A Swedish company has unabashedly adopted the pop culture name synonymous with flying cars and is now taking orders for what might be a viable personal eVTOL. The production model Jetson One was unveiled last week and the 12 ultralight and drone-like single-seat aircraft being built in 2022 have already been sold at the introductory price of $92,000. The company’s brazen adoption of the name of the iconic space age cartoon family made popular in the 1960s is also reflected in its mission statement. “Our mission is to make flight available to everyone,” the company said in its news release. “The Jetson ONE is an electric helicopter that you can own and fly.  We intend to make everyone a pilot.”

The actual operation of the aircraft blurs the line between passenger and pilot, however. The occupant steers and decides how fast to go (up to a limit of about 50 knots) but the computer looks after mundane details like keeping it in the flight envelope and away from objects thanks to a suite of LiDAR (Light Detection and Ranging) sensors. Like a drone, the aircraft will automatically hands-free hover over a point. Endurance is about 20 minutes. Because it’s an ultralight, no certificate is required. The Jetson has eight motors and rotors and can fly with one motor out. If things get more serious than that, a ballistic parachute is standard equipment. It comes as a 50 percent kit that has “detailed build instructions” but the company doesn’t say how long it takes to complete.


  1. With the whirling blade of death inches away from the cockpit and of course open to all nearby spectators, lets see how long it take for a major amputation. Why is “safety” always stressed in aviation and then so blatantly ignored for the “New Technology”?

  2. Once again, an inspiring, magical video of these personal drones with exhilarating music in the background. I think it’s pretty clear now that the personal drone industry wants to mask how god-awful LOUD these things are. A small, whiny drone is annoying enough. Four or six heavily loaded disks moving one or two fat butts around will be beyond reason.

  3. The camera drone does far more maneuvering than the product itself.

    The cynical part of me sees a lot of marketing and camera-hype to pump up a ‘meh’ product. I would much rather see a video that uses a fixed camera and has the machine do all the flying around to demonstrate its capabilities.

    • That was my thought too, Kirk. Someone really knew how to fly a camera drone. The “pilot” pretty well just motored along in a straight line. To me, this thing looks like the Chinese E-Hang except before they put the fancy fiber glass shell over it. The video reminds me of scenes from the Mandelorian where he is riding one of the speeders across the desert.

  4. I would order one today if it had a range twice the current 20 minutes. 20 minutes has to be on a perfect day with a 160 lb occupant (notice I didnt say pilot) which Im guessing puts yo more in the 10-15 min range.

  5. I am highly Suspicious. There have been so many personal aircraft conns over the years. I see nothing in the video that does not say this is a lightweight dummy in a converted drone being controlled from the ground. Show us one long continuous take of a person walking up, getting in, and flying over the
    Grand Canyon then you may have some credibility .

  6. This will be another aviation mess similar to ICON’s introduction of their aircraft as the “jet ski” with wings. Jetson One maybe classified as a Part 103 vehicle. However, it still flies and is just as capable of crashing as any other certified airplanes.

    When an accident happens to a Part 103 aircraft, the NTSB and FAA have no part, nor interest in investigating once it is known it is indeed flying under Part 103 rules. The aircraft now becomes a “vehicle” that now falls under the jurisdiction of the State Police or local law enforcement. Notice how the video has the Jetson One flying low, weaving around trees, hills, and directly over by mere feet, other Jetson One “vehicles”. This is the attitude being portrayed that anyone now is a pilot.

    How do does one get a checkout for their $92K aerial “vehicle”? And will the checkout foster the image that anyone is a pilot promoting the type of flying being seen in the video? And when one of these Jetson machines crashes, who will be investigating? Who will be picking up the pieces? Not the FAA or NTSB. It will be the local constable after the State Police wash their hands clean of any responsibility for “policing” aerial “vehicles”. What could possibly go wrong with owning and flying a Jetson One?

    ICON found out that not just anybody can be a pilot. ICON found out that an airplane is an airplane not an aerial “jet ski” just because it can land and take off from water.

    Flying requires ADM. Not everyone understands what that means. Now we have an aerial “vehicle” that allows anyone with $92K to buy a flying “vehicle”, and become a pilot without ADM skills. This leaves anyone who finds out the hard way ADM needs to be taught and understood prior to flight and crashes… to the scrutiny not of the aviation community but local or state law enforcement.

    Although Part 103 flying has matured greatly since its early 80’s inception with better equipment, training, and 20/20 hindsight. It’s roots to present have been associated with and largely trained by the aircraft/airplane community. This Jetson One puts a lot of sophisticated technology, performance, with considerably different flying capabilities into the realm of Part 103 community with little or no prior association with airplanes or helicopters. Is the current Part 103 community prepared for this? And is the current Part 103 community prepared for the intervention of enforcement and/or investigation by government agencies outside of the flying community as a whole?