>>1905229Before I begin let it be known I agree something like the osprey can't be replaced by EVTOL simply because the range isn't there since battery energy density and specific energy is too shit for it. However a lot of your points are incorrect.
>carries less payloadAs I said at the start.
>can't air refuelYeah agreed as it stands.
>if one battery catches fire you are deadDepends on the chemistry used, we have high performance batteries that don't explode or combust when abused.
>any fan being hit will down the thingThe beauty of a multi rotor design is that you can afford to lose a few and use the rest to compensate. You can even program a computer to adjust automatically be it electric motor or ICE.
>it takes longer to recharge than to refill an aircraftYeah true.
>you have to bring a big electricity generator everywere this thing goesYeah true
>shit rangeSame as above.
>requires the same materials as the osprey to build + all the rare materials for batteries and more fibersBattery cost is cheap even with rare metals, and it's only gonna get cheaper.
>12 engines make the thing more maintinence heavyElectric motors are cheaper, smaller and simpler to maintain. Easy for technicians to remove and replace/fix, and the wiring is solid state compared to tricky fuel systems that might leak internally.
>harder maintinence, requiring new training and less people in nato that know how to maintain the thingAirtechs have already been introduced to the concept of electric motors because engines have starter motors and batteries, it won't blow their minds to deal with a less complicated electric power train.
>your range varies with temperature lmaoYeah true.
Hopefully battery technology will continue to improve, but it's going to be decades before EVTOLs see the kind of range that ICE aircraft are capable of. They'll have their niche for short range in a few years.
