Paris Air Show 2017: The Surefly personal helicopter

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 3 жов 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ • 722

  • @HanSolo__
    @HanSolo__ 2 роки тому +3

    I would say the human factor is a KEY in the case of the safety of helicopter flight. The skill level needed is not close to the car, motorcycle, plane. It is a different story, and to master this skill is not an easy task.

  • @forestsoceansmusic
    @forestsoceansmusic 6 років тому +1

    One of the best, clearest spokesmen I've ever heard. Shame they didn't show it flying with people inside.

    • @pauljames1682
      @pauljames1682 6 років тому

      They would have to start with a scale remote control model.

    • @forestsoceansmusic
      @forestsoceansmusic 6 років тому

      Looks like they've already done that, with this working full-sized one at the Paris Air Show.

  • @steveklick
    @steveklick 6 років тому +1

    I like that guy, he doesnt have a douchy personality. Very informative and realistic.

  • @forestpepper3621
    @forestpepper3621 7 років тому +2

    A big safety feature of traditional helicopters, but apparently not this vehicle, is "auto-rotation". If a helicopter's engine stops, the helicopter can glide safely to the ground by auto-rotating its blades; basically this is the same way that Maple tree seeds spin down to the ground. However, auto-rotation requires "variable pitch blades", which this vehicle does not have.

  • @alishanmao
    @alishanmao 6 років тому +5

    did it fly?

  • @andrec.136
    @andrec.136 4 роки тому +1

    I love the concept. The redundancy, the parachute, the crumple zones etc. I love the look and sound of the traditional helicopter and I own a few radio controlled models, however, I also know that it only takes one problem to bring them down. You have to be on top of maintenance with the traditional heli. I would seriously own one of these Surefly crafts.

  • @Hotwire_RCTrix
    @Hotwire_RCTrix 7 років тому +2

    A real idea, not a fantasy. Very impressive!

  • @brendanjohnson4931
    @brendanjohnson4931 6 років тому +1

    Its nice that the media is getting the fact straight on this one, even if it only took 25 years for them to do it. I would like to see how the New York Times reported this piece at the time.

  • @michaelmixon2479
    @michaelmixon2479 5 років тому +1

    This could truly revolutionize helicopter design and flight. I do hope the FAA gives it certification.

  • @JollyFlys
    @JollyFlys 7 років тому +1

    Beautiful engineering concepts, i hope it comes to consumer markets and an even better version.

  • @TruckTaxiMoveIt
    @TruckTaxiMoveIt 7 років тому +1

    This is a cool life-size version of the toys you give your kids

  • @redbearalaska2416
    @redbearalaska2416 6 років тому +1

    Longer range and more room would be fantastic. Cargo area can be used along with emergency situations use the area for stretcher and medical supplies. Excellent idea hope it grows and becomes on the market.

  • @fromontario6954
    @fromontario6954 7 років тому +25

    No demo of it actually flying?
    Also what's the max altitude and weight capacity?

    • @onjofilms
      @onjofilms 5 років тому +1

      They have a video on UA-cam where they get an amazing 6 inches off the ground. Compared to E Hang that flew 300 m off the ground.

    • @possiblyadickhead6653
      @possiblyadickhead6653 5 років тому +3

      Look at the stick. It's so small and the keys for ascending and descending are placed stupidly far away what a joke.

  • @hang-sangitch
    @hang-sangitch 7 років тому +1

    Wow.. these guys covered it all! Really cool 😊

  • @janhollon3078
    @janhollon3078 6 років тому +1

    Electromagnetic propullsion engine would replace the gas engines and produces its own power source that would greatly extend your range. Now add two small pontoons and I would be inclined to buy a couple to park behind my houseboat. Thank you for creating a unique and useful product.

  • @songmaster9308
    @songmaster9308 6 років тому +13

    Let us know when you get it off the ground.

  • @davoandersen5153
    @davoandersen5153 6 років тому +1

    keep the GREAT work up..!! My boys want to be the first drone racing pilots..!

  • @alizakhan9862
    @alizakhan9862 2 роки тому +1

    Peace of mind,heart & soul only

  • @michaelt3172
    @michaelt3172 7 років тому +1

    This is a much better design than some of the others I have seen. It's safer to have propellers above the pilot to balance the mass below

  • @graemecooper3653
    @graemecooper3653 7 років тому +1

    Great concept. May I suggest a CF ring around the perimeter of the blades as someone is going to loose body parts.

  • @oscarandgroucho
    @oscarandgroucho 7 років тому +1

    With that limited range it's meant strictly for commuting. What good is that parachute when you're in trouble over a city?

  • @wobblebits
    @wobblebits 6 років тому +18

    "As simple as controlling a DJI drone" hmmmm
    *thinks back to all the times I've bonked my drones into trees and pavement in the beginning*

    • @6themaker
      @6themaker 4 роки тому

      wobblebits my drone randomly errors in the sky and falls all the time last time it survived a 900foot fall into my buddy’s field still flys just as good as the day I bought it

    • @6themaker
      @6themaker 4 роки тому

      It’s like an esc error. It flips side to side till it hits ground so it stays inverted providing no thrust but at the same time the video will cut and all control will cut but works fine once turned off and back on and back on ground also I haven’t flown it in a horizontal sense farther than like 100yards from me and no higher than 300m

    • @6themaker
      @6themaker 4 роки тому

      We are talking bout the DJI spark here btw

  • @jarnosaarinen4583
    @jarnosaarinen4583 7 років тому +1

    I like it, when do we see it fly?

  • @daren2154
    @daren2154 6 років тому +6

    Well why don't you show it flying ?!?!

  • @mickbooker5940
    @mickbooker5940 6 років тому +2

    Haven't actually been able to find any film of this thing flying!!!

  • @richardstubbs6484
    @richardstubbs6484 7 років тому +1

    I was hoping to see it fly - is there a video of a flight?

  • @Itsisawnotiseen
    @Itsisawnotiseen 6 років тому +2

    The parachute will bring you down safely. Yeah, never mind those high tension power lines you are floating into. Just don't touch anything metal but do prepare to be cooked to well done.

    • @gangleweed
      @gangleweed 2 роки тому

      A dunb arse will do that and expect to get away with flying near power lines.

  • @tonybristol8774
    @tonybristol8774 7 років тому +1

    Understand they are trying to keep cost down, but it seems a small turboshaft engine mated to a generator/alternator would be MUCH more efficient from a power/weight standpoint than any internal combustion engine, with the possible exception of some type of rotary...

  • @FentoZ
    @FentoZ 6 років тому +1

    janes by his market will you guys be at ces 2018 ? hopefully that thing will fly there

  • @andykasperianjr.9874
    @andykasperianjr.9874 6 років тому +4

    where's the video of it actually flying??

  • @murdelabop
    @murdelabop 7 років тому +1

    They need to offer a version of it with helicopter controls. They can have all the autonomous systems they want, but helicopter controls are the way they are for a good reason.

  • @sputnik4216
    @sputnik4216 6 років тому +1

    Does this come in an actual flying model? Scanned the video didn't see any point where it's in the air.

  • @davidsherburne8429
    @davidsherburne8429 7 років тому +10

    They never fly them in. They truck them in. I have never seen any of them more that 10' off the ground.

  • @ShivShankar-ro7uo
    @ShivShankar-ro7uo 6 років тому +1

    I want to see it, flying video . Why don't uploaded. Is it fly or not please ?

  • @r.c.collins6513
    @r.c.collins6513 7 років тому +1

    I can look up at the sky right now and not see/hear a single aircraft. That will change forever in the near future. Enjoy the serenity while it lasts.

  • @richardhead8264
    @richardhead8264 7 років тому +5

    The gas struts for the doors are mounted upside-down.
    The rod should be at the bottom, and the cylinder housing should be at the top.
    This ensures that the oil in the cylinder seals against the piston and prevents the compressed gas from leaking.

    • @mitchking1491
      @mitchking1491 7 років тому

      Richard Head Lucky you're here!! I reckon they built this whole prototype without even considering the struts won't work.

    • @richardhead8264
      @richardhead8264 7 років тому +2

      Mitch King, they work for a while, but the Nitrogen seeps out much quicker without the oil barrier. Check out the info at Industrial Gas Springs. Or look inside the pneumatic chair you may be sitting on, and you will find that the rod projects toward the floor, and the cylinder housing is nearest your derrière. This arrangement allows gravity to keep oil at the seal.

    • @richardhead8264
      @richardhead8264 7 років тому +1

      www.indgassprings.com/mounting-instructions.html

  • @chrisbarr959
    @chrisbarr959 7 років тому +87

    a giant drone big enough to carry people

    • @jermaineblalock5553
      @jermaineblalock5553 7 років тому +4

      Chris Barr exactly

    • @johnjohnson4161
      @johnjohnson4161 7 років тому +1

      Tac Soldier .

    • @1compaqedr8
      @1compaqedr8 6 років тому +2

      Chris Barr no. This has a gas engine to generate electricity for the electric motors

    • @mrpanther7013
      @mrpanther7013 6 років тому +1

      A drone is operated remotely. As you can see by the video it is controlled inside the aircraft. Making this a helicopter. Not a drone!!

    • @frostyproctor2460
      @frostyproctor2460 6 років тому +1

      Country music

  • @JRESHOW
    @JRESHOW 7 років тому

    Pretty sure I'm ganna buy me one of these. Thanks for sharing.

  • @christopherd6399
    @christopherd6399 7 років тому +1

    Unless I see it in the air, it's just a concept. Also, to achieve the desired ubiquitousness, it would have to incorporate a much more complex version of autonomous automobile technology that performs reliably in three dimensions, not just two, as currently exists. I say at least 20 years out before they are widely used.

  • @martycoolguy6933
    @martycoolguy6933 7 років тому

    we made multi prop drones with the all the spares we had in our spares box back in 1993,i have been making and flying model planes for years.

  • @arhalimi5883
    @arhalimi5883 6 років тому +1

    all the best Sir ..

  • @ImaginationBlue
    @ImaginationBlue 5 років тому +1

    I love all the redundancy in fail safe features, but I would prefer the parachute only deploy by passenger / pilot choice, not automatically. I would be concerned it might accidentally deploy and get caught in those rotors, then the whole thing is shot.

  • @JustMeTalking
    @JustMeTalking 7 років тому +1

    Those lower blades would decapitate anyone going near that thing on the ground (especially uneven surfaces). Why build the blades so low?

  • @jonashs6088
    @jonashs6088 7 років тому +19

    It is uncomfortable to have the controls to the right,
    it would be fine with the controls up front

    • @phugwad
      @phugwad 7 років тому

      JonaS HS A control stick on the right has been standard on the F-16 since 1980, seems to work fine. Airbus also uses a side stick controller and I have heard no complaints from pilots.

    • @jonashs6088
      @jonashs6088 7 років тому +1

      controls in F-16 are HOTAS, right and left, also, pilots have his arms held side by side on armrests, that is quite diferet, it has not armrest, it may be not comfortable when maneuvering

    • @russelltowles5564
      @russelltowles5564 7 років тому

      strato man f

    • @russelltowles5564
      @russelltowles5564 7 років тому

      strato man u

    • @phugwad
      @phugwad 7 років тому

      JonaS HS As someone who flew both high performance jets and civil aerobatic aircraft I don't see any disadvantage to a side stick controller vs a center stick. I find both to be completely acceptable, with maybe a nod to the sidestick if it is well designed. One does not pull much G in a helicopter so an armrest may not be so important. The side throttles on all the jet trainers and fighters I have flown did not have an armrest and it didn't feel like a problem to me. HOTAS is great, as it allows the pilot to focus on combat, or just flying, but really doesn't enter into the question of sidestick vs center stick. HOTAS has been standard in virtually every new fighter since the F-15 and these new fighters have had a mixture of side and center sticks.
      I don't think this helicopter has throttles at all, motor power is likely controlled by the computers that handle most of the flying on this machine. But those toggle switches for altitude and something else? don't seem well thought out.
      It is also somewhat telling that we never saw the helicopter fly.

  • @JulianFischerJulesBarner
    @JulianFischerJulesBarner 7 років тому +1

    I missed one thing which is surplus lifting power (e.g. how much cargo can be mounted externally/ could I lift something heavier/denser than normal passengers i the cabin?)

    • @gangleweed
      @gangleweed 2 роки тому

      When the bicycle was invented nobody wanted to think in terms of cargo carrying capacity.

  • @arodrigues2843
    @arodrigues2843 7 років тому +9

    It was just a question of time, until they make a grown up drone!!!!

  • @abazdarhon
    @abazdarhon 7 років тому +2

    It's good to see this technology alive it kick out those who live in they posh pilot society and airspace will be now for every one. Long time but at list. The future is coming. It's like on streets you have money for car you can drive because airspace and land either sea is for every one not only few.

  • @elgalloazul
    @elgalloazul 7 років тому +1

    I like the name "SureFly". I would probably have used the name "Seld-M-Crash", which has a nice ring to it as well.

  • @ApPersonaNonGrata
    @ApPersonaNonGrata 7 років тому +4

    How many of these did you chute-test and crash-test?
    Can we see the results of each?
    Thanks

    • @DanSlotea
      @DanSlotea 7 років тому +3

      James Apperson wich part of the words "first prototype" you don't understand?

  • @melsuarez
    @melsuarez 6 років тому

    Very cool looking. Was shocked at the control panel, it's location, as well as the throttle mechanism. Certainly a cost and weight-saving thing. Looks makeshift to me. But the concept is great. If a DJI drone can do it why not a manned heli. Good luck with the FAA.

  • @aeasus
    @aeasus 7 років тому +1

    I would like to know the distance it could fly if you replaced the engine, generator, and associated electric production system controls with an equal weight of batteries, what would that distance be? I would think the price would come way down as well.

    • @gangleweed
      @gangleweed 2 роки тому

      Replacing with batteries means you lose the ability to refuel in a short time anywhere you can get fuel, and you need to find a charging station somewhere .

    • @aeasus
      @aeasus 2 роки тому

      @@gangleweed How about putting fast charging stations at all local airports, problem solved.

    • @gangleweed
      @gangleweed 2 роки тому

      @@aeasus It would only work if you went direct to an airport with one but if you ran out of power getting to one you would not be able to recharge......perhaps a plug in solution might work but that would suggest a large battery pack.......I like the idea of an onboard petrol generator solution as you can get petrol any where at the moment.
      My opinion is that they've spent too much time making it look pretty whereas it should have been prototyped as a viable flying machine then prettied up to get sales........I don't think this model will ever get to a flying capability until the basic concept flies with a payload and a live pilot at the controls.

    • @aeasus
      @aeasus 2 роки тому

      @@gangleweed there are better designs already flying

    • @gangleweed
      @gangleweed 2 роки тому

      @@aeasus ....up, down, around and around, those magnificent men and their flying machines.........for me, Terra Firma.....the more firmer the less terror.
      Having watched one too many of those air disaster shows I'm a dedicated ground hugger and will never ever be hoisted in the air by one of those contraptions ever, I have more respect for the well being of my body than to potentially experience the effect of jumping off a high cliff onto jagged rocks which is the same effect in the end.

  • @aMoneyYell
    @aMoneyYell 7 років тому +2

    I LOVE IT!!!!!

  • @gregoryjoseph6775
    @gregoryjoseph6775 7 років тому +1

    Do we control over where the parachute put us down? What if it put me down on a 64000Kv line?

    • @gangleweed
      @gangleweed 2 роки тому

      Don't fly over power lines dumb arse.......don't go to bed without a parachute in case you fall out of bed in the night.....LOL

  • @LuvBorderCollies
    @LuvBorderCollies 7 років тому

    "Many single points of failure". That's why I say there are no unnecessary parts in a helo and each is relying on each other to stay in the air.

  • @tojujackson5505
    @tojujackson5505 6 років тому +1

    How does it work

  • @wjj4832
    @wjj4832 7 років тому +1

    Who is the parachute supplier?

  • @You-are-right-but
    @You-are-right-but 7 років тому +1

    Really impressed!!!

  • @justfly2525
    @justfly2525 7 років тому +9

    They need to look at the mice/joysticks that are used for 3D CAD drawing. Pull the stick up to go up. Push the stick down to go down.

  • @rc2672
    @rc2672 7 років тому +15

    I hope this sort of effort gets support from the FAA. It is time to open up the air for the public.

    • @madmax2069
      @madmax2069 7 років тому +1

      R C most of the people that could afford one are already in the air.

    • @blackdeath4u
      @blackdeath4u 7 років тому +3

      madmax2069 if they can automate the process much like they do with cars, no reason why they couldn't get down to $50,000-$80,000 for one of these... Cheaper then an escalade or a high end bmw....and how many of those are on the streets. These guys should get in cahoots with tesla. If tesla can bring their batteries and factory into the equation the price would come wayyyyy down.

    • @kmart636
      @kmart636 7 років тому +2

      Airways are not just ready to be opened up to the public where any spoiled kid or guy with a good job could fly around. Think of the collateral damage on the ground when 1 dumbass wrecks his new drone...

    • @MsSomeonenew
      @MsSomeonenew 6 років тому

      Once they have full autopilot sure, otherwise you really can't trust people without extensive training.

  • @Rozgreez562
    @Rozgreez562 7 років тому

    Basically a Logitech joystick is missing. Overall well executed idea and machinery.

  • @chaselight1872
    @chaselight1872 6 років тому

    try a ballistic helial descent prop to spin the vehicle slowly to the ground without vehicle rotation assembly for a security feature. instead of a parchute

  • @dlwatib
    @dlwatib 7 років тому +3

    Needs a VR glove. Joysticks are so yesterday! ;)

  • @WilliamJones-Halibut-vq1fs
    @WilliamJones-Halibut-vq1fs 5 років тому

    Certification is the big issue. This type of device can not autorotate. This device uses a petrol generator for electric power and the batteries merely as a safety backup. A parachute is a further backup.

  • @pauld8156
    @pauld8156 7 років тому +6

    Make the control interface a PlayStation. You can practice all you want at home then go fly it for real with a PlayStation controller with simulation hours under your belt.

    • @weareallbeingwatched4602
      @weareallbeingwatched4602 7 років тому

      Paul D you sir have got a good way of thinking.
      Tbh a controller for a Pc matching the control surface of the aircraft is probably within budget. If you can afford the aircraft you can afford a controller for a simulator.
      But certainly the idea of using a commercial games console as a training simulator is a great idea. Somebody should do that for cars.

    • @soweliLuna
      @soweliLuna 7 років тому

      I don't like the helicopter itself but that's actually a really good idea lol

  • @elecnut8211
    @elecnut8211 7 років тому +1

    This is great !!! I would love to be part of this team. Where do i sign up ?

  • @kickinbackinOC
    @kickinbackinOC 7 років тому +1

    BRAVO! TREMENDOUS STEP FORWARD IN AVIATION!
    Whoops, was I shouting? Sorry!

  • @tsicby
    @tsicby 5 років тому

    Awesome, but they don't seem to be able to get a clearance to fly the thing. What are they afraid of?

  • @nasam789
    @nasam789 7 років тому

    what is the size of this machine, Length, Width, Height, Weight

  • @northcacalacka545
    @northcacalacka545 6 років тому +3

    Does it come in fun colors? I'll take one in blue....

  • @jackguthrie1542
    @jackguthrie1542 5 років тому

    Now that is cool should have had this 40 yrs ago!

  • @shemphoward6274
    @shemphoward6274 7 років тому

    Interesting and looks promising but is multiple points of failure really better then a single point? And do you have some AI in mind to avoid hazards like Vortex-ring state, wind and ground hazards, as an un-aware pilot-passenger could place himself at great risk in a semi-atomoious aircraft?

  • @KamalSingh-gx6iy
    @KamalSingh-gx6iy 4 роки тому

    How much price this private helicopter can is still available now in India

  • @sudan8300
    @sudan8300 5 років тому

    Why not to add 8 propeller instead of being 2 propeller, obviously its reduce noise as well as increase thrust.

  • @scythelord
    @scythelord 7 років тому

    There's a reason why Quadcopter design hasn't been used for large helicopters, they're far less efficient.

  • @ShankarShankar-rs2vz
    @ShankarShankar-rs2vz 5 років тому +1

    Sir please upload flying video. I want to see flying video.

  • @andrewwilson8317
    @andrewwilson8317 5 років тому

    Must be loads of these buzzing around by now?

  • @erics4086
    @erics4086 6 років тому

    I call bull on a "patented" crumple zone landing skid. What's the USPTO utility #?

  • @ProChoiceJesus
    @ProChoiceJesus 7 років тому +59

    As a holder of a Commercial Pilot Certificate with Instrument Rating, I'm uncomfortable with one thing (among others) said in this video...namely, that a pilot of Surefly would not have to undergo many hours of training to operate this aircraft. They seem to be attempting negotiation with the FAA for some sort of much less or hardly any training requirement. I am not comfortable sharing the sky with those who are not skilled in aerodynamics, airspace, piloting, FARs, ATC procedure, etc...

    • @ET_Don
      @ET_Don 7 років тому +2

      I agree on having to share the sky with lesser qualified pilots, or worse, non-pilots.
      I'm a pilot myself, fixed wing and rotor.

    • @DaveKnTex
      @DaveKnTex 7 років тому

      Agree, but it does answer many problems related to helecopters. I think they are vastly under pricing the unit; I would think by a multiple of 4+ times. The marketing people need to sit down and rethink their customer base. If a person is in a position to pay $200K would a price of 800K and above make a difference is units sold? I do believe it would have a strong niche market, but not for your regular Joe as they seem to be targeting.

    • @TheLsav8r
      @TheLsav8r 7 років тому +5

      At 200,000.00 how man incompetent people do you think can afford them? Your worries are unfounded. Besides this isn't even real, it's a concept.

    • @mcearl8073
      @mcearl8073 7 років тому +11

      TheLsav8r agreed, plus aren't pilots already sharing the skies with untrained pilots flying ultralights and experimentals around.

    • @solardiymadesimple.3779
      @solardiymadesimple.3779 7 років тому

      ProChoiceJesus I

  • @Ravennevarr
    @Ravennevarr 3 роки тому

    Is there a way to regulated or tax it? Former politician here

  • @francisguidera972
    @francisguidera972 7 років тому

    And you don't need the skill to be able fly a helicopter either! Incredible stuff!

  • @tomthompson7400
    @tomthompson7400 7 років тому

    does it work , ,,, or is it a model ,,,, ie has it flown , a simple yes or no will suffice.

  • @martycoolguy6933
    @martycoolguy6933 7 років тому

    The parachute idea is not that safe you have to be a certain height,certain speed,and if you had to deploy you have seconds,and then if your not disorientated,will it deploy every time.

    • @carabela125
      @carabela125 7 років тому +1

      It's a ballistic parachute, meaning it is shot out of it's container. This is proven tech on Cirrus aircraft.

    • @gangleweed
      @gangleweed 2 роки тому

      Don't worry about that aspect, you won't be affording one any time this century.

  • @beeqool
    @beeqool 6 років тому

    i wonder why it doesnt use multiple small 1 cylinder generators for extra redundacy, instead of one big generator?

    • @gangleweed
      @gangleweed 2 роки тому

      Have you ever tried to start a weed chopper and after a few pulls without luck you toss it back in the garage and use a hand shears?

  • @stepvanjoe3469
    @stepvanjoe3469 7 років тому

    Built by the same company that used to build step vans?

  • @redbugg99
    @redbugg99 7 років тому

    so what you are saying is the prototype doesn't work ... yet

  • @hanifemuhamed8249
    @hanifemuhamed8249 6 років тому

    Does it come in black

  • @andrewwilson8317
    @andrewwilson8317 5 років тому

    Any video of it flying? The numbers make things look a bit iffy? Eight motors are going to be 20 HP each to give vertical lift ,roughly 160 BHP. Pretty much the same as Robinson 22? It pretty light and needs all of that to get off the ground two up! Given the motors, batteries,generator and engine then it going to be much heavier? Each motor not going to be less than 10 kg so 80kg there, batteries going to be much the same so80kg there, engine going to be 160 to 180 hp minimum and that another 80 kg if not more and generator that makes enough power going to be 50kg , no less. The empty weight going to be no less than 500 o 550 kg with a lift off weight of 750 kg or more when two up with fuel. 160 HP will be only just enough to lift 750 kg. Keep up great work guys, going to be bloody hard work and a lot of keen design to get it to viable flying status.

  • @danomanol
    @danomanol 7 років тому

    Anyone seen a video of this thing flying? I've searched for 20 minutes - can't find evidence it can lift off even an inch...?

  • @commonsense769
    @commonsense769 7 років тому +1

    Can you send me your prototype, so that I can test before purchase?

  • @COLNAGO1969
    @COLNAGO1969 7 років тому +7

    all talk but no flying whats the deal with that

    • @DickHolman
      @DickHolman 7 років тому

      Probably no certification, he did say they were talking to the FAA about it, & this was @Paris Air Show, so, no ticket, no flying.

    • @TotalRookie_LV
      @TotalRookie_LV 7 років тому

      COLNAGO1969
      I guess they are not allowed to fly it, at least not in a populated area, as it's not a registered aircraft yet. Besides there are restrictions for drones too, especially near airfields, in theory, I can't even fly tiny drone of my kid in my yard, since it's less than 5km from an international airport.

  • @Homoprimatesapiens
    @Homoprimatesapiens 7 років тому

    Before getting the green light from authoraties, new safety fly rules have to be implemented. Otherwise the swarm of octo locusts will cause havoc.

  • @vastmicro1200
    @vastmicro1200 6 років тому

    Definitely a great step, and I want one, but hopefully the flight control app doesn't crash like DJI software does. I'd want redundant computer systems integrated if it hasn't already been done.

  • @cartmanrlsusall
    @cartmanrlsusall 7 років тому

    if it performs well they have a winner just by the simplicity of that control system

  • @aaahtex902
    @aaahtex902 7 років тому +2

    I WANT SOME NOW!~!!!!
    GREAT INNOVATION!!!

  • @HarleyFXS
    @HarleyFXS 6 років тому

    Generating electricity from an engine and then converting it back with motors will lose more than 50% of that energy. If there are batteries for emergency landing, then the engine should drive the propellers directly, and with a small generator to keep the batteries charged.

  • @ChuckBeefOG
    @ChuckBeefOG 7 років тому

    So many tech nerds will be walking into the rotors in no time

  • @KSPilo
    @KSPilo 7 років тому +1

    It's so save, you need to put 8 fast spinning rotors just slightly over head level to make it highly unsave again....duh!

  • @selamatmuhamad5690
    @selamatmuhamad5690 6 років тому

    Good for medical emergency use in the congested city area..

  • @berniemccann8935
    @berniemccann8935 6 років тому

    Gas engine charging batteries ... so why only 20 to 70 mile range?

  • @sonshinelight
    @sonshinelight 6 років тому

    Is this another Icon? Where it's made "easy" and looks sexy, like flying a jet fighter? A la Roy Halliday?