Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Heart aerospace completes first flight of largest electric aircraft

heartaerospace.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 170 posts

Re: Heart aerospace completes first flight of largest electric aircraft

#91

Post by jmaw »

danans wrote: post #80

> Powered entirely by batteries, X1 used approximately $5 worth of electricity during its first flight It's fun to look at the arithmetic behind this to pull out the assumptions. To lift a 25000 lb mass 1100 ft in the air requires just over 10kWh, but that's assuming no air resistance or friction, so let's triple the energy needed to 30 KWh. Let's add another 10 kWh for forward distance covered (assuming it was mostl…

Ooo, sneaky. Not being familiar with flight verbiage, I didn't catch the "27 minute mission" being different than a 27 minute long flight!

Re: Heart aerospace completes first flight of largest electric aircraft

#92

Post by tensor »

TSiege wrote: post #74

Does anyone know if there is a theoretical limit for how energy dense a battery could be? I wonder if there is a possible future where some sort of commercial long haul flights could be done by a fully electric plane. I've never gotten a great answer on this, and maybe we don't have an answer for certain since battery chemistry is some sense is still early days

From what I remember on the topic, batteries are not yet remotely close to dense enough to enable long haul flights. Even hydrogen electric doesn't cut it, and hydrogen fuel is much denser energy wise than conventional batteries.

Perhaps if solid state batteries become cost effective to produce at scale that would change the feasibility, but someone else would have to chime in there.

Re: Heart aerospace completes first flight of largest electric aircraft

#93

Post by coryrc »

danans wrote: post #80

> Powered entirely by batteries, X1 used approximately $5 worth of electricity during its first flight It's fun to look at the arithmetic behind this to pull out the assumptions. To lift a 25000 lb mass 1100 ft in the air requires just over 10kWh, but that's assuming no air resistance or friction, so let's triple the energy needed to 30 KWh. Let's add another 10 kWh for forward distance covered (assuming it was mostl…

The jet planes are flying much higher and are loaded; I'm assuming this one was empty. That would account for the power discrepancy.

Finally, I think you might be still high on the power cost. $.10/kwh is retail cost in the PNW, they might be, um, bullshitting a little and have purchased power at a very good rate at a particular time just so they could say $5. They didn't say every flight would be $5. So energy could have been 3x more than you estimated.

Re: Heart aerospace completes first flight of largest electric aircraft

#94

Post by cameldrv »

burkaman wrote: post #67
vel0city wrote: post #11

At 120 miles of useful pure electric range, I can't imagine there are many US corridors where that pure electric range makes sense. That's still a range where the door to door time of a car can still win. I wonder why they don't push the idea of it being a hybrid more, as it seems to me a lot of useful routes are going to rely on the generators. I'd love to see something that can do around 250mi. It would be nice to…

There are like 10,000 flights between Milwaukee and Chicago every year. Personally I would take the train, but a lot of people do not.

My guess is most of those are passengers from Milwaukee connecting in Chicago. You could take the train, but then you'd be in downtown Chicago, and have to take Uber or the El to O'Hare. That's a big hassle and takes a while.

Re: Heart aerospace completes first flight of largest electric aircraft

#95

Post by margalabargala »

TSiege wrote: post #74

Does anyone know if there is a theoretical limit for how energy dense a battery could be? I wonder if there is a possible future where some sort of commercial long haul flights could be done by a fully electric plane. I've never gotten a great answer on this, and maybe we don't have an answer for certain since battery chemistry is some sense is still early days

The answer to this question depends heavily on your definition of "battery".

Re: Heart aerospace completes first flight of largest electric aircraft

#96

Post by Garlef »

vel0city wrote: post #11

At 120 miles of useful pure electric range, I can't imagine there are many US corridors where that pure electric range makes sense. That's still a range where the door to door time of a car can still win. I wonder why they don't push the idea of it being a hybrid more, as it seems to me a lot of useful routes are going to rely on the generators. I'd love to see something that can do around 250mi. It would be nice to…

San Francisco - Napa Valley

Booze Cruise aka "Winetasting" for the tech crowd

Fly sustainable, guzzle some fermented bio grapes, ...

Re: Heart aerospace completes first flight of largest electric aircraft

#97

Post by vel0city »

bkummel wrote: post #53
vel0city wrote: post #11

At 120 miles of useful pure electric range, I can't imagine there are many US corridors where that pure electric range makes sense. That's still a range where the door to door time of a car can still win. I wonder why they don't push the idea of it being a hybrid more, as it seems to me a lot of useful routes are going to rely on the generators. I'd love to see something that can do around 250mi. It would be nice to…

Remember the days when people laughed at the range and charge times of first-gen electric vehicles?

I agree these numbers are likely to improve. I'm purely thinking about this particular model at this particular time.

I'm mostly just wondering why they're making such a big point talking about this being a battery electric plane when the actual commercial variant they hope to sell will likely be mostly used like a plug-in hybrid (I'd imagine).

> The ES-30 is a conventional fixed-wing, 30-seat hybrid-electric regional airliner

Re: Heart aerospace completes first flight of largest electric aircraft

#98

Post by alistairSH »

catketch wrote: post #41
voakbasda wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And there’s that whole pesky problem of not being able to glide to a safe landing when something goes catastrophically wrong.

that varies with the design (they could have small fixed wings). Beta have full-airframe ballistic parachutes i believe. That is feasible at least for smaller aircraft.

IIRC, the fastest and heaviest plane with a ballistic parachute system is the Cirrus jet, which is both lighter and slower than a typical commercial twin-engine turbo-prop (looked at the King Air and the Dash 8 to cover small corporate and larger commercial workhorse).

Not saying a parachute couldn't be designed to work, but there isn't an existing option today.

Re: Heart aerospace completes first flight of largest electric aircraft

#99

Post by alistairSH »

coryrc wrote: post #90
M95D wrote: post #82

Air transport in general, not just this airplane, could benefit from a catapult or winch takeoff at airports. It could be electric, it would reduce the most energy-demanding part of flight and make takeoff safer. They could also use electric tugs to and from the runway, not just at the terminal.

Why do you believe that?

Specific to the electric plane, you remove some of the battery weight, as that energy would then come from the catapult.

But, as a general thing? I don't see it happening. There's a TON of complexity in a catapult system.

Plus, the amount of spilled champagne in first class is going to ruin a lot of suits and blouses. Can't have that. ;)

Re: Heart aerospace completes first flight of largest electric aircraft

#100

Post by SECProto »

danans wrote: post #80

> Powered entirely by batteries, X1 used approximately $5 worth of electricity during its first flight It's fun to look at the arithmetic behind this to pull out the assumptions. To lift a 25000 lb mass 1100 ft in the air requires just over 10kWh, but that's assuming no air resistance or friction, so let's triple the energy needed to 30 KWh. Let's add another 10 kWh for forward distance covered (assuming it was mostl…

> I'd guess the actual flight time was only 10 of the 27 minutes, 30 kWh used over 10 minutes is 300kW of peak power

I would note this line from the press release:

> its all-electric propulsion system delivered more than one megawatt of power.

I assume this was peak during takeoff.

Post reply on HN