There's a lot of buzz about flying taxis, even though none are buzzing overhead.
Investors are pouring capital into start-ups racing to develop new electric aircraft that take off and land vertically like a helicopter but fly horizontally like an airplane. Major airlines are investing in some of these start-ups, betting that they will one day zip passengers between airports and city centers much faster than cars or public transit.
They face hurdles. One major issue is they will need enough places for these vehicles to take off and land. Integrating them into existing air-traffic-control systems could also be a challenge.
Gary Gysin, chief executive of Wisk Aero, says he sees a future where air taxis will seem commonplace.
The Bay Area-based company, backed by aerospace giant Boeing Co., is developing an automated flying taxi that would seat four passengers but has no pilot on board.
Boeing CEO David Calhoun said last week the aerospace giant hopes eventual regulatory approval of Wisk's automation will help pave the way for broader use for the technology in commercial aviation.
Mr. Gysin, 63 years old, previously headed Liquid Robotics, which has developed solar- and wave-powered ocean robots. Boeing bought that company in 2016.
He spoke with The Wall Street Journal about his vision for this new form of transportation.
Are these flying taxis for real? And when are we going to see these commonly in U.S. cities?
Yes, they are for real. The large regulatory authorities have strong initiatives to bring these services to market.
There are a lot of entrants in the space, and a lot of people say that they're going to build something. To me, it's like the early auto industry. It's just not possible there are going to be 200 companies that actually survive and build a full-scale airplane that gets certified for flight in the U.S. or flight in Europe.
There are many serious, credible players, and this market will absolutely happen. Maybe 2025 is the first time you might see a piloted version of an air taxi that enters the market. But it's 2025 to the end of the decade when you'll start to see all the action.
It's always a bit alarming when helicopters are flying over your house -- you don't know if the cops are after you, or if you're on the news. Will people inside their homes hear the flying taxis?
They are dramatically quieter than a helicopter. If you spin the blade slower, it's quieter. And so everybody is working on their technologies to make sure the rotors and the blades are big enough so you can spin them slower, still get the lift and propulsion you need and be super quiet.
The loudest part is when you take off and land. The quietest is when you're flying like an airplane.
How will you convince the public that it's safe to fly in?
This form of flying will be safer than any form of aviation that exists today. But: Easy to say. What we need to do is prove it with data.
Do you think that the lack of the pilot in an aircraft will make it harder to comfort nervous passengers who need that convincing?
There's the screen that's in each seat -- it shows your flight route, when you're going to bank, how much time you have left in the flight, etc. At any point in time, you can hit a button and talk to somebody on the ground. For whatever reason, to your point, to get that comfort. There's also a help button inside the cabin, if you want, and again, someone will come on immediately.
We still have humans in the loop, we still have pilots -- they're on the ground. And they are the ones that will be in touch with air-traffic control, they're the ones that will be in touch with the passengers that are on board.
We are flying prescribed routes, but if for some reason, a pilot needs to intervene, they can.
There have been news stories over the years about autonomous vehicles having issues with threat detection on the ground. How do you avoid that in the air? Is it simpler given that there aren't pedestrians in the air for example?
It is a much simpler technical problem. Trying to build an autonomous car is technically -- I don't want to say it's a nightmare -- but it's really hard.
Think about pedestrians, someone on a bike, a ball runs in the street -- on and on and on and on. Lines on the road that may not be super clear. Automating in the airspace already has been done and is being leveraged today.
How will it compare to a taxi ride or UberX ride from O'Hare airport to downtown Chicago? Is the idea that it's the same price, but it'll just be faster?
Yes -- orders of magnitude faster.
And at that price, will it be financially viable for the owner and operator of the flying taxi?
We think it's the only way the market really scales.
Think about it -- no pilot, we don't have the normal pilot-training costs in the cockpit. It's all electric, so there's fewer parts, fewer things to service. So the operating cost for this is pretty low.
What about the infrastructure to make this network possible? What's going to be needed for vertiports in cities, landing spots for these flying taxis? And do buildings need to have reinforced roofs?
No, because these tend to be lighter aircraft than helicopters.
You have to have communications infrastructure to be able to talk to the aircraft. And then where are you going to land? The good news is we don't need an airport. We don't need a runway. You need a pad.
So what do you need there? You need electric charging infrastructure for all-electric aircraft. And then you'll need sensors that are outfitted around a vertiport for autonomous landing.
Our idea is to leverage existing general-aviation airports, existing helipads. You'll see a lot of videos where there's a shiny new vertiport on top of the building. And that's great. But there are also helipads that are unused that are on top of buildings already, and those certainly can be outfitted.
