1Lun
I wouldn't buy one in my life!
Why?
1. air cabs don't solve any problems, especially not traffic problems. How many cabs would have to be in the air to relieve traffic on the ground? Talking about relieving traffic congestion is complete nonsense. Add to that the inefficiency of the means of transportation. Good grief!
2. the market will not grow at all because this solution will fulfill expectations to zero. There is no market for an inefficient means of transportation for small groups. MAXIMUM I see an application here as a replacement for rescue helicopters, which are very expensive to buy.
3. landing/take-off zones: Where please should hundreds of air cabs land & take off in the city center?
4. noise: In no video of Lilium that I have seen so far can you hear whether and how loud these things are.
5. range: experts have been pointing out for years that Lilium's figures cannot be achieved.
Conclusion: Can air cabs be built? Yes. Is it a good idea? No. It's a disastrous idea with no rhyme or reason.
But the WORST thing is this insane government, which also wants to burn 100 million here (Bavaria and the federal government together). How can anyone be so incredibly stupid?
I understand that technologies need to be promoted - but not such utter nonsense!
When Lilium went public, I wanted to short it immediately, but I couldn't find an instrument. That's a great pity.
Lilium is the moronic dream of a couple of students who played bullshit bingo with complete fools like Thelen.
And finally: you only have to look at the share price performance - that says it all. Anyone still investing is really beyond help. If you want to gamble in the short term, buy in the hope of support from the federal government and Bavaria. But then please get out immediately!
Why?
1. air cabs don't solve any problems, especially not traffic problems. How many cabs would have to be in the air to relieve traffic on the ground? Talking about relieving traffic congestion is complete nonsense. Add to that the inefficiency of the means of transportation. Good grief!
2. the market will not grow at all because this solution will fulfill expectations to zero. There is no market for an inefficient means of transportation for small groups. MAXIMUM I see an application here as a replacement for rescue helicopters, which are very expensive to buy.
3. landing/take-off zones: Where please should hundreds of air cabs land & take off in the city center?
4. noise: In no video of Lilium that I have seen so far can you hear whether and how loud these things are.
5. range: experts have been pointing out for years that Lilium's figures cannot be achieved.
Conclusion: Can air cabs be built? Yes. Is it a good idea? No. It's a disastrous idea with no rhyme or reason.
But the WORST thing is this insane government, which also wants to burn 100 million here (Bavaria and the federal government together). How can anyone be so incredibly stupid?
I understand that technologies need to be promoted - but not such utter nonsense!
When Lilium went public, I wanted to short it immediately, but I couldn't find an instrument. That's a great pity.
Lilium is the moronic dream of a couple of students who played bullshit bingo with complete fools like Thelen.
And finally: you only have to look at the share price performance - that says it all. Anyone still investing is really beyond help. If you want to gamble in the short term, buy in the hope of support from the federal government and Bavaria. But then please get out immediately!
•
77
•
1Lun
@Charmin
Regarding 1: there are good simulations in which you can see the time savings for distances of 100km or more. You also have to take into account that Lilium does not want to cover inner-city traffic but traffic between two cities. For example, Ingolstadt - Munich.
Re 2: There are already various pre-orders. There are declarations of intent to purchase almost 100 jets.
Then to say that there is no market for them is incomprehensible to me.
Re 3: This will of course be an infrastructure issue. But the fact that you land and take off vertically means that nowhere near as much space is needed as with conventional runways.
But it should be possible, especially near parks or large shopping centers.
Re 4: The lilium jets are by far the quietest in the industry, which is due to the internal drive technology.
Re 5: We'll have to wait and see how the tests go.
I think that there is already a use case here. And in my opinion, it is also right to support such companies.
But everyone has to form their own opinion 😊👍🏻
Regarding 1: there are good simulations in which you can see the time savings for distances of 100km or more. You also have to take into account that Lilium does not want to cover inner-city traffic but traffic between two cities. For example, Ingolstadt - Munich.
Re 2: There are already various pre-orders. There are declarations of intent to purchase almost 100 jets.
Then to say that there is no market for them is incomprehensible to me.
Re 3: This will of course be an infrastructure issue. But the fact that you land and take off vertically means that nowhere near as much space is needed as with conventional runways.
But it should be possible, especially near parks or large shopping centers.
Re 4: The lilium jets are by far the quietest in the industry, which is due to the internal drive technology.
Re 5: We'll have to wait and see how the tests go.
I think that there is already a use case here. And in my opinion, it is also right to support such companies.
But everyone has to form their own opinion 😊👍🏻
•
22
•
1Lun
@Addi_48
Re 1: The energy density of batteries is currently still a disaster. Flight time and range are severely limited, which is why your argument regarding the reduction in load is merely a relative representation of the problem.
Re 2: The regulatory hurdles and air traffic regulations are very high. If you add passenger transportation to this, the costs will rise immeasurably, which is why market acceptance will fall. They will therefore remain permanently unprofitable. In the course of the scaling possibilities, something more than a few declarations of intent will have to happen. Here I am fully with @Charmin. It will remain a means of transportation for the top 1% or for rescuing people.
Regarding 3: Have you ever looked into vertiports? They are anything but economical. Space and infrastructure still have to be created. Not to mention the bureaucracy ...
Re 4: Aircraft movements at low altitudes can also be disruptive. Electric motors also generate enormous noise emissions, even though they are mostly located in the high-frequency spectrum. Electromagnetic vibrations should never be underestimated. Otherwise you could mix industrial areas with residential areas in the future, couldn't you? After all, electric actuators are predominantly used there and yet the noise emissions are far above the limit value.
5: There is no need to wait for tests. The physical parameters are limited. You can only optimize here, but not expect a quantum leap in technology. The figures given by Lilium are simply window-dressing and unrealistic.
Re 1: The energy density of batteries is currently still a disaster. Flight time and range are severely limited, which is why your argument regarding the reduction in load is merely a relative representation of the problem.
Re 2: The regulatory hurdles and air traffic regulations are very high. If you add passenger transportation to this, the costs will rise immeasurably, which is why market acceptance will fall. They will therefore remain permanently unprofitable. In the course of the scaling possibilities, something more than a few declarations of intent will have to happen. Here I am fully with @Charmin. It will remain a means of transportation for the top 1% or for rescuing people.
Regarding 3: Have you ever looked into vertiports? They are anything but economical. Space and infrastructure still have to be created. Not to mention the bureaucracy ...
Re 4: Aircraft movements at low altitudes can also be disruptive. Electric motors also generate enormous noise emissions, even though they are mostly located in the high-frequency spectrum. Electromagnetic vibrations should never be underestimated. Otherwise you could mix industrial areas with residential areas in the future, couldn't you? After all, electric actuators are predominantly used there and yet the noise emissions are far above the limit value.
5: There is no need to wait for tests. The physical parameters are limited. You can only optimize here, but not expect a quantum leap in technology. The figures given by Lilium are simply window-dressing and unrealistic.
•
11
•