Edit: Also the mass market adoption of small quadcopters; these "distributed electric propulsion" flying car type things are basically the same concept: flight control by altering the speed of an array of propellers.
Also a lot of university teaching/research on both of the above.
He seems to believe that eVTOL are the future of mass transportation, like an airborne version of taxis. I personally don't find that plausible at all, but maybe I'm just not creative enough to imagine a future where this would work.
But I will bet money that we'll see self driving electric Ubers on the road before we see those air-taxis.
And it's going to be incredibly hard to compete with those. Especially as city will be becoming less crowded as more and more people realize they don't need a car anymore.
I live in Bangkok where Taxis are extremely cheap compared to owning a car. I would never bother getting my own car, it's just so convenient to let someone else drive in the city.
- are the air taxi concepts technologically viable? I'd say yes, after all they are flying one way or the other. Besides being electric concepts like Joby and Volocopter are proofen. Lilium is techologically more challenging, but still feasible with existing tech. Not sure robo taxis will beat them there.
- Commercial viability. We know there will be a market for robot taxis, they are taxis without a driver. There UAM is the big bet, is there a market, and if so how big is it? There robo taxis might be faster.
Currently its mostly another set of startups to invest in. They might look attractive to VCs because they're ambitious, require lots of capital, and the technical feasability of a specific approach is complex enough to find merits in. The jury is still out if any of them are actually viable from a technology and economic perspective.
Lilium's approach specifically has been publicly critized by aviation experts to not be make sense when looking at the basic physics.