Rolls Royce develops propulsion system for flying taxi

Though this might bring some interest ? electric ? flying Taxi 4-5 Persons 500 Miles ? Vertical take off.

ngine maker Rolls-Royce has designed a propulsion system for a flying taxi which it says could take to the skies as soon as early next decade. The British firm said it had drawn up plans for an "electric vertical take-off and landing" (EVTOL) vehicle, which could carry four to five people. The vehicle could travel at speeds of up to 250 mph (402 km/h) for approximately 500 miles, it said. Rolls joins a variety of other firms in seeking to develop flying vehicles. Speaking ahead of this week's Farnborough Airshow, Rob Watson, head of the company's electrical team, said: "We are well placed to play a leading role in the emerging world of personal air mobility and will also look to work in collaboration with a range of partners."

Rolls said the initial concept for EVTOL used gas turbine technology to generate electricity to power six electric propulsors, specially designed to have a low noise profile. Its wings would be able to rotate 90 degrees, enabling the vehicle to take off or land vertically. It could also use existing heliports and airports. "We believe that given the work we are doing today to develop hybrid electric propulsion capabilities, this model could be available by the early to mid 2020s, provided that a viable commercial model for its introduction can be created," the firm said. The company, which will disclose more details at Farnborough, said it was looking for an airframe maker and a partner to provide aspects of the electrical system.

www.bbc.co.uk...

This makes sense and is a flying car you can finally trust.

Rolls Royce is already known as a maker of fine cars and aircraft engines.

I hope I get the chance to fly in one.

a reply to: abe froman

Right now they aren't. They apparently tried some new things with their recent improvement package on the Trent 1000 and it's biting them hard. Rolls and Pratt both are having big problems with new engines. GE should run into issues with their new one soon.

Seems like a decent idea, for those who will be able to afford it. Also;

originally posted by: abe froman
Rolls Royce is already known as a maker of fine cars and aircraft engines.

The car maker and jet engines are two different companies. BMW own the rolls Royce brand currently for car manufacturer.

If they build them for long enough I may have enough cash to ride in one.

a reply to: Funem

I've seen several plans to use vehicles like this for hops from in city heliports, to nearby airports. Something like catching one in Oakland, and flying to San Francisco.

a reply to: skywatcher44

So, it doesn't drive on roads though?

So its just an airplane capable of vertical take off and landing, maybe the first designed for private use? A cheaper faster way to travel medium distances, on routes that aren't worth using a jumbo jet. Like if I, in the Seattle area, wanted to go to Eastern Washington, I wouldn't have to deal with driving over the mountain pass, which can be closed or require snow tires and people get into serious accidents all the time, my dad was an emt in the Chinook pass for nearly a year before the frustration got to him cause they were a small poorly funded district dealing with a lot of trauma, so I can see how it would be frustrating knowing that if only they had the right equipment maybe that last person wouldn't have died. This was over 25 years ago, but still, it doesn't make me feel very safe driving on the pass. I still do it, but, this air taxi sounds incredible. I don't know why they would design it for 4 or 5 people, I'm assuming that's 1 pilot and 4 passengers, or perhaps it can be converted on the spot for 2 passengers and one space for a wheelchair, stroller, or extra cargo? But the catch is they have to store the seats at the airport before they take off. But I suppose weight is an issue. If they wanted to make it for 8 people, they might have to add 2 more engines, that's 2 more things that can go wrong. Or make the existing engines more powerful, so then it would be much louder and it seems like silent engines are a priority for this idea to work properly.

I guess people could just take 2 or 3 taxis, or use one and make 2 or 3 trips, if they have a lot of people. Or sit on each others laps 🤔😋

a reply to: 3n19m470

It's an electric aircraft, so it doesn't need fuel. The ones I've seen so far are autonomous, so if it says 5, it's five passengers, without a pilot.

Well this is not George Jetson mobile enough for me.

I want my sky machines with landing ports like the Jetson's. Computers would keep us from crashing and Nanotubes might make it possible to have the car shrink to a small case like in the cartoon series opening.

a reply to: skywatcher44

Please ! please, let this become normal before I die.

a reply to: 3n19m470

It takes me three hours to drive to new orleans from my house.

This would be awesome for people like me.

I have family in NO.

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
a reply to: skywatcher44

Please ! please, let this become normal before I die.

Lol..

*gets in new flying car thingo*
"I did it. I got one before I died!!"
*crashes into cliff*

a reply to: SummerRain

Dies happy 8)

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: 3n19m470

It's an electric aircraft, so it doesn't need fuel. The ones I've seen so far are autonomous, so if it says 5, it's five passengers, without a pilot.

But it needs batteries, and those take up a constant weight for the duration of the flight. As an aircraft burns up hydrocarbon fuel, it gradually loses weight.

a reply to: stormcell

Which is why it's 5 passengers over 250 miles.