It means they're well-backed, financially, and will likely get wherever they want to go, at least technologically.I have no predictions for the future but Larry Page’s interest in all this surely means something.
The VTOL multicopter part dictate a three axis artificial stability system. Will do in airplane mode too. A ballistic recovery system does take care of the power out condition.I don't know if anyone has addressed this yet... but... how would this aircraft achieve natural stability on the pitch axis? The Rutan canards and tandem wings used a higher loading on a smaller canard at the front, combined with CG placement. This allowed the aircraft to be trimmed for level lifght at different speeds, and resume level flight within X oscillations after an upset.
If you use (what appear to be) equally sized wings with (what appears to be) equal loading, it seems to me that you will not achieve any natural stability... and be forced to rely on some kind of active system. An active system like that IMHO has no justification on this type of machine. It would be another point of failure, and possibly a catastrophic failure. One ol the positive things about this particular machine is that it LOOKS like it could glide down to a survivable landing in the event of a power system failure above some altitude threshold. If you needed an active system to prevent it from swapping ends, that important safety feature goes away.
It is what progress do look like.Takes dotcom billionaires and carbon fiber and and terabytes worth of computer data storage and processing capability to do what Pitcairn did 80 years ago with wood and steel.
Don't you just love progress?
Call me selfish, but I don’t care if the rest of society can’t integrate this thing.It's a great dream. Society hasn't quite caught up with the technology yet.
Explanation? I understand that as a Part 103 UL it requires prior permission to enter controlled airspace. But, such permissions are routinely granted. As and E-AB what else would be required other than the normal ATC contact call?It flies more or less autonomously. So the authorities likely don't have the airworthiness criteria to allow it in the airport airspace yet,
I like analogies, so I'm going to make one. The Pitcairn autogyro is to the Blackfly Opener as a Estes model rocket is to the SpaceX Falcon 9 landing on a barge in the ocean.Takes dotcom billionaires and carbon fiber and and terabytes worth of computer data storage and processing capability to do what Pitcairn did 80 years ago with wood and steel.
If you do not think that an autonomous, redundant, human safe octocopter that can also fly using passive lift from fixed wings while incorporating fail-safe capabilities represents progress, I wonder what progress would look like to you.Don't you just love progress?
A semi-autonomous EA-B requires an airworthiness certificate. None have been granted yet, as far as I know.Explanation? I understand that as a Part 103 UL it requires prior permission to enter controlled airspace. But, such permissions are routinely granted. As and E-AB what else would be required other than the normal ATC contact call?
Hundreds of RVs have autopilot systems, which have been granted E-AB airworthiness certificates. They are semi-autonomous.A semi-autonomous EA-B requires an airworthiness certificate. None have been granted yet, as far as I know.
An EA-B requires a pilot certicate. None have been granted for electric powered lift, as far as I know.
The 777 has an airworthiness certificate.
I didn't say it will never happen.