It may be buried in there someplace....maybe. I find stuff like this: https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p5332.pdf
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.
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.
And I see this;
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.
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.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.
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?
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'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
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
Certainly do not. Politics really doesn't mix well with most subjects unfortunately. Thanks for a thoughtful post!
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.
Folks, lets remember to stay on topic here and not get into Spin Zone territory.
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.
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.
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?
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.
That makes sense, unless they're able to extend the battery life. I wonder, however, if there's an advantage in dispatch rate.
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.
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.
