NetJets To Buy 150 Lilium eVTOLs

9

NetJets said last week that it’s buying 150 Lilium eVTOLs and plans to operate them as Part 135 charter aircraft. According to TransportUp, the world’s largest fractional announced the deal in a statement to investors. The eVTOLs will apparently be based in Florida where Lilium intends to build an eVTOL network serving central and southern parts of the state. NetJets will be a partner in the network, which will link larger cities with existing and new-build “vertiport” facilities and may also join the Lilium sales team to sell eVTOLs to individuals.

“We are very excited to be working together with the world’s largest private jet company, NetJets,” said Sebastien Borel, Lilium vice president of business. “The U.S. market will be a good test for us to see how far we can go. But it’s meant to be global, and we’re confident this will drive us to be global.” Lilium’s latest aircraft uses dozens of small ducted fans arrayed on tilting canards and wings, and the company says it will carry six passengers at 175 MPH with a range of almost 200 miles.

Russ Niles
Russ Niles is Editor-in-Chief of AVweb. He has been a pilot for 30 years and joined AVweb 22 years ago. He and his wife Marni live in southern British Columbia where they also operate a small winery.

Other AVwebflash Articles

9 COMMENTS

  1. Hello. The energy density of Li-ion is 2.1 MJ/L. The energy density of gas is 35 MJ/L. This means that 70 lbs of gas has the energy equivalent of 3,000 lbs of Li-ion batteries.

    Our Arrow could travel about 600 miles in any direction with 72 gallons of fuel and still have safe reserves. Batteries that could enable the same capability would weigh more than the Arrow itself. How will this aircraft carry six passengers 200 miles and still have a safe margin?

    It feels like some are rushing to electric aircraft before batteries are ready for prime time operations i.e. trying to fit a round peg into a square hole. Perhaps hydrogen makes more sense. The other aspect with batteries is one never really knows exactly how much range remains. Batteries are far more sensitive to extreme temp variations. Charge this aircraft on a cold winter night and leave it unplugged on the ramp. The next morning one will have a very unpleasant surprise … I expect the range could be cut in half in very cold conditions whereas a gallon of gas will the same the next morning regardless of the temp. I would like to drive an electric car and would enjoy an electric Arrow but only if they matched the capability of what I have now. Our SUV can drive rings around a comparable electric car relative to long distance trips (we do take them), and I doubt any electric offering can match the capability of our Arrow.

  2. You’re making too much logical sense in your position, JB. The e-car and e-airplane people (especially) just aren’t “getting” this. They are quite literally possessed by the notion that e-everything is gonna save the planet and nothing a sane, logical person who presents the irrefutable evidence to them will make any difference. They have been either brainwashed or are fanatics. Just over the weekend I got ‘into’ it at a gathering with a guy who just wouldn’t accept that the notion is currently not doable. And THEN … when I said IF the batteries did exist, we’d have to start building more atomic plants, the guy shouts, “NO, NO!” So lemme see if I have this right … they want everything to run on electricity but don’t want atomic or coal or natural gas powerplants. I guess they think fairy dust coming from windmills and photovoltaic sources will replace those great sources. Texas found out a little sumpthin’ about that last winter, didn’t they.

    No one denies that IF the energy required to run an electric car or airplane were equal to that of the equivalent weight and volume of gas and refueling were easier and shortened, that it WOULD be the way to go. Unfortunately, it ain’t.

    Last week, I sat down and spent a day researching how much energy capability would be required if all of the 300 million or so cars were somehow magically powered by batteries needing recharged. Answer, it is IMPOSSIBLE !! The grid capacity as it is now cannot sustain that idea. And until a Type 3 recharging station is on every major corner — like gas stations today — it ain’t gonna work. But they don’t give a S$#T. They’ll argue with you anyways. And the NetJets people are out of their minds here, too !!

    You did NOT bring up the fact — nor do these tree huggers even think about it — that a battery cannot be depleted to 0% without harming it. It can barely go below 50%, without premature harm. Your iPad or iPhone actually counts the number of times their batteries go below 80%. After 200 runs like that, they start slowing down. Paul Bertorelli’s video on the Pipistrell a few weeks ago highlighted the fact that the battery R&R was over $20K … for a PIPSQUEEK airplane !!

    Who was it in WWII that replied to the Germans … “NUTS!” DITTO !!

    • It was the commander of the 101st Airborne, McAuliffe. I never can remember his name either. If you like WW2 history there’s a fairly recent book out about General Maurice Rose who was not at all famous, but very much should have been.

      Here’s something maybe we ought to all think about. Given all the knowns and unknowns, there is still much more interest in unproven electric aircraft than our antiques.

      Now, before they sold off to the Chinese, I believe Diamond was on the right track. I believe they made a much more attractive aircraft and better value than the 172, but the 172 still outsold them. Cirrus also did well, and while more successful, still didn’t really sell that many planes. The Austro engines reportedly overcame the problems with the Thielert engines and are now doing well enough. They burn jet A or diesel for lower operating costs.

      Still, our market prefers C172 and SR22 with old style engines, and yet there seems to be a much bigger interest in the world for flying solutions with electric engines.

      I don’t care if the lycosaurs are the finest engines that will ever be put in flying machines now or ever, the rest of the world disagrees so GA is dying. Perception matters. If we don’t change, the world will change anyways.

    • Well, Eric … the people who might aptly respond that we’d still be driving behind horses and need buggy whips DO have a point. When the auto replaced the horse drawn everything — and I can remember horse drawn junk collector wagons ON the streets of Chicago in the early 50’s — electric cars made a showing for a while. Jay Leno has one. That said … they didn’t last … for the reasons already discussed. Gas engines replaced them. The battery situation is NOT up to the task and won’t be for the forseeable future until they figure out what powered the UFO’s they have in S4 at Area 51 and at Area 52.

      So here’s a parallel story. Just now — literally — I went to Home Depot to buy a replacement leaf blower; mine went west yesterday after about 5 years. I looked at the battery powered units which were overpriced for the power they provided but — WORST OF ALL — the run time was 15 to 20 minutes! That won’t get my side yard cleaned. And at my northern operating location in the woods, I run a corded unit for 4 to 6 hours at a time in fall when the leaves fall. A battery anything will not work for me. So I bought a pair of $50 corded blowers … one for now and one on spare. That oughta get me to the point where I don’t need one anymore. The proper ‘tool’ for the job.

      Tell ya what … when George Bye calls me up and tells me he’s got my drop in replacement for my 172’s 160hp engine (that he promised nearly a decade ago) and has batteries that’ll last 4 hours w/ reserve … I’ll join the masses. Until then — the people who think electric is the future … swell … go buy that junk. You won’t find ME in any such line. I’ll wave when I fly by. Most people just want to flap their jaws and don’t know what they’re talking about.

        • No, I’m saying that if we have range anxiety in electric cars, we’ll REALLY have range anxiety in any airplane running purely on current battery technology. And, if everything that currently uses an engine were converted to electric, our grid cannot supply the necessary energy. Paul B’s dissertation on the Pipistrel Alpha Electro in January shows that these contraptions are not yet ready for anything serious in aviation.

      • Larry, you seem to miss my point.

        There are no shortage of buyers for for V8 powered cars, corded leaf blowers, or gasoline leaf blowers. I doubt if we check their websites, they are screaming as loudly about the battery powered alternatives being inferior as we are here.

        The problem we have is that we are still using ancient engine technology having had this same reaction to most every new innovation except avionics for decades. And now, even if we were correct every time, there is insufficient demand to sell as many planes as we did 50 years ago.

        Maybe we should think about how we could get some new engines and aircraft that will both sell and work. I may not remember the fifties, but I sure as hell remember all the skepticism about composites and BRS. I’m not saying we all have to get on the electric bandwagon, but we really have to realize what we have is not attractive outside our little club. It just isn’t.

        If NetJets will commit to these things, but not prop planes, then the more you think electric planes are crazy, the more you should realize they REALLY don’t like our planes. If we don’t get more people buying planes, we will get voted out of the sky before long.

  3. The Lilium eVTOL is probably the smartest eVTOL design out there but it is limited by the battery technology. Hydrogen fuel cells would be a better approach than Lithium Ion batteries. Hydrogen fuel cells have an energy density 10 times greater than Lithium Ion batteries. The big disadvantage of hydrogen fuel cells is the manufacturing, distribution and storage of hydrogen fuel. We faced these same disadvantages when AVGAS was first manufactured. It’s a myth that hydrogen is less safe as a fuel than lithium ion batteries, AVGAS or jet fuel. If we poured the same amount of money into hydrogen fuel cell improvement that is being poured into lithium battery technology, we would be much further along with eVTOLs.

  4. You guys are obviously correct about energy storage density and airplanes. You are also correct that we need more nuclear power to make electric cars truly green. But you’re off base on the day to day practicality of electric cars today. They have good range, they recharge during your lunch break on long trips, and my wealthy pinko friends all love driving them.

    Now: Can we make all things right at once? No. We don’t have enough nuclear power. We don’t have enough consumers who understand the technology. But the pieces are coming into place.

LEAVE A REPLY