Everything will eventually be electric

[Mark IV[_6_]]

World's fastest electric plane. (so far )
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNAPLxZtoPg
http://www.flightofthecentury.com/long-esa/

Motor-Trend, Car of the Year is Electric:
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/business/2012/11/tesla-s-electric-is-motor-trends-car-of-the-year/

400wh/kg is achieved:
http://enviasystems.com/technology/
(They already know how to produce
1500wh/kg. It is forthcoming.)

Thin-gap electric motors, Amazing:
http://www.thingap.com/products/index.htm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y10o9EBp_W0&feature=results_video

Other aviation electric motor specialties:
http://www.yuneec.com/PowerMotor_Tech_spec.html

Plane with built-in solar panels:
http://inhabitat.com/elektra-one-solar-plane-now-comes-with-its-own-photovoltaic-charging-trailer/
(Actually, the entire surface...both top and
bottom should be covered in photovoltaics)

---
Mark

[[email protected]]

Mark IV > wrote:
> World's fastest electric plane. (so far )
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNAPLxZtoPg
> http://www.flightofthecentury.com/long-esa/

From the article:

"Following the record run, a cell inside the pack became damaged and Chip
executed a "priority landing" with no power, at Inyokern's 7,100 foot long
runway 33."

You also have to go far.

> Motor-Trend, Car of the Year is Electric:
> http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/business/2012/11/tesla-s-electric-is-motor-trends-car-of-the-year/

Priced at a mere $49,900 to $97,900.

> 400wh/kg is achieved:
> http://enviasystems.com/technology/
> (They already know how to produce
> 1500wh/kg. It is forthcoming.)

Gasoline is 13,000 WH/kg; only an order of magnitude short.

> Thin-gap electric motors, Amazing:
> http://www.thingap.com/products/index.htm
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y10o9EBp_W0&feature=results_video

"ThinGap Embedded Motors are not well-suited to low-speed or "traction"
applications.."

Can't pull the bass boat up a hill.

> Other aviation electric motor specialties:
> http://www.yuneec.com/PowerMotor_Tech_spec.html
>
> Plane with built-in solar panels:
> http://inhabitat.com/elektra-one-solar-plane-now-comes-with-its-own-photovoltaic-charging-trailer/
> (Actually, the entire surface...both top and
> bottom should be covered in photovoltaics)

For flying inverted?

On a clear day with your panels at 90 degrees to the Sun you get about
1 kW/square meter.

With the panels at 45 degrees to the Sun you get about 700 W/square meter.

Be sure to land well before dusk.

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article
>,
Mark IV > wrote:

> World's fastest electric plane. (so far )
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNAPLxZtoPg
> http://www.flightofthecentury.com/long-esa/
>
> Motor-Trend, Car of the Year is Electric:
> http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/business/2012/11/tesla-s-electric-is-motor-trends-
> car-of-the-year/
>
> 400wh/kg is achieved:
> http://enviasystems.com/technology/
> (They already know how to produce
> 1500wh/kg. It is forthcoming.)
>
> Thin-gap electric motors, Amazing:
> http://www.thingap.com/products/index.htm
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y10o9EBp_W0&feature=results_video
>
> Other aviation electric motor specialties:
> http://www.yuneec.com/PowerMotor_Tech_spec.html
>
> Plane with built-in solar panels:
> http://inhabitat.com/elektra-one-solar-plane-now-comes-with-its-own-photovolta
> ic-charging-trailer/
> (Actually, the entire surface...both top and
> bottom should be covered in photovoltaics)
>
> ---
> Mark

"Everything will eventually be electric?" I don't think so! Unless
someone can come up with something like the sci-fi "zero point module,"
"dilithium crystals" or some other means of storing large amounts of
energy in small, lightweight packages, it won't.

Batteries, which must store the equivalent of fuel *and oxidizer* will
always be deficient here. For gasoline engines, the ratio is 15:1 by
weight of oxidizer/fuel.

It isn't the motors, but the energy source which fails.

[george152]

On 13/12/12 06:36, Orval Fairbairn wrote:

> "Everything will eventually be electric?" I don't think so! Unless
> someone can come up with something like the sci-fi "zero point module,"
> "dilithium crystals" or some other means of storing large amounts of
> energy in small, lightweight packages, it won't.
>
> Batteries, which must store the equivalent of fuel *and oxidizer* will
> always be deficient here. For gasoline engines, the ratio is 15:1 by
> weight of oxidizer/fuel.
>
> It isn't the motors, but the energy source which fails.
>
And how would such a machine fit into an average fleet of training
aircraft ?
Most of the day it would be out either being recharged or having the
battery pack replaced.
And range.
Any landings and refuelling away from base would have to take account of
facilities at the destination..
At the moment it sounds far to complex to return revenue
There was one electric powered aircraft in the 30s that looked great but
could only fly circuits..

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article >,
george152 > wrote:

> On 13/12/12 06:36, Orval Fairbairn wrote:
>
> > "Everything will eventually be electric?" I don't think so! Unless
> > someone can come up with something like the sci-fi "zero point module,"
> > "dilithium crystals" or some other means of storing large amounts of
> > energy in small, lightweight packages, it won't.
> >
> > Batteries, which must store the equivalent of fuel *and oxidizer* will
> > always be deficient here. For gasoline engines, the ratio is 15:1 by
> > weight of oxidizer/fuel.
> >
> > It isn't the motors, but the energy source which fails.
> >
> And how would such a machine fit into an average fleet of training
> aircraft ?
> Most of the day it would be out either being recharged or having the
> battery pack replaced.
> And range.
> Any landings and refuelling away from base would have to take account of
> facilities at the destination..
> At the moment it sounds far to complex to return revenue
> There was one electric powered aircraft in the 30s that looked great but
> could only fly circuits..

Did it have a very LONG extension cord?

[Vaughn]

On 12/12/2012 2:37 PM, george152 wrote:
> And how would such a machine fit into an average fleet of training
> aircraft ?

Training is all about economics, and the economics for battery powered
aircraft (or virtually any new aircraft) for the training market simply
aren't there...and may never be.

> Most of the day it would be out either being recharged or having the
> battery pack replaced.

Not necessarily so. You could have quick change battery packs that
presumably would take no longer to swap than it takes to refuel a plane.
However, that would require multiple battery packs, so economics rears
it's ugly head again.

> And range.
Quickly improving. A few electric models are plenty good enough for
sport use today.

> Any landings and refuelling away from base would have to take account of
> facilities at the destination..

As they always have...

> At the moment it sounds far to complex to return revenue

Complex? Nonsense! Electric planes can be quite simple compared to an
equivalent IC plane.

Return revenue? You mean economics? That's another matter! It's
actually the real issue, and perhaps the deal killer.


> There was one electric powered aircraft in the 30s that looked great but
> could only fly circuits..

Your point?

[[email protected]]

Vaughn > wrote:
> On 12/12/2012 2:37 PM, george152 wrote:
>> And how would such a machine fit into an average fleet of training
>> aircraft ?
>
> Training is all about economics, and the economics for battery powered
> aircraft (or virtually any new aircraft) for the training market simply
> aren't there...and may never be.
>
>> Most of the day it would be out either being recharged or having the
>> battery pack replaced.
>
> Not necessarily so. You could have quick change battery packs that
> presumably would take no longer to swap than it takes to refuel a plane.
> However, that would require multiple battery packs, so economics rears
> it's ugly head again.
>
>> And range.
> Quickly improving. A few electric models are plenty good enough for
> sport use today.
>
>> Any landings and refuelling away from base would have to take account of
>> facilities at the destination..
>
> As they always have...
>
>> At the moment it sounds far to complex to return revenue
>
> Complex? Nonsense! Electric planes can be quite simple compared to an
> equivalent IC plane.
>
> Return revenue? You mean economics? That's another matter! It's
> actually the real issue, and perhaps the deal killer.
>
>
>> There was one electric powered aircraft in the 30s that looked great but
>> could only fly circuits..
>
> Your point?


The real problem for for any vehicle application is charge time which
is limited by basic physics and how much power you can get down a wire
and through a practical connector.

Say you have the equivelent electric airplane of your typical bug smasher
that has 180 HP and runs at 75% power.

Neglecting any losses and conversion efficiencies, which just make the
numbers worse:

That is 180 X .75 X 745.7 = approximetely 100 kW.

If you fly for 3 hours you use 300 kWH.

Assume the battery voltage is 100 V, which is a rather ballpark typical
value for an electrical vehicle, you have to supply 3 kAH to charge the
battery.

If you want to charge the battery in a half hour, your cable and connectors
must carry 6,000 Amps.

Increase the battery voltage to 200 V and an hour charge time and you still
have to carry 1,500 Amps.

[george152]

On 13/12/12 10:33, Orval Fairbairn wrote:

>> And how would such a machine fit into an average fleet of training
>> aircraft ?
>> Most of the day it would be out either being recharged or having the
>> battery pack replaced.
>> And range.
>> Any landings and refuelling away from base would have to take account of
>> facilities at the destination..
>> At the moment it sounds far to complex to return revenue
>> There was one electric powered aircraft in the 30s that looked great but
>> could only fly circuits..
>
> Did it have a very LONG extension cord?
>

:)
No but it did have a very large lead battery