There seem to be two extremes of opinion about Advanced Air Mobility - but which one is closest to the truth?

The Teeter Totter of Opinions About AAM

Depending on who you ask, the probability of seeing electric vertical takeoff and landing (eVTOL) aircraft in the foreseeable future ranges from "ain't gonna happen" to "see you in a year or so." A while back, I?challenged folks?to provide some evidence supporting the whole AAM concept by persons or entities NOT affiliated with or benefiting from the AAM world. There weren't any eligible responses. So what's really going on here? Who's closer to the "truth"?

Opinion: Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs)

If you ask the OEMs - those building the eVTOLs - it is not a matter of IF. Rather, it is a matter of WHEN. And although the WHEN keeps shifting, there recently has been some solidification of aircraft certification schedules with all eyes on 2025-2026. Operations are purported to be forthcoming soon thereafter.

Obviously, some OEMs are in much better positions to make such claims than others, with Joby and Archer seemingly leading the pack. I do not doubt that Joby and Archer will be flying for hire within a couple of years - I have seen the aircraft and their assembly lines with my own eyes. Both Joby and Archer have impressive campuses and are clearly on the cusp of scaled production, with each building industrial-sized manufacturing facilities.

But despite all the progress that OEMs have been making, there are still a lot of "what ifs" and question marks.

Statements made by some eVTOL OEM C-suite folks often leave me (and apparently others) scratching one's head. Some defy logic, others economic realities. This was reinforced yet again when I found an article from August 28, 2024 in Wired. It's sort of an autopsy of Volocopter's faux départ in Paris.

Volocopter's CEO made it sound promising that Parisians and visiting spectators would fly above the Seine in the OEM's VoloCity eVTOL: "[We’re] making people aware that this is not science fiction,” he went on to try and convince Wired that "the flying taxi [is] a sustainable, safe, and quiet mode of transport that would become normal in just a few years."

Opinion: Some economic promotion entities

Some, but not all, economic development entities are touting AAM. And why not? AAM may lead to new jobs, construction projects, enhancements to local transit, and the image of being "leading edge." According to the president of the regional council of ?le-de-France, the region of France that contains Paris, "The development of low-altitude aviation for urban air mobility is an adventure full of promise—for employment, for the environment, and for the lives of ?le-de-France residents."

Opinion: The nay-sayers

Not everyone was given rose-colored glasses, apparently. There have been widespread concerns about the economics and true impacts AAM may have on a locality. Doubts have been cast as to the affordability of the service. Here's what Volocopter's CEO stated in early 2024: “We strongly believe that when we go into the hundreds and thousands of these vehicles, that we can easily reach a price per equivalent seat which is only a bit higher than a taxi on the street." Thousands of the eVTOLs? The same price as a road taxi? With other OEMs claiming similarly high production numbers, it's got researchers and laypersons both wondering if this whole AAM thing really is sustainable.

Also, questions remain as to the viability of a new proposed service that intends to replace one that already exists - helicopter shuttles.

But helicopters are so loud. Pas de soucis mon ami, eVTOLs are not. Or are they? One spectator of the Pontoise Volocopter demonstration flight noted, “I thought it was quite, quite noisy."

Then there's the public perception piece. OEMs assume everyone wants AAM and see the benefit. This, in my opinion, is the biggest mistake made so far in terms of the overall business model. Now OEMs are back peddling, realizing they've neglected key components of success - perception and acceptance. Paris was the first of what is likely to be many cases where AAM was attempted to be "force fed" to residents, resulting in a boomerang of discontent. Here is what was said about the Paris service idea: “We don't need them... it’s not mass transportation.” Further, it was noted that eVTOLs create visual and noise pollution without being able to deliver the advertised benefits to those affected on the ground.

Even more resistance surfaced as the opening ceremony approached: "Seventeen thousand people have signed a petition so far calling for the project to be scrapped, and politicians in charge of Paris also joined the backlash—pitting politicians in the capital against the wider region and government." Even Parisian leadership wasn't on board, with a deputy mayor stating "“absurd gadget... [that] only benefit[s] a few ultrarich people.” Another deputy mayor added that AAM "is useless, it is anti-ecological, it is very expensive.”

The Jury is Out

I'm not looking to start an argument about the viability or utility of AAM. In reality, this will be settled by market forces and perhaps some good timing. I do think we will see some form of AAM in the near term. Beyond that, however, it's still too premature to claim that this will be as big of a deal as it has been made out to be.

As I predicted almost two years ago, we are seeing some consolidation among AAM businesses, with the big OEMs purchasing up suppliers and key partners. I stand by my prediction that a period of insolvency is on the horizon, with the weakest players disappearing from existence.

Too Many Questions Remain

We can never know everything we need to know before launching a business or product. However, there are some questions that MUST be settled before making substantial investments. Here are only a few of the questions that I have heard among AAM stakeholders, namely those in a neutral role in reference to OEMs and AAM service providers:

1. Show me the money - what does the business model really look like? Let's take a look at the honest-to-goodness numbers and be frank about what can be expected. These flights will not be as cheap as taxis anytime soon.
2. Where are these 1,000's of aircraft going to: a) park at night, b) charge, c) be repaired?
3. Who is going to fly the 1000's of aircraft? We already have trouble finding qualified pilots for conventional aircraft. Can AAM really afford pilots being paid $50,000-$75,000 each?
4. Who's paying for the infrastructure? What about the charging infrastructure, including switchgear, transformers, groundwork, etc? So far, there's a lot of finger-pointing about this one - oh, they're going to pay, wait, no, you're going to pay... Let's face it, building 100's of vertiports isn't going to be cheap and the ROI isn't looking like it will pencil out anytime soon.
5. What do people really think about the prospect of AAM in their backyard? I'm guessing a lot can be learned from Paris. Other communities are starting to place restrictions on drone operations. eVTOLs are next.
6. How is AAM going to be "equitable"? If history provides any lessons, helicopter transport is too expensive to be equally available to all, especially in the form of a taxi service. Furthermore, airports and other "yucky" infrastructure are typically surrounded by less fortunate neighborhoods. I'd imagine at least some vertiports will be located where the land is cheap, repeating the cycle of typically disadvantaged populations. The populace will bear the burden of noise and visual pollution without being able to reap the benefits of the intruders.
7. Speaking of equity - how many eVTOLs are handicapped friendly? The FAA views vertiports as airports; thus, they must be accessible, but what good is it if the disabled can't fly in the aircraft that service the vertiport?
8. When are stakeholders going to admit that AAM is not going to ease urban congestion? Has Uber and Lyft eased congestion?

Thanks for listening!

#AAM #RAM #UAM #FAA #vertiport #evtol #aami #vfs #cami #advancedairmobility #airtaxi #airline #airtravel #airtransportation

Consolidated by #AMRG