They aim to be much cheaper to run. Helicopters are mechanically complex so require a lot of maintenance, and have multiple single points of failure so you can’t skip the maintenance, and are demanding to learn to fly. The hourly rate of a helicopter is high.
Electric motors are simple and reliable and all these companies use multiples so have some redundancy. Multi-rotors require computer control for stability. With that done the piloting is easy.
Sure, they're trying to make it cheaper. But all of the eVTOL designs I've seen can't autorotate, making them much less safe (contrary to your implication about redundancy).
Everything I've seen about this space is people with big checks trying to cut corners to enter a new market, and it seems ripe to fail much like the 737-MAX.
And that's ignoring all of the problems with the market itself, not to mention regulations, as well as logistical headaches of transporting between rooftops (which by the way, many cannot safely support landing pads - so now you also have to retrofit skyscrapers with incredibly expensive infrastructure).
To be fair you answered my question and I'm just being belligerent, so thank you for the response.
The likelihood of failure is much lower with an eVTOL than a conventional helicopter. Additionally a BRS chute could work with eVTOLs in a way it couldn't with a normal heli.
> The likelihood of failure is much lower with an eVTOL than a conventional helicopter.
You're basing this on a myriad of assumptions as eVTOL designs are barely at the prototype stage right now. Helicopters have been in use for decades, so we know how safe they are.
If they truly prove to be safer then that's awesome, but based on everything I've seen I don't believe that to be true.
Why don't you believe that to be true? There are a myriad of ways for a combustion powered helicopter to fail. Just look at how many billionaires have been killed in helicopter flights.
Electric motors do not fail as often as combustion engines. Most eVTOL designs have redundancies that don't exist in a normal helicopter. I have flown R22s a handful of times and there were many times where an engine failure would have been disastrous.
What makes you think people aren't working on all the problems you think they are ignoring? I personally know at least one person working each and every one of the problems you mentioned.
Just because they're working on the problems doesn't mean they're going to solve them. When you look at all the pieces and read that article about the clusterfuck that is Kitty Hawk, you start to get a sense of just how much buzz and how little substance there may be.
FWIW I've interviewed at many of the eVTOL companies and found too much sizzle and not enough steak.
But to each his own. Ultimately it's just my opinion. Reality will assert itself regardless of what I think.
Electric motors are simple and reliable and all these companies use multiples so have some redundancy. Multi-rotors require computer control for stability. With that done the piloting is easy.