You Can Buy This Personal Flying Vehicle Now - Jetson One | How Much Does It Cost? eVTOL | Review 

Yes sir

@@sysublime5091 what in the actual fuck are you talking about?! Are you seriously inferring that my yes sir is a stab at non-female pilots?! If you are serious and you are not trolling this is exactly why people hate your feminist bullshit ideals. That's is so weak if you really are serious.

Apples to oranges. Oh... well done.

All those "other" aircraft require a pilot's license and many certifications. That's completely incomparable to this ridiculous toy, which essentially is designed to skirt-around any legal requirements and probably kill the idiot at the controls... (I seriously doubt that any of the kit builders will go the the lengths of having a proper ultralight inspection and certification done...)

@@sysublime5091 If you need a Sport Pilot rating, the market is pretty much non-existent. All of these "personal" multicopter companies are trying to get in the "no license required" Part 103 Ultralight category, that's the ENTIRE premise of all of them (BlackFly, etc)! If you require a rating, your market shrinks by a few orders of magnitude to the point of essentially non-existence.

Thanks for the laugh! 🤣 Welcome to the channel, Jed!

I’d pay $40k tops

That's reasonable, Rick. Once supply of eVTOLs increase, prices will go down.

@@FGain Yup, that's just common sense, look at various stuff like computers and flatscreen TVs. Prices WILL go down eventually.

92G is a drop in the bucket for a lot of people. Supply and demand, if they were any cheaper everyone could afford one, and right now these toys aren't for everyone.

You're welcome! Thanks for watching and welcome to the channel!

Exactly. This is just the very beginning. As eVTOL tech matures, we'll start seeing some really cool aircraft. Thanks for watching, Josh!

Aluminum/air batteries would increase range and reduce weight. Someone just needs to figure out a way to cost effectively swap them or get them to recharge.

I wish I could flap my arms and fly...what a stupid post...you want 5G in the first Iphone? Geez it's no wonder most go nowhere in life, if you need it to be perfect you'll never have a product...you just get it out and then refine it

@@andrefecteau Please address the virtually intractable battery power density issue then, until you or someone else does that the criticism is valid and there is NO WAY around this, no refining away the power density/weight/expense/range problem.

@@Veldtian1 that's only your opinion...I'm sure Elon and others are fathoms ahead of you, not to mention you read everyday about emerging technologies...so take your limited brain and stuff it up your butt I'm sure it will fit without any density issues

And nearly 100k cost.

May make a good theme park attraction though - 20 mins for $100...............they'll be right on the money!

Yep that battery life needs improvement.... Have they ever herd of solar-power? And hybrid engines? Im sure there is a weight limitation but with the correct materials it is possible...

​@@Rnicky01 no, you just stupid. solar panels 1000 times less powerful that venicle engines and hybrid 10 timess much weight

I'll take yours then.

That would be dope

what's the top speed of these again?

that would be good give more research money then then it would be closer for US😉

Thanks for the laugh! 😂🤣 eVTOLs are actually not that loud because they are all electric. Here is a video showing the noise level of a couple larger eVTOLs ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-3rpzgwDsdOI.html Welcome to the channel!

​@@FGain You're pretty funny yourself, given how what you referenced has nothing to do with the unit shown in this video nor compares it to a leaf blower either. 😁 #FALSEEQUVILANCYFAIL 🤣🤣🤣 And yes, I totally agree, A HO scale model toy is nowhere near as powerful as a diesel-electric locomotive, despite both having wheels that are round. 😋

yea because there are so many leaf blowers in the middle of nowhere, where you would be flying these things. Another offense unto mankind's evolution via RU-vid comments section. How about "give ambulances competition for noise!" or "fog horns" or "anything that makes loud noises." Something can't give competition to another if they don't even play in the same sandbox, so the comparison is moot. Furthermore, since when were leaf-blowers relevant in 2021? Be more relatable.

@@john1105 LOL!!! So..... You cant imagine that these could ever come to the suburbs and like areas where leaf blowers are used? 🤣🤣

@@john1105 Leaf blower use is at an all time high

If we all had one of these it would be raining crashed Jetson 1's. Seen the modern drivers of today?

yea man can't wait for them to fit a power plant inside of it, sounds really economical and totally feasible! 🙄

put some solar panels on it and that 20 mins could be 40 mins or as long as the sun is out

@@john1105 like I said " in time" JA

Thanks for watching and commenting, Robert!

But ... but ... the company's slogan is "Everyone is a pilot". I guess they didn't really mean "everyone".

Thanks for following, Luis!

🙂

And people…

This will certainly help with the range, but would negatively impact the sound profile. Also, the idea with eVTOLs is to have them run on clean energy. Thanks for watching, Jose!

@@FGain Yep, we're going to all have to get used to an unproven ideological stance governing even our transport efficiencies, I guess by 2035 when they plan to have no petrol cars on the road we're all just never going to be able to go on outback country 4WD trips either right? We'll all have to just stay within a 200km radius of our compact high density micro apartments being drenched in 5G - actually 48G electro smog and tucking into our soy/bug burgers and carefully regulating our social media posts to maintain our social credit scores too right? The future sounds awesome.

@@Veldtian1 BUZZ KILL !!!

😁

You can not use gas engine in these vehicles because gas engine are way more heavier ,bigger and complex than electric motors as a result these vehicle cannot have such a small form factor and would become as big as a helicopter and that would completely ruined the only advantage this vehicle has in front of helicopters.

I wonder how long before it turns up killing someone on the set of a movie? This thing is not safe. It's insane to market this to "everyone."

Thanks for watched Noel. Welcome to the channel!

The FAA is working on it I bet. I dont want some idiot flying these over my house. If it flys, it needs to be licensed, and licensed mechanics keeping them correctly operating. I also wonder about what insurance they will need to be operated as well.

@@rty1955 I think it comes under LSA Rules that are already in place -

on second thought it is more like Ultralight / Para Glider rules

@@artbobik3516 yeah and see how well that works! People flying w/o oxygen, flying in the clouds etc. As more people buy these things, I can bet the FAA will crack down. All it will take is 1 accident with an airliner, or accident where loss of life, or major property damage is concerned. W/o a license to lose, it will be a free for all up there.

It will be in just a few years. Battery energy density is increasing very fast.

Maybe if the pilot isn't too heavy, it can carry a small generator and fuel.

You're gonna need to be triple vaxxed also.....

You could carry a small generator for that. Or just buy a real helicopter like a Robertson. Or Cb 300.

@@efisgpr apparently the Chinese have come up with a battery that will last decades.. that then would be feasible.

I do too imagine flying any time I have a long commute. Personal eVTOLs can save so much time. Thanks for watching and commenting!

When I was a kid (I'm 61) I daydreamed about riding 4 wheeled motorcycles as I rode my horse across our ranch. It eventually happened..

Tim, for us city boys, the idea of riding a horse is almost as exciting as flying an eVTOL 😁

This would make a nice timeshare venture or as a rental vehicle. Fly and land at sheds where spare batteries are being recharged by solar in remote locations, do a battery swap and keep going so you can tour beautiful locations.

not quiet, trust me

@@n0spam911 put the mit toroidal props on

Shots fired

the America is fat thing was so 10 years ago. A bit tired that joke. Back to the drawing board!

I'll give you the $92K for ONE of your fleet..... don't forget the indefinite range, plzkthanx

@ NMIBUBBLE sounds like a great Idea. Wish that I had some money. I'd like to get a break in life and someone with alot of money would overlook all the Shit Talk about me help he out with a few of my Ideas and endeavors.

Thanks for watching, Christopher.

Yes governments always ruin everything. Thanks for watching, Nick. Welcome to he channel!

@@FGain governments: they lie, tax, ban, and make a few things compulsory.

I cannot disagree with you on that.

The United States government, especially the liberals who run on the low emissions and save our planet, will be the first to swoop in and tax the heck out of all green energy advancements. Be prepared to pay more in insurance, "fly" license, and landing fees to recharge the Jetson will exceed current fuel costs at the pump. It's sad.

I hate to disagree with you but it's rather easy to do that with this comment about it being "green". How exactly is this green? Well it's a one person aircraft and a ultralight like aircraft so in the USA it means it costs less to own. But it has a range of about 15 to 20 minutes. Early on some promo stuff said 15 minutes for a 182 pound guy and speeds up to 63 miles an hour. This means a range of 15 miles. So let's see how green it is. It has an 88 KW Kilowatt battery. Let's assume that the battery is charged with 100 percent efficiency which is not going to be the case, but let's give it the benefit of that doubt. The average house in the United states does use a lot of energy. In most states the average kilowatt usages is between 800 KW per month and 1000 KW per month. That's for electricity which may include all the appliances and at times for some cooking or even heating, but it depends so it averages out to easily over 880 KW hours a month. This means for ONE FLIGHT for 15 minutes and 15 miles at max speed, you are going to need 3 days worth of electricity from you're normal use. How is that green? By the way in our neighborhood in Detroit we have DTE energy and their default energy model is electricity comes from Fermi or some nuclear plant, which ironically is more green that some sources of fuel, depending on how you look at it. And coal for base electricty with PEAKERS often being natural gas turbines which burn natural gas in a gas turbine engine in buildings. So we are burning coal to power our grid mostly and that coal will be sending electricity and with ten rides within 15 miles for their entire ride you will be doubling you average home electricity bill. If the energy comes from Coal, well it may be cheaper, but if the Biden Green Agenda 21 goals happen there won't be any energy from coal, oil, natural gas, etc. So we will have 5% of our energy and wealth with the Agenda 21 plan. Electric isn't green and horsepower is needed to move large items which offer comfort and protection. Each new component of technology even special stuff costs in embedded energy to make it. So this is green compared to some aircraft I supposed, but it's not really green for the average person in the USA and we are energy wasters. But it's "electric" and to the Biden lovers and fantasy folks electric equals green. Electricity can produce fairly easily 80 percent efficiencies from energy with electric motors so they have their place. If you lower the needs of the person and strip them of safety and comforts and give them a much smaller vehicle you can have a more efficient vehicle. Also in urban areas near you're home you won't be able to fly this in the USA, so you have to cart it out to the country to fly it over country side. That's not green it requires a truck and a trailer. Now to compare that with efficient rides that are more green there is bicycles or ebikes which can be using 1 cent a mile to transport you. It's a lot less energy required and for flat land 350 watts max will get you up to 18 miles an hour for most ebikes and get you a long way. If you pedal you're calorie power will provide even further efficiency but on average it's a penny a mile. Not 3 days worth of electricity or 88 KW for 15 miles. An 88kw battery charge would charge my ebike more than 90 days as it has a battery pack of about 700 watts and I can get about 40 miles riding quite fast on average on a charge of 700 watts. So I can ride my ebike 3600 miles with 88 kilowatts of power. That is way more green than this flying drone that can get you 15 miles on the same energy. It's more exciting of course and a cool thing. A play toy for the rich or those who have the money to spare. Pretty affordable actually but having a drone that kicks up a lot of dust won't make you a big star at most parties. People won't want you to show up and kick up the dust. Just my 2 cents which will take me two miles on an ebike.

The noise is very low in comparison to other aircraft, given that it is fully electric. That is the benefit of eVTOLs. Here is a video that compares the noise level of two eVTOLs (larger than the Jetson One) to conventional aircraft (helicopters and airplanes). Thanks for watching and welcome to the channel!

@@FGain I'm not sure how to respond to a factual and thoughtful reply on YT. Thank you.

@@sugarsugarplum1332 I forgot to attach the link to the video I mentioned. Here it is ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-3rpzgwDsdOI.html

Far enough to reach your heart ❤

So you want thousands of everyday people flying over your head and crashing into buildings as they occasionally have "flying car" trouble and maybe fly into a school or hospital? I don't believe you've thought this through.

Now there is a business idea. Start an eVTOL based park where people can fly these electric aircraft. Insurance might be a pain tho.

@@FGain would have to be 18+ and signed consent form.

I think this kind of design should be Open Sourced. Then other tinkerers can replicate and improve on it gradually. Open Source would of course bring the cost down, making it more accessible.

@@manofsan There needs to be a business behind it, with visionary leaders at the helm, and not Github users

Get a 20-ish dollar flight controller and flash cleanflight betaflight or inav into it then hook up some ESCs, brushless motors, PDB, GPS, and whatever sensor you want, and then you have it. The FC software's are mostly open sourced, it's not that Chinese will duplicate the design of this vehicle, it's that the vehicle itself is just a scaled up duplicate of DIY drones. Someone have made a manned flying tub years ago and this kind of flying vehicle project are everywhere nowadays.

Please do so and I’ll buy one😂

A friend of mine once said 'there are the talkers and the finishers' so get started! No one I stopping you.

Спасибо Михаил за просмотр и комментарии!

Могу сделать ещё немного конструктивных предложений авторам данного проекта. Предлагаю сделать радиоуправляемый дрон на основе данной конструкции, который будет использоваться только для спасения и эвакуации одного человека. Наличие пилота в плоскости вращения пропеллеров будет рискованной затеей если отсутствует защита лопастей. По этому можно перенести точку подвеса пассажира в область ниже лопастей. Для быстрого понимания конструктивных особенностей такого изделия опишу его на виртуальном примере: Представьте ситуацию, при которой несколько человек оказались на льдине, или далеко заплыли, или оказались отрезаны от спасателей стеной пожара или болотами, или находятся на крыше разрушающегося или горящего здания, или находятся в расщелине гор, посреди селевого потока, и т.п. Т.е. люди нуждаются в быстрой эвакуации, но при этом находятся в местах недоступных для спасателей. Приезжает машина спасателей, из неё выгружают складной дрон, подготавливают его, вкладывают в него батареи. Дрон пилотируется дистанционно специально-обученным спасателем. Пилот ориентируется по камерам установленным на дроне, которые обеспечивают обзор для пилотирования, и обзор области находящейся под дроном. Дрон прилетает на место, зависает над человеком которого планируется эвакуировать, и сбрасывает канат прикреплённый к дрону, (таких канатов в дроне 3 или 4, на разные случаи. Каждый из них должен иметь возможность дистанционно отсоединяться от дрона, в случае случайного зацепления за ненужное препятствие или когда на канат в панике вешаются несколько людей что угрожает дрону). Так же, дрон может сбрасывать и рацию для связи, и поисковой маячок для удобства поиска спасателями. По рации (или громкоговорителю установленному на дроне) дают инструкции эвакуируемому, человек их выполняет, крепится к канату, и дрон переносит эвакуируемого к спасателям. (Таким образом можно эвакуировать по одному человеку за один заход, с крыш, из воды, со льдин, с болот, из непроходимого леса, и т.п. А так же производить поиск с помощью дрона с применением тепловизоров). Когда дрон привозит человека к спасателям, то, пока занимаются человеком, в дроне заменяют батареи, - таким образом, если у спасателей будет несколько комплектов батарей, то дрон можно эксплуатировать круглосуточно (с заряжением отсоединённых батарей, и с передышками для узлов дрона). Данная лётная конструкция очень хорошо подходит для изготовления двух типов дистанционно-управляемых дронов: 1. Складного дрона для эвакуации, (что очень важно для транспортировки дрона), и 2. Дрона для доставки специалиста с инструментами в нужное место, (имеющаяся на видео модель). Дистанционное управление показано в применении прототипа данного изделия. Создатели данного изделия поймут мои предложения и без чертежей. Организаторский момент: если создатели изделия сделают эвакуирующий дрон для служб спасения, снимут рекламный видеоролик о всех его возможностях, и будут продавать его по небольшой доступной цене, то они автоматически станут первыми на кого будут смотреть покупатели, а малая и доступная стоимость обеспечит стабильный серийный сбыт, что в сумме дадут возможность постоянной стабильной торговли такими дистанционно-управляемыми дронами, и стабильный доход для развития данного направления техники, (чтобы торговать дронами для служб спасения, и одновременно развивать другие направления модернизации этого изделия). Удачной работы!

@@user-rk7ml4km4h Многие компании разрабатывают такие дроны. Например, EHang производит автономный дрон на 2 места. Эти дроны не очень компактны, но их все же можно перевозить на небольших грузовиках. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-GdZR0bBD-wM.html

Посмотрел предложенное видео. E-Hang штука крутая. В основном для полётов "первым классом". Дорогая, а значит про стабильные продажи и массовое тиражирование можно забыть. Для служб спасения можно сделать что-нибудь попроще, без крытой кабины, компактнее для перевозки, и гораздо-более функциональнее чем E-Hang. Производители подобных изделий почему-то стремятся выйти на рынок "транспортных средств первого класса" дорогого сегмента (клиенты этого сегмента рынка в основном выбирают для себя что-нибудь понадёжнее для перевозок: яхты, вертолёты, самолеты, и т.п.), и при этом, так как производители стараются выйти на дорогой сегмент рынка, они в спешке забывают про гораздо-более массовый рынок который организуется спросом различных служб спасения и экологических служб, которым тоже нужны инструменты для работы. Службы спасения ценят компактность, т.е. - чем компактнее и много-функциональнее, - тем и лучше. Вообще, E-Hang как такси - хорошая идея, но для использования её в населённых пунктах, сначала нужно настроить слаженную работу навигации, позиционирования, с привязкой на погоду и на графики городского авиатранспорта и городских мероприятий, - и, следовательно, пока подобные системы необходимые для надёжной и слаженной работы автоматических пилотов транспортных систем имеются не во всех городах, то данный сегмент рынка ограничен. Ведь предоставлять вместе с летающими такси, ещё и специальный центр с дистанционными пилотами, - это нерентабельно. А службы спасения немогут полагаться на отдалённые центры пилотирования, т.к. службы спасения и экологи работают в отдалённых областях, и в условиях в которых требуется максимальное лётное адаптирование к ситуации и условиям работы. По всей видимости, большую часть стоимости летного такси составляет сервис дистанционного пилотирования. Высокая стоимость всего комплекта лётного такси вместе с центром пилотирования (если нет автопилотов), играет против развития тиражного производства этих такси, т.к. большая стоимость играет роль "пробки" в звеньях производства-торговли-обслуживания, и при такой стоимости такое такси становится нерентабельно (т.е. получается что "цена душит промышленное направление"). Но направление нужно развивать, т.к. оно даёт много полезных изделий для применения в гражданской жизни, и тут придёт на помощь производство недорогих специализированных модификаций, для массового серийного производства, что обеспечит стабильный доход для развития направления. Приведу в пример виртуальное сравнение, сравнивающие два сегмента спроса по данному изделию и его модификациям: что больше принесёт прибыли в год: 15 штук E-Hang по цене 300 000 дол (4 500 000 за год торговли, при чём рынок быстро насыщается и спрос падает), или 200 штук эвакуирующих дронов на базе Jetson-One по цене 30 000 дол (6 000 000 за год, при этом рынок только увеличивает спрос)? Производители зачастую стремятся развивать дорогие модификации изделий, и это хорошо. Но при этом всегда нужно помнить про рынок недорогого сегмента, который отличается огромными объёмами стабильного спроса. Для быстрого развития производств подобных изделий, производители могли бы осваивать два рынка одновременно. Спасибо за видео.

Honda has announced plans for a VTOL aircraft. I made a video about it ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-cE_rqpZeBgo.html . Thanks for commenting, William! Welcome to the channel!

When will DJI get in the market.

Good call! The motorcycle companies have been making some very powerful engines in a compact form for years, you'd think they could engineer a pretty robust flying machine.

I actually don't agree with this being green or electric being a great idea for VTOLS . . . but considering the technical hurdles they are trying to overcome, I consider this actually to be very cheap. This is almost like a hobby gone wrong for the founders. I can't imagine them making much of a living or profit off these for the price they are charging. With the safety features and all the redundant components they need this is actually quite cheap.

Why don't these designs come with a quick change power pack. The battery could be on a lease basis with a set recharge contract. The range then would be from station to station, where the battery would be quickly swapped for a fully charged one, and a safety check completed at the same time.

Thanks for the laugh, Rob! 🤣🤣

Good question. Unfortunately I do not have a good explanation for it. I thought it was just a cinematography direction they have chosen, but perhaps there was an ulterior motive. Thanks for commenting, Will. Welcome to the channel!

Its the cretins who think its "artistic". This is what happen when you give film students a camera

It's not safe to have you behind a joystick and/or a throttle lever, so it seems 😁. Thanks for commenting!

To be fair Bob, those who can afford a $92k toy can probably afford hiring someone to assemble the aircraft for them. Thanks for watching!

Like led tv's, just wait three more years. 😂🤣

I'll assemble it for ya Bob. Labor is $50 plus $5,000 to read the instructions and figure out the assembly process. Also, I'll have to ummm......test fly it. You know, for your safety.

no you're talking!

I'll love a two seater to get my dog with me.

Probably have to keep your weight down with 2 people flying! It would have to be stronger motors or something!?

You summed up the comments section perfectly 😁

"yet". I love the attitude!

What about a simple DJI drone in that case? More flight time, zero risk, and 90k cheaper.

@@speedwayjesus2660 true they also have paramotors that can fly low and slow

😁 FAA the party pooper

It certainly comes with risks however I think the risk of a battery catching on fire is fairly low, as long as it is well maintained. Thanks for watching and welcome to the channel!

The FAA absolutely hates Lithium-ion batteries, that's why, and also many other reasons, these aircraft will never be approved for flight in the USA

@@FGain Consider LiFePO4 technology, same energy density but more stable. One downside is lower voltage for cell.

You worry too much

@@scottprather5645 ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-1Sp-zjRm3Q8.html

Yes, once energy density of batteries increases, flight time will increase. The development solid state batteries, which deliver higher energy density, is looking very promising. Thanks for watching! Welcome to the channel!

That thing is not going to fly for 20mins. It supposedly weighs 86kg. Let's say 66kg of that is battery. I think I'm being generous there. Energy density of batteries is about 0.166kwh/kg, so you get 11kwh. Engines are rated for 88kw. So at full power you get 7.5mins. You could probably hover 1m above the ground for 15mins at half power, but that's it.

@@FGain oh yes, in another decade 😆

Why did you have to ruin this fantasy for me? 🙃

Fair question. A parachute is only effective above a certain altitude. Thanks for watching and welcome to the channel!

They say it’s a rapid deploy chute, whatever that means

They had a flying drone car back in the 90’s when I was a kid.

Oh wow. I've never hear of a W.A.S.P before. This thing looks very cool, however does not seem very safe. Thanks for commenting, Burt. Welcome to the channel!

@@FGain I think the Wasp was going to cost over a million a vehicle. I've heard they could fly 60 miles an hour and they were like a Johnny quest platform. Having a rocket engine under you could ruin the day of those you land near, or start some nice brush fires.

Regulations are very strict in NYC. I bet only air taxis (eVTOLs) will be allowed, not personal eVTOLs. Thanks for watching L. Hope to see you again on my channel!

Sounds like you do not like to live dangerously.

@@FGain I fly single engine land and gliders, both have wings that can keep you up without an engine; never liked helicopters; I’d willingly fly Lilium/Joby etc once they have been certified, but not something like this which comes in near the bottom of the Experimental category, if it’s going to be licensed at all!

@@elkcircle7245 Seems like you took my comment a bit too seriously 🙂

@@FGain no, not at all, just pointing out the risks.🤓 but it’s also quite costly for something that’s basically unproven.

You'd still have the parachute rescue system in case of a system failure but I guess it's not very useful at low altitudes.

Im from Germany and the company is basically next door. The CEO died lately in one of his gyrocopter.

@@erdalevin5672 so does that mean the ceo had a accident ? while flying the gyrocopter? all aviation is dodgey. iam a paramotor pilot.

@@erdalevin5672 That will always be a danger, no matter what, even more so when flying.

Unfortunately, this has proved to be the case in the past. The current example is governments' unfavourable regulation of cryptocurrency. Thanks for watching and commenting!

@@FGain Have you looked into how much weight you could reduce using Carbon fiber construction, then using that weight allowance to add more batteries to extend the range? Or is this negligible? I know there's a cost increase in doing this, yet there is more of a chance in cost reduction over time when compared to aluminum construction.

@@bluefalconssuck5881 I'm guessing it would be insignificant performance increase at a significant cost increase. The better approach that I can think of for range extension would be a winged design. Lift would be provided by wings and rotors would provide thrust. Check out my video titled 'Which eVTOL is Better' or 'eVTOL comparison' (I change the title from time to time) in which I talk about the pros and cons of various eVTOL designs.

@@FGain The FAA is very stringent with regards with aircraft flight safety. It is unlikely any eVTOL will receive a Certificate of Airworthiness, as there are to many risks involved. Battery powered aircraft are too dangerous, as Lithium-ion batteries have been known to explode and catching fire due to thermal runaway

@@doughowdy7009 I disagree with your second point. Joby has recently completed test flights with NASA. One of the goals of the tests was to identify gaps in current FAA regulation policies to help incorporate advanced air mobility aircraft into the National Airspace System. I have a video on these tests on my channel.

Could not agree more. Thanks for watching and welcome tot he channel!

I see eVTOLs being used more as air taxi, than personal modes of transportation, at least in the beginning. Check out my videos as I cover many of such eVTOLs (Lilium, Joby, Hyundai, Vertical Aerospace, etc.) Thanks for commenting and welcome to the channel!

I only think about drunk flying in the future. Maybe there will be flying police trying to catch those drunk pilots

@@igibon8 Police chases in the future are gonna be dope

@@FGain police chases in the future will be lame because in the future the police will be able to shut your car down via the internet. your car won't be able to go over 5 MPH over the speed limit in your area.. The future will suck

I think this points out to the fact that "smart cities" and other initiatives from Agenda 21 will be that more things are self driven in other words you are basically a passenger and these are controlled by GPS and the control of where they can fly and when they can fly has to be vetted with a flight plan. It's one thing to fly them when you want to but another thing to have them integrated into a smart city. But the "Smart City" plan is a big money plan for technology but it means you are connected to the grid and the overlords have more control and you are more venerable to hackers or software failure. Or the system that decides you are not politically correct and have to be locked out of the rental control system. Kind of like drones right now with the FAA. They have to "regulate airspace" and they have a goal to regulate all drones even hobby ones so the business drones and air taxi drones can fly around without crashing into you're toy drone or you're Jetson 1. The promise and hope is always to fly in an unregulated way like the good old days. But that's the hype. The reality is if you want a safe airspace, the regulations are required and more computerized control is needed. So it will take the "fun" out of the various power sports. Because people are impulsive and make mistakes. This has a high degree of a mistake being the death of the operator, but nobody want's 500 lbs of aircraft and passengers falling on their house or even car, much less a crowd. So these have very limited value but some dream of a 5th element like future. Unfortunately you can't argue with physics and the green types who love to quote this often have a basic misunderstanding of engineering, energy and common sense.

Flying lawn mower. That was my first impression too. 😀 These exposed rotors do look dangerous. I wonder what approach regulators will take in regards to rotor enclosure.

@@FGain The don't just look dangerous, they are dangerous both to people outside and the pilot. One broken blade and you have a piece of metal flying off at a few hundred kilometers an hour.

Reminds me of that hovercraft in the game UT2004. It was a twin prop vehicle you could use to decapitate players in the game.

There would definitely need to be some housings on those if they were every available to park in public, probably also rotor wash hazard warnings on the side and probably some mesh like material to keep people from sticking their hands inside the prop housing. (Don't look at me, people do dumb stuff...just sayin lol)

Lmao I was thinking 5k

There are so many startups working on personal eVTOLs that I have no doubt prices will go down in a not so distant future.

anda benar

Terima kasih kerana menonton!

@@FGain sama-sama..sukses terus pak!!!

Yes, but the all electric F-150 won't turn as many heads as the Jetson One ;) Thanks for commenting Gary. Welcome to the channel!

A cheaper "alternative" would be a First-Person View drone. Will give you the same rush, with no risk of physical harm. 😁

@@FGain I agree. Too risky to fly a new manned toy.

I'd like to see what failure mode looks like. They say it has ballistic parachute, but I think we need a video which demos this.

We certainly do. Also, keep in mind that at a low altitude ballistic parachute is ineffective

​ @FGain - I think they should also include airbags, which could also add significant protection at lower altitudes. It should even have the option for a flotation device, in case of flying over water/swampland. I admit, I wish this barebones design could be Open Sourced, in order to make it more accessible and available at lower cost to designers and tinkerers to build and even improve.

" You can buy..." No. No I can't. I would need money for that, but I can't even afford borrowing some money. 😆 🤣 😆

@@aleisterlavey9716 :-)

Oh yes, I bet these would be very useful on a farm. Thanks for watching Joseph! Welcome to the channel!

I might set my goals a little lower.

Flying dreams are the best! I've only had a few but I remember them vividly.

I agree. eVTOLs will have many applications as I discuss on this channel. Thanks for watching!

I'd like to make a flat gurney style drone with all of the propellers covered maybe even suck air in through vents on the sides with webbing on top like Molle gear. A rescuer rides on top of the flat surface bucked in with D rings and rescues a jumper from a building or someone dangling over the side of a cliff. Fire engines could carry one on top and use them for swift water rescues as well.

Well then, you better start saving up $92k 😏 Thanks for watching, Juan!

Exactly what I was thinking.

Thant would be dope!

I wish I could be like Oprah Winfrey and give everyone a Jetson One. You get a Jetson One, andyou get a Jetson One, everyone get a Jetson One! 😂 Welcome to the channel!