Electric powered commercial aircraft -- here we go!
I'm not slagging the effort but electrics have a long way to go......
The bigger the airplane the longer it will take to make use of stored electrical energy. For some drone, training aircraft doing pattern work or small aircraft local shuttle service it might work okay.
Maybe we should better try to beam the energy onboard up from the ground or down from space?
Maybe we should better try to beam the energy onboard up from the ground or down from space?
Oh yes it was. Nothing for the narrow minded.
https://phys.org/news/2018-11-diamon...es-flight.html
https://www.newscientist.com/article...-indefinitely/
https://phys.org/news/2018-11-diamon...es-flight.html
https://www.newscientist.com/article...-indefinitely/
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Auckland, NZ
Age: 79
Posts: 713
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An electric motor has about 90% efficiency!
Oh yes it was. Nothing for the narrow minded.
https://phys.org/news/2018-11-diamon...es-flight.html
https://www.newscientist.com/article...-indefinitely/
https://phys.org/news/2018-11-diamon...es-flight.html
https://www.newscientist.com/article...-indefinitely/
How would you apply this to appassenger aircraft travelling at speed for hundreds /thousands of miles? Have you any idea how much energy that would require from the laser ?
Baby steps. However, the sums don’t look as bad when you take into account:
It was replacing a Wasp Junior, which weighed 300kg and probably turned fuel into useful work somewhere in the 10-20% efficiency range (and less out of optimum power band) to make 450hp, with a 750hp electric unit weighing ~130kg at >90% efficiency. All the pipes, valves, generator, induction/exhaust, filters, controls, etc. can be removed which I’d guess is at least 50kg; you do need a power controller and wiring but because it’s fairly high voltage it’s not like huge bus-bars. That leaves space for ~200kg of battery before you get it to the dry weight it was before conversion.
For short hops there's no need to waste fuel to warm up the engine, there’s instant power available and maintenance should be less of a problem as the electric motor doesn’t care how many times it’s been started and stopped. Doesn’t need plugs and oil, either.
It’s obvious we won’t be getting transatlantic electric passenger aircraft for a while but this would seem an ideal place to start and see where the tech takes us. There are plenty of places where a quiet transport doing 10-20min legs would make a lot of sense...
It was replacing a Wasp Junior, which weighed 300kg and probably turned fuel into useful work somewhere in the 10-20% efficiency range (and less out of optimum power band) to make 450hp, with a 750hp electric unit weighing ~130kg at >90% efficiency. All the pipes, valves, generator, induction/exhaust, filters, controls, etc. can be removed which I’d guess is at least 50kg; you do need a power controller and wiring but because it’s fairly high voltage it’s not like huge bus-bars. That leaves space for ~200kg of battery before you get it to the dry weight it was before conversion.
For short hops there's no need to waste fuel to warm up the engine, there’s instant power available and maintenance should be less of a problem as the electric motor doesn’t care how many times it’s been started and stopped. Doesn’t need plugs and oil, either.
It’s obvious we won’t be getting transatlantic electric passenger aircraft for a while but this would seem an ideal place to start and see where the tech takes us. There are plenty of places where a quiet transport doing 10-20min legs would make a lot of sense...
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Used to be the Beer Store, now the dépanneur
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
https://www.magnix.aero/products/ is a good start.
Electric power is going to "work its way up" slowly but surely - from piston-prop-type aircraft to turboprop-type airframes. I won't even guess at when something resembling an "electric Embraer" will get here - if ever. But every little bit helps.
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unfortunately all technically feasible but a long way from commercial.
Electric aircraft, bio-fuels and laminar flow new design aircraft all part of the distraction developed by the ICAO regulator and industry to ensure that no one notices the industry has no plan to transition off hydrocarbon fuel.
Despite the often chanted 2-3% of CO2 emissions the industry repeats, by mid century it will be substantively more.
Unlike the maritime industry, aviation has no plan to replace the present source of fuel.
Electric aircraft, bio-fuels and laminar flow new design aircraft all part of the distraction developed by the ICAO regulator and industry to ensure that no one notices the industry has no plan to transition off hydrocarbon fuel.
Despite the often chanted 2-3% of CO2 emissions the industry repeats, by mid century it will be substantively more.
Unlike the maritime industry, aviation has no plan to replace the present source of fuel.
- Electric aircraft are an exciting concept, but as Fullwings notes a transatlantic flight a long way away......
- Bio fuels are technically feasible, but the sheer landmass required to grow the fuel would result in less food growing areas. Of course, bio-fuel still produces CO2... As a point of interest to replace 10% of the US airlines ASK would necessitate an areas the size of Florida to grow the fuel.
- Laminar flow developments aside, the flying wing concept as depicted by ICAO would fly for sure, but the re-design of all the associated infrastructure to support this new design is very very costly...
Unfortunately all technically feasible but a long way from commercial.
Electric aircraft, bio-fuels and laminar flow new design aircraft all part of the distraction developed by the ICAO regulator and industry to ensure that no one notices the industry has no plan to transition off hydrocarbon fuel.
Despite the often chanted 2-3% of CO2 emissions the industry repeats, by mid century it will be substantively more.
Unlike the maritime industry, aviation has no plan to replace the present source of fuel.
Electric aircraft, bio-fuels and laminar flow new design aircraft all part of the distraction developed by the ICAO regulator and industry to ensure that no one notices the industry has no plan to transition off hydrocarbon fuel.
Despite the often chanted 2-3% of CO2 emissions the industry repeats, by mid century it will be substantively more.
Unlike the maritime industry, aviation has no plan to replace the present source of fuel.
- Electric aircraft are an exciting concept, but as Fullwings notes a transatlantic flight a long way away......
- Bio fuels are technically feasible, but the sheer landmass required to grow the fuel would result in less food growing areas. Of course, bio-fuel still produces CO2... As a point of interest to replace 10% of the US airlines ASK would necessitate an areas the size of Florida to grow the fuel.
- Laminar flow developments aside, the flying wing concept as depicted by ICAO would fly for sure, but the re-design of all the associated infrastructure to support this new design is very very costly...
BTW, what is the maritime industry plan for moving the current crop of 100,000 plus ton ships?
Japan, Korea and China are putting a lot of effort into installing a network of hydrogen filling stations, so that cars like the Toyota Mirai can run relatively pollution-free. As suggested above by pattern_is_full, an array of options feeding into the aircraft batteries could be the way to go. (Photovoltaic cells, even pax pedaling in the on-board foot rest gym bikes could provide useful trickles.)
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Not where I want to be
Age: 70
Posts: 268
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
