AltoVolo says it's done with prototype flight testing, and is gearing up to build a full-scale demonstrator next.
Why don't they show those instead of the renders?
this post was submitted on 04 May 2025
11 points (78.9% liked)
Civil Aviation
393 readers
1 users here now
News from civil commercial and noncommercial aviation, videos, discussions, and more.
Basic rules
1. English only
Title and associated content has to be in English.
2. No posts about military aviation
Avoid any and all posts related to military aviation.
3. No meme posts
No meme posts. Those should go to [email protected].
4. Instance rules apply
All lemmy.zip instance rules listed in the sidebar will be enforced.
If someone is interested in moderating this community, message @[email protected].
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Because we’ve been building “flying cars” for 70 years with nothing to show for it other than prototypes. Or in this instance not even that - a render.
The idea is too sweet and the investor money from the gullible too ready to flow so we rehash it every decade or so, ignoring physics and logic.
They're just helicopters. That's what the flying car design converges to, at least if you need a pilot. And I think those will be required for a while longer.
Yes - but here the words “flying car” do a lot of heavy lifting.
They feed people some expectations about an techno utopia as well as operating costs, availability, complexity, range, noise, maintenance none of which match reality.
Except that craft like this are much more efficient (i think) and easier to fly. Helicopters are notoriously hard to fly whereas anyone can fly a quadcopter, especially with assistance like auto-hover and whatnot.
I do think there is a market for these sort of vehicles (for the rich) once a design is settled on.
Larger rotor is more efficient. Agree on the hard to control, but that's moot if you have a pilot, since they'll need to be qualified to rotary wing. If you don't have a pilot, then you'll need to change the regulations significantly. I think that's what they're betting on, but it's not a given my any means.
More efficient at helicopter things, but this is a VTOL which i think swings it back into its favor for standard flight.
I'm not an expert though. lol
Vtol just includes vertical takeoff and landing, which helicopters do. The motors for eVTOL can be smaller than engines, so maybe you save some weight avoiding the collective? The tail rotor is also just loss, so I would think 2 rotor would be the most efficient. But I think these companies go with more for additional residency?
Any aircraft that can't glide or autorotate is an aircraft I don't ever want to step into
With that ducted fan layout, would it even be controllable with an engine out? Seems difficult/impossible to keep the CG inside the triangle of the engines.
eVTOL personal vehicles can do anything except leave the 3D rendering tool canvas.
I mean, we've seen multiple functioning concepts. They're just kinda crazy.
These billionaires are going to die so fast
It's a hybrid electric?
I think hydrogen fuel cell
Ah good, was worried I'd have to take this seriously