Why electric planes are inevitable

Here you go Jack, right from the source. It will take some work, but you should be able to wade through it, if you want the truth that is....

SOI Tax Stats - Individual Tax Statistics | Internal Revenue Service (irs.gov)
It may be buried in there someplace....maybe. I find stuff like this: https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p5332.pdf
I spent a few minutes looking through it and didn't find what people actually pay in federal taxes, which is all that would cover. How do you know the data is actually in there?
 
While I generally agree, there are sometimes good reasons for desert cultivation. Potatoes (I'm native to Idaho) are susceptible to blight if grown in wet climates. That's what caused the Irish potato famine in the late 1840's. But grow them in a dry climate, when the amount and timing of water applied can be carefully controlled, and it's not a problem. Sure, we also have fungicides now should they be needed, but controlling how much water is applied gets most of the credit for blight-free spuds.

Potato trivia: the Irish (and a German botanist studying the blight) mostly figured out the germ theory of disease during the famine. They showed there was something invisible, yet transmissible, killing the potatoes. However, Pasteur got most of the credit 20 years later when he fixed a critical problem with the early theory and published more widely.
How many potatoes come from Texas, Arizona, Mojave? They grow cotton and alfalfa in AZ. While there may be a good reason for some things to be grown in the desert, the majority of those crops are better grown elsewhere.
 
How many potatoes come from Texas, Arizona, Mojave?

Certainly none of the good ones!
190795308_parade-tater.jpg
 
Hm....does Thanos drive an electric car?
 
I'm almost 40. A very large chunk of the GA fleet is older than me.

A pretty decent portion of the GA fleet is closer in age to the Wright's first flight than it is to today.

I'm fairly certain everyone on this thread will be dead and gone before the electric planes take over GA, just based on the current attrition rate.
 
I'm fairly certain everyone on this thread will be dead and gone before the electric planes take over GA
I think it will take much longer. The most neglected and least maintained system on current GA aircraft is the electrical system. Yet some how when the aircraft goes 100% electric those same owners that struggle to keep their single battery charged and working are going to miraculously figure out how to keep a dozen batteries charged and working.
 
My whole skepticism with electric aviation is not driven by some sort of agenda or bias, just the physics and the chemistry behind it. The energy density of batteries is paltry compared to what you find in a fossil fuel.. even if you adjust for a more efficient overall conversion of energy to mechanical force

We are expecting some sci-fi level leap that as of yet is not happening. In fact advances being made are extremely minimal and incremental.. despite huge corporations throwing billions of dollars into building better battery technology

Take a look at a Tesla's overall curb, no, battery weight and do the math for its energy density..



Maybe in the next three decades there is a market for small local commuter aircraft..


But large long distance travel with quick half an hour turnaround times is the stuff of fantasy. We might as well be waiting for teleportation tech

My primary issue with the video is it makes some serious conclusions based off very weak premise; my dog's weight increased almost tenfold in the span of a year, however it's not accurate to say he will continue to increase tenfold every year moving forward. It's amateur nonsense with some clean packaging to make it seem authoritative
 
Lol, I'm not going down this worm hole, Al said invented/created the internet, same thing, he said so as is posted here, period.

Had he said " During my service in Congress I created, or supported legislation that led to the development of the internet" I would give him a pass, but he is a wordsmith, he knew exactly what he was saying, and said it clearly and succinctly. Snopes, try as it might, can't change that, neither can either one else.

Um where is the audio or printed statements by those who were present when he said it please. Because I have lost that debate before, and would be fun to argue it.
The statement linked above shows that he explicitly stated as part of his job in the Senate, he lead an initiative (the High Performance Computing Act which effectively was the basis for the US Gov to sell off and give up control of the internet to commercial enterprises.

Tim
 
I find the comparison of avgas energy storage to batteries kinda funny. Here is something to think about:
Pipistrel has two planes, one purpose built first as an electric, and later model as a Rotax plane.
https://www.pipistrel-aircraft.com/aircraft/flight-training/alpha/#tab-id-2
https://www.pipistrel-aircraft.com/aircraft/electric-flight/alpha-electro/#tab-id-2

You will notice that the gas plane, has roughly the same useful load when fully fueled. The gas has only just over four times the range of the electric. Oh the battery in the plane? It is tech from over ten years ago. How much has battery tech improved in the last decade? it will not be nearly as along as people think until flight training planes are likely replaced with electric versions. Potentially, short routes like Cape Air. Basically fixed locations where it makes sense to pay the heavy cost for the charging infrastructure.

Tim
 
I find the comparison of avgas energy storage to batteries kinda funny. Here is something to think about:
Pipistrel has two planes, one purpose built first as an electric, and later model as a Rotax plane.
https://www.pipistrel-aircraft.com/aircraft/flight-training/alpha/#tab-id-2
https://www.pipistrel-aircraft.com/aircraft/electric-flight/alpha-electro/#tab-id-2

You will notice that the gas plane, has roughly the same useful load when fully fueled. The gas has only just over four times the range of the electric. Oh the battery in the plane? It is tech from over ten years ago. How much has battery tech improved in the last decade? it will not be nearly as along as people think until flight training planes are likely replaced with electric versions. Potentially, short routes like Cape Air. Basically fixed locations where it makes sense to pay the heavy cost for the charging infrastructure.

Tim
And I see this;

The gas-powered Alpha:

upload_2021-9-23_18-27-9.png

upload_2021-9-23_18-30-13.png
The electric Alpha:

upload_2021-9-23_18-27-54.png
upload_2021-9-23_18-29-43.png

So, they're getting that one-hour endurance by running at considerably lower power, indicated by the 85-knot speed as opposed to the 108-knots in the gas version. I would imagine that the gas version's 3.1 hour endurance would get closer to 5 hours at 85 knots. Maybe even more. See below.

The max speed is also a lot lower, by 20 knots. That indicates less HP in the electric version. The electric's service ceiling is also 12,800 feet, compared to the gas's 18,000 feet. Must be a lot less power.

Not quite apples-to-apples.


This is from the cruise chart for a 1977 Cessna 150:

upload_2021-9-23_18-38-17.png

At 6000 feet and 77% power, the speed is 107 knots and the fuel burn is 5.8 GPH. If we cut the power back to get 85 knots, we get a fuel burn of 3.5 GPH. That's almost 40% less fuel burn. If we ran the gas-powered Pipistrel Alpha down from its 108 knots down to 85 knots, maybe we'd see it's range go from 3.1 hours to 5.2 hours, five times the electric's range, at the same speed.

But five times better is still much closer than the 15 times better we'd expect from gasoline vs. battery calculations.
 

Attachments

  • upload_2021-9-23_18-37-10.png
    upload_2021-9-23_18-37-10.png
    15.6 KB · Views: 4
Unfortunately (and I don't think I've seen it in this thread), a lot of people get the comparison wrong, because they cite the total energy density of batteries vs avgas, which isn't a meaningful comparison for two reasons:
  1. An ICE engine — especially the older tech in our planes — is lucky if it can extract 25% of the energy from avgas, while the rest is simply wasted.
  2. A reciprocating airplane engine and its accessories are very heavy compared to an electric powertrain (excluding battery, since we already compared the battery to the fuel weight, and shouldn't count it twice), so — depending on the engine — you have to allow for the additional saving of 100–200++ lb from not having that big heavy engine as well as the fuel.
Even with these allowances, battery power is still far behind fuel for usable energy by weight, as earlier posters have demonstrated with the comparison between the Pipstrel ICE version and Electro version; but it's not nearly so far as the politically-motivated electric-vehicle skeptics make it out to be (or, to be fair, nearly as close as the politically-motivated electric-vehicle zealots make it out to be, either). Politics and engineering don't go well together.
 
Last edited:
I Potentially, short routes like Cape Air.
Considering how long Cape Air stayed married to C402's that are 40+ years old, and now they have these brand new custom designed Tecnams coming online that they're financially committed to, they're the exact proof of my point. Even if you invented an electric technology that is an exact equivalent replacement to the fleet tomorrow, it will take DECADES before electrics actually take over, just because of the current slow rate of attrition in the fleet.
 
I think it will take much longer. The most neglected and least maintained system on current GA aircraft is the electrical system. Yet some how when the aircraft goes 100% electric those same owners that struggle to keep their single battery charged and working are going to miraculously figure out how to keep a dozen batteries charged and working.
When we're all dead and gone the next generation will be better at caring for batteries than us maybe ;)
 
When we're all dead and gone the next generation will be better at caring for batteries than us maybe ;)
Ha. Doubtful. The up and coming generation can't even seem to keep their phone charged without borrowing my charger cables. :rolleyes:
 
Ha. Doubtful. The up and coming generation can't even seem to keep their phone charged without borrowing my charger cables. :rolleyes:
.

Not only that ..... they are afflicted with a neurosis .

A new study finds a growing number of young people are suffering from climate anxiety

Nearly 60% say they are very or extremely worried about the climate crisis.

75% say the future is frightening.

Researchers say the only cure for climate anxiety is governments around the world taking real action to protect the environment.

.
 
I find the comparison of avgas energy storage to batteries kinda funny. Here is something to think about:
Pipistrel has two planes, one purpose built first as an electric, and later model as a Rotax plane.
https://www.pipistrel-aircraft.com/aircraft/flight-training/alpha/#tab-id-2
https://www.pipistrel-aircraft.com/aircraft/electric-flight/alpha-electro/#tab-id-2

You will notice that the gas plane, has roughly the same useful load when fully fueled. The gas has only just over four times the range of the electric. Oh the battery in the plane? It is tech from over ten years ago. How much has battery tech improved in the last decade? it will not be nearly as along as people think until flight training planes are likely replaced with electric versions. Potentially, short routes like Cape Air. Basically fixed locations where it makes sense to pay the heavy cost for the charging infrastructure.
thank you for posting your sources! The weights are similar, but the proof is right there on Pipistrel's own marketing, the electric plane will go "up to 60 minutes" at roughly 85 knots.. so this has an 85 nm range. The dino fuel powered one will go 108 knots and 324 nm. So yes, the weights are comparable, because they're not going to build a plane that can't take off with any meaningful load if they gave it a battery to actually match it's fossil fuel cousin. So they weigh the same, but one is useless as an aviation tool. Even for flight schools, how's that 50nm cross country going to work with a long charging break?

..no one says electric aviation can't be done, at least not me. But it's just not useful for the mission profile of what aviation does

An ICE engine — especially the older tech in our planes — is lucky if it can extract 25% of the energy from avgas, while the rest is simply wasted.
I mean, we're talking orders of magnitude here.. gasoline has 100X the energy density of lithium ion batteries. Thermal loss, extra engine weight, etc., all that the difference is still massive

A reciprocating airplane engine and its accessories are very heavy compared to an electric powertrain (excluding battery, since we already compared the battery to the fuel weight, and shouldn't count it twice), so — depending on the engine — you have to allow for the additional saving of 100–200++ lb from not having that big heavy engine as well as the fuel.
I'd like to see a Bonanza retrofitted with an electric power plant to prove this point, and retain the same cruise speed, useful load, and endurance.. we've spent billions on this and outside of a few fancy cars have nothing to tangibly show for it in the aviation world

Even with these allowances, battery power is still far behind fuel for usable energy by weight
Thanks! The fact that this tech has been around over 100 years sort of proves that there isn't this unicorn leap of tech so many are hoping for. Fossil fuels just make sense.. easy to transport, store, manage, etc. It's not about cost or some evil empire wanting to destroy the environment. If we're concerned about the amount of carbon in the atmosphere (as we should be) we should focus other ways to extract it from the atmosphere

Politics and engineering don't go well together
Certainly do not. Politics really doesn't mix well with most subjects unfortunately. Thanks for a thoughtful post!
 
Considering how long Cape Air stayed married to C402's that are 40+ years old, and now they have these brand new custom designed Tecnams coming online that they're financially committed to, they're the exact proof of my point. Even if you invented an electric technology that is an exact equivalent replacement to the fleet tomorrow, it will take DECADES before electrics actually take over, just because of the current slow rate of attrition in the fleet.
I think there are certain niches they could take over fast, like short flights (fire patrol, inter-community hops, etc) up north where avgas is hard to find and there are no roads, or even initial flight training if it turns out that the cost difference is really enough to give a flight school a competitive advantage (and potentially drive the others out of business), but agreed that — even if/when electric tech is more capable — there won't be any rush to replace ICE planes where they're already managing just fine and there's no competitive pressure.
 
I think there are certain niches they could take over fast, like short flights (fire patrol, inter-community hops, etc) up north where avgas is hard to find and there are no roads, or even initial flight training if it turns out that the cost difference is really enough to give a flight school a competitive advantage (and potentially drive the others out of business), but agreed that — even if/when electric tech is more capable — there won't be any rush to replace ICE planes where they're already managing just fine and there's no competitive pressure.
Fire patrols spend long hours in the air, far from base. Electric sure doesn't fit that. And where there are no roads, there are no airports with charging stations, either.
 
thank you for posting your sources! The weights are similar, but the proof is right there on Pipistrel's own marketing, the electric plane will go "up to 60 minutes" at roughly 85 knots.. so this has an 85 nm range.

Pipistrel lists their range as 78 or so miles. Takeoff and climb eat into range quite a bit. And I bet that the stated range is at about 1000'AGL. Climbing to 5k might leave you with a 30-mile range or something equally useless.

I mean, we're talking orders of magnitude here.. gasoline has 100X the energy density of lithium ion batteries. Thermal loss, extra engine weight, etc., all that the difference is still massive

I think gasoline is about 60 times the energy density of lithium-ion. If we knock off three-quarters of that to allow for the 25% efficiency of the typical aircraft ICE, we still have 15X the density. As I pointed out earlier, Pipistrel is using an electric motor considerably less powerful than the Rotax in their gas model. If they had one of the same HP, or ran the one they have at the same HP, their range would be small indeed.

One strange thing, though: they claimed the same rate of climb for both airplanes, 1220 FPM IIRC. That implies equal HP for the same gross weight, and yet the max speed is 20 knots lower. Maybe they're using a prop with lower pitch?
 
One day, the last internal combustion engine will be shut down for the last time. The very next day, environmentalists will start a panic over lithium mining, battery disposal, loss of farmland to solar farms, and wind farms killing raptors. The only solution will be for you to submit to their overwhelming wisdom. Until then, Big Oil and Old White Men are the problem, and you’d best get with the program.
 
As a owner of several electric cars there are other issues not even mentioned. One is that almost every battery manufacturer quotes charging rates under perfect conditions. That means the battery at the exact right temp when charging starts and charging only between 20 and 80%. Below 20% and above 80% charge rates are much slower. In actual use conditions are rarely perfect and charge times tend to be double what is claimed. Long cord are problematic and further reduce charge rates. Cold temps kill both charge rate and range. Electric cars see a 30% plus loss of range when temps drop from 80 to 30 degrees F. Current battery packs see significant range degradation as they age. Tesla’s tend to lose about 5% the first year. Batteries Also suffer from parasitic loss. Fully charge your electric plane and come out to fly 6 weeks later and you are not fully charged.
None of this even touches on the issues of how to set up airport charging stations and the tremendous amount of power that needs to be brought in. Even with multiple charging stations to reduce potentially really long waits the more aircraft you have charging the slower the charge rate.
I suspect in real world conditions that 60 minute claimed flight time will end up being 30 minutes and charge rates will be 50% longer. I would also make the wings easy to remove so when inevitable diverts happen you can truck the aircraft back to its home airport if the divert airport is not charger equipped. One last point, electricity is not free as the video claimed in discussing a commuter electrical aircraft verses gas. In fact by the time you build the infrastructure and get power to airports it’s quite expensive.
P.S. Did we even discuss battery fires? They will be fatal every time if occurring airborne.
 
Tesla’s tend to lose about 5% the first year.

As mentioned before, our 2018 Clarity’s battery capacity has dropped from 55Ah on delivery to 46.62Ah after 3 years. If I’m doing the math right (please check me) that appears to be about 18% over 3 years or 6% per year, so apparently in the Tesla ballpark. Our summer EV range has dropped from around 50 miles to about 45 under similar conditions, so about an 11% hit there, again, if I’m doing the math right.
 
Um where is the audio or printed statements by those who were present when he said it please. Because I have lost that debate before, and would be fun to argue it.
The statement linked above shows that he explicitly stated as part of his job in the Senate, he lead an initiative (the High Performance Computing Act which effectively was the basis for the US Gov to sell off and give up control of the internet to commercial enterprises.

Tim
Folks, lets remember to stay on topic here and not get into Spin Zone territory.
 
I think there are certain niches they could take over fast,
There are already niches electric flight has taken over but via drones like pipeline patrol, etc. So if you look at the big picture of an electric "airplane" the industry is moving more to removing the carbon unit pilot which changes the entire narrative. But as to an electric people aircraft until some sort of useable super conductor is developed there is still too much resistive loss for a 100% electric aircraft to go mainstream. Instead, you'll see more hybrid systems move into aviation like deisel/electric did in other forms of transportation did a 100 years ago. However, I think it will be fuel cell technology that will drive an all electric people aircraft as these cells become lighter and more powerful than batteries.
 
Considering how long Cape Air stayed married to C402's that are 40+ years old, and now they have these brand new custom designed Tecnams coming online that they're financially committed to, they're the exact proof of my point. Even if you invented an electric technology that is an exact equivalent replacement to the fleet tomorrow, it will take DECADES before electrics actually take over, just because of the current slow rate of attrition in the fleet.

In all fairness they have stick with the 402 because there has never been a suitable replacement. They have been begging for the last 20 years for someone to build one.
 
… None of this even touches on the issues of how to set up airport charging stations and the tremendous amount of power that needs to be brought in …
You make some great points about EVs and battery tech in the rest of the post, but "tremendous amount of power" sounds like a red herring. Pipestral's fast charger draws a maximum of 20 kW for each plane while actually charging; a high-end clothes dryer or convection oven draws 5 kW. So a flight school's power usage charging a few planes at the same time would be comparable to that of a public laundromat or large restaurant kitchen during a rush.
 
As a owner of several electric cars there are other issues not even mentioned. One is that almost every battery manufacturer quotes charging rates under perfect conditions. That means the battery at the exact right temp when charging starts and charging only between 20 and 80%. Below 20% and above 80% charge rates are much slower. In actual use conditions are rarely perfect and charge times tend to be double what is claimed. Long cord are problematic and further reduce charge rates. Cold temps kill both charge rate and range. Electric cars see a 30% plus loss of range when temps drop from 80 to 30 degrees F. Current battery packs see significant range degradation as they age. Tesla’s tend to lose about 5% the first year. Batteries Also suffer from parasitic loss. Fully charge your electric plane and come out to fly 6 weeks later and you are not fully charged.

You know, I've had an EV (Leaf) for three years and I haven't seen anything this extreme

My range is down from 164 to 162, 1.2% in three years. Maybe that will accelerate as it gets older, but I'm not seeing anything that would qualify as "significant range degradation". If I do, I hope there will be a relatively inexpensive replacement option that uses a better battery technology.

For now, my "mileage" is steady at 4.3 miles/kw, but that does drop to 4.0 in the winter, which is only a 6.98% drop.

I don't pay attention to charge times since the car is just sitting out in the garage while I'm eating dinner, so I can't comment on that. I don't see a loss from my car sitting at the airport. I've left it for 3 weeks once for a business trip that got extended and the battery charge showed exactly what it was when I left.

BTW, if you're only flying once every 6 weeks, get out and fly more. You've got an electric plane, it costs pennies to operate.
 
You know, I've had an EV (Leaf) for three years and I haven't seen anything this extreme

My range is down from 164 to 162, 1.2% in three years. Maybe that will accelerate as it gets older, but I'm not seeing anything that would qualify as "significant range degradation". If I do, I hope there will be a relatively inexpensive replacement option that uses a better battery technology.
My understanding (not a chemist or engineer) is that degradation in li-ion battery capacity is primarily linked to charge cycles, not calendar time. So if you're using your EV to commute 150 km round trip to work every day and then plugging it in every night, the capacity will fall sooner than if you're charging it 1x/week and then using it for occasional short shopping trips (etc) around your area — and, of course, there would be a whole spectrum in-between. It wouldn't be surprising if both you and @Jeff767 are seeing different results due to different usage patterns.

And back to aviation, I noticed that the Pipistrel Velis Electro is initially certified for only 500 hours flight time between battery "overhaul" (not sure what they mean by that — replacement?), but they intend to extend it to longer. They probably need to collect field data to prove to EASA that the battery capacity is still sufficient after 500 hours' use, then will gradually get it pushed back.
 
My understanding (not a chemist or engineer) is that degradation in li-ion battery capacity is primarily linked to charge cycles, not calendar time. So if you're using your EV to commute 150 km round trip to work every day and then plugging it in every night, the capacity will fall sooner than if you're charging it 1x/week and then using it for occasional short shopping trips (etc) around your area — and, of course, there would be a whole spectrum in-between. It wouldn't be surprising if both you and @Jeff767 are seeing different results due to different usage patterns.
Batteries are not all created equal. Quality will vary just as it does with lead-acid batteries or alkaline batteries. Some are famous for catching fire for no good reason, like the current Chevy Bolt problem. Chev says "don't park your Bolt within 50 feet of anything you value." How many people have that option?
 
And back to aviation, I noticed that the Pipistrel Velis Electro is initially certified for only 500 hours flight time between battery "overhaul" (not sure what they mean by that — replacement?), but they intend to extend it to longer. They probably need to collect field data to prove to EASA that the battery capacity is still sufficient after 500 hours' use, then will gradually get it pushed back.
I wonder what the "overhaul" or replacement cost might be. Worst case, we might divide that by 500 and see that it comes to as much as the gasoline would have cost. Electricity might be pennies, but the storage costs plenty.
 
@Dan Thomas

I trust your math more than mine. I calculated four times the range at the slower speed. Still the point is this is four or five times increase in battery capacity, for forty or fifty like many people state.
The 12K limit on the Elextro is not due to power, but battery cooling. I saw an interview with an engineer about it. They basically did not have the data, and decided with the limited existing battery it was not worth pursuing yet.

Tim
 
Considering how long Cape Air stayed married to C402's that are 40+ years old, and now they have these brand new custom designed Tecnams coming online that they're financially committed to, they're the exact proof of my point. Even if you invented an electric technology that is an exact equivalent replacement to the fleet tomorrow, it will take DECADES before electrics actually take over, just because of the current slow rate of attrition in the fleet.

Not at all. it will depend on the capex price. But if the OpEx is enough of a delta, CapeAir would dump the Tecnam faster than a lead balloon. Also, CapeAir has over 125 planes last I read. The Tecnam purchase was for a much lower number; from what I read CapeAir has some Cessna that are becoming financially unmaintainable.

Tim
 
Harbour Air in Vancouver is another interesting example. Their conversion of a DHC-2 Beaver to electric propulsion was more of a publicity stunt than a meaningful prototype, but it is true that they have a business where 10–20 minute flights make up a lot of their operations, flying people and mail to small islands off the coast, so they could be a credible business case for an electric fleet in the future if/when battery tech gets just slightly better.

Drones might be able to take over the mail and package part, but not the passenger transportation.
 
My understanding (not a chemist or engineer) is that degradation in li-ion battery capacity is primarily linked to charge cycles, not calendar time. So if you're using your EV to commute 150 km round trip to work every day and then plugging it in every night, the capacity will fall sooner than if you're charging it 1x/week and then using it for occasional short shopping trips (etc) around your area — and, of course, there would be a whole spectrum in-between. It wouldn't be surprising if both you and @Jeff767 are seeing different results due to different usage patterns.

And back to aviation, I noticed that the Pipistrel Velis Electro is initially certified for only 500 hours flight time between battery "overhaul" (not sure what they mean by that — replacement?), but they intend to extend it to longer. They probably need to collect field data to prove to EASA that the battery capacity is still sufficient after 500 hours' use, then will gradually get it pushed back.

Battery usage and chemistry have play a big part in how long the battery lasts. Most Li polymers from what I have read are happiest between 20 and 80%, If you charge completely to 100% it should be just before you use it. And avoid the deep draw.
The problem with most PlugIn hybrids that I looked into, they do not keep the battery in the happy place so the battery tends to degrade rather fast,
While EVs seem to be more attuned to battery longevity,

Pipistrel will be interesting to watch. Both how many they sell of the Elektro, and how they operate in the field. I have read some positive reviews by flight schools who are using them. For the couple reviews that covered the money side, the flight schools have said the Elektro did/does not pencil out but is very close to nuetral compared to the gas LSA they use for the rest of the training. (The Elektro expected battery replacement costs is fairly close to the life cycle costs of the Rotax engine including fuel)

Tim
 
Battery usage and chemistry have play a big part in how long the battery lasts. Most Li polymers from what I have read are happiest between 20 and 80%, If you charge completely to 100% it should be just before you use it. And avoid the deep draw.
The problem with most PlugIn hybrids that I looked into, they do not keep the battery in the happy place so the battery tends to degrade rather fast,
While EVs seem to be more attuned to battery longevity,

Pipistrel will be interesting to watch. Both how many they sell of the Elektro, and how they operate in the field. I have read some positive reviews by flight schools who are using them. For the couple reviews that covered the money side, the flight schools have said the Elektro did/does not pencil out but is very close to nuetral compared to the gas LSA they use for the rest of the training. (The Elektro expected battery replacement costs is fairly close to the life cycle costs of the Rotax engine including fuel)

Tim
That makes sense, unless they're able to extend the battery life. I wonder, however, if there's an advantage in dispatch rate.

Electric planes do have to recharge for an hour or so between lessons, but with their simpler powertrains, they should also be available much more often, rather than off the flight line for maintenance.

There's also no need for engine covers and preheating in colder climates, which is very time consuming for flight school staff (although there will also be reduced battery capacity in cold weather, as others have mentioned).
 
I have not seen any discussion yet on the dispatch and other factors. I do not think we will have good data for a couple years.

Tim
 
@Dan Thomas

I trust your math more than mine. I calculated four times the range at the slower speed. Still the point is this is four or five times increase in battery capacity, for forty or fifty like many people state.
The 12K limit on the Elextro is not due to power, but battery cooling. I saw an interview with an engineer about it. They basically did not have the data, and decided with the limited existing battery it was not worth pursuing yet.

Tim
The battery energy lost to heat needs to be addressed and accounted for, as does the motor's heat. Battery-electric drive is not 100% efficient either, but it's a lot better than ICE.
 
Harbour Air in Vancouver is another interesting example. Their conversion of a DHC-2 Beaver to electric propulsion was more of a publicity stunt than a meaningful prototype, but it is true that they have a business where 10–20 minute flights make up a lot of their operations, flying people and mail to small islands off the coast, so they could be a credible business case for an electric fleet in the future if/when battery tech gets just slightly better.

Drones might be able to take over the mail and package part, but not the passenger transportation.
The recharge times and type of operation is the drawback. Weather also figures into it. A 30-minute range to a 20-minute destination doesn't work if there's no charging facility, or if rapid turnaround to get back for another flight is on the schedule. Harbour Air flies floatplanes, and not many of their destinations will have those charging stations. I've been along that coast and while the islands are mostly populated to some degree, much of it is as remote and rugged and rough as it was a thousand years ago. Its weather can change in just a few minutes, flights sometimes have to divert or turn around, and if you're past the halfway point of that battery, you're up the creek. Landing out in the Strait, with its winds and strong currents, with no power, is a risky deal almost anytime.
 
Back
Top