eVTOL: electric flying car beats helicopters in silent commute 

The Army and NASA has shown interest, and have supported in the ultimate stealth flying machine!

Practically geniuses. This should've been implemented before or during hand drones were offered. Those fear of evtol days, are over.

@@rolflandale2565the Public fear still exists, for example if you read comments on other sites, people go off on every negative possible. The pessimistic say JOBY will be too dangerous, we already have Helicopters, we don't need eVTOL's, high wind will cause crashes, first crash with injury or death will end this dream, will be too expensive to fly, I'll never fly in one or a pilotless one, where will they land, FAA won't allow, too much competition, won't every happen, and on and on. I disagree with all the pessimism, I am a big JOBY fan. My brother is an expert pilot, he was skeptical at first, then realized, buy buy buy stock or regret at these levels. He admitted he started to buy into a position, a duh moment. We only get a few chances in life to hit a stock large, and this is one, could be a huge success, if you have patience.

@M C Helicopters lack the counter redundancy of multi-engine support. When you compare the dangers of a car and the cruise methods of aircraft, both have a chance of survival with initiative actions. If a classic mono-engine helicopter malfunctions, it will plunge like a rock. The helicopter casualties have a very high death ratio. From famous celebrities to most practical pilots with absolute manual navigation. Jobby has a lot of bureaucracy in structure rendering, but the price is to apply safety.

@@MC-yb5le You should know that, the FAA never allows aircrafts to run until almost a decade test is done, some are lucky its sooner than that.

@@rolflandale2565 FAA will fast track the certification of Joby and Archer --- they know these aircraft are safe because of redundancy

They could have cut the engine on chase aircraft.

Glad it was helpful!

What a waste of time and energy! Just imagine the skies plugged with this stuff ; all beteen 50 and150 feet elevation!!!? What a train wreck waiting to happen! Probably another Federal Funded project! A crony capitalist funded project !😆😡

@@paulratzlaff2935 All personal opinions welcomed! Thank you!

Thousands of us own JOBY stock, not a con man, reel deal. Don't miss out.

yes, if it is possible to fly with 2/6 damaged or more and they are all independent then it would be pretty safe

@@martinuso7446 I doubt that would ever happen though.

with multiple electric motors, all of which can be controlled independently, if a motor is not performing correctly it can be shutdown & remaining motors receive more power to compensate. Having wing like structures also allows for added lift/glide as opposed to "auto rotating" (aka crashing - falling like a rock) in a traditional helicopter. With six motors as long as if four remain operational this should allow for a controlled landing.

Let's try to remember that battery packs can also be redundant --- so in order for a catastrophic failure and crash, this aircraft would need more than two rotors to fail as well as multiple battery packs --- literally close to zero chance!

I can’t wait until we rapidly surpass electric motors and get into plasma propulsion

If i could choose, i woud take the cure for cancer and solution to the hunger problem over any electric car.

Indeed!

​@@xargs0095 as long as their battery and other material production and disposal are safe

@@jareknowak8712 that one seems harder, if you feed people they reproduce more and then there are 2x, 3x,.. the amount of people with hunger

Bad comparison with the HF reference. Surprised you didn’t bring up John Denver too :(

@@blueman5924 Don't know him, but he does fit better as a comparison opon a quick look. I'll admit I want one of these too. But just because I want something doesn't mean I should have it, and a low barrier to entry flying machine is one of them. At least paragliders won't cause as much damage as a small plane.

They are planning for it to become autonomous at some point in the future to make it cheaper and more accessible without causing those problems. Autonomous flight with predefined paths and landing points would probably be easier to develop than autonomous driving, since the sky is much more spacious than streets, there aren't any level cross-roads or t-junctions in the sky, and cyclists/pedestrians won't appear out of nowhere. Still won't be anywhere comparable to today's wide spread of actual cars, just more common than today's helicopters and small planes.

How about self driven planes? Oh, yeah!

@@Chedring Low barrier? This thing is not cheap. Cutting edge technology rarely is. And remember that this is a plane and planes have a ton of paper work attached to them. It isn't like throwing together a Tesla car.

That thing is amazing!! Hopefully battery tech will take the leap and and put an end to 100LL finally

Anything is quiet if you recorded it 300ft away...

It’s an osprey

@@Helloverlord they showed different sound signature of various aircraft’s at the same distance and mentioned that this thing is below 70dB at lift off

What is the sound power at take off compared to helicopters or planes ? How does it match the WHO requirements in the envrironment (55 dB Lden) ? The 65 dB commented in the video does not mean anything : is it pressure ? Where with respect to the source ? Envisioning this kind of things closer to densely populated area than current aircraft will certainly come with noise pollution issue and sorry but the only comparison is in fly by for which you are comparing to non noise regulated aircraft - being « quieter » than unregulated source does not mean anything (apart from the fact that there is indeed a huge noise issue with those objects)

Two terrific minds in harness.

Thank you! I agree that my husband definitely has a more in-depth knowledge of most topics than I (he really does love reading about nearly any topic). Thank you for your comments on the editing. It's very labor intensive so appreciate when people notice.

Totally agree!

A remote quad drone less than a kilogram is subject to a bunch of regulations most people aren't aware of. People are hyped by the positive potential exclusively, they always forget about the 80% other important things : safety, qualifications, infrastructure, regulation of shared space, maintainance and spare parts/qualified vendors and contractors, tested and validated overall systems, operation and management........ At the end of the day (or the decade), it always all come down to what people didn't expect : the operational constraints doesn't meet lambda people expectations in terms of costs or complications, only a few elite will have access to the privilege or service, sometiles via costy dérogation or because you're a billionaire authorities may have trouble challenging. I don't even have a licence to fly an ultralight on my own from an airfield (we steal the flying time of a qualified pilot) and I have a thousand times the knowledge a lambda anyont have in terms of flying and rules/regulation, I know how sensible of a qualification it is, I cannot trust putting any of that very advanced tech vehicles in the hands of the first _"oh gosh it's so dope, I also want a flying car"_ dude : that's a recipe for disaster and drama. If people are regularly going down the road to change the chips of a drone toy to exceed the built-in altitude limitation by regulation, what kind of stupid rules breaking they would intentionally or inadvertently do with a "flying car"? Sharing airspace with people and properties below is the opposite of "having fun", you do care about at all times and abide by the rules, there is NO WAY you decide where you go, just like medevac ops today, you wait for instructions (air traffic control) and you strictly follows virtually already defined limited set of flight routes. We don't want that thing flying over schools or other areas with dense flocks of people walking, there must be regular suitable emergency crash land sites along the routes, like a stadium, highways, corn fields... The only "your fancy extraordinary personal car" that may find birth in a city is the one that meets all those conditions, like Tesla autopilot where a connected centralized service decides how to drive the car. For a flying car, it will be the same : you're not the one to have command, you just input a destination, then the company owning the service flies you there on through defined standardized flight paths and standardized connected "other fellow air travellers in nearby vehicles". That way, we get lambda people out of the equation in terms of training/qualification, and we get all vehicles standardized in terms of regulations, flight rules and behavior. Or else, no personal car, you go to a flying taxi port and you rent the service with a fully qualified trained pilot that will do his best to get you to another port/other places with special derogatory privileges, but he/she remains who has the last word. Hope this helps you have a better window displaying what will slowly take place in the future, so you don't build the wrong expectations from the start..

@@StephenKarl_Integral woah, well explained sir

What does that thing cost ?

Argh, not another pod gadgetbahn company that wants to build something like a train but not as good as a train.

However, the real fun is only starting, how to build 25, 50, and 100 JOBY's a year will be a monumental task. Main reason Toyota partnered early to help and refine the JOBY building process. Joby will need to build 1000's to crush the competition, who is late to the party, and/or years behind.

@@MC-yb5le do not doubt the power of scaled manufacturing with Toyota's expertise --- Joby definitely found the right partner

Our pleasure!

People ridicule when I say this is about to explode. Maybe they majored in physics or whatever but I'm telling you they are going to make this thing explode. They have tech you never heard of and this is obviously the plan.

I cant wait to pay 250$ to fly 4 min away!!!

Closer to an Osprey military plane.

Yes ! Exactly my first thought, thanks for pointing it out. I believe the Robinson R-22 would be a little smaller when I look at the wingspan (+ fans), and from my experience in drones (quad), losing one engine is quite dramatic (immediate loss of control due to assymetry), nowhere near the "chill" you feel when you have power loss on an R-22, you maintain level and you can autorotate if you're high enough.

Very little in common wirh a conventional helicopter nearer to a large rc model aircraft/drone.

They are always helicopters with extra steps

Yes it does it has three wheels like a Robin Reliant 😂

I imagine it is really louder in person?

😄

ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-9scfWN6aXaU.html

Jane, get me outa this crazy thing!

I mean, this thing come easily just pull out of your garage and go.

I mean this thing could easily just pull out of your garage and go... 🙄

sooooo an Osprey?

It will be a fraction of the cost to run, and quiet, win win.

_"it needs to seat 5-7 people..."_ I'm not an engineer, but I'm aware the huge problem of electric flying things is _"not having enough battery to maintain that thing flying for hours _*_the heavier it gets"_* Unlike fossil energy that packs a lot of punch for a small drop of toxic fuel, electricity is like blowing a sheet of paper to maintain it airborne, so, how many people lungs and mouth do you need to maintain a book airborne ? The answer for electric aircraft is... just like airplanes : if you want to lift heavier mass, forget about V/STOL, you need a runway and trade time+distance for potential energy to be converted to lift via wings.

Hahaha, obviously you rarely visit or live in a congested city, for example: LA, NY, Dallas, Washington DC, Mexico City, Tokyo, South Korea and 100's of other congested cities across the world, each city named has a never ending growth with gridlock traffic. Joby will work in all types of scenarios. Delta airlines/JOBY are working together in the future to bring customers directly to the airport, then fly wherever. Delta realizes JOBY is changing the game, save more time for fun/work vs wasting time driving in gridlock traffic. I agree, JOBY will be a great addition to Tourists, moving tourists or workers between islands for example:Belize, Hawaii, Vancouver island, Indonesia to name a few of the 1000's of tourists spots in the world where JOBY can be a vital transportation and learning tool.

You've missed out, PBS showed a documentary on The Future of Electric flight 3 years ago. I've followed JOBY since, actually i buy every time the stock goes under $4, no regrets.

If. it is we're going to need a LOT bigger parking lots.

@Miraak Imagine trying to get that thing into multi-level parking!

I'm not so sure this is for us.

I agree, JOBY will replace the ICE Helicopter, Heli's are becoming rare these days, bye bye Heli , I hate ICE heli noise pollution, rattles my house every time. The USA military is all on board, except the Navy, they have the big boy toys. I predict the Navy will buy these for their ships as well, cheap and easy to maintain. The military will be a windfall for JOBY.

it is not worse, small aircraft still use lead added fuels, and people who live in proximity are still exposed to lead, electric aircraft remove that

There’s an article in motortrend titled you are being lied to about electric cars. Sane applies here. Everything you said is not correct in the least

Last week I was at a small airport to buy something off a guy. He had his own building for his plane. It was a commercially built plane built in the 1950s. It did have a new motor but otherwise it was original, still flying. Planes are built to last longer than cars. So I don't see it being non-recyclable as a problem for an electric plane like this.

@@tinayoga8844 Emissions from fuel combustion are much higher than production emissions of an (electric) aircraft.

Electric vehicles / aircraft are always less polluting due to the overal efficiency, even if mainly non renewable energy is used for charging.

Actually, you're close to the real deal : Let's assume I'm 50 years old with no flying skill but I have 2 millions $ to get that toy. Can you trust me flying that thing alone ? Now take the 17 year old spoiled brat that want to impress his crush and decided to borrow the "flying car" of his dad... (this happens hundred times a day in the world, but the car is not a flyable one.. yet) Just think of it : either you can't but have to centralized those vehicles somewhere, that would be an airport, and only qualified licenced pilots with X000 hours of experience are allowed to fly them, not you or me, or, if people are willing to pay the price to fly to and from their backyard, well, the actual pilot, it being human or AI must be centralized in the servers of a company that has the expertise to fly those, not you or me... So, yeah, like today airplanes (believe it or not), _they will use satellites aswell, and have fly to destination and avoidance of other flying objects too,_ meaning, unless having passed the courses, trainings and tests, with the proper licences and the clearances, neither you or me would be able to "manually fly" the thing, we are just passengers...

We cant trust people to drive cars in a considered way. 6 Exremely dangerous rotors and extreme speed added to the mix? There is no way this will be normalised before we all die, and even then it will be all AI driven for the super rich.

Never gonna happen. Imagine every drunk, aggressive, distracted, and road rager that's on the ground now... up in the air. 46,000 auto deaths per year, and that's for cars that don't fly, or accidents that didn't kill for a ground vehicle but would most certainly kill in the air. It doesn't matter if the tech makes it possible; it's the people aspect that will always prevent flying cars on a large scale.

Never gonna happen. Basically, that's a large scale not remote (but possibly) controlled drone that can lift one or more people, which technically _is_ an aircraft, *not a car !* And we talk about airspace : did you knew above the quarter of a kilogram, you must register your remote controlled drone ? Regulation ! Drones are only allowed to fly in limited airspace. Regulation ! To fly, especially be able to fly over populated areas, even if it's just one person per square kilometer, you need a license. Regulation ! Many billionaires have attempted to put helipad everywhere, started assembling the platform, then dismanteled it, because, you just don't build them where you want the way that suits your needs when you have the means : those things must comply with very precise and restrictive (for safety) conditions, by regulation ! ..... Regulations, regulations, regulations.... and again, regulations, blah blah blah. And regulation is there for one single reason : people *died* when they did not exist, and sure enough, the billionnaire living in the top room of a fancy building don't want trouble or die if some dardevil stupid teenager decided to borrow the "flying car of his dad" to impress his slut by crashing there while violating a couple dozens regulations (yes, it happenned, was not a car but a Cessna, but you get the point : billionnaires don't want dumb people to mess around and they have the means to enforce regulations). Even with regulation, people happily violate them everyday, not everyone can be as disciplined as a pilot, even some pilots aren't that disciplined. The only large scale technology transport that could/would take off and land in your backyard is one that is NOT controlled by YOU, but by some company that has proven it has the expertise to safely move people in the air, ground or over water, and take responsibility is something goes horribly wrong. That's what Tesla is attempting to do, that's what Google is attempting to solve and master at IA level. Til then, there is no way around : airport to airport (not your backyard), valid licenses, submitted and validated flight route, and a bunch of other people giving you instructions you must follow along your entire flight. Yes, the helipad on the rooftop of the hospital _is_ an airport. The helipad behind the White House is an airport. Some highways in Poland/Finland/etc. become "airports", precisely "temporary military strips" in special (crisis) situations. Backyards has to comply with strict conditions to become "private airfields/airports" - regulations again - if you want an airport that close : safety, noise, pollution, airspace integration and conflicts, traffic control, terrain and wheather, aircraft types............... hope you have the means to validate all conditions, but it's pretty clear the _"flying car in the backyard of lambda citizens"_ *is a lie.* Don't dream that much, but I understand how you got there : those people in those documentaries are trying to sell that dream to you and you bought it. None of them is explaining to you you CAN'T have that type of equipment at home, and the trends tells the future will even be tighter in terms of regulations when more people will have access to jet engines and other kind of propellers as they become cheaper.

It will happen but it will be automated flight and there won't be ways for these to crash into each other. You will enter your destination and you will be placed into a highly sophisticated network that will perform ALL functions of the aircraft. I would imagine it would probably be 1500 feet or less and major aircraft would still be doing it's normal thing.

@@StephenKarl_Integral slut? Really? How about pig.

No. Vehicles using multiple rotors are highly subject to loss of control in case of a single engine/fan failure (assymetric lift/trust). Ever lost a fan on a drone ? I did, it was ugly, was only able to salvage the remote control. Those vehicles are not known to include redundancy on that matter. Your way out is to fly high enough, shut down all engines *and have a chute.* You must be trained to identify the nature and the extent of the failure in a matter of seconds, if it's a collision with a foreign object (bird) that may disrupt stability due to a change in aerdynamic and/or power profile, or a more concerning situation like the loss of one or multiple fans. In any case, trouble with lift/power/stability means you land *immediately.* Helicopters is a mastered technology for so long (you glide via autorotation), drone-like vehicles is fairly new and having multiple engines instead of one (or two, with the torque on Helicopters), means more training to have the qualification to handle emergencies. Also, I don't think vehicles that light would survive moderate hail storm, or severe rain. Drones as they are today are not that water proof. That's why safer vehicles able to lift humans are a lot much heavier (and therefore requires runways), they are designed with the strength to face adverse weather or light impacts (birds) and ability to glide and land roughly okay even if losing power (if a suitable land site available, like a corn field). I don't see any way to achieve that with such a small/light vehicle.

That’s the reason our president will not fly in an Osprey 🎉

Probably about 0.1 swaps per year. Electric is always less polluting.

1. No answers yet : those cannot be defined before the mandatory modifications to comply with *regulations,* safety-wise, like the need to have realistic solutions in case of emergency, like a flock of birds strike and loss of control : will the presence of a chute mandatory on that type of vehicle ? That's just one example among hundreds. Til then, there is no reliable payload weight information. 2. Commercial debut will take place when the vehicle, manufacturer, various public management organizations (...) are ready, with the proper qualifications/licenses/authorities, means and tools : How we do, together, for that thing in the hand of anyone doesn't kill anyone or do property damages. 3. Yes : because they tilt to allow V/STOL, having the props near the ground is a bad design : you have less bank/pitch guard, not good on take off/landing. When spinning, those fans are invisible, so pretty sure some ignorant will walk right through. You have the fan under the engine, on a multi parts design, you have to unmount the fan first, then unmount the engine to change it; better have the fans above the engines so you have direct access to the engine during maintainance. Pushers doesn't provide any advantage over pullers unless the design constraints directly favors it, like a better vision, shorter fuel pipes that also makes them lighter, eventually, a center of gravity requirement driven by the type of wing. Also, for sustainable V/STOL manoevers, fans way above the CG is more stable and less subject to complex computer assisted systems to compensate. That's only a few reasons, there are many more...

@@StephenKarl_Integral one pilot and four passengers and luggage per JOBY. I never read anything about weight limits yet, I'll need to ask JOBY at next investor conference. The goal is Autonomous, then no need for expensive pilot by 2030. JOBY is one of the few Evtol's who has a pilot first, then autonooumous by 2030 per the experts/FAA. . Most other comp is going ONLY autonomous by 2030, thus left behind JOBY.

@@MC-yb5le That's what I answered to someone who wrote something like _"I need one, my personal flying car, haha"._ There is no such thing as maneuvering something weighting more than 10 kilograms above people (children) and infrastructures, and you, the pilot has no license or special authorization/qualification. If you fly over populated areas, you must be trained and some authority assessed your ability to CARE about others below and in the air, to not injure or kill anyone or do damage to properties. You must be qualified to manage emergencies, follow directive, have health discipline... So, EITHER the thing goes the road of COSTY licensed pilots, OR the vehicle is UNMANNED, and piloting is realtime computer/AI driven, centralized in some company, like Tesla. If someone dream of manning that vehicle someday, he/she has to be a pilot then, with all what that responsibility requires including having passed all the trainings and tests for the licenses : that's not free or it gets included/diluted in the (rather high) price of the vehicle. Also, how about preflight maintainance check? With 6 engines. You do it aswell (more qualification required) or you pay guys to come to your home before each flight? I'm the _"have some realism/common sense"_ type. I'm not impressed by how many people it boards or how quiet it is, I'm interested to assess how practical and cost effective it can eventually get, as an owner, how much it would cost me, how much trouble or effort I have to swallow to be able/allowed to operate it..? As the manufacturer, what business model is realistic? Should I license pilots or get rid of the concern by getting "pilot" out of the equation, ie, go AI ? As a citizen in residential area below a traffic path of those vehicles, what "peace of mind" am I ready to concede to allow other people to use that vehicle over my house? That's the kind of concern regulation authorities have, because when a crash happens (and it WILL happen), I will be in charge of judging if that vehicle is dangerous or not, and if it is, technically, I'll kill companies, services, people will lose money and their jobs, other people will lose their dream... BEFORE all that happens, I must closely assist the manufacturers and come up with a list of road map and compromises...... The certification process is based on historical occurrence of dramas, and it gets tighter over the decades, not the other way around. Realism is to take it seriously.

Perhaps, the fuel cells will be created for larger planes, larger JOBY'S and/or large boats/trains. The battery is sufficient for 150 mile flight. This is just the beginning journey for JOBY, stock is cheap too.

I can't imagine why anyone, anywhere, would want thousands of these filling the skies. But let's imagine it for a second. You live in a city, and car journies, for a modicum of rich people are now a thing of the past, as they fly by in their personal aircraft. Of course, Joby by this point have sold out to Amazon or Google. Google have lobbied government to allow them to record footage as they pass over your city. On the condition that they give access to law enforcement and national security agencies of course. The final frontier in surveillance has been breached. Facial recognition on every shop front, combines with tracking from the sky to provide the 360 degree picture of your entire life. All so that we can pollute the airways in the same fashion as we have the roads and waters. I couldn't think of a more depressing future. I think Joby have perhaps created a good vehicle for emergency services and other niche applications, which is why they won't need mass production. Hopefully we get some form of democracy before they attempt anything greater than that.

They are partnered with Toyota so will have experienced support to help them scale up into mass production when it eventually comes to that

I wondered about these VTOL companies and their funding. They never seem to sell anything. Then I read about Venture Capital and how they will fund lots of startups but eventually the money runs out or they sell it to someone else or the Chinese.

@@PandamonkiDLuffy Toyota has been making a lot of dumb moves since abandoning their early partnership in electric vehicles with Tesla. Hydrogen fuel cell cars will never be economical or feasible, but maybe Toyota will put their fuel cell technology into VTOLS. Sandy Munro thinks this is the perfect application for fuel cells, and I agree. I still would rather see all electric, but it will be quite a while before batteries have a low enough mass/kwh at mass production scale.

@@pctrashtalk2069 Sad, but true.