Live data from Hacker News

Electric aircraft set to take flight by 2026 under new agreements

hub.united.com

81–90 of 223 posts

Re: Electric aircraft set to take flight by 2026 under new agreements

#81
This is unlikely to come to pass because batteries weigh something like 80× as much as the corresponding jet fuel: https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=kragen

This means much less efficient flight, because lift costs energy, or much slower flight. But it's more plausible for these very short flights than for longer flights.

Solar-powered synfuel seems like a more likely mass alternative for the near future (02030-02050).

Re: Electric aircraft set to take flight by 2026 under new agreements

#83

Wendover Productions (who else?!) recently released a video[1] on the future of electric planes. Quite a lot of information in there! [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aH4b3sAs-l8

LNA, an aviation industry newsletter, recently came to a very different conclusion [1]. The biggest difference to Wendover Productions's numbers is a hugely higher estimate in the cost of replacing the battery every 5-10 years due to battery degradation. [1] https://leehamnews.com/2021/07/01/the-true-cost-of-electric-...

That sounds like a ridiculous assumption. Airplanes are basically guaranteed to not discharge the batteries lower than 20% for safety reasons. I’m guessing they’ll also not charge to fully 100%, like some BEVs. On fixed routes they could charge only what they need to get to where they’re supposed to go plus the required buffer for emergencies. The batteries will probably also be cooled. So it could be an ideal scenario for battery degradation. There are 10yo Nissan Leafs on the road right now that was pretty much the worst case for battery degradation.

You can also imagine that planes will start operating longer routes and then move to shorter routes as the battery degrades. Since the batteries are large they could get a decent amount of money for them when they’re too degraded for airplanes. They should still be useful for energy storage.

I also think it’s likely that when airplanes go mainstream, they’ll use a different chemistry than the standard Li-ion chemistries we have today. Maybe solid state lithium (Quantumscape?) or sodium ion. So it’s very hard to say how big the degradation problem will actually be.

Re: Electric aircraft set to take flight by 2026 under new agreements

#84
post #61
post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Large train stations are far more common than large airports in Europe, so you got this the wrong way around.

How many of these train stations have been built after 1950? And what defines "large" in both cases?

The train station in my city has 80 million travellers per year compared to the airport which only has 27 million. And while I do not think many train stations have been built since the 1950s many have been expanded.

Re: Electric aircraft set to take flight by 2026 under new agreements

#85
post #31
post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Won't batteries be a problem now?

Probably even worse, as fuel can be dumped.

Isn't fuel generally only dumped because landing a (nearly) fully fueled plane exceeds the maximum landing weight of the runway?

Or alternatively, if a plane develops a leak in one of the tanks, it can dump fuel to balance the weight.

Is there a scenario where a plane in flight has its fuel on fire and dumping said fuel helps in any way?

Re: Electric aircraft set to take flight by 2026 under new agreements

#86

Wendover Productions (who else?!) recently released a video[1] on the future of electric planes. Quite a lot of information in there! [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aH4b3sAs-l8

LNA, an aviation industry newsletter, recently came to a very different conclusion [1]. The biggest difference to Wendover Productions's numbers is a hugely higher estimate in the cost of replacing the battery every 5-10 years due to battery degradation. [1] https://leehamnews.com/2021/07/01/the-true-cost-of-electric-...

So, by that article, a fully-loaded turboprop (let's say 19 100 kg passengers, 4900 kg airframe, 320 kg fuel, 308 kg reserve fuel) flying 200 nm weighs ~ 7500 kg and consumes just under 4 MWh of fuel, of which 1 MWh is useful work.

The battery model will weigh at least twice that for the same useful work, so how the hell does it fly as far? Could it actually fly the mandated 100 nm + 30 min contigency*

Re: Electric aircraft set to take flight by 2026 under new agreements

#87

Interesting that the routes they name are 119 and 78 miles. Kinda surprised Americans have flights so short. But then again the aircraft might beat CAFE for a vehicle with a single driver in it, plus aircraft usually carry a load of cargo too, as the passengers pay for the plane to go somewhere and the cargo is the profit. Wonder how much cargo this elegy plane can carry. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_economy_in…

There used to be commercial flights from United from OXR to LAX. It’s only an hour drive but they still managed to have service for quite some time and there’s been talk about bringing it back. Little connector flights like that could help reduce congestion at LAX. I could easily seeing electric flights returning and even being subsidized.

Re: Electric aircraft set to take flight by 2026 under new agreements

#88
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How long is the flight in comparison? And have you factored in the airport time into that? I was looking at taking the Eurostar from London to Amsterdam, and a friend was dismissing it as it took 4 hours where as the flight is ~45 mins. Except its not, the flight its self maybe 45 mins, but you have to get to heathrow (which is further away than St Pancreas) plus get there an hour early. Then we would have to deal wi…

It also depends on train stations being accidentally close to where you depart/arrive. Most people don't live closer to a large train station then to an airport, I'd think.

I dont think that's true at all. Train stations in Europe are far, far more common than Airports. You may have to change rather than a direct train, but chances are you can get around pretty easily.

Re: Electric aircraft set to take flight by 2026 under new agreements

#89
post #59
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It also depends on train stations being accidentally close to where you depart/arrive. Most people don't live closer to a large train station then to an airport, I'd think.

Large train stations are far more common than large airports in Europe, so you got this the wrong way around.

? I don't think so? Every large city has both a train station and a large airport.

Re: Electric aircraft set to take flight by 2026 under new agreements

#90
post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Still has a ways to go. The eBeaver range is dramatically less.

You've got to start somewhere, right? Kudos to the developers of this.

In the 1990s, the idea of electric RC planes were ridiculed as well. I am moderately optimistic that 1:1 planes will eventually follow, as RC electric cars became "good enough" and 1:1 electric cars are a reality now.
Post reply on HN