8 replies
September 22

Tom_Waarne

The new world emerges…

September 23

Arthur_Foyt

Why does eVTOL need special integration?
We already have gas and JetA VTOL.
This is just a different powerplant.
Follow the same proven rules. Done.

1 reply
September 23 ▶ Arthur_Foyt

andy

I can’t think of any certified civilian powered lift airplanes. The Harrier and the V-22 are military only, and the AW609 is still in the future somewhere. Which ones are you thinking of?

1 reply
September 23

kent.misegades

Why is the FAA wasting even 5 seconds on the Rube Goldbergs that no one wants? It ought to be working harder to get affordable mogas onto airports, one easy way to reduce the use of boutique aviation fuels few can afford any more.

September 23 ▶ andy

Arthur_Foyt

We’re talking VTOL. eVTOL should use the same flight operations as liquid fueled VTOL. Simple.

September 23

KlausM

Multiple helicopters move dozens of tourist ever 30 minutes in flights of 6 or more about 20 miles all day. This is a common practice at many cruise ship stops. There’s no SFAR that is necessary to do that. Why do these “air mobility units” need to operate under different rules?

“Air Mobility”, “VTOL” whatever you want to call them they are still just a helicopter. Chinooks have multi-rotors and never needed a SFAR. There has been Helicopter scheduled services for over 50 years. What’s the difference now?

1 reply
September 24 ▶ KlausM

andy

I think the difference - which I agree is not really explained in the article - is that the new rules we’re discussing are for what FAA calls “powered lift” aircraft - they take off vertically, but fly on wings like an airplane in cruise. The article is about eVTOL-powered-lift, not just VTOL, hence the comparison with a Harrier or a V-22 applies. The pilot training presumably includes hovering and vortex ring (not found in the fixed wing syllabus) but also might include concepts of Vx, Vy, Vmca, glide speed and so on which don’t occur in the rotary syllabus in the same way.

So, if it’s not an airplane, and it’s not a helicopter, but you want to certify it, we’re gonna need some new guidelines. I think it’s an interesting challenge.

BTW, despite defending the distinct category of flying machine, I also agree that the fuel source is a minor consideration. Perhaps it runs on dilithium crystals, but I’d still like to know how to get the rating on my certificate!

1 reply
September 24

KlausM

Andy, the Auto-gyro has been flying for many decades without SFARs. I’ve witnessed ‘Jump-Gyro’ competition with hover / vertical climb demonstration of plus two minutes.

After following this topic for several years, the pilot part is what the Little “e” symbol really stands for. Not the ‘electric’ part. The objective is “NO” human Pilot in these things. I’m sure many people reading this will build on the “Future of Aviation” but, the FAA want’s to certify ‘AI Flight Systems’ like this one…