The british skyfly axe is my preference. It can be flown on a standard ppl, and has the option of an ice range extender, which puts it streets ahead imo..
Axe by Skyfly has useful wings and control surfaces hence safer and longer range and much lighter... and ... and.... Airone like all the others "... waiting for better battery capacity.."
Once again, you have achieved the optimal mix of information (both quality and quantity) and engagement in this excellent video. Many thanks. Looks very interesting but leaves one dreaming of step increases in battery energy density! Regards and thanks from Sydney - Dave
I like the Air One. I believe it has possibilities. What I would like to see in all of these types of E-VTOL machines is 1. The ability for pilots (and former pilots, like me) who have certain health issues, which preclude them from currently being able to pass the physical to becoming eligible to again enjoy the freedom of E-VTOL flight. 2. Increased range and speed (which, I assume, means better, cheaper batteries, or perhaps a different type of aviation fuel; perhaps hydrogen power? In connection with #1, above, I think we need something like the "Return to base" capability, currently available in many private and commercial drones. This, along with an automatic landing sequence capability would allow pilots who experience in-flight emergencies (or their passengers) to engage an emergency procedure to automatically return the aircraft to base, or alternatively land the aircraft safely in short order. As far as # 2, above, I do believe the idea of wings for multi-copter-type E-VTOLs is a very good idea. Coupled with retractable gear and better batteries this would improve both range and airspeed. I am looking forward to the day when these new advances in "air mobility", along with automated navigation and flight control will enable old-timers like me to return to the freedom and enjoyment of the sky. Let's make flying as easy and enjoyable as driving. Then perhaps more of us can leave the roads and take to the sky.
Many thanks. As I have said before, fitting wings is a weight penalty and adds complication, but is a worthwhile innovation to increase efficiency and therefore range. This machine is a step in the right direction. I would insist on full 3 axis control by normal means however. Safer in the event of electrical failure.
I think it needs a diet. All of these concepts are just waiting for solid-state batteries and this is tech demonstration so I don't sweat 30 minute flight times too much right now. That won't be the actual volume production product IMO. Thanks for keeping us up to date on new designs!
Air one looks promising, although the front lower blades appear have very little ground clearance for landing in the “backyard”. I’m excited to see how this and others continue to grow the small vtol business
Great video! I'm now a subscriber! I love the Air One and its design...hopefully battery technology can make a break through and help provide longer flight times
I'm definitely for anything that improves flight control, but slightly nervous about having to trust my life to software and annual inspections of sensors. Doing a daily inspection you can check mechanical control surface linkages - not sure whether the software will always tell you about pending problems. Also, the reason that many helicopters moved from 2-blade teetering to 3 or more blade hingeless rotors was to increase the effective hinge offset: this gives the pilot direct pitch and roll control. I'd be surprised if multi-rotor rotational speed control without collective pitch could match something like Cabri G2 for manoeuvrability. True that more capable (read expensive) helicopters are tending to better flight stability control augmentation systems, with fly by wire seen as the high performance solution. So the question is going to be what system will be the most reliable at general aviation costs... Please note that I really am trying to be more upbeat rather than just pointing straight at the high disk loading elephant in the room and moaning about lack of autorotative capability. Time will tell on that one. 😧
A very innovative design - however without control surfaces there will be an increased control burden on the motor management. Not a difficult technical challenge - but likely to introduce response lag when operating at speed, and thus limit effective cruise performance.
I would have thought that they would have been able to use some sort of solar panel to increase the range on these type of aircraft to replace battery power.
Great video I wonder if the wings also assist in recovery should there be a power outage also can these aircraft auto dry rate and land as helicopters do when unpowered? Cheers
I agree with Synergy... on this. A ballistic parachute will be the safety net used in these aircraft. They will never have enough wing area to glide safely to the ground.
Honestly, that is due to the fact that they are electric and not chemically powered. Battery/electric powered transport is still 20+ years away from being able to compete with ice engines. And one of the many challenges batteries need to face that liquid fuels don't is the weight of the batteries that does not decrease as fuel is consumed. Batteries have to be lugged around at full weight no matter what their charge level. Ice powered vehicles become lighter as they use fuel making them get better ranges than if the weight stayed constant. Just give it time. Honestly, I believe there is a technology that will be released/allowed in the near-ish future that will make battery advancement less important (or maybe not at all needed at all). That tech is a form of wireless power transmission that we are just not allowed to use yet. But I believe that time is coming when it will be allowed.
I used to like the Black Fly. But its too pricey and its an ultralight, meaning speed and range arent acceptable. Air-one would be great if they could put a gas engine in the nose for forward flight increasing speed and range..
I keep hearing about this 'Toroidal Propellers' - supposed to be more efficient than regular ones. How come no one is using it? I know it is expensive to make but small 3D printed ones would be cheaper.
NO WORRY BECAUSE NEW A BATTERY IS A COMING PEOPLE!!! IT WILL LAST 3 TIMES AS LONG WITH UNDER A MINUTE TO CHARGE AND IS MUCH LIGHTER. But not as nice as the new anti-gravity model, yet you heard it here first. 👍
Me pareceu pouco otimizado, é totalmente possível redesenhar as quatro hastes de conexão das hélices para funcionarem como asas, e sem perder desempenho no modo pairar (It seemed less optimized to me, it is totally possible to redesign the four connecting rods of the propellers to work as wings, and without losing performance in hover mode)
Good for in city travel with decent speed and range, well priced, should draw much interest. STOL aircraft will be preferred for serving areas from city outskirts to communities 50 miles+ from the city. All these craft should be designed with a pilot at the controls + at least 2 passengers. Autonomous flight is fine for cargo, but not passengers. This should be happening now, the sooner, the faster cities will evolve in to exciting livable places.
Thanks for the update on this craft. I like the use of multiple techniques to get the most efficient design. I still believe that the rotocopter design is still too noisy and open blades too dangerous to people and wildlife. In my opinion this will not be a winning design for popular usage to the average person.
I wouldn't get in one, unless it can either autorotate like a real helicopter (multicopters can't, aerodynamically, because the rotors are NOT controllable in pitch, let alone way too small) or glide like an airplane. Not sure if the failure of even just one rotor motor would turn the whole contraption into a beveled brick.
Good reporting on this and I love your channel! BUT -- 40 minutes flight time. How sad, in the 21st century. That means a range of only 52 miles. What is the advantage? You can just drive that in less than an hour in a car and don't have to screw with driving to and from the airport, and dealing with ATC or Tower for clearance. I would submit that in most cases, It is faster to go by car. See this face --> (ʘ_ʘ) That's a lot of money to pay for the inconvenience.
definitely getting there , am a bit off batteries after two full car carrier ships now destroyed ,so many fires in China we can't keep track ,and the ccp can't keep the lid on ,and now a house destroyed in Germany ,when a car exploded !? .can we have straight hydro carbon or hydrogen ice versions please ,guessing the range would straight away be 1000 km or so . [ a bullet proof rechargable vandium diboride battery would of course change my mind ].
Normal people can NOT afford such dream vehicles. Many of us of age have heard the claims all our lives. I personally was told everyone would own a flying car at the beginning of the 60's. there would be daily trips to the moon, colonizing Mars and a jet pack for that quick jump across town, such luxury would not only be easily obtained but also affordable for all they said Well here we are in 2023 and yes they have made some such vehicles that are not cost effective , cost to much purchase and insurances and such will be extreme. Now the "air taxi" they had helicopters at one time for such actions but few to none could afford to use them, now they say air taxis like quadcopters and even autonomous ? really ? Not going to happen and the liability ? seriously who would dare. If one person dies or gets harmed ( and they will ) that business ends IF they ever get off the ground to start with ( pun intended ) Plus where are those daily flights to the moon and where is that Colony on Mars ? yeah many can claim things and make various flying aircraft and have for many decades , but honestly Mr and Mrs general Public will never own one or use one, it is just not affordable or obtainable . And as cost increases, many can barely buy groceries or pay utility bills, they sure are not going to be able to afford any flying vehicle and as you see they can not even afford a EV and it's charging stations and never will and how many have been burnt up or died out ? yeah same will be with any of these dream machines, NO ONE can ever afford.
It is a beautiful design. Battery improvements will lead to longer flying time. Thanks for the interesting videos.
As a prototype, they are definitely on the right track! And there is always room for improvement, so I think they are definitely a top contender.
Another great video man. Yeah, anything that increases efficiency of these machines is welcome news, and it does indeed look very cool indeed.
The british skyfly axe is my preference. It can be flown on a standard ppl, and has the option of an ice range extender, which puts it streets ahead imo..
Axe by Skyfly has useful wings and control surfaces hence safer and longer range and much lighter... and ... and.... Airone like all the others "... waiting for better battery capacity.."
Agreed, indeed streets ahead on all levels. Range extenders are a no-brainer, even in sailplanes,
Once again, you have achieved the optimal mix of information (both quality and quantity) and engagement in this excellent video. Many thanks. Looks very interesting but leaves one dreaming of step increases in battery energy density! Regards and thanks from Sydney - Dave
I like the Air One. I believe it has possibilities. What I would like to see in all of these types of E-VTOL machines is 1. The ability for pilots (and former pilots, like me) who have certain health issues, which preclude them from currently being able to pass the physical to becoming eligible to again enjoy the freedom of E-VTOL flight. 2. Increased range and speed (which, I assume, means better, cheaper batteries, or perhaps a different type of aviation fuel; perhaps hydrogen power? In connection with #1, above, I think we need something like the "Return to base" capability, currently available in many private and commercial drones. This, along with an automatic landing sequence capability would allow pilots who experience in-flight emergencies (or their passengers) to engage an emergency procedure to automatically return the aircraft to base, or alternatively land the aircraft safely in short order. As far as # 2, above, I do believe the idea of wings for multi-copter-type E-VTOLs is a very good idea. Coupled with retractable gear and better batteries this would improve both range and airspeed. I am looking forward to the day when these new advances in "air mobility", along with automated navigation and flight control will enable old-timers like me to return to the freedom and enjoyment of the sky. Let's make flying as easy and enjoyable as driving. Then perhaps more of us can leave the roads and take to the sky.
Many thanks. As I have said before, fitting wings is a weight penalty and adds complication, but is a worthwhile innovation to increase efficiency and therefore range. This machine is a step in the right direction. I would insist on full 3 axis control by normal means however. Safer in the event of electrical failure.
I think it needs a diet. All of these concepts are just waiting for solid-state batteries and this is tech demonstration so I don't sweat 30 minute flight times too much right now. That won't be the actual volume production product IMO. Thanks for keeping us up to date on new designs!
Flight time isn't very meaningful either. Whats the range?
Yes and batteries are not everything, there is a lot that goes into a flying machine that also needs a lot of work
@@why6212flight time is the range
Great video as usual. Thanks.
Thanks for watching!
I like this one a lot, the lift at cruise is a winner, like a hybrid.
A drone with wings is an excellent idea
The future has arrived.
Air one looks promising, although the front lower blades appear have very little ground clearance for landing in the “backyard”.
I’m excited to see how this and others continue to grow the small vtol business
Great video! I'm now a subscriber! I love the Air One and its design...hopefully battery technology can make a break through and help provide longer flight times
I'm definitely for anything that improves flight control, but slightly nervous about having to trust my life to software and annual inspections of sensors. Doing a daily inspection you can check mechanical control surface linkages - not sure whether the software will always tell you about pending problems. Also, the reason that many helicopters moved from 2-blade teetering to 3 or more blade hingeless rotors was to increase the effective hinge offset: this gives the pilot direct pitch and roll control. I'd be surprised if multi-rotor rotational speed control without collective pitch could match something like Cabri G2 for manoeuvrability. True that more capable (read expensive) helicopters are tending to better flight stability control augmentation systems, with fly by wire seen as the high performance solution. So the question is going to be what system will be the most reliable at general aviation costs...
Please note that I really am trying to be more upbeat rather than just pointing straight at the high disk loading elephant in the room and moaning about lack of autorotative capability. Time will tell on that one. 😧
This aircraft is very Nice!
There is still a lot to do to improve these types of aircraft.
Its the wave of the future!
I like it! I wonder why it's quite so heavy though?
Battery pack alone with the cooling system would be 500 kg
A very innovative design - however without control surfaces there will be an increased control burden on the motor management. Not a difficult technical challenge - but likely to introduce response lag when operating at speed, and thus limit effective cruise performance.
The two tails are for stability? 🧐 Why carry that weight when you can use differential thrust?
I would have thought that they would have been able to use some sort of solar panel to increase the range on these type of aircraft to replace battery power.
Mtow?
How does compare to e-VTOL aircraft?
Great video
I wonder if the wings also assist in recovery should there be a power outage also can these aircraft auto dry rate and land as helicopters do when unpowered?
Cheers
It has a ballistic parachute. The wings wont be of much help in case of a power failure
I agree with Synergy... on this. A ballistic parachute will be the safety net used in these aircraft. They will never have enough wing area to glide safely to the ground.
I like it. I want one.
Very nice design, I just wish it could fly longer to be more useful.
Honestly, that is due to the fact that they are electric and not chemically powered. Battery/electric powered transport is still 20+ years away from being able to compete with ice engines. And one of the many challenges batteries need to face that liquid fuels don't is the weight of the batteries that does not decrease as fuel is consumed. Batteries have to be lugged around at full weight no matter what their charge level. Ice powered vehicles become lighter as they use fuel making them get better ranges than if the weight stayed constant. Just give it time.
Honestly, I believe there is a technology that will be released/allowed in the near-ish future that will make battery advancement less important (or maybe not at all needed at all). That tech is a form of wireless power transmission that we are just not allowed to use yet. But I believe that time is coming when it will be allowed.
I used to like the Black Fly.
But its too pricey and its an ultralight, meaning speed and range arent acceptable.
Air-one would be great if they could put a gas engine in the nose for forward flight increasing speed and range..
We can provide inexpensive fuel cell to triple the range
What happend to Jaunt Air?
Nice job
I keep hearing about this 'Toroidal Propellers' - supposed to be more efficient than regular ones. How come no one is using it?
I know it is expensive to make but small 3D printed ones would be cheaper.
NO WORRY BECAUSE NEW A BATTERY IS A COMING PEOPLE!!! IT WILL LAST 3 TIMES AS LONG WITH UNDER A MINUTE TO CHARGE AND IS MUCH LIGHTER. But not as nice as the new anti-gravity model, yet you heard it here first. 👍
Beautiful craft!
Thank you! Cheers!
Me pareceu pouco otimizado, é totalmente possível redesenhar as quatro hastes de conexão das hélices para funcionarem como asas, e sem perder desempenho no modo pairar
(It seemed less optimized to me, it is totally possible to redesign the four connecting rods of the propellers to work as wings, and without losing performance in hover mode)
How does it compare to Lilium?
Since Lilium is not a quad-copter should it be compared? They are both Evtol though so maybe they should. Aviation be a changin'.
Very inefficient way to fly and risky too. This represents a slight improvement.
Can you compare this to skyfly?
he did
Thank you.
I did this with a VA-1003 series hobby grade stunt drone 1yeqr ago
Good for in city travel with decent speed and range, well priced, should draw much interest. STOL aircraft will be preferred for serving areas from city outskirts to communities 50 miles+ from the city. All these craft should be designed with a pilot at the controls + at least 2 passengers. Autonomous flight is fine for cargo, but not passengers. This should be happening now, the sooner, the faster cities will evolve in to exciting livable places.
Thanks for the update on this craft. I like the use of multiple techniques to get the most efficient design. I still believe that the rotocopter design is still too noisy and open blades too dangerous to people and wildlife. In my opinion this will not be a winning design for popular usage to the average person.
*Octocopter
I guess Elon doesn't have the smartest guys at his disposal... Using proven drone technology is key.. All we need now is the proper batteries.
When quoting specifications, please post imperial values on screen, for those of us who do not use metric. Thank you.
I wouldn't get in one, unless it can either autorotate like a real helicopter (multicopters can't, aerodynamically, because the rotors are NOT controllable in pitch, let alone way too small) or glide like an airplane. Not sure if the failure of even just one rotor motor would turn the whole contraption into a beveled brick.
Would diesel be better
Good reporting on this and I love your channel! BUT -- 40 minutes flight time. How sad, in the 21st century. That means a range of only 52 miles. What is the advantage? You can just drive that in less than an hour in a car and don't have to screw with driving to and from the airport, and dealing with ATC or Tower for clearance. I would submit that in most cases, It is faster to go by car. See this face --> (ʘ_ʘ) That's a lot of money to pay for the inconvenience.
definitely getting there , am a bit off batteries after two full car carrier ships now destroyed ,so many fires in China we can't keep track ,and the ccp can't keep the lid on ,and now a house destroyed in Germany ,when a car exploded !? .can we have straight hydro carbon or hydrogen ice versions please ,guessing the range would straight away be 1000 km or so . [ a bullet proof rechargable vandium diboride battery would of course change my mind ].
Until it comes with a turbine or Rotron mated to an axialflux generator, it's going to be not much more than an exhibition piece/toy
Normal people can NOT afford such dream vehicles. Many of us of age have heard the claims all our lives. I personally was told everyone would own a flying car at the beginning of the 60's. there would be daily trips to the moon, colonizing Mars and a jet pack for that quick jump across town, such luxury would not only be easily obtained but also affordable for all they said
Well here we are in 2023 and yes they have made some such vehicles that are not cost effective , cost to much purchase and insurances and such will be extreme. Now the "air taxi" they had helicopters at one time for such actions but few to none could afford to use them, now they say air taxis like quadcopters and even autonomous ? really ? Not going to happen and the liability ? seriously who would dare. If one person dies or gets harmed ( and they will ) that business ends IF they ever get off the ground to start with ( pun intended )
Plus where are those daily flights to the moon and where is that Colony on Mars ? yeah many can claim things and make various flying aircraft and have for many decades , but honestly Mr and Mrs general Public will never own one or use one, it is just not affordable or obtainable . And as cost increases, many can barely buy groceries or pay utility bills, they sure are not going to be able to afford any flying vehicle and as you see they can not even afford a EV and it's charging stations and never will and how many have been burnt up or died out ? yeah same will be with any of these dream machines, NO ONE can ever afford.
Skyfly copy cat with just higher weight
no canard its fake lolololo lmao 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
USELESS range to short and battery too small