Electric planes might seem futuristic, but they aren't that far off, at least for short hops:
Two-seater Velis Electros are already quietly buzzing around Europe, electric sea planes are being tested in British Columbia, and larger planes are coming. Air Canada announced on Sept. 15, 2022, that it would buy 30 electric-hybrid regional aircraft from Sweden's Heart Aerospace, which expects to have its 30-seat plane in service by 2028. Analysts at the U.S. National Renewable Energy Lab note that the first hybrid electric 50- to 70-seat commuter plane could be ready not long after that. In the 2030s, they say, electric aviation could really take off.
[...] Aircraft are some of the most complex vehicles out there, but the biggest problem for electrifying them is the battery weight.
[...] Jet fuel can hold about 50 times more energy compared to batteries per unit mass. So, you can have 1 pound of jet fuel or 50 pounds of batteries. To close that gap, we need to either make lithium-ion batteries lighter or develop new batteries that hold more energy. New batteries are being developed, but they aren't yet ready for aircraft.
An electric alternative is hybrids.
[...] Using batteries as a power assist during takeoff and climb are very promising options. Taxiing to the runway using just electric power could also save a significant amount of fuel and reduce the local emissions at airports. There is a sweet spot between the added weight of the battery and how much electricity you can use to get net fuel benefits. This optimization problem is at the center of my research.
Hybrids would still burn fuel during flight, but it could be considerably less than just relying entirely on jet fuel.
I see hybridization as a mid-term option for larger jets, but a near-term solution for regional aircraft.
[...] With electric hybrids, airlines could also make more use of regional airports, reducing congestion and time larger planes spend idling on the runway.
Included explanatory video about hybrid planes
Previously:
This Is What's Keeping Electric Planes From Taking Off
United Airlines to Buy 100, 19-Seat Electric Planes from Heart Aerospace
Australia's First Electric Passenger Plane Takes To The Skies
New Hybrid Plane Will Add Second Electric Engine As Battery Costs Drop
Related Stories
Move over electric cars, here come electric planes:
Luckily, electrification isn't always an all-or-nothing proposition, especially in a plane with several engines. A new partnership from Airbus, Rolls-Royce and Siemens appears to take advantage of this fact. Dubbed the E-Fan X, this will be a demonstration hybrid aircraft which—initially—will have one of four gas turbine engines replaced by a two megawatt electric motor. But as the system matures, is demonstrated to be safe and, presumably, as battery costs come down, provisions will be made toward replacing a second turbine with another 2MW motor.
...
A big part of the motivation for projects like this is, apparently, the European Commission's Flightpath 2050 Vision for Aviation, which includes a reduction of CO2 by 75%, reduction of NOx by 90% and noise reduction by 65%. The happy side effect, presumably, will be cleaner air, lower dependence on fossil fuels, and cheaper flights too.
If they put solar panels on top and wind turbines on the wings, they can recharge while they fly.
Arthur T Knackerbracket has found the following story:
Australia's first electric aircraft has begun test flights at Perth's Jandakot Airport, amid hopes the plane will be flying to nearby Rottnest Island within months.
The two-seater single-engine Pipistrel Alpha Electro has two batteries that can keep the plane in the air for an hour, with an extra 30 minutes in reserve.
The team behind the plane says while there are environmental benefits in doing away with jet fuel, electric planes are also safer and easier to fly.
"Electric propulsion is a lot simpler than a petrol engine," Electro.Aero founder Joshua Portlock said. "Inside a petrol engine you have hundreds of moving parts. "In this aircraft you have one switch to turn the aircraft on and one throttle lever to fly."
The engine is powered by two lithium-ion batteries, similar to those used in the Tesla electric car. There is no gear box or multiple moving engine parts —instead the plane's motor attaches directly to the propeller. Rather than a fuel gauge, a panel tells the pilot the amount of power left in the battery, and estimated minutes of flight time, based on the throttle position.
The batteries are re-energised in about an hour by a supercharger based at the Jandakot airfield.
[...] In mid-January Mr Bodley will begin training local pilots to fly the single-engine electric plane, with registered pilots required to complete a familiarisation flight before flying solo.
Mr Portlock said the group had held discussions with the Rottnest Island Authority to install a supercharger to tap into its solar array, allowing pilots to fly the plane to the island.
Future plans include electric air-taxis capable of carrying up to five people to the holiday destination.
United Airlines to buy 100, 19-seat electric planes from Heart Aerospace:
[REUTERS] United Airlines (UAL.O) said on Tuesday it would buy 100 19-seat ES-19 electric planes from Swedish start-up Heart Aerospace, as the U.S. carrier eyes battery-powered aircraft for regional routes.
It is the latest in a series of such "innovation-related" announcements by United as major airlines come under pressure to cut emissions.
The U.S. carrier's venture funding arm said in a release it is also investing an undisclosed amount in the company with Bill Gates' Breakthrough Energy Ventures and Mesa Airlines (MESA.O).
United would not disclose the value of the order, which is conditional on the aircraft's meeting safety, business and operating requirements.
Mesa would buy an additional 100 ES-19s, subject to similar requirements, which can fly customers up to 250 miles.
The plane will enter service as soon as 2026.
United could use the aircraft to connect hubs like Chicago O'Hare International Airport to smaller routes. Some of these routes have been cut by legacy carriers because they are too expensive.
Arthur T Knackerbracket has processed the following story:
Startups are exploring how electric planes could clean up air travel, which accounts for about 3% of worldwide greenhouse-gas emissions. The problem is that today’s electric aircraft could safely carry you and about a dozen fellow passengers only around 30 miles, according to a recent analysis.
The limiting factor is the battery, in particular the amount of energy that can be stored in a small space. If you’ve folded your legs into a cramped window seat or been charged extra for overweight luggage, you’re probably familiar with the intense space and weight constraints on planes.
[...] Batteries have been packing more power into smaller spaces for about 30 years, and continuing improvements could help electric planes become a more feasible option for flying. But they’re not there yet, and ultimately, the future of electric planes may depend on the future of progress in battery technology.
The prospect of electric flight is appealing in many ways. Aviation contributes a growing share of the global greenhouse-gas emissions that cause climate change, and battery-powered planes could help speed decarbonization in a growing sector.
Arthur T Knackerbracket has processed the following story:
Israeli company Eviation Aircraft successfully launched the Alice on Tuesday morning from Washington's Grant County International Airport. The zero-emission plane traveled at an altitude of 3,500 feet for its eight-minute inaugural flight.
"This is history," Gregory Davis, Eviation's president and CEO, told CNN Business."We have not seen the propulsion technology change on the aircraft since we went from the piston engine to the turbine engine. It was the 1950s that was the last time you saw an entirely new technology like this come together."
With battery technology similar to that of an electric car or a cell phone and 30 minutes of charging, the nine-passenger Alice will be able to fly for one hour, and about 440 nautical miles. The plane has a max cruise speed of 250 knots, or 287 miles per hour. For reference, a Boeing 737 has a max cruise speed of 588 miles per hour.
[...] "We've actually generated, frankly, terabytes of data with the data acquisition systems that we had on the aircraft, so we're going to take a couple of weeks actually and review it to see how the aircraft performs versus our models and our analysis," Davis said. "From there, we'll understand what we need to do next."
The company says it expects to be working on developing an FAA-certified aircraft through 2025, followed by a year or two of flight testing before it can deliver Alices to customers.
Three different versions of the Alice are in protoype stages: a "commuter" variant, an executive version, and one specialized for cargo. The commuter configuration holds nine passengers and two pilots, as well as 850 pounds of cargo. The executive design has six passenger seats for a more spacious flight, and the cargo plane holds 450 cubic feet of volume.
See also: Electric Planes Are Coming: Short-Hop Regional Flights Could be Running on Batteries in a Few Years
(Score: 4, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 27 2022, @03:41PM (7 children)
> To close that gap, we need to either make lithium-ion batteries lighter or develop new batteries that hold more energy.
It's also possible to optimize the aircraft/wings for lower power consumption & longer range, likely at the expense of cruising speed. First guess is this will push the appearance of clean-sheet-designed battery planes toward the appearance of gliders -- higher aspect ratio wings (longer span, shorter chord).
Battery electric also requires a new look at the classic Bruguet range equation, https://web.mit.edu/16.unified/www/FALL/thermodynamics/notes/node98.html [mit.edu] which is based on the reduction in aircraft weight (fuel burn) during flight.
Since there is no fuel burn, landing speeds will be higher, landing gears and brakes will have to be proportionally stronger.
(Score: 2) by Snospar on Tuesday September 27 2022, @04:09PM (5 children)
I'd have thought fully electric blimps would be an even greener option and you remove the problems with landing gear and landing speeds. As we're talking short-hop regional flights here the added advantage of not requiring huge long runways is another plus.
Huge thanks to all the Soylent volunteers without whom this community (and this post) would not be possible.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 27 2022, @08:00PM (1 child)
Blimps were all the rage five or ten years ago. What happened to that, I wonder? Amazon was going to build them, some heavy lift company in Germany was going to build them. Now you don't hear anything about them.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Wednesday September 28 2022, @01:44PM
They're still chugging along. I subscribe to a couple channels on YouTube that track their progress. Airlander is one of the companies that have been active recently. They had a mishap a couple years ago with a test flight that slightly damaged one of their ships; they corrected the issue but getting everything tested and certified seems to be an agonizingly slow process.
I believe there is a bright future for airships for passengers, freight, and other uses. Passengers can take sky cruises. Freight can go point-to-point without suffering the piracy and geographical choke points that container ships do. And airships can dwell in-theater as observations and communications centers in ways that other aircraft can't. You could even employ them as mobile hospitals that can land on-site and deal with outbreaks or other medical crises in locations that aren't very accessible via ground or sea.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 27 2022, @11:37PM (2 children)
> fully electric blimps
Might have posted this here before. I was fortunate to get a Goodyear blimp ride, about 25 years ago, over LA. Spectacular view of the city because we cruised at 35 mph (50 kph). That was also nearly the top speed. Interestingly, it was also the climbing speed and the descending speed. Since the blimp is neutrally buoyant, there isn't any effort spent on going up (or any to be reclaimed when going down).
35 mph might be faster than the 405 during "freeway parking lot" hours in LA, but for other routes, driving will be faster.
If you are talking about rigid airships, like Zeppelins, they go somewhat faster, but still leisurely compared to commercial short hop turboprop planes.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Wednesday September 28 2022, @01:36PM (1 child)
That's cool. How was the ride?
I have often thought that airships would be great for sightseeing, especially if they're able to employ quiet propulsion. Balloon rides are popular in places like Cappadocia, but of course they're at the mercy of the wind.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 29 2022, @01:54AM
The blimp ride was very smooth, it was late afternoon and very calm on the ground. However, it wasn't quiet--there were two IC engines running near full throttle all the time to maintain 35 mph flying speed. Not exactly sure but I believe these were flat-6 Continentals, like used in a number of small "general aviation" aircraft perhaps about 200 hp each?
My friend and I were the only passengers this time, so we could walk around and look down from any of the slanted side windows. Also spent quite a bit of time talking with the captain and co-pilot. One of the more interesting things they had done was teach top level engineering test pilots (Air Force and Navy) how to fly the blimp--to widen the scope of test pilot education.
As noted above, the really fun bit was when the pilot stood the blimp on its tail or on its nose (climbing or descending). The airspeed sat right at 35 mph.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by choose another one on Tuesday September 27 2022, @07:31PM
Bjorn Fehrm at Leehams did a big series of technical articles on electric aircraft a few years ago, the tech issues haven't changed (AFAIK):
https://leehamnews.com/2017/06/30/bjorns-corner-electric-aircraft/ [leehamnews.com]
More recently he's done an even longer series on sustainable aircraft (not the same thing as electric...):
https://leehamnews.com/2022/01/07/bjorns-corner-sustainable-air-transport-a-deeper-look-part-1/ [leehamnews.com]
It's clearly written stuff for readers with basic physics / tech knowledge but assumes (I think) no prior knowledge of aviation tech (caveat: that's my assessment, and I do have some such knowledge so it's difficult to tell properly).
Worth a read, although if you want to read before the discussion... start another one next week.
(Score: 2) by Snotnose on Tuesday September 27 2022, @08:01PM (9 children)
As the summary says batteries are heavy. They also take a long time to charge.
Planes are expensive, every minute sitting on the ground is money lost.
So, yeah, you can fly from San Diego to LA in 30 minutes. But that takes 2-3 hours to recharge the batteries. I live in San Diego, most of my flights have started San Diego to LA. AFAIK, none of my flights spent 2-3 hours on the ground after getting me to LA. No, they left ASAP to bring more Sandy Eggins to LAX.
I'm not seeing how spending 2/3 of their time recharging their batteries is going to be profitable when the other option is to spend 5 minutes pumping gas into the wings.
When the dust settled America realized it was saved by a porn star.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 27 2022, @08:22PM (3 children)
They just have to make it easier to swap them out. But on the whole, this stuff is very primitive. There is just as much electricity in the air as there is wind. We have to learn how to harvest it.
(Score: 2) by deimtee on Wednesday September 28 2022, @03:54AM (2 children)
New idea for a plane!!
Have the plane tow two wires, one with a normal kite so it trails upwards, one with a Charlie Brown kite so it trails downwards. Only fly during thunderstorms and power the engines with lightning.
If you cough while drinking cheap red wine it really cleans out your sinuses.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 28 2022, @04:42AM
There's lots of potential between clouds (and even more in dry air with separate areas of electrical charge) that doesn't arc over, which you don't want anyway. It's all there just waiting for us.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 29 2022, @02:00AM
> Only fly during thunderstorms ...
I know you were joking, but flying in thunderstorms ain't fun. Happened to me once, on a turboprop hopper out of Akron OH. It had been raining pretty hard and I was surprised that the flight actually left on time. Once we got up, about half the passengers were vomiting (~7 out of 15 passengers) the ride was so rough. I managed to keep my lunch down, but when lightning struck the plane and all the lights went out, that was quite stressful. I guess they were protected by circuit breakers and the lights came back on after a few seconds...but it felt like minutes at the time.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Thexalon on Tuesday September 27 2022, @08:54PM (3 children)
And the other-other option is to build / improve rail lines that cover what are currently frequently short regional flights. It's pretty proven technology at this point, and while it's hard to build at first once you have it it's relatively easy to maintain.
Plus trains are on average much less cramped than planes, especially the short regional hopper planes.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Wednesday September 28 2022, @01:57PM (2 children)
Train travel is wonderful, and high-speed rail even more so. You go from city center to city center and get to feel like a human instead of livestock the whole way.
It is, though, very expensive to build the infrastructure. You also have a lot of roadblocks in securing rights-of-way and all that sort of permitting. And to make it worthwhile as a travel alternative the rails have to be dedicated to passenger traffic; in the United States Amtrak has to share lines with freight trains where freight has priority, meaning that the passenger train has to sit tens of hours on sidelines for the freight trains to pass before they can proceed. It is a terrible experience.
It is a great pity that with all the trillions of dollars that the US printed to cover the economic damage of the coronavirus lockdowns that none of it was allocated to build such a rail network across the country (or at least in densely populated areas like Southern California, the Northeast, or the Great Lakes).
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Wednesday September 28 2022, @04:18PM (1 child)
On one such trip, I was chatting with the train staff about it, and apparently the George W Bush administration made changes to help with that, but Amtrak could only demand priority over freight if they were running on time so the freight line could plan ahead. The problem is that once a train starts getting significantly behind schedule, then they no longer have the priority and can be kept on a siding.
As far as building a better passenger rail network goes, there are some projects underway to do that like California High Speed Rail and the Texas Central, But my understanding is that the cost isn't half as much of a problem as the NIMBYs, who seem to be mostly concerned that a train station near their homes will bring the "undesirables" with it (evidence of this actually happening is slim at best, but that won't change their minds anytime soon). Had cost been the main issue, really the right time to have built this stuff is 2009 or so, when land was cheap (thanks to the real estate market crash) and a large pool of desperate unemployed people who would have been delighted to work on something that significant.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 29 2022, @02:08AM
> the NIMBYs, who seem to be mostly concerned that a train station near their homes will bring the "undesirables" with it
A good friend lives on the edge a small town near the Great Lakes. Active freight train tracks run through the village center. Upwards of a dozen long freight trains/day, the problem isn't undesirables (the trains don't stop), the problem is the huge noise that goes on for 10-15 minutes every time. His house is nearly a mile from the tracks and the noise is still upsetting. Living in the village closer to the tracks must be really unpleasant and I think most of those houses are not occupied.
(Score: 2) by legont on Wednesday September 28 2022, @02:44AM
You have to have 30 or 45 minutes fuel reserve.
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: 2) by bzipitidoo on Tuesday September 27 2022, @09:49PM (6 children)
If assisted takeoff is such a good idea, and could greatly reduce fuel consumption and thereby lighten the load, why not build such capabilities into the runways? Aircraft carriers have these catapult systems, to launch fighter planes.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 27 2022, @11:29PM
Have you ever watched video of carrier takeoffs? I guess catapults are fun for top gun macho fighter jocks & jockettes.
I'll pass on that option, thank-you-very-much. The acceleration during a normal take off is plenty.
(Score: 3, Informative) by donkeyhotay on Wednesday September 28 2022, @01:00AM (4 children)
Having worked on the flight deck of an aircraft carrier, I'd have to say that using a catapult to launch a civilian aircraft is a pretty violent way to get your average citizen up in the air. Additionally, the aircraft need to have some pretty beefy nose gear and main mounts for that sort of thing. It would also require extra ground crew to safely rig up the launch and inspect it.
(Score: 2) by bzipitidoo on Wednesday September 28 2022, @02:19AM (3 children)
i should hope that the much greater room available on land means a catapult system could be a lot gentler, taking much more time and space to accelerate a plane more slowly. Also, could do it in a way that doesn't require making beefy attachment points. For instance, what if a plane was simply put on a flatbed vehicle large enough to hold it?
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 28 2022, @02:33AM (2 children)
OK, time to get out your sliderule. How much CO2 is released in making that magic platform, maintaining it, and the power to propel it? Note that the power to propel the platform + plane will be larger than the power to just accelerate the plane alone--but maybe you can recoup some with regenerative braking of the platform?
Compare to normal takeoffs, using the expected platform lifetime and number of takeoffs the platform will "de-carbonize".
(Score: 2) by bzipitidoo on Wednesday September 28 2022, @06:13PM (1 child)
One would expect that the pressures of the marketplace would have businesses seeking every possible savings, and so they would have already made these calculations, and concluded that it's not worth it. Sadly, however, we have seen that businesses often don't behave rationally on these matters, and for a variety of reasons will ignore all kinds of low hanging fruit. Employees who do manual labor constantly worry about being replaced by automation, and will look for ways to discredit, slow walk, and otherwise impede such progress, all while pretending to cooperate. The c-suite can be just as bad, screaming that they will be ruined by government regulation, even when the changes they are being asked to make would help the company's bottom line.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 29 2022, @02:11AM
Forgot to mention that nearly all larger airports have two runways to deal with changing winds. So you will need two catapults and they will have to be bi-directional for those days when the wind is opposite the prevailing direction(s).
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Wednesday September 28 2022, @02:02PM
I read a study [sciencedaily.com] a while back that suggested ion propulsion might be more efficient than conventional jet propulsion. There were some guys at MIT that build a prototype that flew across a large gymnasium, but there hasn't been a lot of research into the propulsion method.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Wednesday September 28 2022, @02:13PM
Why are they trying to develop electric airplanes? Is it to lower the carbon footprint of powered flight? If that's the case, then they shouldn't be using airplanes at all but airships.
Washington DC delenda est.