I'm puzzled as to why all these futuristic air frames have multiple 'props' instead of rotors?
It can't be efficiency or that configuration would be flying now- lots of early vertical flight tried multiple props.
Is it to ease transition to higher speed flight? The S97 scoots right along, Bell held the rotorcraft speed record for years with the 533 (an early, highly modified production UH1 with jet engines providing thrust), and the Fairey Rotodyne was pretty quick.
Does the layout seem familiar, scalable because of drone popularity? Apples and oranges, I think. Drones fly pilotless or remotely controlled enabled by systems that allow stability and navigation with minimal training. Those systems would work with conventional rotors as well, yes? Even in a compound helicopter/rotodyne, I think.
Efficiency will be at least as important in a battery powered aircraft, if not more so.
Final thought- the popularity of these will require sophisticated air traffic control interfaces. Urban skies get pretty crowded now with conventional aircraft. That straight-line high speed flying taxi thing has a lot of hurdles.
Edited by Wally, 09 May 2018 - 16:10.