19
top 17 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Pons_Aelius@kbin.social 22 points 11 months ago

I am sorry but what do they promise?

A transport option that cannot scale, will only be for the wealthy?

The people who are the target market for this already have access to helicopters.

Also:

Betteridge's law of headlines is an adage that states: "Any headline that ends in a question mark can be answered by the word no."

[-] AdamEatsAss@lemmy.world 12 points 11 months ago

Wouldn't a subway or train be 100 times more cost effective and safe? In a connected city asky taxi alleviates 1 car from traffic, a subway alleviates thousands. Not to mention the extreme danger of helicopters and tall buildings. Helicopters are easily affected by upa and downdrafts, and large buildings in cities typically create these conditions. Seems very dangerous to put a bunch of these out, even experienced helicopter pilots need practice with a new machine. On top of that what about air traffic control and landing? Do I have to schedule my rides in advance to avoid mid air collision? Will buildings have to be reinforced for landing pads?

[-] BombOmOm@lemmy.world 9 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Helicopter taxis exist today, but almost nobody uses them because they are too expensive. These don't solve the expense issue, I see no reason these will change anything notable

Range of 22 miles

Ah, so even worse at its basic function than helicopter taxis we have today. The chopper has to fly from it's base, to you, to your destination, then back to it's base using a total of 22 miles? And let's not forget you need to keep a few of those miles in reserve. Worthless as a taxi.

[-] guylacaptivite@sh.itjust.works 7 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Hit the nail right on the head. This is just a company trying to rebrand helicopters. And bad helicopters at that. They are banking on naive people who think this is actually a novel and viable technology. It will at the very best be another toy for the super wealthy to send the kids to Disney.

[-] magnor@lemmy.magnor.ovh 8 points 11 months ago

Billionaires first. A few testflights ought to iron out the kinks.

[-] Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social 1 points 11 months ago

I wonder if these are also made from rejected carbon fiber scraps

[-] magnor@lemmy.magnor.ovh 2 points 11 months ago

I think we can cut corners and use cardboard. They are not going underwater after all.

[-] Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social 3 points 11 months ago

Except let's say it's an advanced renewable composite material

[-] magnor@lemmy.magnor.ovh 2 points 11 months ago

I like this idea. You're hired in the marketing team.

[-] autotldr@lemmings.world 6 points 11 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


Volocopter expects to get the European aerospace regulator, EASA, to clear its machine, the VoloCity to carry passengers in the next few months, so they can be ready for the Olympics.

He says that more powerful, cheaper batteries will emerge, allowing Volocopter to build a bigger aircraft that will be able to offer services at lower prices.

Lilium says there is potentially a huge market for such an aircraft which can offer connections around congested cities, or services where rail links are poor.

He points to a deal announced in June under which Shenzhen Eastern General Aviation (Heli-Eastern), plans to buy 100 Lilium aircraft.

Heli-Eastern runs air links in the Greater Bay region of China, which includes Hong Kong, Shenzhen and Macao.

He also makes the point that the new firms will have to get much bigger: "It is crucial for the industry to scale-up to avoid adopting a model limited to business travellers or financially privileged individuals."


I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[-] _haha_oh_wow_@kbin.social 6 points 11 months ago
[-] TimeSquirrel@kbin.social 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Flying personal cars like "Back to the Future" style will never be a thing, sorry to burst everyone's bubble.

Or rather, they might be a thing, but not for you and me.

[-] QHC@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

What problem do they solve, and is that problem still solved if 50% of people are using this new method of transportation?

[-] theoretiker@feddit.de 4 points 11 months ago

You are very optimistic with that 50%.

The problem they solve is rich people having to share the road with the common folk.

[-] HorseFD@lemm.ee 2 points 11 months ago

Flying electric taxis? Are we finally living in the future?

[-] TenderfootGungi@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

For the moderately wealthy, yes.

[-] MedicPigBabySaver@lemm.ee 1 points 11 months ago
this post was submitted on 08 Aug 2023
19 points (78.8% liked)

Technology

55692 readers
2446 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS