Yes you heard right — a giant autonomous drone that fits a human.
It’s basically what you would expect to see if someone shrunk you down to the size of a LEGO and stuck you next to a DJI Inspire.
Except no one was shrunk, and the giant flying machine was sitting smack in the middle of the CES drone section.
EHang, which was founded in 2014 and has raised about $50M in venture funding to date, was pretty gung-ho about telling everyone at CES that the 184 was the future of personal transport. And for the most part, people were too in awe to question them.
But the reality is that the company probably was using the 184 as more of a marketing tool for their standard-sized drones like the Ghost. Not that we’re saying that the 184 will never be a real thing, just that it probably isn’t coming to a Best Buy near you anytime soon.
None of their employees were in tune with the drone’s technical specifications, let alone an MSRP or release date. But we did snag a press kit from the company, which actually provided some worthwhile information.
The drone is about four-and-a-half feet tall, weighs 440 pounds, and will be able to carry a single passenger for 23 minutes at a speed of 60 MPH. The 184 also has gull-wing doors and arms that fold up.
EHang said that the drone will be totally automated, meaning passengers will input a destination and have no control during the flight. The company says this will make the machine safer by eliminating “the most dangerous part of standard modes of transportation, human error.”
This also means that passengers are basically helpless in case anything goes wrong, but the company notes that their fail-safe systems include multiple backups for each flight system, as well as a feature where the aircraft will immediately land if a passenger’s life is at risk.
Ultimately, it’s probably going to be a few years before we ever see the EHang 184 flying in anything more than a demo video. Plus, we can’t imagine what the FAA would say about the thing.
That being said, it’s nice to see a company thinking ahead and inspiring the drone community.
Safety
So the X8 configuration is a good choice but only if configured right because I could not find any information as to how the ESC-s are placed and how many separate controllers are used, what type they are, etc. EHang does say that there are “multiple backups” in place, but what they mean is unclear. The key here is to have separate boards of redundancy where both controllers and ESCs are backed up by fallback systems. In that case, theoretically even 4 of the 8 rotors can stop and the vehicle could be able to land safely. EHang’s CEO mentioned in an interview that even if 6 motors would fail on 3 of the arms, the AAV (Autonomous Aerial Vehicles) would be able to “spiral to the ground” safely. Well, that sounds kind of scary, doubt that it would not result in anything anyone can survive. The manufacturer says that “the 184 AAV is embedded with Ehangen fail safe system” which suggests that they designed their own solution.
Hope they release more information on that.
At the same time, unlike winged aircraft multirotors do not have a gliding capability and that could be a concern. I guess EHang could mount an automatically deploying parachute like a BRS chute to let the vehicle ascend safely. But if there is no such system involved and the passenger has to bail due to a malfunction, the 8 rotors being right next to the doors is a bit of a concern. I am no aircraft designer, but it would seem reasonable to place the rotor blades above the craft for added security. Placing the rotors up high would also prevent bystanders from getting injured while takeoff and landing.
Power Supply
The 184 will have a 23 minute flight time roughly allowing a 10 mile flight as announced at CES this week. Whether that, combined with a 2-4 hour charging time is sufficient for day-to-day use depends on the owner’s personal situation, but to me it seems a little too limited. Information is scarce at this time as to the type of battery the 184 will use, but the flight time suggests Lithium Polymer and that could also be a concern to be honest. LiPo batteries are great, most UAVs use them, but they have to be handled correctly and tend to lose voltage suddenly in certain conditions such as cold weather. How you store and deplete them is also an issue, check out our guide on LiPo battery care.
Being zero emission is all great, but EHang should consider other power supply options like hybrid power (just an idea) in order to make the EHang 184 a reasonable alternative to small helicopters.
Control Mechanism
Now this is where it gets really scary. Reports from the EHang booth at CES say that the “pilot” or better say passenger in the cockpit will not have a chance to fly the aircraft or take over controls from the autonomous system. Well, not being able to fly the aircraft is a problem because it takes away most of the fun I would imagine owners could have owning this puppy. A system similar to waypoint flying in UAVs that simply takes you to a desired location by just clicking on it on Google Maps sounds great as an option. But only as an option. Not the only way to fly the aircraft. I know not all possible future users are multirotor fanatics but I am quite sure that the first people to get one of these would be them. And not letting them fly the damn thing seems like a really bad idea.
According to the announcement, in case of emergency situations the EHang 184 will be piloted by personnel sitting in command centers somewhere and help you land safely at the “nearest possible location”. Now forget the fact that they will have to build these centers first which is mostly a matter of funds and the availability of qualified pilots that can take on the responsibility of saving someone’s life from the distance. The US already has problems with drone pilot shortages but I guess whereas those guys take lives, these pilots would be saving lives from the distance. A better headline for recruitment for sure.
But what happens if there is no connectivity between the aircraft and the command station? I personally would be a bit scared to let an autonomous system combined with some command center in the distance take responsibility for my safety. Sure, Google has self driving cars but doing that in 3 dimension in the air is a totally different ballgame. While Intel and other corporate giants are working on obstacle avoiding UAVs, this technology is simply not in the state where they could be trusted to fly manned aircraft in urban locations.
No comments:
Post a Comment