On Thursday, Archer Aviation, in partnership with United Airlines, unveiled its plans to launch an electric air taxi network in New York City.
Not so sure this was a good time to announce low altitude rotary wing passenger service along the river.
I know European companies which thought certification for paying passengers (or even sale to private individuals) would be a piece of cake, who are still trying, years later.
The US slimmed down government departments will no doubt rush this through in next to no time – although I did note no start date was given.
Per flight cost to passengers? Total cost per flight to taxpayers? The young author of this piece was not around when there was regular seaplane and helicopter service to Manhattan. Both ended due to high costs and noise complaints.
Worse. It doesn’t appear that their eVTOL is a helicopter, but a powered-lift aircraft. Helicopters have their own safety issues, c.f. the recent inflight RUD of a tour chopper apparently due to maintenance issues. But choppers have a much longer safety record than multi-propeller powered-lift aircraft, especially as paying-customer conveyances. I think this announcement is merely Archer blowing smoke while looking for more funding.
I’ve seen quite a few of these “aspirational aviation announcements” in my time, so our “young author” may be the only one among us to see this become reality, Kent.
Not so sure this was a good time to announce low altitude rotary wing passenger service along the river.
Not so sure that they did.
Their eVTOL is a fixed wing aircraft with pivoting propellers - it spends most of its time at the same altitudes as any other plane.
And the routes that they published seemed to avoid the river, not fly along it.
I would expect that eVTOLs would be considerably safer than helicopters as electric motors are much more reliable than internal combustion engines plus there are multiple motors and if everything stops, it will still glide. It should also be cheaper and quieter than helicopters. The biggest question I would have is the size of the market and who will survive the inevitable shake out as they are too many startups trying to do the same thing.
I’m not getting into one of these until they go at least a year of constant service without incident. That’s my bar–where’s yours?
That’s my bar–where’s yours?
I’d cheerfully jump on its inaugural run.
That’s my bar–where’s yours?
I would also take the ride on the first day - especially if the alternative was two hours in traffic.
Yawn. It’s an electric helicopter. Those wealthy enough have been able to get a helicopter ride from Manhattan to an airport for years.
I don’t see how this will be significantly less expensive.
This to me falls under the “I’ll believe it when I can buy a ticket” category. Even if the fuel cost is zero because New York sets up free charging cords all over the state, the cost to buy these will not allow fares low enough for anyone that already didn’t think about private charters to rent one.
Archer’s air taxi estimates a 7 minute hop from Manhattan to JFK, but after getting to the vertiport, boarding, limited baggage, and a shuttle from the landing site to the terminal, the whole trip still takes 45 to 60 minutes.
The competish, Uber et al, picks you up at your door, runs in any weather, carries your luggage, and drops you right at the terminal. No transfers, no hassle.
Archer’s still questionable price will likely land between $100 and $170 per ride, maybe more if weather or other operational factors limit operations. UberX for the same trip runs about $65 to $90. Uber Black ranges from $120 to $200, but includes door-to-door service and full luggage space.
Archer has big overhead, strict weather limits, and risks from crowded airspace. It might work for high-end travelers on perfect days, but for most people, Uber is cheaper, simpler, and more reliable.
After spending almost 10 minutes trying to figure this out. Odds of real success in NYC by 2035? Around 30%. 
No, it is not. It cannot autorotate. For nearly every failure mode of a helicopter (barring the bizarre self-RUD recently) autorotation is most survivable outcome. In a congested area, far more survivable than a gliding airplane. And far more survivable than a plummeting powered-lift device.
This topic was automatically closed after 7 days. New replies are no longer allowed.