I am a 92 year old retired Aeronautical Structures Engineer “ex Canadair RCAF Boeing and Transport Canada Airworthiness” and see one of the the greatest developments in engineering is, the improvements in batteries bringing forth tremendously the use of the Electric motor . This motor is so versatile in its use and development, it’s vastly increased application is amazing. Could you have ever imagined the way Lillium has adapted the electric motor for flight.
A adapted jet engine using Stanley Meyers patents is likely MORE sustainable, as they dont have to mine using Afican slave labor. And this EV most likely can only be flown in good weather.
Using the term "jet" to refer to the propulsion may be colloquially adequate, but won't showcase the difference between combustion-based airbreathing reaction engines and any other kind of propulsion system (though it does share some similarity with rocket engines and ion thrusters). That's because what makes a jet enginebe called like that is the fact that the combustion directly powers the rotation of main fan blades. There aren't any pistons or even any mechanical power transfer other than the axle shared by the combustion compressor and the main fan. Still, we usually call any ducted-fan a "jet" engine; Why? Well, that's because all jet engines are, by design limitations, ducted fans! This is the natural consequence of needing a proper chamber for the combustion, access to plenty of air for the combustion to occur and a nozzle at the end to increase the speed of the resulting airflow (mainly the air that gets "bypassed" on modern turbofans, though the combustion exhaustion also helps a bit). So yeah, Electric turbofans cannot be considered jet engines, as they are driven by electric motors, not a mix of compressed air and fuel... Or anything similar. An ion thruster, however, could be made into an electric jet engine, as you can ionize the compressed air to accelerate it and drive the rotor shaft. But I don't see the point of doing so, as ion thrusters (and rocket engines) accelerate gasses beyond "intake" speed (not that rockets have any intake, LMAO), meaning that they don't need a mechanical compressor, just a nozzle at the exhaust. Oh, and if you are wondering why jets need the air to exit the nozzle at a greater speed than it enters, the answer is quite simple: You can only move using air jets as fast as the air gets expelled. We call this "nozzle velocity". However, the blades of any fan can only accelerate air as fast as their tips move (at best, that is), meaning that the closer you get to Mach 1, the closer you are to having flow separation occur on the tip of a conventional turboprop aircraft's propeller blades. When this happens, the aircraft suffers severe efficiency losses as the propeller blades experience flow separation. Moreover, the parasitic drag over their surface of the blades increase by the square of their speeds, meaning less fuel efficiency the faster the blades rotate and the larger they are. Hence the need for nozzles and, by extension, the duct around the fan. Finally, let's not forget that the faster the blades move, the more kinetic energy they have (making collision with objects or animals potentially catastrophic. That explains intake to exhaust ratios (or nozzle rations), but why should you use two giant turbines instead of many smaller ones? 1- Smaller turbines need the same kind of components as larger ones, and the miniaturization will not always translate into a proportionally lighter and smaller component due to material and technology limitations. It also makes maintenance a pain in the back. Big metal. Stronk. Potent. Never broke. Monke happy. 2- Smaller turbines will have a way high percentage of nacelle frontal and external area / total turbine area (nacelle duct and the turbine fan). This means an increase in the drag and friction the more engines you use to achieve the same thrust. Plane smooth. Air flows. Monke happy. 3- Not an specialist, but I've seen somewhere that multiple engines running close to one another can also be a source of problems. May or may not search for it later. So remember that juicy, gargantuan GE90 and its successor, the GE9X? That's why they are like that. Though this is not possible for small VTOL aircrafts like this one.
Excellent explanation and analysis. Aside from the fact of having many engines for thrust being detrimental to performance and the problems of maintenance, it also just looks strange and inefficient, purely as a visual analysis. To me, it looks like something from the cold war era soviet design bureau, but with advances in battery design. Also, the use of the word "jet" as nomenclature is, in my opinion, purely for marketing hype and sensationalism, as is most marketing these days because people are becoming more and more drawn to, (and persuaded by) idiomatic expressions and labels.
Great video. Looking forward to more contents in the future. Love this channel. One of the important part to evaluate the cell performance which is not captured by Lilium is the battery cycling performance. It's a trade-off between power, energy and cycle life. It's great to see the battery can provide enough power for vertical take-off and landing while has decent energy density. However, the unit economics will suffer if the cycle life is bad and drive the operation cost too high, then the price won't be accepted by broader users
In aviation, we are used to engine-overhauls, replacements and even major fuel tank overhauls. So, to replace recyclable batteries every several years should not be problematic. However, maintaining battery temperatures *would* be a major problem to solve. I am not thinking that such batteries would be subject to _cycles_ such as in automotive applications. During normal operations, jet aircraft can constantly _trickle regen._
this is a technology only for the super rich folks from WEF who will own everything meanwhile you will own nothing and be "happy" otherwise your money will be frozen and social credit score removed which will make you lose privlages such as: driving a bicycle (yes that will be a privlage because it will be the only personal mode of transportation left after davos bans all the cars and motorcycles)
Real-world aircraft operate at close to gross weight. For a typical small aircraft, payload can represent as much as 50% of total gross weight. The performance numbers given here are at “operational empty weight”. Assuming that the aircraft has a relatively small payload (as one would expect from a battery aircraft) of, say, 25% of gross weight, the energy requirements for VTOL will be considerably larger which will affect both range and safety margins. I would really be interested to see how this aircraft performs using a conventional runway. Certain existing VTOL aircraft such as the Harrier aircraft reauire rolling takeoffs when loaded to near gross weight as they are incapable of vertical takeoff fully loaded despite using fuel that has an energy density almost ten times that of the best batteries. Furthermore, the Harrier, being both a warplane and fuel-consuming aircraft has an advantage for vertical landing as it is much closer to empty weight upon landing having shed much of its payload weight while in flight. My point is that for all the press that eVTOL aircraft are getting, true, practical, electric flight will appear sooner in conventional fixed-wing form as it is much easier to achieve.
Impressive technology! Very good science at work here. Otto would be very proud and it's about time someone gives recognition to his name. There will be great advances in renewable energy supply (with and without batteries) in a near future. It's coming up. You have a great design that will best benefit from it. And... it looks mighty good! My best wishes to you all!
I am not an aerodynamic engineer, but I have been a commercial pilot most of my working life. I know that initial roll and climb needs up to ten times the power of cruise. It has always surprised me that a ground based launch assist systems have never been used except carrier based aircraft and gliders.
or just start taking off vertically with a extension cord attached lol and if you are high enough you "just unplug it" sounds silly..i know, but gliders get pulled even with a 1km rope to takeoff and unhook it in air without any dramas which is harder
@@faustinpippin9208More on this idea. the aircraft needs to get a minimal horizontal speed before unplug the cord. how could you deal with this issue? How would you keep the cord plugged in while the aircraft slowly speeding up?
The remote control flying world has already adopted the EDF designation for electric model jets. The nitrio fueled R/C Jets have been called DUCTED FANS since the 1970's. R/C Jets with the new generation of electric motors have been called EDF's since the early 2000's. Lilium is electric. Lilium is powered by multiple Ducted fan units. So as far as I can see, EDF applies. Having said all of that, the public will make all this engineering work worthwhile. The company will have to decide whether EDF or JET will play best with the consumer who will ride in it. And I didn't forget the FAA. Lawyers too. Liability will also play a part in how things are marketed. It will be interesting to see how this plays out. But as a licensed pilot, I'm just ready for a ride.
Or the range…the most “efficient” electric engine still can only travel a 3rd of the distance as any ICE…it’s almost like it’s the laws of physics holding back electric vehicles vs the laws of man 😏…weight and energy density are still a thing and unfortunately there’s still more stored energy in one gallon of fossil fuel which weighs about 6-7 lbs than a several hundred pound battery
Curious what C discharge rating is deemed neded for VTOL. Does anyone explore dual chemistry or dual battery designs? What's the higher Wh/kg cell used thus far? Tesla and NIO are loosely claiming to be at 360 Wh/kg for upcoming products.
How long does it take to fully charge and what happens if you lose all power when flying? Can it charge up as fast as it takes to refuel a regular airplane? Can it glide? If you're going to tell us how impressive the engineering is, you should probably answer these basic and obvious questions.
How much can VTO noise levels be reduced with a 50 meter, 100 meter or 200 meter runway? Could winch assisted landings be considered to limit VL noise levels?
Even though I agree with de classification of the aircraft as a Jet aircraft, I just find it funny that the video cites Wikipedia as sources for the defenitions of Jet and Jet aircraft... =D. I Remember the times in school we had to copy the sources at the bottom of the wikipedia pages to avoid at all costs using wikipedia itself as a source. Awesome technology, looking forward to see Lilium grow as a company and bring us all incredible new Technologies.
Wikipedia is full of commies. Jet has most likely been focused group, and would likely be better for marketing. Stanley Meyers water powered Jet engine is more truth ful. Of course commies love to change definition. And according to Wikipedia, Stanley meyer is a "conspiracy theory".
ok, lets assume it works and there is a 50 km range transfer service. After landing you need to recharge again for how many hours then ? I am not getting the concept and I can not derive any usage and business model. The further we are away the more likely is a speedy alternative connection and the more specific the connection is, the less number of persons are there and recharging is difficult. Anyway, a nice money burner and interesting to follow as long as not invested.
Exciting, the next 10 years should be in range, speed, capacity and incorporating unique wing designs away from a traditional to radical but stable wing and fuselage designs.
It is a duct fan, powered by an electric MOTOR. Not an internal combustion jet ENGINE. A prop plane shoots a jet of air too, but we don't call them jet planes. Details don't seem to be very important to the general populous. Although it is good marketing, people will associate safety because you call it a jet, not a fan like that thing on the ceiling of their house.
It's a wonderful, clever engineering development, but I'm not so sure about the commercial potential. The range is 100 to 150 miles, depending whether empty or fully loaded (I think six passengers). Where's the market for that? With a car, you can get there in about 1.8 hours. I don't recall hearing the speed of the aircraft, but what's it's travel time, half that? But then you have to go to and get from an airport. How many small airports are there? Importantly, there isn't much of a market for that niche in aviation right now, so this invention will have to create its own market. Not an easy thing to do. On the other hand, such accomplishments have been done.
Visit brilliant.org/eVTOLinnovation/ to get started learning STEM for free, and the first 200 people will get 20% off their annual premium subscription.
Ojalá algún día este vehículo sea alimentado por baterías de estado solido, de sodio azufre, por ejemplo, pudiendo así desempeñarse con todo su potencial.
Could a micro turbine generator fueled by hydrogen be an alternative to batteries? GE has large hydrogen turbine generators already, could we see a suitcase-sized hydrogen power pack system used as a clean energy source?
@@eVTOLinnovation The gas is being propelled by a fan. We are not talking about a compressor fan in a jet. It is a fan that pushes air through a tube. If it makes you guys feel better, keep calling a ducted fan a jet. Just know that you will be constantly ridiculed by trying to change the definition of a ducted fan to a jet.
@@eVTOLinnovation I didn't say that. I said your fan is not a compressor fan. Fact: Your propulsion system is an electric motor turning a fan. The fan provides the thrust. It is a ducted fan. I am not taking away from the coolness of the plane. It is very cool, but calling it a jet is just like the woke crowd trying to reinvent history.
It is clear that Lilium will work best in a short take-off and landing setup. How short a runway will be needed will depend on the load and weather conditions. So for me Joby is the most optimal solution since it can do vetol and thus access a city location, which will be reinforced apartment rooftops that are also being used by helicopter operators. I do like the Lilium solution but they needs to go for airport setups which means just using the jets in an underbody configuration and no need for small distributed jet, just 4 large jets which reduce complexity and maintenance costs which simplifies everything. The battery can thus be used for more range since no need to hover. The analysis is telling them what market to go for but Lilium refuses and is sticking to the e-Vetol market . This is not going to work, thus the institutional investors have gone to Joby etc.
I find it HILARIOUS that people think toys for the rich will save the planet. Battery car good ergo battery flying machine also good. These are not planet savers. There is not enough resources for just the battery cars.
The reality = 75 miles trips the most. The revolution starts at the energy storage level, too heavy, too low power, expenses for multiple battery packages will be astronomical, nothing beats combustion engines, yet.
TIL: Nobody can define "JET". Also, Newton's 3rd law is true for all kinds of propulsion not just jets. Btw a turbojet/turbofan engine has 10+ fans. The Lilium engines have one fan. Quite the difference in compression and complexity.
In fluid mechanics, a jet is a region of directed flow with a velocity that differs from that of the surrounding fluid. The static pressure across the boundary of the jet is constant, and this boundary, itself containing a velocity gradient is called a free surface.
Dear Lilium designers/engineers, I want a two-seater Lilium jet and if you don't mind, incorporate into the manufacture of same a coil in the nosecone in front of each fan that will serve to harvest the kinetic energy from the rotation of the fan shaft in the form of electrical energy to be used to continuously charge the battery array. Naturally, this will result in unlimited range without ever needing to be "plugged in". Get on this right away a let me know when this relatively simple task is complete so that I may purchase one for say, a few thousand dollars, if that price is feasible. (tongue in cheek)
@@paulslevinsky580 I am serious and though I've never used it in gainful employment I do have an AS. degree in Computer Science Electronics. That idea of incorporating a coil in the nosecone of each of those electric engines in order to harvest the kinetic energy from the rotation of the engine shaft in the form of electrical current that could be used to continuously charge the battery array is feasible, in my opinion.
@@oscarwindham6016 - Then I Have Diamond Mine to gift you! It's in Tuktoyaktuk, if you don't mind the "Walk!" 🙄 Everyone thinks they can get "Perpetual Motion" so easily! It appears you are one of them! 🧐😂
A birdlike design with hybrid electric range using ethanol and toroidal propellers and solid state batteries to reduce the weight a little more feathered wings wing tip winglets 3 on each wing bigger engine sets 2 on each wing and one built into the tail the tail feathers having a downward curl at the tips acting like a vertical stabilizer the tail drive system has the small ethanol motor and in horizontal flight the engine is turn off so that only at vertical take off and landing and when electric range is reached will it ever be used very little using very clean burning fuel two and a haft passengers which is to say a third passenger if they aren't too heavy like a dog or a light woman or kid or some bags packed a rumble seat would be good for this decorative solar panels suggestive of feather pattern on back wings and tail theoretically able to recharge the electric motors for horizontal take off and short electric range flight with horizontal landing so your not completely stranded without fuel water landing variant with floating skies and the solar panels have a scaly look to them instead 2 sets of 3 engines on the wings only for this version no ethanol motor horizontal take off and land only ,but still birdlike design just like the first if your landing on water your don't need vertical take off anyway and last but not least insect like design dragon fly one and a haft seat two sets of wings forking out front set longer than rear set tilt motors at the tips of each wing ethanol engine behind the haft seat in the body of the flyer no wing feathers or tail feather small vertical stabilizer at the end of the streamlined body hard thin land skies you could buy those off a normal helicopter kit solar panels have armor like pattern on the body only wings are white rounded canopy almost like the real bug small enough you could sell it as a kit just a suggestion AK
I still wonder where these things are to fly from and to, if it's not going to be regular airports and not regular parking lots. Heli ports already in existence...I doubt would be available to these unless a helicopter was substituted.
LILIUM’s aircraft is just so beautiful!!! Love it’s looks. For me, open propeller eVTOL makes me uncomfortable. It’s because it makes me linked to military aircraft. It just looks scary…
I agree that it can be called as jet, to be exact as electric jet. But this is not jet engine, maybe electric jet motor instead? Engine is associated with combustion IMHO
By your reasoning, technically all propeller airplanes are jet airplanes too which makes that distinction irrelevant. From 36 to 30 EDFs (electric ducted fans), increasing diameter by 10% only increases efficiency by 10%. By comparison Joby, Beta, Vertical, Archer, etc evtols have 3X larger diameters which results in 3X more efficient using the same battery tech.
They have given no test data to support their claims, a full seize prototype has not yet flown and their 7seater does not stack up mechanically or commercially. Way to muck hype about this aircraft. the supposed dates of the prototype launch have been put back time after time. The aircraft will undoubtedly fly but its range and commercial viability are greatly disputed Aeronautical data that they have based their prospectus on has been shown to be incorrect.
It will unfortunately be years before zoning and doubting armchair experts will be ok with city landings. So save battery power and use small airports and have vertical landing for future and/or emergencies. I hope this electric ducted fan aircraft continues to evolve. They could benefit by going to a STOL event and see what is working with currently flying aircraft that take off in 100 feet.
I don't think the rotor design is so innovative as depicted in the video. The small rotors would have huge losses. I can't see how it would compete against the archer evtol which would provide better performance and mile range.
Galvanic voltaic pile batteries aircraft reminds me of when I had an idea for a solid fueled jet engine so eventually only and editor in of Chengdu Sichuan took interest who put it in production for antiship cruise missiles and officially such an editor was officially rewritten as an "unperson to have never existed" by Beijing Central Committee.
Such a great aircraft design, but why bother with that batery stuff? It will be much better to make it hybrid with much smaller bateries for takeoff, landing and emergencies. On board generator would be real gamechanger for this aircraft.
Is not a "JET"! It is just an Electric FAN engine. The term JET is used for internal combustion engines. The first engine was the TurboJet. The rest, TurboFan, TurboScramJet, TurboPro are all derived from the internal combustion "JET". It's just an electric motor with FAN! So it's called Elerric FAN.
“Gas turbine” and even then there’s a couple of break downs such as “axial flow” (German design) vs “centrifugal flow” (British design) ….semantics…it’s a thing unfortunately
It doesnt appear to be practical, one hundred miles is nothing. By the time you have got to the airport booked in, boarded, flown and disembarked left the airport to get your destination one could drive point to point in the same time.
So it should be called an Electric Ducted Fan……Jet includes hot gas, the internal combustion definition. So it is incorrect to call it a jet. It’s an Electric Ducted Fan….your marketing team might want to call it a jet, cause it sounds cooler. But it’s not what it is….
Right. The remote control flying world has already adopted this designation for electric model jets. The nitrio fueled R/C Jets have been called DUCTED FANS since the 1970's. R/C Jets with the new generation of electric motors have been called EDF's since the early 2000's. Lilium is electric. Lilium is powered by multiple Ducted fan units. So as far as I can see, EDF applies. Having said all of that, the public will make all this engineering work worthwhile. The company will have to decide whether EDF or JET will play best with the consumer who will ride in it. And I didn't forget the FAA. Lawyers too. Liability will also play a part in how things are marketed. It will be interesting to see how this plays out. But as a licensed pilot, I'm just ready for a ride.
@@rocketboy917 definitely see your point but it’s semantics…is lift generated from newtons 3rd law or Bernoulli’s principle? Technically both definitions are correct 🤷🏼♂️…im mean technically most commercial aircraft use “high bypass turbo fans” or “turbo props”…hell even some helicopters use a “turbo shaft” system where as fighter aircraft use “turbo jets” …all are powered by gas turbines but only one is considered a “jet” …again it’s all semantics….in the car world we call turbo chargers “turbo chargers” but in aviation they’re called “turbo superchargers” 😂🤷🏼♂️
How many times "specific" word can you count?? Top marketing bla bla. Its not efficent nor enviromentaly friendly. Targets only super elit people. Freakin expensive because not massproduced.
It's called ducted fan. Nobody calls it jet engine or jet whatever. You just trying to confuse people. O look, it uses force of reaction so every engine is a jet engine.
Its all unscientific nonsense. Especially the battery and propulsion part. An EDF is inefficient and that x 30 or even times 36. Where are the discharge rates? Where the capacity of the battery? Missing all necessary info. How many Volts? How many Amps? Running time aprox. 10 min.....range 5 miles. Anybody with some performance info? What a dream- for money
It is not a jet period. It is called a ducted fan stop playing word games to make it sound “oh so special it’s a jet” sarcasm. No such thing as an electric jet engine! OK you wanna call it a jet let’s see it do at least mock .55 in pressurized comfort.
@@eVTOLinnovation anybody can change the definition on Wikipedia to whatever they wanted to say. Is that what you did? Jet engines are internal combustion engines stop playing your childish word games. It’s still a ducted fan!
@@mrsmith324 Alastair McIntosh, Lilium's Chief Technology Officer, Who worked for Rolls-Royce and was in charge of delivering the Trent XWB for the A350, calls it a Jet Engine. He is definitely not wrong and I don't think he is lying.
The world sustainablility is so cringe. In Stanley Meyers patents, he had a REAL combustion JET, that could be modified for air planes. He was killed by the oil barons. The hydrogen was the fuel after splitting the water. These new EV technologies are less about sustainablitly and more about control. Meyers technology was also zero emission. These electric vehicles will be so expensive that only the rich will be able to use them. And the amount of environmental degradation from the creation of batteries will render the sustainablity claim hypocritical.
I am a 92 year old retired Aeronautical Structures Engineer “ex Canadair RCAF Boeing and Transport Canada Airworthiness” and see one of the the greatest developments in engineering is, the improvements in batteries bringing forth tremendously the use of the Electric motor . This motor is so versatile in its use and development, it’s vastly increased application is amazing. Could you have ever imagined the way Lillium has adapted the electric motor for flight.
A adapted jet engine using Stanley Meyers patents is likely MORE sustainable, as they dont have to mine using Afican slave labor. And this EV most likely can only be flown in good weather.
Lilium seems to be covering all the bases. This bodes well for a smooth certification process.
Using the term "jet" to refer to the propulsion may be colloquially adequate, but won't showcase the difference between combustion-based airbreathing reaction engines and any other kind of propulsion system (though it does share some similarity with rocket engines and ion thrusters).
That's because what makes a jet enginebe called like that is the fact that the combustion directly powers the rotation of main fan blades. There aren't any pistons or even any mechanical power transfer other than the axle shared by the combustion compressor and the main fan.
Still, we usually call any ducted-fan a "jet" engine; Why? Well, that's because all jet engines are, by design limitations, ducted fans! This is the natural consequence of needing a proper chamber for the combustion, access to plenty of air for the combustion to occur and a nozzle at the end to increase the speed of the resulting airflow (mainly the air that gets "bypassed" on modern turbofans, though the combustion exhaustion also helps a bit).
So yeah, Electric turbofans cannot be considered jet engines, as they are driven by electric motors, not a mix of compressed air and fuel... Or anything similar. An ion thruster, however, could be made into an electric jet engine, as you can ionize the compressed air to accelerate it and drive the rotor shaft. But I don't see the point of doing so, as ion thrusters (and rocket engines) accelerate gasses beyond "intake" speed (not that rockets have any intake, LMAO), meaning that they don't need a mechanical compressor, just a nozzle at the exhaust.
Oh, and if you are wondering why jets need the air to exit the nozzle at a greater speed than it enters, the answer is quite simple: You can only move using air jets as fast as the air gets expelled. We call this "nozzle velocity". However, the blades of any fan can only accelerate air as fast as their tips move (at best, that is), meaning that the closer you get to Mach 1, the closer you are to having flow separation occur on the tip of a conventional turboprop aircraft's propeller blades.
When this happens, the aircraft suffers severe efficiency losses as the propeller blades experience flow separation. Moreover, the parasitic drag over their surface of the blades increase by the square of their speeds, meaning less fuel efficiency the faster the blades rotate and the larger they are. Hence the need for nozzles and, by extension, the duct around the fan.
Finally, let's not forget that the faster the blades move, the more kinetic energy they have (making collision with objects or animals potentially catastrophic.
That explains intake to exhaust ratios (or nozzle rations), but why should you use two giant turbines instead of many smaller ones?
1- Smaller turbines need the same kind of components as larger ones, and the miniaturization will not always translate into a proportionally lighter and smaller component due to material and technology limitations. It also makes maintenance a pain in the back.
Big metal. Stronk. Potent. Never broke. Monke happy.
2- Smaller turbines will have a way high percentage of nacelle frontal and external area / total turbine area (nacelle duct and the turbine fan). This means an increase in the drag and friction the more engines you use to achieve the same thrust.
Plane smooth. Air flows. Monke happy.
3- Not an specialist, but I've seen somewhere that multiple engines running close to one another can also be a source of problems. May or may not search for it later.
So remember that juicy, gargantuan GE90 and its successor, the GE9X? That's why they are like that.
Though this is not possible for small VTOL aircrafts like this one.
Excellent explanation and analysis. Aside from the fact of having many engines for thrust being detrimental to performance and the problems of maintenance, it also just looks strange and inefficient, purely as a visual analysis. To me, it looks like something from the cold war era soviet design bureau, but with advances in battery design.
Also, the use of the word "jet" as nomenclature is, in my opinion, purely for marketing hype and sensationalism, as is most marketing these days because people are becoming more and more drawn to, (and persuaded by) idiomatic expressions and labels.
Thanks for the Video, especially the battery part was brilliant -ly explained! ;)
Extremely Exciting 🌟👍🏻
Great video. Looking forward to more contents in the future. Love this channel.
One of the important part to evaluate the cell performance which is not captured by Lilium is the battery cycling performance. It's a trade-off between power, energy and cycle life.
It's great to see the battery can provide enough power for vertical take-off and landing while has decent energy density. However, the unit economics will suffer if the cycle life is bad and drive the operation cost too high, then the price won't be accepted by broader users
In aviation, we are used to engine-overhauls, replacements and even major fuel tank overhauls. So, to replace recyclable batteries every several years should not be problematic. However, maintaining battery temperatures *would* be a major problem to solve. I am not thinking that such batteries would be subject to _cycles_ such as in automotive applications. During normal operations, jet aircraft can constantly _trickle regen._
The Tech is amazing, i can't wait to fly in one of them!!
You got about 10 years to wait?
this is a technology only for the super rich folks from WEF who will own everything meanwhile you will own nothing and be "happy" otherwise your money will be frozen and social credit score removed which will make you lose privlages such as: driving a bicycle (yes that will be a privlage because it will be the only personal mode of transportation left after davos bans all the cars and motorcycles)
Incredible engineering
Real-world aircraft operate at close to gross weight. For a typical small aircraft, payload can represent as much as 50% of total gross weight. The performance numbers given here are at “operational empty weight”. Assuming that the aircraft has a relatively small payload (as one would expect from a battery aircraft) of, say, 25% of gross weight, the energy requirements for VTOL will be considerably larger which will affect both range and safety margins.
I would really be interested to see how this aircraft performs using a conventional runway. Certain existing VTOL aircraft such as the Harrier aircraft reauire rolling takeoffs when loaded to near gross weight as they are incapable of vertical takeoff fully loaded despite using fuel that has an energy density almost ten times that of the best batteries. Furthermore, the Harrier, being both a warplane and fuel-consuming aircraft has an advantage for vertical landing as it is much closer to empty weight upon landing having shed much of its payload weight while in flight.
My point is that for all the press that eVTOL aircraft are getting, true, practical, electric flight will appear sooner in conventional fixed-wing form as it is much easier to achieve.
Yes... just because it can VTOL doesn't mean it must always VTOL.
Impressive technology! Very good science at work here. Otto would be very proud and it's about time someone gives recognition to his name. There will be great advances in renewable energy supply (with and without batteries) in a near future. It's coming up. You have a great design that will best benefit from it. And... it looks mighty good! My best wishes to you all!
-- Excellent!
Master piece
Nice Job, i will create my e-vtol soon.
I am not an aerodynamic engineer, but I have been a commercial pilot most of my working life. I know that initial roll and climb needs up to ten times the power of cruise. It has always surprised me that a ground based launch assist systems have never been used except carrier based aircraft and gliders.
or just start taking off vertically with a extension cord attached lol and if you are high enough you "just unplug it" sounds silly..i know, but gliders get pulled even with a 1km rope to takeoff and unhook it in air without any dramas which is harder
@@faustinpippin9208Brilliant idea, The first company who implement this idea will be successful
@@faustinpippin9208More on this idea. the aircraft needs to get a minimal horizontal speed before unplug the cord. how could you deal with this issue? How would you keep the cord plugged in while the aircraft slowly speeding up?
Do we have a sim for this yet.
In the Azul Airlines soon.
The remote control flying world has already adopted the EDF designation for electric model jets. The nitrio fueled R/C Jets have been called DUCTED FANS since the 1970's.
R/C Jets with the new generation of electric motors have been called EDF's since the early 2000's.
Lilium is electric. Lilium is powered by multiple Ducted fan units. So as far as I can see, EDF applies.
Having said all of that, the public will make all this engineering work worthwhile. The company will have to decide whether EDF or JET will play best with the consumer who will ride in it. And I didn't forget the FAA. Lawyers too. Liability will also play a part in how things are marketed. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
But as a licensed pilot, I'm just ready for a ride.
You totally ignore the major elephant in the room, power source.
Or the range…the most “efficient” electric engine still can only travel a 3rd of the distance as any ICE…it’s almost like it’s the laws of physics holding back electric vehicles vs the laws of man 😏…weight and energy density are still a thing and unfortunately there’s still more stored energy in one gallon of fossil fuel which weighs about 6-7 lbs than a several hundred pound battery
So where can I get those cells? Want to test on my own.
Curious what C discharge rating is deemed neded for VTOL. Does anyone explore dual chemistry or dual battery designs?
What's the higher Wh/kg cell used thus far? Tesla and NIO are loosely claiming to be at 360 Wh/kg for upcoming products.
500Wh/Kg is here now.
How long does it take to fully charge and what happens if you lose all power when flying? Can it charge up as fast as it takes to refuel a regular airplane? Can it glide? If you're going to tell us how impressive the engineering is, you should probably answer these basic and obvious questions.
What's the life expectancy of the ZenLabs cell?
How much can VTO noise levels be reduced with a 50 meter, 100 meter or 200 meter runway?
Could winch assisted landings be considered to limit VL noise levels?
That is a great question. A short runway would also improve the energy performance a lot.
Even though I agree with de classification of the aircraft as a Jet aircraft, I just find it funny that the video cites Wikipedia as sources for the defenitions of Jet and Jet aircraft... =D. I Remember the times in school we had to copy the sources at the bottom of the wikipedia pages to avoid at all costs using wikipedia itself as a source.
Awesome technology, looking forward to see Lilium grow as a company and bring us all incredible new Technologies.
Wikipedia is full of commies. Jet has most likely been focused group, and would likely be better for marketing. Stanley Meyers water powered Jet engine is more truth ful. Of course commies love to change definition. And according to Wikipedia, Stanley meyer is a "conspiracy theory".
This could be very useful for police and medical rescue operations too
does it has a parachute?
This is an electric multi engine fan plane.
Semantics.
For decades we’ve already had water “jet” propulsion in boats and ships, and most of those are spun by piston engines.
Tomayto-tomahto 🤔😖
That’s a funny way of describing “investment money burner”
What is engine-out L/D?
ok, lets assume it works and there is a 50 km range transfer service. After landing you need to recharge again for how many hours then ? I am not getting the concept and I can not derive any usage and business model. The further we are away the more likely is a speedy alternative connection and the more specific the connection is, the less number of persons are there and recharging is difficult. Anyway, a nice money burner and interesting to follow as long as not invested.
Watch The Insane Engineering behind The Lilium Jet | Part 2
ruclips.net/video/Cn-5qqgEW6E/видео.html
Battery swap ...
Ok…that common sense you’ve got …it has no purpose in this brave new world 😂…this engineering is pipe dream territory 🫡
Exciting, the next 10 years should be in range, speed, capacity and incorporating unique wing designs away from a traditional to radical but stable wing and fuselage designs.
Why don’t Lilium put in a range extender generator to double the range?
Without combustion, I have to call it a ducted fan. Cool design though. Mine forces air over the wing.
It is a duct fan, powered by an electric MOTOR. Not an internal combustion jet ENGINE. A prop plane shoots a jet of air too, but we don't call them jet planes. Details don't seem to be very important to the general populous. Although it is good marketing, people will associate safety because you call it a jet, not a fan like that thing on the ceiling of their house.
can it glide?
3:29 But was it transition with a full payload dead weight ??? I doubt it very much.
5:11 Ten seconds in VTOL mode is extremely optimistic.
When lilium zet sell in to the commercial market???
👍🏻❤️
It's a wonderful, clever engineering development, but I'm not so sure about the commercial potential. The range is 100 to 150 miles, depending whether empty or fully loaded (I think six passengers). Where's the market for that?
With a car, you can get there in about 1.8 hours. I don't recall hearing the speed of the aircraft, but what's it's travel time, half that? But then you have to go to and get from an airport. How many small airports are there? Importantly, there isn't much of a market for that niche in aviation right now, so this invention will have to create its own market. Not an easy thing to do.
On the other hand, such accomplishments have been done.
This is a toy for the WEF rich like satan claus and hollywood weirdos too, for their zero carbon future utopia.
❤️👍❤️
So; prop planes are jets.
Marry Kenney Patents of ground based fans referenced by Marshall J. Corbett are essential.
When can I have it?
2025
Visit brilliant.org/eVTOLinnovation/ to get started learning STEM for free, and the first 200 people will get 20% off their annual premium subscription.
Signed up! Thank you for the discount and the great content
@@topherkins Thank you, I really appreciate that
Is not a "JET"
This video contains so many mistakes. The Lilium Jet is not a jet aircraft. I am sorry but I have to correct the video on this.
Where is your argument?
👍🏻
Iya li, datang aja ya,
😎👍
How far can it fly
10-15 min
@@localenterprisebroadcastin5971 needs repulsers.....otherwise a rc toy can fly farther
Best way to learn something is teach it yourself.
Ojalá algún día este vehículo sea alimentado por baterías de estado solido, de sodio azufre, por ejemplo, pudiendo así desempeñarse con todo su potencial.
Could a micro turbine generator fueled by hydrogen be an alternative to batteries? GE has large hydrogen turbine generators already, could we see a suitcase-sized hydrogen power pack system used as a clean energy source?
plutonium
At this stage of fuel cell development, it might make more sense to burn the hydrogen as fuel in a standard jet turboprop.
Stanley meyers engince can be modified for air flight.
😎✅
you paint it green and we gonna call it, thunderbird-X2
I need a Zenlab battery for my 2000W scooter.
De-Icing concepts need to be solved. And this will require huge amounts of energy unless surfaces can be somehow _treated._
This is a fair weather vehicle only.
By this definition of "Jet Propulsion" then all propellers work by jet propulsion. Nice video though.
It is a ducted fan engine. Calling it a jet is silly. By your definition, a prop is a jet.
No. Jet (noun) a rapid stream of liquid or gas forced out of a small opening.
@@eVTOLinnovation The gas is being propelled by a fan. We are not talking about a compressor fan in a jet. It is a fan that pushes air through a tube. If it makes you guys feel better, keep calling a ducted fan a jet. Just know that you will be constantly ridiculed by trying to change the definition of a ducted fan to a jet.
The majority of the gas does not go through the compressor in a TurboFan.
@@eVTOLinnovation I didn't say that. I said your fan is not a compressor fan. Fact: Your propulsion system is an electric motor turning a fan. The fan provides the thrust. It is a ducted fan. I am not taking away from the coolness of the plane. It is very cool, but calling it a jet is just like the woke crowd trying to reinvent history.
It is clear that Lilium will work best in a short take-off and landing setup. How short a runway will be needed will depend on the load and weather conditions.
So for me Joby is the most optimal solution since it can do vetol and thus access a city location, which will be reinforced apartment rooftops that are also being used by helicopter operators.
I do like the Lilium solution but they needs to go for airport setups which means just using the jets in an underbody configuration and no need for small distributed jet, just 4 large jets which reduce complexity and maintenance costs which simplifies everything.
The battery can thus be used for more range since no need to hover.
The analysis is telling them what market to go for but Lilium refuses and is sticking to the e-Vetol market .
This is not going to work, thus the institutional investors have gone to Joby etc.
Nice that electric flight is moving forward for the good of mankind.
I find it HILARIOUS that people think toys for the rich will save the planet. Battery car good ergo battery flying machine also good. These are not planet savers. There is not enough resources for just the battery cars.
What about unpowered glide?
It will glide about as well as the space shuttle.
@@bradkubota6968 hopefully not as well as the “Discovery”
The pile of investors money should cushion the fall upon impact
@@bradkubota6968 It's just a matter of time before Lilium Mission Control reports that they "bricked" one. 🚀 🧱 💣 🤣 😂 😅 😁
it would be better to go hybrid given with what battery technology is today.
The reality = 75 miles trips the most. The revolution starts at the energy storage level, too heavy, too low power, expenses for multiple battery packages will be astronomical, nothing beats combustion engines, yet.
Ducted fan = Jet ?
TIL: Nobody can define "JET". Also, Newton's 3rd law is true for all kinds of propulsion not just jets.
Btw a turbojet/turbofan engine has 10+ fans. The Lilium engines have one fan. Quite the difference in compression and complexity.
In fluid mechanics, a jet is a region of directed flow with a velocity that differs from that of the surrounding fluid. The static pressure across the boundary of the jet is constant, and this boundary, itself containing a velocity gradient is called a free surface.
Cool...dose it have parachute and flotation safety?
B
There are electric motors not electric engines, and combustion engines not combustion motors.
Dear Lilium designers/engineers, I want a two-seater Lilium jet and if you don't mind, incorporate into the manufacture of same a coil in the nosecone in front of each fan that will serve to harvest the kinetic energy from the rotation of the fan shaft in the form of electrical energy to be used to continuously charge the battery array. Naturally, this will result in unlimited range without ever needing to be "plugged in".
Get on this right away a let me know when this relatively simple task is complete so that I may purchase one for say, a few thousand dollars, if that price is feasible. (tongue in cheek)
funniest thing i heard today, thankyou
@@operator2618 The cost was the only part that was meant to be humorous.
@@oscarwindham6016 yer serious ??!!??!!!????
@@paulslevinsky580 I am serious and though I've never used it in gainful employment I do have an AS. degree in Computer Science Electronics. That idea of incorporating a coil in the nosecone of each of those electric engines in order to harvest the kinetic energy from the rotation of the engine shaft in the form of electrical current that could be used to continuously charge the battery array is feasible, in my opinion.
@@oscarwindham6016 - Then I Have Diamond Mine to gift you! It's in Tuktoyaktuk, if you don't mind the "Walk!" 🙄
Everyone thinks they can get "Perpetual Motion" so easily! It appears you are one of them!
🧐😂
A birdlike design with hybrid electric range using ethanol and toroidal propellers and solid state batteries to reduce the weight a little more feathered wings wing tip winglets 3 on each wing bigger engine sets 2 on each wing and one built into the tail the tail feathers having a downward curl at the tips acting like a vertical stabilizer the tail drive system has the small ethanol motor and in horizontal flight the engine is turn off so that only at vertical take off and landing and when electric range is reached will it ever be used very little using very clean burning fuel two and a haft passengers which is to say a third passenger if they aren't too heavy like a dog or a light woman or kid or some bags packed a rumble seat would be good for this decorative solar panels suggestive of feather pattern on back wings and tail theoretically able to recharge the electric motors for horizontal take off and short electric range flight with horizontal landing so your not completely stranded without fuel water landing variant with floating skies and the solar panels have a scaly look to them instead 2 sets of 3 engines on the wings only for this version no ethanol motor horizontal take off and land only ,but still birdlike design just like the first if your landing on water your don't need vertical take off anyway
and last but not least insect like design dragon fly one and a haft seat two sets of wings forking out front set longer than rear set tilt motors at the tips of each wing ethanol engine behind the haft seat in the body of the flyer no wing feathers or tail feather small vertical stabilizer at the end of the streamlined body hard thin land skies you could buy those off a normal helicopter kit solar panels have armor like pattern on the body only wings are white rounded canopy almost like the real bug small enough you could sell it as a kit just a suggestion AK
I still wonder where these things are to fly from and to, if it's not going to be regular airports and not regular parking lots.
Heli ports already in existence...I doubt would be available to these unless a helicopter was substituted.
I imagine Lilium will eventually add capacitors to the battery system.
And what would that solve? 0x0 doesn’t equal 1
@@localenterprisebroadcastin5971Higher power requirements for time of vertical up and down. It's not rocket science.
Capacitors are much heavier than batteries
Water jet moves water, air jet moves air. Nuff said.
LILIUM’s aircraft is just so beautiful!!! Love it’s looks. For me, open propeller eVTOL makes me uncomfortable. It’s because it makes me linked to military aircraft. It just looks scary…
Doesn't burn fuel, not a jet. It's an EDF (Electric Ducted Fan).
I agree that it can be called as jet, to be exact as electric jet. But this is not jet engine, maybe electric jet motor instead? Engine is associated with combustion IMHO
A jet! ......that's pushing it too far, it would be fair to say fan, just like they actually state in the video.
By your reasoning, technically all propeller airplanes are jet airplanes too which makes that distinction irrelevant. From 36 to 30 EDFs (electric ducted fans), increasing diameter by 10% only increases efficiency by 10%. By comparison Joby, Beta, Vertical, Archer, etc evtols have 3X larger diameters which results in 3X more efficient using the same battery tech.
Exactly, you are totally right. I do not understand why the author of this video is portraying ducted fans as jet engines. They are nothing alike…
Ducted fans are not jets. They're ducted propellers.
They have given no test data to support their claims, a full seize prototype has not yet flown and their 7seater does not stack up mechanically or commercially. Way to muck hype about this aircraft. the supposed dates of the prototype launch have been put back time after time. The aircraft will undoubtedly fly but its range and commercial viability are greatly disputed Aeronautical data that they have based their prospectus on has been shown to be incorrect.
It will unfortunately be years before zoning and doubting armchair experts will be ok with city landings. So save battery power and use small airports and have vertical landing for future and/or emergencies. I hope this electric ducted fan aircraft continues to evolve. They could benefit by going to a STOL event and see what is working with currently flying aircraft that take off in 100 feet.
109 MILE RANGE. HMMM??? I THINK I WILL JUST DRIVE BECAUSE I WILL NEED A CAR ANYWAY.
I don't think the rotor design is so innovative as depicted in the video. The small rotors would have huge losses.
I can't see how it would compete against the archer evtol which would provide better performance and mile range.
Transition = Gee I hope this works
Galvanic voltaic pile batteries aircraft reminds me of when I had an idea for a solid fueled jet engine so eventually only and editor in of Chengdu Sichuan took interest who put it in production for antiship cruise missiles and officially such an editor was officially rewritten as an "unperson to have never existed" by Beijing Central Committee.
53😊😅😅😅😅😅😅
Shut up and take my money !!!
that's the plan
Such a great aircraft design, but why bother with that batery stuff? It will be much better to make it hybrid with much smaller bateries for takeoff, landing and emergencies. On board generator would be real gamechanger for this aircraft.
Is not a "JET"! It is just an Electric FAN engine. The term JET is used for internal combustion engines.
The first engine was the TurboJet. The rest, TurboFan, TurboScramJet, TurboPro are all derived from the internal combustion "JET".
It's just an electric motor with FAN!
So it's called Elerric FAN.
“Gas turbine” and even then there’s a couple of break downs such as “axial flow” (German design) vs “centrifugal flow” (British design) ….semantics…it’s a thing unfortunately
It doesnt appear to be practical, one hundred miles is nothing. By the time you have got to the airport booked in, boarded, flown and disembarked left the airport to get your destination one could drive point to point in the same time.
So it should be called an Electric Ducted Fan……Jet includes hot gas, the internal combustion definition. So it is incorrect to call it a jet. It’s an Electric Ducted Fan….your marketing team might want to call it a jet, cause it sounds cooler. But it’s not what it is….
Right. The remote control flying world has already adopted this designation for electric model jets. The nitrio fueled R/C Jets have been called DUCTED FANS since the 1970's.
R/C Jets with the new generation of electric motors have been called EDF's since the early 2000's.
Lilium is electric. Lilium is powered by multiple Ducted fan units. So as far as I can see, EDF applies.
Having said all of that, the public will make all this engineering work worthwhile. The company will have to decide whether EDF or JET will play best with the consumer who will ride in it. And I didn't forget the FAA. Lawyers too. Liability will also play a part in how things are marketed. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
But as a licensed pilot, I'm just ready for a ride.
@@rocketboy917 lol what about a jet boat that does that need to be changed to water ducted turbine powered craft
@@rocketboy917 definitely see your point but it’s semantics…is lift generated from newtons 3rd law or Bernoulli’s principle? Technically both definitions are correct 🤷🏼♂️…im mean technically most commercial aircraft use “high bypass turbo fans” or “turbo props”…hell even some helicopters use a “turbo shaft” system where as fighter aircraft use “turbo jets” …all are powered by gas turbines but only one is considered a “jet” …again it’s all semantics….in the car world we call turbo chargers “turbo chargers” but in aviation they’re called “turbo superchargers” 😂🤷🏼♂️
How many times "specific" word can you count?? Top marketing bla bla. Its not efficent nor enviromentaly friendly. Targets only super elit people. Freakin expensive because not massproduced.
It's called ducted fan. Nobody calls it jet engine or jet whatever. You just trying to confuse people. O look, it uses force of reaction so every engine is a jet engine.
It is still misleading and disingenuous to call it a jet .
Its all unscientific nonsense. Especially the battery and propulsion part. An EDF is inefficient and that x 30 or even times 36. Where are the discharge rates? Where the capacity of the battery? Missing all necessary info. How many Volts? How many Amps? Running time aprox. 10 min.....range 5 miles. Anybody with some performance info? What a dream- for money
These guys are like Jim Bede great ideas but no delivery, they talk alot but deliver nothing.
It is not a jet period. It is called a ducted fan stop playing word games to make it sound “oh so special it’s a jet” sarcasm. No such thing as an electric jet engine! OK you wanna call it a jet let’s see it do at least mock .55 in pressurized comfort.
It is a Jet Engine by definition.
@flu flu Jets maybe, not an engine
@@eVTOLinnovation anybody can change the definition on Wikipedia to whatever they wanted to say. Is that what you did? Jet engines are internal combustion engines stop playing your childish word games. It’s still a ducted fan!
@@mrsmith324 Alastair McIntosh, Lilium's Chief Technology Officer, Who worked for Rolls-Royce and was in charge of delivering the Trent XWB for the A350, calls it a Jet Engine. He is definitely not wrong and I don't think he is lying.
I don't care what its called, as long as it works in purpose designed for.
ad copy
100 miles....not good enough......fail
That is NOT a jet aircraft. It is just a battery powered demonstrator that will never be practical. Stop wasting money.
The world sustainablility is so cringe. In Stanley Meyers patents, he had a REAL combustion JET, that could be modified for air planes. He was killed by the oil barons. The hydrogen was the fuel after splitting the water. These new EV technologies are less about sustainablitly and more about control. Meyers technology was also zero emission. These electric vehicles will be so expensive that only the rich will be able to use them. And the amount of environmental degradation from the creation of batteries will render the sustainablity claim hypocritical.
BATTERY AIRCRAFT... NON-STARTER