Electric Airbus???

Battery life is 1/2 hour. That's not even VFR reserves to take off and land at the same airport.
 
It's a motorglider. How long do the batteries really need to last anyway?

Funny that this effort started with them playing around with a Cri Cri.
 
frfly172 said:
It's a move in the right direction.
Click to expand...

Agreed, if they only found a way to increase battery life that would create a whole new industry, (Imagine your cellphone/laptop lasting for 1 week instead of 8 hours).
 
MarkZ said:
It's a start.
Click to expand...

frfly172 said:
It's a move in the right direction.
Click to expand...

Not really. The industry already knows how to build a lightweight aerodynamically efficient aircraft. It's not hard to calculate the amount of power needed to sustain flight. The aircraft uses no new technology. The only difference between this aircraft and one that could have been built in someone's garage is that Airbus spent millions to do it.

As for the airliner mentioned in the story that will carry 90 passengers for two to three hours, the possibility of that being built and in service in "15 or 20 years" is laughable.

The Airbus demonstrator converts 60 kW to one half hour of flight. What will happen when electric power is applied to a large aircraft?

A recent story in Aviation Week mentions the Avic MA700, a 78 seat regional airliner being developed by the Chinese manufacturer. Empty weight is estimated at 58,400 lbs. Power for the aircraft will be provided by two Rolls-Royce AE2100 turboprops producing more than 3,000 kW each.

Powering such an aircraft with batteries and electric motors would require an advancement of several orders of magnitude in battery power density along with a similar exponential reduction in battery weight. Two 3,000 kW electric motors built using current technologies would weigh more than the aircraft mentioned above. Even if some miracle allowed batteries to provide unlimited energy storage while simultaneously weighing next to nothing, I don't foresee technological breakthroughs allowing the miniaturization of the principles of electromagnetic force which would make 4,000 HP electric motors weigh the same as a turboprop engine.

If the electric airliner proposed by Airbus used the same amount of power as the Avic MA700, it would need a battery capable of providing somewhere between 12,000 and 16,000 kWH for a two to three hour flight according to my probably inaccurate math.

Proponents of electric vehicles do a disservice to the public by making such nonsensical projections. While I don't doubt that battery technology will advance, at the present there are known chemical and physical limitations which will not allow a storage battery the size of a twelve pack to move an automobile fifty miles or make it possible for a battery powered airliner to carry 90 passengers from Dallas to Los Angeles.

The possibility of technological advancements allowing this to occur in the next two decades are miniscule. There isn't any motivation for doing so. Private industry won't provide the money to perform the R&D, and political opposition to funding it with tax dollars would be overwhelming.

Fossil fuels will be around for at least another fifty years. I believe energy densities required to provide motive power for large transport systems will preclude the use of storage batteries. Development of fuel cell technology is much more promising than advancements in batteries. Electric power and batteries will be relegated to commuter and service vehicles for the foreseeable future.
 
Last edited:
FloridaPilot said:
Agreed, if they only found a way to increase battery life that would create a whole new industry, (Imagine your cellphone/laptop lasting for 1 week instead of 8 hours).
Click to expand...

Imagine a container of LH2 and a fuel cell instead of a normal battery. Lots more energy stored, and high speed recharge.
 
many self-launced gliders only carry 10-15 mins fuel. Half an hour is plenty
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top