Electric Battery Passenger Airplanes (how soon?)
I think Capetonian has it right.
Or a Chucker of Chocks?
Jetsons anyone?
Opsbeatch
Won't work on transAtlantic flights. I can never keep the plug ends and adapters straight between US and British outlets.
Can't we just have lots of really long extension leads...
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: In transit
Age: 70
Posts: 3,052
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't forget there is also a problem with the voltage conversion, 220/240 in Europe and 110 in the US. So you'd need step-down transformers for the westbound journey and step-up transformers for the eastbound. And those long cables are heavy. And they might get tangled up with other aircrafts' cables although I suppose if they painted them in fluorescent paint they could solve that problem. Except at night. No, there's a solution to that too, really powerful searchlights on the 'planes, but that would use more electricity ................ oh well .............
Apart from all that, great idea.
Apart from all that, great idea.
It all sounds a bit fanciful.
However, as a first step, someone would have to design a hybrid engine. Going all electric in one leap would never be acceptable, and carrying two types of engine would be hopelessly inefficient in terms of weight and drag.
So - a high bypass fan engine where the main fan can switch from turbine drive to electric drive. Any engine designers out there prepared to give us some input?
However, as a first step, someone would have to design a hybrid engine. Going all electric in one leap would never be acceptable, and carrying two types of engine would be hopelessly inefficient in terms of weight and drag.
So - a high bypass fan engine where the main fan can switch from turbine drive to electric drive. Any engine designers out there prepared to give us some input?
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 2,584
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Going all electric in one leap would never be acceptable, and carrying two types of engine would be hopelessly inefficient in terms of weight and drag.
Or...
Could it be we're being told a pack of lies about them? They wouldn't do that, would they?
Noooo!
Going all electric in one leap would never be acceptable, and carrying two types of engine would be hopelessly inefficient in terms of weight and drag.
Hence the only solution would be one for the kerosene and the batteries to drive the same fan. A true hybrid engine.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Los Angeles, USA
Age: 52
Posts: 1,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No, a hybrid system is not necessarily ineffiect at all. In fact, that's what we will see before we see pure electric flight. Sure, a 777 going transatlantic is a far way away on pure electric power, but maybe not in a hybrid version.
Here's the deal in my plane. I cruise at 55% at altitude. My climbs take rarely more than 10-15 mins. My plane would be ideal for a hybrid solution. You takeoff nice and silently and neighbour friendly with electric propulsion at full power. Once airborne, you start up your gas/jet powered genset and run it at 100%. This 100% is the equivalent of the 55% power needed at altitude. So now you can sustain 55% cruise without eating in to your power reserves. Or maybe throttle back to 45% on the electrics, and have the extra 10% charge the battery. Or run the batteries at 75%, thus depleting them slightly, but going faster for a shorter trip etc. Your choice.
The advantage is you don't have to deal with any of the bulls**t of last century:
1. No carb ice.
2. No need for complicated constant speed props (as electrical motors have linear power output and no sweet spot).
3. No TBO - only limited by bearing life.
4. No CO poisoning.
5. No shock cooling.
6. No rich cut.
7. No degradation at altitude, no need for turbos etc.
8. Built in Fadec (brushless motors you set a RPM setting and it keeps it through the controller, no matter what).
9. No need to check oil.
10. Much less weight - 15Kw (21hp) R/C brushless weighs less than 2kg. That means that a O-200 replacement would weigh about 10kg. That leaves a lot of weight for a battery..
11. No dirt.
12. No vibrations.
13. No noise.
14. No leaning at altitude.
Electric is the future and here now. How we chose to store the power to drive them will take a little longer.
Here's the deal in my plane. I cruise at 55% at altitude. My climbs take rarely more than 10-15 mins. My plane would be ideal for a hybrid solution. You takeoff nice and silently and neighbour friendly with electric propulsion at full power. Once airborne, you start up your gas/jet powered genset and run it at 100%. This 100% is the equivalent of the 55% power needed at altitude. So now you can sustain 55% cruise without eating in to your power reserves. Or maybe throttle back to 45% on the electrics, and have the extra 10% charge the battery. Or run the batteries at 75%, thus depleting them slightly, but going faster for a shorter trip etc. Your choice.
The advantage is you don't have to deal with any of the bulls**t of last century:
1. No carb ice.
2. No need for complicated constant speed props (as electrical motors have linear power output and no sweet spot).
3. No TBO - only limited by bearing life.
4. No CO poisoning.
5. No shock cooling.
6. No rich cut.
7. No degradation at altitude, no need for turbos etc.
8. Built in Fadec (brushless motors you set a RPM setting and it keeps it through the controller, no matter what).
9. No need to check oil.
10. Much less weight - 15Kw (21hp) R/C brushless weighs less than 2kg. That means that a O-200 replacement would weigh about 10kg. That leaves a lot of weight for a battery..
11. No dirt.
12. No vibrations.
13. No noise.
14. No leaning at altitude.
Electric is the future and here now. How we chose to store the power to drive them will take a little longer.
Last edited by AdamFrisch; 15th May 2013 at 03:58.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Surrey Hills
Posts: 1,478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AF says in part.....
"The advantage is you don't have to deal with any of the bulls**t of last century:"
Well......
The bulls**t comes from the Renewable Nutters who are "saving the Planet" and costing us dear in vastly inflated electricity prices.
The USA is now exporting fossil fuels and there are centuries of supplies available. Why
scrap a cheap power source for a marxist concept that simply will not work?
Electric Battery Passenger [Commercial Airline types] Aeroplanes (how soon?) -
Never, is probably the answer.
"The advantage is you don't have to deal with any of the bulls**t of last century:"
Well......
The bulls**t comes from the Renewable Nutters who are "saving the Planet" and costing us dear in vastly inflated electricity prices.
The USA is now exporting fossil fuels and there are centuries of supplies available. Why
scrap a cheap power source for a marxist concept that simply will not work?
Electric Battery Passenger [Commercial Airline types] Aeroplanes (how soon?) -
Never, is probably the answer.
Why scrap a cheap power source for a marxist concept that simply will not work?
Electricity is a pretty ideal way to power a vehicle for all kinds of technical reasons. That is why the rail companies think it a good idea to string out tens of thousands of miles of very expensive copper cable around the World. For an aircraft, electrically powered fans would be almost certainly simpler, cheaper, lighter and safer than current turbofans.
The problem is when you have to move away from a wired supply. The storage of electricity at a density anywhere near comparable with hydrocarbon fuel is looking increasingly like an intractable problem. Generations of major investment has upped power density by a factor of about 5 from classical lead-acid batteries. A further increase of a factor of 50 is needed when in fact we seem already to be into a curve of diminishing returns. Forget the politics - that is the reason we may never see a practical all-electric aircraft.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Surrey Hills
Posts: 1,478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DHU
Electricity is Marxist? Now there is a new one for me.
The principle of using AGW CO2 as an excuse to tax us and to use scaremongering tactics to try and force us to scrap oil and gas and coal and use hideously expensive so called 'Renewables' to generate electricity will bring us to our knees. Pure Marxist tactics and deployed by James Hansen and Michael Mann at every opportunity. And all their grant grabbing cronies.
Reality will eventually win however.
Electricity is Marxist? Now there is a new one for me.
The principle of using AGW CO2 as an excuse to tax us and to use scaremongering tactics to try and force us to scrap oil and gas and coal and use hideously expensive so called 'Renewables' to generate electricity will bring us to our knees. Pure Marxist tactics and deployed by James Hansen and Michael Mann at every opportunity. And all their grant grabbing cronies.
Reality will eventually win however.
aviate1138
Pure Marxist tactics
Pure Marxist tactics and deployed by James Hansen and Michael Mann
Reality will eventually win however.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Surrey Hills
Posts: 1,478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DHU
Marxism's environmental legacy | SocialistWorker.org
socialistworker.org/2011/10/06/marxisms-environmental-legacy
Marxism's environmental legacy. Dan Sharber looks at the deep connections between Marxist thought and environmentalism. October 6, 2011.
One of many links
Marxism's environmental legacy | SocialistWorker.org
socialistworker.org/2011/10/06/marxisms-environmental-legacy
Marxism's environmental legacy. Dan Sharber looks at the deep connections between Marxist thought and environmentalism. October 6, 2011.
One of many links
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 464
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I remember as a kid in the seventies the usual suspects were telling us that the oil would run out before the end of the century. One day in the distant future it will, but by then we'll have much better power sources than lithium batteries: indeed, we'll probably have an airliner powered by nuclear fusion before we have one powered by batteries.
