sign up log in
Want to go ad-free? Find out how, here.

Electric air taxis are on the way – quiet eVTOLs may be flying passengers as early as 2025

Technology / analysis
Electric air taxis are on the way – quiet eVTOLs may be flying passengers as early as 2025
Joby Air Taxi
Source: Joby

Imagine a future with nearly silent air taxis flying above traffic jams and navigating between skyscrapers and suburban droneports. Transportation arrives at the touch of your smartphone and with minimal environmental impact.

This isn’t just science fiction. United Airlines has plans for these futuristic electric air taxis in Chicago and New York. The US military is already experimenting with them. And one company has a contract to launch an air taxi service in Dubai as early as 2025. Another company hopes to defy expectations and fly participants at the 2024 Paris Olympics.

Backed by billions of dollars in venture capital and established aerospace giants that include Boeing and Airbus, startups across the world such as Joby, Archer, Wisk and Lilium are spearheading this technological revolution, developing electric vertical takeoff and landing (eVTOL) aircraft that could transform the way we travel.

Electric aviation promises to alleviate urban congestion, open up rural areas to emergency deliveries, slash carbon emissions and offer a quieter, more accessible form of short-distance air travel.

Two style of eVTOL, both with propellers that lift them vertically, with New York Harbor in the background.

Joby, on the helipad, and Volocopter, in the air, demonstrated their eVTOLs in New York in November 2023. Volocopter hopes to fly demonstrations of its VoloCity air taxi at the 2024 Paris Olympics. AP Photo/Bebeto Matthews

But the quest to make these electric aircraft ubiquitous across the globe instead of just playthings for the rich is far from a given.

Following the industry as executive director of the Oklahoma Aerospace Institute for Research and Education provides a view of the state of the industry. Like all great promised paradigm shifts, numerous challenges loom – technical hurdles, regulatory mazes, the crucial battle for public acceptance and perhaps physics itself.

Why electrify aviation?

Fixed somewhere between George Jetson’s flying car and the gritty taxi from “The Fifth Element,” the allure of electric aviation extends beyond gee-whiz novelty. It is rooted in its potential to offer efficient, eco-friendly alternatives to ground transportation, particularly in congested cities or hard-to-reach rural regions.

While small electric planes are already flying in a few countries, eVTOLs are designed for shorter hops – the kind a helicopter might make today, only more cheaply and with less impact on the environment. The eVTOL maker Joby purchased Uber Air to someday pair the company’s air taxis with Uber’s ride-hailing technology.

Archer’s Midnight air taxi takes a test flight. The company is partnering with United Airlines.

In the near term, once eVTOLs are certified to fly as commercial operations, they are likely to serve specific, high-demand routes that bypass road traffic. An example is United Airlines’ plan to test Archer’s eVTOLs on short hops from Chicago to O'Hare International Airport and Manhattan to Newark Liberty International Airport.

While some applications initially might be restricted to military or emergency use, the goal of the industry is widespread civil adoption, marking a significant step toward a future of cleaner urban mobility.

The challenge of battery physics

One of the most significant technical challenges facing electric air taxis is the limitations of current battery technology.

Today’s batteries have made significant advances in the past decade, but they don’t match the energy density of traditional hydrocarbon fuels currently used in aircraft. This shortcoming means that electric air taxis cannot yet achieve the same range as their fossil-fueled counterparts, limiting their operational scope and viability for long-haul flights. Current capabilities still fall short of traditional transportation. However, with ranges from dozens of kilometres to over 160 kilometres, eVTOL batteries provide sufficient range for intracity hops.

The quest for batteries that offer higher energy densities, faster charging times and longer life cycles is central to unlocking the full potential of electric aviation.

CNBC takes a look at the history behind eVTOLs and the future of the market.

While researchers are working to close this gap, hydrogen presents a promising alternative, boasting a higher energy density and emitting only water vapour. However, hydrogen’s potential is tempered by significant hurdles related to safe storage and infrastructure capable of supporting hydrogen-fuelled aviation. That presents a complex and expensive logistics challenge.

And, of course, there’s the spectre of the last major hydrogen-powered aircraft. The Hindenburg airship caught fire in 1937, but it still looms large in the minds of many Americans.

Regulatory hurdles

Establishing a “4D highways in the sky” will require comprehensive rules that encompass everything from vehicle safety to air traffic management. For the time being, the US. Federal Aviation Administration is requiring that air taxis include pilots serving in a traditional role. This underscores the transitional phase of integrating these vehicles into airspace, highlighting the gap between current capabilities and the vision of fully autonomous flights.

The journey toward autonomous urban air travel is fraught with more complexities, including the establishment of standards for vehicle operation, pilot certification and air traffic control. While eVTOLs have flown hundreds of test flights, there have also been safety concerns after prominent crashes involving propeller blades failing on one in 2022 and the crash of another in 2023. Both were being flown remotely at the time.

The question of who will manage these new airways remains an open discussion – national aviation authorities such as the FAA, state agencies, local municipalities or some combination thereof.

Creating the future

In the long term, the vision for electric air taxis aligns with a future where autonomous vehicles ply the urban skies, akin to scenes from “Back to the Future.” This future, however, not only requires technological leaps in automation and battery efficiency but also a societal shift in how people perceive and accept the role of autonomous vehicles, both cars and aircraft, in their daily lives.

Safety is still an issue with autonomous vehicles on the ground.

The successful integration of electric air taxis into urban and rural environments hinges on their ability to offer safe, reliable and cost-effective transportation.

As these vehicles overcome the industry’s many hurdles, and regulations evolve to support their operation in the years ahead, I believe we could witness a profound transformation in air mobility. The skies offer a new layer of connectivity, reshaping cities and how we navigate them.The Conversation


*Jamey Jacob, Executive Director, Oklahoma Aerospace Institute for Research and Education, Oklahoma State University.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.

Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.

46 Comments

There is only one manned eVTOL flying in NZ and that is ZK-IAB. Drone type eVTOLs are a great idea, but their inherent weakness is that they cannot autorotate if there is a loss of power.

Up
1

"Electric aviation promises to alleviate urban congestion"

Hahahahaha, for the super rich maybe. It will be like the helicopters flying over Sao Paolo, the super rich fly, everyone else stuck in traffic.

It will be beautiful, waking up and falling asleep to giant drones buzzing overhead. Fortunately most of the super rich who want these are also surrounded by rich NIMBY neighbours who will oppose helipads or flightpaths in and over their properties/suburbs. 

Possibly a use for shuttling people from Auckland to Waiheke but if we start seeing building to building take-off we will know the end is near. 

Up
8

Noise is another disadvantage of drone type eVTOLs. If ZK-IAB flew over your house at the minimum legal height of 1000ft you wouldn't know is was there.

Up
0

The companies developing them mainly look at autonomous vehicles fleets, they don't really care about retailing to individuals

Up
0

As a Waiheke resident, I really don't want any more helicopters buzzing me. I'm not the only one.

Up
0

What's the current count of helicopter landing pad permits? More than the 62 the Herald ​​​​​​​reported last year?

Up
0

Looks like 65 on the map on this page: https://quietskywaiheke.nz/. And more coming.

Up
2

Great to see how open minded you are to new technology Agnostium, good on you for seeing the positives and the marvellous potential in new developments... (sarc)

Up
1

I am opened minded to new technology.

I ran a feasibility for this as we were looking at whether we should approve a license for one of these firm to occupy the roof for a future taxi dock on a few new developments we were responsible for. A firm came over a few years ago to try to buy the rights for a whole heap of buildings in Auckland. They have bought up big in the UK. 

I have no doubt that they will be a thing in the next decade, they have their uses like I said (taxi for the super rich to avoid congestion, potentially medical emergencies, and some tourism). 

They will not, and I am 99% certain of this having run the numbers, have any impact on urban congestion. 

Up
3

"I ran a feasibility for this as we were looking at whether we should approve a license for one of these firm to occupy the roof for a future taxi dock"

Poor them, they never stood a chance.

Up
2

A big chunk of the work we do is to assess the feasibility of future transport trends and how they might play out in New Zealand in terms of legislative requirements, policy settings and infra requirements. Things like EVs, automated vehicles, e-micro-mobility, TaaS, alternative fuels, etc...

One of the more annoying things we have to do is dampen down politician's enthusiasm for ideas that regularly pop up as silver bullet solutions, e.g. drones, gondolas, EVs, etc... The other annoying thing is politicians that decide on the mode solution before even defining the problem that they want to solve. If you want to know why Europe and places like Switzerland is so good for public transport it's because they invest in proven, already established transport solutions and use technological advancements to optimise them. They don't get distracted by new shiny things. 

Determine the outcomes, work out the strategy draft the policy, work out the implementation plan. We tend to jump to the solution first here. 

Up
1

Think I'll let the early adopters get the kinks worked out first on this one.

Up
3

I'm happy to oblige !

Up
1

Exactly how are they 'quiet'? The engine itself may be quieter than one burning avgas. But the batteries make them heavier than an equivalent liquid-fueled helicopter, so there will be more rotor noise, as there always is with more weight, which is the larger and more annoying component of the noise. So overall there will be more noise for an equivalent aircraft. Plus more downdraft, of course.

If they did indeed transform the way that we travel, it would mean a lot more of them, which would basically ruin life for anyone near the flight paths. As they can go anywhere, that's everyone. Moreover, the statistics show that rotary winged aircraft are inherently less safe than fixed wing planes (because as I understand it, recovering from mechanical failure or loss of control is hard or impossible, whereas you can glide in a fixed-wing plane) and they are much less efficient, fuel/energy-wise. This column is headed 'technology/analysis'. Delete the analysis part please, as it's just a re-hash of some industry press-releases.

Up
1

This might be of interest, although further independent testing is required.

Up
1

Yes, thanks, it was interesting. Also unexpected. And I see that this particular aircraft can glide, which should make it safer. Looks like some impressive design and engineering work and I eat my words and think they probably would be quieter and safer. I'd be quite happy if they eventually replaced existing helicopters (unless the numbers of flights increased above current levels, as that would erode and overturn those benefits).

Up
1

Anything that replaces helicopters, to whatever degree... yes please.

Up
0

There's also noise cancellation actively investigated, even in NZ, see https://www.dotterel.com/

Up
1

"Electric aviation promises to alleviate urban congestion"

Auckland is predicted to have just shy of 8 million daily trips by 2048. Now you only need to reduce peak car travel by a small percentage to "fix" congestion. Even so in order for electric aviation to alleviate urban congestion you're talking about 10s of thousands of drone helicopter trips every day at peak times. 

This has nothing to do with alleviating urban congestion, it's about allowing the super rich to not be affected by it.

Most people in New Zealand (Auckland in particular) want better public transport. One of the secrets to getting better public transport is to make sure the rich have to use it too. The tube is used by everyone from tradies, to High Court Judges, the aristocracy and company CEOs. Once powerful people who have decision making powers start being invested in the public transport experience funding comes quickly as does the removal of many institutional and political obstructions. 

To sum up, if you want a better transport system these EV drones need to go in the bin. 

Up
5

Getting a small percentage of people to use e-bikes for some of their shorter trips, on existing roading infrastructure would blow out any congestion busting benefits of electric aviation by a factor higher than a 1,000 fold. Even just making sure kids could get back to cycling to school like the good old days would pretty much solve peak congestion in a lot of our cities. 

E-bikes are proven technology, incredibly cheap and require minimal infrastructure changes to achieve massive mode shift. European cities are literally saving billions of dollars every year by putting in a few protected cycle-lanes overnight and rejigging their cities traffic circulation plans. 

Meanwhile in NZ we've got a govt committed to building more unaffordable and unmaintainable mega-motorways in the wop wops to serve their trucking lobby and land-banking funders. 

Up
8

I'm a bit of a petrolhead (at least if my garage is anything to go by) but by FAR my favourite form of urban transport is my eBike.

Here in Chch you can get anywhere in the four aves faster on an ebike than you can in a car at anything but completely off-peak times. A journey that would take me 20 mins in rush hour traffic is completed in 7-10 mins on my eBike depending on whether I get lucky or not with the light changes. 

If I'm riding to a meeting I can crank up the assistance so I don't have to work up a sweat, or when riding home I can drop the assistance down for some extra exercise. 

The advantage of the eBike is that it has allowed me to curtail my vehicle use significantly (to the point where replacing my old V8 4x4 or my "fun" car with an EV simply doesn't stack up). I fill my car perhaps only 25% as often as I used to.

I think a lot more people could reduce commute times and come out ahead financially by keeping their existing vehicle for less frequent driving (even if you've got a garage full of complete gas guzzlers like I do) and instead using an eBike as much as possible. 

The only caveat is you really do need the separated cycle lane infrastructure, particularly to encourage parents to let their kids ride. Despite being a car guy I'm fully on board with cycle lanes as they make such a difference to feeling safe enough to ride.

 

Up
8

100% agree. I’m the same and my SUV can sit idle for weeks while I Ebike or use my ev car. In places like Christchurch here we should be going full noise on cycleways. I went to Copenhagen last year to visit one of our sons, flat like Christchurch, but very very cold in winter. The city is so quiet as rush hour does have some cars but overwhelmed by cycles (they also have a great underground metro and buses). Large numbers of people don’t have cars, families use Christiana bikes for transporting kids and shopping etc. and it happens all year they dress for it. It’s a mind set and my son and his friends love it and hate the idea of having to buy cars if they come back here. There’s also the cost savings.

The people also look so healthy with cycling and walking all the time.

Another of my sons worked for one of these flying taxi companies. They will come and the money and intellect being thrown at them is absolutely mind blowing - most in NZ have no comprehension of what is going on in the world. The IP they develop on these will also be used elsewhere in aviation.

Up
0

I weigh up a lot of infrastructure proposals with the e-bike test, i.e. would spending the same amount of money on giving people free e-bikes reduce congestion by more or less? As you say, the e-bikes don't need to be for everyone, we just need a percentage of all road users to be using them. Most projects don't meet that test.

Suppose a new 500 million dollar urban motorway is proposed, at say $2000 a pop, would a one off gift to 250,000 households of an e-bike be a more effective use of funds? No ongoing maintenance costs either. Or assuming a 5% debt servicing fee, 12,500 free e-bikes to give away a year in perpetuity.

Up
5

It's the right way to think about it. People are particularly bad at understand the costs and benefits of transport infrastructure investment. 

I bet if we ran poll on here on how much it costs to maintain the current road network in Auckland, per km costs to maintain a cycleway, how many free ratepayer subsidised car parks there are, how much we pay in rates to cover the cost of one park and ride parking spot, how much of household rates goes towards subsidising car drivers, people would not have a clue but they are very willing to have an opinion on whether those things are worthwhile or not.  

Mainly because there is a massive amount of money to be made from extracting as much wealth as possible from people, and those people that get the wealth spend big on fooling people as to what the right solutions are. 

Up
5

Worth thinking about how many e-bikes could have been subsidised or provided for free using the chunk of money used to subsidise electric cars.

Up
1

That work has been done, I can't remember it off the top of my head but if I find the research I'll share. 

Up
0

Anything that encourages the wealthy to put their money back into the economy is good in my books. 

Up
0

You must be a fan of wealth tax then...

Up
0

Agnostium: "you only need to reduce peak car travel by a small percentage to "fix" congestion"

These are your words.  Well, if "the rich" (your words) use electric aviation, then, by your definition, "congestion is fixed".  That's a win-win for all.  The real issue you have, is that you hate "the rich" so much, that you would rather have congestion for all, rather than have "the rich" use electric aviation and have "congestion for all, fixed"

Up
2

a few rich guys flying around is not going to take 5% of traffic off the roads.

Up
3

But a few poor guys cycling around is going to take 5% of traffic off the roads ?

Up
2

I haven't done the research but my gut feeling is that, given the number of people struggling to make ends meet these days, there are far more people who could afford to ride a bike than there are who could afford to hire an aircraft.

Up
1

I don't know how they can claim to be eco-friendly. A drone will use a lot more energy to transport something than an equivalent electric ground based vehicle.

Up
3

It's green-washing, make it electric and suddenly it's supposed to be eco-friendly? Same techniques used to promote Tesla's and Electric SUVs. Just electrifying something doesn't make it eco-friendly. 

Up
2

These guys are a bit late to the party.  Dubai is launching robo taxi copters in 2018 after trialing them in 2017

Up
2

Dubai has no substance, one of the most odious places in the world. 

Up
3

Yes, I love Dubai too, what an amazing city of development and innovation, it's just incredible.  Anyone with a bit of childhood dream left in them will love creative, new innovations.  Sadly, it looks like that child in you, has left a long time ago Agnostium. 

Imagine if everyone was like you on this planet, we would still be travelling on horses (maybe not, that would possibly be too dangerous for you) and amputating limbs without anaesthesia because it's far too dangerous too.

Up
2

What a strange comment, are you OK? Did you invest in taxi drones or something? 

Up
1

This outlines some of the case against Dubai, if you are interested.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=tJuqe6sre2I&pp=ygULRHViYWkgc3Vja3M%3D

Up
1

From small beginnings:

Industry Contributors

Joby Robotics

A flight test of Joby's Lisa/L autopilot and Aspirin IMU all running the Paparazzi rotorcraft code

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k1_iPCJLuwA

One of the first iterations of Joby's VTOL transitional aircraft. Yes before you ask, this plane really does fly on code that is in the repository.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LWTi2Dgh0Fw

Up
0

I have a commercial model size example of Joby's VTOL transitional aircraft renamed quadshot.

Up
1

Like all great promised paradigm shifts, numerous challenges loom – technical hurdles, regulatory mazes, the crucial battle for public acceptance and perhaps physics itself.

As I read this article, I was wondering if Interest readers were in favour of pioneering new technologies and exciting new directions for mankind, if most people understood that, we have modern transport, medicine, communication etc... today because a few adventurous people dared to dream about a better future.... 

Reading the comments section, it's clear that the majority of commenters are a sad bunch of old farts who have long ago let go of their childhood dreams and adventure.

Up
3

I'm still waiting on my back to the future hoverboard and star wars speeder bike. I love this type of thing, with each technological jump I get one step closer.

My issue is when they say it will solve urban congestion.

Up
3

Well done Agnostium, for recognising that you belong to the group of people in the last paragraph of my previous post.

Up
0

Banned. Government will want to keep people paying to use their infrastructure.

Up
0

Would be interesting to see what traffic flow laws would be required if 10,000 (as an example) were in the air at the same time.  For a started the air corridor to the Airport would be out of bounds.  How would that number of copters flying into the CBD be traffic managed?  Would height separation  be necessary?

Sure the technology is there and great BUT the traffic control implementation of a swarm of copters flying here there and everywhere needs to be considered.

Think about current congestion around schools when mommy has to pick up the kids.  Copters stacked in a huge holding pattern around each school?

Maybe we need to talk about copter traffic control rather than the technology of a flying car.  I just cant get my head around 10,000 copters lining up (who controls the holding pattern) to land in the CBD on roofs and be stored somewhere.  The copters are much larger than a car.  How big does the copter park have to be?    

Up
0