I totally forgot about Wing (drone delivery in DFW). Looks like this would have to work within the same framework they do. Anyone used them? I live outside of the delivery area but I know some people who have, but more as a novelty.
1:01p, 5/8/24
In reply to Decay
Amazon has drone delivery set up in CoSta.Decay said:
I totally forgot about Wing (drone delivery in DFW). Looks like this would have to work within the same framework they do. Anyone used them? I live outside of the delivery area but I know some people who have, but more as a novelty.
Buy a man eat fish, he day, teach fish man, to a lifetime.
- Joe Biden
I think that, to be very honest with you, I do believe that we should have rightly believed, but we certainly believe that certain issues are just settled.
- Kamala Harris
- Joe Biden
I think that, to be very honest with you, I do believe that we should have rightly believed, but we certainly believe that certain issues are just settled.
- Kamala Harris
1:08p, 5/8/24
In reply to Maximus_Meridius
You CAN put parachutes on them, though.
I will say that eVTOLs have more push behind them than autonomous helicopters, though. Hell, even Bell had the Nexus concept years ago. BTW, Bell made an autonomous 407 years ago - it's now the MQ-8C.
I would love to see the QTR come to fruition. It was a cool concept. And the simulation code was actually mostly brand new stuff that we wrote, rather than modified legacy code that was created around the time of my birth in the late 60s.
No they can't autorotate...helicopters work by changing rotor blade pitch while at constant RPM. eVTOLs have constant propeller pitch but change RPMs on the different rotors. So, you can't drop the eVTOL propeller to flat pitch.Maximus_Meridius said:Ag with kids said:I literally was testing some AAM technology with live flights using helicopters as surrogates in that area last month. The flights took off from just north of Alliance and flew around Denton. There's even plans to develop a vertiport prototype up near Denton.Maximus_Meridius said:
I cannot even imagine the hand-wringing and pearl clutching that will happen when someone tries to set this up near DFW airspace. Because here in FW, you've also gotta dodge Meacham, Alliance, and the NAS.
This is actually a topic I'm interested in, though I think the little toys in the OP are a waste of time and money. Better chance is a fuel powered autonomous quadcopter that can carry 25 or so and be set up in a mass-transit type setup, in my opinion.
DFW is a PRIME area for this - there's been testing going on for years there.
There's even a few companies in DFW working towards building eVTOLs.
Now...we WERE using helicopters as surrogates. But, that's because we were mainly testing the stuff regarding getting into and flying in the corridors as well as some communications technology.
Fun stuff
The MIZ...
BTW, I worked on a prototype for a Quad Tiltrotor years ago. Had a lot of fun getting it to fly in the simulator. It would have been for the military, though.
Good stuff. Had no idea that the MIZ was even a thing. I think autonomous passenger helicopters happen first, just because it's more familiar and proven technology (can an eVTOL autorotate?). Bell recently announced that they are using a 429 as an autonomous flight test bed. eVTOL might be the eventual solution, but the battery tech has a long way to go before it makes sense.
Also, the quad tilt idea isn't dead.
You CAN put parachutes on them, though.
I will say that eVTOLs have more push behind them than autonomous helicopters, though. Hell, even Bell had the Nexus concept years ago. BTW, Bell made an autonomous 407 years ago - it's now the MQ-8C.
I would love to see the QTR come to fruition. It was a cool concept. And the simulation code was actually mostly brand new stuff that we wrote, rather than modified legacy code that was created around the time of my birth in the late 60s.
1:15p, 5/8/24
In reply to Decay
I don't know that package delivery UAS will follow the whole corridor idea. They may just operate under 400 ft where current UAS are already authorized for flight.Decay said:
I totally forgot about Wing (drone delivery in DFW). Looks like this would have to work within the same framework they do. Anyone used them? I live outside of the delivery area but I know some people who have, but more as a novelty.
1:28p, 5/8/24
In reply to Ag with kids
What keeps drones from hitting other drones at those heights? Just managing their own traffic and hoping nobody else is there?
Ag with kids said:I don't know that package delivery UAS will follow the whole corridor idea. They may just operate under 400 ft where current UAS are already authorized for flight.Decay said:
I totally forgot about Wing (drone delivery in DFW). Looks like this would have to work within the same framework they do. Anyone used them? I live outside of the delivery area but I know some people who have, but more as a novelty.
What keeps drones from hitting other drones at those heights? Just managing their own traffic and hoping nobody else is there?
2:28p, 5/8/24
In reply to Decay
I assume they have some type of oversight from a "dispatch" center that monitors the telemetry of their aircraft.
If they've got beyond visual line of sight (BVLOS) waivers for the flights, then they HAVE to have installed some plan to have surveillance other than eyeballs on the UAS.
When we fly, we get the telemetry from the UAS and also use radar/optical sensors. We have some equipped with ADS-B, too - but I'm quite sure that no package delivery will use that.
The FAA has regulations that have to be followed for doing package delivery, too. So I think they follow Part 107 AND Part 135, but I'm not totally familiar with their CONOPs.
Well, most are visual line of sight so you have eyes on the UAS to be able to avoid obstacles (ground pilot could take control). I know that detect and avoid (DAA) tech is on some UAS which would be onboard sensors to detect those obstacles autonomously and the the autopilot would maneuver to avoid them.Decay said:Ag with kids said:I don't know that package delivery UAS will follow the whole corridor idea. They may just operate under 400 ft where current UAS are already authorized for flight.Decay said:
I totally forgot about Wing (drone delivery in DFW). Looks like this would have to work within the same framework they do. Anyone used them? I live outside of the delivery area but I know some people who have, but more as a novelty.
What keeps drones from hitting other drones at those heights? Just managing their own traffic and hoping nobody else is there?
I assume they have some type of oversight from a "dispatch" center that monitors the telemetry of their aircraft.
If they've got beyond visual line of sight (BVLOS) waivers for the flights, then they HAVE to have installed some plan to have surveillance other than eyeballs on the UAS.
When we fly, we get the telemetry from the UAS and also use radar/optical sensors. We have some equipped with ADS-B, too - but I'm quite sure that no package delivery will use that.
The FAA has regulations that have to be followed for doing package delivery, too. So I think they follow Part 107 AND Part 135, but I'm not totally familiar with their CONOPs.
2:34p, 5/8/24
In reply to Cromagnum
That's the funniest thing I've seen in a long time!Cromagnum said:
The day after people buy those things.
sleepybeagle
7:24a, 5/9/24
In reply to Aggie Jurist
I'm referring to the complexity of ICEs and the ever evolving technology to improve efficiency. And, no, small piston singles is not the market at all. SPS are a recreational market for the most part, unless your talking flying a fly fisherman on a bush plane to some wilderness.
That said, I know enough of aviation tech to understand the royal PITA it must be to have to deal with a well meaning beaurocrat looking over my shoulder or my AP mechanics work, the maintenance schedules and the costs involved. Rightly so, I suppose; with life safety at issue.
But you have to admit that an electric motor is far more reliable, far less complex and probably more powerful than an ICE. Fuel and battery weight are really insignificant during a catastrophic engine or battery failure of a winged aircraft...and I'll add traditional helicopter as they may auto rotate to safety.
Battery technology is evolving at a far higher rate than engine technology, and I don't see ICEs being able to improve much further. F1, the highest of technical sports, has quietly admitted so, all F1 teams use hybrid propulsion to achieve their ultimate power, woe is the driver that looses his electric charge system or electric motor.
Currently, about a third of the Lillium's weight is dedicated to batteries:
"According to ResearchGate, the battery mass of the Lilium Jet is roughly one-third of the aircraft's maximum take-off mass (MTOM). The Lilium Jet has an estimated maximum take-off weight of 7,000 lbs (3,175 kg). The aircraft also has a payload of about 1,543 lbs (700 kg)."
The apples to oranges comparison between traditional aircraft and a Lillium is 25% to 30%, don't know about helicopters...I would guess much more. But with VTOL you are dedicating a significant portion of energy to the V portion where as a traditional aircraft needs an comparatively enormous allocation of space dedicated to their application.
Living in one of those aircraft communities must be lonely...you need binoculars to chitchat with your neighbor.
Urban air mobility is coming, one way or a nother, and it can't be done by traditional aircraft. Will they dominate the skies? I don't think they will anymore than supercars today populate the streets. Living in DC, I see supercars around here at least twice or three times a month, about as often as I see a SPS flying overhead.
Full disclosure...bought fifteen hundred shares of Lillium at .6 about six months ago, play money if you will. Nothing significant going to happen with stock until next year or the following once they start service in Florida and Texas. ETA, that Lillium will not be doing the operating, they are selling fleets to two providers in the US so far, over twenty jets, so far.
Aggie Jurist said:Please. I've worked on plenty. The standard piston singles uses redundant magneto ignition and carburetor fuel delivery, a single cam with pushrods and air cooling. It's a simple design. All the things you listed are typically not seen in piston singles - turbos, super chargers, fuel injection (is seen in higher end engines) etc. The market these things are going after are small piston singles. My point about complexity was that a hybrid might make sense, but added to complexity that wasn't needed. And my point about fuel weight is one of the biggest hurdles. When you burn fuel in a ICE, the weight is gone - giving you better performance as you burn fuel. With a battery - you get a fall-off in performance while weight remains the same.Quote:
How many piston engine motors have you disassembled or worked on? I'll give you that a little COX Honey Bee model engine is a simple two cycle engine but once you get to 4 cycle, variable valve timing, turbos and superchargers, fuel injectors not to mention all sorts of sensors; it's a wonder engines don't fail more frequently. They are getting less reliable with the complexity and probably reaching their zenith, particularly the larger V8s, hate to see it but ICE manufacturing is going to aspirated I4s, or hybrid electric propulsion, until that gets too complicated and battery tech improves. Electrical power is just that more efficient and less complex.
I'll give you that turbines are a bit less complex, but the precision and tolerances make ICE look like a walk in the park not to mention their more limited application.
Batteries ARE certainly a big link in the chain but companies like AMPRIUS are working to solve the weight problem, they are singularly focused on eVTOL batteries and charge density.
Lillium's battery software is designed to never get below a critical level, should battery charge get below a threshold the "car" begins its safe descend. Of course, **** happens, but **** can happen walking down your stairs at home.
You want to argue that the reduced weight of fuel over a flights period is somehow relevant? Well, hell, what happens when you run out of fuel...right, nothing good, but either way, with a Lillium or an airplane you can at least glide...hopefully, safely.
I'm referring to the complexity of ICEs and the ever evolving technology to improve efficiency. And, no, small piston singles is not the market at all. SPS are a recreational market for the most part, unless your talking flying a fly fisherman on a bush plane to some wilderness.
That said, I know enough of aviation tech to understand the royal PITA it must be to have to deal with a well meaning beaurocrat looking over my shoulder or my AP mechanics work, the maintenance schedules and the costs involved. Rightly so, I suppose; with life safety at issue.
But you have to admit that an electric motor is far more reliable, far less complex and probably more powerful than an ICE. Fuel and battery weight are really insignificant during a catastrophic engine or battery failure of a winged aircraft...and I'll add traditional helicopter as they may auto rotate to safety.
Battery technology is evolving at a far higher rate than engine technology, and I don't see ICEs being able to improve much further. F1, the highest of technical sports, has quietly admitted so, all F1 teams use hybrid propulsion to achieve their ultimate power, woe is the driver that looses his electric charge system or electric motor.
Currently, about a third of the Lillium's weight is dedicated to batteries:
"According to ResearchGate, the battery mass of the Lilium Jet is roughly one-third of the aircraft's maximum take-off mass (MTOM). The Lilium Jet has an estimated maximum take-off weight of 7,000 lbs (3,175 kg). The aircraft also has a payload of about 1,543 lbs (700 kg)."
The apples to oranges comparison between traditional aircraft and a Lillium is 25% to 30%, don't know about helicopters...I would guess much more. But with VTOL you are dedicating a significant portion of energy to the V portion where as a traditional aircraft needs an comparatively enormous allocation of space dedicated to their application.
Living in one of those aircraft communities must be lonely...you need binoculars to chitchat with your neighbor.
Urban air mobility is coming, one way or a nother, and it can't be done by traditional aircraft. Will they dominate the skies? I don't think they will anymore than supercars today populate the streets. Living in DC, I see supercars around here at least twice or three times a month, about as often as I see a SPS flying overhead.
Full disclosure...bought fifteen hundred shares of Lillium at .6 about six months ago, play money if you will. Nothing significant going to happen with stock until next year or the following once they start service in Florida and Texas. ETA, that Lillium will not be doing the operating, they are selling fleets to two providers in the US so far, over twenty jets, so far.
8:19a, 5/9/24
In reply to agdoc2001
agdoc2001 said:
I don't see where I could hang my truck nuts from.
America the Beautiful
1776 - 2020
1776 - 2020
8:20a, 5/9/24
In reply to Shooz in Katy
Parachute would be a must for me to get into one of those things.Shooz in Katy said:
Parachutes are built into these things, right? Still won't protect them from power lines when they lose power mid air.
8:21a, 5/9/24
Use case: $250k/yr+ working in a city center with bad traffic but want to live 20-50mi away.
What'll be funny will be the rich people problems where the drone downs them for weather reasons and they have to wait for their Tesla to come rescue them.
What'll be funny will be the rich people problems where the drone downs them for weather reasons and they have to wait for their Tesla to come rescue them.