Siemens' 110 lb world-record electric aircraft motor produce 348 hp at 2,500 RPM [Archive]

Larry Dighera

November 14th 15, 09:38 PM

<http://www.gizmag.com/siemens-world-record-electric-motor-aircraft/37048/>
Siemens' world-record electric aircraft motor punches above its weight
COLIN JEFFREY APRIL 20, 2015 7 PICTURES
Researchers working at Siemens say that they have produced an electric
aircraft engine with a claimed ...
Researchers working at Siemens say that they have produced an electric aircraft
engine with a claimed weight-to-performance ratio of 5 kW per kilogram (Photo:
Siemens)
Image Gallery (7 images)
Researchers at Siemens have created a new prototype electric motor specifically
designed for aircraft that weighs in at just 50 kg (110 lb) and is claimed to
produce about 260 kW (348 hp) at just 2,500 RPM. With a quoted power five times
greater than any comparable powerplant, the new motor promises enough grunt to
get aircraft with take-off weights of up to 1,800 kg (2 ton) off the ground.

The motor was developed with the support of the German Aviation Research
Program LuFo as a ... Siemens hopes to see further evolutionary increases to
the power output of their new electric motor ... Researchers also utilized a
range of computer simulation methods to model the motor prior to construction
.... Weighing in at just 50 kilograms (110 lb), a new prototype electric motor
specifically designed for ...
Researchers say they produced such a light but powerful motor by analyzing all
of the components of previous electric aircraft motors and incorporating
optimized improvements to these in their new prototype. Added to this, the
researchers also utilized a range of computer simulation methods to model the
motor prior to construction, before then applying the findings to produce the
lightest and strongest set of components possible.

As a result, the new aircraft electric drive system achieves a claimed
weight-to-performance ratio of 5 kW per kilogram. This ratio is an exceptional
figure – especially if compared to similarly powerful industrial electric
motors used in heavy machinery that produce less than 1 kW per kilogram, or
even to more efficient electric motors for vehicles that generate around 2 kW
per kilogram. The four electric motors in the Solar Impulse 2, by comparison,
produce just 7.5 kW (10 hp) each.

The new Siemens electric motor is also direct drive and does not require a
transmission, spinning a propeller up to speeds of around 2,500 RPM.

"This innovation will make it possible to build series hybrid-electric aircraft
with four or more seats," said Frank Anton, Head of eAircraft at Siemens
Corporate Technology, the company's central research unit. "We're convinced
that the use of hybrid-electric drives in regional airliners with 50 to 100
passengers is a real medium-term possibility."

Siemens has been involved in a range of electric motor driven vehicles,
including a collaboration with Volvo on a fast-charging motor vehicle and with
shipping company Norland for an electrically-driven passenger ferry.

This electric motor innovation, however, may be just the ticket for the
company's joint venture with the Diamond aircraft company, who they supply with
electric fan motors for their DA36 E-Star 2 motor glider. The last one
generated just 60 kW.

The motor, which was developed with the support of the German Aviation Research
Program LuFo as a project of Grob Aircraft and Siemens, is planned to start
in-flight-testing before the end of 2015. Siemens also hopes to see further
evolutionary increases to the power output in the not-too-distant future.

Source: Siemens

[email protected]

November 14th 15, 10:14 PM

On Saturday, November 14, 2015 at 4:38:18 PM UTC-5, Larry Dighera wrote:
> <http://www.gizmag.com/siemens-world-record-electric-motor-aircraft/37048/>
> Siemens' world-record electric aircraft motor punches above its weight
> COLIN JEFFREY APRIL 20, 2015 7 PICTURES
> Researchers working at Siemens say that they have produced an electric
> aircraft engine with a claimed ...
> Researchers working at Siemens say that they have produced an electric aircraft
> engine with a claimed weight-to-performance ratio of 5 kW per kilogram (Photo:
> Siemens)
> Image Gallery (7 images)
> Researchers at Siemens have created a new prototype electric motor specifically
> designed for aircraft that weighs in at just 50 kg (110 lb) and is claimed to
> produce about 260 kW (348 hp) at just 2,500 RPM. With a quoted power five times
> greater than any comparable powerplant, the new motor promises enough grunt to
> get aircraft with take-off weights of up to 1,800 kg (2 ton) off the ground.
>
> The motor was developed with the support of the German Aviation Research
> Program LuFo as a ... Siemens hopes to see further evolutionary increases to
> the power output of their new electric motor ... Researchers also utilized a
> range of computer simulation methods to model the motor prior to construction
> ... Weighing in at just 50 kilograms (110 lb), a new prototype electric motor
> specifically designed for ...
> Researchers say they produced such a light but powerful motor by analyzing all
> of the components of previous electric aircraft motors and incorporating
> optimized improvements to these in their new prototype. Added to this, the
> researchers also utilized a range of computer simulation methods to model the
> motor prior to construction, before then applying the findings to produce the
> lightest and strongest set of components possible.
>
> As a result, the new aircraft electric drive system achieves a claimed
> weight-to-performance ratio of 5 kW per kilogram. This ratio is an exceptional
> figure - especially if compared to similarly powerful industrial electric
> motors used in heavy machinery that produce less than 1 kW per kilogram, or
> even to more efficient electric motors for vehicles that generate around 2 kW
> per kilogram. The four electric motors in the Solar Impulse 2, by comparison,
> produce just 7.5 kW (10 hp) each.
>
> The new Siemens electric motor is also direct drive and does not require a
> transmission, spinning a propeller up to speeds of around 2,500 RPM.
>
>
> "This innovation will make it possible to build series hybrid-electric aircraft
> with four or more seats," said Frank Anton, Head of eAircraft at Siemens
> Corporate Technology, the company's central research unit. "We're convinced
> that the use of hybrid-electric drives in regional airliners with 50 to 100
> passengers is a real medium-term possibility."
>
> Siemens has been involved in a range of electric motor driven vehicles,
> including a collaboration with Volvo on a fast-charging motor vehicle and with
> shipping company Norland for an electrically-driven passenger ferry.
>
> This electric motor innovation, however, may be just the ticket for the
> company's joint venture with the Diamond aircraft company, who they supply with
> electric fan motors for their DA36 E-Star 2 motor glider. The last one
> generated just 60 kW.
>
> The motor, which was developed with the support of the German Aviation Research
> Program LuFo as a project of Grob Aircraft and Siemens, is planned to start
> in-flight-testing before the end of 2015. Siemens also hopes to see further
> evolutionary increases to the power output in the not-too-distant future.
>
> Source: Siemens

Electric Airplanes:

More torque

More BHP

Altitude unaffected

Quieter

No plugs

No carburetor

Sustainable

Lighter weight

No messy fluids

As researchers continue to work on creating better
batteries, the logical solution all along was always
the Auxiliary Power Unit for charging.

In an ideal world, there would be a RTG such as NASA
and Russian lighthouses have used for decades. The
Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generators can put out
whopping power from a container the size of a coffee
thermos. Fairly benign from a gamma ray exposure
standpoint, you could keep an electric airplane up
for weeks at a time.

Thanks for the post. I had it in my electric plane
database. Here is the video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owPUOI6Urg8

---

Vaughn Simon[_2_]

November 14th 15, 11:51 PM

On 11/14/2015 5:14 PM, wrote:
> As researchers continue to work on creating better
> batteries, the logical solution all along was always
> the Auxiliary Power Unit for charging.

Well yes that will work (assuming an electric drive train with a
battery) , ...as long as that APU produces significantly MORE power than
the average that you will need at the prop hub. The reason why you
would need MORE power is to make up for the losses inherent in the
generator, motor, battery, and controller.

>
> In an ideal world, there would be a RTG such as NASA
> and Russian lighthouses have used for decades. The
> Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generators can put out
> whopping power from a container the size of a coffee
> thermos. Fairly benign from a gamma ray exposure
> standpoint, you could keep an electric airplane up
> for weeks at a time.

Sorry, that is just complete nonsense! Forgetting for a moment the
problems with carrying highly radioactive materials in an aircraft, and
forgetting that those materials are so rare and expensive that even few
spacecraft use them these days, RTGs are very inefficient devices. Most
produce, at most, a few hundred watts of electrical power, a tiny
fraction of what a full-sized aircraft would need.

[email protected]

November 15th 15, 03:02 AM

On Saturday, November 14, 2015 at 6:51:57 PM UTC-5, Vaughn Simon wrote:
> On 11/14/2015 5:14 PM, wrote:
> > As researchers continue to work on creating better
> > batteries, the logical solution all along was always
> > the Auxiliary Power Unit for charging.
>
> Well yes that will work (assuming an electric drive train with a
> battery) , ...as long as that APU produces significantly MORE power than
> the average that you will need at the prop hub. The reason why you
> would need MORE power is to make up for the losses inherent in the
> generator, motor, battery, and controller.
>
> >
> > In an ideal world, there would be a RTG such as NASA
> > and Russian lighthouses have used for decades. The
> > Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generators can put out
> > whopping power from a container the size of a coffee
> > thermos. Fairly benign from a gamma ray exposure
> > standpoint, you could keep an electric airplane up
> > for weeks at a time.
>
> Sorry, that is just complete nonsense! Forgetting for a moment the
> problems with carrying highly radioactive materials in an aircraft,

Yes, I said "in a perfect world" (not the current one). While
it's legal to obtain a permit to work with radioactive material,
few can do it, and the FAA wouldn't even consider such. But
then, who says you have to do it in a modern country.

> and
> forgetting that those materials are so rare and expensive

They can be obtained for a few planes, but no, you couldn't
mass produce this system. I think you may be surprised at
how easy it is to obtain an isotope on the world market.

> that even few
> spacecraft use them these days,

They are still used in every deep space mission.

>RTGs are very inefficient devices.

They are highly efficient. It's just a thermocouple system.

>Most
> produce, at most, a few hundred watts of electrical power, a tiny
> fraction of what a full-sized aircraft would need.

Well yes. I wasn't suggesting attaching the motor itself to
the RTG. I'm saying- if you have a battery bank that may last
say 2 hours stand alone, then having the storage system
permanently connected to this battery charger, depending on
your draw, would be a tremendous extender. It's like having
your battery bank plugged into a wall socket at all times
to an electrical source much stronger than a trickle charger.
Your watt/amp gauge would tell you when to conserve.

And yes, 400 watts would be about max. Really the question is,
"how much electricity can I replace with the charger, as
opposed to what the motor is pulling out of the battery bank".
If you are soaring, you're using no power but it's still
charging.

---

[email protected]

November 15th 15, 03:24 AM

On Saturday, November 14, 2015 at 10:02:07 PM UTC-5, wrote:
> On Saturday, November 14, 2015 at 6:51:57 PM UTC-5, Vaughn Simon wrote:
> > On 11/14/2015 5:14 PM, wrote:
> > > As researchers continue to work on creating better
> > > batteries, the logical solution all along was always
> > > the Auxiliary Power Unit for charging.
> >
> > Well yes that will work (assuming an electric drive train with a
> > battery) , ...as long as that APU produces significantly MORE power than
> > the average that you will need at the prop hub. The reason why you
> > would need MORE power is to make up for the losses inherent in the
> > generator, motor, battery, and controller.
> >
> > >
> > > In an ideal world, there would be a RTG such as NASA
> > > and Russian lighthouses have used for decades. The
> > > Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generators can put out
> > > whopping power from a container the size of a coffee
> > > thermos. Fairly benign from a gamma ray exposure
> > > standpoint, you could keep an electric airplane up
> > > for weeks at a time.
> >
> > Sorry, that is just complete nonsense! Forgetting for a moment the
> > problems with carrying highly radioactive materials in an aircraft,
>
> Yes, I said "in a perfect world" (not the current one). While
> it's legal to obtain a permit to work with radioactive material,
> few can do it, and the FAA wouldn't even consider such. But
> then, who says you have to do it in a modern country.
>
> > and
> > forgetting that those materials are so rare and expensive
>
> They can be obtained for a few planes, but no, you couldn't
> mass produce this system. I think you may be surprised at
> how easy it is to obtain an isotope on the world market.
>
> > that even few
> > spacecraft use them these days,
>
> They are still used in every deep space mission.
>
> >RTGs are very inefficient devices.
>
> They are highly efficient. It's just a thermocouple system.
>
> >Most
> > produce, at most, a few hundred watts of electrical power, a tiny
> > fraction of what a full-sized aircraft would need.
>
> Well yes. I wasn't suggesting attaching the motor itself to
> the RTG. I'm saying- if you have a battery bank that may last
> say 2 hours stand alone, then having the storage system
> permanently connected to this battery charger, depending on
> your draw, would be a tremendous extender. It's like having
> your battery bank plugged into a wall socket at all times
> to an electrical source much stronger than a trickle charger.
> Your watt/amp gauge would tell you when to conserve.
>
> And yes, 400 watts would be about max. Really the question is,
> "how much electricity can I replace with the charger, as
> opposed to what the motor is pulling out of the battery bank".
> If you are soaring, you're using no power but it's still
> charging.
>
> ---

I believe an automobile, due to weight and tire friction, requires more power
than a plane. This is just a guess.

"According to the company, their technology would allow you to charge the battery of a Nissan Leaf in 12 minutes instead of four hours. Because that battery has a capacity of 24 kWh, a back-of-the-envelope extrapolation would give us a charging time of 42 minutes for the 85 kWh battery of a top of the line Tesla Model S."

http://www.gizmag.com/dual-carbon-fast-charging-battery/32121/

---

[email protected]

November 15th 15, 04:20 AM

[email protected]

November 15th 15, 04:33 AM

[email protected]

November 16th 15, 11:41 PM

Just for clarification here, while it would be nice to
have an RTG (especially since it takes 100 years to run
out of charge) obviously for the ordinary man and pilot
this would be difficult. Also, adherence to rules is of
course, foremost. It is however a do-able concept that
doesn't violate the law of energy conservation.

That being said, simply replace that component with a
hydrogen fuel cell. A little different, but people are
doing it and it works for an APU charger. Combined
with quick charge batteries, you'll be fine.

Lastly I want to give an illustration. If you take a
dc light bulb, a 9 volt battery, and say... 50 feet or
more of wire and make the connection, you will either
see no light, or a faint orange glow. Then if you take
that same coil of wire and drop it into a bucket of
liquid nitrogen with the 2 ends hanging out, then connect
the bulb and battery, it will burn as bright white as
the battery touching the bulb itself. This is due to
zero resistance and super conductivity.

Now, being realistic think of an airplane today with
a long wiring harness of several wires. It will be
zip tied to the frame and run through grommets at
points to prevent sheathing penetration. What if we
take that harness and run it through an insulated
metal tubing, with leak-proof ends. Imagine an insertion
point wherein you can inject liquid nitrogen. You
have now just done the same thing as in the above
illustration.

This is just one example of my design that could be
installed in your cryogenic system to achieve super
conductivity. Should the liquid nitrogen warm over an
extended period... it will harmlessly vaporize, and
you'll recharge it as needed.

---

[email protected]

November 19th 15, 10:15 PM

The concept wherein an "antennae" actually receives the directed
energy while in flight, and recharges your battery bank.

"It remains to be seen exactly what the specifications and consumer reception for Ossia and uBeam's technology will be. Nonetheless, the need for wireless power is real across a variety of applications. From simple consumer cell phones to electric vehicles, wireless power would fill a real need. If power could be transmitted long distances wirelessly, it would completely change "range anxiety" which has held back the EV market."

http://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Will-2016-Be-The-Year-Of-Wireless-Energy.html

---

[email protected]

November 19th 15, 10:30 PM

wrote:
> The concept wherein an "antennae" actually receives the directed
> energy while in flight, and recharges your battery bank.
>
>
> "It remains to be seen exactly what the specifications and consumer reception for Ossia and uBeam's technology will be. Nonetheless, the need for wireless power is real across a variety of applications. From simple consumer cell phones to electric vehicles, wireless power would fill a real need. If power could be transmitted long distances wirelessly, it would completely change "range anxiety" which has held back the EV market."
>
> http://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Will-2016-Be-The-Year-Of-Wireless-Energy.html
>
> ---

Unfortunately the laws of physics says this is highly inefficient.

The efficiency is of minor importance when doing things like charge a
cell phone with takes milliwatts, but becomes totally impractical at
the megawatt level it would take to power even a small vehicle.

--
Jim Pennino

[email protected]

November 19th 15, 11:59 PM

On Thursday, November 19, 2015 at 5:31:04 PM UTC-5, wrote:
> wrote:
> > The concept wherein an "antennae" actually receives the directed
> > energy while in flight, and recharges your battery bank.
> >
> >
> > "It remains to be seen exactly what the specifications and consumer reception for Ossia and uBeam's technology will be. Nonetheless, the need for wireless power is real across a variety of applications. From simple consumer cell phones to electric vehicles, wireless power would fill a real need. If power could be transmitted long distances wirelessly, it would completely change "range anxiety" which has held back the EV market."
> >
> > http://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Will-2016-Be-The-Year-Of-Wireless-Energy.html
> >
> > ---
>
> Unfortunately the laws of physics says this is highly inefficient.
>
> The efficiency is of minor importance when doing things like charge a
> cell phone with takes milliwatts, but becomes totally impractical at
> the megawatt level it would take to power even a small vehicle.

In a weak coupling at resonance, magnetic resonance couplings can transfer energy with high efficiency. The specification results at high power are proposed. In this paper, the feasibility of wireless power transfer with large air gaps and high efficiency by small sized antennas that can be equipped on the bottom of EVs is proposed.

http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/login.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5289747&url=http%3A%2F%2Fieeexplore.ieee.org%2Fxpls%2Fabs_ all.jsp%3Farnumber%3D5289747

[email protected]

November 20th 15, 12:02 AM

On Thursday, November 19, 2015 at 5:31:04 PM UTC-5,
> Unfortunately the laws of physics says this is highly inefficient.
>
> The efficiency is of minor importance when doing things like charge a
> cell phone with takes milliwatts, but becomes totally impractical at
> the megawatt level it would take to power even a small vehicle.
>
>
> --
> Jim Pennino

A circuit model is presented along with a derivation of key system concepts, such as frequency splitting, the maximum operating distance (critical coupling), and the behavior of the system as it becomes undercoupled. This theoretical model is validated against measured data and shows an excellent average coefficient of determination of 0.9875. An adaptive frequency tuning technique is demonstrated, which compensates for efficiency variations encountered when the transmitter-to-receiver distance and/or orientation are varied.

http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/login.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5437250&url=http%3A%2F%2Fieeexplore.ieee.org%2Fxpls%2Fabs_ all.jsp%3Farnumber%3D5437250

[email protected]

November 20th 15, 12:12 AM

On Thursday, November 19, 2015 at 5:31:04 PM UTC-5, wrote:
> wrote:
> > The concept wherein an "antennae" actually receives the directed
> > energy while in flight, and recharges your battery bank.
> >
> >
> > "It remains to be seen exactly what the specifications and consumer reception for Ossia and uBeam's technology will be. Nonetheless, the need for wireless power is real across a variety of applications. From simple consumer cell phones to electric vehicles, wireless power would fill a real need. If power could be transmitted long distances wirelessly, it would completely change "range anxiety" which has held back the EV market."
> >
> > http://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Will-2016-Be-The-Year-Of-Wireless-Energy.html
> >
> > ---
>
> Unfortunately the laws of physics says this is highly inefficient.
>
> The efficiency is of minor importance when doing things like charge a
> cell phone with takes milliwatts, but becomes totally impractical at
> the megawatt level it would take to power even a small vehicle.
>
>
> --
> Jim Pennino

Yes, this technology is still in the research stage, and is
not part of the actual blueprints which I hold of an atomic,
cryogenic (artery system) electric, stealth plane.

---

[email protected]

November 20th 15, 12:24 AM

wrote:
> On Thursday, November 19, 2015 at 5:31:04 PM UTC-5, wrote:
>> wrote:
>> > The concept wherein an "antennae" actually receives the directed
>> > energy while in flight, and recharges your battery bank.
>> >
>> >
>> > "It remains to be seen exactly what the specifications and consumer reception for Ossia and uBeam's technology will be. Nonetheless, the need for wireless power is real across a variety of applications. From simple consumer cell phones to electric vehicles, wireless power would fill a real need. If power could be transmitted long distances wirelessly, it would completely change "range anxiety" which has held back the EV market."
>> >
>> > http://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Will-2016-Be-The-Year-Of-Wireless-Energy.html
>> >
>> > ---
>>
>> Unfortunately the laws of physics says this is highly inefficient.
>>
>> The efficiency is of minor importance when doing things like charge a
>> cell phone with takes milliwatts, but becomes totally impractical at
>> the megawatt level it would take to power even a small vehicle.
>
> In a weak coupling at resonance, magnetic resonance couplings can transfer energy with high efficiency. The specification results at high power are proposed. In this paper, the feasibility of wireless power transfer with large air gaps and high efficiency by small sized antennas that can be equipped on the bottom of EVs is proposed.
>
> http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/login.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5289747&url=http%3A%2F%2Fieeexplore.ieee.org%2Fxpls%2Fabs_ all.jsp%3Farnumber%3D5289747
>

Non sequitur.

FYI there was a pilot project to test magnetic resonance couplings for
vehicle power on roadways; too expensive to be practical.

--
Jim Pennino

[email protected]

November 20th 15, 12:24 AM

wrote:
> On Thursday, November 19, 2015 at 5:31:04 PM UTC-5,
>> Unfortunately the laws of physics says this is highly inefficient.
>>
>> The efficiency is of minor importance when doing things like charge a
>> cell phone with takes milliwatts, but becomes totally impractical at
>> the megawatt level it would take to power even a small vehicle.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Jim Pennino
>
> A circuit model is presented along with a derivation of key system concepts, such as frequency splitting, the maximum operating distance (critical coupling), and the behavior of the system as it becomes undercoupled. This theoretical model is validated against measured data and shows an excellent average coefficient of determination of 0.9875. An adaptive frequency tuning technique is demonstrated, which compensates for efficiency variations encountered when the transmitter-to-receiver distance and/or orientation are varied.
>
> http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/login.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5437250&url=http%3A%2F%2Fieeexplore.ieee.org%2Fxpls%2Fabs_ all.jsp%3Farnumber%3D5437250

Ignores the reality of flight.

--
Jim Pennino

[email protected]

November 20th 15, 12:26 AM

wrote:
> On Thursday, November 19, 2015 at 5:31:04 PM UTC-5, wrote:
>> wrote:
>> > The concept wherein an "antennae" actually receives the directed
>> > energy while in flight, and recharges your battery bank.
>> >
>> >
>> > "It remains to be seen exactly what the specifications and consumer reception for Ossia and uBeam's technology will be. Nonetheless, the need for wireless power is real across a variety of applications. From simple consumer cell phones to electric vehicles, wireless power would fill a real need. If power could be transmitted long distances wirelessly, it would completely change "range anxiety" which has held back the EV market."
>> >
>> > http://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Will-2016-Be-The-Year-Of-Wireless-Energy.html
>> >
>> > ---
>>
>> Unfortunately the laws of physics says this is highly inefficient.
>>
>> The efficiency is of minor importance when doing things like charge a
>> cell phone with takes milliwatts, but becomes totally impractical at
>> the megawatt level it would take to power even a small vehicle.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Jim Pennino
>
> Yes, this technology is still in the research stage, and is
> not part of the actual blueprints which I hold of an atomic,
> cryogenic (artery system) electric, stealth plane.
>
> ---

Which part of the laws of physics says this is highly inefficient did
you not understand?

--
Jim Pennino

Vaughn Simon[_2_]

November 20th 15, 12:54 PM

On 11/19/2015 7:24 PM, wrote:
> Ignores the reality of flight.
>
....and of physics

I figured that out after posting once to this thread. You are wasting
time and keystrokes Jim. I decided to apply the old saying, "Don't feed
the trolls."

[email protected]

November 20th 15, 05:12 PM

On Friday, November 20, 2015 at 7:54:52 AM UTC-5, Vaughn Simon wrote:
> On 11/19/2015 7:24 PM, wrote:
> > Ignores the reality of flight.
> >
> ...and of physics
>
> I figured that out after posting once to this thread.

Ha! Is that why you didn't reply once it was pointed out that
you had mistakenly assumed that my system directly connected
the principal drive to be powered by the auxiliary power unit?

Or the mathematical calculations of amp/hour depletion rates vs.
recharge rates to predict flight extension with quick-charge
carbon batteries that can charge a car in 12 minutes, which
you'd never heard of?

And I'm sure you already knew all about a liquid nitrogen
artery design that facilitates a cryogenic, zero resistance,
super conductive design for aviation, but you chose not to
comment about any of this because... I'm a "troll"?

Good God.

---

You are wasting
> time and keystrokes Jim. I decided to apply the old saying, "Don't feed
> the trolls."

[email protected]

November 20th 15, 05:44 PM

On Thursday, November 19, 2015 at 9:46:04 PM UTC-5,

<snip>

I hear you saying that you are skeptical of this technology,
and it is noted.

I don't have an opinion on it. It does
seem however that directed energy over long distances may
present a problem to unintended receivers.

---

[email protected]

November 20th 15, 06:01 PM

wrote:
> On Thursday, November 19, 2015 at 9:46:04 PM UTC-5,
>
> <snip>
>
> I hear you saying that you are skeptical of this technology,
> and it is noted.

The technology is great for charging cell phones and toothbrushes.

> I don't have an opinion on it. It does
> seem however that directed energy over long distances may
> present a problem to unintended receivers.

Dispersion.

--
Jim Pennino

[email protected]

November 20th 15, 11:15 PM

On Saturday, November 14, 2015 at 11:20:42 PM UTC-5, wrote:
> On Saturday, November 14, 2015 at 6:51:57 PM UTC-5, Vaughn Simon wrote:
> > On 11/14/2015 5:14 PM, wrote:
> > > As researchers continue to work on creating better
> > > batteries, the logical solution all along was always
> > > the Auxiliary Power Unit for charging.
> >
> > Well yes that will work (assuming an electric drive train with a
> > battery) , ...as long as that APU produces significantly MORE power than
> > the average that you will need at the prop hub. The reason why you
> > would need MORE power is to make up for the losses inherent in the
> > generator, motor, battery, and controller.
>
> Also, I forgot to mention that I'm a professional
> designer and illustrator, formerly with Lockheed-
> Martin. Within this electric airplane concept which
> would sustain these very long ranges with an RTG,
> is a series of conforming "mini-tanks" which encapsulate major
> electrical components. Holding no more than 5 gallons
> total, you top them off with liquid nitrogen. This
> cryogenic sealed system effectively turns your electrical
> system into a zero-resistance super conductor. Control
> surfaces are best facilitated with servos and fly by
> wire software.
>
> This may sound a little exotic, but other people have
> verified the plausibility and science behind it. A
> home-build isn't out of the question. With generator,
> super conduction, and fast charge NON-lithium batteries,
> the range may really be how long you can sit in a seat.
>
> ---

Anyway...

Basic Aircraft Electrical Systems

Some very simple single engine aircraft do not have an electrical system installed. The piston engine is equiped with a Magneto ignition system, which is self powering, and the fuel tank is situated so it will gravity feed the engine. The aircraft is started by means of a flywheel and crank arrangement or by "hand-proping" the engine.

If an electric starter, lights, electric flight instruments, navigation aids or radios are desired, an electrical system becomes a necessity. In most cases, the system will be DC powered using a single distribution bus, a single battery and a single engine driven generator or alternator. Provisions, in the form of an on/off switch, will be incorporated to allow the battery to be isolated from the bus and for the generator/alternator to be isolated from the bus. An ammeter, loadmeter or warning light will also be incorporated to provide an indication of charging system failure. Electrical components will be wired to the bus-bar incorporating either circuit breakers or fuses for circuit protection. Provisions may be provided to allow an external power source such as an extra battery or a Ground Power Unit to be connected to assist with the engine start or to provide power whilst the engine is not running.

Advanced Aircraft Electrical Systems

More sophisticated electrical systems are usually multiple voltage systems using a combination of AC and DC buses to power various aircraft components.. Primary power generation is normally AC with one or more Transformer Rectifier Unit (TRU) providing conversion to DC voltage to power the DC busses. Secondary AC generation from an APU is usually provided for use on the ground when engines are not running and for airborne use in the event of component failure. Tertiary generation in the form of a hydraulic motor or a RAT may also be incorporated into the system to provide redundancy in the event of multiple failures. Essential AC and DC components are wired to specific busses and special provisions are made to provide power to these busses under almost all failure situations. In the event that all AC power generation is lost, a static Inverter is included in the system so the Essential AC bus can be powered from the aircraft batteries.

Robust system monitoring and failure warning provisions are incorporated into the electrical system and these are presented to the pilots when appropriate. Warnings may include, but are not limited to, generator malfuntion/failure, TRU failure, battery failure, bus fault/failure and circuit breaker monitoring. The manufacturer will also provide detailed electrical system isolation procedures to be utilized in the event of an electrical fire.

In compliance with applicable regulations, components such as Standby Flight Instruments and Emergency Floor Lighting have their own backup power supplies and will function even in the event of a complete electrical system failure.

Provisions are virtually always provided for connecting the aircraft electrical system to a fixed or mobile Ground Power Unit.

http://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/Aircraft_Electrical_Systems

---

[email protected]

November 21st 15, 12:03 AM

On Friday, November 20, 2015 at 6:15:13 PM UTC-5, wrote:
> On Saturday, November 14, 2015 at 11:20:42 PM UTC-5, wrote:
> > On Saturday, November 14, 2015 at 6:51:57 PM UTC-5, Vaughn Simon wrote:
> > > On 11/14/2015 5:14 PM, wrote:
> > > > As researchers continue to work on creating better
> > > > batteries, the logical solution all along was always
> > > > the Auxiliary Power Unit for charging.
> > >
> > > Well yes that will work (assuming an electric drive train with a
> > > battery) , ...as long as that APU produces significantly MORE power than
> > > the average that you will need at the prop hub. The reason why you
> > > would need MORE power is to make up for the losses inherent in the
> > > generator, motor, battery, and controller.
> >
> > Also, I forgot to mention that I'm a professional
> > designer and illustrator, formerly with Lockheed-
> > Martin. Within this electric airplane concept which
> > would sustain these very long ranges with an RTG,
> > is a series of conforming "mini-tanks" which encapsulate major
> > electrical components. Holding no more than 5 gallons
> > total, you top them off with liquid nitrogen. This
> > cryogenic sealed system effectively turns your electrical
> > system into a zero-resistance super conductor. Control
> > surfaces are best facilitated with servos and fly by
> > wire software.
> >
> > This may sound a little exotic, but other people have
> > verified the plausibility and science behind it. A
> > home-build isn't out of the question. With generator,
> > super conduction, and fast charge NON-lithium batteries,
> > the range may really be how long you can sit in a seat.
> >
> > ---
>
> Anyway...
>
> Basic Aircraft Electrical Systems
>
> Some very simple single engine aircraft do not have an electrical system installed. The piston engine is equiped with a Magneto ignition system, which is self powering, and the fuel tank is situated so it will gravity feed the engine. The aircraft is started by means of a flywheel and crank arrangement or by "hand-proping" the engine.
>
> If an electric starter, lights, electric flight instruments, navigation aids or radios are desired, an electrical system becomes a necessity. In most cases, the system will be DC powered using a single distribution bus, a single battery and a single engine driven generator or alternator. Provisions, in the form of an on/off switch, will be incorporated to allow the battery to be isolated from the bus and for the generator/alternator to be isolated from the bus. An ammeter, loadmeter or warning light will also be incorporated to provide an indication of charging system failure. Electrical components will be wired to the bus-bar incorporating either circuit breakers or fuses for circuit protection. Provisions may be provided to allow an external power source such as an extra battery or a Ground Power Unit to be connected to assist with the engine start or to provide power whilst the engine is not running.
>
> Advanced Aircraft Electrical Systems
>
> More sophisticated electrical systems are usually multiple voltage systems using a combination of AC and DC buses to power various aircraft components. Primary power generation is normally AC with one or more Transformer Rectifier Unit (TRU) providing conversion to DC voltage to power the DC busses. Secondary AC generation from an APU is usually provided for use on the ground when engines are not running and for airborne use in the event of component failure. Tertiary generation in the form of a hydraulic motor or a RAT may also be incorporated into the system to provide redundancy in the event of multiple failures. Essential AC and DC components are wired to specific busses and special provisions are made to provide power to these busses under almost all failure situations. In the event that all AC power generation is lost, a static Inverter is included in the system so the Essential AC bus can be powered from the aircraft batteries.
>
> Robust system monitoring and failure warning provisions are incorporated into the electrical system and these are presented to the pilots when appropriate. Warnings may include, but are not limited to, generator malfuntion/failure, TRU failure, battery failure, bus fault/failure and circuit breaker monitoring. The manufacturer will also provide detailed electrical system isolation procedures to be utilized in the event of an electrical fire.
>
> In compliance with applicable regulations, components such as Standby Flight Instruments and Emergency Floor Lighting have their own backup power supplies and will function even in the event of a complete electrical system failure.
>
> Provisions are virtually always provided for connecting the aircraft electrical system to a fixed or mobile Ground Power Unit.
>
> http://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/Aircraft_Electrical_Systems
>
> ---

Conductors lose all of their electrical resistance when cooled to super-low temperatures (near absolute zero, about -273o Celsius). It must be understood that superconductivity is not merely an extrapolation of most conductors' tendency to gradually lose resistance with decreasing temperature; rather, it is a sudden, quantum leap in resistivity from finite to nothing. A superconducting material has absolutely zero electrical resistance, not just some small amount.

Superconductivity promises extraordinary capabilities for electric circuits.. If conductor resistance could be eliminated entirely, there would be no power losses or inefficiencies in electric power systems due to stray resistances. Electric motors could be made almost perfectly (100%) efficient. Components such as capacitors and inductors, whose ideal characteristics are normally spoiled by inherent wire resistances, could be made ideal in a practical sense. Already, some practical superconducting conductors, motors, and capacitors have been developed, but their use at this present time is limited due to the practical problems intrinsic to maintaining super-cold temperatures.

http://www.allaboutcircuits.com/textbook/direct-current/chpt-12/superconductivity/

---

[email protected]

November 21st 15, 12:23 AM

wrote:
> On Saturday, November 14, 2015 at 11:20:42 PM UTC-5, wrote:
>> On Saturday, November 14, 2015 at 6:51:57 PM UTC-5, Vaughn Simon wrote:
>> > On 11/14/2015 5:14 PM, wrote:
>> > > As researchers continue to work on creating better
>> > > batteries, the logical solution all along was always
>> > > the Auxiliary Power Unit for charging.
>> >
>> > Well yes that will work (assuming an electric drive train with a
>> > battery) , ...as long as that APU produces significantly MORE power than
>> > the average that you will need at the prop hub. The reason why you
>> > would need MORE power is to make up for the losses inherent in the
>> > generator, motor, battery, and controller.
>>
>> Also, I forgot to mention that I'm a professional
>> designer and illustrator, formerly with Lockheed-
>> Martin. Within this electric airplane concept which
>> would sustain these very long ranges with an RTG,
>> is a series of conforming "mini-tanks" which encapsulate major
>> electrical components. Holding no more than 5 gallons
>> total, you top them off with liquid nitrogen. This
>> cryogenic sealed system effectively turns your electrical
>> system into a zero-resistance super conductor. Control
>> surfaces are best facilitated with servos and fly by
>> wire software.
>>
>> This may sound a little exotic, but other people have
>> verified the plausibility and science behind it. A
>> home-build isn't out of the question. With generator,
>> super conduction, and fast charge NON-lithium batteries,
>> the range may really be how long you can sit in a seat.
>>
>> ---
>
> Anyway...
>
> Basic Aircraft Electrical Systems
>
> Some very simple single engine aircraft do not have an electrical system installed. The piston engine is equiped with a Magneto ignition system, which is self powering, and the fuel tank is situated so it will gravity feed the engine. The aircraft is started by means of a flywheel and crank arrangement or by "hand-proping" the engine.
>
> If an electric starter, lights, electric flight instruments, navigation aids or radios are desired, an electrical system becomes a necessity. In most cases, the system will be DC powered using a single distribution bus, a single battery and a single engine driven generator or alternator. Provisions, in the form of an on/off switch, will be incorporated to allow the battery to be isolated from the bus and for the generator/alternator to be isolated from the bus. An ammeter, loadmeter or warning light will also be incorporated to provide an indication of charging system failure. Electrical components will be wired to the bus-bar incorporating either circuit breakers or fuses for circuit protection. Provisions may be provided to allow an external power source such as an extra battery or a Ground Power Unit to be connected to assist with the engine start or to provide power whilst the engine is not running.
>
> Advanced Aircraft Electrical Systems
>
> More sophisticated electrical systems are usually multiple voltage systems using a combination of AC and DC buses to power various aircraft components. Primary power generation is normally AC with one or more Transformer Rectifier Unit (TRU) providing conversion to DC voltage to power the DC busses. Secondary AC generation from an APU is usually provided for use on the ground when engines are not running and for airborne use in the event of component failure. Tertiary generation in the form of a hydraulic motor or a RAT may also be incorporated into the system to provide redundancy in the event of multiple failures. Essential AC and DC components are wired to specific busses and special provisions are made to provide power to these busses under almost all failure situations. In the event that all AC power generation is lost, a static Inverter is included in the system so the Essential AC bus can be powered from the aircraft batteries.
>
> Robust system monitoring and failure warning provisions are incorporated into the electrical system and these are presented to the pilots when appropriate. Warnings may include, but are not limited to, generator malfuntion/failure, TRU failure, battery failure, bus fault/failure and circuit breaker monitoring. The manufacturer will also provide detailed electrical system isolation procedures to be utilized in the event of an electrical fire.
>
> In compliance with applicable regulations, components such as Standby Flight Instruments and Emergency Floor Lighting have their own backup power supplies and will function even in the event of a complete electrical system failure.
>
> Provisions are virtually always provided for connecting the aircraft electrical system to a fixed or mobile Ground Power Unit.
>
> http://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/Aircraft_Electrical_Systems
>
> ---

Yeah, so what?

--
Jim Pennino

[email protected]

November 21st 15, 12:24 AM

wrote:
> On Friday, November 20, 2015 at 6:15:13 PM UTC-5, wrote:
>> On Saturday, November 14, 2015 at 11:20:42 PM UTC-5, wrote:
>> > On Saturday, November 14, 2015 at 6:51:57 PM UTC-5, Vaughn Simon wrote:
>> > > On 11/14/2015 5:14 PM, wrote:
>> > > > As researchers continue to work on creating better
>> > > > batteries, the logical solution all along was always
>> > > > the Auxiliary Power Unit for charging.
>> > >
>> > > Well yes that will work (assuming an electric drive train with a
>> > > battery) , ...as long as that APU produces significantly MORE power than
>> > > the average that you will need at the prop hub. The reason why you
>> > > would need MORE power is to make up for the losses inherent in the
>> > > generator, motor, battery, and controller.
>> >
>> > Also, I forgot to mention that I'm a professional
>> > designer and illustrator, formerly with Lockheed-
>> > Martin. Within this electric airplane concept which
>> > would sustain these very long ranges with an RTG,
>> > is a series of conforming "mini-tanks" which encapsulate major
>> > electrical components. Holding no more than 5 gallons
>> > total, you top them off with liquid nitrogen. This
>> > cryogenic sealed system effectively turns your electrical
>> > system into a zero-resistance super conductor. Control
>> > surfaces are best facilitated with servos and fly by
>> > wire software.
>> >
>> > This may sound a little exotic, but other people have
>> > verified the plausibility and science behind it. A
>> > home-build isn't out of the question. With generator,
>> > super conduction, and fast charge NON-lithium batteries,
>> > the range may really be how long you can sit in a seat.
>> >
>> > ---
>>
>> Anyway...
>>
>> Basic Aircraft Electrical Systems
>>
>> Some very simple single engine aircraft do not have an electrical system installed. The piston engine is equiped with a Magneto ignition system, which is self powering, and the fuel tank is situated so it will gravity feed the engine. The aircraft is started by means of a flywheel and crank arrangement or by "hand-proping" the engine.
>>
>> If an electric starter, lights, electric flight instruments, navigation aids or radios are desired, an electrical system becomes a necessity. In most cases, the system will be DC powered using a single distribution bus, a single battery and a single engine driven generator or alternator. Provisions, in the form of an on/off switch, will be incorporated to allow the battery to be isolated from the bus and for the generator/alternator to be isolated from the bus. An ammeter, loadmeter or warning light will also be incorporated to provide an indication of charging system failure. Electrical components will be wired to the bus-bar incorporating either circuit breakers or fuses for circuit protection. Provisions may be provided to allow an external power source such as an extra battery or a Ground Power Unit to be connected to assist with the engine start or to provide power whilst the engine is not running.
>>
>> Advanced Aircraft Electrical Systems
>>
>> More sophisticated electrical systems are usually multiple voltage systems using a combination of AC and DC buses to power various aircraft components. Primary power generation is normally AC with one or more Transformer Rectifier Unit (TRU) providing conversion to DC voltage to power the DC busses. Secondary AC generation from an APU is usually provided for use on the ground when engines are not running and for airborne use in the event of component failure. Tertiary generation in the form of a hydraulic motor or a RAT may also be incorporated into the system to provide redundancy in the event of multiple failures. Essential AC and DC components are wired to specific busses and special provisions are made to provide power to these busses under almost all failure situations. In the event that all AC power generation is lost, a static Inverter is included in the system so the Essential AC bus can be powered from the aircraft batteries.
>>
>> Robust system monitoring and failure warning provisions are incorporated into the electrical system and these are presented to the pilots when appropriate. Warnings may include, but are not limited to, generator malfuntion/failure, TRU failure, battery failure, bus fault/failure and circuit breaker monitoring. The manufacturer will also provide detailed electrical system isolation procedures to be utilized in the event of an electrical fire.
>>
>> In compliance with applicable regulations, components such as Standby Flight Instruments and Emergency Floor Lighting have their own backup power supplies and will function even in the event of a complete electrical system failure.
>>
>> Provisions are virtually always provided for connecting the aircraft electrical system to a fixed or mobile Ground Power Unit.
>>
>> http://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/Aircraft_Electrical_Systems
>>
>> ---
>
> Conductors lose all of their electrical resistance when cooled to super-low temperatures (near absolute zero, about -273o Celsius). It must be understood that superconductivity is not merely an extrapolation of most conductors' tendency to gradually lose resistance with decreasing temperature; rather, it is a sudden, quantum leap in resistivity from finite to nothing. A superconducting material has absolutely zero electrical resistance, not just some small amount.
>
> Superconductivity promises extraordinary capabilities for electric circuits. If conductor resistance could be eliminated entirely, there would be no power losses or inefficiencies in electric power systems due to stray resistances. Electric motors could be made almost perfectly (100%) efficient. Components such as capacitors and inductors, whose ideal characteristics are normally spoiled by inherent wire resistances, could be made ideal in a practical sense. Already, some practical superconducting conductors, motors, and capacitors have been developed, but their use at this present time is limited due to the practical problems intrinsic to maintaining super-cold temperatures.
>
> http://www.allaboutcircuits.com/textbook/direct-current/chpt-12/superconductivity/
>
> ---

Yeah, so what?

--
Jim Pennino

[email protected]

November 21st 15, 12:27 AM

On Monday, November 16, 2015 at 6:41:09 PM UTC-5, wrote:
> Just for clarification here, while it would be nice to
> have an RTG (especially since it takes 100 years to run
> out of charge) obviously for the ordinary man and pilot
> this would be difficult. Also, adherence to rules is of
> course, foremost. It is however a do-able concept that
> doesn't violate the law of energy conservation.
>
> That being said, simply replace that component with a
> hydrogen fuel cell. A little different, but people are
> doing it and it works for an APU charger. Combined
> with quick charge batteries, you'll be fine.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Uxb8v4ylTU

.. . . . . . .

"The efficiency of this process is not limited by the thermodynamic constraints of combustion engines and consequently achieves a fuel-to-electricity efficiency two to three times higher than current engine/generator combinations.

The fuel cell does not have to be recharged once empty, as hydrogen and oxygen/air are continuously supplied to the fuel cell stack, allowing continuous operation."

http://aviationweek.com/commercial-aviation/airbus-flight-test-fuel-cell-apu-replacement

---

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/9780470686652.eae1028/abstract

[email protected]

November 21st 15, 03:13 AM

On Friday, November 20, 2015 at 7:31:04 PM UTC-5, >
> Yeah, so what?

Shut up asshole.

george152

November 22nd 15, 07:15 PM

On 11/21/2015 4:41 AM, wrote:
> On Friday, November 20, 2015 at 7:54:52 AM UTC-5, Vaughn Simon wrote:
>> On 11/19/2015 7:24 PM, wrote:
>>> Ignores the reality of flight.
>>>
>> ...and of physics
>>
>> I figured that out after posting once to this thread.
>
> You figured nothing out. Electric airplanes are flying right now.
> Advances are being made in this field every day. I merely cited
> how these technologies have been incorporated, or can be
> incorporated into new designs.

If you want an expensive toy with a range of (at the most) two hours
and two seats then the 'electric' aeroplane is great.
if you want to carry a payload over a decent range turbine power is the
(now) only way to go

Larry Dighera

November 22nd 15, 10:41 PM

On Mon, 23 Nov 2015 07:15:05 +1200, george152 > wrote:

>if you want to carry a payload over a decent range turbine power is the
>(now) only way to go

Hello George,

Is this what you had in mind?

<http://www.pilotmix.com/impulse-100-td>
<http://flightclub.jalopnik.com/pocket-rocket-is-the-450hp-turbine-powered-light-plan-1741203914>

"Pocket Rocket" Is The 450hp Turbine-Powered Light Plane Of Your Dreams
15
Tyler Rogoway
Filed to: Turboprops11/07/15 4:50pm

"Pocket Rocket" Is The 450hp Turbine-Powered Light Plane Of Your Dreams
1

Take an Impulse 100 <http://www.pilotfriend.com/experimental/acft3/80.htm> very
light plane, beef up its structure and elongate it, and then strap a
450-horsepower Allison turbine to the front of it and you end up with one fast
and fun daemon of the skies that also looks freakin’ awesome!

Oh, and considering the locale and unique home of the Pocket Rocket shown in
the video below, its owner may be a Bond villain:

Just listen to this thing start up, run and shut down. The soundtrack is almost
worth the price of admission alone!

According to Gonzoaviation.com these are the basic performance specifications
for this one-off aggressive flying machine:

Max cruise at 2,000ft - 220 kts

Cruise at 16000ft - 282 kts

Rate of Climb @ 80 kts 6200 ft/ min.

@130 kts 4200 ft/min.

Rate of descend @180 kts 6000 ft/ min.

Stall power on: none, climbs with 80° nose up
Stall power off: 39 kts

Structural G limit +10/-10

This thing is like a balls-out anime version of the Marchetti SF-260C with a
tail wheel and I want one.

Contact the author
===========================

Impulse 100

With the Impulse 100, an interesting high-performance ultralight aircraft is
due for his first flight at the Baden Airport. If everything goes accordingly
the aircraft could first fly in January. The following flight test will be
conducted in Southern France due to weather and timing constraints. The
certification is expected for May. The Impulse will supposedly offer a maximum
speed of 330 km/h. The calculated cruise speed is at 270 km/h, the manoeuvring
airspeed at 220 km/h. The manufacturer, Impulse Aircraft, is listing the range
at 1700 km plus a one hour reserve. The Impulse 100 is entirely made in a
carbon honeycomb sandwich. The aircraft stands on a fixed gear, a version with
a retractable undercarriage is projected for the future. With a fixed propeller
and a basic instrumentation, the aircraft is listed for DM129500 plus VAT.
According to its designer, Philipp Steinbach, the good looking and performance
wise promising ultralight aircraft will be suitable for glider towing.
specifications

powerplant
propeller
length 20.9 ft
height
wing span 28.5 ft
wing area 97 sq ft
seats 2
empty weight 595 lbs
useful load 992 lbs UL 1588 lbs EXPT
gross weight
fuel capacity 26.4 gal us UL 42.2 gal us EXPT
range 1056 mls

performance
takeoff distance, ground roll 200 ft
rate of climb 1560fpm
max speed x
cruise speed 168 mph
landing distance, ground roll x
service ceiling x

limiting and recommended speeds
design manoeuvring speed (Va) 137 mph
never exceed speed (Vne) 205 mph
stall, power off (Vsl) 39 mph
landing approach speed x

All specifications are based on manufacturer's calculations

[email protected]

November 25th 15, 03:57 AM

On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 2:15:08 PM UTC-5, george wrote:
> On 11/21/2015 4:41 AM, wrote:
> > On Friday, November 20, 2015 at 7:54:52 AM UTC-5, Vaughn Simon wrote:
> >> On 11/19/2015 7:24 PM, wrote:
> >>> Ignores the reality of flight.
> >>>
> >> ...and of physics
> >>
> >> I figured that out after posting once to this thread.
> >
> > You figured nothing out. Electric airplanes are flying right now.
> > Advances are being made in this field every day. I merely cited
> > how these technologies have been incorporated, or can be
> > incorporated into new designs.
>
> If you want an expensive toy with a range of (at the most) two hours
> and two seats then the 'electric' aeroplane is great.

Yes sir, that's correct. They're really still experimental
right now. I do think I've worked out a few solutions
though.

> if you want to carry a payload over a decent range turbine power is the
> (now) only way to go

Sure. Sadly I'm only able to fly basically trainers right now
until a few ducks get lined up.

---

george152

December 2nd 15, 08:29 PM

On 11/23/2015 10:41 AM, Larry Dighera wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Nov 2015 07:15:05 +1200, george152 > wrote:
>
>> if you want to carry a payload over a decent range turbine power is the
>> (now) only way to go
>
> Hello George,
>
> Is this what you had in mind?
>
>
>
> <http://www.pilotmix.com/impulse-100-td>
> <http://flightclub.jalopnik.com/pocket-rocket-is-the-450hp-turbine-powered-light-plan-1741203914>
>
> "Pocket Rocket" Is The 450hp Turbine-Powered Light Plane Of Your Dreams
> 15
> Tyler Rogoway
> Filed to: Turboprops11/07/15 4:50pm
>
> "Pocket Rocket" Is The 450hp Turbine-Powered Light Plane Of Your Dreams
> 1
>
> Take an Impulse 100 <http://www.pilotfriend.com/experimental/acft3/80.htm> very
> light plane, beef up its structure and elongate it, and then strap a
> 450-horsepower Allison turbine to the front of it and you end up with one fast
> and fun daemon of the skies that also looks freakin’ awesome!
>
> Oh, and considering the locale and unique home of the Pocket Rocket shown in
> the video below, its owner may be a Bond villain:
>
> Just listen to this thing start up, run and shut down. The soundtrack is almost
> worth the price of admission alone!
>
> According to Gonzoaviation.com these are the basic performance specifications
> for this one-off aggressive flying machine:
>
> Max cruise at 2,000ft - 220 kts
>
> Cruise at 16000ft - 282 kts
>
> Rate of Climb @ 80 kts 6200 ft/ min.
>
> @130 kts 4200 ft/min.
>
> Rate of descend @180 kts 6000 ft/ min.
>
> Stall power on: none, climbs with 80° nose up
> Stall power off: 39 kts
>
> Structural G limit +10/-10
>
> This thing is like a balls-out anime version of the Marchetti SF-260C with a
> tail wheel and I want one.
>
> Contact the author
> ===========================
>
> Impulse 100
>
> With the Impulse 100, an interesting high-performance ultralight aircraft is
> due for his first flight at the Baden Airport. If everything goes accordingly
> the aircraft could first fly in January. The following flight test will be
> conducted in Southern France due to weather and timing constraints. The
> certification is expected for May. The Impulse will supposedly offer a maximum
> speed of 330 km/h. The calculated cruise speed is at 270 km/h, the manoeuvring
> airspeed at 220 km/h. The manufacturer, Impulse Aircraft, is listing the range
> at 1700 km plus a one hour reserve. The Impulse 100 is entirely made in a
> carbon honeycomb sandwich. The aircraft stands on a fixed gear, a version with
> a retractable undercarriage is projected for the future. With a fixed propeller
> and a basic instrumentation, the aircraft is listed for DM129500 plus VAT.
> According to its designer, Philipp Steinbach, the good looking and performance
> wise promising ultralight aircraft will be suitable for glider towing.
> specifications
>
> powerplant
> propeller
> length 20.9 ft
> height
> wing span 28.5 ft
> wing area 97 sq ft
> seats 2
> empty weight 595 lbs
> useful load 992 lbs UL 1588 lbs EXPT
> gross weight
> fuel capacity 26.4 gal us UL 42.2 gal us EXPT
> range 1056 mls
>
> performance
> takeoff distance, ground roll 200 ft
> rate of climb 1560fpm
> max speed x
> cruise speed 168 mph
> landing distance, ground roll x
> service ceiling x
>
> limiting and recommended speeds
> design manoeuvring speed (Va) 137 mph
> never exceed speed (Vne) 205 mph
> stall, power off (Vsl) 39 mph
> landing approach speed x
>
> All specifications are based on manufacturer's calculations
>
It's a start :)