Live data from Hacker News

One man designed and built the ultimate bush plane

arstechnica.com

41–50 of 83 posts

Re: One man designed and built the ultimate bush plane

#41
post #21
post #8

i wonder if he considered an electric motor. no horsepower penalty for high altitudes with that. just the battery problems..

There are plenty of folks experimenting with electric bush planes, but they are more like electric tricycles with wings and a chair at this point.

any links?

Re: One man designed and built the ultimate bush plane

#44
post #2

This is very cool. I had to look around a bit, but I found a link to DRACO taking off at at a competition: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hp3402SOk8A Apparently this distance is about 100ft. Stats are all over the place, but "DRACO will climb at 4,000 feet-per-minute (FPM) and cruise at 180 mph (290 km/h) at 16,000 feet." which apparently blows everyone else out of the water (and it should for a 1M+ plane) Also, 5 m…

That short take off took me totally by surprise. That's not even 100m

110ft is cited by Ars.

Re: One man designed and built the ultimate bush plane

#45
post #8

i wonder if he considered an electric motor. no horsepower penalty for high altitudes with that. just the battery problems..

Battery problems for planes are huge. Atleast for a big plane like a 787 MAX the battery to achieve same performance would easily weigh more than the aircraft by an order of magnitude.

I imagine even for bush planes the battery weight will be immense due to the much much lower energy density (it's about 2-3 orders of magnitude and you loose fuel while you fly, batteries don't change weight when discharged).

edit: electric motors do have penalties for high altitude, notably the reduced pressure will make cooling less efficient and reduce the maximum power output (though generally your efficiency overall should remain stable and normal)

Re: One man designed and built the ultimate bush plane

#46
Woo, turbines are great; fantastically reliable, awesome power-to-weight, able to use cheaper and safer fuel than gasoline piston engines. They are pretty expensive though, wikipedia says the PT6 used in this project starts at around $500K.

There's a few companies designing smaller turbines (100-200 kW size) for aircraft, http://www.turbotech-aero.com/ and https://www.turb.aero/ , competing with Rotax 912, Lycoming, Continental. Guess we'll see if the promises of lower costs come true.

There's also a few companies making diesel aircraft engines, AFAIK these have seen some success in Europe where 100LL is crazy expensive.

Maybe GA is, ever so slowly, entering the jet (fuel) age..?

Re: One man designed and built the ultimate bush plane

#47
post #37

As someone who does this kind of work, the timeline is absolutely insane. The aircraft started out as a PZL-104MA Wilga 2000 but he redid part of the wing, built an entire carbon fiber cowling and redid the wiring, all on top of the engine install, though that and the carbon fiber he had fairly extensive previous experience with. One thing you'll notice if you watch the build videos is he makes extensive use of very…

Speaking of crazy timelines, Robert X. Cringely attempts to build a plane in 30 days in the documentary Plane Crazy : https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0164814/ https://www.nytimes.com/1998/07/22/arts/television-review-th...

I remember watching that on TV. IIRC, he failed totally with a fibreglass design, cut it up with a chainsaw in a rage, then went and found some people who actually know how build planes out of wood properly. And still failed the deadline.

Re: One man designed and built the ultimate bush plane

#48
Being an airplane/aviation aficionado I really like this kind of stuff and the amount of time and effort that went into this "prototype", but I can't get past one important thing... it cost 1 million to modify it!!! Given enough money and time, people can build anything :-)
Post reply on HN