America's FAA Shifts Gears Slightly on Certifying Future 'Flying Taxi' Pilots (avweb.com) 20
Flying cars — or even electric flying taxis — are the dream of several well-funded manufacturers building "electric vertical-takeoff and landing aircraft" (or eVTOLs).
But will they face stricter government regulations than anticipated? Long-time Slashdot reader wired_parrot reports that America's Federal Aviation Administration has shifted gears — "revising it certification requirements for eVTOLS from small aircraft to a powered-lift category." (The original submission cites a "growing number" of issues for the industry to resolve — and asks whether this raises concerns about the viability of the whole potential eVTOL market.)
Meanwhile, AVWeb reports: According to a Reuters report, the impetus for the shift came from an ongoing audit by the U.S. Department of Transportation's Office of the Inspector General. The IG said so-called Urban Air Mobility vehicles present the FAA with "new and complex safety challenges...."
In a written response to a request for clarification, an FAA spokesperson told AVweb:
"The FAA's top priority is to make sure the flying public is safe. This obligation includes our oversight of the emerging generation of eVTOL vehicles. The agency is pursuing a predictable framework that will better accommodate the need to train and certify the pilots who will operate these novel aircraft.
"Our process for certifying the aircraft themselves remains unchanged. All of the development work done by current applicants remains valid and the changes in our regulatory approach should not delay their projects. As this segment of the industry continues to grow, we look forward to certifying innovative new technologies that meet the safety standards that the public expects and deserves."
But will they face stricter government regulations than anticipated? Long-time Slashdot reader wired_parrot reports that America's Federal Aviation Administration has shifted gears — "revising it certification requirements for eVTOLS from small aircraft to a powered-lift category." (The original submission cites a "growing number" of issues for the industry to resolve — and asks whether this raises concerns about the viability of the whole potential eVTOL market.)
Meanwhile, AVWeb reports: According to a Reuters report, the impetus for the shift came from an ongoing audit by the U.S. Department of Transportation's Office of the Inspector General. The IG said so-called Urban Air Mobility vehicles present the FAA with "new and complex safety challenges...."
In a written response to a request for clarification, an FAA spokesperson told AVweb:
"The FAA's top priority is to make sure the flying public is safe. This obligation includes our oversight of the emerging generation of eVTOL vehicles. The agency is pursuing a predictable framework that will better accommodate the need to train and certify the pilots who will operate these novel aircraft.
"Our process for certifying the aircraft themselves remains unchanged. All of the development work done by current applicants remains valid and the changes in our regulatory approach should not delay their projects. As this segment of the industry continues to grow, we look forward to certifying innovative new technologies that meet the safety standards that the public expects and deserves."
Pie in the sky (Score:5, Insightful)
We've had VTOL craft for decades.. they're called helicopters and although we were promised (by the likes of Popular Mechanics and Popular Science magazines) that every household would have its own flying car or helicopter by the year 2000, no such thing has eventuated.
The reality is that eVTOL craft are just not viable yet. Such craft are only earning revenue when they're in the air so having to sit on the ground for a hour or more while they are being recharged effectively kills their economic viability. At least a regular helicopter can be refueled in a couple of minutes and be ready to fly again.
What's more, the failure modes for helicopters are well proven and robust. If the helicopter's power source (engine) fails, they can be autorotated to a safe (if not comfortable) landing. What happens when the battery or ECU of an eVTOL with a myriad of tiny propellors goes out? Well I don't see it floating gently to the ground, that's for sure.
Sorry, eVTOL urban mobility craft are about as likely to be successful as the concept of delivering your pizzas by drone.
Re: (Score:1)
A "myriad of tiny propellers" could probably be made safer than a regular helicopter with redundant batteries. Small propellor count aircraft, like quadcopters, are just extra dangerous because the multiple motors just give multiple opportunities for failure without adding redundancy.
They're not developing these things to replace busses though. They're for the people who already fly around in helicopters but would like to be able to land in places where previously helicopters have annoyed the neighbours too
Re:Pie in the sky (Score:4, Interesting)
There's no reason they can't do battery swaps for craft like these. The reason battery swaps aren't practical for automobiles is structure. But a multicopter doesn't have that problem. You can just build a frame and hang things off of it... like batteries. That's the same reason why battery swaps are a potentially viable solution for OTR trucking — the fuel tanks are already hanging off of the outside of the frame.
But the truth is that aircraft can already be profitable even though they spend a lot of time on the ground, and require a lot of maintenance that electric multicopters won't because they have so few moving parts — typically, literally only the rotors. And hopefully, some kind of pyrotechnic-ejected parachute system for if all the other systems fail at once...
Re: (Score:1)
Are you saying aerodynamics is not a problem for helicopters?
Average speed for helicopters is 160 mph.
Re: (Score:2)
That's not what I'm saying at all, but thanks for playing.
On a multicopter the structure is provided by a frame as a rule, not the skin. They aren't a unit body like an airplane. Any skin is for aerodynamics, looks, and/or rain protection.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"What happens when the battery or ECU of an eVTOL with a myriad of tiny propellors goes out?"
Why do you think they would not autorotate like a traditional helicopter's rotor(s)?
Fair enough (Score:3)
FAA does have jurisdiction over flying things
Re: (Score:2)
Technically only if they're in the air.
Re: (Score:2)
Every so often I take a cruise of the AAIB (Air Accident Investigation Bureau - America probably has something similar, but I forget it's name) website to see if there have been any interesting, novel incidents. Around a third of the reports are of aircraft bumping into each other while moving around on the apron. Not necessarily under their own power. All covered by the aviation authorities. Including repair standards, to reduce the chance of things f
new aircraft should stick with the old rules (Score:4, Interesting)
Our process for certifying the aircraft themselves remains unchanged.
Which it should be. There is new aircraft technology but idea of pilots doing whatever they want like in the 1920s is not something for the 2020s. When one gets a PPL, they must follow the rules and practice good procedures, no stunts like Trevor Jacob. Also if FAA doesn't grant a Part 91 waiver don't proceed with a plane swap stunt anyway.
I don't think we will ever see the flying car as portrayed in 1950s Popular Mechanics or 1980s Back to the Future. Maybe an aircraft that is affordable for the middle class like in the 1960s? Will you be able to use it in some places like San Jose where politicians are trying to close Reid Hillview (they may just do it eight years from now)?
Sorry not happening. (Score:2)
Yeah sure, it's futuris
Delivery drones (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Delivery drones would probably be optimized for packages under 10 kg. A lot of people are over 80 kg. Besides the life of the passenger being valued now than packages, that means a lot more mass for the vehicle -- and proportionally the same gain in kinetic energy when something goes wrong.
Re: (Score:2)
Insurance rates, for starters. So, seriously, you want some bottom-of-the-range cab company flying it's string'n'sealing-wax repaired cab over your house with legal-minimum road insurance?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I know people with at least 20 years of driving bans (between them) from DR10 (the 5 year endorsement on your driving license for being convicted of "driving or being in control of a vehicle while under the influence of alcohol or drugs" ; at least one in each category).
Autonomous vehicles on the public road here are required to have a driver ready to take contr
Re: (Score:2)
eVTOL designs suck (Score:3)
If it can't fit in a parking spot it is useless. If it can't be driven on a road it's dumb. Helicopters already exist, if that suits your fancy.