|
Uber's proposal is for electric tilt rotor in an urban environment:ooh:
No wonder they are regulator shopping, who will want to sign off that kind of operation? One only has to look at the history of tiltrotor alone to realise as a public transport concept it is very risky, let along throwing it into busy cities with 1000's of people to kill on the ground. I love to know what the contingency is for an engine failure in transition, or for a stuck rotor in transition. CASA would be crazy to even entertain this proposal as it stands right now. |
It's kind of ironic in a "that'll never fly Mr Wright" kind of way that once you (presumably) issue someone with a pilots licence, they are immediately endowed with the understanding as to why something will never fly...
|
Originally Posted by Andy_RR
(Post 10348560)
It's kind of ironic in a "that'll never fly Mr Wright" kind of way that once you (presumably) issue someone with a pilots licence, they are immediately endowed with the understanding as to why something will never fly...
The laws of physics can show why Mr Wright et al were not pursuing a folly. Right now logic says this concept will not fly, current laws of physics, economics and logistics can show what this will likely not work. True, never say never, but tell me how you think this might work. |
Originally Posted by Andy_RR
(Post 10348560)
It's kind of ironic in a "that'll never fly Mr Wright" kind of way that once you (presumably) issue someone with a pilots licence, they are immediately endowed with the understanding as to why something will never fly...
|
Forget about the technology of the machine, assume the boffins will solve the technical issues and produce a "driverless" drone capable of carrying 180-250kg payload.
Where is the market? Think about your own travel habits. Work to home. Home to work. Home to shops. Shops to home. Home to restaurant or entertainment area and back. Now, how many suburbs could accommodate a craft landing within walking distance of your house? Sure, your local Westfield can give up a hundred car bays and fence off a 60m by 60m landing pad but as said above what about the CBD? The front runners in this should be parcel delivery by autonomous drone, are they near? Not really. When they solve the parcel delivery issues then the air taxi may be closer to reality. Probably more like this Neville, not tilt rotor... https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....b36287324c.jpg |
If Boeing have trouble with the concept why on earth are a IT company going to solve it? Yes, it's all just bull dust, actually it's more like a mashup - first you clump together a bunch of crap, then you polish it, then you roll it in glitter. |
Not to be a conspiracy nut here, I know we all reckon this will be drawn out so much by CAsA that it'll never happen, it'll be decided to be un-economical because of the barriers, but what if the exact opposite is true? CAsA have always wanted GA out of the Air, they've made that perfectly clear on many occasions, now imagine someone comes up to them offering to do something with a Modern Fleet, that can be held accountable to stringent Maintenance requirements, that operate according to fixed rules due to being coded in and take a whole bunch of GA Aircraft and Pilots out of the air in our crazy old wacky flying machines? What if they view this as an opportunity to further then agenda of eliminating GA as we currently know it with something that is far easier for them to regulate? No more pesky Pilots to worry about, no more Piston engines, less flying schools required and certainly a lot less GA AOCs out there?
|
Originally Posted by Icarus2001
(Post 10348594)
Probably more like this Neville, not tilt rotor...
|
I’ve personally got no idea if the technology is currently feasible, however, who’s going to be operating these flying cars? God help us if it’s the average driver! The only way this could work is it for to be autonomous and controlled from a central station that handled all deconfliction. |
Noise alone will kill this idea, then there is the issue of weather. I for one would not want to be watching from the air as a buster or cold front rolls towards me. |
Congestion at the landing point will also be an issue - some high-rollers want to Uber in to the footy field for the finals - only 2 landing spots available, there are 20 of them in a holding pattern, batteries getting low...
|
Originally Posted by Ixixly
(Post 10348745)
Not to be a conspiracy nut here, I know we all reckon this will be drawn out so much by CAsA that it'll never happen, it'll be decided to be un-economical because of the barriers, but what if the exact opposite is true? CAsA have always wanted GA out of the Air, they've made that perfectly clear on many occasions, now imagine someone comes up to them offering to do something with a Modern Fleet, that can be held accountable to stringent Maintenance requirements, that operate according to fixed rules due to being coded in and take a whole bunch of GA Aircraft and Pilots out of the air in our crazy old wacky flying machines? What if they view this as an opportunity to further then agenda of eliminating GA as we currently know it with something that is far easier for them to regulate? No more pesky Pilots to worry about, no more Piston engines, less flying schools required and certainly a lot less GA AOCs out there?
CASA need the GA industry to keep their justification for lunacy!:-) This would have to be the most entertaining thread on Prooooon, we should have a fictional section where crazy ideas get air time without ever having to leave the ground:-):-) |
Originally Posted by 27/09
(Post 10348575)
Andy,
The laws of physics can show why Mr Wright et al were not pursuing a folly. Right now logic says this concept will not fly, current laws of physics, economics and logistics can show what this will likely not work. True, never say never, but tell me how you think this might work.
Originally Posted by neville_nobody
(Post 10348583)
Go have a look at the 80 odd year history of tiltrotor operation and tell me what Uber knows that everybody else doesn't. If Boeing have trouble with the concept why on earth are a IT company going to solve it? Unless someone has a technological breakthrough this is going to be a nonstarter. That's before you even start thinking about battery powered aircraft.
Having said that, I believe the air taxi idea, whilst one way of attracting funds to aid development, is a step too far too quickly. Sure, it may come eventually but I think a personally-owned eVTOL, perhaps starting in the experimental category - possibly even as an E-AB makes more sense, at least initially It's undoubtedly a huge new area of possibility with lots to explore and many lessons to learn. The technology will be developed. The real question is where and who will own the rights to it... As far as it being a viable possibility, I believe it already is now with current tech. I haven't seen any proposals made public that to me look aerodynamically viable but I have been doing my own design calcs on a single-seater concept and at 650-ish kg MTOW yields a 135kt/250km/h cruise speed for a 100km/54nm range with a VTOL each end. That's about 25-30kWh worth of energy, I think. One key question remaining is what reserves are likely to be required for electric aircraft since demanding 30mins when the maximum range flight time is only 25mins seems a bit extreme and would kill the idea dead at this point in technology. As far as Über et al being IT companies and not aerospace companies, I don't see the issue here since it isn't skills or expertise they offer but rather financial muscle and backing. The real expertise needed is usually readily available if you have money to spend. No, I don't believe we'll have viable air taxis in the time frame predicted here but we sure as hell should be playing about in this sandpit well before five years has elapsed. |
I wouldn't compare Uber's abilities to overcome legislative issues within the motor car taxi industry to a similar ability to overcome legislative issues within the aviation industry. For one, the motor car taxi industry had deteriorated to the point where license holders were earning tens of thousands of dollars for doing sweet FA while the drivers of their taxis worked on a 50% cut of the fare and were struggling to make ends meet. If you look closely at that industry you will also find many of these license holders own multiple licences - the system is well and truly broken and I wouldn't be surprised if the government was actually in favour of Uber helping break up that industry. There is a bloke down my street who was a taxi driver all his working life, then settled to become just a license holder of 2 licenses letting others to do his work - he managed to acquire 15 houses in his work life. When the price of taxi licences dropped because of Uber both he and his family began protesting very vocally on being compensated.
I just don't see the same similarities between the motor car taxi industry and the aviation taxi industry as there is much less fat in the latter. |
If this actually happens, then it will be because the foreign based entrepreneurs behind it persuade the Fed government at Cabinet level to approve it as a part of some larger deal in which they and the government are parties. CASA will not play any part of it, nor will they have any interest in playing with something over which they have no control, instead it would be rubber stamped by some agency called something like the Advanced Transport Authority (etc).
And it might even work ! |
Those who suggest that the Big multinationals will flout the law anyway may be right.
unauthjorised sattelite launch A US tech start-up has been slapped with a historic fine for launching unauthorised satellites, prompting warnings about "runaway cowboy-like behaviour" from private companies joining the space race. Key points:
Swarm Technologies was fined $US900,000 ($1.28 million) for launching four mini satellites in January 2018 after explicitly being denied permission by the US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) over concerns about the ability to track them. An investigation found Swarm used an unaffiliated launch company in India to get around the restrictions, but was caught out when the satellites transmitted signals back to a station in Georgia in the US. "We will aggressively enforce the FCC's requirements that companies seek FCC authorisation prior to deploying and operating communications satellites and Earth stations," FCC Enforcement Bureau chief Rosemary Harold said. Mick |
Jeez,
I use a SAT phone a lot, does that mean I have to get FCC approval to receive transmitted signals from space? |
Originally Posted by Andy_RR
(Post 10349351)
Whilst I agree with you that a tilt wing/rotor is a desirable, perhaps necessary aspect of a viable eVTOL solution, I think to suggest that Boeing "having trouble with the concept" as a bar to all others being successful is painting with a broad brush indeed! Sure there's been some issues since the XV15 days and the V22 isn't without issues but that hasn't stopped the roll-out of the V280 nor the AW609. All of these craft are monsters compared with what I think is necessary for an Über air taxi business model They also offer good lessons in what actually works in real life.
In regard to fixed reserves or battery power available, they are already pushing for FAA waivers. As mentioned previously this is just a PR exercise and by going to the regulators they are gaining free publicity and credibility. You can read all about it here: Elevate Whitepaper |
Originally Posted by Icarus2001
(Post 10348594)
Forget about the technology of the machine, assume the boffins will solve the technical issues and produce a "driverless" drone capable of carrying 180-250kg payload.
Where is the market? Think about your own travel habits. Work to home. Home to work. Home to shops. Shops to home. Home to restaurant or entertainment area and back. Now, how many suburbs could accommodate a craft landing within walking distance of your house? Sure, your local Westfield can give up a hundred car bays and fence off a 60m by 60m landing pad but as said above what about the CBD? The front runners in this should be parcel delivery by autonomous drone, are they near? Not really. When they solve the parcel delivery issues then the air taxi may be closer to reality. Probably more like this Neville, not tilt rotor... https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....b36287324c.jpg |
Originally Posted by neville_nobody
(Post 10350198)
However neither of those types are certified. My point is that for such a radical design, if aerospace companies are having problems over a 20 year design phase then why do Uber think they are going to get this up and running with electric motors in 5 years??? Why not just stick to a fixed rotor? It's not like you need speed to fly around a 60-100NM radius which is what most cities would be.
|
Interesting video and very commendable for being honest enough to post the performance figures.
I saw figures of of the electric R44 pulling 250Nm in the hover (the Lycoming IO-540 is rated at 168Kw or roughly 168Nm) and this electric version was using 30% more torque when single pilot. I also saw figures of 250 Amps being used, the latest Tesla P100D is rated at 100 Amps and if used at once then a cooling period is required, if done regularly then a new set of batteries are in order. Finally, the flight test was done in 2016, over 2 years ago. If this electric caper was really viable I would guess we would be seeing more recent videos and better performance figures, but alas, we are well and truly stuck with the same problem that has plagued this technology since the times of the ancient Egyptians - the battery. |
IO540 in the R44 is rated at 245hp which is 646Nm at 2700. Electric motors are probably geared differently.
The OP quotes power figures in the comments of the video. 105kW in cruise. 140kW IGE hover, 160kW OGE. 700V 70-odd kWh battery from memory. I think a Tesla model S pulls waaay more than 100A (edit: 1600A apparently for ludicrous mode capable battery packs) |
|
I look Fwd to the skies filled with these things, maybe in the next life, maybe:-) |
Anyone passing through Darwin Airport should make sure you look out the window toward the south-eastern end of the runway. If you get lucky you will see one of the U.S. Marines V-22 that rotate through Darwin on a regular basis. Watching one of these frightening contraptions taxi and transition to flight will disabuse any rational observer of the idea that anything like that is going to be a realistic option for public transport any time soon. How Bell and Boeing have got them to work at all is miraculous.
|
In the IT industry, that video is classified as “smoke and mirrors”. A marketing concept vehicle that will be nothing like the sad reality. |
Exactly right Sunfish. The funny thing is that a helicopter can already do that type of transport, the fact that they do not (regularly) shows that it is not a market that works.
|
I dunno George. I think they're amazing, but at least also an order of magnitude larger than what's needed for any possible air-taxi operation.
As far as helicopters being a present-day analog, I'll repeat what I said earlier - they're expensive to operate in terms of power, maintenance complexity and skill level. That's a lot of stuff to be paid for before you get to the payload bit... |
|
Question -
In the event of the battery pack 'shorting out' / Lithium exploding - or whatever - what do youse think is the likelihood of a successful 'auto rotate' back to the surface of the Earth, or whatever is directly underneath you at the time, hoping that it won't be a busy freeway / high-rise / high tension power lines / train track in peak hour.....etc you get the drift. Cheers Just curious is all...... |
|
Originally Posted by Andy_RR
(Post 10354664)
As far as helicopters being a present-day analog, I'll repeat what I said earlier - they're expensive to operate in terms of power, maintenance complexity and skill level. That's a lot of stuff to be paid for before you get to the payload bit...
|
Still gonna need approximately the same power to lift the airframe, pax, battery pack and a load of electrons. Stored chemical energy is a lot quicker to refill than a flat battery. Need round electrons to roll through the wires, then a round-to-flat converter to allow the flat electrons to be packed into the battery. Then there is the supply of coloured electrons to put in the glass screens.
The world is made of protons, neutrons, electrons, and morons. |
Originally Posted by 27/09
(Post 10355323)
Can you explain how these will be any less expensive to operate in terms of power maintenance and complexity? I'll concede the skill level might the lower, but won't reduce the overall cost significantly.
There is already an electric LSA model operating successfully in multiple flying schools world-wide. There are no regulator maintenance items on the motor and the TBO is 2,000 hours! |
Originally Posted by Squawk7700
(Post 10355599)
Maintenance required on the electric motors will be far less than a turbine, that’s for sure! There is already an electric LSA model operating successfully in multiple flying schools world-wide. There are no regulator maintenance items on the motor and the TBO is 2,000 hours! Also your comparison is for a non certified aircraft, these Air Taxis will need to be certified with the attendant costs that come with certification. |
Originally Posted by 27/09
(Post 10355761)
Granted the electric motors will be cheaper to maintain, but no one has mentioned the battery technology. There are six monthly capacity check requirements now for the batteries in your ICE powered aircraft though I suspect many owners aren't complying with these requirements. Just have a look at the requirements for the likes of the Concorde batteries currently in use. I'd imagine there will be even a higher level of capacity testing when a battery is the motive source.
Also your comparison is for a non certified aircraft, these Air Taxis will need to be certified with the attendant costs that come with certification. battery technology is the main thing that has limited the advancement of any EP machine and will continue to be so for a very long time yet! Weight, storage capacity, cost and replenishment time will always be what holds back this fanciful idea on a large commercial scale. |
I'm imagining that once you have battery management systems, motor controllers and flight control systems then maintenance will become more like a continuous condition monitoring process by electronic means along with almost all preflight tasks. At least some of the high end UAVs are doing this at least partially and most of the big jet turbines are likewise under continuous surveillance.
Battery capacity will be determined every discharge-charge cycle. |
Originally Posted by 601
(Post 10347744)
What stations/ autonomous transport port. Isn't the whole idea to do away with "hubs" so you can go from point to point.
People point to the disrupters as a model for this form of transport. But all the disrupters have done so far is develop an App and use a proven transport system - cars, bikes and now scooters. The only difference between a taxi and these disrupters is the use of an app to allow people to access private vehicles and undercut what was a tightly controlled transport model in the case of taxis. They have not introduces a "new" transport system. Just an app that can organise a driver and a vehicle for you. Taxis have had that system in place for years. They just used an older technology (phones - remember them) but have now developed their own apps which work well. Now with this autonomous transport system using a flying vehicle of some description, not only do they have to develop the app for organising the ride, but the mode of transport and the underlying system to support it. Landing and takeoff sites, navigation system, battery charging systems, maintenance systems, noise abatement, autonomous control or pilot control are some of the hurdles to overcome. A previous post mentioned a sea of red lights on the highways. Just imagine a swarm of large noisy electric vehicles converging on Sydney Harbour for the New Years fireworks and then all trying to get home. Where will they park for a couple of hours? I remember sitting on the grass outside a unit in Kirribilli watching the boat traffic after the 2000 fireworks. The boat traffic was that crowded you could have walked from Kirribilli to the Opera House across the Harbour by hopping from one boat to the next. Just imagine cruising at 500 feet over the Sydney CBD while tweeting your latest thoughts to all your followers only to hear or see "Lost satellite reception" come up on the app that is communicating with your autonomous transport system. The mind boggles!! . Uber did not introduce a whole new transport system, just an app to organise private vehicles and drivers. Same with these scooters that have resulted in a fivefold increase in admissions to the ER departments for injuries. Quite often the driver "contractors" make minimum wage or less...and that's before vehicle depreciation is taken into account. To me a lot of the disruption is figuring out a way to semi legally exploit workers to work for less than what's advertised. |
Andy: I'm imagining that once you have battery management systems, motor controllers and flight control systems then maintenance will become more like a continuous condition monitoring process by electronic means along with almost all preflight tasks. At least some of the high end UAVs are doing this at least partially and most of the big jet turbines are likewise under continuous surveillance. Battery capacity will be determined every discharge-charge cycle. Yes, I know I’m cynical. |
Originally Posted by Sunfish
(Post 10356492)
Andy: ..........That would be logical, so, based on experience to date, CASA will introduce Australia specific unique test and inspection requirements on top of anything the FAA specifies. These requirements will then triple the cost of deployment in Australia compared to the USA. Yes, I know I’m cynical. Born of long experience of the Australian approach to bureaucratic obfuscation and interference, no doubt not limited to aviation ---- where "safety" (whatever that means) is the unrestrained multiplier. Tootle pip!! PS: As many people are now just starting to find out ----- the "economy" of their Prius or Tesla did not include the cost of replacement batteries, nor the real cost of disposal of the exhausted batteries. One supportable analysis (meaning reasonably neutral or unbiased numbers) shows that the only state where an electric car would be "more green" in Australia would be Tasmania, because the recharge source is mostly hydro power. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 22:04. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.