4:03 "....keeping it at 423 degrees Fahrenheit..." That is a pretty good trick. Maybe you better have a human read your script rather than a robot. Or better yet just pull the channel!
@vaughnbay Thanks for pointing that out! We definitely own the mistake at 4:03 where we misread the temperature as 423°F instead of -423°F. Apologies for the slip-up! 🙏 While we do use some automation in our workflow, we have a dedicated team behind the channel that works hard to bring you accurate and engaging content. Mistakes like this help us learn, and we’ll be sure to improve our content quality checks in future videos. Thanks again for your understanding and for watching! We appreciate your support.
the existing record for range using ICE for an aircraft of way less than 1/4 this weight was over 7000 MILES -set 30 years ago (it might have been increased since -see FAI records) the Rutan Voyager flew 25000 Miles non stop in 1986 (my own Opal from 1976 was able to fly over 6000 miles and my design for a circumferential (world around) aircraft was published in Australian Aircraft magazine in May 1981 (to use the then new Sarich "Orbital" engine-- hence the 'orbit' ) Boil off of Hydrogen would itself limit possible range if nothing else.
@rossnolan7283 Thanks for sharing those incredible examples of long-range flights! The achievements of the Rutan Voyager and other historic aircraft are remarkable, especially considering the technology available at the time. However, the focus of Joby’s hydrogen aircraft is different. It's designed for urban air mobility and shorter regional flights, with the goal of reducing emissions and providing sustainable air transport. You’re right that hydrogen boil-off can limit range, and it’s one of the challenges hydrogen-powered aircraft face today. However, advancements in fuel cell technology and hydrogen storage are being actively researched to extend range while keeping emissions low. While Joby’s aircraft isn’t aiming for the same long-distance records, it represents a different approach focused on clean, short-range aviation rather than ultra-long-haul flights. It’s exciting to see how technology evolves to meet different aviation needs!
Hydrogen comes and goes, 1973 in Germany post oil shock, Pres Bush senior, Calif CARB etc etc but more shut downs than start ups lately. Evtol either way is inherently the worst way for UAM even if you make a virtue of miserable economy and range....😢
@SKYHOOK_DRONE_IMAGING Haha, true, hydrogen is flammable! 🔥 But let's not forget, the jet fuel used in traditional aircraft is also highly flammable. In fact, almost all fuels we rely on, like gasoline, diesel, and even kerosene, are combustible. The key difference with hydrogen fuel cells is the advanced safety measures that are in place to handle the fuel safely. Hydrogen is stored under pressure and handled with strict protocols to ensure safety. When done right, hydrogen is a clean and efficient energy source that could significantly reduce emissions compared to conventional fuels. It’s all about balancing innovation with safety!
I wonder what the weight difference is? I believe it flew with app. 80 kilos of hydrogen. This doesn't mean a transition, it's an addition. Used only for higher milage flights.
@philzail2532 Great question! The weight difference between using hydrogen and batteries is an important factor in aviation, especially with eVTOLs. From what I understand, the 80 kilos of hydrogen used in Joby's flight would likely be for longer-range flights rather than short urban hops. So you're right-it's more of an addition to extend the range, rather than a complete shift from batteries. Hydrogen is lighter than batteries for energy storage, but the fuel cells and storage systems also add weight. This hybrid approach could give Joby flexibility depending on the mission!
If the hydrogen tanks and fuel cells, cooling etc etc takes up all the interior space then why is it not just a stunt? (Notice that you can no longer see through the windows...) how much does a five million dollar taxi need to charge?
@rossnolan7283 You raise a fair point! Hydrogen tanks and fuel cells do take up significant space, especially when factoring in cooling systems and safety features. However, it's important to remember that this flight wasn’t about full passenger capacity-it’s more of a proof-of-concept to show how hydrogen can extend range. You're right that visibility through windows might be compromised for now, but the design could evolve as the tech matures. As for the $5 million taxi question, that’s the challenge: balancing cost, efficiency, and range. The upfront price might be high now, but as technology scales and infrastructure develops, the cost per ride will likely come down. Right now, it’s all about pushing the boundaries and refining the design for future commercial use.
@danielchristiansen6163 A 523-mile trip is definitely an impressive demonstration of range and shows just how far Joby has come in terms of reliability for longer flights. 🚁 While it’s a great milestone, it’s important to remember that long-range performance is just one piece of the puzzle. Reliability over time and in various conditions will be key in proving how consistent Joby’s aircraft can be for everyday urban and regional air mobility. Still, this flight sets a strong foundation for what’s to come in the eVTOL space!
Joby concepts are NOT valid. You CANNOT land VTOL without a dust/dirt free VTOL PORT which costs mega $$$. The future is landing on roads at the speed limit (25 to 80 MPH in USA), folding wings or props WHILE MOVING at speed limit, moving into lane and driving on. No VTOL allowed. This requires proper DOT requirements, such as crash safety and road ability, which Joby has no clue about. A VTOL is NOT a flying car. Not even close. All EV junk will go bankrupt when new combustion tech comes out that is 75% efficient in cruise and 60% in climb. Try 5 a place at 1 gal/hr at 120 MPH on fuel that costs $1/gal to make from solar thermal... Less than 1 cent/mile. This same craft can go 360 MPH on 27 gal/hr. Fast and slow is KEY. Old combustion is 3 to 12 times more fuel. EVs are a total and complete JOKE. Joby has no tech for the future. NONE. All obsolete. Just a friendly hint.
@seaplaneguy1 Thanks for sharing your thoughts! You bring up some interesting points regarding the challenges of VTOL landings and infrastructure, like the need for specialized vertiports. It’s true that dust and debris can be a challenge for VTOLs, especially in unprepared areas, but companies like Joby are working on solutions for urban environments with controlled landing zones. While vertiports can be costly, they’re part of the broader vision of urban air mobility infrastructure, similar to how airports and highways required significant investment when they were first built. Regarding your point about folding wings and road mobility, that’s definitely a different approach seen in flying car concepts like Terrafugia or Samson Switchblade, which combine driving and flying abilities. However, Joby’s vision is more focused on air taxis, not flying cars, and aims to reduce urban congestion with safe and efficient air travel rather than road integration. As for the future of EV technology, advancements in battery efficiency and electric propulsion are rapidly improving. Combustion engines still have their place, but many experts see a sustainable future in electric aviation, especially for shorter regional flights where emissions reductions are a priority. I appreciate the points you raised, and I think this will be a fascinating space to watch as both combustion and electric technologies evolve.
@@Discover.Aviation RE fuel will be 3 gCO2/kwh for solar thermal made fuel, and 15 gCO2/kwh for nuclear made fuel. Gasoline is 300. A 100% RE grid will be ~300 gCO2/kwh, or 100 times more than solar and 20 times more than nuclear. A coal grid is ~ 1000, or 3.3 times more CO2/kwh. With new combustion we get CO2 and water capture. This means no fires. Key issue. You can't pull over to the side of the road if a fire starts in an airplane. A battery fire on an airplane would REQUIRE that the battery be dropped immediately or all die. This issue alone will end EVs. A 5 place at $1/gal and 100+ MPG is ~ 1 cents/mile for fuel. With new combustion and active drag reduction, that can drop by 1/2. With blown wing, there is no stall or spin issue like there is with a VTOL in transition. The idea of VTOL requires much more training and has huge risk and redundancy requirements that will end in people dead. These VTOL companies are WASTING close to $1 billion each in IPO. The investors will ALL go bankrupt. The only question is do they want to all go bankrupt or do they want to invest in new combustion tech that will truly change ALL the world and do so quickly, all while interfacing with EXISTING infrastructure and airlines?
4:03 "....keeping it at 423 degrees Fahrenheit..." That is a pretty good trick. Maybe you better have a human read your script rather than a robot. Or better yet just pull the channel!
@vaughnbay
Thanks for pointing that out! We definitely own the mistake at 4:03 where we misread the temperature as 423°F instead of -423°F. Apologies for the slip-up! 🙏 While we do use some automation in our workflow, we have a dedicated team behind the channel that works hard to bring you accurate and engaging content. Mistakes like this help us learn, and we’ll be sure to improve our content quality checks in future videos. Thanks again for your understanding and for watching! We appreciate your support.
the existing record for range using ICE for an aircraft of way less than 1/4 this weight was over 7000 MILES -set 30 years ago (it might have been increased since -see FAI records) the Rutan Voyager flew 25000 Miles non stop in 1986 (my own Opal from 1976 was able to fly over 6000 miles and my design for a circumferential (world around) aircraft was published in Australian Aircraft magazine in May 1981 (to use the then new Sarich "Orbital" engine-- hence the 'orbit' ) Boil off of Hydrogen would itself limit possible range if nothing else.
@rossnolan7283
Thanks for sharing those incredible examples of long-range flights! The achievements of the Rutan Voyager and other historic aircraft are remarkable, especially considering the technology available at the time. However, the focus of Joby’s hydrogen aircraft is different. It's designed for urban air mobility and shorter regional flights, with the goal of reducing emissions and providing sustainable air transport.
You’re right that hydrogen boil-off can limit range, and it’s one of the challenges hydrogen-powered aircraft face today. However, advancements in fuel cell technology and hydrogen storage are being actively researched to extend range while keeping emissions low. While Joby’s aircraft isn’t aiming for the same long-distance records, it represents a different approach focused on clean, short-range aviation rather than ultra-long-haul flights.
It’s exciting to see how technology evolves to meet different aviation needs!
Hydrogen comes and goes, 1973 in Germany post oil shock, Pres Bush senior, Calif CARB etc etc but more shut downs than start ups lately. Evtol either way is inherently the worst way for UAM even if you make a virtue of miserable economy and range....😢
Hydrogen is Flammable! Go Boom!
@SKYHOOK_DRONE_IMAGING Haha, true, hydrogen is flammable! 🔥 But let's not forget, the jet fuel used in traditional aircraft is also highly flammable. In fact, almost all fuels we rely on, like gasoline, diesel, and even kerosene, are combustible. The key difference with hydrogen fuel cells is the advanced safety measures that are in place to handle the fuel safely. Hydrogen is stored under pressure and handled with strict protocols to ensure safety. When done right, hydrogen is a clean and efficient energy source that could significantly reduce emissions compared to conventional fuels. It’s all about balancing innovation with safety!
I wonder what the weight difference is? I believe it flew with app. 80 kilos of hydrogen. This doesn't mean a transition, it's an addition. Used only for higher milage flights.
@philzail2532 Great question! The weight difference between using hydrogen and batteries is an important factor in aviation, especially with eVTOLs. From what I understand, the 80 kilos of hydrogen used in Joby's flight would likely be for longer-range flights rather than short urban hops. So you're right-it's more of an addition to extend the range, rather than a complete shift from batteries. Hydrogen is lighter than batteries for energy storage, but the fuel cells and storage systems also add weight. This hybrid approach could give Joby flexibility depending on the mission!
@@Discover.Aviation My thinking was about. More payload may create new uses.
you asked a question, you might check out Abbott Aerospace qualified aerospace engineering evaluation of this aircraft and this stunt.....
@rossnolan
Thanks for the suggestion! I’ll definitely check out.
If the hydrogen tanks and fuel cells, cooling etc etc takes up all the interior space then why is it not just a stunt? (Notice that you can no longer see through the windows...) how much does a five million dollar taxi need to charge?
@rossnolan7283 You raise a fair point! Hydrogen tanks and fuel cells do take up significant space, especially when factoring in cooling systems and safety features. However, it's important to remember that this flight wasn’t about full passenger capacity-it’s more of a proof-of-concept to show how hydrogen can extend range. You're right that visibility through windows might be compromised for now, but the design could evolve as the tech matures.
As for the $5 million taxi question, that’s the challenge: balancing cost, efficiency, and range. The upfront price might be high now, but as technology scales and infrastructure develops, the cost per ride will likely come down. Right now, it’s all about pushing the boundaries and refining the design for future commercial use.
We are talking orders of magnitude shortcomings not just small incremental improvement.
Couldn't get me into one!
@SKYHOOK_DRONE_IMAGING Haha, fair enough! eVTOLs definitely aren’t for everyone, especially when it comes to something so new and futuristic.
500mile trip = top reliability...
@danielchristiansen6163 A 523-mile trip is definitely an impressive demonstration of range and shows just how far Joby has come in terms of reliability for longer flights. 🚁 While it’s a great milestone, it’s important to remember that long-range performance is just one piece of the puzzle. Reliability over time and in various conditions will be key in proving how consistent Joby’s aircraft can be for everyday urban and regional air mobility. Still, this flight sets a strong foundation for what’s to come in the eVTOL space!
Joby concepts are NOT valid. You CANNOT land VTOL without a dust/dirt free VTOL PORT which costs mega $$$.
The future is landing on roads at the speed limit (25 to 80 MPH in USA), folding wings or props WHILE MOVING at speed limit, moving into lane and driving on. No VTOL allowed.
This requires proper DOT requirements, such as crash safety and road ability, which Joby has no clue about. A VTOL is NOT a flying car. Not even close.
All EV junk will go bankrupt when new combustion tech comes out that is 75% efficient in cruise and 60% in climb.
Try 5 a place at 1 gal/hr at 120 MPH on fuel that costs $1/gal to make from solar thermal... Less than 1 cent/mile. This same craft can go 360 MPH on 27 gal/hr. Fast and slow is KEY. Old combustion is 3 to 12 times more fuel. EVs are a total and complete JOKE.
Joby has no tech for the future. NONE. All obsolete. Just a friendly hint.
@seaplaneguy1
Thanks for sharing your thoughts! You bring up some interesting points regarding the challenges of VTOL landings and infrastructure, like the need for specialized vertiports. It’s true that dust and debris can be a challenge for VTOLs, especially in unprepared areas, but companies like Joby are working on solutions for urban environments with controlled landing zones. While vertiports can be costly, they’re part of the broader vision of urban air mobility infrastructure, similar to how airports and highways required significant investment when they were first built.
Regarding your point about folding wings and road mobility, that’s definitely a different approach seen in flying car concepts like Terrafugia or Samson Switchblade, which combine driving and flying abilities. However, Joby’s vision is more focused on air taxis, not flying cars, and aims to reduce urban congestion with safe and efficient air travel rather than road integration.
As for the future of EV technology, advancements in battery efficiency and electric propulsion are rapidly improving. Combustion engines still have their place, but many experts see a sustainable future in electric aviation, especially for shorter regional flights where emissions reductions are a priority.
I appreciate the points you raised, and I think this will be a fascinating space to watch as both combustion and electric technologies evolve.
@@Discover.Aviation RE fuel will be 3 gCO2/kwh for solar thermal made fuel, and 15 gCO2/kwh for nuclear made fuel. Gasoline is 300.
A 100% RE grid will be ~300 gCO2/kwh, or 100 times more than solar and 20 times more than nuclear. A coal grid is ~ 1000, or 3.3 times more CO2/kwh.
With new combustion we get CO2 and water capture. This means no fires. Key issue. You can't pull over to the side of the road if a fire starts in an airplane. A battery fire on an airplane would REQUIRE that the battery be dropped immediately or all die. This issue alone will end EVs.
A 5 place at $1/gal and 100+ MPG is ~ 1 cents/mile for fuel. With new combustion and active drag reduction, that can drop by 1/2. With blown wing, there is no stall or spin issue like there is with a VTOL in transition. The idea of VTOL requires much more training and has huge risk and redundancy requirements that will end in people dead.
These VTOL companies are WASTING close to $1 billion each in IPO. The investors will ALL go bankrupt.
The only question is do they want to all go bankrupt or do they want to invest in new combustion tech that will truly change ALL the world and do so quickly, all while interfacing with EXISTING infrastructure and airlines?