151–157 of 157 posts
Just reading through the about page... Where is the aircraft/rotorcraft experience in upper management? There are many reasons that helicopters are dominant at the scale of human transport (some of which have been brought up in this comment thread) and multicopters are prevalent at smaller (drone-size) scales... All of this is to say I'm extremely skeptical.
Is there any data on the sound profile of this thing? As the rotors become smaller the disc loading increases, making them much louder and more shrill. If that's effectively mitigated here, this looks really cool; if not, I think it will be hard to negotiate take off and landing rights with most communities.
The sound field is non-uniform (mostly axial), and there are claims of being able to reduce it through special phasing of the two rotors, using different numbers of blades on each, etc. But I wouldn't be particularly hopeful.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As any pilot knows, the stomach unfriendly words from Tower are: "Caution, Wake Turbulence". The air, being a sparse fluid, can change fast. Especially so if another aircraft has flown through it recently. It's not that there isn't anyone there, it's the air they left behind is all non-laminar now. Doubly being suddenly downwind of stationary objects like towers, wind farms, and mountains. Also, quick point of cautio…
It comes with a parachute
In the end, I still fear tech like this will not be as stringent as needed.
electric transmission vs mechanical and 8 tiny inefficient props? 1 hour flight with 30kg of fuel? I can make something more efficient in a garage...
So like what, $70 round trip commute? Hmm.