The Outstanding Engineering behind Kitty Hawk's Heaviside Personal eVTOL
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 12 сен 2024
- Unfortunately, i am not able to keep creating new videos in my current situation.
Visit: evtolinnovatio...
Email me: request.0207@gmail.com
I'll be evaluating offers and ideas. Thanks.
---
This aircraft can travel at 180mph and has 2.5 times the range of Opener's BlackFly. It also uses less than half the energy per mile of travel than a Tesla Model S. It is fully electric and of course, it can take-off and land vertically.
It is Kitty Hawk's most advanced eVTOL vehicle yet, Heaviside. And in this video, I will explore the technology behind it, what are the pros and cons of this aircraft, And how it compares to Opener's BlackFly, the most market-ready personal evtol aircraft at the moment.
Watch Next:
📺 How Google's co-founder, Larry Page, is building a Flying Car Empire. The untold story. 👉 • How Google's co-founde...
Recommended Video:
📺 Pure HYPE or truly Revolutionary? The KEY aspects of Opener's BlackFly Innovative Design 👉 • Is this the best perso...
Related Video:
📺 The company Elon Musk wishes he had founded. The Lilium eVTOL Jet, no Tesla Airplane eVTOL Jet $QELL. 👉 • The company Elon Musk ...
Follow me on Twitter 👉 / evtolinnovation
I hope you enjoy it!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sources:
➡️ • Project Heaviside by K...
➡️ • Heaviside Soaring
➡️ • Forward Swept Wing Air...
➡️ kittyhawk.aero/
➡️www.researchga...
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you really enjoy my content, you're welcome to support me and my channel with a small donation via Stripe or Crypto. 🙏
Stripe: Buy me a coffee ☕️ buy.stripe.com...
BCH 👉 1JRTiZg8TWWPajuue9EntM15q7c7TMZTuZ
BTC 👉 1JRTiZg8TWWPajuue9EntM15q7c7TMZTuZ
ETH 👉 0x9041e9c8694a05b6c0c4c575cf719f1062f28e4f
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact me: evtol.innovation@gmail.com
✌️
#Heaviside #KittyHawk #eVTOLinnovation
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
►FAIR-USE COPYRIGHT DISCLAIMER
* Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, commenting, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational, or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.
1)This video has no negative impact on the original works (It would actually be positive for them)
2)This video is also for teaching purposes.
3)It is transformative in nature.
4)I only used bits and pieces of videos to get the point across where necessary.
►NO INVESTMENT ADVICE DISCLAIMER
The content of this video is not investment advice and does not constitute any offer or solicitation to offer or recommendation of any investment product. It is for general purposes only and does not take into account your individual needs, investment objectives, and specific financial circumstances. Investment involves risk.
Unfortunately, i am not able to keep creating new videos in my current situation.
Visit: evtolinnovation.notion.site/eVTOL-innovation-RUclips-Channel-054d7bae8e344a0b8851f4be18600498?pvs=4
Email me: request.0207@gmail.com
I'll be evaluating offers and ideas. Thanks.
That is awesome! As batteries keep improving these types of aircraft will keep getting better and better
Negative. They are out of business. You’re another person that needs to do your research before letting your fingers engage your keyboard.
At least this VTOL aircraft actually has a glide ratio. Most of the opposition rely wholly and solely on the technology to maintain the rotors if one fails or separates you’re over your finished.
They could use something other than electric power and maybe someday it would be wort a shit. 150 years this is all we get. We did better in Afghanistan.
@@captsirl yeah, whatever. This is only a few years, if not months away from a 1000 mile range , while being extremely safe to fly
@@adm7890 Then why did you show a little RC model flying and not the real thing.
@@captsirl I didn't post that, but the technology is there and is coming upon us quickly
@@adm7890 Batteries haven't changed that much
Nice. BTW: Stall at the root of the wing is the way that most wings are designed, forward swept or not. You always want to keep aileron control for as long as possible. That is what the wing washout is all about" The difference in angle or attach between the end of the wing and the root of the wing to make sure that the root stalls first.
My root stalls at the most inopportune times. Good thing there's a pill for that.
They extensively tested that wing design, i like it. it gave them 100 mile range and a top speed of 180 mph. The redundant safety featues and the automatic parachute. FAA needs to make it an easy to get liscence and it can then go
He does an excellent presentation here, i might add..
To learn more on eVTOL architectures 👉 ruclips.net/video/fmiVd-CiNmw/видео.html
Didnt know idubbbz was dedicating himself to engineering
Lol, literally the first thing I thought when I saw him
Hey when are u gonna 3d print urself one of these and then make a video about it ? Lol
Next gen tomato bomber 😉
Hey while I got you outside your channel! Stop messing around and make some sugar potassium rockets!
Omg Lmao
Blackfly, to be fair, is going for an entirely different aircraft rating. The rules governing ultralight aircraft (AKA no pilots license needed) are far different than what Heavyside is doing. Blackfly CAN go faster than 80mph but is limited down to that speed due to ultralight FAA regulations.
Yea FAA regulations is the reason why personal air travel doesn't exist.
We could easily see shirt range ultra fast and efficient air travel but FAA regs kill it.
What a total kick that would be! I wish it wasn't so expensive.
It doesn't have to be, but as an "early mover" Rich Boys toy, there is a prerogative, on the part of the "Marketeers" to over charge for everything (also they can blame "Lack of market interest" when Vapourware evaporates)..
NB, these novel configuration craft are often more a labour of Love by the designer/developer (or a fixation on the ridiculous for a lot of designs out there) , and they often go bankrupt in the process of fighting patent infringements when they should just get to market in a reasonable price point and let the economics sort themselves out. Easiest way to become a Millionaire, start with a Billion and try to market a New Aircraft concept.(stolen/Misappropriated)
Lol..he almost convinced me that 35dBs behind that breeze won’t be audible and then whirrRrrRrr gosh its loud 🤪
that was at 1500ft, think he said 65db on takeoff
The point is for it to be quieter during flight mode.
Best vtol ev video I watched so far. Really informative and looks promising...
Shouldn’t you wait until you actually have a pilot in the plane before you start giving efficiency numbers?
Just wondering, what's the max cargo weight it can carry, and still provide the same range? Also is the airframe scalable to provide more space, with same performance?
Not much. And all this about great batteries is bogus. From a guy who worked in this for a long time. It’s a fancy RC plane.
Wrong numbers for efficiency! Tesla 270Wh/mile is for the car with 5 seats (even 7) so it has to be divided by at least 5 to have per passenger mile , that's 54Wh/passenger mile
It is still better efficiency /vehicle, though.
Not exactly, 5 passengers will give less range.
The numbers on lilium are also incorrect
How often will it be carrying more than one passenger in typical usage?
@@grejen711 Yep, exactly.
Heaviside is my favourite eVTOL and these videos are really good!
Agree, great airplane!
If you are going to push the air out of your vehicle's way then pushing it down means that you do not need a strong/heavy support structure like wheels that impact the road, and you do not need to navigate past all the other vehicles on the flat 2D plane/roads we all live on. Roads are heavy construction and need expensive maintenance. Drains, earthworks, bridges, etc.
This aeroplane has 3D to manoeuvre in, and can be free of the only local airport and its congestion.
In the horse and buggy day nobody could see the future of the automobile.
With robotic planes we need less vehicles, as we can just call one up as needed.
You got it right! 👏👏👏
@@eVTOLinnovation once you showed how little energy was needed in this particular vehicle then all the other aspects to the transport problem was obvious.
Even they said how surprised they were with the efficiency of the design. And what it meant.
With Elon solving the more extremely complex robotic control of cars and then once you allocate an altitude and a defined route, and have collision avoidance, you have solved most of the individual transport problems.
Pp
Pp
Theres still a traffic volume problem and human behaviour aspect to consider.
No audio after 7:33, tried several different times and even CC.
Same no audio
Thanks for letting me know. I'm trying to solve it now.
Solved
I’d love to see a version with a 20 minute battery (5 minutes each for take off and landing quietly, and 10 minutes emergency reserve) with a micro-jet powered generator in the tail-boom as range extender (in addition to the slight added thrust) running on methylated spirit or ethanol. With the reduced battery size and weight, a tandem seating configuration could accommodate a passenger.
I like the range extender idea, 20 min battery not so much.
are the Wh/mi measured over passengers?
Either way, this thing looks like a blast to fly, and the VTOL capability makes it really attractive for people who would otherwise have bought an airplane.
This is a single occupant vehicle. So the numbers are what the numbers are. Pay attention and you can answer your own questions.
@@seanregehr4921 I meant for joby and lilium figures
Can it also handle a failure of both front propeller?
First video I've watched of yours. I was expecting to a bunch of BS mis-pronounced robo-voice words with false info and stock footage. This was great! Thanks for this. I remember when kittyhawk was announced as working on an aircraft, but this is the first details I've seen of it. Seems to fit the general aviation market well which is more realistic than the "flying cars/taxis" that most companies are trying to fill
There are a bunch of 'em out there, and each serves a different function. For my usage this is FAR and away the winner. It is truly an aircraft and can be fully utilized in the NAS.
jetsons I think have the best evtol.
@@VikingsFan-sy2vc what do you feel makes it the best?
@@VikingsFan-sy2vc Jetsons is really cool but I like the range and the enclosed cockpit of the Heaviside a bit more. Regardless, I want one of each!
Kittyhawk Heaviside - twice as efficient as a Tesla Model S? One is a 1 seater recreational aircraft while the other is a 4/5 seater luxury sedan. The only road vehicles you can compare the Heaviside to is an electric motorbike or ElectraMeccanica Solo and they will trash the Heaviside on efficiency, eVTOL innovation.
Yes but Tesla yo!
Agree however drive thru any city and see how many single occupancy SUVs you see around you.
They used Tesla model S as a reference point people are familiar with. Besides that there is no comparison. No Tesla fan here either.
Please keep in mind It's an aircraft not just a car, it needs a push of power to take off and land, and power injection consistency to maintain the balance in the air. I would say well done!
Love my model s but I wanna fly!
So a single Tesla can get my family of 5 from A to B for around 270Wh/mile and park in a standard parkingspace.
To get my family from A to B in this thing you need 5 of those using 180Wh/mile which is 900Wh/mile in total and when you park you need a 30 by 30 foot area for landing and then how much room for parking?
This is a recreational or pleasure craft only. Maybe for personal transport from your estate to the inner city and back daily at most. It lacks the ability to do much else.
2:40 a nice nod to the x-29
This is quite impressive!
Didn’t know Idubbz was an aerospace engineer
The smaller the diameter the "fan" the lower the airflow per fan, the higher the rpms and the more noise generated. The bigger the fan the higher the airflow, the lower the rpms and the less noise it creates. If you push out fan diameter to extremes you get to a point where the fan tips are breaking the sound barrier and then bad things happen but before that it's sweet. An excellent design well executed, well done.
The smaller propellers are chosen because you can fit more in the same space and this gives fallback options if and as you lose (a) propeller(s).
@@seanregehr4921 Actually, I think the propellers on this reviewed craft are quite big compared to some. In time the compared dB of all will be interesting relative to diameter.
can it glide/land with zero rotors working?
Wh/(passenger*mile) would be a good matrix to evaluate the energy efficiency. I assume all companies are using different mission profiles to get the range number so sometimes they are not too comparable unfortunately
1:14 those are Wh/(passenger*mile) values.
@@eVTOLinnovation Thanks for pointing that out. I assume the tesla one is from EPA, the efficiency Wh/(passenger*mile) would be much higher if they fit 5 people in the vehicle (The flip side argument is that the average number of the passengers in a car is lower than 2 in general)
@@xuyan2650 Yes, the Model S value was taken from EPA. (I think they use only one passenger for the calculation but I'm not sure).
Source
"The promise of energy-efficient battery-powered urban aircraft"
www.researchgate.net/publication/352505370_The_promise_of_energy-efficient_battery-powered_urban_aircraft
@@eVTOLinnovation No, they are not. Tesla model S has around 55 Wh/mile * passenger. You messed up badly.
There is no discussion of the prop and tilt mechanism design, or what testing has been done for reliability.
They talked about forward swept wing and trailing props and tilting design extensively...any other design aspects may be proprietary data at this point. They did do safety testing of multiple engine out failures and other failure circumstances as mentioned in video at 6:01. Did you watch this video ?
I hope someone in your crew served in the Navy on the Kitty Hawk
I for one have been lucky enough as a child of a Topgun instructor have been on it
HAVE YOU?
From flying Tigers to flying cars oh my!
I can tell you from the video, there's no way that the noise level of this thing is anywhere near as low as 60db. It sounds as loud as a WW1 air squadron flying overhead.
NB root vs tip stall is more due to washout not forward sweep - the forward sweep allows the main hover "thrusters" to be better centred about the CG with a shoulder wing spar behind the human payload. - yes there is "some" spanwise flow gains.. Nice craft. - maybe the foward - duckbill/canard - lifters could be extending from the leading edge of the main - with folding blades to act as a leading edge fence.. get the nose even cleaner. (NB, Yep youtube isn't a design bureau - lol...) -
As a function, the Heaviside is definitely a step up!
omg....
Yeah, but you can't park it in your garage, or any standard parking space, so it's not much better or different than what has been on the market.
You need to specify cons toon per km per occupant.
Wow!
The thing that has always concerned me about these new eVTOL aircraft is scary failure mods.
This one, seems like it is much safer than most all the others I have seen.
I would love to fly it.
Agree, If it is positively stable and the stick is connected to control surfaces and not a computer then maybe it will glide. As you point out the rest of them are not so safe. Most are using a ballistic chute. I'd like take this one around the patch too.
The noise claim was very carefully selected. It was reported that the noise in the cockpit was 160 dB!
I mean...... If it's inexpensive enough, I might think about a purchase, it's just that range really limits the mission.
👏👏👏👏 great
From india
Might be a dumb question, but would an Autogyro design be an excellent eVTOL design platform? Why aren't we seeing more companies using it?
When it's time to make it a 2 Seater, > 8 Motors on the Main Wings, vs 6; + 4 on the Canard! Maybe 1 fixed in Pusher Configuration!
Nice to see Damon moved on after Makani
I didn't know about Makani project. Thanks for sharing
Get back to me when they have the confidence to put a pilot in it.
Great !!
12:28 wow idubbz is really branching out these days
I want one
1:10 - I'll take the Joby because it seats 5 people 😎
Glad to see that Damon has moved away from 'Data Driven Design' to 'Good Idea Driven Design'
How much does it weigh ? Complex rotor vectoring ! Black fly doesn't have that potential maintenance issue.
the lilium jet Is way more efficient because it can carry more passengers
Black fly had a chance show off at Oshkosh and it was underwhelming but at least they had pilots getting in the vehicle, unlike this video. It appears to me that most of flying was done with a model. Fly the real thing at Oshkosh next summer - man carrying - and do as much flying as the ultralights do, then talk.
And how much does it cost? More than this Ole man can come up with!
HOW THE EPA RATES ELECTRIC VEHICLES
"Unfortunately, there are elements inherent in the EPA’s testing procedures that tend to skew the ratings. For starters, vehicles are tested without a full load of passengers, cargo and options aboard. All else being equal, the heavier a vehicle’s rolling weight, the more energy is needed to reach and maintain a given speed.
Also, the tests are conducted indoors at room temperature. An electric car’s range tends to suffer when subjected to extremely cold or hot weather. This is both because of the adverse effects of high and low temperatures on a battery’s charge, and the drain caused by operating the heater and air conditioning.
What’s more, a given motorist’s driving habits can also affect an EV’s energy consumption. Lead-footed acceleration and driving at higher speeds will tend to drain the battery faster than will maintaining a smooth and steady pace. Driving on under-inflated tires will also cost an EV owner additional kilowatt-hours of electricity."
This has almost nothing to do with the fact that a Model S with 5 passengers on board will have almost the same consumption of the same car with just the driver. The added weight of 4 passengers is almost irrelevant with a car this size. Yes, the consumption will be more, but of a very small amount. So the Wh per mile per passenger of a full loaded model s will be around 55. Your comparison is still completely wrong and very dumb.
@@GiovanniEsposito5 Four passengers would add 15% of the model S weight.
The Tesla was added as a reference. After all, most people travel by car alone.
@@eVTOLinnovation Yes, and that 15% more weight will just increase the consumption by a modest 5-10% or less, expecially considering the condition of the test. So your Wh/mile per passenger number is completely off and still the comparison does not make any sense.
It's more efficient because air friction or drag is far less consuming of energy than tire friction. So airplanes have to more efficient because the matrix they travel in
The energy consumption comparison is comparing this 1 seater to 5+ seater aircraft?
for real thought that was idubz
What kind of measures are necessary if one were to say collide with a bird and the propeller cannot change positions any longer? Are you just SOL?
How are the sailing capabilities,when the energy drops? With parachutes can't landing properly on an airport...
Why not have one main engine with thrust vectoring at the locations where the propellers are currently located?
if you want to talk about efficiency you 've got to consider passenger count you cannot compare kitty hawk (1 seat) to lilium (7 seats) as you cannot compare boeing 737 (215 pas.) to 777 (368 pas.) without considering their capacities
1:15 per passenger
Me watching this wishing i can have one so i will go to my university which is in the middle of nowhere. It would be so much fun.
The spanwise flow of swept back wings can be managed, but they are sensitive to side wind. They are used in airplanes flying close to the speed of sound or in tailless airplanes. Straight wings is better in all other situations.
You left out the takeoff phase as a benefit too.
It's not twice as efficient as a Tesla. The useful load on this thing is what 200lb the Tesla will carry 1200lbs without issue using only twice the energy.
i think i would prefer it scaled up as a four-seater with more range. the increased maintainance and complexity from the tiltrotors would be a lot less of a factor in that priceclass.
The cost will certainly double and the price likely triple for that much plane. Also at that point in time, one would question why to buy this EVTOL instead of a private plane? The private plane actually travels much further as well and has plenty of space even a bathroom.
@@seanregehr4921 i wouldnt realy pit it against private planes, its a VTOL. if you could have a plane, you wouldnt need a VTOL. but i honestly dont know how it would compare to a private helicopter?
Imagine that you're having a heart attack, and you could choose to fly to emergency in this, instead of a chopper!
Woooww cool😎👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻
Is it fair to compare watt hr per mile between vehicles that hold different # of passengers? I don’t think it’s fair to compare to joby and Tesla model s
This is Very easy design. You need more try.
i like it but i wanna trailer it to a cabin or something to scoot around
What is the cruise speed?
Now imagine it actually had a Tesla dry battery and Motor from a plaid !!!
Only 1 passenger? What's the payload?
Can we stop comparing everything to a Tesla? 🤦♂️
Que esperan para instalarle un suministro eléctrico de celda de hho para generar electricidad? Y aumentar el alcance
TAKE MY MONEY!!!
looks like the Junkers Ju 287 from the second world war
They need a two seater hybrid for longer distance
The modifications I'd make with the Kitty Hawk, is to move the main wings 2/3rd or almost all the way to back(not center of body) then swap the front wing & blades to shift behind the pilot cockpit, this would give a flat balance lift and lower drag in geo travel.
Imagine if, by the next decade, flying cars becomes available to everyone at an affordable price tag of $30,000 or less! It is just a matter of time to figure out how to control traffic in the sky. And when there is bad weather, we could just simply convert it back to a driving car! To save space, why not just retract the wings back into the body of the car. We could have retractable wings! The propellers will automatically line up parallel with the wings and then the wings would retract.
Forward swept wings have been proven to be a terrible idea where structural integrity and dynamic behavior under load are concerned. Other than the "cool looks" they have no benefits within the mission envelope and speed range of this concept.
The thing is - when you design with the sole goal of creating the most efficient airplanes, even VTOL aircraft, targeting the mission envelope of efficient electric personal flying transport the result will look rather boring.
Does anyone think modern airliners look "cool"? They don't, they all look more or less the same, they are boring and there is a reason for that: The mission of creating the most efficient passenger airplane design restricted by current material and technology doesn't allow for any other outcome.
So how do you explain the great performance and best energy saving EV plane??
They have clearly determined that those concerns don't affect this project's purposes.
The forward swept wings actually distribute the center of thrust nicely. An optimal VTOL design is totally different from a 747.
The aeroelastic problems you think are important are easily overcome with modern composite structures. Aircraft structures have moved on from wood fabric and aluminium.
Price ?
People are struggling to drive on the road. You want them all to fly? You must be joking.
What us the EHANG VT30 watt per mile
ffs make half of props foldable!
Wait. 20 MPH slower than the Joby, the joby has 50% more range, and carries 5 times the number of people. Oh, and the practical advantages of the props being above head level to keep numpties from braining themselves. I fail to see any advantage here.
This looks way better than the black fly. The BF is bulky and appears very touchy on the controls. Watch when BF leaves the ground, it jumps and waggles excessively. That's not a good thing for the potential owners.
There are a lot of benefits to having many small props in front of the wing instead of behind it.
Can it fly autonomously? I mean get in it put in your destination and it will take you there
Feel like its a bit silly to compare the efficiency of a plane to a car. Might aswell compare a boat to a spacecraft.
Full speed any where. At designated altitude. No crawling through intersections and stop start travel.
Fly to a regional airport and leave the vehicle behind as you fly out for the long distant trip.
Global warming issues not a factor, free fuel, sunlight PV.
Also, it's a little on the heavy side.
Name of the craft is a tribute to Oliver Heaviside ?
So how fast will the police Evtol go (:
That’s a really neat looking craft. But I’m pretty sure the Tesla Model S has room for 5, including the driver. I’m also quite sure it does not consume 1.35 kWhr / mile! Stating Whr/passenger-mile is a gross misrepresentation unless you take all but the driver’s seat out of the Tesla. Don’t do that. It tarnishes your credibility. Again, looks neat though.
I'll take a lilium
I would like to speak to the design team ! Please, have them contact me !
This aircraft appears to be a model aircraft not a real full size aircraft?? No one seen flying it?