Jetson One: A personal flying vehicle just for having fun 

You and morticians.

Take u very much for your professional duty's..Ft worth Texas

That’s why there will never be cars commercially sold to general public flying all over as we see in Back to the Future and stuff nor even in a distant future. Not a matter of technology, it just wouldn’t work.

ATVs are so dangerous and unstable, because they are so top heavy, and weight tends to go forward. Wouldn't have so much trouble if they were designed like a go kart.

@@pmoris4405 meet George Jetson!!

That adds more weight, lets perfect the flying first and then We can move ahead with esthetics.

@@powerhouse884 That's fair. I get it. I just hope that it eventually happens.

@@powerhouse884 how heavy can carbon fiber or fiberglass covers really be?

@@powerhouse884 the covers would be more for safety rather than aesthetics.

@@De1Litto For the battery to keep up? A lot, we are not accounting the variable weight os the passenger.

It's only cool as long as there are no others in the sky around you.

@@jimblack8027 Exactly! Take it to a big area with no one around and fun fun galore.

Now 30 minutes!

@@Jesus_616_Christ you're missing the point.. the main buyers have properties.. you wont be loading it on your truck you will be taking it straight up off your property. Its not a device to commute, its a device to fly around for fun.. in 2023 the batteries should be good for 28 minutes of fly time.. and you can buy extra batteries that charge in one hour on the 220/240v. Stop comparing this device to one thats been around for many decades.

Also depends on your weight

If you want endurance, energy storage is not the way to go. Once you start getting to the scale of vehicles, you have to start generating power, battery's cons begin to outweigh the pros at that size. This is how it will always be, technology has comparative strengths and weaknesses.

Its meant for recreational purpose. Not as a mean of transportation

Yeah.... Tax cos and commuters can will use this.. Exxon Mobil and co won't like that

I doubt batteries will ever reach those levels. Generator or direct mechanical drive from an ICE could get you longer flight times. If you really want longer flight times, you need a more efficient way to fly which would be fixed or autorotating wings. Both of those options are already on the market, at an even more affordable price. What this hits that most of the other options don't is hovering, there are very few similar vehicles like this (price range, size, and ease of use due to less gov regulation) that can hover.

@@midgetman4206 interesting , what do you know about direct mechanical drive for this ? You mean a motor w some sort of pto to 4 shafts to rotors, or 4 independent motors ? Israel has a tiny hydrogen linear piston motor... Maybe 4 of those ? Let's network if you want , 2 four zero 3 e I gh t 9 0775 ... 👍

thats NOT even coming in a DECADE. Vehicle is simply TOO HEAVY , it needs to be Stripped and it needs WINGS and a pusher prop for Greater Efficiency. QUAD Copter is a waste of Energy.

What is this mystery battery tech that will magically be 20-30x as efficient?

2+ hours? where do you need to go daily that's needs 2 hours of flying?

They should figure out how to put a motor on it...

@@jamesfox9922 as long as internal combustion is our method of making power, helicopters will continue to be our flying cars.

Fernando Galue: When I was working, my commute was about 25 miles. Since this vehicle has a top speed of 63 mph, I have to assume that about half that (30-35 mph) would be its most energy-efficient speed. Where I live, I would not be able to take a shorter, more direct route to work without upsetting the FAA and other authorities, so I'd have to fly the full 25 miles, around my local "no-fly" zone. The one-way trip would therefore take about an hour. Add the return trip and that's almost two hours of flight time, with a "fudge factor" for safety. I'd hate to run short of power and be forced into an emergency landing miles from home. Granted, I don't have to make that daily trip anymore; but since you asked, I thought I'd offer a real-world example. And there are millions of people in "bedroom communities" across the U.S. who have daily commutes as long or longer; and air miles as opposed to ground miles would probably shorten the commute only marginally for most people. So there's your answer. Or rather, ONE answer. Hope it's helpful.

@@kellyrobinson1780 sure it’s not meant for 99% of people. But for the 5-10% that live close to work thats huge. 5% of US is ~16 million people so it’s viable if somebody makes mass production of these and brings prices down to $10-20k

Hey! You get to go to Italy!

They must used live streaming it's expensive to go that place

Because you could?

@@mattbrew11 q1

You : "Spends 92 thousand dollars on flying machine" Also You : "Gets worried about having a training session in Italy"

waste of money when there are already small planes and copters that are cheaper and fly longer!

My wife would probably say, "No."

Add the noise on top of that and it's just not going to work. But it's a good step in the right direction. If they could bring that price down, the time up and the noise WAY down then I think they are getting somewhere. It'll happen one day. 😀

@@michaeldunson2531 How is it a waste of money? 0 maintenance unless you crash it, and the cost to charge it is probably less than 1$ per full charge. Compare that to fueling a heli or a small plane. Not to mention doing an overhaul on a heli turbine or plane engine lol.

@@michaeldunson2531 do you know how much it cost for flight training? then you have the cost of A&Ps, hanger, fuel, insurance, Instrument adjustments, and certification. 10s of thousands of dollars per year. I am selling my 2 aircraft and buying one of these. I can make it fly longer. remove the batteries and replace them with a capacitor. only a very small backup battery weighing a pound or less will be needed to start the electric motors. once started the capacitor will keep running the motors with an indefinite charge. they never go dead. you will have unlimited flight time. of course, it's illegal because of government control of ultralights. but we won't let that stop us. we have previously done this with cars/trucks and aircraft. basic physics. it is not a waste of money.

Based on the ~60mph limit I presume this is regulated as an ultralight -so no requirement on guards.

Dude, this is NOT a fkng car with people walking around it. lol

Trust me, SOMEONE will stick their fing hand in it, somehow. Lol

You mean like Airplanes…?

@@powerhouse884 airplanes fly at tens of thousands of feet. This thing flys at

@@powerhouse884 Airplanes are not allowed in National Parks

@@apilotspersective Neither does this or any public vehicle last time i check.

A lot of people buying this machine have property.

I know and I personally would hate it if these things were buzzing around national parks! Just thinking about how cool the view would be!

@@petetherealrelentless6542 Pretty sure the above comment referenced the CNET salesman's declaration of a dream to fly over the Grand Canyon or Yosemite.

Yeah I just don't think you'll be able to fly these in the National Parks unless ultralights are already allowed but I doubt it.

Are you kidding me, flying this thing over the Grand Canyon or Yellowstone National Park? That is absolutely horrible idea. Great so now people go to a national park to enjoy nature and you see this monstrosity flying around disturbing nature and polluting the landscape for everyone? No thank you!! These things should be banned from every National Park on day one.

Agreed. Think of the sound an average drone makes, then times that by 20. That's the Jetson.

Okay, put in earplugs then.

@@crogersMX everyone else in the area?

Ya i thought the same thing. Must be so loud. But with a helmet and earplugs it may not be too bad.

It's cool and all but the world is already too loud as is.

That’s the same thing I was thinking of

Captain obvious has spoken

@@sherrimoquin5553 me too

1. Duh! 2. So what?

You sound Jealous you didnt think of it. Looks badass

20 minute flight times are probably not realistic at this point. Probably more like 10-12 minutes. $92k for that? Nah, Ill buy an Ultra light for half the cost...

@@adampennington2388 They could fix that with a petrol range extender. Petrol has 50x the energy density compared to batteries...

nerd

Looks great but not a lot different than the gyrocopters the English had in WW2 But i wish you luck

+SiggyMe "Return Time?" Return from where? Most people are probably going to fly in a very local area. I doubt this will be used for travel, just fun.

@@short-hand4312 i dont think you understand how a capacitor worksm first it doesnt hold so much energy it delivers a huge amount of energy in short time, trying to resist or control a capacitor delivery will make it far less efficient, plus the danger of the capacitor exlosion.

​@@short-hand4312 Link it then, because what you're describing is a 'perpetuum mobile', which by our current understanding of physics is just not possible, especially in a machine with motors demanding 88 kW of power. I do have a feeling you didn't quite understand the "10 fun facts about NASA" video you watched. I'm guessing you'll disappear now or say that "I should do my own research".

Um, no. What would ranchers do with this? Emergency? Is it two-seater? Takes a little longer than 10 minutes to find someone given you would have to have 10 minutes to fly back and you can bet that 20 minutes is in best case scenario.

@@Jason-33W The ability to transport this in the back of a pickup, and then launch when the area is impassable provides a lot of flexibility. 20 minutes is short...but that will change. Accessing canyons is another example where these would prove useful. Just dropping off water and first aid supplies would make a huge difference while gearing up for the main rescue.

Isn’t that high? Must be nice living in your ivory and gilded tower?! Shhhheeeeeiiiiiiiit.... man! Isn’t that high, gimme a break.

Then wear a helmet

@@williamrayburn5314 it wouldn't be too high if it was more refined. Goes a lot more than 20 mins...at least an hour of flying time and go at higher altitude but for what it is I'd say it's a bit too high

@@powerhouse884 what about your Neck

@@williamrayburn5314 I think he means not that high for the first of it's type. I'd be inclined to agree with him. Yes, the price will come down as production increases due to economies of scale and competition. It will never be what you'd call cheap though.

You dont ride a jetski in a storm...

They wouldn’t allow to fly this at high altitudes.

@@TheNivektube meaning, "strong winds thru canyons could blow it into the canyon walls."

...Only if the wind can go through canyon walls.

They just said it has triple redundancy the speed controller will compensate for wind im sure that's one of the first things they had to deal with. Does your drone just fall out of the sky or crash if a gust of wind hits it?

And the award for "UNDERSTATEMENT of the year goes to.......😂😂

I agree you can't fly over property or people at an elevation less than 500'

I don’t see how A) this is any different to a helicopter and B) why it can’t just fill up with petrol

Not to mention hitting other itty bitty flying machines if this technology really “takes off”!

I believe the strict regulation for drones is because they are not being being flown first person, but rather remotely. Flying clear of dwellings in the country is 500 feet and 1,000 feet minimum over a city which if for light aircraft (e.g. Cessna 172). Helicopters and gyro planes do not have the same flight level restrictions as a fixed wing aircraft and I believe that the same would apply to this aircraft. FWIW

flying COFFIN.

@@markplott4820 tiny coffin though, after you get chopped

Very short flight sequences edited together. It's a funding project, that's all.

It'll be a HIT in vacation spots as a rental...

This is basically a toy for rich people…

😂

😂😂😂🤣🤣🤣🤣

@@user-io4sr7vg1v Well thinking about the UK here; I don't see them being legal any time soon. And as for eat shyt and dye, despite your yokel spelling I understood, well as for that attitude, the authorities will just wait for you to land, confiscate your little flyer and throw you in jail. Yeah I know 'fweedom'. LOL.

I don’t think drone laws will apply to this. Those are all written very specially as “Unmanned Arial Vehicles” (UAVs). I’m sure the FAA will be all over it once it does launch, but don’t think there is anything in place today (coming from a US perspective).

The parks where I live don’t allow drones

Agreed. Initially the only people who will be able to enjoy owning and operating these flyers will be wealthy individuals with acres of land the size of small towns.

@@user-io4sr7vg1v "i have guns too". Oh god, really buddy?! So you want to get you (and your family) shot / killed over a this. Also,, you do realize those rules (no drones) are there to protect us, right?

Power lines, mums washing out in the yard, high tension cables, heads, faces, hands..... uh yeah a lot of concerns there!

They aren't intended for commuter use. They are recreational vehicles only.

It's a good start. Someday we'll see a 10x gain in battery density, at which point something like this could turn into an actual commuter type of vehicle.

@@mikeshafer exactly. This is in it’s infancy. We’re gonna need a massive leap in battery tech to be able to pull off something that’s equal to a car.

there are no such systems on paragliders and ultralights, those are unregulated and left to adults to enjoy or not, as it should be. It’s called personal responsibility, if your not competent or unwilling to take responsibility for your choices, don’t buy and fly one.

There are other ways to fly and much cheaper than buying one of these.

All good points. Would housing diminish the performance of the blades, do you know? And if so, to what degree?

There's no point in putting a shroud on the blades. You aren't supposed to bump into anything, so better make sure you don't. A shroud would just get crushed anyway at any decent speed. For smaller drones it sometimes make sense to have these, but they have a lot less weight. A shroud that survives a "bump" between a wall and that multi-hundred-kilo beast would be so heavy that the craft can't take off. So no, it doesn't make any sense.

Exactly what I was going to say. +1 to your comment. 💪😃

Trees? If say to keep limbs from detaching from its owner

Having a blade bolt fail and slice your chest open might be messy

@@sharaihmolyneaux8181 with any luck you'd be a goner before crashing.

太棒了👏它可以用在農業、海巡、山巡、偵查、定位、説不定增加功能還能用於國防。

Ditto for cattle ranches in FL, TX, KY & TN.

there comes a time where a floor to item cost is implemented. sure 10 cent beer per glass would be nice, but within 15 mins, every dredge in society (with their problems) appear. there's a reason why "nice" places charge $12+ per beer.....keeps the riff raff away. so much upper end money now, 92k is chump change.

I hope they partner with Tesla and get that kind of battery

You could probably reach those times with an ICE. One way is more compact, lighter, and simpler with the cost of reducing efficiency. The other would require complex driving and actuation mechanisms, take more space, require more thorough and regular inspections/repairs, and weigh more, but could have an overall higher fuel efficiency. Those 2 would be either the generator method or mechanical transmission.

@@midgetman4206 Yeah I have no need for this to be electric. Petrol is very energy dense and fairly light for me to carry a refill canister in a storage compartment. I'd buy it as soon as it's available if they had a petrol version. The only argument I could see is that an exposed engine is going to be pretty loud, but I imagine this thing is deafening regardless.

the batteries are swappable.. its all going to happen.

How do I order one?

And maneuverability would be reduced to almost nothing. Leave the design to the engineers. 😂

Here's George Jetson......

But can you fold it into a briefcase?

@@ivanlowjones yes but only once

I guess. But there's other options which can do certain tasks significantly better, everything except mostly hovering

@@midgetman4206 yes, but the giant drones are the easiest to build, and they will be the cheapest and easier to use. No pilot training, no over complicated controls.

@@sardaracampa1733 For one, before it boils within me any longer, this configuration isn't a "drone" it's just multicopter or multirotor. Now that this is out of the way, this is what I got to say. It's quite the opposite really. Where the other vehicles have complexity is their control systems such as the control surfaces (ailerons, elevators, and rudders) and sometimes variable pitch. This aircraft specifically will cost equally as much as the high end, but overshadows the average. There's already a market and industry for the ultralight category aircraft, which this probably falls under. If you just want to fly and don't care how, a paramotor is the way to go. Want a bit more comfort and range? A fixed wing/glider ultralight does it no problem. Care more for low speed and ease, or like the idea of flying a helicopter but don't have the money? Autogyros got you covered. Those 3 options cover everything except hovering, an incredibly low in-use profile, and high maneuverability. This could fly in places not reachable or too risky by other craft, but that's about it. Wings and/or an ICE or a hybrid would bring great improvements to this, but for now, it's too costly for what it offers.

Good points, but I see less of a problem for the pilot and much more of a hazard for pedestrians. Imagine this thing flying thru the forest and accidentally decapitating a family on a nice Sunday stroll.

Mow down your grass and any annoying neighbors on a single tank of gas.

@@petedavis7970 oof

Cover the blades 8hr battery life Once they fix those two things it's on

@@calessel3139 Riot Control.

you did hear him mention the safety parts, eh? if these were $25K and people could afford them as luxuries akin to a harley or muscle car, the only people interested would be those confident in their abilities to control a machine and have an interest in flying. i think the points you said could also apply to private pilots in most ways. i'd venture to say the person flying one of these is several notches above a ground-bound schmuck in a mercedes who somehow can barely manage to fill his own gas tank.

They prob said the same thing about cars, but somehow it works out

@@hannibalbarca6308 30k people die each year in the US from car crashes. And most of those drivers have years of experience and don't get any of their injuries from falling.

@@Moosetick2002 out of tens of millions

It’s just a matter of time …… if we don’t wipe ourselves out first ….. 😐

Unfortunate that this should be coming out when 42% of American adults are obese.

Genius!!! ♡

Not an airplane or moped, but an airped!

you are limited to 10k feet by law. and yes it will fly that high.

@@short-hand4312 Who else wants to see a 10,000ft punch out? I'm down!

Anything for rent would most likely have far stricter regulation. This is classed as an ultralight aircraft therefore very few rules apply.

Insurance will scupper that dream. If not the lawsuits will.

@@nelsonclub7722 Waivers are you friend.

@@neirad537 US lawyers are not

@@nelsonclub7722 I bet those skydiving, parasailing, jetsky, Zipline, bungee jumping, scuba diving business must be all broken by bow. Also remember lawyers In the US can only have licenses, check notes... US States

The neighbours would be happier with only 20 minutes of these super loud drones I reckon.

Guys you weren't paying attention because the guy did say it was louder than he expected so they did not leave it out. In all honesty did you expect something with 4 engines to not be loud?

@@mikehunt6179 I think the original comment is perfectly fine. I don’t know why you feel the need to argue.

@@wallraven55 just like I don't know why you felt you needed say something to me about it. It works both ways snowflake!

It is!

Not just… Awesome though I think.

Then that's not a drone

@@midgetman4206 Then what is it?!

@@Machielovic This is a "multicopter" or a "multirotor". A drone is something that is remotely operated (pretty much exclusively designed for that purpose. So you can't also just call any vehicle with that as an ability a drone), meaning it doesn't have to fly or look like a quadcopter.

My understanding was that there is a lidar anti collision system. I don't know how far I'd trust it though. Tesla's keep crashing while on autopilot.

I assuming it is to save weight. Adding guards will decrease flight time even further.