FAA OKs Third Ultralight eVTOL
October 22nd, 2018 by Nicolas Zart
SNIPPET:
Apparently, “WORLD’s FIRST No pilot LICENCE, No aircraft CERTIFICATION official approved personal drone HOVERBIKE S3 2019″ really irked the FAA. Officially, the FAA determines whether an aircraft, such as the Hoversurf model, meets the aviation § 103.1(a), (c), and (e) requirements. The Hoverbike S3 does, so take that to mean it’s been approved if you like, but don’t go too far with the claim if you don’t want to upset the FAA. eVTOLNews posted the FAA letter.
What surprised me is the relatively small battery pack, which is 12.3 kWh. While small on paper, the battery pack gives the HoverBike S3 40 minutes of autonomy in drone mode. That comes down to 10 to 25 minutes dependent on the weight of the pilot and weather conditions. The Hoverbike can be charged in 2½ hours without removing the batteries.
How much is the beast?
The Hoverbike S3 2019 limited edition will cost $150,000 and requires a $10,000 reservation deposit for an estimated delivery of 2 to 6 months.
Full article:https://cleantechnica.com/2018/10/22/faa-oks-third-ultralight-evtol/Agelbert COMMENTS: I am an experienced pilot and former Ultralight Aircraft Flight Instructor. I know exactly how these butterfly type aircraft fly and how they handle winds and/or turbulence.
The difference between an Ultralight and 'normal' aircraft (from "light" aircraft to a Commercial Jumbo jet) comes down to the fact that the weight of the pilot is a LARGE percentage of the total weight being flown above the ground. The weight rules (empty weight - aircraft without fuel and pilot(s) - versus gross weight) vary by country but you can assume that the pilot weight represents at least 40% of the gross weight.
This means that if you are a midget or anorexic, the aircraft will perform much better. 😀
But of course, most people are not midgets or anorexic thin.
These E-VTOLs have the drone software to keep the pilot from, in theory, making mistakes. BUT, since a pilot is so heavy in comparison to the overall machine, the software CAN be overcome temporarily by a large side force from a sudden pilot movement.
Add to that gusty wind conditions and you have a very precarious situtation. Controlling an Ultralight in gusty winds is very difficult. I know all about it. We did not fly in those conditions. We would run out to the runway on either side of an ultralight trying to land in gusty conditions to grab the wing ends (Quicksiilver aircraft) so the wind would not flip the plane when the pilot got it on the runway. They are just too light to resist wind gusts with flight controls while on the ground at speeds below 20 mph.
The E-VTOLS have the advantage of not having large wing surfaces. BUT, they will be every bit, if not more so, as hard to handle in gusty winds as the typical Ultralight.
IOW, the E-VTOL is a fair weather flying machine ONLY👎 . It will never be a commuter vehicle or a work vehicle (e.g. herding animals in remote areas, boundary secority patrol, transmission tower power line inspection, routine wind turbine inspection, etc.).
All the advantages of a a drone are lost when you put a pilot into a drone software controlled machine.
😟I would love to have one of these E-VTOLs for fun, but I doubt they will be affordable for the average person. They will be a toy for the rich, period.👎
All that said, IF they make an all weather E-VTOL (more powerful motors with a large battery pack and enclosed cabin), then it can become a practical commuter or work vehicle.
✔I think it is cheaper to just electrify ⚡ Ultralights. They don't need a lot of space to take off (even less to land!) and they can fliy at 45 mph to inspect and observe for hours with a nice battery pack.👍 😎
Andy They really need enclosure ducts around those pedestrian slicing fans. With these motorcycle-like vehicles, the rider is equally in danger from them.
Kurt Lowder > Andy my thoughts exactly. that looks terrifying
Brent Jatko > Kurt LowderI can see grisly (is there any other kind?) pedestrian decapitations already.
Agelbert > Brent JatkoWell said. If I were to design one of these E-VTOLs, I would put the pilot/passanger location BENEATH the props, not above it. It looks kike they took a drone, upsized it, and slapped a pilot seat on it 👎 . Yeah, they may claim the added structure framework to get the motors and props above the pilot adds "too much weight". I beg to differ.
1. With the pilot beneath the motors, the pendulum effect increases stability. The reverse is true with the pilot above the motors.
2. As you observed, the props on the present pilot above props unstable design will have to be shielded. The weight of the shielding will be a factor in performance degradation. Housing the props is not necessary when they are above the pilot.
3. Pilot visbility below is vaslty improved with motor and props above the pilot.