I definitely agree that being first to market will not determine long-term success in this sector of air transport. Good point as to which aircraft the public will embrace. I get the impression that most of these companies have done little or no real market research. Most members of the public I speak with have absolutely no idea that this mode of transport is heading their way.

Personally betting they won’t… but who am I to say… I only know how to design fixed wings and rotorcrafts 😂

I do wonder so hard feel vertical has good chance but feel be more profit in city to city cargo like for dhl etc fedx etc. but this will take off on social media people will oay just to go to different city form new travel (look at me selfie selfie selfie) then it be the normal. Think there is landing port in UK already (ready) Blade has got some very good ideas for this type of vtol

Last I checked, their stock was trading at $1.62 a share. Assuming that they can deliver what they propose, which is a very big assumption. I think that the stock is a steal at its current valuation.

Why? The design seems very expensive and high-maintenance

😤

Let "Professors" - "Profess!" These folks are Designing, Testing, Proving, Refining! These "Professors" probably are still saying, "You can't Land a Rocket and Reuse it!" Also!! 🤨🥴🙄

But we all know that the battery technology simply doesn't exist to make this viable. That's why every other start-up is using a more conventional approach based on proven battery technology that exists today. This outfit are relying on outside technology beyond their control, yet to be brought to market.

Lilium Jet review here: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/ftFmnqljyrXcf4U.html

hay look at the date is 2023, battery tech is now here doe this. 😅

Fear Not! Concord also had its "Efficiency" challenges, but still operated for about 20+ Years! 🤨🤭

Land "Flat to Ground?" On what? A "Skid?" That Wears out after 10 Uses? And is impractical, or even worse, to "Taxi In" after " Landing" if a Rolling Landing! (Not "ALL" destinations, will have "Heliports" or "Vertiports!")

Odys Aviation have a hybrid platform that looks promising.

Maybe an automatic APU like larger jets would do the trick to increase range and recover from power loss. Or, maybe a full-time APU with a small battery pack would be reasonable. Just my $.02 on the subject.

@@fredericklyon2006 Ideally, a battery just large enough for a safe landing in the event of power losss. It could take off on batttery power, and start the engine at 1k feet so that you have minimal noise at ground level.

Ahhh... But what an interesting "Parlor!" 😂

Really? Do you see how many people have a "Box" or "Glassed in Viewing Area" to go see"The Game?" That's "Enough" people to make these ideas start! If $70 Million Global 7500's can sell like Hotcakes, faster than we can build them, stop thinking "Everyone" is at your level, Financially!

@@robertweekley5926 How do you think that's a response to anything I said? How would the world be transformed by sports stadiums having slightly better luxury boxes? And again: How is the world transformed by rich people that can afford helicopters switching to a new brand of helicopters? That's not a transformation in any reasonable sense at all.

you are so right Simon .... is that a good number ... I do not like to use the word " assume " .... hope they read these comments and comment back about that .... Lilium has been doing good , stocks are up and down , just like the others . Archer and Joby doing the same . Lilium is Germanys" Wrights brothers . Gong in the right direction .

@@Ilikeit616 I too hope that Lillium make it as their technology seems good, their plans seem to make sense. I just worry when they start to emulate the Joby and Archer hot air. Lillium will work based on a) their technology b) their organisation and thoroughness. I suspect a) is good (certainly seems so) and given their German heritage I fully expect b) to also be true. But they don't need to bhsit us. The facts will speak for themselves.

It’s the probability of failure calculated by factoring chances of every redundant system, a requirement for EASA.

This is why the designer isn't the one you assume is laying down all cards, that is just who your dealing with, it's the spectators that offer more overlook field of insight to gain from.

10^-9 or 1 in a billion failure rate per flight hour is the standard for commercial airliners in EASA. Lilium isn't claiming 10^-9 in safety to exaggerate their safety rating. Its the minimum requirement outlined by EASA.

It's a Plane within 45 Seconds of lift off, however! And would possibly have a Better "Glide Ratio" of a Cessna 150 - a Plane most Pilots know, will only glide about 5-7 Miles forward, per Mile Above the Ground Level. Plus, "It" (the Cessna 150) only has One Ancient Designed Engine! This (the Lilium) has 30 Modern Electric Motors, and a Canard Adds Lift, whereas a conventional Horizontal Stabilizer, adds Load, or Down Force, to stabilize the Twisting Effect of the Air flowing off the Trailing Edge of the Main Wing! As such, this already is more "Efficient" in Glide, due to the Higher Lift to Drag Ratio!

I'm assuming 12 days, since they didn't mention it at all. More practically, make a version with swappable batteries. Call it "refueling" or whatever, but don't make me wait while the thing charges up.

What possibility does it open that helicopters can't do?

Still is. Especially electrical. Payload and range is poor. Certification could be a nightmare.

@@julesdomes6064 this is done by a start up though, this used to be lockheed type projects.

Ehang 😂

Naah. No safety. Death trap.

a helicopter?

How will you get there, in the first place? On foot? By Horse? Use a Dirt Bike? And how will you clear the "Leveled Landing Space" of Trees, Rocks, Stumps, Bears, etc? 🤔🤨

@@robertweekley5926probably by flying carpet. Nobody has an operational flying carpet at this time, but I am sure it will exist in the future.

No idea what u r talking about. If any child can do this in the garage, why do the lilium folks need billions and years to develop it? Tell us, smartie...

“Imbesiles”. Check your spelling. “Midels, hav, surpice, “. “The tech is better than is being portrait (portrayed)”. Do you ever take the time to read what you wrote?

It’s piloted

what about rhe curent crappy aviation industry, ex ac mechanic, is time to change.

A jet is a jet is a jet.

omg, it can be called what ever, am pw jet mechanic , i dont gwt ofended. Is time to live the jet in the past.

@@valienterfIf we leave jets in the past, aviation will come to a halt.

could you cite your source? I've been curious how their range compares to the competition.

Lilium web site and Wikipedia. Lilium now announced to cancel the 5 seater and try a seven seater. Same problem: no load possible. Empty 1400 kg, max take off weight 3200kg and the battery with 300kwh is 1700 kg. Lilum does not supply info to battery weight or kwh/ kg. Actually the battery doesnt exist and shall be presented in 2025...with 350 kwh. Approx. 50 % of what is needed for more then 15min flight. At take off over 500 kw of power needed, in horizontal flight ( if achieveable) aprox. 200 kw....That means with 2 lift offs flight time is aprox. 10 min. Range aprox. 15 miles. If all goes well. So far the transition to horizontal flight doesn't work.

Just talk me through how you drain a battery in 5 mins without it setting on fire.

not True, the test go to 200 mil plus. are you in the old aviation induatry by any chance. Ex jet mechanic and i love this new tech.

Actual jet pilot here (retired). Maybe someday, but this thing is years, probably decades away from being certified airworthy to carry paying passengers. I have many systems redundancy questions, e,g., how is the power pack divided so a failure won’t cause catastrophic failure and loss of all power. What is the glide ratio? Etc. I can see this thing going into Humpty Dumpty mode pretty easily.

I don't expect Lilium to be successful, nor am I an enthousiast of their tech, but I think you largely miss the point here. This vehicle is highly redundant, there will be no need for "go-arounds" as with conventional aircraft that have to meet numerous requirements. It won't be sensitive to lateral winds, their engineers will manage to handle that problem. Just put in two computers, job done. The crucial point is electric powering, i.e. the weight-to-capacity ratio and max output for take-off and landing with respect to the payload. That's the real challenge. As I see it, the focus in battery tech development is on the price, not on the two issues mentioned above. Lilium has only released a five minute test flight video in march 2023 that still leaves a lot to be desired and answered. They vocally announced they develop six-seater craft, but still hover around in five-minute-videos with the same old drone...

@@frankyboy1131 Perhaps read my post more closely -- loss of power should not result in loss of control (vectoring thrust only works if you have thrust to vector ....) with power off the 'turbines' are basically flat plate area or worse - gigantic airbrakes and with no control is not a good combination . You can get caught above or in cloud and need to divert or just survive and need time to sort things out --running out of battery power in this and lots of other scenarios is probable, even certain in a fleet or such things in short time --the headlines will do the rest. fail dangerous not fail safe . "Glide" like a greased brick - going sideways. The 'seaminess' (opposite of 'seamless'?) of the whole two taxis four ubers and their operators just to get to and from - work? - every time..... Notice the extensive areas of separated flow in their videos --but no effect on 'flight' meaning it is all done with brute force --somewhere someone has to burn the coal equivalent of over a thousand horsepower to feed this thing --measure the emissions THERE and breath the air also.

@@rossnolan7283 Okay, I see the point now that you are making here. Sorry for the inconvenience, it took me some time to understand. You are right, their demo vids shows how hard it is for this vehicle to take off in the first place, so a sudden change of environmental conditions or a power loss offers no margins to cope with that. Did I get that right? However, basically there are ballistic parachute rescue systems available to prevent a deadly crash, but given the cost and construction /weight of such a vehicle, the company would probably have to write off all the "drop-outs" at their first emergencies immediately. By the way, I have no idea how the Opener 'BlackFly" (four wings, open rotors) behaves in a power-loss incident, nor how redundancy (to prevent or mitigate that) is achieved, but the whole concept seems more reasonable to me.

@@frankyboy1131 parachutes have to fillout and then arrest the neccesary descent rate --only possible from some hundreds of feet altitude , otherwise they, and blackfly just plummet - like most objects in a gravitational field . Retro rockets are the only feasible way to avoid 'splattering' --there is a british firm already offering such hardware and making the case for low level vulnerability when you have no forward velocity - whether dieing in the resultant bushfire is better than a quick death on impact is something you will have o.o1 seconds to decide if you happen to be in most of Australia in summer for example or any other flammable location. There are many cases of sailplanes and some lightplanes landing in trees without loss of life or even, remarkably significant damage - a tree of the 'spreading' kind is almost what you would design to give a soft survivable cover over the unyielding earth - this of course requires a considerable wingspan to intercept enough of the fine branches and foliage rather than plunging through it as more compact or wingless evtols will (and rotors will just shred of course ) The public fear of 'falling out of the air' will be stoked by the first taxi service 'accidents'.and the PanAm helicopter crash footage will get aired yet again.....

Or burst into flames