>>1689855Eviation is going for niche markets like very small rural airports. Islands on coast and such. That about 10 passenger size limits it to such niche routes. I have hard time seeing that small planes as profitable unless there are serious tax payer subsidies. The potentially more game changing electric plane is Heart Aviation ES-19. They are going for 19 passengers and 400km range. That might take some of the shortest routes from regional jets and turbo props, mostly feeder traffic smaller cities and airports to larger cities with major airports.
Very idea that trains would compete with any smallish aircraft is silly. What trains compete with in aviation is mostly short distance flights on high passenger volume routes. Things flown with anything between regional jets and large wide bodies. Even 747 had short range option with less fuel tanks and all high density cattle class seating. Boeing managed sell bunch of those to Japanese airlines and handful to Korea and Taiwan. Those got killed by high speed rail and twinjets that were more economical even without all cattle cattle configuration than 747SR. As footnote, second of NASA shuttle carrier aircraft was a ex-JAL 747SR-100. Larger aircraft in regional traffic almost always have geographical reason to exist. Sea or mountains making land traffic impossible or slow due to bottle necks. For small planes competition is car if there isn't water around.
On helicopter side electrics will offer expensive very short haul passenger traffic, business people flying from city to airport and possibly air tours for tourists, probably even more niche business than small 10 passenger or smaller fixed wing aircraft. Electric helicopters won't have endurance for utility market, at least manned ones. Drones might replace police helicopters. Ambulance helicopters for most parts aren't going to be replaced with electric because 30min endurance just isn't going to cut it outside of the most densely populated metropolitan areas
