We Wanted 140 Characters, Instead We Got Flying Cars

This Week’s Focus: eVTOL and Urban Air Mobility
Flying taxis may have once seemed like science fiction, but recent advancements in eVTOL (electric vertical takeoff and landing) technology have brought us closer to making them a reality. While air taxis are poised to serve niche markets in major metropolitan areas, broader adoption faces challenges in urban airspace management, battery technology, and cost reduction. This week, we look at the challenges the industry faces and the hurdles that need to be overcome regarding infrastructure, safety, and public perception. 

In an interesting move, Toyota is investing an additional $500 million in Joby Aviation, further solidifying its role in the eVTOL (Electric Vertical Take-Off and Landing) industry. 

With this investment, Toyota is not merely pouring capital into emerging technology, but also embedding its production systems and engineering expertise into Joby’s development processes. According to the announcement, engineers from Toyota are actively collaborating with Joby’s team, contributing knowledge of manufacturing methods and design tools that could streamline the aircraft’s production.

CEO JoeBen Bevirt, of Joby Aviation, emphasized that Toyota’s collaboration has been vital for their progress: “The knowledge and support shared by Toyota have been instrumental in Joby’s success.” 

It’s interesting to see Toyota involved in this industry. I wouldn’t associate Toyota with risk taking (unless you define risk as adding another cup holder), but this collaboration illustrates the firm’s product strategy in enabling sustainable and hopefully efficient urban transport —air taxis are poised to tackle mobility challenges in congested urban areas.

With the eVTOL industry’s significant capital requirement (estimated at $1 billion for development through to certification), Toyota’s investment not only accelerates technological advancements but also gives confidence to regulators​. 

But the question remains: Why are these air taxis lagging? 

The following is an unofficial hype cycle for air travel (created in 2022): 

So where are we in the hype cycle? Are we finally at the plateau of productivity? Does this really solve congestion issues, and will air taxis ever scale to become a viable solution? 

Let’s delve deeper.

Regulation: The Paris Olympics and the Missed Opportunities for Flying Cars

Electric vertical takeoff and landing aircraft were supposed to debut at the 2024 Paris Summer Olympics. Volocopter, a leading German air taxi manufacturer, had even partnered with the Paris airport authority ADP to construct vertiports around Paris, including one on a platform along the Seine River. Their goal was to shuttle passengers to Olympic venues using autonomous air taxis.

Unfortunately, despite extensive efforts, the necessary approvals from EASA (European Union Aviation Safety Agency) were delayed, and the firm's VoloCity aircraft were not ready for commercial operation in time. Volocopter had hoped to make French President Emmanuel Macron its first passenger during the Games, but alas…their hopes were dashed. 

Nevertheless, the test flights carried out over the Versailles Palace were a symbolic demonstration of the possibilities these air taxis could offer in the near future.

The Paris 2024 setback hasn’t deterred plans for 2028 in Los Angeles, where Volocopter and competing firms like Joby Aviation and Archer Aviation are aiming to exhibit air taxis for widespread public use, but the delay emphasizes the technical and regulatory challenges the eVTOL industry faces, despite the rapidly advancing technology.

Mike Leskinen, President of United Airlines Ventures, points out that the biggest hurdles aren’t necessarily technological but regulatory. Ensuring air taxis achieve the same safety standards as commercial aircraft while integrating into existing air traffic systems will define the timeline for widespread adoption​.

The complexity of getting an aircraft certified for commercial use is monumental. There is a reason we see very few accidents in commercial airlines (writing this at the airport, while waiting for a flight was not a trivial matter…). 

But, unlike traditional planes, which operate under well-defined regulatory frameworks, eVTOLs are an entirely new category, requiring fresh regulations​. The need for safety standards comparable to commercial jetliners has placed a significant burden on companies, as EASA aims for a catastrophic failure rate of just one per billion flight hours​.

Given these challenges, the Paris Olympics serve as a reminder that while the visionaries pushing the concept of air taxis are hopeful, they must confront the “cold, hard reality” of national airspace systems​. The task of integrating these vehicles into the crowded urban airspace, ensuring they meet stringent safety requirements, and winning public confidence is no small feat.

Batteries and Range: A Technical Bottleneck

But the regulatory framework is not the only reason the industry has not yet taken off (no pun). 

The technical challenges of battery performance and range are among the biggest hurdles. 

One of the key technical issues eVTOLs face is managing the power required for both vertical takeoff and horizontal cruising. This power-intensive operation limits the aircraft’s range and payload due to batteries’ lower energy density compared to jet fuel​. Staying airborne consumes a large amount of energy, and with current battery technology, air taxis can only fly short distances—typically 50 to 100 miles on a single charge​. Additionally, battery technology poses safety risks, including the potential for lithium-ion batteries to ignite, which significantly complicates the certification process.

To overcome these challenges, companies like Joby Aviation are exploring hydrogen-electric propulsion as a possible alternative to battery-only designs. Recently, Joby successfully tested a hydrogen-electric air taxi demonstrator, achieving a range of 842 kilometers​. While hydrogen holds promise for longer-range flights, it introduces new challenges in infrastructure, such as the need for refueling stations and safety protocols around hydrogen storage.

For battery-powered eVTOLs, improving the energy density remains crucial. Farhan Gandhi, director of Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute’s Center for Mobility with Vertical Lift, explains in an article in the Financial Times that with the current technology, there’s a point where “you’re carrying battery to carry battery, instead of people and payload.” This limitation not only reduces the commercial viability of air taxis but also raises concerns about their operational efficiency​.

The relatively short range confines them to urban areas or city-to-airport routes. Longer intercity travel still remains out of reach for most eVTOLs, unless significant advancements in battery technology are made.

Congestion: The Driving Force Behind Air Taxis as The Future of Urban Mobility

So let’s further explore the potential impact air taxis can make in the urban landscape. 

A significant factor driving optimism for air taxis is their capacity to bypass the congestion that plagues modern cities. United Airlines and Archer Aviation plan to introduce air taxis between Newark Airport and downtown New York, reducing a typical one-hour journey to just ten minutes​. The fare is expected to be around $100, which is competitive with existing premium transportation services.

Traffic congestion in metropolitan areas like New York, Los Angeles, and London costs billions of dollars annually in lost productivity and increased emissions. The average commuter in Los Angeles, for example, spends over 100 hours a year stuck in traffic, and the resulting emissions contribute to poor air quality and environmental degradation​.

Air taxis offer a potential solution to road congestion, and the concept of urban air mobility (UAM) has the potential to free up road space for other uses, such as pedestrians, cyclists, and public transit. 

However, congestion in the air could also become a problem. As John Cox, an aviation safety expert, points out, the challenge of integrating air taxis into already congested air traffic control systems is significant. Finding the right balance between road congestion and airspace management will be critical for the success of air taxis. 

To mitigate these challenges, air taxi services will need well-designed flight corridors and coordination with urban infrastructure to prevent new forms of congestion.

The paper “Flying Taxis Revived: Can Urban Air Mobility Reduce Road Congestion?” asks whether urban Air Mobility (UAM) reduces road congestion in metropolitan areas?

The paper develops an agent-based travel demand model to assess the potential demand and the impacts of UAM in the Munich region, with a focus on mode choice, vertiport access/egress, and UAM vehicle capacity constraints.

The model simulates demand based on various scenarios, including access and egress times, waiting times, and infrastructure needs. It incorporates sensitivity analyses to evaluate the potential impact on the existing transportation network. The simulation relies on assumed demand and network characteristics for UAM, and was conducted based on Munich’s traffic conditions. 

The study found a small predicted mode share for UAM (0.61%) under base conditions and no significant reduction in road congestion. In fact, including trips to and from vertiports increases car-driven kilometers by 0.3%!

The paper concludes that UAM may serve niche markets (e.g., emergency vehicles or trips between poorly connected areas), but will not significantly alleviate urban congestion. To have a meaningful impact, UAM would need improvements in infrastructure and a strong justification for specific use cases.

Can Air Taxis Ever Become Affordable?

A key question surrounding air taxis is whether they can become a viable and affordable option for the average commuter. 

Current estimates suggest that air taxi rides will be priced similarly to helicopter services, which remain out of reach for most. 

But let’s delve deeper into understanding the costs by taking a look at the viability of eVTOL aircraft for trips like Manhattan to JFK, which can be evaluated quantitatively through a comparison of costs and time savings compared to traditional ground transportation, particularly cars.

1. Energy Costs (Electricity vs. Fuel)

One of the most significant cost reductions for eVTOLs comes from the switch to electric propulsion. In a helicopter, fuel costs can reach $123 per hour, while electricity for eVTOLs is expected to be up to 30% cheaper due to the efficiency of electric motors and lower energy consumption​. 

For instance, an eVTOL flight on the Manhattan-JFK route (about 14 miles by air) would consume around 8-10 kWh of energy, costing approximately $1.50-$2.00 (assuming an average electricity cost of $0.15-$0.20 per kWh)​.

By comparison, an internal combustion engine vehicle (e.g., an Uber Black SUV) covering the same route during heavy traffic would consume around 1 gallon of fuel, costing approximately $4.00-$5.00 (depending on fuel prices). The efficiency of eVTOLs in terms of energy per mile further enhances their viability as a low-cost, high-efficiency transportation option.

2. Maintenance and Overhaul Costs

Electric motors have fewer moving parts than internal combustion engines, leading to lower maintenance costs. Helicopter maintenance includes periodic checks and overhauls that cost $89 per hour for routine maintenance and $94 per hour for overhaul parts​. For eVTOLs, maintenance costs are expected to be at least 30% lower, largely due to the simplicity of electric motors and fewer mechanical components.

To provide a clearer picture:

For a 7-minute eVTOL flight from Manhattan to JFK, the prorated maintenance cost might range between $5 and $10, depending on the specific vehicle and maintenance schedules.

In contrast, car maintenance costs (including tires, oil changes, and mechanical upkeep) would add around $0.10-$0.15 per mile to a 14-mile ride, yielding a maintenance cost of $1.40-$2.10 for the same journey.

3. Battery Replacement Costs

Battery replacement is a non-trivial cost for eVTOLs, but its impact diminishes over time as battery technology improves. An eVTOL battery pack may last around 1,500-2,000 cycles, which equates to several years of operation under normal use. For instance, a 143 kWh battery used by Archer Aviation would cost approximately $100,000 to replace, with battery degradation leading to periodic replacements. However, the prorated cost per flight would likely be in the range of $10-$20, depending on the number of charge cycles​.

4. Pilot Salaries

Initially, eVTOLs will require human pilots, adding to the cost structure. Helicopter pilots typically earn around $100-$200 per hour. Given that an eVTOL flight from Manhattan to JFK takes about 7 minutes, the pilot cost per flight would be roughly $20-$30​. As the industry moves toward automation, however, this cost could drop substantially, improving the long-term cost efficiency of eVTOLs.

5. Landing Fees and Infrastructure

Landing fees account for a significant portion of the cost of a helicopter flight—up to 40% of the total​. eVTOL landing fees are expected to be lower due to the reduced infrastructure required for electric aircraft. While specific figures for eVTOLs are not yet widely available, estimates suggest that fees will be 20-30% lower compared to helicopters, as utilization of vertiports increases. This would reduce landing fees from about $60-$80 (current helicopter rates) to approximately $40-$50 per flight.

6. Other Operational Costs

Additional costs such as insurance, regulatory compliance, and air traffic control services will contribute to the total, but are expected to be lower than helicopters due to the simpler, lighter nature of eVTOLs. These costs would likely add around $5-$10 per flight.

7. Prorated Vehicle Cost (Depreciation)

The upfront cost of an eVTOL vehicle can range between $1 million and $3 million depending on the model and manufacturer​. With an expected operational lifespan of around 10,000 flight hours, the depreciation per hour of flight can be calculated to determine the prorated vehicle cost per trip.

For instance, using a conservative vehicle cost of $2 million and a lifespan of 10,000 flight hours, the cost per hour would be $200. Given that the Manhattan-JFK flight is approximately 7 minutes long (or 1/9th of an hour), the prorated vehicle cost per trip would be $22. 

Below is the total Cost per Flight Breakdown (Manhattan to JFK) compared to a car ride:

Of course one has to acknowledge time saving:

eVTOL: The flight time is about 7 minutes, with total time (including boarding and taxiing) expected to be 15-20 minutes. This is especially valuable during peak hours when traffic congestion can dramatically increase travel time by car.

Car Ride: The total trip duration during off-peak hours is 40-50 minutes, but can extend to 75-90 minutes during rush hour.

In summary, eVTOLs have the potential to augment urban transportation by drastically reducing travel times, but the high operational costs mean they will likely serve niche markets in the near term. Cars, while slower, remain far more cost-effective for most commuters.

But it’s important to say that the cost differences, while large, are not of different orders of magnitude. There is definitely a segment of the population, for which eVTOLs will be a viable option. The question is whether this segment is big enough to allow costs to decrease enough, so the comparison is viable. 

Market Size: The Cities That Will Benefit

The benefits of air taxis will likely be concentrated in large metropolitan areas with significant traffic congestion and high-income populations that can afford premium transportation. 

Cities like New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, London or Paris are prime candidates for early adoption of air taxi services. These cities have both the demand for faster travel and the financial capacity to support the necessary infrastructure, such as vertiports and air traffic management systems​.

Medium and small-sized cities with less congestion may not benefit  as much initially. The cost of building vertiports, maintaining fleets, and coordinating with local aviation authorities will likely deter smaller cities from adopting air taxis in the near future​.

According to a McKinsey analysis, cities will need a dozen or more vertiports to support a fully operational air taxi service​. For example, Paris and Los Angeles are already planning multiple vertiport sites to accommodate air taxis by 2028. These cities will serve as test cases for whether air taxis can be scaled to other urban areas around the world.

My concern is that there might not be enough cities to sufficiently lower the cost of R&D and manufacturing per eVTOL.

Conclusion: A Future in the Skies… With Limits

In the near future, the skies over cities like New York and Los Angeles may indeed be buzzing with air taxis, but widespread adoption will require time, investment, and innovation. The road—or sky—to affordable, efficient, and scalable urban air mobility is still long, but it’s clear that we’re on the brink of a revolution.

In the end, the excitement around eVTOLs illustrates humanity’s enduring fascination with flight and the potential to revolutionize how we move within our cities. Whether we’ll soon be summoning flying taxis through our smartphones remains to be seen, but it’s clear that the vision is within reach—even if it will never be as widespread as taxis…or Twitter (now X).