What’s between AAM introduction and Consumer Acceptance
by Sandy Murdock 6th Nov 2022 JDA Journal
Disruptive technology is exciting and initially frightening. Below is a great article by Flight Global that captures many insights into the introduction of Advanced Aerial Mobility vehicles (AAMs); the sources include two US Representatives, Delta Airlines, the GAO and OEMs in the forefront of this development. The conundrum lies in the interest this new form of flight creates public interest, but that novelty also tends to deter potential passengers from using these efficient, green aircraft. There is a split of opinion among these entrepreneurs:
- Some are of the opinion that for as long as 2030, only cargo AAMs should operate to give the consumer some time to trust no pilots on board
- Others assert that the transition from today’s cockpits with full automation with a human next to the controls to accepting AAMs is not that great of a consumer leap of faith.
The biggest determinant of such paths may be the FAA’s certification risk analyses.
EASA commissioned a Study on the societal acceptance of Urban Air Mobility in Europe
It made the following conclusions—
- 1. EU citizens initially and spontaneously express a positive attitude toward and interest in UAM; it is seen as a new and attractive means of mobility and a majority is ready to try it out;
- 2. The notion of general/public interest is a determining factor for acceptance: use cases for the benefit of the community, such as medical or emergency transport or those connecting remote areas, are better supported than use cases satisfying individual/private needs;
- 3. The main benefits expected from UAM are faster, cleaner and extended connectivity;
- 4. However, when encouraged to reflect upon the concrete consequences of potential UAM operations in their city, EU citizens want to limit their own exposure to risks, in particular when related to safety, noise, security and environmental impact;
- 5. Safety concerns come first, but the study also shows that citizens seem to trust the current aviation safety levels and would be reassured if these levels were applied for UAM;
- 6. Noise is the second main concern expressed; the study indicates that the level of annoyance varies with the familiarity of the sound, with familiar city sounds at the same decibel levels being better accepted; it also confirms that the distance, duration and repetition of the sound impacts its acceptance;
- 7. UAM is seen as a good option to improve the local environmental footprint, through reduced urban traffic congestion and better local air quality; but at the same time citizens express major concerns about UAM’s impact on wildlife;
- 8. The results also demonstrate a limited trust in the security and cyber security of UAM, requiring threat-prevention measures;
- 9. The integration of UAM into the existing air and ground infrastructure must respect residents’ quality of life and the cultural heritage of old European cities;
- 10. Finally, local residents and authorities feel directly affected by the deployment of UAM and want to engage and play an active role in its implementation.
The FAA may have a similar study, but the observations seem to transfer easily between the continents.
