The Insane Engineering behind the Joby S4

[@eVTOLinnovation]

Unfortunately, i am not able to keep creating new videos in my current situation. Visit: evtolinnovation.notion.site/eVTOL-innovation-KZbin-Channel-054d7bae8e344a0b8851f4be18600498?pvs=4 Email me: [e-mail] I'll be evaluating offers and ideas. Thanks.

[@BrianBetron]

The amount of engineering going into advanced aviation is amazing.

[@Cloxxki]

It's the one thing is can to to MAYBE be allowed to operate such toys near any buildings of any kind. Propellors and batteries are both ANCIENT technology. Very first viable plane had a prop. To get anywhere on battery power, such a low energy solution, takes superlightweighting. I don't think it's about to make electric flying a big thing for decades to come. Too loud, too slow, low on energycapacity.

[@BrianBetron]

@Ale trip that is a good question, what do you think the reason is that this is yet to happen?

[@BrianBetron]

@Ale trip batteries seem to continue going down in price and up in power. Imagine where they will be in 10 or 20 years by looking at how far they have come in the last 10 or 20 years. We are in for some exciting times and crazy tech.

[@nickkacures2304]

Thanks for the the great video I keep thinking about how much fun this would be to get me to my cabin and how this will open up remote roadless areas for camping trips,fishing,and exploration

[@Paiadakine]

This vtol is the best practical design so far.

[@skyisthelimit3255]

I buy Joby every Friday , doing this untill 2024 when it’s full launch , then holding for 5 more years after that.

[@timothy4538]

Yes bro, hold until 2030s when eVTOLs us expected to fully take off (as a form of transportation)

[@inthebush96]

I'm about a month away from getting my Commercial Pilot Certificate. The idea that this is the aviation world I'm coming into is so ridiculously exciting. I'd love to be a part of this in some way in the future, but even from the outside it's gonna be awesome to see what Joby and other companies can do with eVTOL

[@frankyflowers]

pilotless aircraft is exciting for you?

[@inthebush96]

@@frankyflowers if it's ever something that happens that'll be really impressive and I'll totally be excited about it, but that's not what this video or my comment was about haha

[@hunterhobson135]

@@frankyflowers Their not pilotless

[@frankyflowers]

@@hunterhobson135 they aren't able to lift the weight of a human and stay up 6 minutes.

[@hunterhobson135]

@@frankyflowers I'm sorry you've been misinformed

[@Mattys556]

Caint wait for these!! Distance will not be far behind.

[@nickkacures2304]

Every time I watch a new episode I am blown away by the implications of this new opportunity in travel and how will it mesh with the electric vehicle disruption I hope you guys are watching Tony Seba and his Rethink X videos on the coming all electric electric economy

[@hualongDong-w7n]

JOBY S4 is a talent design,this vedio is fabulous,I want to konw where can i get JOBY S4's propeller design model? is it confidential?

[@FLORIDIANMILLIONAIRE]

The tilting rotors are dangerous compared to cruise and lift configuration where there is less moving parts to break

[@PatrickIanCheng]

thank you

[@grizzly3133]

Insane a very proper commemy

[@ultrajd]

With some modifications, these aircraft would be perfect for emergency response.

[@dominiquetournie6174]

L'idéal serait de créer un champ magnétique autour de ce genre de véhicule, afin d'éviter les collisions.

[@jeromeavila3195]

Nice video

[@garymcfadden2797]

I sure hope they are best in this space as I recently bought 2,000 shares @ $5.30/share. FYI excellent video.

[@frankyflowers]

they never show it flying for more than a few seconds between edits on any video.

[@eddie4050]

@@frankyflowers I think they are working with hydrogen fuel cells on some of their models, if so the distance they can travel will be greater than just being battery powered.

[@frankyflowers]

@@eddie4050 why would you think that? they aren't. they only have one. they crashed one and had to make another one.

[@evandrodaolio]

I buy joby in alls pullbacks. I am a proud shareholder

[@brianb-p6586]

The long flight mentioned was impressive, compared to other battery-electric drones; however, in that flight the aircraft was not carrying a payload, or even a pilot. Joby calls it an "air taxi", but how useful is a taxi which can't carry any passengers... it's not a taxi at all.

[@pauljamesk3526]

My missis goes everywhere with me I need a two seater 😄😀

[@hasanchoudhurymd]

JOBY future AirUber AirTesla? Long.

[@mohammaddoustyfard4822]

Good

[@karlheifisch]

I keep wondering: Joby or Lilium? What do you guys think?

[@danielhart1524]

Both are in both markets, UK and US. Both stocks are cheap now after being shorted, so it would be simple to buy both until one overtakes the other.

[@LukeFG]

Joby is the better company

[@ThePepsg35]

I really dont like the perpelers there too exposed and is dangerous if it hits some birds in the air can be deadly, lilium is much safer and safety is key to success in a company.

[@levinmaa711]

Great Video! Really informative. However, it would have been even greater to have seen some numbers. What the decibel levels are, to be specific.

[@chrisn7847]

Under 65 decibels in takeoff and hover compared to helicopters 90-100 which is about 100 times quieter. In cruise, Joby's S4 does about 40 decibels.

[@digestiveissue7710]

Yeah, what an INSANE bigger than usual drone

[@brian.louis107]

Why not develop a toroidal propeller? The decibel is slightly lower but the sound is a lower pitch 'hum' rather than the higher pitch snap of conventional blades.

[@brianb-p6586]

The currently fashionable "toroidal" design does not allow for variable pitch, so it is unusable on this type of aircraft.

[@Ljw-low-ljw]

This is the real ‘net zero’ future of aviation. Hydrogen powered airliners zooming businesspeople (at an affordable price for them) across the atlantic I think is a pipe dream.

[@matthewspry4217]

JOBY ARE THE DADDY

[@cjswa6473]

Lots of props... Which throw blades.. Stress points.. Etc. What's the material? Carbon fiber? Looks great right up to the point of complete failure

[@Cloxxki]

Fellow NERDS, please read: If VTOL ports are to be placed right by cities (yes please), why not incorporate advanced MagLev powered winch systems so do crafts get to SKIP the vertical phase? Just launch them! Large beam structures with a central fulcrum to optimize launch angle. Could be vertical. Aided by a larger water tank on board combined with a good air pressure vessel. After the initial MagLev launch, when the craft is truly airborne, the water tank is emptied (google: bottle rocket technology) very silently turning its initial mass into much desired thrust. The craft will be kept near maximum fuselange speed until the water runs out. Transition to horizontal flight at VERY significant altitude only and people on the ground barely heard the whole launch and take off. Can be done with water from a river just before hitting the sea, no need to use drinking water. Sea water would damage a lot of tech and flora and fauna on the ground.

[@Cloxxki]

Electric cars on sale now can do a standing quarter mile in 9 seconds and change. Well over 1G initially. So my not have a launch structure largely underground, which launches VTOLs at similar rate to speeds higher than the efficient cruise on battery powered rotary axes? You save battery, travel time and NOISE. Approach just needs to be away from cities, followed by a gravity powered taxi phase (slope). This could be made monorail powered to effect high speed taxi with mm precision. But only if your craft is also your city car, else, why bring it to the edge of the city at all?

[@nickkacures2304]

Wow I never thought of that I suppose it’s another thing for the market to determine .Would the G force be around what you get in a normal commercial jet flight

[@FPVREVIEWS]

yes, magnetic rail to launch. and to land, just fly it precisely into the magnetic rail, to generate energy while stopping. so that the energy is recovered along with the aircraft, and skip the VTOL.

[@rossnolan7283]

@@Cloxxki What you describe is ATOL assisted Take Off and Landing -- the same general idea as an aircraft carrier/ glider winch launch/kite etc -- the take off GAINS energy not sapping the batteries and creating mayhem . Nice to see some critical thinking despite the hoopla.

[@skyloveglobalnelsonbarbonc8009]

Why holding two control

[@c.a.nixiii4650]

So it is basically a ALPHA prototype giant drone? Are there videos with ACTUAL people INSIDE piloting the craft? All flying shots show an empty cockpit.

[@Cloxxki]

All this PUSH for electric flight, but we don't have a thrust device that is any more refined than an axe. VTOL adoption is furthermore VERY hypothetical. One needs to jump through ALL the helicopter hoops, and make it happen battery powered. It's cool and all, and I want a VTOL in my back garden (or better: under a hatch doubles as BBQ deck), but please put some effort into finding a better way to tun electric energy into thrust, OK?

[@FPVREVIEWS]

electric motors are often more than 90 percent efficient. Propellors are at least 70-80's percent efficient. the major issue is energy density of the batteries.

[@c.a.nixiii4650]

If my battery runs out midflight can I crash into the top of a building that has a Heli-Charging station? Asking for a friend.

[@Cloxxki]

Why weren't heicopters huge when gas what cheap? Plenty of people can afford them, let alone when they'd be built in larger volume.

[@petercitterio4467]

@cloxxki gas prices aside, helicopters require lots of maintenance which means money and time. way more than fixed wing aircraft.

[@JoeyBlogs007]

How does it fly without power ???

[@brianb-p6586]

It doesn't. In any multi-rotor design a complete power failure ends the flight.

[@johnprendergast1338]

I gave up on Ultra Lights years ago .. Fat people only on windy days ...

[@seaplaneguy1]

ALL, yes ALL, of these "eVTOLs" will go bankrupt. They all failed to understand the problem and the business model is silly in the extreme. New distributed combustion tech makes ALL EV tech (car, airplane, boats, houses) obsolete. It is 60% at pull power and 75% in cruise. 3 HP/LB at motor. EV motor + battery is 0.25 HP/LB... Active Drag Reduction (1/2) enabled by engines, not with EVs. The drag can be up to 8 times less than EV craft. Door to door is key. All eVTOLs cannot afford the weight to be roadable like this combustion tech can. 0 to 360 mph. 125 gallons gives 15,000 mile range at 120 mph, 3750 miles at 240 miles, 2400 miles at 300 mph, 1666 miles at 360 MPH. No EV can come close by 100:1. CO2 is 200 times less with RE fuels vs a 100% RE grid. On gasoline it is 3-4 times less CO2 than an EV. Just a friendly hint. Heads up. You will lose all investment into eVTOLs.

[@seaplaneguy1]

The map shows Santa Monica airport, LAX, downtown Los Angeles, Hollywood and John Wayne airport. Hardly a wide coverage. As for the motor out, you need to balance it laterally by shutting down the opposite motor. The S2 had four motors across each side, making a loss of one main wing motor go to 75% which is valid. The S4 with only two motors each side makes it not valid. The folding props with cruise props on the s2 shows they don't understand the problem, just like the x-57 failed to understand. This Joby tech fails to get the aero correct. The correct solution alludes them... Their props are very expensive and did cause an in flight break up. Very poor design and very costly. Yes, different RPM...NASA did that on the x-57. Old idea. New combustion tech will allow $100,000 craft with 5 place for real air taxi.

[@fbloggs]

Insane engineering? A huge part of the engineering effort that's being done is engineering of the press releases and messaging to give the impression that these companies have a viable product that's close to being certified. It isn't - certification is further away today than at the outset, now that the FAA has had a chance to see what's on offer regarding passenger safety in the event of total loss of thrust.

[@brianb-p6586]

How much did Joby pay for this video? It was good, but certainly not objective.

[@DoctorWolfpack]

I’m so glad and relieved that the Joby crash on 2/16/2022 was not mentioned in this video. Thank you very much for protecting the Joby brand 🙏🏼

[@extremeencounter7458]

Sarcasm?

[@danielhart1524]

Well if you want to bring up the crash to smudge the Joby name, how about you bring up the fact that Joby and the US military is jointly testing the craft for military applications and that the test craft was doing 275 mph (well above its recommended top speed for consumer flight) and flying through aggressive maneuvers near a California Army airfield at the time of the crash.

[@1wolfkiller357]

Testing the limits of the aircraft which is required for full FAA certification. Joby is the closest to full certification and will be the next Tesla in my opinion.

[@DanFrederiksen]

do you have to speak that way?

[@aileronhelicopters]

What companies like Joby don't understand are the problems faced by Helicopter industry, electric power isn't the solution neither is many rotor blades, Before presenting an invention first tell us what problems is it solving, what advantages does it have over two seat existing helicopters Otherwise people will still not be interested... , but I wish them well.

[@aileronhelicopters]

@@lawrenceb3850 @Nick Kacures These are problems in the helicopter industry. 1_ Helicopter operating costs: _ Maintenance _ Fuel cost _ Inspection 2_ Range, Speed, Payloads compared to costs 3) Flight: Training Hovering 4) Mechanical problems: Tail Rotor strike/accidents Torque Engine failures Transmission failures Noise 5) safety *We have got solution for all these and in May were going to manufacture a helicopter that can fly for over 7 months without being refueled again or flying from UK to California and back without being refueled again at less than 2$ fuel cost per hour*

[@aileronhelicopters]

@@nickkacures2304 so making Joby will make everyone flying Airbus H125 and R44 ground them?? The maker of Joby wanted an electric multi rotor helicopter that can fly two passengers... But not a multi purpose Helicopter. People to buy that Helicopter are very few than if they made a multi purpose electric helicopter

[@gpaull2]

@@nickkacures2304 - what massive increase in battery energy density? Other than speculation and unfulfilled promises it’s been almost stagnant since the jump from nicad to lipo. RC hobbyists came up with the software and hardware to make multi rotor control possible, without the complexity of variable pitch blades. IMO this is the whole reason for the existence of this emerging industry.

[@julieta203]

Lilium offers a much better platform

[@chrisferguson1911]

It's a helicopter with 6 props...period.

[@taterkaze9428]

Another dumb idea. The phrase they're looking for is "energy density". I love all those exposed blades. I'm sure nothing can go wrong there. How many motors does it need to fly? What happens if one or two motors fail? Does it have a fire suppression system for the batteries? So tired of all this rich-toy hype.

[@pelleban]

I would say all those things you mention would also apply on a helicopter, with worse answers on each. As a pilot I would love to actually fly this myself, just for the joy of flying. Nothing wrong about dreaming of nice experiences, why does that bother you?

[@HVM_fi]

Maybe watch the video first before commenting...

[@chrisn7847]

The aircraft has multiple levels of redundancy for batteries failing and/or rotors failing. ‒ 6 propellors - can fly safely with the loss of any one propellor ‒ Each motor is redundant and powered by two separate inverters ‒ Each inverter is wired to a separate battery pack ‒ 4 isolated and redundant battery packs on board ‒ Motor continues to function if an inverter or pack fails ‒ Batteries in wing away from passengers

[@ThePepsg35]

I really dont like this aircraft, I'm in lilium much safer and elegant for commercial use

[@Dec3.1903]

Idiot concept. Gas has 50 times the energy of a battery for the same weight. You can not build a practical ev aircraft carrying the weight of the batteries.