The same Ohio river valley where the Wright brothers pioneered human flight will soon manufacture cutting-edge electric vertical takeoff and landing aircraft.
Even if you have electric flying helicopters, the rotary component makes them very expensive to maintain as blades and components need to be replaced sometimes every 500 hours or less and require constant safety checks and inspections.
Great data, now what’s the equivalent for small scale electric motor based helicopters? Considering you’re essentially talking about the maintenance requirements of chemical powerplants and rotor wings lifting 10+ times the weight. That’s like saying because you have to do pre-operational checks on semi trucks during your trip that it’s too expensive to drive cars.
Imagine how many taxi cabs have a malfunction of some sort every year. Now imagine that taxi cab crashing into a building or crowded street if it had a malfunction instead of just cruising to a halt on the side of the road.
Do you not realize we already have thousands of aircraft flying that this could already happen to? It’s really strange to have you guys cherry picking this as a thing to be concerned about when aircraft that could fall out of the sky are already over your head right now.
Redundancy is the name of the game, if you have more than the amount of engines you require, then you can have a couple fail and still remain airborne. It’s also why VTOL designs are safer as they have some lift potential even with a dead-stick scenario.
Here you are accusing people of cherry picking when you’re doing the same thing, or just assuming that we can rely on technology that hasn’t even been invented yet, cannot be manufactured at scale, or is far too expensive for anyone but the most wealthy people on the planet to use. 
You’ve made several comments throughout this post that are absurd, reductive, and so out of touch with reality as to be ridiculous and/or hilarious. None of them make any rational sense. 
You’ve made several comments throughout this post that are absurd, reductive, and so out of touch with reality as to be ridiculous and/or hilarious. None of them make any rational sense.
Yeah, unless you know literally anything about aircraft. Which im sure you don’t. Or do you have more years in Aircraft maintenance than me?
Thanks for the strawman, it does however give me an idea of the kind of maintenance he’s talking about and why it’s required on larger platforms but not on smaller electric motors like what eVTOL prototypes use.
People are in here claiming that because larger helicopters need a 30 day inspection that electric motors are going to have the same level of maintenance and servicing requirements. In reality we would probably adapt by creating something in between a private pilots license and whatever certifications ultralight and paramotors enjoy to get off the ground. That would no doubt include training and certification on basic operational maintenance.
That’s not a strawman. You keep arguing about the mechanics of the craft when that has nothing to do with it. THAT is a strawman.
Top it off with guesses without any facts to back it up doesn’t make your argument any better.
Once again, being a mechanic, doesn’t mean you have any knowledge about flying an aircraft. You’ve made that clear by constantly trying to steer the conversation back to engine parts and maintenance.
Great data, now what’s the equivalent for small scale electric motor based helicopters? Considering you’re essentially talking about the maintenance requirements of chemical powerplants and rotor wings lifting 10+ times the weight. That’s like saying because you have to do pre-operational checks on semi trucks during your trip that it’s too expensive to drive cars.
Do you not realize we already have thousands of aircraft flying that this could already happen to? It’s really strange to have you guys cherry picking this as a thing to be concerned about when aircraft that could fall out of the sky are already over your head right now.
Redundancy is the name of the game, if you have more than the amount of engines you require, then you can have a couple fail and still remain airborne. It’s also why VTOL designs are safer as they have some lift potential even with a dead-stick scenario.
Here you are accusing people of cherry picking when you’re doing the same thing, or just assuming that we can rely on technology that hasn’t even been invented yet, cannot be manufactured at scale, or is far too expensive for anyone but the most wealthy people on the planet to use. 
You’ve made several comments throughout this post that are absurd, reductive, and so out of touch with reality as to be ridiculous and/or hilarious. None of them make any rational sense. 
Yeah, unless you know literally anything about aircraft. Which im sure you don’t. Or do you have more years in Aircraft maintenance than me?
Lmao, the this is a joke, right?
Being a mechanic doesn’t make you a pilot or give you any special knowledge about flight systems.
Thanks for the strawman, it does however give me an idea of the kind of maintenance he’s talking about and why it’s required on larger platforms but not on smaller electric motors like what eVTOL prototypes use.
People are in here claiming that because larger helicopters need a 30 day inspection that electric motors are going to have the same level of maintenance and servicing requirements. In reality we would probably adapt by creating something in between a private pilots license and whatever certifications ultralight and paramotors enjoy to get off the ground. That would no doubt include training and certification on basic operational maintenance.
That’s not a strawman. You keep arguing about the mechanics of the craft when that has nothing to do with it. THAT is a strawman. Top it off with guesses without any facts to back it up doesn’t make your argument any better.
Once again, being a mechanic, doesn’t mean you have any knowledge about flying an aircraft. You’ve made that clear by constantly trying to steer the conversation back to engine parts and maintenance.