Scenes of flying cars are familiar from films such as Blade Runner, Star Wars and The Fifth Element. People have long since conquered the airspace there. In reality, things look a little different – at least at the level of individual mobility. If you talk to someone like Patrick Nathen, co-founder of the Urban Air Mobility company […]

Scenes of flying cars are familiar from films such as Blade Runner, Star Wars and The Fifth Element. People have long since conquered the airspace there. In reality, things look a little different – at least at the level of individual mobility. However, if you talk to someone like Patrick Nathen, co-founder of the urban air mobility company Lilium, it doesn’t sound so much like utopia anymore. The company wants to take off into the third dimension with the environmentally friendly on-demand Lilium jet. We spoke to Patrick Nathen about the opportunities of air mobility for urban and rural dwellers and what impact this “mobility shift” could have on the structure of our cities.

Baumeister: Patrick, what does the city of the future look like to you?
Patrick Nathen: Very full. If you consider that around 70 percent of the world’s population will be living in urban areas by 2050, you can assume that cities around the world will develop into very compact, crammed metropolitan areas. This will naturally result in more inner-city traffic, but also an increase in traffic between cities and the countryside. Long traffic jams will become the rule rather than the exception. Not to mention the increasing air and environmental pollution caused by traffic.

B: That sounds very negative. What would have to happen for the city to have a positive future for you?
PN: Mobility has to change, because it determines how comfortable we feel in the city, but also in the countryside or on the outskirts. However, I believe that if so many people in urban areas are competing with each other for space but also for the way they get around, then we need additional space in order to give these people more space and opportunities for movement. In my opinion, mobility must therefore expand into the third dimension. And thus into the airspace. But not somehow, but sustainably, in the sense that we don’t simply pull the smelly, noisy traffic upwards, but that environmentally friendly vehicles are on the move in the airspace.

B: Like your Lilium jet… What’s so special about the vehicle?
PN: Our Urban Air Taxi Jet has 36 motors, is electrically powered, takes off vertically and can be operated autonomously. The motors in the wings are extremely quiet. We have already successfully completed the first test flights at an airfield in Munich. One day, the Lilium jet will be able to take up to five people from A to B – both within the city and to rural areas and peripheries. In this way, it will be possible to relieve the burden on the urban transport infrastructure and existing traffic areas, but also connect residents of rural areas to the city. This new form of mobility would make life in the countryside more attractive and thus relieve the burden on cities.

B: What is the range of the vehicle?
PN: The Lilium Jet should be able to fly 300 kilometers at 300 km/h. This range also guarantees that mobility beyond the city is possible.

B: Patrick, some media outlets are criticizing you for saying that this range is not even possible. Apart from that: Are there perhaps simply too many critics who are afraid of a mobility revolution? In view of all the problems it brings with it, transport as we have known it up to now no longer seems to be up to date.
PN: There are a lot of critics. But that’s a good thing. We need a discussion that permeates all levels of society, in which everyone feels addressed and wants to have their say. This is the only way to make the transport revolution a success, to relieve the pressure on our cities, to connect rural areas to urban areas – but without putting more strain on the environment. It’s also about acceptance. We are active in the field of individual Urban Air Mobility (UAM). This is a completely new business area. Establishing vehicles like the Lilium Jet would completely change cities and how we move around in them. That also creates fears. And they are justified, especially as long as the technical, technological and political framework conditions are not yet in place. There is still a lot of work ahead of us.

B: Are you talking to representatives of local authorities, cities, planners, architects? It’s not just about getting air cabs flying, the corresponding infrastructure also has to be in place.
PN: We don’t just want to provide the planes, we also want to be involved in creating the take-off and landing infrastructure, but also in the customer experience, in the passenger processes. To do this, we need partners, just like any other urban air mobility company. And these are the cities, politicians, authorities, architects, urban planners and mobile phone companies. It won’t work without them. Urban planners and architects in particular could also think about this new form of mobility as part of urban development. This is primarily about existing buildings. How can this mobility be embedded in existing structures? How can we expand existing structures instead of building new ones?

B: When I think of densely built-up cities like Tokyo, New York or Mexico City in this context… Where do you start and end up? How do you change trains? Where do you park? Do you have a vision for how the Lilium Jet could work?
PN: We could land and take off directly in urban areas, as the jets are quiet and take off vertically. This would work on rooftops, at airfields, parking garages, in existing park & ride systems. Hubs could be set up everywhere where passengers can quickly and conveniently transfer, board and disembark and where jets can be recharged. These hub architectures could be duplicated like a kind of template. And they can be set up wherever they are needed. Ideally at transportation hubs. This also guarantees us a certain degree of flexibility, so that we can position these hubs in any city, regardless of its existing building structure. Of course, these are just ideas so far. But there are already cities that have had good experiences with Urban Air Mobility. We can build on this.

“Politics must create the framework conditions.“

B: So your vision is for UAM to be integrated into a city’s existing transportation concept?
PN: Exactly, mixed mobility is the answer to the question of how we will get around in the future. I use car sharing, I take an Uber, I take the subway, I walk, maybe I use an e-scooter or a bicycle and then I take an air cab for part of the journey. I can imagine this working particularly well if I live in a rural area and work in the city. But this mix of different types of mobility is also interesting for megacities – if you want to travel ten kilometers by car in Shanghai, Delhi, London or Tokyo today, it’s not unusual to spend a few hours in a traffic jam. Or even sprawling cities like Los Angeles… Mixed mobility could herald a turnaround in transportation.

B: Could…
PN: Yes, it could, because the problem is that there are so many mobility providers and they don’t really work together. In order to create a mobility flow and allow users to choose between alternatives, there would have to be a platform that thinks and organizes mobility together across city boundaries. Up to now, everything has been separate and therefore cannot form a “whole”. There are already pilot projects here and there in which local public transport and private mobility providers are brought together, but politicians need to create a framework so that every form of mobility is simply part of everyday life and can therefore also interlock and thus generate the most benefit for the user.

“Cities are changing rapidly, are very dynamic and must allow for innovation.“

B: But to make UAM suitable for the cities of tomorrow, urban infrastructures and traffic management systems need to be redefined…
PN: Yes, and that is of course a mammoth task. Especially since, to be honest, the market for urban air mobility doesn’t actually exist yet. We are currently researching and working in an area where future users don’t even know that they need the product. But it was similar with electric vehicles. And here we are currently being taught better – of course also in the wake of climate change. It is precisely this fact that manned UAM in particular is (still) a kind of playground that makes it all the more difficult to speak plainly when it comes to rethinking urban infrastructures and traffic management systems.

B: Patrick, last question, as you’ve already mentioned, there are cities that have already taken a step into the third dimension. In Singapore, Mexico City and San Francisco, for example, helicopter cabs are already flying. Although they are still very expensive to use and not really an everyday means of transportation, it is a first step. Which city do you think would particularly benefit from UAM?
PN: Actually all of them. But of course there are numerous urban centers where people are stuck in traffic jams for hours on end, day in, day out. The fast-growing metropolitan areas of Asia in particular are close to gridlock in some cases. These cities are changing rapidly, are very dynamic and have to allow for innovation because they are reaching their limits when it comes to traffic and transporting millions of inhabitants, commuters and tourists. Or let’s look at Paris. I can’t remember not taking about two hours from Charles de Gaulle airport to the city center every time. Imagine if we could just fly over the traffic jam on the Lilium jet…

The interview first appeared in the mobility issue of topos 110. You can read more about mobility from our colleagues at topos.