
Kitty Hawk is accepting waiting-list signups for its electric personal aircraft - elmar
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/24/technology/flying-car-technology.html
======
11thEarlOfMar
RE: electric flying things...

Is battery energy more efficient with air speed lift from a wing, like
traditional aircraft, or from air suspension, like a helicopter? Does the
mass/energy of a gasoline power train (including fuel & motor) exceed an
electric power train?

I guess I'm wondering about the viability of electric power for flight at all.
Drones are useful for some applications with light payloads and conducive
environments, but when you need to lift a substantial payload, like me, isn't
battery just too little power density?

~~~
dingaling
Air suspension?

Helicopters are aerodynes just like fixed-wing aircraft, deriving lift from
aerofoil speed. They are just less efficient because in traditional single-
rotor designs only part of the rotor disk is generating lift at any one time (
and part is stalled ) and of that part needs to be directed as propulsive
thrust.

Some helicopters have employed short wings to offload the rotor.

A wingless VTOL aircraft such as the Flying Bedstead, or the Lunar Lander
testbeds, is a non-aerodyne and is even less efficient because it relies on a
small volume of highly-accelerated air for lift versus displacement of a large
quantity of slow ( roughly speaking ).

~~~
Gravityloss
I guess you could think of a hovering helicopter vs a circling aircraft, both
having the same weight and hence same lift. Both have to accelerate some air
mass downwards. The lift comes from the velocity x mass = momentum of air,
which has to be the same with both.

Since the airplane wings affect a larger air volume than the helicopter
blades, the airplane accelerates a larger air mass, but to a lower speed. The
helicopter: smaller air mass, higher speed.

Since energy required is proportional to the second power of speed, the
helicopter requires more power for the same lift.

You could create a helicopter that was quite efficient in hover, with really
big blades. It would then have some other problems, like limited speed.

------
phreeza
I would call this a 'novel flying contraption', or maybe a 'flying jetski' as
the article calls it. Not a flying car.

~~~
elmar
they call it "flying car" because technically could replace the "car
functionality" on this case more a "motorcycle functionality" with an aerial
vehicle.

Probably should be called flying motorcycle but on a marketing level doesn't
have the same impact.

~~~
JKCalhoun
If by car functionality, you mean those 5 minutes trips you take in the car
... to the corner grocery store?

(At least this is what I understand the range to be.)

~~~
elmar
the range is expected to double every 10 years so in a couple of decades you
will have similar range to cars :)

~~~
JKCalhoun
Are we talking about battery technology leading to that range doubling?
Because I was under the impression that energy densities of our current
battery technology were already pushing the limits. To double the range I
suspect you need to quadruple the energy density. Sounds like the making of a
bomb. :/

~~~
elmar
yes, battery power to weight ratio is the factor that increases range, you are
correct current technology is on is limit, the increase on range is based on
speculation that new chemistries will evolve in the future.

------
dTal
>electric

Hard problem.

>personal aircraft

Much harder problem, if by that they mean "flyable without a pilot's license".
You need to tackle reliability, then AI on the order of self-driving cars,
then regulators, then infrastructure. Even Tesla is having a hard time making
a _slightly different kind_ of car.

Why tackle all the hard problems _at once_? Why not make a self-landing
helicopter, or a "normal" electric aircraft (like Tesla but for planes), or a
reliable and cheap (!) _experimental_ VTOL craft? I can't help but think that
the only reason to do it this way is because you're selling sizzle, not steak.

------
mlpinit
If you like this you might also like Lilium.
[https://lilium.com/](https://lilium.com/)

~~~
kumarvvr
What is the range on this thing?

Also, at this point of time, maybe we can engineer good specs and good price
into the product, but we cannot overcome human factors.

\- Riding in strong winds. \- Loss of control over populous areas. \- Higher
risk of crime in a vehicle that has no boundaries like roads and dividers.

The most likely solution is to make a cloud connected one which refuses to fly
in or into bad weather, automatically lands during emergencies etc. But then
that will necessitate some sort of remote control over the vehicle, leading to
a host of other issues related to lack of privacy.

~~~
elmar
current range of prototype should be 5 minutes empty.

------
hajile
If I'm going to be going to be flown around by a quadrocopter, I think I'd
prefer this more laid back approach.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EPC8qElrG-I](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EPC8qElrG-I)

------
JustSomeNobody
Not looking forward to a bunch of people trying to fly these around.

Also, not looking forward to the headlines about disputes[0] about airspace
over people's property.

Edit: clarification

[0] Dude with a shotgun vs dude on a flying "car".

~~~
giarc
People couldn't handle hoverboards without crashing, now we are going to add
another axis to the mix... watch out.

------
lazyjones
Looks like a silly contraption to me, far too slow to replace a car (and earn
the misleading article title). I'd find a hybrid quadcopter /
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground_effect_vehicle](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground_effect_vehicle)
project more worthwhile. Take off and land like a quadcopter, then fly fast
and efficiently using the ground effect. Compensate for uneven ground with the
down facing rotors...

What does the Kitty Hawk compete with?

\- small helicopters cost $XX.XXX and have been available for many years.
Proven technology, though unsafe. E.g.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosquito_Aviation_XE](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosquito_Aviation_XE)

\- small airplanes for the crazy? [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLgR3Ipo-
Ng](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLgR3Ipo-Ng)

\- flying cars that can actually drive on the road?
[https://www.aeromobil.com/flying-car/](https://www.aeromobil.com/flying-car/)

It looks like a toy in comparison, to be operated by quadcopter enthusiasts
for 5 minutes ... Perhaps they should call it "flying golf cart"?

------
elmar
I am working on a Startup with a similar aproach but using a fixed wing
vehicle.

I speculate the kitty hawk vehicle will have 10-15 minutes airtime and will
cost around $100k

~~~
falcolas
There is an interesting correlation between multirotors and 15 minute flying
times. It always seems to take an abnormally large battery pack (and
correspondingly less payload) to get to 20 or 30 minutes.

~~~
elmar
you are correct, bleeding edge tech small drones do 25 minutes if you do a
large drone capable of people transport you can do 25 minutes empty when you
put a passenger inside you get 15 minutes.

------
lutusp
Many readers of the linked article won't understand the meaning of "ground
effect" and what role it plays in the video. It's possible to create a
demonstration flying craft that can't ascend above the ground effect regime,
but still create an impressive video.

In short, if the video had shown ascent to an altitude of, say, 100 feet, I
would be much more impressed.

~~~
nradov
Regardless of ground effect lift, 100ft altitude is well into the "dead zone"
for vehicles like this. Too high to survive a crash and too low to use a
parachute.

------
hdhzy
Paying now $100 will get you a discount of $2000... But since the total price
is unknown this seems...dubious.

------
coldcode
Looking forward to seeing flying car crashes. Lookout below! Seriously how do
you avoid killing people innocently underneath one of these when it fails?
Build "roads" in the sky like in Back To The Future?

------
avryhof
Of course it won't get me to work faster. I live on the opposite side of the
airport from work, so I'll always have to go around.

------
BerislavLopac
What about Lilium? [https://lilium.com/](https://lilium.com/)

~~~
elmar
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14183749](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14183749)

~~~
BerislavLopac
Thanks!

------
agumonkey
With foldable "wings" it would have such a strong Star Wars vibe.

ps: lakehawk

------
Luuseens
It's not really a car if you can't drive it.

------
dang
We changed the URL from [http://uk.businessinsider.com/larry-pages-flying-car-
startup...](http://uk.businessinsider.com/larry-pages-flying-car-startup-
kittyhawk-has-launched-2017-4).

------
ithinkinstereo
So in the next 8 months? Seems like Google has an interesting pipeline of
novel new products, but I wonder if any this will ever see the light of day,
let alone by the end of the year.

I wonder why Google is doing all this pre-launch marketing hype. Usually this
is the playbook that startups use to hype up VCs for funding rounds. Maybe
just for PR and branding?

Reminds me of UBeam's "we plan on launching publicly this year!" (said in
2015, 2016, and now 2017)

~~~
maxerickson
No price, no information about how long the battery lasts.

[https://kittyhawk.aero/faq/](https://kittyhawk.aero/faq/)

I expect it will barely be a product when it launches, certainly not one with
wide appeal.

~~~
elmar
am working on a Startup with a similar aproach but using a fixed wing vehicle.

I speculate the kitty hawk vehicle will have 10-15 minutes airtime and will
cost around $100k.

It will appeal to a very niche market of deep pocket hobbyists.

~~~
turc1656
Yup. The site's FAQ page says that while you don't require a pilot's license,
it is designed to be flown over freshwater in non-congested areas. That's
pretty limiting.

There goes my dream of commuting to work like a boss in half the time.

~~~
elmar
this is only to avoid problems with the FAA, "non-congested areas" it's a
fluid concept that basicly can mean whatever the FAA needs it to be.

You can try your luck and fly around with this thing as you would with any
other ultralight.

a good post on the subject
[http://eaaforums.org/showthread.php?5261-Part-103-quot-
conge...](http://eaaforums.org/showthread.php?5261-Part-103-quot-congested-
quot-amp-Part-91/page2)

~~~
turc1656
Very interesting. So it seems like a craft/vehicle such as this can get away
with flying in congested areas because of it's maneuverability. What's more,
we have a helipad on my building at ground level! And we happen to be on the
water! I wonder if I could actually pull this off at some point in the future
where I fly over the water and land directly on the helipad. Would need a
place to keep the craft, though.

~~~
elmar
well my startup is bulding an electrical self-flying fixed wing part 103
compliant for $40k, much more versatile than Kitty
[http://bit.ly/2pdeml5](http://bit.ly/2pdeml5) we will be doing pre-sales
soon, maybe you would like to be an early adopter.

It can be adapted with floats if you wish.

