All of the car talk, whataboutism and misty-eyed bromides about the Wright brothers and steam engines in the world don’t change the fact that something must to be commercially viable to survive in the modern world, and what is essentially an uglier 172 with 90min of endurance is not exactly the image of easily commercially viable.
You guys like numbers. This is only marginally better than the electric Pipistrel, which is rated for 50min + reserve (80min). That plane has two seats and is essentially useless aside from pattern work for and short hops to airports that are less than 100mi apart, this one is advertising that it is roughly equivalent in the range department (90min - 30min reserve = 60 min), and that’s advertising. What’s real world? If it were 90min + reserve, they would have said that, because it’s an increase of a third and that’s more than significant. In the end, its viability outside of its home market with its lax regulations will depend on cost. We’ll have to see what it costs, since it’s Chinese it’ll probably be cheaper than if it were a Cessna, but the 2-seat flying e-bike Pipistrel is $200,000+, and let’s not forget that deep cycling the batteries will significantly shorten their “TBO” vs someone’s babied EV which almost never gets deep cycled and does half of its “charging” over its life off of regen.