Electric aeroplanes...

[Sam Rutherford]

...anyone here flown one?

[DownWest]

Nope, but they were building a nice twin electric down the road near Royan. AirBus were funding, but pulled the plug (oh dear..not deliberate pun). Aimed at the training market with a 45 min endurance. Tandem seating in an all composite airframe. Good reports until the idea stopped. They had previously build a carbon Cri Cri with electric power that worked well, but it was just a stepping stone to the trainer.
DW

[Jan Olieslagers]

An electric powered CriCri was the coffin of a strongly reputed aviator and aircraft builder round here - I still miss him, and still distrust those smallish boxes storing huge amounts of energy; forever, probably. Oh yes, I know, of course, tomorrow's haircut will be for free... ;) Everything will be better tomorow, yes, of course, but today and tomorrow I'll still fill two 20 litre jerrycans at the village petrol pump, to go flying.

[piperboy84]

Have a hard enough time keeping my phone charged up, would have no chance with an electric airplane.

[Lantern10]

Had a quick look on you tube, there are quite a few videos so I think that one day some of the smaller aircraft will be powered this way.

[Pilot DAR]

I was asked to participate in design and approval of an electric conversion for a 172. Though it seems to have gone quiet, I learned quite a few peripheral things while I studied the concept. A big one was charging batteries. The problem is that either you have to swap heavy and expensive batteries to keep the plane in service, or it's down for hours charging after a half hour flight. Training aircraft don't generate revenue while they're parked charging. Swapping several hundred pound batteries will involve heavy lifting, and probably a dented airframe at some point. Putting the batteries in place of fuel tanks in a Cessna would be difficult to impossible. It's a logical place, but hardly an easy do. A whole bunch of screws for a 152/152/172 fuel tank cover, but not possible for a 180 and on.

The authorities were very eager to support the concept with regulatory flexibility. For example, at present, an "engine" must be type certified to be eligible for a certified aircraft. I can't certify a motor to the engine design standard, so I can't use a type certified powerplant in the installation. Previously a project stop, but the authority really wants to give on this point, among others.

It'll happen, and I look forward to it, but it's a ways off for commercial application just yet.

[oldpax]

A lot of "resistance against them!

[First_Principal]

This link (https://www.pprune.org/pacific-general-aviation-questions/603909-first-electric-aircraft-oz.html), and the links to other sources within that thread, may be of some interest...

FP.

[Sam Rutherford]

Thanks - still very little though. Have been chatting to Pipistrel, but they're coy about how many electric aircraft they've actually sold.

Fascinating stuff, and clearly the future, but still some (mainly weight of batteries) issues to solve.

[mikemmb]

There is so much R&D going on in the car industry that the concept of batteries being big heavy boxes that have to be constantly lugged about to be recharged will be overturned. For example Toshiba have developed a new titanium niobium oxide battery that gives cars a 200 mile range and can be recharged in 6 minutes.
This will give rise to much more innovative installations such as batteries with unusual shapes to fit in dead spaces and the use of distributed battery installations (lots of smaller batteries spread about).
When the current push to electric cars was first mooted, my immediate thought was that "refuelling stops" would consist of pulling up and swapping battery packs (bit like the old coaching inns swapping horses!) ..........how wrong I was?

[Sam Rutherford]

You're right, but of course weight/bulk is still less important to cars than to aircraft.

I love the 'change horses' analogy, very apt!

[dirkdj]

10 years ago, electric cars were a dream, now I drive one every day, it is fully charged every morning in my garage and drives better than any other car I have had. Prices of batteries are coming down exponentially, capacity to weight ratio goes up. It is the beginning of the end for internal combustion engines.

[MCR01]

I don't know about being worried by "smallish boxes storing huge amounts of energy" (presumably you're thinking of Lithium ion batteries?). Just try calculating the energy in two 20L jerrycans of petrol!
I used to fly a petrol powered DG808, 20L of petrol 4 inches from your right shoulder; now I fly an electric Antares with cables carrying 280V DC immediately behind your neck (but with the batteries in the wings). I feel safer in the Antares. In both these gliders the pilot wears a parachute.
The MCR01 I used to fly had 80L+ petrol immediately above your knees and no parachute system.
None of them feel safe to me.
So to return to the original question: no I haven't flown an electric airplane and yes I've flown several hundred hours in an electric powered sailplane but with a typical powered launch time of 6 minutes and an absolute engine run time of about 11 minutes my experience and range is very limited!
On the plus side the batteries are now over 10 years old and only 4 of the 72 cells are down to 97% of their original capacity. Their predicted life is about 20 years, probably just as well as their replacement cost is the same as buying a new Lycoming...

[effortless]

Um!

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=EQK9m_OBVgY

[Sam Rutherford]

Not an aeroplane.

:)

[Genghis the Engineer]

Short answer: no.

Long answer, actively studying them and hoping to first fly one this summer as part of working into a flight test programme.


So I'd class myself as knowledgeable, but for the moment, mostly second hand knowledge. Nonetheless, very happy to discuss what I do know, and my opinions on it.


In very short term - I'm a fan, I think that they are definitely part of the future, but probably not all of the future.

G

[Sam Rutherford]

And whilst you're online - thank you for the 'electric' tip. Really excited about it...

[PA28181]

Fascinating stuff, and clearly the future,

May not be around to see if this really is the future, IMHO this is a non-starter for anything outside of pure private short hop flying returning to the same airfield/charging point.

While there is funding available for these "fantasy" projects they will aways be promoted as "the clean, green future" until the reality sets in and the cash dries up.

NO one is ever going to fly the atlantic or even as far as Benidorm on an elec aircraft with hundreds on-board.

It ain't goin' to happen.

[Sam Rutherford]

I always love it when someone says 'NO one is ever...'

That someone can believe with absolute certainty that something will fail...

For the record, I believe this is all coming way faster than we realise - and that this is a good thing.

Slight thread drift, but I met one of the senior controllers at Belgocontrol last month. He confirmed that pilotless planes (and equally automated airspace/airfields) cannot come soon enough (from a flight safety, not job security, point of view).

[PA28181]

That someone can believe with absolute certainty that something will fail...

Certainly do.

Well when an electric A380 with 450 PAX flies to Hong Kong I will say "you were right" however as I am on that BA flight next month I will stick to an oil burner for now.

Unfortunately a lot of this electric aeroplane hype is too tangled up trying to compare car/bus/truck elec technology without accepting the harsh realities of leaving the ground with a stack of battery's. There are no lay-bys or hard shoulders..:)

Just taking into account the amount of chemical energy in hundreds of ton's of avtur then translate to storage capacity of battery's no matter how good Mr Tesla can make them, is going to let you fly with dozens let alone hundreds of other pax.

[xrayalpha]

Ah for the days when electricity was becoming too cheap to meter. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Too_cheap_to_meter

Predictions are hard, but the energy in a couple of jerry cans still takes a heck of a lot of battery power. Let alone A380s.

I think there are some great changes to come in light aircraft design in particular now that the electric engines are so small and light and the fuel (ie batteries) can be located wherever you want and won't change the C of G as the power is "consumed".

But sitting on the terrace at Atlanta airport a few weeks ago looking at the sheer number of flights taking off and the huge fuel compound, I didn't feel a need to rush to my broker and dump my Shell shares.

(old stock market adage: Never Sell Shell)

[pulse1]

Toshiba have developed a new titanium niobium oxide battery that gives cars a 200 mile range and can be recharged in 6 minutes.

I used to be able to work this out but what sort of power supply does one need to do that?

[Whiskey Kilo Wanderer]

I always thought electric propulsion, assuming enough power was available, would be good for aerobatic flight. Short duration with time on the ground in between sequences. No problems of inverted fuel or oil systems.

Alternative is this Part 103 home built example.

YouTube Vid.

[Crash one]

I don't believe this "It will never happen" notion.
I do subscribe to, "We don't know what we don't know".
If someone had suggested 100 years ago that you could cut grass efficiently with a piece of plastic string, they would have been laughed at.
If someone were to tell the gunnery officer on HMS Victory that one day you could put an explosive shell into a target 600 miles away to within a yard, what would he have said?
Battery technology is making leaps and bounds in the motor industry and it won't be too long before power density--weight--size will fit aviation.
Suppose the entire wing of an A380 could be one battery weighing the same, and rechargeable in seconds by a man made bolt of lightning, taking 5/10 hours to discharge at cruise, then what?
Who can say with certainty "it can't be done".
Not today it can't, but-------

[abgd]

I do subscribe to, "We don't know what we don't know".I agree with you that electric and/or hybrid aircraft will become widespread but I disagree that we don't know what we don't know, at least in broad terms.

Batteries of various types have been around for a long while; the main issues with them are longevity and energy density. There are physical limitations on the energy density of the Lithium Ion cells that are currently used to power aircraft and they'll never compete outside the training/microlight/powered glider markets. There are chemistries such as Lithium-Air that could be practical in terms of energy density for longer range aircraft but thus far they've been hard to develop. Ditto for fuel cells. Will they become practical? Maybe. But the basics of electrochemistry are well understood and there are hard limits on what the technologies will be able to achieve.

[anxiao]

I am also highly sceptical when someone says, "it can never be done,"

I am the proud possessor of a pile of 'Flight' magazines from 1912 to 1918. In one of the articles a professor of medicine from Birmingham University (England) states that it is physically impossible for a human to fly at more than 250 miles an hour as his chest will cave in.

Unless you are dealing with a law of thermodynamics, the future can be anything the human imagination can conceive.

At Freidrischhaven this year there will be a good selection of electric motors and aeroplanes, many more than even five years ago. It is happening now.

[PA28181]

For those who want to do the math. An A380 takes approx 253 tons of Jet a-1, this produces 11.3 kWh/Kg. As the aicraft fly's this fuel is burnt so becomes lighter and more efficient. Battery's retain their weight. Not sure of the limitations of top speed of propellors, assuming that is how elec propulsion is delivered? if this results in a lower max cruise speed then more fuel will be needed. I'm sure someone will be able to give more accurate predictions, but i still stick to the idea we will never fly as we do today commercially with elec but except for some very limited small private operations and limited short hop commercials it will not be the norm.

[Genghis the Engineer]

Problems to be solved...

- Energy density
- Crashworthiness of any battery technology used.
- Best practice in power system management
- Pilot training and qualification
- Ground infrastructure for charging, battery swappover, etc.
- Design practices

I don't see any of that as insoluble, it's just that the solutions seem likely at the moment to primarily favour small, short duration training aeroplanes. That seems unlikely to be the permanent position and touring light aeroplanes and regional airliners may just happen in my lifetime, if not necessarily in my flying career.

However, I'm quite happy to also say that some things I'm regularly reading are complete cobblers. I am getting to the point of wanting to shout abuse at the authors every time I read of yet another "flying taxi" project offering an electric, autonomous flying car that will be delivered within 5 years, operate from outside people's houses and cost a fraction of the price of a new Cessna 172 - having been developed invariably by teams with little or no aircraft design, flight test and certification experience. There is just so much snake oil there that the people who are peddling this rubbish should be facing public ritual humiliation, not having their fanciful artists impressions spread all over the internet.

G

[Crash one]

I would agree that, currently, the technology favours the light end short duration stuff.
But taking that list of problems to be solved.
Energy density.
Would make the personal single/two seat VTOL device possible using current drone technology.
What is this story about Toshiba developing a battery giving cars a duration of 200 miles, recharged in 6mins? True or krap?
Would this be possible with a row of 240volt sockets at the local pumps?
Crashworthieness.
I watched something recently where a battery was hit with a hammer, smashed in half and still delivered power. Whether that was practical or a set up I don't know.
What is the crashworthieness of a can of Avgas by comparison?
The rest, training, etc will follow as reqd.

[Genghis the Engineer]

As I said Crash - they're all solvable problems, just not overnight, and not necessarily in a way that permits a straight swap with the technologies we're flying at the moment, or at the same scale.

For example - a major issue may be unattended charging - if you rummage around YouTube you can find plenty of examples of people who seem to be determined to blow batteries up, and the most exciting seem to be where they've deliberately overcharged them. That's solvable too - but is a problem that just doesn't exist at-all with present technologies.

Another for-example. Train a new PPL on an all-electric, then they want to go and fly a Piper or Cessna conventional product. What differences training will then need in a new aeroplane that has a fuel system instead of an electrical system, can change CG position with fuel/energy state, and requires familiarity with a mixture control and carb heat. Again, all solvable - but does need to be solved.

G

[O_K_]

I think we (private flying pilots) will be the first to use battery powered airplanes regularly. Some are in the market already, and two seat planes with about 1 hour endurance are getting close to where a training aircraft needs to be. If performances were doubled to around 2 hours things start to get interesting for flight schools. Service and maintenance costs are very low, except for batteries but that is a quite predictable write-off with time.

Conversion to piston or turbine should not be more challenging than conversion between piston and turbine today. Regarding things like carb-heat, I was actually shocked to meet pilots at my current club that had never flown a plane with carb heat, only new 172SP's with injection engines, so there we have a challenge already today.

[Jan Olieslagers]

What is this story about Toshiba developing a battery giving cars a duration of 200 miles, recharged in 6mins? True or krap?
Would this be possible with a row of 240volt sockets at the local pumps?

Scratching head... Many unknowns... bit of assumption here and there.

Drive 200 miles ~ 320 km at (assume, on the optimistic side) 3 l/100 km => burn 10 litres of petrol. There's 13 kWh in a kg of petrol so one litre holds 13 x 0.8 (density) ~ 10,4 kWh. So those 10 litres burned are equivalent to 100 kWh or a bit more. To charge 100 kWh in one hour takes 100 kW power (and that's assuming a 100% efficient charge process) - to do so in 6 minutes = 1/10th of an hour requires 1 Megawatt. Not something to take from a 230V~ socket or you would need VERY solid cables. And a power plant VERY near by.

Someone please check my maths? It is getting late. The 13,0 kWh/litre is from en.wikipedia

I was actually shocked to meet pilots at my current club that had never flown a plane with carb heat

To each their own :) To me it is shocking that there are pilots who do fly with such paleo-primitive technology.

[Genghis the Engineer]

I see where you're coming from there Jan, but I think you're missing a fundamental difference in efficiency. An electric powerplant on an aeroplane is around 70-80% efficient, whilst piston engine powerplant is around 15% efficient. So you only need to store for an electric system about 1/5th of the total energy you do in a fuel tank. I'm guessing that there's a similar difference on cars.

The other side of that - and the fundamental problem for electric flight is that the energy storage density of petrol is about 46 MJ/kg, whilst for the very best Li-Ion batteries it's about 0.9 MJ/kg.

So you need 1/5th of the energy (thus allowing sensibleish charging times and very low energy costs) but because energy storage density is about 1/50th - you need 10 times the mass to store energy to do the same amount of work.

On a car, that's bearable within reasonable limits. But the 70L = 50kg of fuel you'd need for an hours flying plus sensible reserves in a PA28 requires around 500kg of batteries. The 450kg difference is all of your available payload, and then some.

G

[abgd]

I used A123 batteries in my electric helicopter a decade ago. They're still going strong and you could charge them in 8 minutes. They were unfussy and the combination of batteries/motor gave a better power to weight ratio than an IC engine. It was only in energy density that they fell short.

The obvious solution to the fast-charge problem is to have a large battery on slow charge from the mains. If you take somebody for an hour's lesson then charge in 10 minutes from the ground-based battery then you will only need a 17kW mains supply - assuming you need 1/5 the energy of petrol for an equivalent flight. Expensive, but probably cheaper and easier than trying to swap batteries in and out of the aircraft which is the other solution that has been proposed.

[dirkdj]

The electric motor is a lot lighter for the same HP output as an IC engine, making up for some of the weight penalty of the batteries. Plus, it runs efficiently at very low RPM, making more efficient and lower noise propellers possible.

[Jan Olieslagers]

@GtE: thanks, there had to be a flaw somewhere. Still, if only 20% is required of what I calculated, it still takes a 200kW power source to recharge in 6 minutes - only slightly less unrealistic. And @abgb, "only" a 17kW power supply? How many m2 of solar panels does that take? Or a 40+ amp cable from a 400V outlet? Or would you produce those 17kW from a diesel generator ;) ? And mind you, that is only for one aircraft. If, on a sunny weekend day, your field wants four planes in the training circuit than you'll need four of those 17 kW power sources, too.

On a more general note, I agree that the evolution is not to be reversed - but I remain highly cautious, there's too many tell-tales around, and the technology does need time to ripen.

[A and C]

There is an electric motor fitted to a glider that seems to have some advantages over the lawnmower engines that are currently used when a glider runs out of lift but these have had problems with battery fires so there is currently an AD to fit a fire detection system.

The Question Of do I use the parachute or do I try to land the glider after a fire warning is the current hot topic in gliding clubhouses when the weather prevents flying.

[Deltasierra010]

Even Elon Musk hasn't been bold enough to promote electric passenger flying and the likely reason is the Laws of Physics. Here on planet earth we have things like gravity and wind resistance to cope with and a vehicle is never going to sustain long periods of motion from battery power alone, particularly at high speed.
To do that will need an entirely new and yet unknown power source,

[Sam Rutherford]

Kryptonite...

[Jan Olieslagers]

... or nuclear fusion, said to be 99% ready for operation 50 years ago. O no, wait, it still is at 99% - reminds one of an aircraft homebuild project... ;)

[First_Principal]

Another take on electric aircraft here (https://lilium.com/).

Fairly light on detail but it it looks as if they've got it working in real life. There appears to be some serious work that's gone into it by an experienced team, and they have real backing, so it's not a 'vapourcraft' :D

Whether the predictions will come true is another matter, nevertheless good luck to them!

FP.

[Chuck Glider]

OK, it has flown so the engineering must be sound enough, I guess, but to my eye that Lilium thing just looks so unbalanced...but perhaps to a millennial it just looks cool.

[Sam Rutherford]

I would suggest that in the 'future' (now!) how it looks is almost as important as how it flies for commercial success!

[First_Principal]

I'm no millennial, but I was raised on 'Thunderbirds' (:O); to my mind it looks a bit like '2', which was always my favourite, so I'm ok with the looks. Also, I think the full-size version looks a little more reasonable dimensionally?

However I was a little concerned at the way it appeared to pitch into a turn, not certain they quite had the stability algorithm right at that point. No doubt it will be improved (or it was possibly just something in the way the video portrayed it)...

FP.

[abgd]

Personally I don't like the Lillium aircraft - for one thing that's a small model without any significant payload. It simply looks 'wrong' as if it needs a larger canard on the front

However, a few posts back someone pointed out that to compete with a spamcan you would need to carry a huge amount of batteries. One way you can do this is to improve your batteries. Another way is to make your airframe more efficient.

Electric aircraft can do VTOL relatively easily compared to IC engine powered aircraft. This means that you can get away with a much lower wing area as you don't need to worry about stall speed in the case of an engine failure - especially if you also carry a ballistic parachute. Also, if you have to divert or land in an emergency you can land on a postage stamp, so having an excess range becomes less important - you shouldn't need to carry the same amount of reserves as an IFR spamcan. So long as you have two minutes' warning of the batteries running out you should be able to put it down somewhere. Unless you're over water, of course.

The regulators' heads must be hurting.

[Genghis the Engineer]

Electric aircraft can do VTOL relatively easily compared to IC engine powered aircraft.

How do you figure that?

G

[abgd]

The power to weight ratio can potentially be much larger. The motors will give you many horsepower/kg and the batteries often have a huge power density, if not necessarily a large energy density.

It's a while since I did the sums but I believe electric motors for radio control aircraft are now managing 10-15 horsepower/kg whereas on O320 will give perhaps 1.6hp/kg.

Some batteries can be drained in less than a minute, so you could potentially carry enough batteries and motors to achieve 2 jump take-offs and landings on a far smaller mass budget than if you were trying to achieve the same thing with an IC engine.

You might be able to combine the VTOL capabilities of an electric aircraft with a relatively small cruise motor burning fuel, to achieve a very efficient hybrid system.

[Genghis the Engineer]

Okay, so you are distinguishing between power density and energy density. You may be right.

An interesting perspective - any calculations available?

G

[Mark 1]

Off the cuff figures:
A 5C current is reasonably sustainable from power optimised cells for a short period depending on cooling etc (i.e go from 100% SOC to minimum in 0.2 hours) so a 20 KWh pack could deliver 200KW of power at a cost of about $4000 and a pack weight of 100-150kg.
A 200KW IPM motor and planetary reduction gear could weigh down to about 40-50kg.

So you could have a 250 HP auxiliary motor with ~10 minutes endurance for a weight penalty of about 150-200kg.

[abgd]

That's conservative. A123 batteries I've used in my model helicopters are said to be able to go from full to empty at 35C and can manage 60C for short periods. There are Lithium Polymer batteries on the market that are claimed to be good for 150C or more. In practice they probably won't manage many cycles if you do that to them with any regularity, but it wouldn't surprise me if you could get 60C reliably and A123 cells are pretty bombproof.

What would you actually need to be able to do? Climbing to 300 ft then accelerating to 140mph needn't take too long. You'd need enough reserves to maneuver for a bit then land pretty much immediately if required. It sounds feasible to me. If you put a 250hp motor with 3 minutes of endurance in a sub 200kg 1 person aircraft, it should do 0-140 and 0-300 feet pretty quickly.

You can pedal a fuselage like this up to 80 - 90 mph on a kilowatt or so (human power + gravity with a 2/3% gradient) so presumably you could get it up to 160mph on 10 horsepower or so - without wings.
https://www.ohio.edu/mechanical/programming/hpv/Whittingham_81mph.jpg
https://www.pprune.org/ HRUVITEhJSkrLi4uFx8zODMtNygtLisBCgoKDg0OFxAQGi0lHR0tLS0tLS0t LSstLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLf/AABEIALEBHQMBIgACEQEDEQH/xAAbAAABBQEBAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAEAAECAwUGB//EAD0QAAEDAgMFBgUCBQMEAwAAAAEAAhEDBBIhMQVBUWFxE4GRobHwFCIywdF C4QYjYnKCFVLxFpKywjNDU//EABoBAQEBAQEBAQAAAAAAAAAAAAABAgMEBQb/xAAlEQACAgICAgICAwEAAAAAAAAAAQIRAxITMSFBBFEUYQUiMpH/2gAMAwEAAhEDEQA/ALGVMo/ZSpUI0WqQUxHMrHIdFjMh1IzkM0ofw8lrGn7KXYjn4lXkJxGI6m6ZVtInePB apoA7z77kwtW+wPwjyJk4mjPNI7kzqZ4LTFEewn7P3CzuXjMgW39JPeiGUTH DzR3Yj2Euz95o5lWOjPfTG8u9FANaNAPutPsx7lR7EcPfgruNDPNR24ZJGSN YWj2fuf2SwpuhozL7IuyOaiLITIcO9apaPcJYR7hVZDPEjOdQdy8UuyfwlHm kDrCbsRuhNy6AJpngfCVATPLwWoGJYSimTjAMPNTfSgSR3ozDO5Ng5JuXQyX U50mPFVChnxC2xT5JjQHBbWUw8NmbTaeEeaas0HifILRFEc1E2w/3FTkLx+DNYwjPJOXA9ei0vh+fkmNv0V5ETjYG1p0JCh8ENZKPNBOKZCm/0XT7MysyNB76Kds09y0iydygKATk8E4/NmeC0O18FCoHjQAjpK0XWzTuSFHmVpTQ0ZnMLN84uUq4WhdmHRyRHw45KQpl HP6Ch9mpiTSgxcHdLuUQfNWYydx8QvmcjPfQTiSLkK1xOhOXemNXcMU9CPVT cUFTzSlCU6rt5I4SPwVNtXOJAKbsUEJSEPUq5xMdxjxUBVO6D3FXkY1QWU0I N9Z3GP8AEn7qcu0kdY+0pyMaoJwpQhy7dOe/3KWOTAcJ6pyE0QRCUBDVMQ4++9R7V0bvNXkY1QUQmLEJ8RzB7yn7fKZ8z+E5 GNUE4By8EsA5IencYhIdKRr805GNUEdm1I0whW3I3O8lMV/6vEQryMaou7MJ+zCHNd3Ijj/wEviR/uHknIyaouNMJBg4+qq+JExi+yapcganyyTlGiLsA4+ZT4Bx80JSvg4wCJ6Jx eNnUDuV5SaIJw80xHP0VAuQd7SpGrvyTlGiLY5pYDyUG1QcxB6Jn1wN09AnK NCzszyT9keHvxQ/xTfYKXxTdft+6co0QR2J4JuxPAoEbTbvDh1Ct+Mbz8FeVk0QQaZ4JsB4FVNu Ad/mrDWjUkd6vMTjQUKA119UHVDdZIIVzZ1xQfEeSkHT9Xzdy8x3B21WkRoeJ1V lAEDWeavoW9J5xYRI5JrlwaY38hl3lAQ7Gc9RyyQtwyDGZaekhGUZmXQOiru w0ODwWCN5lAC2zGiYeY4RHqrnPDRJJI5Z+iJ7VrxkWnmI+6EIdOcAcf2QE8T Ykvy3blWZbmXkg8BlCvpPByJnuRAteBy4IAF9MES0kjkoUrZoIJbnyC0m2+E EjNZ95fgiCDPLJAWuoiZaAT1z81SaB1zHIu/CrZXOWoRjaucOiFAD0HB3HLw8VbWYZ3RzlRNUTh3cir2Oa39fmqQy2imHwQ5 vjn4lXiowmPpPMnNHV6zTMa9FifGFxhxAI3Yc1rWxdGj2DhpmOEEoTsC5xaS COZIjlEI+1uGluboPJV3tscOIPPOIk96gFQbhGENDemhVbrVzj8zWnhEz5oG nb1XOkVBHA6+i0aYdMSOeaNUBGzn6gDGkx91ewNIjLwUXuLhhB6+5Vb7UgAt dpxP5UYG7HDkA08ic/EqVGgTmWM7iEPSAc+XPEhGlxAzgjiPuo3RSFahGYAjlqqaVo0k/M7PdwUDWLXS4gjlKNaWkSIhLJRn3FNtOBJMnTD+EVVtcsQkeCnWpuiQYSY9x 1dn4qgqpAOyxHyTVbWRn+Cr30nEbsW7QKvG4fW2eYIhAZpq0w4DV3SfMrRdR ETlPRRubZjjoBzVlAFusEeaNgoZTa44ZIPLLzSc2m3JxJ4b/AEUX1ASS10HeP3TU7psZ5nuQBFJ7HyIwuQ7TUGUz1kLnaW1qjnYgBHTPxWzY 35qNksMDeJWtWhYXSunNk4SqrXbRcPmH7KDboH9LyDvgoa82a7Cezcehy9Ff HsgY7aIH0wc9NSqa78eZaR3wsila1qbAch0+6tp3jXEY5MceKa/RTZbScCMLSfD8KVW/eJDmRzhNbXbo16QhL7bL6f1Ny5rCXkN0X0to9PfRbmz7gOC4W3rms8OZlnmu utAGDWStTVIRYZdwyS090rMG0Q76oJCNc9p1WbU2a1xJxQdyykVllS5bvHiU U6iHt+U4T4+srOFiY+o4hpkhWbSqUye0aQNx49Eafohfbse15BPeRJKPq02u 358VlUhUqnETDd06+S0KVk7QOkdUCIXNIwC05jicj5LNvbY4wez11IgecLa7 JzSobQBLPkdnvVU6DRXYU2NGQ75JV7roaSDyXLf6thdAIneEfSuH1Mw1w6b1 qn7IbFCu3Fw6fuqLmkGuL3E4eXvNAUqHzSTBRm0Wl9LC0/usvz4KSoXJBmHYUS28a6REdCsvZlYtEVJ8jkrrizpvMsABHdPXNXWuyWPUon HOIBvVaQoGNZHgs+ldYSGuPctSjetLTGayzSKKjGEZsjkr6b2hvygAcEC6q1 xkE/ZD3l6GxB/CULNZ1uHtmCFX2I038VGjcvc3KD0KEu6bhnMFSg2G1KDokblCjekiHAhU2V1 AzOfVHMLXiHfhGgUXIL8mxG+TCgAQMOKCpV6LWNOEnxJ9Vi3FSR/8kQqkSy69vuza7GemeZ8ll2e0gQTDu/8AYKm4umPMObijjMHuWhR2qxrQBI5NEgeC7a0ujF+Quk+m75msbiPDMK+32m 1stwgRqAFx9S6fScWFuY4fbIKk3T3O+Vxnh9tFNC7I9IoXLXiYQ147gC0LO2 K97QO0Ge5bD68/SM953LjVM2BMcSCCSecT/wALOtNnMDiXDf8AqBW3Rmd3oiW0JOabUOyuya1uYAT3NsyrILR3gFSr08One dVZSOQLfNLLRhts6dA5YRPcijXnNpBHVDfxDUMYQBJ1OeXehNk2wbSdHPmtv qzK7onUviXRiPdu65Ky1vTiwfUeKFDIEkAnkAYRdN7csgDx0R0UPq3LWjOBz lTZWa9sOgj3xQVWza6C84uWqPsrdmmoWHJFKq1oC35T3BSpsLQMjPop17ODL fVEU2O3hNkSii7uS0CcxxQD7ppJG/otK8AymQRzWZdU8Z0g8YjzVSTDbOd2jsdxqYwRHALWtLM4RJjoVe5u7xWha0 A0a/dbc01RlRMa4qhmckj08VIbXYCGg6o+7tKTjLgD4+ixL3Z8vxMAI3Qc1YpMjb QTdVwRmfIflV296MgCEPVp1IwCmHHiDJ8NVbs7Yz8Yc8gch95XSUaXkypW/BpVqVOQ5wlWUQwtdgMcVJ1gSTJEboyWPd46ZxYTrvzELilZ0sCa5wc75sp55 rRoup1GgHVZd5cB+e/rKDoVng4Y196wuulqzntTO02ewtyDhHAoy4oY4z05rF2fZ1BEuHqVssa4aLh Ls6Izb2kWaun18lO0rukZHvC061IESQsy8ujTEkRwUKF3rJEwVwV889thJLQ dM5XZM2s1zYJCEr7NoVDJJnpE9SusJa9mZK0ZJ2C7JwqAjzV9OzDMluC1/lw0rm7u6cxxaVjeUumVJI3ds7IaXB7WiRrMrOp2rH1B8uEjhvXTW9UPb8wPV B3Oxww4mE9xPnmkJteGSS9oCqVix+f5RY2mAAPwsm1ZUfUcJMc/3Wva7MBBa4Z+a1KgmzUtny3FCttiDmFG0gDA7coFuGYBjj+64mwi7pYxAyKQ okAKFtVlWiSYWfJUZd2WiRUAPd+UNTqU2tIBHot66tWOEuEkaLgds0H03OJy nQcAusGpKjL8ErlpxEgiORTUbg6anmc1hNe53HuKLZRcwQWmSvQ40qOKlbOp 2bdiPnyHcjHVcWkD7rkqFtUguIiOK0tj3Lw7Nh65/cLzTh7R2izobYEH5iY5FaLCRocuawzcZ6zxjOPBH0a0gAEFcWjaC7gYhIy+6 ANEk5N8UYWncZ71W3nkukG0qMyo568dWa+AzxIVtpdvg4syNwEwtR72g5lsc 1WypRBMFonWHR5LrxyfnV/8Mbx+zLuNpB9NwxYY+qcyJ071x+19pue8UaUhu8DMuJ0ne48ua1tuXhBcynS IBM4iMQJ4/KfuszYtjTY7tKlwASWmcFQEQZMfKc5jTgvoYsfEv2eaT5H46N+y/h57A7E9xfSAc5pywyJDmkE5iV1ti3HSaXb29IIyPmCqKW37TsntFenifIHy1 ThBaBvYOeXNU223aTGBlOahEw9wwjMz9Mye9ahOUk1I1lwU04IsrUDScJMtO h5dFc6kx4GIyEFUr45LzM++5ZNntH5yAZbJjmAvn/KxODuJ3xu15D9qbGp4S8ZFD2Wy2YQXd3uFrUqjXtMnuVPbQY8FwWWVG9ES7N ozafFKldEOE6dUrhhcNSOYQ7LQZfODHEwUT2Q6NS5eG5zkVxu3a1Wo4hrjhG 4TmtnaxaWR2jRG6QszZt9TpuOIOz36j0XbHF9pGZNdMzaFrcCMpHXNdRRGTS 7IrJr7RIqFzRiae71KHuNpVXGQABwxBWePJP0ZUoR9nUufICDudl03mXHNc5/qdxOQZ1lQq3Nw8yajR0AWF8XIug80DsaruzdhGc8pCPo15ABWbSupMnulI3Q DswFyfk6roPq2gDpaYVlOq2I1PJZFzWJzxEclO1r5ZnXiUBptAPzQffVUvxu PyjLmnoTyhXF8AgT3StEKGVoMTnvRgud37LKpOJJy6TEo22cRlE+EKMpO5e7 CQ0lvMa+Kx7nY5qCatYkcJ9TK1Lm1Orm4hwyWXXq4ZHw1UA72uPvyW4R+n5M SZy1zZinUJaRh3S4T4A6IavtgscNcjuzB8VdtLZ9u1x/l3Anx8XAfdBMLGGWhwHBxBPvwXsUL/Z596N+72q19EOAJPAoay22Bq0hUWe0KQMkvHQCPPVF9naPOIvcTzEeq5vDXa OnJfTNS1u2VcphI3LaUkmAN5XN3Jp0yXB0sHPOdzRG8rm9p7XfVdmYG4bgFu HxVL+0n4MSzPqPZ2G0P44IkUh3n8LAuP4hr1Dm93isNjSUdb25XoUoY/EFR1x/Flk8yCBcvdvKup4jvKItrJaFCzTlk+2etfGxx9AFOm7iUTRtTuEcVoii1okk BU1Np0m7y7oo8yQ4U+kVtsRyR9nbge/ysqrt8j6WAdf2WdebVqvEF0DgMpWPyPo3+LJo7PallWfavr0y1tFrXOmZc/DuaBoJBEk9yytnXv8qmOyBIb9ROvNXf9UUmbLFoMTqr2va6B8rA6oTmTy3Cd VjW0Bjf5jdBlnI8s1hJZH/c8mbbHGo/YY8Vy/GHMHKSm7S6mcbY5fuFV27NMTj0bHqE4rT9Ae48z+JWuPF9Hl3yfYa6o8j56j j1kDyQlRo3Bp5mfyrRbVzn2Ij+sZeLoVFSif1VaNPkHNPk3EVuNR8JGWm+2T FMjc0f4n7lQwHV0Ad2fqqi+iNa7nf2td/7FqpN3bjRlRx5ua30a5a2kZ1iWODJ+seZ/wDEKouHFx6Zeqi7arR9NFg5uL3H1A8lE7Zq/pLWf2sY3zDZ80uQqIRQoPcflY93eT6BEnZ9Uatpjk57WnwLwsavfVX/AF1Hu6uJHgTCHCU/sWvo9FfBePnEcmucfx6qVWlSLplxjlA8yCs1+16I0a7wj1VI21H0sdHN0DyX iXx5P0ermS9nV0bVr2fcAflCXVthOUxzzK5+nt2vikA95keijd7VuHmSQ3oD 91pfFk2ZeeKOjtqzwZc6RuAAy80TWvmPEZ/92H1XEl9c6vqHpkPJV1GH9TjP9TiPUrf4n7Mfko7GWzm9jeZe2fVQ/wBVpsOdXwIK4ujTE/Ww98+gRYdSHPo059JGa3+KvbJ+Q/SOsf8AxVQA1fPIfus6r/FImWsce78LKFx/tpHq6G+klKa2oY2ORJ9YTgxLtk5cj6QVc/xC9/8A9M9ZKx7io5xnsz0wyPMLQFCqW4sYHHIR3mSfJVPYNX1Y/wAi0eoW1xx6I1kl2Z5t3HVjvBQ+CMxMdSMgNSe5FP7Kc3SOrnf8rP25dMp0s NPI1JGgHyDXQbzl3FdIyUnRzlFpGRtS9DzgbkxuTRx4uPMoalTlV0myVs2Fl PRc8uQ+j8L4u3kjaWkrcs7HuRFtbNYMToHVUXW1AMmeP4C8znR9dYvUUGVar KYz8N5Wbc7Wccm5DzWZWrEmTn1VWLJZ2bNrCo9+QirXLsyZVMqGJOXKI2xyV F5SKhUcNStRVs5ZZKMbYnOgSffJa1HaFINb/KLjAnE8xMZ5NAMd65uvWxdBoPe9aFLQdB6L1QhR+ez595eOjVO1z+mlSb/jiPi8lRqbcuCI7VwHBsNy4fKAs+U0rdI4bMnUqF2ZJPXP1UZUcSRerRPI6Sj KYqiicppUUkFDlyUpkkLR1hz+ljh/cMPpJVNWpUBjs28plw8clhs/iKsBAI64RPipN2zcu+ls9GuM+Cl5B/Q2wKh//McYBJ8SYSZbv1xwOQE93sLIFzdnV2Af1FrB5qirUdrUr0ie958AFNcjG2NG3 UY3R9Vx6kZdZ/KRpW7d+Lp80+ULDbe02/qLv7aYb5lycbbpjSji/uefRseqjxz+yrJD6NhlzSExTOe785j0Ti+cTkwAcj6wPusn/qZw+mhQb/iXHxeSmP8AFNxufh/tDWf+IU4mXkib9P4l30sd3MdHiU1S2rkRUexo/qfTb6Zrl6u2ajvre93VxKp+N5IsQ5UdQaNJowvuWxwb2lTwyjzUTWtG6Gs7o 1rB5klc38UOaYXI5rXGzPIbx2lT0Zbid2N7nT/24Vz+3rntK7sgAPlaBoAMsu+T3q2ndtBBzyIPhmhqIa5+vkn+UzeNbzSDNkb ONRwAC6yrTZbtgwXbgjdmMp0bPtW0yapMBxgACMzGpOYXKXlcuJLnCZzkr5s pylLwfqsCx44U3RO7ui8ye4IR7lXUuWDV47pKFfft3SfJajim/RnJ87BDwpIvcU0oJ1/waO/NVOvH8Y6ZLtHBL2eCf8pj9Js0yD06qt1dg1d4ZrMdVJ1JTNbK6LCl2eWf8pN/5VB770fpb3n8BC1axKrJygJg0roopdHhy58mT/TsQK128Fn2tKXLRW0ckJKEksKoEUk8JkAySdOhSICScpiUA6ZKU0oCr/U6n6cLf7WNH2VVS9qO+qo89XFVmkeBSNI8D4LpZxogUlPAeB8E2A8CgIpJ8J 4FKDwUAyeUsJ4FLAeBSxQ0pSpdk7gl2LuCWi0RlKVLsXcE3Yu4JaFESUM4EH 7ovsXcPRMbd3BR0zUbRX8U4jCXGOEmFXKv+FPBN8KeHmsUjV2UpwrPhncFqb H2fReSK9d9CNMNLtMXGYeI8FlypFUbMghSZTJ0zWztK0tWuAodq4AZuqloLz xDGD5R1JPRUNgaZKKVouoKyzPvNTFkeI996IxlNJSy6lL7Pm3uH7rUsa9Cmy DbU31I+t7nuHXsycMoApwo1ZV4LMWuQEncI8k4cq0pVIWY0pVcp5VTJRKUpU DKQWrFEpSlRTwpsKHlMnwHgn7I9EsURTEqeEDelkpbKKUpUoCcELVkohKQUs Q4JY0sDYU4YUxeUi5AP2ZSwDeVFIBKFkoHVNI4JJJSFingmMpwUyUSyMJEKS ZTUtkYSUkxU1LZEhNhU1HKUoWNCUKSYqCxklIUypilxKtCyqElcWtTSOCULK 4ThvJTL03aIBBql2agahUe9AXdnxTQ3iqZ6pggL8bU3bcAqwEoUA7qzk2qUJ 0sDQklKjiQFidJJaRBymKSS2BJykkhBwn3pJKAYJikkhBNT70kkAyQTJIURU T+EklGVkSk3TvTpKezPssYiGJklSjP0VBSSWTTIKRSSUBAapFJJAxzqoBJJC EgnKSSFHCcJJKAioPSSVQHTuSSVMvs/9k=
How big would you need the wings to be to attain a stalling speed of 140mph? How much induced and parasitic drag would they have? This is the part of the question that I really don't know how to answer, but I imagine if you were to design an aircraft to fly at high speed without any requirement to be able to fly at low speed (because this is taken care of by the VTOL system) you could make them considerably more efficient. I suspect you might have a better handle on this than I do, Genghis?

Perhaps given a more modest cruising speed you might be able to power such an aircraft very efficiently - perhaps just a few horsepower to fly straight and level at 100+mph? Obviously a practical aircraft needs some excess power to outclimb downdrafts and outclimb terrain. Also, most people find being in an HPV claustrophobic. However, I bet you could find a compromise hybrid or wholly electric vehicle that would give you a vehicle with VTOL capability and a half-decent range, and that it could end up looking not altogether unlike the Lillium.

[Victorian]

An interesting observation from the Space X people is that powered recovery is best delayed until the very last moment, because every second spent decelerating or hovering is an extra 32 ft/sec/sec. That's why the boosters plummet and only light up at the very last moment (or not).

I wonder how this would compare with a parachute recovery system in an aircraft already equipped with electric VTOL? It's not clear that the 'G' would be any more than for a parachute arrival. The amount of residual, or even segregated battery capacity could be very small. And no pyrotechnics.

An interesting example of Lipo power is in Rocket Lab's Rutherford engine which flew to orbit recently from NZ. Instead of turbopumps, which in Saturn V famously had more horsepower than a Navy destroyer, they use reportedly 50HP motors driving dual impeller pumps for 8 minutes of powered flight. With multiple units, these numbers are quite similar to our own VTOL requirements.

[Deltasierra010]

There is a lot of practical knowledge we can draw from electric cars, the weight of a Tesla S is similar to an M5, performance is similar, range is probably less with electric but not much. The main downside is the time taken to refuel, around 1 hour if you have a 120 amp supply, cost per mile is much less because no fuel tax.

Because engine weight offsets battery weight a practical electric trainer with a decent range looks feasible, longer range the battery weight overhauls the performance. Others have proposed 5x energy efficiency gains, we have not seen this in cars, maybe improved batteries would change the power weight balance.

The next question, is there a manufacturer willing to develope, certify and build such an aircraft that will probably sell at a few dozen each year.

[First_Principal]

Here's another project:

https://www.stuff.co.nz/technology/102203642/air-taxi-trials-possible-in-six-years-as-tech-company-trials-flying-vehicle-in-canterbury

Shows as a registered aircraft, s/n 002 o perhaps there is/was another:

Zephyr Airworks Mule SPA s/n 002 MCTOW 1224kg Aeroplane Air No. 0 (https://www.caa.govt.nz/script/flight-man?Manual_ID=0)

FP.

[mikemmb]

There is a lot of practical knowledge we can draw from electric cars, the weight of a Tesla S is similar to an M5, performance is similar, range is probably less with electric but not much. The main downside is the time taken to refuel, around 1 hour if you have a 120 amp supply, cost per mile is much less because no fuel tax.

Because engine weight offsets battery weight a practical electric trainer with a decent range looks feasible, longer range the battery weight overhauls the performance. Others have proposed 5x energy efficiency gains, we have not seen this in cars, maybe improved batteries would change the power weight balance.

The next question, is there a manufacturer willing to develope, certify and build such an aircraft that will probably sell at a few dozen each year.

.........."cost per mile is much less because no fuel tax."

Need to be careful with this assumption. When we all go electric, tax will still need to be raised ..........somehow, we just don't know what, how, when?

[Fionn101]

Hi Everyone,

With the recent thread on operating costs of a light single , I was left wondering about how our electric aircraft are developing?

would anyone have any updates to the thread?

I would imaging operating costs to be significantly cheaper (I have been wrong before) when we subtract the fuel , oil , hydraulic and air systems required.

1 or 2 more questions :
how has battery energy density increased since the old lithium based batteries ?
and do you foresee future light aircraft being more of a drone style multi-prop than a regular fixed wing ?

I'm merely curious as to how technology has moved on since we last spoke about this. One or two friends of mine have fully electric cars and would never look back at a 'smoker' car again.

All thoughts and opinions welcome,
Thanks,
Fionn