Electric powered commercial aircraft -- here we go!
 

Harbour Air, of Vancouver BC, one of the world's most well-known (and reputable) operators of float planes, is on track for commercial flights in electrically powered aircraft. Much discussion among the pros here in Canada of some of the more challenging issues (i.e. How do you calculate such things as fuel requirements and fuel remaining?).

https://vancouverisland.ctvnews.ca/h...sday-1.4721986

here is the official news release which is intended for sharing.

Harbour Air and magniX Announce Successful Flight of World's First Commercial Electric Airplane

https://mma.prnewswire.com/media/749...=publish&w=200Inaugural flight is the first step in becoming the world's first all-electric commercial fleet

VANCOUVER, British Columbia, Dec. 10, 2019 /CNW/ -- Harbour Air, North America's largest seaplane airline and magniX, the company powering the electric aviation revolution, today announced the successful flight of the world's first all-electric commercial aircraft. The successful flight of the ePlane, a six-passenger DHC-2 de Havilland Beaver magnified by a 750-horsepower (560 kW) magni500 propulsion system, took place on the Fraser River at Harbour Air Seaplanes terminal in Richmond (YVR South) this morning. The plane was piloted by Harbour Air CEO and founder Greg McDougall. This historic flight signifies the start of the third era in aviation – the electric age.https://mma.prnewswire.com/media/104...=publish&w=950The world's first fully electric commercial aircraft takes flight. The Harbour Air ePlane is magnified by the magniX magni500, a 750-horsepower electric propulsion system.https://mma.prnewswire.com/media/104...=publish&w=950The world's first fully electric commercial aircraft takes flight. The Harbour Air ePlane is magnified by the magniX magni500, a 750-horsepower electric propulsion system.https://mma.prnewswire.com/media/104...=publish&w=950The world's first fully electric commercial aircraft takes flight. The Harbour Air ePlane is magnified by the magniX magni500, a 750-horsepower electric propulsion system.https://mma.prnewswire.com/media/104...=publish&w=950The world's first fully electric commercial aircraft takes flight. The Harbour Air ePlane is magnified by the magniX magni500, a 750-horsepower electric propulsion system.https://mma.prnewswire.com/media/104...=publish&w=950(PRNewsfoto/magniX)

https://mma.prnewswire.com/media/104...Air_ePlane.jpghttps://mma.prnewswire.com/media/104...stFlight_1.jpghttps://mma.prnewswire.com/media/104...stFlight_2.jpghttps://mma.prnewswire.com/media/104...t_Flight_3.jpghttps://mma.prnewswire.com/media/104...arbour_Air.jpg"Today, we made history," said Greg McDougall, CEO and founder of Harbour Air Seaplanes. "I am incredibly proud of Harbour Air's leadership role in re-defining safety and innovation in the aviation and seaplane industry. Canada has long held an iconic role in the history of aviation, and to be part of this incredible world-first milestone is something we can all be really proud of."

Earlier this year, Harbour Air announced its partnership with magniX and the company's intention to build the world's first completely electric commercial seaplane fleet. The magni500, which was unveiled at the Paris Air Show in June, 2019, is a high-power-density electric propulsion system that provides a clean and efficient way to power airplanes. Today that plan took flight and became a reality.

"In December 1903, the Wright Brothers launched a new era of transportation—the aviation age—with the first flight of a powered aircraft. Today, 116 years later, with the first flight of an all-electric powered commercial aircraft, we launched the electric era of aviation," said Roei Ganzarski, CEO of magniX. "The transportation industry and specifically the aviation segment that has been, for the most part, stagnant since the late 1930s, is ripe for a massive disruption. Now we are proving that low-cost, environmentally friendly, commercial electric air travel can be a reality in the very near future."

magniX and Harbour Air will now begin the certification and approval process for the propulsion system and the retrofitting of aircraft. Once the certification is complete, the rest of the fleet can be magnified with magniX's all-electric propulsion technology.

To see images and videos of the world's first all-electric commercial aircraft flight, please visit the media kit.

About Harbour Air

Seriously looking forward to seeing the first commercial operations of an electric powered aircraft.

Motors - how many, more that one?
One tonne batteries?
How much fuel can the Turbo Beaver carry?
Is the a MTW that is lower than the MTOW?
How many pax can it carry with the batteries fully charged?

6 pax must mean without baggage, or 3 pax with. (?) 100 miles range, and then a quick change of batteries?

Every future landing of this short range aircraft will be heavy weight because of the heavy batteries. No wonder they picked a Beaver.

Range is given as 160km or 86nm. But of course in general-public stories they never distinguish between absolute range and range-with-reserves. Reserves will be an issue as certification of ePlanes ramps up.

Nonetheless there are "enough" places in the world where that is a reasonable range. Only about 50nm between the site of this test flight and Victoria Harbour. Which would require ~25 minutes in this aircraft - but 180 minutes by car and ferry.

Similar for San Juan - St. Thomas or San Juan - Vieques. Not to mention the famed "shortest commercial flight in the world." Westray to Papa Westray - 53 to 90 seconds ;)

Also, BTW - for test purposes the battery is lead/acid. There are lighter batteries planned.

Cannot believe how small the motor is.

Half a beer barrel

I am not sure where this rumour started, but this is not true, the test flight used lithium ion batteries, there is no way you could fly a plane with lead acid batteries capable of delivering the power and charge needed. Lead acid batteries store about 35-40 Wh/kg, Lithium ion is 100-265 Wh/kg.

I'd have some serious fire concern with electric flight. Just look up FAA's laptop cabin fire instructional video. How about batteries that can be emergency jettisoned?

I guess that laptop was FAA certified and can be issued with a form 8130.

Yea, me too. The plane flew for 15 minutes. Now they have to figure out how to build thousands of airports spaced a maximum of 25 miles apart. :p

I suspect that's why it's a float plane. The flight from Kenmore to the San Juan's is a blast.

1000kg of lithium ion batteries would give a duration of around 20 mins assuming favorable conditions, cold weather will reduce the capacity of the batteries considerably. Maybe for a quick sightseeing trip or training it could be usefull. You would need a seriously heavy recharging supply to get a quick turnaround. Better battery technology could make duration more usefull maybe in 5 yrs time

Looking at Harbour Air website, their sightseeing flights offered at Vancouver are 10, 20, 35 minutes of flight time. I expect the majority of their customer sightseeing flights could be handled by the initial batteries and no doubt there will be ongoing improvements in range as is happening with electric cars.

The North West US and Vancouver area rarely gets that cold, plus I would think it no problem to keep the batteries warm and insulated during service. If there are technical glitches, that is what the development effort is there for.
I think the concept is quite sound and wish them all success.

What is the approval process for a conversion like this that is intended to be used for commercial fare paying passengers.

A new airframe and engine combination should require some new certification shouldn't it?

Definitely yes. Though I have had no involvement with this project, I was involved in the certification study for another electric airplane proposal. A new "basis of certification" will be required, as the present basis of certification never envisioned electric motors as powerplants. Another member here has been similarly involved in developing a new certification basis.

In my discussions with Transport Canada Aircraft Certification Branch, they expressed an eagerness to participate in new design standards, as they recognize the need. There are other international authorities also working to develop new and appropriate design standards for electric planes. In my detailed review, I found that on the whole, certification of an electric plane becomes less burdensome than for an engine driven plane, when the requirements for ignition engines are no longer required. It is certain that this will be accomplished, it's just a matter of time. Harbour Air is obviously involved in that process, and good for them investing back into a new and important industry. Lots of development is required, and it has to start somewhere!

It'll be a Supplemental Type Certificate (STC). Commonly used for aircraft modifications - some more major than others. While some STC projects are done via DER approvals, I'm guessing that for a completely new powerplant installation the local regulatory office would be involved (maybe even some involvement from the national level due to the novel aspect of the change and it's high profile).

A battery swap? Changing 1000kg worth of battery on a float plane... that's going to be a fun exercise! :suspect:

Someone above mentioned "range" and "endurance"... I saw a claim in a story that they were expecting 30 mins flight + 30 mins reserve.

Kudos to them for giving it a go... hopefully it will help advance battery technology.

A great start for electric power, but surely simple physics limits what can be achieved unless someone invents an entirely new kind of battery.

For example, the specific energy of avgas and jet fuel is about 43 MJ/kg. The best lithium-ion batteries top out at about 0.9 MJ/kg (the batteries in a Tesla are about 0.7 MJ/kg), so they have a fraction of the storage of liquid fuels. The best battery technology in theoretical development (Lithium-air) has a theoretical maximum of 41 MJ/kg, more realistically they'll get 1/4 to 1/3 of that from the technology.

The key is energy density, the laws of physics don’t change, it takes exactly the same energy for a given weight and speed regardless of power source. The company projections are over optimistic if they expect 30 mins + 30 reserve with current technology, the experience with cars is that battery capacity and range achieved is very variable and a large margin has to be allowed. Range anxiety is a constant issue and will be critical in an aircraft.

Don't forget that electric motors are typically 90 to 98% efficient, whereas a petrol powered piston engine is likely to be around 30 to 40% efficient. Thus your 43MJ/kg avgas is closer to 15MJ/kg. There's still a long way to go, but it does rather narrow the gap.

The Wrights managed 120', and look at where we are now. These guys are starting the practical ball rolling, and I for one wish them every success.

Both nonsense and Herod make very good points and clearly Rolls Royce think electric aircraft have a promising future too. In highighting the energy density issue, I was merely trying to make sure readers understood one of the main obstacles to progress in this field. I think we should all wish them success.

https://www.rolls-royce.com/media/ou...ing-accel.aspx

It has just dawned on me that only short flights are possible on electric power, now and for the foreseeable (because physics), but that these flights are the most vulnerable to concerns about climate change.

As I live in New Zealand, I am not well-disposed to "flight-shaming" (I'd love to be able to catch a train to Sydney), but sight-seeing flights, and short commuter flights when ground alternatives are available, are the sort of elective activities that we might all cut down on. So, climate neutral gives the joy-flight industry a great selling point.

No worse than with a petrol engine, I would imagine. My old Beech C23 glided like an anvil. I doubt a Beaver would be much worse! The longest flight is around 50 n.m. most of it over protected waters, so a water landing should be feasible in the event of engine failure.

New US engine type certificate project, Canadian STC airplane modification project. It's been covered in various news releases by MagniX and Harbour Air.

Back in the late 80s I used to spend time with a somewhat knowledgeable DHC2 pilot, some of you might have heard of him? His name was Jack but folks around Porpoise Bay called him Blackie. Over one of probably several hundred cups of coffee I bought him at the Sechelt Family Mart, I asked him why he would lay on the power as he set the floats down and he said if he didn't "Blossom" would wind up a submarine!

I have no first hand experience with such, but a little throttle is, I believe, normal procedure when landing on water? Kinda makes sense...

Really cant get excited until the promoters are excited by the payload and range. You can build an electric anything, the issues are how much useful work can be done, for how long and how long to recharge. Everything else is fluff, window dressing and promotional hype.

One hundred and sixteen years ago today...range, 852 feet, payload, zero. Ya gotta start somewhere.

I have a cunning plan to extend battery life for aviation, but someone else will surely make money off it, and laugh into the bargain, so I'm keeping this one close to the old chest.

I’m in Vancouver for about half the year. Been following this story for a while. Unfortunately I don’t share the same enthusiasm for the project as the manufacturers do. Charging time, the need for many, many identical proprietary battery designs and charging stations at numerous airports, the logistics of change a 1 ton battery between flights and a whole host of other issues makes this a huge undertaking. Battery technology is still not there. Tesla has taken the technology about as far as you can and they are years and years away from any new implementation. While I would love to see it happen, the engine is probably the best thing that comes from this but, until they improve battery tech it’s going to be some time before any commercial service begins, if at all.

Not sure I'd be so pessimistic about this. With legs < 30min this would actually make sense - *if* there is any payload left.

However, as is often sadly the case, they manage to make the maximum buzz with minimum hard info. A lot of speculation floats around. Does anyone know any actual numbers except for the motor specifications (weight / power are known)?

In particular:
* what capacity battery?
* how many kW charging?
* what mass for the battery is actually true? 1000kg has been floated, but no source given as far as I can see. However 1000kg would mean MTOW minus empty weight = zero for the DHC2, even when taking into account that the electric engine is lighter than the combustion one by at least 350 pounds. So that can't be the full story... Did they increase MTOW for this? Otherwise for more than ~1000 lbs battery weight 6 persons on board should be be impossible.
* Battery swapping? This has been floated around, too, but would seem really weird for a floatplane... It also seems kind of useless, since for a leg of 20mins with 30min reserve from the last landing still left in the battery out of the 60 mins total endurance, you'd only have to charge from 50% to ~85%. This can be done with relatively high speed charging, so to get below 15 minutes for those 35% should not be a problem. Probably more than current minimum dock turnaround times, but not that much more to warrant a complicated swap operation...

Anyways, doing this with a 1947 design Beaver of all airframes, is so weird and wonderful that ol'Havilland in his grave probably has a big fat smile on his face...

Not particularly difficult. A little more judgement required than on a runway, though less worry, as you're more likely over a more suitable landing surface. It is a requirement that all planes be power off landable, the Beaver floatplane is no different, regardless of powerplant.

When I specified the motor arrangement for an electric 172 project, I specified an electric variable pitch, feathering propeller. In the case of power loss, it could autofeather, and gliding would be more easy that many piston powered airplanes.

Yes, as we found, there are penalizing performance (range) considerations for electric planes. But that's going to improve. Every great product improves with development. Ten years ago, you desk top computer might run for twenty minutes on the ten pound back up power supply. Now, a tablet will run all day, doing more work, and the whole thing is 5/16" thick, and weighs a small fraction of the back up battery unit. A battery the size of two choclate bars will start my car! We can't imagine the developments in such a needed product!