The low-altitude economy

One of the core goals of China’s five-year plan just begun and an overall strategic economic direction is what is known as the low-altitude economy, and that means the use of all that space between the ground and the tops of buildings, and the altitude used by commercial aircraft. Drones have developed so far and fast in the past decade, and have provided the opportunity to look at all sorts of ways to moving goods and people from one place to another with maximum efficiency. But how easy is it to integrate the concept of the low-altitude economy into the real economy, into real life, particularly the major cities, and the answer is that it always seems slightly beyond the possible. Sort of like China’s currency being made fully convertible on the current account. It’s always going to happen in just a few years’ time, but never actually gets done.

We were talking recently to an entrepreneur, the founder of a state-funded “low-altitude economy company” producing drones with the capability of carrying one or several people with great speed and efficiency from one place to another over relatively short distances, and his confident view was that within three or four years, we would be seeing drones carrying both human beings and freight buzzing around in the air of China’s major cities. 

We’re not saying that’s not possible, because anything is possible in China. But especially in the major cities, one mistake, one error, one drone falling out of the sky into a crowd, one drone slamming into a building and everything changes. And of course, the risks involve not just drones. There are also small private planes. Speaking of which, there was the incident on Sunday in Beijing involving a plane that hit the façade of Beijing’s tallest building, an incident in which the pilot died and 13 people were injured. The official announcement later in the week was the pilot was a 66-year-old man who was depressed. The details are really not so important. The point is how to control airborne devices skimming around urban areas at high speed. The point is the problem of control. How to address a threat caused by an airborne device which is suddenly moving in an unacceptable direction. What is the response time required and what response should there be? Is it fighter jet or is it other drones? How to offset the risks? 

Right now, there is reported to be a nationwide ban on private planes flying. Overall, the low-altitude economy is undoubtedly a huge opportunity in terms of tourism in remote areas, sort of an extension of the use of helicopters. But drones should be safer than helicopters because they have many more motors. Having said that, and in spite of the news, we would still prefer flying machines with wings.

Have a good weekend!