Volocopter, whose predecessor E-Volo, may have invented the multi-copter concept, has filed for insolvency in Germany but is vowing to continue its certification bid. It intends to gain EASA certification for its VoloCity and the insolvency will keep creditors at bay while it raises more money to cross that finish line. “We are ahead of our industry peers in our technological, flight test, and certification progress, CEO Dirk Hoke said in a news release. "That makes us an attractive company to invest in while we organize ourselves with internal restructuring.”
Writing was on the wall once they failed to provide “taxis” at the Paris Olympics.
Could not get certification in time and did not realise that in order to get full political backing you had to stroke the right-wing regional president and the left-wing mayor at the same time.
Now they probably will always have difficulty in Paris, even though special landing sites were built (by the region), as the population is convinced the concept is for rich people only, and will bring only noise and disruption to the masses.
Hoke defended the company’s financial record thus far noting that it has successfully raised hundreds of millions of dollars in capital since it was founded in 2011. **How do you defend losing your ass consistently for fourteen consecutive years? “With one of the lowest burn rates industry. Big deal, so you’re so very proud of losing money slower than others. The statement is beyond stupid. Volocopter has successfully operated in an extremely difficult financial environment,” he said. “However, despite recent intensive fundraising efforts, finding a viable solution to maintain regular operations outside of insolvency proceedings has not been possible.” It will be business as usual as the company develops its restructuring plan and goes after more funding. You have redefined the definition of “delusional.” It has not announced any layoffs among its approximately 500 employees. Again, about as delusional as it gets.
OK, it’s about time AVWeb does a Mea Cupla and admits that its readers are pretty smart, after all. Austrian Economics (which focuses on liberty & truth, not MMT & Keynesian economics), tells about “lost opportunity costs”. Wealth has been transferred from doing useful things to funding efforts which were doomed from the start as they lacked a real market and attempted to defy physics. How could this wealth have been used better to improve aviation, especially to lower the cost of sport aviation, where all things start? The situation with aircraft powerplants is particularly critical, their costs having exploded in recent years. If there are still those who believe that electric propulsion is the solution, let them make the case with lower costs, high reliability, low weight, fast turnaround, ease of maintenance, etc. Whenever the buzz words of the climate crisis cult are invoked, you know that snake oil is being offered, and not a viable solution. The real crisis is the cost of aircraft ownership and operation, which includes the rapid increase in the fees charged to hangar and operate from government GA airports. The solution is also not to be found in government grants and other taxpayer-funded programs - only a free market, unfettered from government meddling, can provide solutions. When the foundation of flying (sport aviation) declines, everything is lost.
No. It’s politically supported.
“think about all those people that created them. Technicians, engineers, hundreds of people who’ll be able to feed their children tonight so those children can grow up big and strong and have little teeny weeny children of their own, and so on and so forth. Thus, adding to the great chain…of life.” -Zorg
In the case of electric, multi-rotor aircraft I think “the population” is pretty much correct. I can’t wait to listen to all that multirotor noise from the Amazon drones whizzing over head to deliver diapers and energy drinks.
A major manufacturer of LSA aircraft for US and worldwide markets, Flight Design, also filed recently for insolvency in Germany, but that went by without coverage in AvWeb. So, too, did the fact that just before Christmas, Rotax effectively grounded over 5,000 aircraft pending significant inspection and repair of its 912, 915 and 916 engines. It sure would be nice if AvWeb paid a little more attention to these GA happenings and just a little less to airline, military and electric aviation.
From Russ:
We missed the Flight Design story (I’ll get something up tonight) and I haven’t seen anything on Rotax but will make enquiries. We appreciate news tips from the public because we do miss stuff. Don’t be afraid to let us know if you spot something.
I’m laughing - the line sounds like ‘we haven’t crashed yet’ as the airplane continues to lose altitude.
Probably are many electric aircraft schemes still operating, but I predict a ‘dotcom bust’ (remember that fiasco from VCs spending unwisely).
One stoopid bunch in Seattle urged the company they funded to sign up for more office space than they planned to, to handle future growth - yet the company was not near profitable yet. It went broke.
There’s also the factors Tom Cable of the renowned VC company Cable and Howse listed in a talk I attended.
Number 2 priority was ‘Can we trust these people?’.
Number 3 priority was ‘Can these people follow through?’.
(Number 1 was just the start: 'Are we interested in this type of business? C&H focussed on medical and software.)
Typical of many new things especially faddish.
Especially if taxpayer subsidies are available.
And if Greenie Points are available from regulators.
Tax treatment may be a factor. I blew it decades ago when I assumed a tax benefit for R&D would not apply to a development project for an arrangement that had already been proven in service.
Then was shocked to learn that a person’s mundane sports car project qualified.
(The tax deal was that companies with money could get a tax benefit from investing in a project of someone else’s, didn’t have to be related to the company’s own business. Seemed that only marketing costs were explicitly excluded. I don’t recall how tooling costs for production were handled, if design is very good then one can make tooling good for series production.)
There are two-seat helicopters, a usable configuration for law enforcement IMO if not encumbered with equipment (FLIR and spotlight are very desirable). But range is important - I’d want a few hours at least.
(Chasing local thieves is one thing but police have had to chase a car quite a distance, length of Fraser Valley in one case, in other cases surveillance such as tracking a vehicle to its destination. (Also a case in FV, I forget why, hit and run and robbery are conceivable - get more information on perps and associates, perhaps recovering other loot.)