Apologies for the re-upload, but we had to fix a small issue with the video. Thanks for watching!

The Lilium looks dope...can't wait to see this thing in the flesh.

Thanks for sharing your video and content

Magnific video

Proud Investor 🎉 LILLIUM 😊

13:55 Archer has not demonstrated transition yet with the Midnight. Archer management needs to be more transparent and honest about their progress.

The Traswing has the most potential of all VTOL aircraft designs.

Lilium have the best tech

greetings! We know what you two look like so maybe a bit less face time & more of the aircraft? Best of luck!

Take a good look at the reality of the 'traffic problem' @ around 23. minutes -- the volume of existing ground level 'mobility' is thousands of times greater than any possible eVTOL activity limited to a few score ,or less, 'vertiports' --to measureably reduce road congestion you have to understand the relationship between traffic density and #1 flow speed and #2 flow rate (total number of vehicles per minute passing any point ) -both are highly non linear but in different ways . Nearing 'choked' flow the removal of around 5% of the vehicles can at least double the flow rate and that is a feasible goal which benefits the non flying traffic and citizenry far more in system terms than those who fly . The inherent expense of setting up elaborate landing/take off/changeover/ uber parking and passenger collecting/dispersal, waiting rooms, recharging , vehicle moving (like the conveyor in the volocopter vid ) baggage etc etc functions will limit the 'nodes' in the system to so few that congestion at them will be the main limiting and safety issue. Airports are like parking spaces for airplanes - somewhere to pull out of the 'stream' ,stop, and get out to continue on -leaving the vehicle behind - there are many millions of such places in any city for motorcars ,motorcycles etc but only a very few airports, bus terminals,train stations or even taxi ranks -- to get to a meaningful contribution to citywide mobility will require a huge increase in the number of land/launch places and the placing of them in close proximity to where most journeys start and finish --being SUBurban for most starts and going to other NON CBD skyscraper top destinations , (as depicted on these promo videos) -likely to other low rise suburban ,industrial/educational etc places. VTOL has been touted for decades (mainly in the 60s as a spin off from the then military 'tri service' projects) as a coming civilian flying bus service - with helicopters briefly testing the concept but failing for reasons not to do with noise or battery technology -- the economics alone mitigate against rotary wing flight and they are relegated to medical emergency, military and quasi government roles still . Promoting the current wave of battery powered aircraft as 'taxis' is an admission that the long sought goal of a flying car - operated much as a roadcar - is unobtainable and then making a virtue out of the fallback 'call a cab' alternative . How many people commute by taxi or uber to work or school or anywhere on a regular basis,- or could afford to ? Adding these one THOUSAND or so horsepower devices requiring a whole new 'taj mahal' type infrastructure is not going to improve the economics (check out the Uber Elevate videos for the enormous multi story 'v ports' their architects came up with) Suffice it to say I know that there is a way to realize the 'Jetsons' flying car type vision that is not uneconomical, not limited to non suburban operation, is 'door to door' unlike the six stage daily trip by evtol/uber , is fail safe ,actually quiet and 'ticks all the other boxes' of ecological 'purity' (eg recyclable unlike thermoset composites) owner operable , etc etc -- and it is not VTOL . What is needed is to avoid any GROUND ROLL and of course any dependency on airports or runways (or 'vertiports' ) and give access to where people live and want to go without disturbing the neighbours or requiring their real estate just for starters. The answer is ATOL - Assisted take off and landing --think of launching a glider by winch or a kite -- phenomenal rate and angle of climb with no onboard power or noise (or a much watered down aircraft carrier launch ) from an elevated , over road , minimalist cable structure - the Brodie system developed in WW2 or the very first flyers -the Wright bothers ,- used assisted take off and the pioneers like Curtiss and Bleriot both landed and launched from suspended cables --anyway , I am trying to bring a little perspective to this headliong race to a(nother) dead end in the VTOL stampede --as your guest noted, as much a phenomenon of hot cheap money as any technical virtue. Enough for now -just to see if anyone , anywhere even shows interest and can look beyond the hype . ...........

Cities have induced demand, a couple of % of users using VTOL would just mean more cars on the ground. The actual solution is trains and metros and removing cars to make space for bikes and walking. Anything else is a drop in the bucket. So this whole VTOL space is a niche application detraction from solving most real problems.

Death trap

Lilium's Jet is where it's at!! Customers don't like propellers hanging all over the place. We want jets. RIP the Dash 8.

So Sergio, FAR 91. 119 Minimum Safe Altitude contains altitude restrictions for flying over populated areas. Tell me Sergio....why did the FAA implement these rules. I am NOT INTERESTED in how the EVTOL industry intends to use the Washington lobbying pack of rats to get around these rules but rather a clear explanation of why the clearance rules are in place. Explain that to me Sergio. Why?

ALL, yes ALL, of these "eVTOLs" will go bankrupt. They all failed to understand the problem and the business model is silly in the extreme. New distributed combustion tech makes ALL EV tech (car, airplane, boats, houses) obsolete. It is 60% at pull power and 75% in cruise. 3 HP/LB at motor. EV motor + battery is 0.25 HP/LB... Active Drag Reduction (1/2) enabled by engines, not with EVs. The drag can be up to 8 times less than EV craft. Door to door is key. All eVTOLs cannot afford the weight to be roadable like this combustion tech can. 0 to 360 mph. 125 gallons gives 15,000 mile range at 120 mph, 3750 miles at 240 miles, 2400 miles at 300 mph, 1666 miles at 360 MPH. No EV can come close by 100:1. CO2 is 200 times less with RE fuels vs a 100% RE grid. On gasoline it is 3-4 times less CO2 than an EV. Just a friendly hint. Heads up. You will lose all investment into eVTOLs.