Southwest latest to aim at electric air taxi dream with Archer partnership

Southwest Airlines and Archer Aviation have penned a preliminary deal the pair hope will give them a slice of the electric vertical takeoff and landing (eVTOL) air taxi action* in future California skies. The corporations signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) "to develop operational plans for electric air taxi networks … …

[usbac]

"The eVTOLs are seen as an emissions-free alternative to passenger transportation to and from airports."

Where does all of the electricity come from? How about the impact of manufacturing and supporting the vehicle?

Any time I see "emission-free" I usually assume it is some kind of greenwashing...

[MyffyW]

Have an upvote - I do get what you mean, but if I lived in LA I'd rather have one of these things passing my house than an elderly Chrysler Voyager spewing diesel fumes.

[druck]

Neither of them make a pleasant noise, but the diesel is less likely to fall from the sky.

[CowHorseFrog]

Maybe the problem is too many idiots travelling instead of thinking of more time and pollution efficient ways ...

[Paul Herber]

I would love an Archer plane to land at Grundy airport! With a Horrobin as the pilot!

Oh hello, I didn't see you there!

[MachDiamond]

Who is this for?

The people that can afford it likely value their skin too much to ride one.

The days past when meetings in person were much more important are fading away and those business meetings were the biggest driver for fast long-distance transportation. There's still some need today, but not at the cost and risk that multi-copter taxis will have.

As a licensed pilot, it's very easy for me to see the downsides.

[CowHorseFrog]

Re: Who is this for?

meetings ?

What do you call commuting ?

How many people sit in front of a computer really need to commute ?

[IGotOut]

"I say old bean...

...why are we going East out of the airport when I need to go North"

"Ah you see gov', all the poor people live East, so what wiv the 130db of noise from this old bird, we're not allowed to go directly Norff, rarver we 'as to ga rand first innit"

If you don't think this is the case, just see how often US (and often UK) freeways were diverted to plough through poor neighbourhoods, rather than more wealthy one.

[captain veg]

Re: "I say old bean...

Probably more to do with the land purchase cost than the risk of offending nobs with noise. See also the railways driven through Southwark (on brick arches) to connect London Bridge to Charing Cross and Cannon Street.

-A.

[MachDiamond]

Re: "I say old bean...

"If you don't think this is the case, just see how often US (and often UK) freeways were diverted to plough through poor neighbourhoods, rather than more wealthy one."

Even with Eminent Domain, the State has to pay a fair market value for the properties they take. I'd also suggest that the poor neighborhoods are also the ones that need a treatment by bulldozer. The language will be something like "The area was in the greatest need of redevelopment". Translate that to the disparity between the tax base and the cost of providing services is too great. The poor also don't have the money to hire the same caliber of attorney either.

[Bebu]

I take it...

US airports, or the cities they serve, don't have the public transport infrastructure that would make these services redundant?

Strikes me that the US in particular after a century and half, is a vast and evergrowing conglomerate of the wrong solutions to the wrong problems. (An enormous midden that is a monument to human stupidity and cupidity.)

[MyffyW]

Re: I take it...

I recall some of my American colleagues visiting the Netherlands and being blown away by the railway system, whilst I admitted it was far more efficient than the British lash-together.

We later travelled back from London to Manchester on a Virgin abomination, and then a version 1 Metrolink tram and still they raved.

[CowHorseFrog]

Re: I take it...

You forgot to ask the real question ... why are these people travelling int he firsst place ?

SUrely there are ohter ways ?

[MachDiamond]

Re: I take it...

"You forgot to ask the real question ... why are these people travelling int he firsst place ?"

If you are in management and discussing the sale of a division or the buyout of a rival firm, you do that with face to face meetings, not Zoom. It might also be an engineering session to flesh out a new product. It can be much faster and cheaper to put everybody in a room with plenty of paper, pencils and white boards to get it started. After that, the work can be chopped up and parceled out so everybody can work on their bit someplace else.

[CowHorseFrog]

Re: I take it...

Mach: If you are in management and discussing the sale of a division or the buyout of a rival firm, you do that with face to face meetings, not Zoom.

cow: Why ?

Mach: It might also be an engineering session to flesh out a new product. It can be much faster and cheaper to put everybody in a room with plenty of paper, pencils and white boards to get it started. After that, the work can be chopped up and parceled out so everybody can work on their bit someplace else.

cow: Again you fail to see the original problem.. Why are your engineers so scattered in the first place ? They should be co-located, to avoid this time waster.