200hp Electric Sikorsky
 

Aero-news.net reported today that Sikorsky will show a 200hp electric S-300 at EAA Airventure next week.
I will be looking for this.

Aero-News Network

Interesting...

This is going to lend a whole new world of meaning to the commonly-announced statement... "I've got a flat battery..." :suspect:

I'd imagine, engine controls would be more like a turbine than a piston, iow importance of torque and temp (and of course amps).

Wonder if they'll fire it up at Oshkosh so you can hear how quite it is...

awesome, cant wait to the pictures and hear it hover :ok:
wonder if it still has conventional gearbox then just having electric motor replacing the engine, or if it has two motors one for main-rotor and one for tail-rotor which would be cool, then eliminating the need for gearboxes and tail-shaft and lot of moving parts

"In building the demonstrator, the Innovations team replaced the propulsion system with an electric motor and controller from US Hybrid, coupled with a lithium ion energy storage system from Gaia.
Eagle Aviation Technologies executed the custom airframe modifications and assembly of the demonstrator aircraft."

　

Technical innovation. :confused: :confused: :confused:
Perhaps, innovative marketing, so as to claim a http://www.unicopter.com/First.gif.

Dave

Dave Jackson,

You nailed it. "Sikorsky Innovations" is probably not the best name for a company division that is the lead on this particular project. All the innovative stuff is COTS from subcontractors. The systems SI is engineering don't appear to be especially challenging.

The motor supplier, US Hybrid, makes PM drive motors that operate well above this aircraft's rotor speed. So I would speculate that some sort of reduction gearbox will still be necessary.

riff_raff

Electric Helicopters?
 

What a complete and total load of of PR Poop!


Electric helicopters eh? For what purpose?

So the foolish pilot flies too long, and the battery runs down. Enter autorotation, and it recharges the battery on the way down. By the time you get to the bottom to flare, you've got power again! I like the idea!

It will probably be happily difficult to over rev, with the clutch not engaged. I do wonder about type certifying an electric motor as a powerplant though! It looks like we'd need a whole new certification basis for that....

Electric helicopters may seem impractical now, but Igor has probably heard that before. We need a reason to make batteries lighter and motors more powerful. Every journey begins with the first step.

I have to concur that this media release is a fairly substantial beat-up, and that it has been done to show people that more than lip service is being given to electric drive technology. It could be, that it has been done to place the company in a position to acquire more "green" funding.

There are vast amounts of Govt money available to any company or even an individual who can produce some evidence of a product that shows some advance in the reduction of reliance on hydrocarbon fuels, and a contribution to a greener planet.

However, direct electric drive has a long way to go. The basic problem is that no-one - not even the Li-Ion battery worshippers - can claim that they have an improved battery design, that can come anywhere near the performance of any hydrocarbon-fueled, IC engine.

The basic battery problems stem from inadequate storage and "power-on-demand" capabilities, right through to an inability to recharge quickly.
Caterpillar spun off battery development improvements into a company called Firefly (no relation to Project Firefly).
This new Caterpillar-instigated design involved carbon foam cells that promised vastly improved performance and low cost, as the basic aim of the design being that no metals were required, and carbon is exceptionally low cost, and one of the most common elements.
Unfortunately, the design went nowhere, and Firefly have filed for bankruptcy.

The Swedes have the Effpower battery. A promising lead-acid development that utilises bi-polar plates. Not the bi-polar battery that Microsoft have recently raved about (the one you can insert without reference to correct polarity). No, the Effpower battery design is based around the premise that standard lead-acid batteries only access one side of the plates for power generation. Improving the design so that power is accessed from both sides of the plates makes for a more efficient battery, with lighter weight for power output, and at lower cost than a standard lead-acid battery.

Volvo have poured a heap of money into Effpower, and will shortly be using the Effpower battery in their hybrid vehicles, such as trucks, buses, and some construction equipment.
Hybrid power is the halfway step to all-electric power, and this concept is being embraced by many manufacturers of vehicles and construction equipment.

Their aim is to utilise a smaller engine, (usually a diesel) to drive a reversible generator/motor, that recharges batteries, as well as powering the vehicle/machine, on demand. Regenerative braking turns the electric motor into a battery-charging generator.
Batteries driving the electric motor provide power for lower speeds, and when full power is required, the IC engine adds its power to the electric motor for maximum performance. Volvo will have buses and trucks in production next year, utilising this concept.

There are already excavators in production that utilise hybrid power. They have batteries that power the excavator swing motor, and the swing motor uses regenerative braking for battery charging when it has passed the mid-point of it's swing, and the swing needs to be brought to a stop. The diesel engine also recharges the batteries.
The biggest and most promising development, that really IS a major breakthrough, is the Australian CSIRO-developed Ultrapower battery. This battery utilises standard lead-acid technology, but combines super capacitors in its construction to provide a massive power boost on demand, and to assist with rapid recharge.

The CSIRO claim that lead-acid battery design is a proven principle, and has no major inherent problems, as Ni-MH, and Li-Ion batteries do. In addition, a crucial factor is that lead-acid batteries are 100% recyclable, unlike all other batteries.

This Ultrapower battery is well past the design stage. It has been tested in a hybrid electric vehicle (HEV), and that car has covered over 160,000 kms in testing, with outstanding results. Licences to build the Ultrapower have been given to Furukawa of Japan, and Furukawa has extended the licence to the Advanced Lead-Acid Battery Consortium of America, a group of 54 organisations intent on advancing VRLA battery development.

None of this does anything to seriously advance the possibility of an all-electric chopper. An all-electric chopper will always be hampered by weight considerations of the batteries. A hybrid chopper is a distinct possibility, as hybrid design is currently the most promising technology.

The Ultrapower battery is aimed at HEV's, not 100% electric vehicles; although it is possible that the Ultrapower will be able to meet the demands of an all-electric design. As far as an all-electric, completely-viable chopper? Not in the foreseeable near future, IMO. A hybrid power chopper? Yes, very likely in the foreseeable future.

onetrack,

I have to agree somewhat with your comments about purely electric propulsion systems for autos or aircraft. While purely (nuclear) electric propulsion makes sense for large ships and subs, it is not yet practical for cars or aircraft, due to limits with battery technology. The motor technology is ready, but the batteries are still way short of where they need to be.

In my opinion, the whole emissions-free, electric drivetrain argument also doesn't make sense. At least here in the US, where 60% of electricity is produced by burning coal and another 20% is produced by nuke plants. Your "electric" helo is, in reality, coal or nuclear powered.

Regards,
riff_raff

Dave,

The US Patent Office appears to agree with you, at least insofar as in the way Sikorsky claimed an invention embodying some of these concepts in US Patent Application No. 12/018,217.

US 12/018,217 includes 16 claims; the Office rejected all 16 claims on July 2, 2010 in view of published records of pre-existing work in the field.

Cheers!

United States Patent & Trademark Office

I can see a major new business opportunity here for commercial providers of in-flight refueling...

http://i.imgur.com/M0cyMIB.jpg

:E

I/C

Would you have to switch on the power supply at the socket with a second probe? :)

So, for intercontinental flights, would you need receptical adapters, or would there be different probes available?

Well fat chance on an international standard plug...

NonSAC,

As always, thanks again for your support and information.

It is going to be interesting, and educational, to read the Patent Office's rejections against each specific claim. I assume that Sikorsky can still argue against some rejections; IF they feel that they have any valid argument.

_________________________________________________


Here is a more technically realistic approach toward innovation and an electric future.
A 2010: A look at a new innovative EADS helicopter design


Dave

Dave,

Fairly cool stuff. The Europeans appear to be focused on solving all the electric motor substitution problems first while allowing the battery industry to solve the power density issue independently - a sensible strategy IMO.

It'll be interesting to see how Sikorsky pursues the rejections in US 12/018,217. They bought their ticket, I'd expect them to finish the ride by responding to the rejections in some manner - though they'll have to pay for someone to write the response.

Whether the argue the rejections, amend the claims, or both depends on how bad the art uncovered by the examiner affects their plans for protecting the technology. Sikorsky's response without extension fees is due 10/2; last day to respond without abandonment is 1/2/2011, so we'll have to wait until then to see.

It's interesting to compare the search report prepared by the Korean Patent Office in the related International Application to that done by the US examiner - the US examiner found a bunch more art. Perhaps Sikorsky will revisit the practice of selecting the KPO as the ISA going forward, and use the USPTO or EPO going forward? Not sure, but my guess is that they were interested in saving some coin.

I'd be curious to see what an EPO examiner would uncover in a search on a related European filing.

Cheers!

Ian - Shouldn't that picture be more clearly showing an industrial-sized set of booster cables?? :E

NonSAC - Patents are rejected by the hundreds on a daily basis, and it's getter harder to get a patent approved, purely because of the vast number of patents already issued, and the "prior art" reason for rejection. Many companies regularly re-try their applications when they are initially rejected. Then, the companies always face the litigious companies or individuals, who claim, once the item is in production, that the company producing the item, has stolen THEIR idea/s, and infringed THEIR patent/s... :{