Coal-powered airplane

I’m thinking the same thing. 10 minute reserve isn’t much if the one runway gets closed and you have to find another airport.

Also wondered how long the battery lasts doing touch and goes.

At idle power, the windmilling prop to motor goes into generator mode and charges the battery.
The airplane is intended for local flying and touch and goes, costs about $3 in electricity to charge so it's great for primary training.
So likely just over an hour 15 or an hour and a half.
$3 for "fuel" vs $40-70 for 100LL (or more for 100UL)
Also, the maintenance will be much cheaper since electrical motors usually have only 1 moving part.
Think 33-50% decrease for airplane rental

In California our electrical grid is already overwhelmed, they recently passed legislation that is supposed to phase out internal combustion vehicles by 2035. Where is all of this power supposed to come from?

A whole lot to unpack here.
First, the aviation portion. In the unlikely event that you DO replace all training aircraft with electrical, the percentage increase of total power would be insignificant. It probably wouldn't be noticed.

Second, if all internal combustion cars and buses were replaced, it probably wouldn't make a difference either.
Why? because most cars and buses are charge at night, when the grid is not heavily utilized.

Also, when you see anyone trolling "Coal Powered Planes/Cars/Trucks" They are always trolling and/or stupid and likely don't understand basic physics and global politics.

Coal plants are being closed left and right, Natural Gas is being utilized as topper instead of primary in many locations. Solar and Wind is bring built at and rapid pace to expand the overall grid and save money.

So technically, so areas ARE coal powered, but as time goes on, they will be fusion (the sun if you're stupid) powered.

On a global level, the more electric our infrastructure can become, the less we have to import oil from questionable governments, compete for said oil reserves, and spend less money on useless military enforcement of said governments.

Buy yeah, electric airplanes are the same as your diesel "coal rolling" tiny penis pickup truck.
 
The bigger question is. If they shut down the natural gas storage facilities at Porter Ranch, Honor Rancho and Playa Del Ray, how will Edison generate electricity?

The media hasn't asked that question yet.
Solar power and windmills, duh. :rolleyes:

The media HAS asked the question and answered it.
and through sarcasm, Cherokee was unintentionally correct

Wind power, solar, proper grid management and battery support is built faster, more reliable, and much cheaper with the unintentional side effect of being far less polluting.

oh sorry, Coal for muh Free-Dumbs.
Herp A Derp!!
 
At idle power, the windmilling prop to motor goes into generator mode and charges the battery.
The airplane is intended for local flying and touch and goes, costs about $3 in electricity to charge so it's great for primary training.
So likely just over an hour 15 or an hour and a half.
$3 for "fuel" vs $40-70 for 100LL (or more for 100UL)
Also, the maintenance will be much cheaper since electrical motors usually have only 1 moving part.
Think 33-50% decrease for airplane rental



A whole lot to unpack here.
First, the aviation portion. In the unlikely event that you DO replace all training aircraft with electrical, the percentage increase of total power would be insignificant. It probably wouldn't be noticed.

Second, if all internal combustion cars and buses were replaced, it probably wouldn't make a difference either.
Why? because most cars and buses are charge at night, when the grid is not heavily utilized.

Also, when you see anyone trolling "Coal Powered Planes/Cars/Trucks" They are always trolling and/or stupid and likely don't understand basic physics and global politics.

Coal plants are being closed left and right, Natural Gas is being utilized as topper instead of primary in many locations. Solar and Wind is bring built at and rapid pace to expand the overall grid and save money.

So technically, so areas ARE coal powered, but as time goes on, they will be fusion (the sun if you're stupid) powered.

On a global level, the more electric our infrastructure can become, the less we have to import oil from questionable governments, compete for said oil reserves, and spend less money on useless military enforcement of said governments.

Buy yeah, electric airplanes are the same as your diesel "coal rolling" tiny penis pickup truck.
My truck burns gas. You seem very up tight.
 
Nice job getting ratio’d for the thinly veiled slight against electric vehicles. Do people really think, even if it was true about coal use (which it demonstrably isn’t), that the makeup of one specific grid is a valid argument against developing or purchasing electric planes or cars for that matter? Genuinely curious.
 
Nice job getting ratio’d for the thinly veiled slight against electric vehicles. Do people really think, even if it was true about coal use (which it demonstrably isn’t), that the makeup of one specific grid is a valid argument against developing or purchasing electric planes or cars for that matter? Genuinely curious.
I have no problems with electric vehicles, in fact I think most of them are cool. But I think we need to improve our infrastructure to handle the increased demand before we start making them the only new purchase available.
 
Nice job getting ratio’d for the thinly veiled slight against electric vehicles. Do people really think, even if it was true about coal use (which it demonstrably isn’t), that the makeup of one specific grid is a valid argument against developing or purchasing electric planes or cars for that matter? Genuinely curious.
I can only tell you what I think. Electricity is not a form of energy. It's a form of energy transfer. You're not getting it for free. It comes at a cost; i.e. burning fossil fuels. Wind, solar, and hydroelectric can supplement that, but windmills, solar panels and hydroelectric plants have direct and environmental costs too.

I'm in favor of continued research and development of alternative energy, provided it comes about via the free market, and not government dictates.
 
The only way the infrastructure will get built is if we have no choice because the mandate is coming.

Infrastructure is always a step behind demand. Schools, roads, sewage lines, electrical lines, hospitals, ect. Always has been, always will be. Getting politicians whose primary concern is the next election to plan for projects that will not bear fruit for 10 years is a challenge at the best of times. Nixon may have signed the plaque left on the moon, but it was Eisenhower that created NASA.

I'm not the least bit surprised that the TX grid is under strain with how much growth has happened recently. Adding electrical generation capacity is a 10 year project even in "business friendly" Texas.
 
A whole lot to unpack here.
First, the aviation portion. In the unlikely event that you DO replace all training aircraft with electrical, the percentage increase of total power would be insignificant. It probably wouldn't be noticed.

Unfortunately I don't see a market for electric airplane outside of the traffic pattern. The weight of batteries just isn't anywhere close to being able to go anywhere. You can make a light trainer good for 60 minutes of touch & gos which will find a niche at big flight schools, but that it for the now.

Second, if all internal combustion cars and buses were replaced, it probably wouldn't make a difference either.
Why? because most cars and buses are charge at night, when the grid is not heavily utilized.

Also, when you see anyone trolling "Coal Powered Planes/Cars/Trucks" They are always trolling and/or stupid and likely don't understand basic physics and global politics.

Coal plants are being closed left and right, Natural Gas is being utilized as topper instead of primary in many locations. Solar and Wind is bring built at and rapid pace to expand the overall grid and save money.

So technically, so areas ARE coal powered, but as time goes on, they will be fusion (the sun if you're stupid) powered.

These trolls are technically correct, but miss all the context. I grew up in oil refinery central and even I can see that electrifying light cars and trucks is a good idea. A natural gas electrical plant is 10X more efficient converting fossil fuel into miles traveled.
 
Stopped by for steampunk, disappointed.
3252d4.jpg
 
Unfortunately I don't see a market for electric airplane outside of the traffic pattern. The weight of batteries just isn't anywhere close to being able to go anywhere.

There is absolutely a market for them.
Just not a viable solution... yet.

Many business cases depend on 400wh/kilo which is not far off.

High power transfer systems that are flight weight and durability are all still in the works but well within present technology capability.

Build it, and they will come.

A lot of mechs are going to have to evolve their skills to high power electrical.
Which, for the most part, is a good thing.
 
There is absolutely a market for them.
Just not a viable solution... yet.
I will be happy to be proven wrong, but the weight to power of batteries is a LONG way off from being competitive.

Electric cars have come a long way in the past 15 years but at the moment, I think electric airplanes are more Model T than Chevy Volt.
 
I will be happy to be proven wrong, but the weight to power of batteries is a LONG way off from being competitive.

Electric cars have come a long way in the past 15 years but at the moment, I think electric airplanes are more Model T than Chevy Volt.

Proven wrong about the market?
What proof are you looking for?
The proof is 400wh/KG. That's it. That's the barrier.
3-5 years? If that?

Also should have said "More Model T than Tesla"
The Volt is not really a good example of the best technology.
 
Proven wrong about the market?
What proof are you looking for?
The proof is 400wh/KG. That's it. That's the barrier.
3-5 years? If that?

Also should have said "More Model T than Tesla"
The Volt is not really a good example of the best technology.

This industry is still stuck with powerplants based on 1930s technology. Electronic fuel injection and computer controlled reciprocating engines would be absolutely wonderful and should have been adopted decades ago, but the FAA has stopped almost all R&D with crippling amount of red tape. E-mags have been embraced by the experimental aircraft world, but only recently have been permitted for standard category aircraft (and only replacing one of the two magnetos). Some pilot have been drug kicking and screaming into accepting the Rotax engines, but that's 30 year old tech.

So you need to find a market for a 400K C-150 with 2 hours of endurance. I'm sure that a motor overhaul and battery replacement every 500 hours or some other maintenance requirement will also add to costs. I can see some big flight schools making that investment and 10 years later things trickling down to the LSA type market.

I don't see large turboprop sized aircraft ANYTIME in the foreseeable future. I'm sure we can get a Brassila sized electric airplane to fly, but having any payload left to earn it's keep.

I'm 100% on board for electric cars and trucks for most drivers and even light airplanes in the near future. However I still see us burning kerosene for large airplanes for a long time.

Someday hopefully:
 
Back
Top