Once again, batteries just aren’t living up to hopes and dreams. Only a year ago Rolls Royce were excited about the nine-seater P-Volt electric plane — forecasting that it would be carrying customers on ninety mile hops in 2025 and 250 miles by 2030. Alas, it must have been a sobering year. The developers of the P-Volt have pulled the pin indefinitely and decided to wait until battery capacity and weight improvements make it realistic.
The P-Volt made by Tecnam
Pioneering electric plane shelved as batteries only last a few hundred flights
Howard Mustoe, The Telegraph
A pioneering electric plane developer has shelved development of its new craft after discovering that its batteries will only last a few hundred flights before they need to be replaced.
Tecnam said its main challenge was the energy density of the batteries available today, which are relatively too heavy for the amount of power they can store.
The speed at which the batteries would lose charge would erode the nine-passenger craft’s value, ruining its commercial prospects, it added.
“Not commercially viable” could be name for most Green engineering.
What do we call it when it’s so bad it’s not even subsidy-viable? — A blessing.
They’re talking about batteries “degrading in weeks”:
Tecnam was more forthright in their press release. “A few hundred flights” was the optimistic best case scenario. Fast charging and rapid turnarounds would make that worse:
The proliferation of aircraft with “new” batteries would lead to unrealistic mission profiles that would quickly degrade after a few weeks of operation, making the all-electric passenger aircraft a mere “Green Transition flagship” rather than a real player in the decarbonisation of aviation. Taking into account the most optimistic projections of slow charge cycles and the possible limitation of the maximum charge level per cycle, the real storage capacity would fall below 170Wh/kg, and only a few hundred flights would drive operators to replace the entire storage unit, with a dramatic increase in direct operating costs due to the reserves for battery replacement prices.
The power to waiting ratio was doomed
Waiting times are too long, the power is too low, and the battery life is terrible.
The truth is everyone in aviation wants fast-charging planes so the air crew and the capital assets aren’t sitting around for hours paying airport-world prices while they earn nothing. But batteries have a shorter lifespan if they are pumped hard, fast and charged completely full. Sadly slow charging and underchanging are not a solution either. Even if we treat these babies gently with long slow feeds, they would only store less than “170 watt-hours per kilogram”. As the Telegraph authors point out, jet fuel has an energy density of 12,000 watt-hours per kilogram, which is seventy times as much.
The bottom line, Tecnam explains, is that the only alternative to waiting for the development of much lighter, better batteries, is “extremely aggressive speculation on uncertain technology”. It would be a wild and risky bet. Not that we aren’t doing that with our energy grids.
It’s not as if they weren’t told the batteries were not good enough and probably never will be.
On NZ television and newspapers a couple of days ago there was a story about the
Sea Glider.
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/video/seaglider-is-part-ferry-part-plane/KHKXEPTBCRO52IJGHT2665HW74/
It looks quite good until you realise it is only a scale model.
Battery energy density is not the only problem. Imagine what would happen if it hit a flock of seagulls.
270
Here is a link to another story about the Sea Glider.
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/northern-advocate/news/electric-seagliders-to-add-to-transport-connectivity-from-whangarei/K57FEPCDHFGL5MSBX36HE7F3L4/
No mention of the size of the battery or how long the battery would last.
My prediction is that it will never happen.
210
They used to have perfectly good Grumman Widgeons running out to the islands. At least they could actually ‘land on land’, the Sea Glider is a boat with wings. If there was ever a market for Auckland to Wangarei they could have used amphibians with avgas.
Well, the Govt & the Councils will dump a few million dollars in as subsidies, then it will fall apart leaving a couple of guys rich.
220
I looked up the Seaglider report on the CNN page. Very Jetsons like and uses the same principle that pelicans use to glide over the water. CNN says they are very fast and fossil free. They don’t mention the fossils used to make the things or the fossil fueled electricity used to charge nor the time to charge between their very fast runs up the coast. I am also wondering about the number of bird strikes when traveling very fast just above the water in sea bird territory.
210
appears they are trying to recreate the Russian Ekranoplan ground-effect vehicle from the 1980s
230
Yes Ivan. But I understand the Eraknoplanes crashed. But more importantly, they used liquid fuel, not battery power.
120
A flock of seagulls?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iIpfWORQWhU
As per the lyrics and as with many of these “suggestions”, keeping a distance is a good idea.
That aside, gas turbines are more efficient and more reliable than piston types, ESPECIALLY in aircraft operating at higher altitudes. Also, as in road vehicles, the “battery” id “dead-weight. The vehicle does not get any lighter, the further it travels, unlike hydrocarbon-fueled types
Anyone like to play with the numbers (and raw physics) for a “battery-powered” turbo-fan powered aircraft. There are plenty if qyite efficient propellor systems out there, nut the=y require actual engineering skills to design, manufacture and maintain.
These loonies are high on the drugs of endless? subsidies and weapons-grade Hubris.
Then there is the resurgent madness of “Green Steel”. Replace the “Carbon’ in iron and steel-kaking with Hydrogen. Have any actual, functional metallurgists even bothered to look at that caper. The energy balance on the production of hydrogen is “interesting” to say the least and then there are th eperennilal issues of transport and storage. Apparently “Green Hydrogen” is the other “new” thing. Green? As in; immature and naive, or “green” as in “festering”?
Then, standby for the REAL future?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJk245qi-PI
220
And do not forget the “slight” problem of hydrogen in steel makes it brittle and weak
150
A trans-Pacific flight LAX to HKG in a 747-400 aircraft requires 180,000kg of jet fuel. Using the 70x energy density difference stated above, that would require 12,600,000kg of batteries . As the max takeoff weight of the 747-400 is just shy of 400,000kg, the whole idea just doesn’t compute until an energy storage system with much higher energy density comes along. Add to that, as stated above, the battery aircraft is still as heavy at the end of the flight, thereby not increasing in efficient as the flight progresses.
40
So unimaginative.
The answer is a fleet of refuelling planes which tow recharging cables which the plane carrying a passenger can bypass the depleted batteries and keep flying.
And have you never heard of drop tanks? Well drop batteries could be jettisoned and caught by following battery powered planes for recharging.
20
I have to ask, why the push for electric planes and electric cars especially when the means to charge them, using fossil fuels, is being run down.
Don’t they realise that without reliable base load power they can forget about using batteries. Batteries don’t create power they only store it. All of this stupidity is because some stupid non scientists think that a necessary life giving gas is causing problems, what twaddle.
450
If you were a conspiracy theorist, the push for e-vehicles, e-cookers and e-heaters is about making you rely on the networks that they control and can ultimately turn off.
Frankly I think that conspiracy theory is probably correct, but then I find that … with most conspiracy theories these days.
440
As you allude; conspiracy theories have a bad habit of coming true. When the powers that be control the light switch we are in trouble. They can already switch off my solar remotely so switching off individual wired in appliances will be no bother and if that fails when you have used your allocated amount of electricity for the day they just disconnect you.
Chris (the genius) Bowen was asked about the price of energy going up and how people would cope. His answer “use less energy”. He is in moron class.
190
EV’s…cars and planes…are the answer to a non existent problem.
If you want to read some real BS, this story from Sky’s chief meteorologist is a ripper…apparently the Worlds climate is ” changing at a rate of knots “. Michael Mann is quoted in the story, so you can imagine the story line.
https://www.skynews.com.au/insights-and-analysis/new-shipping-laws-a-rising-el-nino-and-a-massive-eruption-these-are-the-other-factors-driving-global-temperatures-to-the-brink-of-a-critical-threshold/news-story/421deac7f74b768f2a32f37c797997ec
170
Crap from start to finish.. As soon as I saw the photo of the Coonabarabran farm in the middle of the last drought it was obviously propaganda. I’ll bet the photo is green from bottom to top at the moment.
80
Let’s face it, liquid hydrocarbon fuels and an internal combustion engine (piston or jet*) are the nominal solution for energy density, safety, economy and fast turn around.
Alternatives have been tried in the past such as liquid hydrogen of which there was a big research program in the 1980’s e.g. Tupolev Tu-155 which actually flew and many US programs and nuclear in the 1950’s e.g. U.S. MX-1589 project but failed to deliver on cost or practicality.
Now batteries are being tried but have major deficiencies. And there is no economic or military justification, just wokeness.
In the book Advanced Batteries by Robert Huggins http://books.google.com/books?id=atEOtixRHvcC&lpg=PA75&dq=Li/CUCl&pg=PA78#v=onepage&q=Li%2FCUCl&f=false the maximum theoretical specific energy of batteries is calculated to be 1166.4 Wh/kg or about 5 times the capacity of current batteries but still more than 10 times less than jet fuel.
In the future, if the Elites have their way, they will be the only ones flying on hydrocarbon fueled private aircraft and the rest of us won’t be flying at all. We’ll be confined to “15 minute cities”.
Incidentally, the White House resident plans to further weaken the United States with battery operated military vehicles.
https://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/articles/2022/2/4/military-wants-its–vehicles-to-go-electricwith-detroits-help
Australia is pursuing similar insanity.
https://www.defence.gov.au/news-events/news/2022-08-19/charging-ahead-quietly-and-cleanly
Get woke, go broke.
*Yes, a jet engine is considered “internal combustion”.
292
*Yes, a jet engine is considered “internal combustion”.
Thats because external combustion is, well, just a fire.
Sorry DM couldn’t help myself. Really appreciate your posts
200
What about a steam engine? 😉
80
Somebody once made an aircraft with a steam engine, and also the Brits made a sub with a steam engine. For some strange reason, neither was successful.
80
The Royal Navy’s K-class submarines were very much dreaded ……… not so much by the enemy but by their own crews who dubbed them “Kalamity class” .
50
Besler in the 1930’s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nw6NFmcnW-8
It worked. Was very quiet. And could stop taxing quickly.
Sir Hiram Maxim in the 1890’s was an engineers try. Many think his plane was the first to fly.
Certainly it flew further than the Wright Bros. first flight.
40
Steam engines are “External Combustion “engines.
30
External combustion. !
30
Thought so. It was a genuine question. The fire is external to the steam compartment. I was wondering if because the fire is enclosed, it was ‘internal’. Thanks for the reply.
10
I led a Cavalry Troop on an exercise in the late 70s from Hilston to Broken Hill driving M113s. We averaged about 4 hours per day when we were not moving for 16 days. Our 80 gallon tanks only needed topping off twice each time taking about ten minutes. So now a truck with a huge generator will pull up and run out some very long leads and sit there thumping away for hours while the electric Bushmaster fills up. Our troop could be refueled and under way in less than 20 minutes. How long for a troop of EVs?
140
Gosh, they should shoot them straight over to Ukraine for field trials and see if they can humiliate Russia..
A 100Km range is fine for the travel they would do on the Great Counterattack. Of course that is NOT at 0-100kph in a couple of seconds, or even pulling a full load at 70kph over fields, that will be slowly round and round the parade ground to get 100km out of it.
I’m sure the Chinese will be fielding the same gear when we go up against their troops too, its only fair and the BRICS are terribly woke.
51
Thanks Dave.
The military in this country are utterly stupid. ICE is the way to go for military vehicles. Quick refueling, and no need to run generators, which you need to cart fuel to in the first place. And the range is poor for EVs
One complete military dunce was apparently saying that the ADF needed to be going for EVs and renewables to attract the young people. So the aim is to appeal to the woke, rather than provide a ready for action, effective and efficient military force????
Save us….
101
“batteries . . . are relatively too heavy for the amount of power they can store“.
Electrons are heavy. Just grab a couple and try lifting them above your head. I’m not responsible for your injuries.
130
Indeed.
Electrons have a density of 10^21 g/cm3.
Protons merely 10^14 g/cm3.
70
And
the Density of Photons;
Is Zero or otherwise 0.00 g/cc.
20
Yet they still have momentum. 🙂
31
Are u kidding?
🙂 🙂
10
Photons carry momentum.
p = ℎ / 𝜆
Where p is the momentum of the photon, h is Planck’s constant and 𝜆 is the wavelength of the photon.
40
I wonder how Max might talk about this now, in 2023.
🙂
20
Nope… they have momentum..
They are odd little fellas..
Have “effective mass” when moving, hence momentum, but no mass when at rest.
This might help… https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Ycwm0Ybzh4
31
So, by extension, the sun’s rays beating down on us have momentum.
Really?
20
The term “effective mass” confirms that the fact that the photon has no mass.
Photons are an electromagnetic wave and can only interact with other electromagnetic forces and it seems that we are heading into Brian Cox territory.
20
Some people think that photons never move from colder to hotter regions.
In actuality photons can’t steer. They just flow in every direction in which they were originally fired.
The second law applies to net energy flow, not individual photons.
Any observations on the above?
20
Slightly off topic- this stunning video revealing the EV ponzi investment scheme
China is Throwing Away Fields of Electric Cars – Letting them Rot!
Which basically means all the figures of a burgeoning sales of EV is fake, like their ghost cities.
161
Link doesn’t work for me Simon, but I’ve seen the picture you are referring to before.
80
Try this. I assume it is the vid referred to:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1SEfwoqKRU8&t=11s
30
Ditto, site not available.
10
Site cannot be reached. Someone does not want you to see what reality is.
50
Here is a video of the field of rotting EV’s.
https://youtu.be/1SEfwoqKRU8
1.3 million views in 24 hrs.
91
Plus the obvious speed limit of propeller driven planes- I still marvel at the
flying boats that initially generated the concept of transatlantic travel
back in the 1930’s. The were huge but slow and noisy. The “Electric Plane”
will be quiet.
The other aspect is battery performance at -40 degrees which is the ambient
temperature at altitude and temperature cycling of battery packs.
150
So, despite warnings that batteries were too heavy and lacked sufficient capacity for use in aircraft, they went ahead anyway, only to find that batteries are too heavy and lack sufficient capacity.
But of course the reason they ignored reality was that their objective wasn’t to perfect the electric airplane, but to harvest lots of taxpayers’ money in subsidies and grants. They doubtless knew the battery tech wasn’t viable, but in the course if confirming this, they no doubt developed lots of new IP elsewhere in the ‘plane, all for free.
On that basis, the project was probably a success.
281
Don’t any of these companies employ real, competent engineers any more ?
Battery technology is, and always has been, and almost certainly will be useless for any meaty engineering applications.
170
So the electric battery plane is a disaster? So what’s new , perhaps the King and Flinder’s island fantasies are also a disaster? Big surprise NOT.
And the US and EU electric battery army tanks should be a real hoot, up against the tried and tested diesel powered tanks of China and Russia.
AGAIN, when will we ever WAKE UP to these imbeciles and morons? Can we really dig any lower compared to proper scientific research?
Batteries are a TOXIC disaster and the energy density is ZIP, but these clueless loonies still persist.
How many more TRILLIONs of $ will the OECD countries WASTE before the voters force them to stop? Who knows?
280
“Electric” tanks? Ferdinand Porsche was messing about with electric drive systems for tanks in the 1930s and 40s. NOT a completely silly idea, especially if you consider the precision and complexity if a conventional mechanical final drive in an armoured vehicle.
The proposed “mil-spec” batteries would want to be better behaves than the Tesla and Lexus “self-imolators”. Watching tanks explode catastrophically is a daily event for those keeping track of the Ukraine caper. (Dry storage of bulk “ready rounds” in the fighting compartment of a tank is definitely a health hazard). Adding several tonnes of Lithium Ion battery to such a vehicle would be “interesting” in that Chinese curse, sort of way.
The soviets / Russians have LONG needed to to keep their vehicles WARM in the depths of serious winters. If you have the fuel, run the engine. If fuel is in short supply; plan “B”. This requires lighting a bunch of small fires UNDER the vehicle. VERY important with more delicate things like trucks; the chassis will BREAK if you try to drive it away in -40C- temperatures.
How much battery storage will be dissipated just keeping the battery WORKING.
Does anyone know of an HONEST plot of Tesla battery performance vs ambient temperature?
Finally, name the countries sitting on the major sources of the ingredients for these batteries.
200
Try 43 tons of batteries to equal the fuel onboard an Abrams tank will require a trailer a bloody large one
90
Ferdinand Porsche’s VK 30.01 (P) and VK 45.01 (P) prototype tanks had gasoline engines with electric drive systems, much like a diesel-electric locomotive. They were not battery operated.
70
Diesel (or gasoline)-Electric makes sense for that kind of application. A diesel engine turns a generator which powers electric motors at the drive wheels. This is how heavy mining equipment both tracked and rubber tires do it. I’m not sure how an EMP would effect such a design, though.
Battery-Electric makes no sense at all.
40
Diesel-electric works really well in lots of cases. It decouples the ICE from the drive and allows the engine to produce maximum power while allowing the electric motor to produce it’s maximum torque at 0 rpm.
30
“And the US and EU electric battery army tanks should be a real hoot, up against the tried and tested diesel powered tanks of China and Russia.”
I’m interested in how they will recharge these piles of junk on the front line, perhaps give Ukraine a few to test.
100
Diesel generators. Kind of defeats the purpose I know, but hey, we’re in a brave new world building back better aren’t we? Or something.
40
And folk thought city streets full of horse manure 150 years ago was a health hazard. With today’s lunacy, there’s a future not only in breeding equine horsepower (for mobility) but also collecting their ’emissions’ (health & safety)… oh wait – insect gruel or horse steak? The possibilities are endless!
150
Today, in Leftist-run cities like Los Angeles and San Francisco, human rather than horse manure is considered a problem and that’s far worse than manure from a herbivorous animal.
120
Will many major media outlets even mention it? The predominant media controls the information most people receive. I am no longer surprised at how ill informed and ignorant my fellow citizens are of things other than entertainment. panem et circenses.
Funny that the best informed “young uns” I know get their news on TikTok. Little wonder the “powers” want it shut down.
Being retired, what I miss the most is intelligent discussions with well informed colleagues. In today’s pc world I wonder if those can stll occur in the workplace.
130
If you have time, check out an Australian comedy series called ” Utopia”. It’s the only thing I watch on Australian ABC these days. In Australia some of the older series are on Netflix. There you will see a very good representation of what’s happening in a lot of office workspaces these days. Especially in the public service, but some of the storylines also apply to commercial workplaces.
60
Wonderful, a new series! Best program I’ve ever seen!
Told my public servant daughter that its back just now, but she says she can’t watch it… tried it once but it makes her feel bad. Its too accurate about Govt & public service.
70
Almost same experience. Son and DIL were watching the other night. DIL (also a public servant – fed) had to stop the show twice to explain to my son that what depicted in the show actually happened to her that day!
20
Just a quick reminder that most of the world’s top army battle tanks weigh between 40 to 70 tonnes and yet can travel hundreds of miles.
So just try to imagine or understand the comparison of 40 to 50 EV cars battery equivalents operating on the battlefield in just ONE tank.
The only leaders who would relish the thought of such a fight would be the Russian and Chinese, but the battle would obviously be very short and very decisive.
https://www.hotcars.com/ranking-the-most-powerful-tanks-in-the-world/
120
Looks economic (wikipedia Eviation Alice):
Two variants of the Alice were originally planned.[26] The initial, unpressurized model was intended for air taxi operations, with energy stored in a lithium-ion battery. Eviation was working on building a prototype scheduled to fly in early 2019.[26] In 2017, a second pressurized model was to be an extended-range ER executive aircraft available by 2023 for $2.9 million, with a more powerful aluminum-air battery with a lithium-polymer buffer, a cabin pressurized to 1,200 m (4,000 ft) at FL 280, G5000 avionics, a 444 km/h (240 kn) cruise and 1,367 km (738 nmi) range.[26] In October 2019, Eviation described only the pressurized Alice Commuter with a 260 kn (480 km/h) cruise speed.[27]
With 260 Wh/kg cells, the 900 kWh battery capacity (3,460 kg, 7,630 lb) is initially estimated to give the design a range of 540–650 nmi (1,000–1,200 km) at 240 knots and 10,000 ft (3,048 m).[5] This is anticipated to increase as battery technology improves.[5] The batteries have been tested to more than 1,000 cycles, equivalent to 3,000 flight hours, They will then require replacement at a cost of $250,000, which is half of the direct operating cost and similar to a piston engine overhaul.[5] Based on U.S. industrial electricity prices, the direct operating cost with nine passengers and two crew, flying at 240 kn (440 km/h), is claimed to be $200 per hour, which compares to $600–1,000 per hour for existing aircraft of similar purchase price such as the Cessna 402s, Pilatus PC-12 and Beechcraft King Air, for operations on routes under 500 nmi (930 km).[5][8] 45% of air routes fall within its 565 nmi (1,050 km) range at 260 kn (482 km/h), or 55% of airline flights according to Flightglobal’s Cirium data.[9]
The electric drivetrain will have a higher voltage than current electrical systems.[5] Two 850 hp (630 kW) Magni650 electric motors will drive two propellers mounted on the aft fuselage.[21] The unpressurized aircraft has a flat lower fuselage.[5] The Italian company Magnaghi Aeronautica supplies landing gear and has already produced the gear for the similarly sized Piaggio P.180 Avanti.[5] It will be built with existing technology, including a composite airframe, propulsion from two Magnix electric engines[21] and Honeywell’s flight control systems, including automatic landing.[7] At 3,700 kg (8,200 lb), the batteries account for 60% of the aircraft take-off weight.[11] Manufacturing is planned in the US.[10]
The company plans for recharging to be carried out by mobile charging vehicles, similar to aviation fuel trucks. Each hour of flight time is expected to require a charging time of 30 minutes.[7][28] The cells are similar to those from auto industry batteries.[20]
32
It doesn’t look economic to me. Notice the statements are in the future. They say “estimated”, “anticipated” or “The company plans for..”
So far Alice has had 1 test flight which lasted 8 minutes.
I had always known battery capacity was a limiting factor for EV aircraft. I hadn’t thought about how the rapid charging would shorten the battery life.
If Rolls Royce cannot make it affordable, I can’t see any other company doing it.
Hybrid is possible. Pure EV, not so much.
70
“the batteries account for 60% of the aircraft take-off weight.”
and, as pointed out previously, 60% of the landing weight, a noticeable disadvantage.
The A380 will take off at 575tons, but burn the 250tons of fuel and land at only 325tons. Even the aircraft flight behaviour on half the fuel would be an advantage in bad weather.
50
Calculate holding and alternate requirements for bad weather, additional power for de-icing props and airframe, and there’ll likely be many circumstances in which the aircraft wouldn’t have the required range to even get off the ground. Now if someone proposed a short range VTOL, that goes a few kilometers, then that might be different, but even then I have my doubts about cost and viability.
30
Meanwhile: China is Throwing Away Fields of Electric Cars – Letting them Rot!
110
Thanks very much for the link Kim and I’m still trying to understand China’s super EV PONZI scheme.
Drone videos have changed the world and I’ll have to explore this site again when I have the time.
50
A good line; “power to waiting ratio”.
But the whole thing has the aurora of an advertising campaign to promote the good environmental intentions of Rolls Royce and Tecnam.
As it stands all specifications regarding performance of the short hop aircraft were well and truly to hand and any engineer would have accurately predicted the result of the expensive “testing” process.
The aircraft itself is now well and truly in the public eye and should sell well with a couple of reliable RR fossil fuel powered engines.
50
Comment misplaced . Should be at the end.
10
OMG!! Anyone want a cheap EV?? This all makes sense because here in Victoria we had one of those crazy bike share schemes. Inner city Melbourne was littered with those yellow bikes back in the late 2010’s. I can remember staying at my unit in Richmond. Week before no bikes and then when I arrived the main streets had these yellow bikes everywhere. Most were vandalised, and a heap ended up in the Yarra River. So here we have a similar crazy scheme except with cars. At least the bikes were used, these EV’s are just sitting in paddocks rotting away.
80
I reckon it will be the same for those big mining trucks up north in WA. Power to weight ratio will wreck batteries quickly. Time will tell.
50
Overhead power lines above the haul road, run them like electric trains and trolley buses with a big coal power station down the road…
Silent with max torque at zero speed, regenerate power going back down the hole.
10
Rolls-Royce has already tested a hydrogen powered jet engine in a World first. Not too sure whether this will take off (no pun intended) as Aviation Fuel (Paraffin in the UK /and Kerosene in the USA – same thing) seems to me to be the best fuel for aircraft. I did an Engineering Apprenticeship with RR when I left School in 1969.
https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/rolls-royce-successfully-tests-hydrogen-powered-jet-engine-2022-11-28/
50
The problem with a hydrogen powered aircraft is how to practically and safely store it and handle it either as a high pressure gas or liquid. It’s a nightmare to handle as a fuel, even for organisations like NASA. It is not suitable as a mass market transportation fuel.
130
That’s why I made my comment as to ‘Not too sure whether this will take off (no pun intended)’.
50
Hydrogen burning in air causes nitric oxides due to the (very) high ignition temperature.
This would cause the EU to ban any flights (see their attitude re diesel engines and the claim that Dutch farmers are ruining the climate by using fertilisers).
You could get around this by including liquid oxygen but that stuffs the payload. And NASA who use hydrogen for their rockets waste about 5-10% to cool the steering mechanisms from the very hot exhaust.
30
“Tested”,.. doesnt mean much ..and it isnt a world first.
Several turbine makers have been working on this for several years to try to solve the many issues …( flame front speed,.. burn temperature, ..etc etc)
“ Testing” is a long , long, way from practical use, let alone flight certification.!
….then there is that issue of Hydrogen storage, cost, and commercial viability ?
10
Pratt & Whitney tested hydrogen in a J-57 turbojet in 1957 for the Lockheed CL-400 Suntan project, which was a proposed supersonic successor to the U2 spy plane. Pratt & Whitney also developed a new Hydrogen engine the model 304, this engine heated the hydrogen in the combustion gases and the hot hydrogen rather than the combustion gases drove the turbine which powered the fan. The engine worked well but the CL-400 project was cancelled. The proposed plane with its enormous fuselage, filled with fuel tanks did not have the required range and there wasn’t a path to increasing it.
If the great Kelly Johnson couldn’t make a Hydrogen plane work the prospects for practical Hydrogen plane are probably very unlikely.
10
The year that commercial airlines use hydrogen as fuel is the year I stop flying, if I am still alive then.
I am prepared to bet that this madness will pass and it never happens. I hope i am alive then.
60
JCB have a hydrogen engine for their earth moving equipment, with the claimed same torque curve as a diesel. I have no idea why they are bothering personally. There is no way a farm can store hydrogen fuel. Especially considering diesel can be stored in a 80 year old rusty drum with spills and be perfectly safe and refuel the tractor in minutes.
Diesel is the perfect fuel, for the perfect engine. I don’t see how it can be bettered. I drive tractors for a living and every time I spend 12 hours on the thing I’m always amazed and comforted by its reliability and extraordinary power.
60
JCB are doing the classic “virtue signaling” for their image and PR.
You will be aware that they have to use huge on site compressor systems to boost the H2 pressure before it is used in their machines.
And i will reserve comment on performance and reliability……let alone operating costs !
10
Philip,
“Diesel is the perfect fuel, for the perfect engine. I don’t see how it can be bettered. I drive tractors for a living and every time I spend 12 hours on the thing I’m always amazed and comforted by its reliability and extraordinary power.”
You appear to be a practical person.
You are, therefore, utterly unsuited for politics – let alone much of modern ‘CliSciFi’.
In the former, everything is about getting [re-]elected – ‘fool a majority of the people once every four years’ [YMMV in parliament/Congress duration].
The latter is simply about getting grant moneys and tenure.
“Now my next project is on the provision of solid hydrogen ballast for electrically-powered research vessels studying the Great Global Heating.
“They will, of course, have a diverse crew – ISM Code requirements for communication and competence are such old hat – patriarchal, racist, probably ableist, certainly homophobic, and deeply misogynistic!
“And we will require the Insurers to pony up, regardless!”
Auto
00
Nuclear jet engines have been made.
Go look up EBR 1 in Idaho the relics of 2 monster jet engines are siting outside
40
We need some Star Trek Warp Speed right now………………….
20
Again….”Tested”,……but never flown or used .
Projects abandoned, not commercially or practically viable,…much like hydrogen will be .
00
One BIG limiting factor for E aircraft is the limited takeoff power available. With a jet you make it a bit bigger and pump in more fuel and you get a lot more thrust, more than enough to lift the extra fuel. As the fuel load lightens cruising at altitude becomes somewhat economical.
Even piston engines have extra “short term” power available for takeoff.
With EA, takeoff weight equals landing weight and there is no “high boost” available for takeoff. Private pilots doing occasional flights might find them convenient for trips to the winery or country races but that’s a niche that may not pay back development costs.
And they will never be fast. There is a tradeoff between high lift and low drag wings.
71
And they still use propellors, I haven’t heard of an electric jet in development yet.
60
Well ….. actually “high boost” IS available with EA !
Both batteries and motors have “continuous” and short duration “ boost” power ratings.
Boost can be several multiples of the rated continuous use power output..
However doing this, puts both into inefficient operating conditions ( heat generated usually) and obviously reduces operating time.
But it wont help make AV any more practical !
10
All this renewable battery, solar & wind bs is falling apart by the day.
Maybe we could get Dylan Mulvaney to endorse them so it’d all collapse faster.
😆😆😆
190
Dylan is available for hire by any entity who want him to endorse products they would like to see fail in the marketplace.
100
“A pioneering electric plane developer has shelved development of its new craft after discovering that its batteries will only last a few hundred flights before they need to be replaced.”
You would think that any sensible engineer would have picked this up in the feasibility study before starting design on the aircraft ???. IMO – Commercially viable battery powered aircraft won’t be possible in our lifetimes and hydrogen has too many safety issues. Fortunately, we have liquid hydrocarbon fuels provided by nature for hundreds of years to come 🙂
As a curiosity – what words caused this post to be moderated ???
50
Lilydale FTO adopts Electric Trainer
Yarra Valley flight trainer Lilydale Flying School has placed an electric aeroplane online for basic training.
The Alpha Electro II uses two 57 kg batteries to power a 60 kW electric engine, giving a cruise of 85 KIAS and a best endurance of one hour.
Maximum takeoff weight 570 kg, able to carry 2 people.
31
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pipistrel_Alpha_Trainer?wprov=sfla1
The gasoline powered version of the same aircraft:
90
Many years ago, when visiting the Victorian highlands, I had a joy ride in an electric powered glider. It took off on power until at gliding height, then folded its props and we sailed around on thermals for 30 minutes or so before landing on wind power. Very enjoyable.
50
They are called “self launching” gliders and make a lot of sense. Winch launching can be dangerous when the wire breaks and tug aircraft are expensive and only available on club days.
00
Brave.
00
Flying schools using them makes sense: It is short, return to base work with ample time for a battery friendly slower charge.
00
If, as flying school owner, you’re working your instructors four hours a day flying, then you’ll need four [possibly five, one ‘spare’] sets of batteries. These are dinky little ones, but the cost will still add up …
If 25KWh [57 kg is – ah – imprecise …. but, MSM] – say perhaps $5000 each, aviation rated.
And so, four sets at $10,000 each. Per plane.
And you might manage two instructors per plane. Becomes big bucks.
And this presupposes the landing field has the electric utility that can charge those batteries [slowly ….].
Auto
10
The trouble with this blog is all ” us ” contributors are way too practical. We look at these subjects from an engineering, physical, mathematical point of view. You know, with real facts. Laws of physics/ chemistry/ maths almost don’t matter anymore. It’s all about the politics, the vibe, vote harvesting. If a green zealot government is in power and they mandate BPP’s (battery powered planes) then it will happen. If that same government decide planes will run on hydrogen and they mandate/ subsidise it, that will probably happen too. If you want to see an example of a green zealot government, look no further than either some of our state governments or present federal government in Australia.
130
Yes.
Conservatives and fellow rational thinkers tend to forget that the basis of the modern Left / Green movement is post modernism in which facts simply don’t matter because there is considered to be no such thing as objective truth or objective reality. “Truth” is whatever you think it is or want it to be. That’s why Leftists always talk about “my truth” not “the truth”.
See my post on post modernism at https://joannenova.com.au/2022/10/the-real-transition-of-the-last-700-years-was-to-fossil-fuels/#comment-2599247
80
Well done David for speaking YOUR truth.
01
When did this your and my truth thing become a thing? I’d never heard it in my life and sometime there it became common speak. It makes no sense at all but it’s as common as “hundred percent”.
20
Truth is truth…end of.
‘My truth’ and ‘your truth’ are merely opinions.
10
While we’re at it; what’s this nonsense with the likes of ‘Snowy 2.0’? What’s wrong with ‘Snowy 2’ or ‘Snowy ll’?
10
Bingo!
00
David, You are right about the divide …
You say – ““Truth” is whatever you think it is or want it to be.”
Which is true until the ground leaps up and smacks your battery-powered plane, hard.
I certainly don’t intend to ‘Fly Battery-Air’ anywhere.
Auto
10
Ross
Its impossible to argue with the insane, and Leftists are insane. They cling to ideological reasons for things, rather than, as you point out, logic and reality. The Covid vaxxes have been a complete and utter disaster if one analyses them carefully, murdering many (still going on with the excess deaths), a truck load of adverse reactions and they actually promote infections. But the Left still cling to them and point to mass vaxxing being a UN policy.
Ditto climate, 15 min cities, gender dysphoria and on and on.
We need to keep pushing back, but my view is that unfortunately society has to virtually collapse and billions need to be ruined before people have personally felt the disasterous results of Leftists madness. Hopefully at that stage socialism is consigned to the dust bin of history and any attempting to push it end up completely marginalised and isolated.
80
There’s a group think here. Try stepping out of it and see the red thumbs you get.
00
Rex Airlines has invested in Dovetail Electric Aviation and they think we could see electric planes flying short haul flights by 2024.
The Australian-headquartered Dovetail recently received a $3 million grant from the Federal Government’s Cooperative Research Centres Projects (CRC-P) program.
After reading Jo Nova’s news today, I’m eagerly waiting till 2024, for all government climate alarmists when booking flights in and out of Canberra to insist on electric powered planes.
https://aviationsourcenews.com/airline/rex-airlines-invests-in-dovetail-electric-aviation/
60
Dovetail’s business model seems to be conversion of existing aircraft to batteries and hydrogen.
If it’s such a good business model I’m perplexed (not) as to why they need $3 million of taxpayer money to be given to them.
And I am disappointed in Rex. It’s a well-run, sensible, reasonably non-woke company and I regularly fly with them and have never seen them fly a rainbow flag or issue any apologetics about how Australia was “stolen” etc. (as if that has anything to do with running an airline anyway).
https://dovetail.aero/
50
What’s the problem?
That aircraft has two wind turbines, just add solar panels.
sarc.
80
Do the flights get cheaper as the battery gets closer to its’ possible failure point?
40
Haha. Roll the dice. Why not? I actually think you would get people prepared to do it.
20
Well fancy that! I recall reading about the electric plane years ago and being defeated in an argument as a cynic and a crank when I stated that I bet it never happens. According to the article it was a sure thing, and a clever Australian company was at the forefront of it all.
Maybe they’ll get one of those salt batteries in there – that very well presented youtube channels tell me are the cheap viable future of transport – and fix the whole problem.
30
[…] because they are uneconomic without quick turnarounds with fast chargers. Constant fast charging shortened the battery life to […]
00
A diesel engines powered car tank contains the equivalent of about 250 – 300 kWh energy (50litres). A battery set with approx the same “content of energy” has more weight than a big SUV (2.5tons). That´s not new to engineers, why did they start those “R&D” campaigns?
00