11–20 of 64 posts
It seems like an obvious feature would be to have solar cells on the upper wing surfaces... I guess the energy payout isn't sufficient for the area?
I wonder how long the batteries will last for? Not the flying time, I mean instead their useful lifetime. It might become extremely expensive if you have to replace the batteries every year or so...
Does anyone have more specifics about the actual capabilities of the prototype? I'm skeptical they're able to get 3 hours of flight time out of a battery pack without sacrificing just about all the weight capacity for things like... a pilot. It's great to see that companies are actively working on electric-powered flight, though, especially in the small aircraft space where it has high potential. Also a small beef wi…
A big part of training is doing "touch and goes" to practice approaches, landing, and taking off (the most dangerous phases of flight) which I would think would tax the battery a lot more than just cruising around for three hours.
As someone who really would love to get into general aviation but finds the fuel costs off-putting, I'd love for this to be successful. Isn't the big problem with electric planes supposed to be the energy density per kg? Wikipedia is showing 46MJ/kg for jet fuel, vs only ~1MJ/kg for lithium batteries [1]. Is this a lesser concern than I've been led to believe, is there recent development that improves lithium batteri…
As someone who really would love to get into general aviation but finds the fuel costs off-putting, I'd love for this to be successful. Isn't the big problem with electric planes supposed to be the energy density per kg? Wikipedia is showing 46MJ/kg for jet fuel, vs only ~1MJ/kg for lithium batteries [1]. Is this a lesser concern than I've been led to believe, is there recent development that improves lithium batteri…
No, petroleum fuels still have a vastly higher energy density than batteries.
My concern about training on an aircraft of this fashion is that you get no exposure to controls such as carb heat, fuel mixture, etc. I wonder if a distinction will be made (in the not so far future) between getting rated on a combustion plane vs. electric? Much like you get rated for high-performance or twin engines today.
I would gladly pay for 5 hours of training for a combustion endorsement, if I could avoid fuel costs for 40+ hours of training to get my private certificate.
My concern about training on an aircraft of this fashion is that you get no exposure to controls such as carb heat, fuel mixture, etc. I wonder if a distinction will be made (in the not so far future) between getting rated on a combustion plane vs. electric? Much like you get rated for high-performance or twin engines today.
Minor nit: high performance is an endorsement, not a rating. (It's a CFI sign-off, not a checkride.)
As someone who really would love to get into general aviation but finds the fuel costs off-putting, I'd love for this to be successful. Isn't the big problem with electric planes supposed to be the energy density per kg? Wikipedia is showing 46MJ/kg for jet fuel, vs only ~1MJ/kg for lithium batteries [1]. Is this a lesser concern than I've been led to believe, is there recent development that improves lithium batteri…
Batteries are just as heavy at landing as they were at takeoff.
A reasonable rule of thumb is that fuel costs between 20 and 33% of the total cost of owning and operating the airplane. Battery tech won't materially change the total costs in my estimation/experience. It would be nice to get rid of TEL-doped fuel, but electric trainers are not going to make flying cheaper, especially when compared to a 60s/70s 150/152/172.