SkyFly-Axe Simple, Practical EVTOL

In this video we look at the Axe Skyfly. A compact EVTOL that is similar to Opener's Blackfly but is a two seater and has a 100 mile range.

[@steffwo]

This EVTOL aircraft has an intelligent design. Reduced to the necessary parts , but still very safe because of its gliding option.

[@chrismonroe5490]

Does anybody have an opinion comparing this to the KH Heaviside energy use performance

[@berloma]

Hope it gets the certification. I like the fact that it can glide without engines and land safely provided a landing strip. Great video!

[@arcanondrum6543]

Always good to see actual flight footage instead of simulations. To me, the Parachute would be redundant, 9 to 1 is good. If only one propeller fails, 3 more are pulling forward. Two failing on one side should (also) be part of the certification testing. Nice aircraft. Short range without the rotary but my longest regular commute was 75 miles one way, so that would be a fit. All production aircraft for little guy General Aviation are too expensive. It feels like we subsidize the big aircraft sometimes.

[@JinKee]

Is the footage of the axe a model or a fullsized manned aircraft?

[@walkerken5]

The best configuration so far for evtol.

[@mrmusanda3576]

It more realistic

[@ilkoderez601]

The "Quickie" is my favorite personal aircraft, ever, so I love the tandem biplane design!

[@rjung_ch]

Like the design, all together the cost sure is up there. But with 200 miles range with the wankel engine in it, it could be a viable commuter for some in need. Thanks for bringing us all these great insights into what is out there! 👍💪✌

[@ElectricAviation]

Totally agree

[@z_actual]

Im not fond of wing tip props for 2 reasons, the extreme impact on control should a tip rotor fail, and the likelihood of failure due to collision. That said we can see a pattern between BlackFly and SkyFly for which SkyFly may seem easier to operate, but BlackFly has the greater efficiency having a straighter thrust axis. If BlackFly had within it a rotating control seat that sought a near level flying position within a vertically squashed spherical cabin I think it would make the best of this concept

[@DrMackSplackem]

Of course, the main issue there (to the best of my info) is the BlackFly's already marginal takeoff weight capacity.

[@richardjenkins4182]

The BlackFly also has two motors per propeller, which is another safety feature.

[@DrMackSplackem]

@@richardjenkins4182 Oh, nice. That makes sense, now that I think about it.

[@Metrofarquhar]

Considering all of this aircraft’s capabilities and safety of operation, $200,000 is not bad in 2023. Just think, it is a two place electric, V/STOL airplane that can fly at respectable lightplane speeds and distances very economically. This really is the 21st century!

[@esmenhamaire6398]

I like that it has good yaw control authority and that it can glide well. I don't like the props not being ducted, due to safety issues when on or near the ground. If they changed the propulsion setup to minimise (or remove) the risk of someone accidentally walking into a rotating propellor, it'd be great!

[@ElectricAviation]

Ducting the props is a wonderful idea

[@FeralRabbit]

Conventional aircraft have existed for decades with a prop strike risk. Unless the ducting were to improve performance to a degree that outstrips their added weight and complexity they're not worth it IMO. I think the missed mark is the wings not having blown lift or at least incorporated into the wingtips to such a degree that they control vortices drag. But hey I'm a guy on the internet.

[@arcanondrum6543]

@@FeralRabbit Hey, guy on the Internet -> 3:15

[@FeralRabbit]

@@arcanondrum6543 so you're saying, the prop not overlapping the wing at all reduces vortex drag the same amount as if they did? Thanks for contributing though. Guy on internet.

[@arcanondrum6543]

@@FeralRabbit #1 @3:15 "...as it can counteract the Wingtip Vortices." - Electric Aviation YT Channel #2 There is clear wingtip/prop overlap.

[@TheJamesmcdiarmid]

Great video - thanks for sharing your thoughts. Looks very promising! Fingers crossed it will be certified soon

[@papparocket]

Some comments mention the issue of landing without power. If the issue causing an emergency landing is low battery power there is nothing that says that the power has to continue to used until the batteries are absolutely exhausted before the thrusters stop. The vehicle control system could be configured such that the vehicle shuts down the thrusters with a small amount of reserve power that can then be used to do a powered landing. The reserve energy would be enough to adjust the glide slope close to the ground to extend the distance slightly to reach the selected landing zone so you don't crash into houses or trees just a few hundred meters short of a viable landing site, and then be able to do at least an extremely short STOL landing to greatly reduce the landing speed, and thus crash energy and potentially a fully vertical landing if sufficient energy is still available at touch down. The power management during final approach and landing would likely take an fully automated flight controller so that the pilots don't have to have the level of expertise to hand-fly such a challenging energy, altitude and speed management scenario. The flight computer would also need to have preloaded into it all the potential landing zones along the planned flight path so that with vehicle position and altitude and estimated wind speed (from difference in airspeed and GPS derived ground speed) when an emergency landing is required it can instantly identify all landing zones that can be reached and identify the best of those available.

[@ilkoderez601]

Price is too steep. We need a homebuilt tandem biplane eVTOL. It's no coincidence that the Quickie also had really good specs...

[@johnh8615]

I want to see a dual purpose water and land version.

[@freak33a]

SUB Style?😂 Titanic Gate vibes😂

[@amentco8445]

​@@freak33aboat vs sub, very different fields.

[@donniewatson9120]

It's appearance is appealing to me!!!

[@ElectricAviation]

The way it glides gives some confidence

[@donniewatson9120]

@ElectricAviation , a FAR 103 legal version would be a good option for the US. Doubtful they will be able to produce one considering the weight constraints. It’s also doubtful they could do it affordably.

[@joseveintegenario-nisu1928]

GR8 achievement! I'd say Axe Tandem Wing machine, close to early Henri Mignet 'Pou du ciel', 'Sky louse', could do well with an slightly different arrangement: front wing larger and higher than rear wing, also Custer Channel Wings, with propellers on leading edge of channel. Engines inside fuselage, propellers driven by shafts. Try it, compare, and if you find something better, buy it! As 'Range extender' the combination of Wankel ICE and generator from Skypower International, a German maker, pls see 'AeroExpo', matches perfectly this Axe Tandem Wing Airplane.

[@sirrodneyffing1]

Looks to be absolutely fantastic. And British!

[@johngalt97]

I look forward to the J.B. version.😏

[@DavidJoy-x5r]

I really need one of these

[@conradboss]

This design has a lot of good things going on. I like it!! 😊

[@ElectricAviation]

It does!

[@Catiadr]

They have addressed the most critical concerns, except pricing. If they were to offer a speed build kit, it would be more affordable.

[@SimonAmazingClarke]

Very nice aircraft interesting concept. Price wise a Cessna 172 is about $500,000, and a Cirrus is $1,200,000 so this seems on the cheaper end. Huge saving in running cost and maintenance

[@sakshammishra8291]

Nice video as always. I think an interesting video would be to cover the topic of using different propellers for Lift + Cruise configuration as seen in various eVTOL designs, and also compare them with Tilt-craft eVTOL designs like Axe, Blackfly, Air One.

[@frederikkruger]

I like it. I think it falls into the conventional VFR general aviation category. Can one not put some solar regeneration capability on the control surfaces for extended range, as this aircraft might be used in “fair weather” operations anyway ?

[@fonwoolridge]

Reaaly interesting vid - really interesting plane! Thanks for your vids !

[@ElectricAviation]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@doctormix71]

Any time I see canards I think it’s beautiful, because not stalling is a beautiful thing! 😂😉

[@dansorkin6985]

Good video. This aircraft reminds me somewhat of the AIR ONE 2-seater EVTOL. Any comments on how they compare in terms of performance, features, stage of development, expected prices, etc?

[@grahamkearnon6682]

Would like the option of a one seat with corresponding decreas in price.

[@planetofthepete]

Safe and Practical - two features that have been missing from most EVToL offerings. This a/c may be the key experimental platform we have been looking for in the UAM market.... and if nothing else it should drive the development of the regulatory infrastructure. One thing i would like to see more of: The Range Extender concept. For all the 'advances' in battery tech it still seems we are well short of the illusive 400Wh/kg - making this tech work requires a lot of operational development which wont happen if we cant push beyond useful range, or supply chain limitations.

[@amitaimedan]

As usual, a great video. 10x.

[@PaulAnthonyDuttonUk]

As a personal carrier seems a lot of money for such a small range.

[@ElectricAviation]

Its good for short hops between rural areas

[@PaulAnthonyDuttonUk]

@@ElectricAviation ..an hour to get there, 4 hours to recharge and one hour back sounds like 15mph to me more or less. I don’t think the tractor has to worry too much just yet. :)

[@brainmaker]

@@PaulAnthonyDuttonUk they have a hybrid version - charge in the air and charge wherever you land - and that has a 2 hr/200mile range

[@JoeyBlogs007]

Needs a camera in the nose to help provide more forward visibility on landing.

[@simonbowden8408]

I think the price is reasonable but the real question is what flight control software is included? Those rotors are very vulnerable and one would want a good object avoidance system included in the price.

[@willthompson2071]

With the Air One hitting 155 max mph and similar range, not to mention prices at 150k, 200k for the Axe is a bit much

[@rossnolan7283]

Following an engine or prop failure it would have to feather the dead prop instantly to avoid catastrophic yaw as well as shutting down the opposite prop. It is a poorly conceived design , a copy of the Doak vz4 configuration to avoid downwash on wings but those spindly arms invite whirl flutter.

[@alkiter1]

They should use Liquid Piston for a range extender.

[@ralphpremici7632]

Does it have regenerative gliding

[@gnsmk357]

Well done presentaion. Cost will sell end of good opiton for low cost flight. Great Video

[@ElectricAviation]

Thank you

[@FlyingFun.]

the glide ability is the biggest advantage imho, but good software would be needed to transistion quickly in the event of a failure , I'm sure thats possible though of course within certain limitations. I've flown rc models for decades and multirotors are by far the easiest and most useful without runways etc but when they go wrong there is simply no safe landing so for that reason I personally would not like to be sat in one, this would scare me at low levels only , once up in the air flying level flight it would be safe as any other plane I think. Price is another story lol.

[@Dadwithallthecool]

Love it.

[@spikelanch]

I love it!

[@sorakagodess]

to be honesty, i think this is the best looking ev aircraft so far, all the other ones looks that they came from a old comic book with terrible design kk

[@alaskawilliam1]

The lateral stability in landing flair, ground effect could be difficult in a x-wind.

[@brainmaker]

.... except there never is a crosswind as stall speed is zero so you can always land directly into the wind

[@alaskawilliam1]

That's handy to be able to rotate into a headwind. Similar to a helicopters.

[@costrio]

I like the inovative ideas but they are way out of my price range. Safety being a prime issue, I don't like naked propeller blades around untrained people. Just saying...

[@ElectricAviation]

The exposed props is the concern for most people, who are interested in this aircraft

[@samnelson3526]

Having the thrust line so far from horizontal is KILLING the range / efficiency, which is a really bad sacrifice to make for an electric aircraft. Its an ambitious choice, I wonder how this will compete

[@MrPilotStunts]

It's what you're paying for simplicity and therefore fewer failure points. Still, one motor fails while hovering, unless you're high enough to switch to gliding, or low enough to not get seriously hurt upon impact, you're pretty much dead.

[@edroman2042]

Not as sexy as some of the other EVTOL on the market but still nice looking. In the end form and function will win over looks. I think it's promising.

[@europaeuropa3673]

I would like to see it flying with the loss of one of the motors.

[@jbird6609]

nice airplane , nice video. I would put an engine in the nose so it can fly like a conventional airplane once at a safe altitude. I wonder what the price is and when its available?

[@kenschmidt3644]

This looks okay but the cost must be under 100k to be practical and sold like a flying car!

[@ddegn]

Do they have a full size prototype? All the flying shown in the video looks like it's an RC model. I would encourage people not to give them any money unless they're much further along than what we've seen so far.

[@TheEvilmooseofdoom]

That's a good way to kill a start-up.

[@ddegn]

@@TheEvilmooseofdoom What does "That" refer to? Not giving them money, or not having a full sized prototype?

[@TheEvilmooseofdoom]

@@ddegn Not giving them money. Usually with these startups they build mockups and test articles to try and attract investors. Development isn't cheap and it's always a losing business unless you can bring something to market and if you run out of money before you can do that, then all the money is wasted. Trying to decide which startup to support and which not to support is a bit of a trick. :)

[@constantinvasile2964]

Better with trust from the top of blades and conterhull and injection of water for cooled and economy fuel or electricity.

[@hadleymanmusic]

Whats the glide like? Or can it glide?

[@Stambo59]

Did you watch the video, it was mentioned several times.

[@brainmaker]

9:1 best glide - comparable to cessna or cirrus

[@ToninFightsEntropy]

A 246kg battery!??!??! I think you meant 'WITH the battery it weighs 246kg"..

[@ElectricAviation]

No the battery is heavy. It is a 48 kWh battery.

[@ToninFightsEntropy]

@@ElectricAviation Your video literally says the battery weighs 246kg. I'm trying to help, but I'll have a laugh along the way.

[@harleycullen6102]

Very cool design but can't be controlled for a safe landing from the hover or any time below wing stall speed therefore can't be called safe and that seams to be the problem for all evtol designs they no engine failure recovery in the first part of the coffin curve and there are no maintenance facilities that can deal with this machine out side of the factory.

[@aniswehbe445]

How about a parachute in case the thing falls out of the sky. A parachute for the whole craft.

[@brainmaker]

BPRS is included see the website - a third layer of safety - much much safer than any helicopter

[@andreschapero3615]

No full size Axe flying so far.... Worrying to me .

[@lapinbuggs356]

Price … too high ! But all the rest sis quiet great !

[@M33f3r]

If it only has a 160kg weight capacity then it will barely hold one adult and a small carry on bag

[@seanyfpv]

160kg is over like 350 pounds right…

[@ElectricAviation]

Hahaha

[@brainmaker]

there are zero two seater evtols operational (dont forget - Ehang cannot fly in more than 5 mph wind... and it has a tiny 20 min/20 mile range..) because everyone including the big archer lilium joby bunch are waiting for "better batteries" - this design is very frugal on weight and energy use - the four wings give a very energy efficient forward flight - rotors only designs cannot toouch that

[@peterboy209]

Two ducted Props between the (joint?) Wings would make it safer and compact i guess. But it would be a stol aircraft then... kzbin.info/www/bejne/favJq6iYpNmGj6c

[@Jkauppa]

tilt the passenger cargo pod

[@Jkauppa]

lift? passive gliding

[@martingarrish4082]

The SkyFly canard design looks sensible in that the canard tip vortices won't interfere with main wing (like Quickie Q2). But non of these designs really seem to push aircraft aerodynamic efficiency very far. Those low aspect ratio wings giving a glide ratio of 9:1 seem to be more about minimising aircraft dimensions. I'd be more excited by 20:1 or even 30:1, and certainly carbon composite can achieve the aspect ratios required without undue weight increase. Putting in an expensive CO2 producing engine defeats the point of electric aviation. And with Lilium gaining their certification basis and Vertical Aero gaining Design Organisation approval, autorotation as a backup for power failure seems to be something else that is being forgotten. I would prefer to see slightly more conventional VTOL & STOL designs for recreational electrified flying, optimised to minimise drag and maximise range. Particularly if these aircraft will be operating out of existing airfields. Somehow, I've found myself being the channel pessimist - this is definitely not my intention. I strongly believe that electric aviation is the way to bring down the cost of recreational flying. It's just a little disappointing that the past 120 years of aeronautical research & development seems to be loosing out to share values is all...

[@llahneb10]

Yeah, cool and simple, but the price is too high. $58k for a 67 HP engine is over the top

[@danieltoone5979]

That’s not a canard, that is a tandem wing

[@danielb516]

400 pounds of payload ... still very light for 2 people

[@atlet1]

Woderful! The price may come down a lot if mass produced. A military version will propably speed up the development.

[@ronrothrock7116]

Interesting design and performance, but I still believe that the "drone" type of flying car designs will never become mainstream. They are too loud and many cities/communities will find this too undesirable and will end up banning their use.

[@TheEvilmooseofdoom]

Yeah, I don't see skies filled with flying cars either. I do however like the idea of being able to drive to one of the local regional airfields and renting something easy to fly and (for me this is important) reasonably idiot proof to do a little weekend warrior sight seeing.. in fair weather. :)

[@ronrothrock7116]

@@TheEvilmooseofdoom In my opinion we'll get there, but just not with the drone models. I suspect that for flying cars to become an everyday thing it will require them to be non-intrusive to people around them. This means relatively small (can fit in 1 or 2 parking spots, relatively quiet and also safe to be around. Jetoptera, showcased on this channel, is up to 30 decibels quieter than than the drone types. It also has an impeller rather than an external propeller. Those external propellers are too dangerous to be around for a car-sized "drone", but the impeller is much safer. I foresee Jetoptera being the best design so far and I expect them to take the lead in personal flying cars.

[@TheEvilmooseofdoom]

@@ronrothrock7116 I think flying cars will introduce such a regulatory nightmare that if it happens it will be a long time coming. Of course advances in autopilot software might render my belief badly dated. I was thinking about people manually flying a TON of similar things over populated area's. The first one to drop on a school would make a big stink in the media. Take the human out of the equation for automated air traffic control and..

[@ronrothrock7116]

@@TheEvilmooseofdoom Ah, I see where you are coming from. I agree completely. I think that the only way regulatory will allow people to leave from their driveway and fly to another location will be on "autopilot". I never envisioned people flying cars all over the place. People have trouble with 2d driving on the ground. I can't imagine the headaches from people driving FLYING cars!

[@brainmaker]

it is actually very quiet indeed .....

[@Seafather]

Why? Why not just make a better electric Gyrocopter? Gyrocopter has better range and safety?

[@brainmaker]

a gyro cannot land vertically - and needs a loooot of runway to take off

[@tamasmihaly1]

Depends on one's expectations, but I think these things look rickity as hell. No way on earth I'm sitting in that thing. It just looks like a very dangerous gimmick.

[@TeslaBulldotcom]

Love this design, what’s happened to black fly, seems to have gone quiet recently

[@ElectricAviation]

BlackFly are just happy doing demos at Oshkosh. They remain mum on the price. Ideally they should have launched a couple of years ago. Now there are other players in the market

[@gasisthepastendoil]

It's probably fake I doubt it would fly without the motors because the vertical fin is too small......

[@Savan_Triveda]

I don't like its fragil look. Forme the Blackfly is more attractive.

[@silviodalle-nogare8775]

Way overpriced for me.

[@jeanpaulchristian3282]

But it has no blown flaps- so its shit

[@Cyberdactyl]

Grossly over-priced 07:02 Half that is still high but could be considered.

[@mpoelsma7561]

It does not look sexy, but great performance. 🤔😏

[@craigsawyer6453]

I grow tired of seeing prototypes that can not lift a pilot, let alone full cargo load. When a designer introduces a new airplane it at least can loft it self and the pilot in to the air. If the technology is not ready why bother showing videos that might as well be the equivalent of the jet packs of the sixties.

[@TheEvilmooseofdoom]

I believe there is a certain amount of testing that has to be completed before they can put a test pilot in it.

[@joseveintegenario-nisu1928]

​@@TheEvilmooseofdoom They've done this. Does Blackfly or other concurrence to Axe 'stimulate' your troll style of comments?

[@goldreserve]

Could imagine Tesla making something similar for 80% less and selling millions of them.

[@billhanna2148]

My first thought too, and it would have autonomous control but a little bigger

[@GudieveNing]

They are. Patience.

[@mcdoctorglock]

@@billhanna2148 No autonomous control!

[@TheEvilmooseofdoom]

@@GudieveNing Says who?

[@gasisthepastendoil]

cgi its fake😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

[@shawnhollahan590]

Sorry but there is no excuse for these ugly designs. Do I really have to start my own aerospace company to show you all how it's done? I guess so.

[@sakshammishra8291]

Lets do it together 😉

[@GudieveNing]

I've done that. A while back. Patience. Battery tech is almost with us. ;)

[@mcdoctorglock]

I just want a backpack version; I don't need an airframe when we can design lightweight, water tight, heated/cooled pressure suit for flying it. Yes, a space suit lite, needed for the comfortable cross country travel in all weather conditions with a back mounted vertical flying pack, capable of altitudes up to a ceiling where the propellers start to lose enough efficiency to make them unable to climb or maneuver. The electric motors would not lose efficiency at altitude, but the props will, hence the need for a pressure suit so the pilot doesn't have to worry about hypoxia.

[@TheEvilmooseofdoom]

Sometimes function must trump form.

[@TeslaBulldotcom]

Is the design scalable to a five seater and would that be competitive with joby and Lillium

[@ElectricAviation]

I dont think they want to be in the Air Taxi market. They want to remain in the personal aircraft category

[@TeslaBulldotcom]

The price is a bit steep I’d be worried that the Chinese can copy it and nock them out at a third of that

[@ElectricAviation]

It is bound to happen. This will keep the price of the original in check

[@skyloveglobalnelsonbarbonc8009]

Globalskylove