter. It's great that we can travel to our ski trips or vacations a bit faster but it's not going impact the mobility needs of 95% of people. Why isn't anyone working on improving commutes through dense cityscapes? It's obviously a much harder problem but it's also a more important one.

I absolutely guarantee this will be anything but less expensive.

You can get an R44 with better range and payload for a couple hundred thousand. This will be an electronic nightmare requiring extensive certification and maintenance efforts. Cessna can't even sell ridiculously old designs for reasonable prices due to certification overhead.

Re: Regional Air Mobility: Why we don’t plan to operate flights under 20km

#20

Post by rvnx » Fri, Jul 24, 2020, 8:08 PM UTC

dheera wrote: post #7

> Or maybe you want to escape to Lake Tahoe for a long weekend? That would be less than an hour on a Lilium Jet, at a cost of around $250 at launch and less in the near future. Therein lies the problem with public transportation in the US. What do you do after you get to Tahoe, Santa Cruz, or wherever? Most of these places are devoid of functional public transportation, and rental car companies have long lines and ro…

Also, the website underestimates one point.

The air taxi is not on top of your house.

You need to actually go from your house to the Lilium jet starting point (at least 30 minutes or more in these complex urban setups) and you need to be in advance for the take-off, eventual security checks and security briefing (like any plane).

After air turbulences, then you are at the Lake Tahoe stuck in the middle of nowhere.

You can take your Instagram picture and wait for the next plane to go back.

Was that really worth saving 1 hour in your life ?

The alternative is to gather with friends on the morning, go get your friends with your car on the way, have a lunch picnic, have a tour around in the nature, discover unexpected places. Come home for dinner.

No stress, no schedule, quality time with friends.