The last thing I expected was EDF (Electric Ducted Fan) propulsion on something described as a jet.
Regional Air Mobility: Why we don’t plan to operate flights under 20km
81–90 of 334 posts
Re: Regional Air Mobility: Why we don’t plan to operate flights under 20km
#82I 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…
Until you invent anti-gravity, VTOL will always be (i) very energy intensive, and (ii) and very disruptive to the surrounding environment. This is both in terms of noise and air turbulence. Self driving is something that may be solved and can become practical for popular use with current and near-term foreseeable technology. Everyday mass use VTOL is not. Sorry, the Jetsons lied to you.
>Everyday mass use VTOL is not. Sorry, the Jetsons lied to you.
Many companies are working on this problem currently. I would say consumer accessible, piloted electric VTOL is closer than fully self driving vehicles.
Re: Regional Air Mobility: Why we don’t plan to operate flights under 20km
#83> 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…
They need to come up with an accompaning service which allows you to arrange for someone with a car to arrive and drive you to your desired final destination. Or in the case of Lake Tahoe the area ski resort, hotel or casino might provide shuttle service.
> shuttle service
Shuttle service is not adequate. Most people do more than just visit a hotel or ski resort. I think the "easy" US-side solution to this problem would be for there to exist a better, more competent car rental service that doesn't require lining up or saying "no" 10 times to humans trying to offer you add-ons, is available 24 hours, is guaranteed, and is located within a 10 minute walk of wherever the Lilian drops you off.
Kind of like ZipCar, but ZipCar has zero cars in Tahoe, 2 cars for the entirety of Fresno (wtf), and cost twice as much as Enterprise for a daily rental despite the fact that they don't have to hire as many humans, which is backwards. ZipCar should be costing half as much as a place with brick-and-mortar and human agents.
Re: Regional Air Mobility: Why we don’t plan to operate flights under 20km
#84Earlier quoted context omitted.
The roads are really good (though the official speed limits are lower than they should be), and nobody wanted the trains since they became obsolete for a lot of North American geography, which in turn reduced the overall interest and investment in trains. The U.S. also has very high standards for the structural integrity of railcars, which precludes many international trainset vendors. The costs of acquiring land for…
Is there no push for this to be stimulated again? In the EU there is a lot of talk about stimulating high-speed rail. Currently it's a total mess though, with each country still having their own standards, high-speed tracks having non-highspeed portions through cities, and simply not having sufficient capacity to support anywhere near the amount of passengers that are carried by air. But I really hope some day the EU…
There is talk. But the cost to build rail is so stupid in the US. You spend billions... connect two cities.. and then what? You can't get around in many cities without a car, so you are still stuck.
Kind of a lot of problems on top of each other from construction costs to land ownership to right of way to city layouts that make trains rough to work in the US. (which stinks, I LOVE trains. had a nice train commute in Chicago, but those are rare in the US)
Re: Regional Air Mobility: Why we don’t plan to operate flights under 20km
#85Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, they should just use some of that VC money into pocketing (AKA lobbying) politicians to relax rules for these specific kind of airplanes, it has worked pretty well for the health industry in the US.
I mean, they probably do that. But the point is: even if politicians DO push that and even if the rules and regulations are written down - doesn’t mean that they will be granted a certification. I mean, funnily enough, they don’t yet even KNOW what they will have to adhere to and achieve and start burning through 300MM USD in investor money... Boeing, Airbus, Cessna, Cirrus and Piper have dozens of years of experienc…
> e.g., each Cessna pilot has to make sure he has 30+min fuel reserve
Well, this is pretty much standard practice!
Edit: Ah I misunderstood your comment. So yes it is standard.
However I could see this not applying to these guys, because with vertical landing capability they should be able to support field landings with really minimal risk.
Re: Regional Air Mobility: Why we don’t plan to operate flights under 20km
#86Earlier quoted context omitted.
One word: compliance. FAA has lot of restrictions to allow a planes to fly with pilot in it. Imagine convincing them that without pilot.
Honestly that is as it should be. Does that kind of regulation inhibit progress in some domains, sure - is the cost of the loss of that progress worth it against the likely outcome of de-regulating it absolutely. Safety regulations are written in blood and when organisations like the FCC, FDA etc fall down on the job people die . I want my cyberpunk aircar as much as the next geek but not at the price of having them…
This seems very absolutist. If we assume the technology exists to make this safe, there are a number of factors that would make this obviously less risky:
4 people per aircraft reduce the number of lives at risk from any particular issue. That doesn't mean the FAA can be 100x as cavalier as they are with an A380, but it does mean the worst possible likely outcome is not as bad.
Short flights - easily predictable weather patterns.
Elimination of pilot error - obviously replaced with computer error, but still.
And as I said elsewhere, the ability to test to destruction.
Re: Regional Air Mobility: Why we don’t plan to operate flights under 20km
#87I love innovation and stuff. Radical ideas. But the aviation market is one of the most heavily regulated - bureaucracy beyond comprehension. Did you ever wonder why Piper or Cessna airplanes look EXACTLY what they did 50 years ago? And why the engines used in these planes (e.g., Lycoming) are referred to as “Lycosaurus”!? If you go for a sightseeing flight with a local aeroclub - you will find the pilot spending 30mi…
Totally agree about the certification. It's so annoying having to do stuff like managing the mixture. There is absolutely no chance I'm going to be better at that than even the most basic FADEC system. Every car since the early 90s has done away with the choke, but for some reason in a 2020-built C172 I still have to do this... :X I would argue that this insistence on safety certification makes actual flights less sa…
Yes!
Rotax (Austrian company) actually builds great engines. They are heavily used in ultra-light airplanes with much more “relaxed” certification.
And you are right: in the ultra-light market, we see a giant boom because of lower certification hurdles and actually much safer systems: automated engine control, constant speed propellers, ballistic parachutes, etc. But Maximum Take-Off-Weight (MTOW) is 650 kg (Germany) that leaves you with a skinny wife/husband, some gas and light baggage...
Airplane engines are operating in tougher environments than car engines - hence bigger tolerances and less sophistication in some parts. They also must not fail. I mean, the engine has to be ok with starting up at 100 degrees F on the ground, climbing at maximum power to 10’000 ft, with below freezing temperatures within 15/20 min and descending down again with an urgy pilot pushing down the cylinder heat temperatures from 400 to 200 degrees fahrenheit within minutes (due to power reduction and increased speed cooling the engine).
Re: Regional Air Mobility: Why we don’t plan to operate flights under 20km
#88I love innovation and stuff. Radical ideas. But the aviation market is one of the most heavily regulated - bureaucracy beyond comprehension. Did you ever wonder why Piper or Cessna airplanes look EXACTLY what they did 50 years ago? And why the engines used in these planes (e.g., Lycoming) are referred to as “Lycosaurus”!? If you go for a sightseeing flight with a local aeroclub - you will find the pilot spending 30mi…
Totally agree about the certification. It's so annoying having to do stuff like managing the mixture. There is absolutely no chance I'm going to be better at that than even the most basic FADEC system. Every car since the early 90s has done away with the choke, but for some reason in a 2020-built C172 I still have to do this... :X I would argue that this insistence on safety certification makes actual flights less sa…
The fact that there are businesses that specialize in engine data monitor analysis and training on mixture operation says a ton about where GA is on this topic. There has been very little movement from the manufacturers on this.
That said highly recommend any materials from Mike Busch on this topic. Super knowledgeable and has moved the needle in getting people to understand how engines operate.
Re: Regional Air Mobility: Why we don’t plan to operate flights under 20km
#89Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, they should just use some of that VC money into pocketing (AKA lobbying) politicians to relax rules for these specific kind of airplanes, it has worked pretty well for the health industry in the US.
I mean, they probably do that. But the point is: even if politicians DO push that and even if the rules and regulations are written down - doesn’t mean that they will be granted a certification. I mean, funnily enough, they don’t yet even KNOW what they will have to adhere to and achieve and start burning through 300MM USD in investor money... Boeing, Airbus, Cessna, Cirrus and Piper have dozens of years of experienc…
Regarding the 30min safety:
Yes, that is absolutely necessary... But I wonder how much 30min in safety will cost Lilium in actual range...
Re: Regional Air Mobility: Why we don’t plan to operate flights under 20km
#90Earlier quoted context omitted.
The roads are really good (though the official speed limits are lower than they should be), and nobody wanted the trains since they became obsolete for a lot of North American geography, which in turn reduced the overall interest and investment in trains. The U.S. also has very high standards for the structural integrity of railcars, which precludes many international trainset vendors. The costs of acquiring land for…
Is there no push for this to be stimulated again? In the EU there is a lot of talk about stimulating high-speed rail. Currently it's a total mess though, with each country still having their own standards, high-speed tracks having non-highspeed portions through cities, and simply not having sufficient capacity to support anywhere near the amount of passengers that are carried by air. But I really hope some day the EU…
California is building a high speed rail line. But there is an enormous amount of reflexive opposition from NIMBY's, Conservatives, and Libertarians. To tell you how bad it is there are 100 year old train tunnels between New York and New Jersey that must be replaced and Republicans have killed the projects to replace them _twice_ simply because they are rail projects and passenger rail is 'bad'