Boeing wants autonomous flying cabs in US airspace by 2030
- Reference: 1663772415
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2022/09/21/boeing_wants_driverless_flying_cabs/
- Source link:
The concept of operations, or " [1]ConOps ," was undertaken as a joint venture with electric autonomous vertical take-off and landing (VTOL) enterprise Wisk, a company whose predecessor Zee Aero was backed at founding by Google co-founder Larry Page and now counts Boeing itself among its investors.
Beyond the duo, there were many other partners and collaborators to pitch in at the roadmap, including the FAA, NASA, Boeing unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) research subsidiary Aurora Flight Sciences, AI airspace management provider SkyGrid and more.
[2]
The overall vision focuses on the lofty core tenet that the service of these flying taxis should be "safe, affordable, everyday flight for everyone." The service would be available day and night, with visual or instrument meteorological conditions.
[3]
[4]
Within the 64-page ConOps are technological, regulatory, and social recommendations for how to integrate the Urban Air Mobility (UAM) specifically into the United States and its National Airspace System, with an intention to be applicable globally.
[5]Heart now pledges 30-seat hybrid electric commercial flights by 2028
[6]US Army drone crashes hours ahead of breaking flight duration record
[7]SOFIA observatory's last hurrah set back by damage from high winds
[8]US military fuels eVTOL research with $75m contract
The aircraft itself will require detect-and-avoid and landing hazard avoidance. Even though it will take a predetermined path, it will need to navigate outside that path in case it needs to land in alternate spaces or divert for other last-second reasons. The UAM itself will be powered by electric propulsion. Those carbon-saving emissions will be important if the technology is going to be used on a large scale.
But the stated ConOps recognizes that some other progress beyond the aircraft itself needs to happen before this vision can become a reality and it sees changes happening in a stepping-stone manner.
For instance, the US is going to need infrastructure on a massive scale, starting with the vertiports from which the aircraft can take off and land, or load goods and passengers.
[9]
Furthermore, there will need to be fleet operations centers, or an air traffic control unit where a professional will monitor and manage not just one, but multiple, vehicles at once, connecting via internet protocol (IP)-based communication. And then there will need to be third-party service providers to provide ground-based solutions, completing tasks an onboard pilot would normally take on, as well as implementing and maintaining C2 datalinks and cybersecurity.
And before those vertiports can go full throttle, they'll have to move beyond the current system of heliport and vertiport operators authorizing access to their surfaces with fixed-base operators managing schedules to vertiport managers controlling surface movements and hovering slot allocations.
[10]
Boeing also reckons there will need to be some global evolution in the regulatory sphere. That task will need to be taken on by the UAM industry itself, and in order to achieve this and an accompanying necessary public buy-in, the industry will also have to advance the level of UAM safety.
"Ultimately, public acceptance of uncrewed UAM operations will be the crucial component to scaling the market," said Boeing.
One thing is clear with this plan – much change will have to happen in order for it to (pardon the pun) fly.
"This ConOps intentionally defines a future that will require an evolution from the current state," said the roadmap's authors.
"The important work we're sharing today provides a stepping-stone in the advancement of UAM in the US and the world," said Wisk CEO Gary Gysin in a [11]canned statement. ®
Get our [12]Tech Resources
[1] https://www.boeing.com/innovation/con-ops
[2] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/front&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2Yys1FRwovgk2@iAY8@COuAAAAJI&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[3] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/front&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44Yys1FRwovgk2@iAY8@COuAAAAJI&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[4] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/front&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33Yys1FRwovgk2@iAY8@COuAAAAJI&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[5] https://www.theregister.com/2022/09/16/electric_commercial_plane_2028/
[6] https://www.theregister.com/2022/08/23/zephyr_drone_record/
[7] https://www.theregister.com/2022/08/17/sofia_damage/
[8] https://www.theregister.com/2022/08/12/us_military_fuels_evtol_research/
[9] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/front&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44Yys1FRwovgk2@iAY8@COuAAAAJI&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[10] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/front&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33Yys1FRwovgk2@iAY8@COuAAAAJI&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[11] https://wisk.aero/news/press-release/uam-conops/
[12] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
From the company that brought you crash-by-wire flight to save a sensor's cost and to lie to the regulators about the implications.
Maybe ...
I skimmed the article, but it sounds like they are thinking controlled airspace on both ends. Given a decade, maybe that's doable. Realistically, can the vehicle be built? Probably. Can it travel safely from terminal to terminal -- say JFK to/from a few terminals in downtown Manhattan? Probably. Can it pick you up or drop you off at the curb in front of your apartment? Betcha not. Two problems -- first it'll probably need a ground footprint a lot bigger than a conventional taxi. Second, vehicle manufacturers are having trouble doing 100% safe navigation in two dimensions. Three dimensions is going to be harder. Probably a lot harder.
After thought. Is any sane insurance company going to underwrite insurance policies for these things?
Re: Maybe ...
There are bunch of companies trailing this - some of which have actual aircraft operating.
As you said, they don't replace taxis, they replace JFK-Manhattan helicopter service.
Basically all are battery powered quad copters, should be cheaper, quieter, lower emission and vastly lower maintenance costs than a helicopter. Might be safer, just because just about anything is safer than a helicopter.
Big problem is that the economics only work out if you are autonomous, helicopter pilots are expensive and cost you a passenger seat. However the FAA and other 3letter agencies are slightly nervous about having potentially remotely controllable 500kg payload drones operating into Manhattan
Never going to happen.
These things are going to be noisy as frig. Nobodies going to want to have hem taking of or landing anywhere nearby, nor live under flight corridors. On top of that electric flight by multicopter craft is just SUPER inefficient, it really doesn't add enough for anything to make it worthwhile. And it saddens me that supposedly smart people keep burning piles and piles of money on it.
SkyGrid
That’s a worrying name. Reminds me of a film with Arnie the schwartz in it.
Good news everbody
Boeing persuaded the FAA that this is really just a new variant on the checker cab and so doesn't need any new certification or testing.
And Andy Kaufman is certified as a mechanic for them