Audio is crap.

@@JoeyBlogs007 In what way do you mean? The clarity, balance, and leveling are all good. What aspect of the audio are you not happy with?

@@UberSprite where do you see how close they are to a finished model?

​​​At the 9:30 mark, Daniel is stating something like 'we now have the battery technology to, when the vehicle is certified for market entry in two years, achieve 175km operational range with reserve power for safety'. I'm paraphrasing from the automated dubbed transcript. From what I gathered watching the whole video, automated/remote control flight tests continue this year, mostly in Spain and confined to flying around one airfield. Around the end of this year, piloted test flights can begin. Those continue through the international certification processes through 2025. In 2026, Lilium should be ready for market entry.

@@UberSprite Battery technology is not hindering their development, as you could easily fly your test vehicles for simply a shorter time.Their competition has shown how that works.

It doesn't even exist yet.

Gtfo of every lilium video spamming comments you bot​@@TheBagOfHolding

@user-hs6xs7zl6k does it have range if it doesn't exist?

Course it's real it's behind them on the video

@@jcrisen5417 1st manned flight in 6 months

Auf Frank Thelen“s KZfaq Kanal.

Agree. I find it puzzling why they wouldn't publicly promote their lift capabilities with the scaled-down test model. So far, we've seen no public weight lift tests beyond the aircraft itself. Demonstrating these capabilities, if they live up to their claims, could have bolstered public confidence, potentially improving investment and stock prices. Instead, they continue to seek significant funding ( government loans ), almost in desperation. If it's that great an idea, why don't they simply get a commercial bank loan. With all those claimed backorders, they could easily repay the interest. In my view, this lack of transparency raises concerns. It suggests that achieving their technical and commercial goals may take considerably longer than anticipated, if they can be achieved at all. I hope they eventually get there, but at the moment, it's just marketing waffle that doesn't make a great deal of sense. Arguably snake oil sales talk.

I perpetually see comments from people complaining about a lack of video demonstrations of aircraft capability. I think there is a fundamental lack of understanding, if not maturity, behind such comments. Lilium has an extremely thin rope to walk in order to not only bring this aircraft to flight capability, but also commercial viability and public acceptance. For example, they need to prove a safety rating of less than 1 in 1,000,000,000 adverse flight events. If you were trying to bring to market an aircraft held to such standards, I'm sure you would also proceed with extreme care and caution as well. As someone who been a team member on large scale projects, my opinion is that Lilium is doing exactly what they should be doing and are demonstrating competent leadership.

Do you even know how much time and care takes for a new product? Clearly not you don't rush things like this

Comes back to money and logic and reasoning. If they demonstrated the actual capability money would be pouring in and their financial woes would end. They have not demonstrated publicly any payload capability, which if it had any, would take minimal time and effort to do. They are caught out.

@@JoeyBlogs007 minimal time what iq do you have these guys have the iq of 130/40 you have the same as a chocolate labrador

I agree. Alot of talking and no manned test.

@@HurleyDeanSandpoint They actually said the end of this year, but which month.

​@@HurleyDeanSandpointIt's already been methodically tested. A manned flight is just formality at this point so calm down

December

better question is when will they do a normal scale test? the videos we saw where all just scaled down and that doesnt say much, we need to see the real thing. i hope lillium will make it but tbh, it just look like a money pit for investors and most investors are emotional because they WANT that we get a cool air taxi. much marketing, few results till now.

同じく日本で期待している者です。完成した時外国で乗れるよう今は淡々と投資しています(笑)

Iam in from the first day. Sure not profitabel yet. But i see the same vision for the future. I hope it will be a great story to tell my grandchildren 😅

Maybe but likely not, what's the target audience for their product and who will accept obnoxiously loud transportation in their city? The technology is interesting but the product seems to cause more problems than it solves. That's my two cents, I wish them the best!

@@TheFlatronify It's guaranteed to be successful for innumerable reasons. The fact that you don't understand that it's quieter than a typical fossil fueled jet and quieter than a helicopter is the same reason you're not going to benefit from their inevitable market gains.

@@EarthCreature. And losses. 🤣🤣🤣

@@JoeyBlogs007 Keep believing that 🤣🤣

They did kind of about a year ago

Just a smaller size

You’re right it’s a scam

It looks risky buscuits.

Of course it isnt synced because it's obviously dubbed into English 😂

can u read the disclaimer? or are u blind

Audio dubbing is crap.

@@JoeyBlogs007 u really care about that for a video like this? wtf u have hearing problems or can't understand? u expect it to be a movie or something

Auf Frank Thelen‘s KZfaq Kanal…

True

They haven’t got the jet mate , it’s all scam

It kind of does. Daniel weinwhatever has videos speaking English on here and it kind of sounds like him.

Exactly. They would need those small fans to turn at very high RPM to generate significant thrust, but the low surface area per fan reduces their efficiency. Therefore, they require numerous small fans to compensate for this lower efficiency. While they claim to be more efficient in cruise flight, the most challenging aspect of VTOL is indeed VTOL itself, not cruise flight. It begs the question: why not optimize the aircraft to maximize efficiency in VTOL and the transition to horizontal flight mode, which are the most difficult and power demanding phases of flight? The horizontal flight phase is much easier to manage and far less power demanding per unit distance flown, than the critical VTOL and transition phase of flight.

@@JoeyBlogs007 Mr. Wiegand once once claimed he saw the concept in a TV commercial... (of course that was just a comic by DA*PA).

As @JoeyBlogs007 points out, it's all about what part(s) of the flight you focus design for efficiency. Jet propelled vehicles are most efficient when in high altitude, horizontal flight. They are not as efficient at hovering. Jet plane efficiency is why trans-continental flights are done in jet planes and not propeller planes or helicopters. When hovering, a jet VTOL noise is less intrusive sounding when compared to propeller VTOL and helicopters. Lilium is designing for a decarbonized, regional-midrange, pleasant flight.

In other words LILM is paying a significant price for having so many small fans that are not VTOL optimised like those VTOLS with larger propellors. They claim to be optimised for cruise flight, however that's only the case against other VTOLS perhaps. However no VTOL ( inluding LILM ) is more efficient in horizontal flight than a conventional electric aircraft design. Impossible. Too much drag from the motors. Too many motors. Wing not optimsed for lift. Wing / motor configuration not optimised for horizontal flight. The VTOLs like LILM would be way over powered for horizontal flight and carrying excess motor weight. The only reason they have so many motors is for VTOL capability. If VTOL capability wasn't required, nobody would design an airplane with so many motors in the wing, as they would never approach optimal power load and it would simply be carrying excess motor weight, given the more limited power requirement for horizontal flight.

They never said they offer flights (as far as I know).

2026 big airlines have billion dollar contracts waiting time and care is needed in massive potential business like this

Less than a tank of gas of the same size.

@@JoeyBlogs007 data? I don't believe that.

@@frijoli9579 It varies immensely depending on the chemical composition of the battery. A radioactive battery re-purposing waste from a nuclear power plant will likely have a tremendously high total carbon footprint to produce. However, a sand battery is just putting regular sand into an insulated silo with some simple plumbing and the total carbon footprint is extremely low.

@@UberSprite how often do they put nuclear or sand batteries in cars and plane?

That's an important question to ask! Let me give you some quick AI generated overview: --- The carbon footprint of an EV battery is influenced by material extraction, manufacturing, transportation, battery size, and recycling. Key factors include: Material Extraction: Mining and processing of lithium, cobalt, nickel, etc., which are energy-intensive. Manufacturing: Production processes are energy-heavy, with carbon footprint varying by regional energy sources. Transportation: Emissions depend on distance and mode of transport. Battery Size: Larger batteries have higher carbon footprints. Lifecycle Emissions: Include production, use, and recycling phases. Estimates: Producing a lithium-ion battery generates 61 to 200 kg CO2 per kWh. A 60 kWh battery could emit 3,660 to 12,000 kg CO2. Lifecycle Comparison: EVs typically have lower lifetime emissions than internal combustion engine vehicles due to higher efficiency and the potential for renewable energy charging. Sources: IVL Swedish Environmental Research Institute European Federation for Transport and Environment International Council on Clean Transportation --- I hope this helps. This is an interesting topic. If you want to know more about this I highly recommend checking out some KZfaq videos about this topic (especially battery recycling) and do your own research!

They apepar to be heading for bankruptcy.

They need money. It's expensive to make 2 toy models and a mockup and to produce videos like this.

Plus a payload. They need to add at least a 400 kg weight including the weight of a pilot. If and when it proves it can lift that into the air vertically and fly horizontally for a minimum of 20 minutes, only then will I be investing.

Exactly. And no demonstrated payload capacity.

Indeed it is. Snake Oil.

I like your way of thinking about it. Electric aircraft likely are the way forward but it will be the conventional fixed-wing aircraft which by nature have a much higher efficiency than (e)VTOL especially for longer distances and are 'safer' in regards < their aerodynamic properties (less complex technology and redundancy necessary to ensure safe flight / gliding in case of an unlikely emergency is at least possible). They are aiming for short distance travel

they clearly said that theyre not in the classic air taxi industry since they produce jets and not helicopters like the rest of the competition. did you even listen to what they said?? liliums range is much larger.

@@ICA_Ghost I know their marketing information, yet this leaves the question unanswered, if they are pretty much obviously developing an air taxi - yet they are saying they don't develop an air taxi, what is Lilium actually developing and what is their target market? If they are developing for cargo, they would not be invested so heavily in design and experience, if they are developing for 'long range (ferry) flights' they would be developing a fixed-wing aircraft. To my best knowledge their product looks pretty much like an air taxi, what do you think are they developing instead? ''If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.''

@@TheFlatronify they just dont call it an air taxi because all air taxis are electric helicopters (without much range or speed) basically which only compete with lilium in take off and landing. you can fly through the whole state off florida with a lilium jet so the difference is pretty obvious to me.

@@TheFlatronify also they ARE developing "fixed-wing aircraft" just look at it.