Matronics Email Lists :: View topic

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

Future of flight...

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> AeroElectric-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

jim(at)PoogieBearRanch.co
Guest

Posted: Wed Jun 21, 2017 11:13 am Post subject: Future of flight...

"Viable" for certain missions, sure. For an FBO renting airplanes for

local flights, training flights, and $100 hamburger runs, we're almost

there already. But "viable" for extended cross-country flights? That

will take a while. It's not the airplane end that will be the slow part,

it will be the charging infrastructure.



Look how long it is taking to get the charging infrastructure built up

for electric vehicles using the highway system, then imagine the

economics involved in setting up "fast chargers" (2-4 hours for a full

charge) at all the GA airports across the nation. And that's IF all the

electric airplane vendors standardize on a charger type / plug / etc.  



I wish it were not true, because I would LOVE to have an electric car

(but can't afford a Tesla), and there is no "fast-charge" station in

between Dallas and Austin that would allow me to drive a Chevy Bolt

(which would be my preferred "inexpensive" electric vehicle) from my

home and my kids' place in Austin. Even with a 200+ mile range, I would

need a charge before I got to their house...  



I suspect we'll experience similar stuff with electric planes for many,

many years.



Jim Parker

ftyoder(at)yoderbuilt.com
Guest

Posted: Wed Jun 21, 2017 3:23 pm Post subject: Future of flight...

Why would you choose to buy a Cole powered car with gas near $2.00 / gal.

headed toward $1.00 for the next several years. Tesla will require a few

more billions of our tax dollars to stay afloat. Look what has happened to

the solar plants. T. Boone Pickens gave up on wind power after spending

millions of his own money.



Tim



--

rick(at)beebe.org
Guest

Posted: Wed Jun 21, 2017 4:17 pm Post subject: Future of flight...

My 2 electric cars are powered by solar panels on my roof, not by coal. 

I choose it because it's still less expensive than gasoline, doesn't 

fund terrorist countries and doesn't pollute the atmosphere. Plus 

they're fun to drive. When I drive regular cars now, I despise the noise 

and vibration.



I'm excited about the explorations of electric aviation. Of course 

battery technology is still too heavy and limited to allow for anything 

beyond short flights right now (although battery capacity is increasing 

quite dramatically) however I think we could see some very cool hybrid 

applications. Designs can be innovative. Using electric motors to drive 

props and ducted fans can be far more efficient than using gear boxes or 

long odd drive shafts. Engines or turbines running generators can run at 

their most efficient speed instead of what's most efficient for the 

prop. Small battery banks can provide a buffer, allow "silent" taxiing 

and give emergency power in case the generator quits.



I also think it could be ideal for helicopters since a large part of 

their maintenance and wear items are gearbox related. There are some 

really interesting developments going on in electric mult-rotor 

designs--full size drones essentially.



And Tesla seems to be doing fine without any of our tax dollars.



--Rick



On 6/21/2017 4:22 PM, Tim Yoder wrote:

[quote] 

 

 Why would you choose to buy a Cole powered car with gas near $2.00 / gal.

 headed toward $1.00 for the next several years. Tesla will require a few

 more billions of our tax dollars to stay afloat. Look what has happened to

 the solar plants. T. Boone Pickens gave up on wind power after spending

 millions of his own money.

 

 Tim

 

 --

ceengland7(at)gmail.com
Guest

Posted: Wed Jun 21, 2017 4:30 pm Post subject: Future of flight...

Cole who? And why would he want to power my car? As to T. Boone, it 

might be worthwhile to expand your news sources a bit, to get a better 

picture.



If you want to see a real tax dollar, and 

lobbied-government-forced-consumer dollar boondoggle, google 'Kemper 

County coal power plant'. Current (pardon the pun) construction spending 

total (and it's not over yet) that is roughly five Hundred BILLION 

dollars *over budget* at >$700Billion, and they have conceded that they 

can never burn coal there economically so they have shifted to natural 

gas. The rate payers in that plant's service area were forced to 

pre-fund a huge percentage of that cost, until the Public Service 

Commission was forced to realize that the consumers it was supposed to 

serve were being ripped off.



Do the math. A significant percentage of their customer base could have 

had 30KW (gross overkill) solar systems *complete with battery storage & 

generator backup*, for the money wasted on that plant.



I'm always amazed that people closely tied to tech (airplanes and what 

powers them) don't believe in how quickly tech advances....



Charlie



On 6/21/2017 6:22 PM, Tim Yoder wrote:

[quote] 



 Why would you choose to buy a Cole powered car with gas near $2.00 / gal.

 headed toward $1.00 for the next several years. Tesla will require a few

 more billions of our tax dollars to stay afloat. Look what has happened to

 the solar plants. T. Boone Pickens gave up on wind power after spending

 millions of his own money.



 Tim



 --

Tim Olson

Joined: 25 Jan 2007
Posts: 2871

Posted: Wed Jun 21, 2017 5:01 pm Post subject: Future of flight...

Well said.  It's interesting...you have 2 electrics.  I have 2 electrics.  Another RV buddy of mine has 2 electrics.  My opinion is, if more people would just try one and buy one, they'd soon see why they are so nice to have.  We wouldn't buy 2 if they weren't making us happy.  My second one I just got as a 3 year lease return and when purchased with 22k miles on it, was a better deal all the way around than any comparable used car with a gas engine.  

And, mine is usually powered by the local hydro dam...

Other times it's powered by a nuke plant not too far away.  Too bad more people don't embrace nuke....it's really the best choice for mass populations.

Tim

[quote] On Jun 21, 2017, at 7:16 PM, Rick Beebe <rick(at)beebe.org> wrote:

 My 2 electric cars are powered by solar panels on my roof, not by coal. I choose it because it's still less expensive than gasoline, doesn't fund terrorist countries and doesn't pollute the atmosphere. Plus they're fun to drive. When I drive regular cars now, I despise the noise and vibration.

 I'm excited about the explorations of electric aviation. Of course battery technology is still too heavy and limited to allow for anything beyond short flights right now (although battery capacity is increasing quite dramatically) however I think we could see some very cool hybrid applications. Designs can be innovative. Using electric motors to drive props and ducted fans can be far more efficient than using gear boxes or long odd drive shafts. Engines or turbines running generators can run at their most efficient speed instead of what's most efficient for the prop. Small battery banks can provide a buffer, allow "silent" taxiing and give emergency power in case the generator quits.

 I also think it could be ideal for helicopters since a large part of their maintenance and wear items are gearbox related. There are some really interesting developments going on in electric mult-rotor designs--full size drones essentially.

 And Tesla seems to be doing fine without any of our tax dollars.

 --Rick

> On 6/21/2017 4:22 PM, Tim Yoder wrote:

> 

> Why would you choose to buy a Cole powered car with gas near $2.00 / gal.

> headed toward $1.00 for the next several years. Tesla will require a few

> more billions of our tax dollars to stay afloat. Look what has happened to

> the solar plants. T. Boone Pickens gave up on wind power after spending

> millions of his own money.

> Tim

> --

alec(at)alecmyers.com
Guest

Posted: Wed Jun 21, 2017 5:08 pm Post subject: Future of flight...

Flight schools will be the very last adopters of electric airplanes if ever. Flight schools only make money by keeping their aircraft in the air every hour of every sunny weekend day, to make up for all the down time. You can refuel an empty gas powered 172 in two minutes while the next pilot is performing a preflight inspection and get it earning money with essentially no gaps. 

Let’s see what the equivalent electricity requirements are. Let’s say we burned 15 gallons in our 172 in our 90 minute flight, and we need to achieve a five minute recharge.

The energy density of gasoline is 45MJ/litre, which is 171MJ/gallon

15 gallons of gasoline has 2.6GJ of energy.

2.5GJ serviced in 5 minutes is about 8.7 MW.

An 8.7MW draw is 800 amps from a dedicated 11,000kV distribution substation. 

That is an entirely absurdly large amount of power to have to provide to an airport: the infrastructure doesn’t exist, would have to be built, and paid for.

So let’s bundle together stunningly efficient airplanes, that fly with 50% of the power required at present. Let’s lengthen the charge time to an hour, throw in multiple battery packs that we can quick change, whatever else you like. By the time you have more than two airplanes on the ramp the cost of the electrical infrastructure to recharge them is beyond belief. 

Now let’s price the cost of electricity with equivalent energy content to a gallon of 100LL:

171 MJ is 47.5kWh, I don’t know what the industrial price for electricity is but the retail price is 12 US cents per kWh, so that gallon equivalent of energy is costing you $5.70 anyway. Not a lot of savings there.

You’re welcome to power your electric airplane from solar panels on your roof, and it might work if you only want to fly a couple of hours a week. That’s not going to cut it for anyone who uses an airplane for anything serious.

[quote] On Jun 21, 2017, at 8:16 PM, Rick Beebe <rick(at)beebe.org> wrote:

 My 2 electric cars are powered by solar panels on my roof, not by coal. I choose it because it's still less expensive than gasoline, doesn't fund terrorist countries and doesn't pollute the atmosphere. Plus they're fun to drive. When I drive regular cars now, I despise the noise and vibration.

 I'm excited about the explorations of electric aviation. Of course battery technology is still too heavy and limited to allow for anything beyond short flights right now (although battery capacity is increasing quite dramatically) however I think we could see some very cool hybrid applications. Designs can be innovative. Using electric motors to drive props and ducted fans can be far more efficient than using gear boxes or long odd drive shafts. Engines or turbines running generators can run at their most efficient speed instead of what's most efficient for the prop. Small battery banks can provide a buffer, allow "silent" taxiing and give emergency power in case the generator quits.

 I also think it could be ideal for helicopters since a large part of their maintenance and wear items are gearbox related. There are some really interesting developments going on in electric mult-rotor designs--full size drones essentially.

 And Tesla seems to be doing fine without any of our tax dollars.

 --Rick

 On 6/21/2017 4:22 PM, Tim Yoder wrote:

> 

> Why would you choose to buy a Cole powered car with gas near $2.00 / gal.

> headed toward $1.00 for the next several years. Tesla will require a few

> more billions of our tax dollars to stay afloat. Look what has happened to

> the solar plants. T. Boone Pickens gave up on wind power after spending

> millions of his own money.

> Tim

> --

wgreenley

Joined: 09 Jan 2010
Posts: 100
Location: Dowagiac, MI

Posted: Wed Jun 21, 2017 5:19 pm Post subject: Future of flight...

Slight correction, total cost is now looking at just over 7 billion, not 700 billion. It was supposed to be a model for environmental technology to create a clean coal power plant.



On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 8:33 PM, Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com (ceengland7(at)gmail.com)> wrote:

[quote]--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com (ceengland7(at)gmail.com)>

 

 Cole who? And why would he want to power my car? As to T. Boone, it might be worthwhile to expand your news sources a bit, to get a better picture.

 

 If you want to see a real tax dollar, and lobbied-government-forced-consumer dollar boondoggle, google 'Kemper County coal power plant'. Current (pardon the pun) construction spending total (and it's not over yet) that is roughly five Hundred BILLION dollars *over budget* at >$700Billion, and they have conceded that they can never burn coal there economically so they have shifted to natural gas. The rate payers in that plant's service area were forced to pre-fund a huge percentage of that cost, until the Public Service Commission was forced to realize that the consumers it was supposed to serve were being ripped off.

 

 Do the math. A significant percentage of their customer base could have had 30KW (gross overkill) solar systems *complete with battery storage & generator backup*, for the money wasted on that plant.

 

 I'm always amazed that people closely tied to tech (airplanes and what powers them) don't believe in how quickly tech advances....

 

 Charlie

 

 On 6/21/2017 6:22 PM, Tim Yoder wrote:

 [quote] --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Tim Yoder" <ftyoder(at)yoderbuilt.com (ftyoder(at)yoderbuilt.com)>

 

 Why would you choose to buy a Cole powered car with gas near $2.00 / gal.

 headed toward $1.00 for the next several years. Tesla will require a few

 more billions of our tax dollars to stay afloat. Look what has happened to

 the solar plants. T. Boone Pickens gave up on wind power after spending

 millions of his own money.

 

 Tim

 

 --

ceengland7(at)gmail.com
Guest

Posted: Wed Jun 21, 2017 5:25 pm Post subject: Future of flight...

Well for starters, you conveniently leave out the percentage of the 

gasoline's energy that actually propels the plane. I won't go any 

farther; doesn't seem to be any point.

Charlie

On 6/21/2017 8:07 PM, Alec Myers wrote:

[quote] 

 Flight schools will be the very last adopters of electric airplanes if ever. Flight schools only make money by keeping their aircraft in the air every hour of every sunny weekend day, to make up for all the down time. You can refuel an empty gas powered 172 in two minutes while the next pilot is performing a preflight inspection and get it earning money with essentially no gaps.

 Let’s see what the equivalent electricity requirements are. Let’s say we burned 15 gallons in our 172 in our 90 minute flight, and we need to achieve a five minute recharge.

 The energy density of gasoline is 45MJ/litre, which is 171MJ/gallon

 15 gallons of gasoline has 2.6GJ of energy.

 2.5GJ serviced in 5 minutes is about 8.7 MW.

 An 8.7MW draw is 800 amps from a dedicated 11,000kV distribution substation.

 That is an entirely absurdly large amount of power to have to provide to an airport: the infrastructure doesn’t exist, would have to be built, and paid for.

 So let’s bundle together stunningly efficient airplanes, that fly with 50% of the power required at present. Let’s lengthen the charge time to an hour, throw in multiple battery packs that we can quick change, whatever else you like. By the time you have more than two airplanes on the ramp the cost of the electrical infrastructure to recharge them is beyond belief.

 Now let’s price the cost of electricity with equivalent energy content to a gallon of 100LL:

 171 MJ is 47.5kWh, I don’t know what the industrial price for electricity is but the retail price is 12 US cents per kWh, so that gallon equivalent of energy is costing you $5.70 anyway. Not a lot of savings there.

 You’re welcome to power your electric airplane from solar panels on your roof, and it might work if you only want to fly a couple of hours a week. That’s not going to cut it for anyone who uses an airplane for anything serious.

> On Jun 21, 2017, at 8:16 PM, Rick Beebe <rick(at)beebe.org> wrote:

>

> 

>

> My 2 electric cars are powered by solar panels on my roof, not by coal. I choose it because it's still less expensive than gasoline, doesn't fund terrorist countries and doesn't pollute the atmosphere. Plus they're fun to drive. When I drive regular cars now, I despise the noise and vibration.

>

> I'm excited about the explorations of electric aviation. Of course battery technology is still too heavy and limited to allow for anything beyond short flights right now (although battery capacity is increasing quite dramatically) however I think we could see some very cool hybrid applications. Designs can be innovative. Using electric motors to drive props and ducted fans can be far more efficient than using gear boxes or long odd drive shafts. Engines or turbines running generators can run at their most efficient speed instead of what's most efficient for the prop. Small battery banks can provide a buffer, allow "silent" taxiing and give emergency power in case the generator quits.

>

> I also think it could be ideal for helicopters since a large part of their maintenance and wear items are gearbox related. There are some really interesting developments going on in electric mult-rotor designs--full size drones essentially.

>

> And Tesla seems to be doing fine without any of our tax dollars.

>

> --Rick

>

> On 6/21/2017 4:22 PM, Tim Yoder wrote:

>> 

>> Why would you choose to buy a Cole powered car with gas near $2.00 / gal.

>> headed toward $1.00 for the next several years. Tesla will require a few

>> more billions of our tax dollars to stay afloat. Look what has happened to

>> the solar plants. T. Boone Pickens gave up on wind power after spending

>> millions of his own money.

>> Tim

>> --

alec(at)alecmyers.com
Guest

Posted: Wed Jun 21, 2017 5:30 pm Post subject: Future of flight...

it's about 30%.

Do you think the percentage of energy you can get out of a battery into useful propulsion is much better?

On Jun 21, 2017, at 21:28, Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> wrote:

Well for starters, you conveniently leave out the percentage of the gasoline's energy that actually propels the plane. I won't go any farther; doesn't seem to be any point.

Charlie

[quote] On 6/21/2017 8:07 PM, Alec Myers wrote:

 Flight schools will be the very last adopters of electric airplanes if ever. Flight schools only make money by keeping their aircraft in the air every hour of every sunny weekend day, to make up for all the down time. You can refuel an empty gas powered 172 in two minutes while the next pilot is performing a preflight inspection and get it earning money with essentially no gaps.

 Let’s see what the equivalent electricity requirements are. Let’s say we burned 15 gallons in our 172 in our 90 minute flight, and we need to achieve a five minute recharge.

 The energy density of gasoline is 45MJ/litre, which is 171MJ/gallon

 15 gallons of gasoline has 2.6GJ of energy.

 2.5GJ serviced in 5 minutes is about 8.7 MW.

 An 8.7MW draw is 800 amps from a dedicated 11,000kV distribution substation.

 That is an entirely absurdly large amount of power to have to provide to an airport: the infrastructure doesn’t exist, would have to be built, and paid for.

 So let’s bundle together stunningly efficient airplanes, that fly with 50% of the power required at present. Let’s lengthen the charge time to an hour, throw in multiple battery packs that we can quick change, whatever else you like. By the time you have more than two airplanes on the ramp the cost of the electrical infrastructure to recharge them is beyond belief.

 Now let’s price the cost of electricity with equivalent energy content to a gallon of 100LL:

 171 MJ is 47.5kWh, I don’t know what the industrial price for electricity is but the retail price is 12 US cents per kWh, so that gallon equivalent of energy is costing you $5.70 anyway. Not a lot of savings there.

 You’re welcome to power your electric airplane from solar panels on your roof, and it might work if you only want to fly a couple of hours a week. That’s not going to cut it for anyone who uses an airplane for anything serious.

> On Jun 21, 2017, at 8:16 PM, Rick Beebe <rick(at)beebe.org> wrote:

> 

> 

> 

> My 2 electric cars are powered by solar panels on my roof, not by coal. I choose it because it's still less expensive than gasoline, doesn't fund terrorist countries and doesn't pollute the atmosphere. Plus they're fun to drive. When I drive regular cars now, I despise the noise and vibration.

> 

> I'm excited about the explorations of electric aviation. Of course battery technology is still too heavy and limited to allow for anything beyond short flights right now (although battery capacity is increasing quite dramatically) however I think we could see some very cool hybrid applications. Designs can be innovative. Using electric motors to drive props and ducted fans can be far more efficient than using gear boxes or long odd drive shafts. Engines or turbines running generators can run at their most efficient speed instead of what's most efficient for the prop. Small battery banks can provide a buffer, allow "silent" taxiing and give emergency power in case the generator quits.

> 

> I also think it could be ideal for helicopters since a large part of their maintenance and wear items are gearbox related. There are some really interesting developments going on in electric mult-rotor designs--full size drones essentially.

> 

> And Tesla seems to be doing fine without any of our tax dollars.

> 

> --Rick

> 

> 

> 

>> On 6/21/2017 4:22 PM, Tim Yoder wrote:

>> 

>> Why would you choose to buy a Cole powered car with gas near $2.00 / gal.

>> headed toward $1.00 for the next several years. Tesla will require a few

>> more billions of our tax dollars to stay afloat. Look what has happened to

>> the solar plants. T. Boone Pickens gave up on wind power after spending

>> millions of his own money.

>> Tim

>> --

ceengland7(at)gmail.com
Guest

Posted: Wed Jun 21, 2017 5:59 pm Post subject: Future of flight...

oops. You're right. I guess it just       seems like 700 billion, after watching that fiasco for so long.

       

       To return the favor; slight correction to your evaluation; it was       *marketed* as a model for environmental technology to create a       clean coal power plant. Talk about alternate facts....

       

       On 6/21/2017 8:19 PM, William Greenley wrote:

     

     [quote]       Slight correction, total cost is now looking at         just over 7 billion, not 700 billion. It was supposed to be a         model for environmental technology to create a clean coal power         plant.

       

         On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 8:33 PM,           Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com (ceengland7(at)gmail.com)>           wrote:

           [quote]-->             AeroElectric-List message posted by: Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com (ceengland7(at)gmail.com)>

             

             Cole who? And why would he want to power my car? As to T.             Boone, it might be worthwhile to expand your news sources a             bit, to get a better picture.

             

             If you want to see a real tax dollar, and             lobbied-government-forced-consumer dollar boondoggle,             google 'Kemper County coal power plant'. Current (pardon the             pun) construction spending total (and it's not over yet)             that is roughly five Hundred BILLION dollars *over budget*             at >$700Billion, and they have conceded that they can             never burn coal there economically so they have shifted to             natural gas. The rate payers in that plant's service area             were forced to pre-fund a huge percentage of that cost,             until the Public Service Commission was forced to realize             that the consumers it was supposed to serve were being             ripped off.

             

             Do the math. A significant percentage of their customer base             could have had 30KW (gross overkill) solar systems *complete             with battery storage & generator backup*, for the money             wasted on that plant.

             

             I'm always amazed that people closely tied to tech             (airplanes and what powers them) don't believe in how             quickly tech advances....

             

             Charlie

               

               On 6/21/2017 6:22 PM, Tim Yoder wrote:

                          [quote]                 --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Tim Yoder"                 <ftyoder(at)yoderbuilt.com (ftyoder(at)yoderbuilt.com)>

                 

                 Why would you choose to buy a Cole powered car with gas                 near $2.00 / gal.

                 headed toward $1.00 for the next several years. Tesla                 will require a few

                 more billions of our tax dollars to stay afloat. Look                 what has happened to

                 the solar plants. T. Boone Pickens gave up on wind power                 after spending

                 millions of his own money.

                 

                 Tim

                 

                 --

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> AeroElectric-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum