Lilium aviation electric VTOL jet.

DWG said:
We're probably looking at the IP being tied up in legalities for months if not years, and even when that's resolved it's going to be tarnished by it. The chances of someone buying the IP are probably much lower now than they were before Christmas.
Click to expand...
Easy tiger;- when Airbus’s Acubed was developing their evtol disaster it was done at arms length in California (no oversight, they blew a small fortune). An executive in Toulouse, full of the hype wondered if the IP would be so valuable it needed to appear on the corporate balance sheet. So the IP lawyers were dispatched to investigate. Following a visit they reported back that the IP value was zero. The whole subject has been so methodically patent carpet bombed, it’s doubtful anything will stick.
 
Last edited:
Zoo Tycoon said:
Easy tiger;- when Airbus’s Acubed was developing their evtol disaster it was done at arms length in California (no oversight, they blew a small fortune). An executive in Toulouse, full of the hype wondered if the IP would be so valuable it needed to appear on the corporate balance sheet. So the IP lawyers were dispatched to investigate. Following a visit they reported back that the IP value was zero. The whole subject has been so methodically patent carpet bombed, it’s doubtful anything will stick.
Click to expand...
Why was A³ Vahana a disaster? The goal was to fly an experimental eVTOL in a certain time frame and thats what they did. Most of the team went with their knowledge to Archer and they dont look that bad!
 
Reaper said:
Why was A³ Vahana a disaster? The goal was to fly an experimental eVTOL in a certain time frame and thats what they did. Most of the team went with their knowledge to Archer and they dont look that bad!
Click to expand...
Airbus isn’t a charity, and it bleed research funds that produced nothing of any value in return. Big companies don’t innovate because too many seniors, who control research budgets miss use them as their own personal brand development…. All show but no go.
 
Zoo Tycoon said:
Airbus isn’t a charity, and it bleed research funds that produced nothing of any value in return. Big companies don’t innovate because too many seniors, who control research budgets miss use them as their own personal brand development…. All show but no go.
Click to expand...
You need to go through research and technology before you actually will produce something viable. Do you waste money? For sure, since you never know if you technology assumptions are correct and you havent even married the technology with the business case, yet. Did they learn anything? For sure. Did they transfer the knowledge into other products? You tell me if you are working for Airbus Helicopters! If not at least they presented themselves as a company that is at the forefront of something new and exciting. Thats why people want to work there!
 
Reaper said:
You need to go through research and technology before you actually will produce something viable. Do you waste money? For sure, since you never know if you technology assumptions are correct and you havent even married the technology with the business case, yet. Did they learn anything? For sure. Did they transfer the knowledge into other products? You tell me if you are working for Airbus Helicopters! If not at least they presented themselves as a company that is at the forefront of something new and exciting. Thats why people want to work there!
Click to expand...
The whole evtol thing (indeed the practical battery aeroplane) was/is a gamble on battery technology progressing rapidly, which to date it hasn’t, That’s why a lot of gamblers have lost or the clever ones sold the dream on for a tidy profit to someone else can who will take the loss. As I’ve said on here before I was shocked how poorly understood battery energy density and charging issues were by otherwise quite clever guys. The grim reality gradually hit home but in that time number of programs were funded. The guys at Vahana must have known the limitations but that wasn’t the message coming out.

Believe it or not Airbus really got nothing out of Vahana, I heard one of the seniors asking “how did that have happened?. They might as well just set fire to the money”. That’s why Airbus Helo did their own evtol, and I understand they certainly got some corporate learning from that.
 
Last edited:
www.flightglobal.com

Insider insists Lilium Jet would have gone the distance but for botched rescue

Certification of the Lilium Jet could easily have been achieved by late 2027 through the restructuring central to Lilium's revival had the abortive rescue of the business not collapsed due to a lack of funding, according to a senior staff member.
www.flightglobal.com www.flightglobal.com

It's actually more interesting for details of what went wrong and who owns the IP - the initial downpayment only covered the transfer of staff to Lillium Aerospace, IP remained with Lillium Gmbh pending the main tranche of money, which never arrived.
 
I guess, they never intended to finish a single prototype. In that moment you can fly it, you have to prove your claims and they never ever could have even come close to their predicted targets. The strategy was, to squeeze out as much money out of their investors as possible and to gain time until the magic wonder batteries arrived...

The intellectual properties are surly close to being worthless.
 
I disagree it was a viable airframe and had done numerous test flights for the last few years.

They just did not grasp the "cash burn" effect of 1000 employees, when they probably needed 100.

Regards,
 
Their longest documented flight lasted about 5 min and the testing model had no interior or any payload.

Some years ago, one prototype (= empty shell) burned because they partially removed the electric insulation of high power cables to save some weight...
 
What's the point of an interior or payload when you're trying to make sure it can fly, what drop 50k on a RR bespoke interior?

Having massive cash burn was its eventual downfall.

Regards,
 
Halcyon66 said:
Having massive cash burn was its eventual downfall.

Regards,
Click to expand...
Having a technically non-viable concept was the problem, that even a massive number of employees burning an eye watering amount of cash couldn’t make work.

View: https://youtu.be/Hk6kF2eOxOQ?si=IiWI1k6_hMfDkvW0


When you’re up against a fundamental energy density issue, making it fly is a meaningless milestone. I’ve seen people compare it to the early days of gasoline powered flight… it’s not an apples with apples comparison…what would progress there be like if the fuel supply had been limited to a single coke cans worth per flight.

I note in the Flightglobal article the claim “We knew with a high degree of confidence that the aircraft was working and didn’t anticipate running into trouble that would require a redesign,” but only 12 months before unexpected “when problems with battery production and software saw the year-end target for first flight move into early 2025”.

In reality Lillium made numerous claims over close to ten years and never delivered anything beyond a model flying for 5 minutes.
 
Last edited:
that even a massive number of employees burning an eye watering amount of cash couldn’t make work.
Click to expand...

The point was that all these employees were doing little, what if a company has 10,000 employees, they will do better than one with 500?

These guys were hiring ex-airline Honcho's and setting up vertiport deals all over the place.

The airframe had merit, and it died due to zero knowledge of running a company.

In reality Lillium made numerous claims over close to ten years and never delivered anything beyond a model flying for 5 minutes.
Click to expand...

Yep, to keep the dollars coming. That is the process of OPM.....................

Regards,
 
I see that you are both right. The tech is remotely convincing and the management pompous to think you need hundred of Millions of dollar to prove a concept on small Airplanes. Lilium will probably stand as the Nero of Aerospace.

800 employee for what they have achieved is flabbergasting as way overstaffed, probably breaking Soviet era numbers in low productivity (I can only see this as being a credible amount if they had included the local Mousers and their prey!)

You don't need a shiny prototype with well rounded, endlessly reshaped on the design table curves. You need a rough demonstrator that fly everyday, in all type of terrain and environmental conditions.

Alas, and believe me, I know the startup industry from the Good, the Bad and the Ugly, the talkative daily morning online meeting was probably the peak point of cerebral activity of many there. And the damage will be enduring since those bad actors (a term chosen wisely) and reversal efficient management habits will pollinate across the European industry since nobody is pointing the finger at those gapping deficiencies.
 
Last edited:
If there would have been a prove of concept, the Billions would have continued to flow, for good reasons. With the promised values, it would have revolutionized the short haul traffic, the point is just, it didn‘’t work!

Its was all a good show, just like the Nicola truck rolling downhill...
 
I tought, that Inobat would have been resposibel for the battery design, but Lilium designed the batteries themself and Inobat would have been a supplier for production only. Battery production started in April 2024, so the wonder batteries should allready exist. With the assumptions they used in their own papers, the battery design alone should have a high value and many investors should be highly intrested in the company, even without the Liliumjet.

Could it be, that their own battery design wasn't setting the new benchmark?:eek:

lilium.com

Lilium Starts Production of High-Performance Battery Packs for the Lilium Jet - Lilium

Lilium’s battery packs are being designed to meet the highest aviation safety standards First units off the battery assembly line at Lilium’s headquarters will be used for verification testing ahead of first piloted flight of the revolutionary Lilium Jet, targeted for end of 2024 This follows...
lilium.com lilium.com
 
If there would have been a prove of concept, the Billions would have continued to flow, for good reasons.
Click to expand...

The funding for start-ups was going a long time before they went under.

news.crunchbase.com

Global Funding Slowed In Q3, Even As AI Continued To Lead

Global venture funding in the third quarter of 2024 reached $66.5 billion, Crunchbase data shows. That’s down 16% quarter over quarter and 15% year over year from the $78 billion invested in Q3 2023.
news.crunchbase.com news.crunchbase.com

Regards,
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom