On Fri, 03 Jan 2020 20:17:59 -0800, markmocho53 wrote:

Let's talk about how much fuel it takes to get an airliner from Point A
to Point B. You want to climb above the weather (30,000 ft. or more),
you want to haul enough passengers and their stuff to pay the cost of
doing business, the airplane, the crew, the maintenance, the insurance,
and all the rest of what makes a business run and an airplane fly.

What are you going to use to make this happen? Jet-A1 (or JP-4 or
Kerosene, or diesel, or whatever other petrochemical compound) with a
sufficient energy density to lift its own weight plus the mass of the
airplane and payload and keep it aloft until Point B is reached (with a
significant fuel reserve because **** happens).

You want electric airplanes that will do the same thing? Not likely. The
energy density of the most powerful battery bank is still nowhere near
sufficient enough to allow an airplane (even Light Sport Aircraft) to
take off, climb to altitude, cruise for long distance and carry anything
but batteries.

Yes, battery technology is improving, and quickly. But the actual laws
of physics take over and determine the maximum output and duration of
every chemical battery.

"$200,000 worth of Tesla batteries, which collectively weigh over 20,000
pounds, are needed to store the energy equivalent of one barrel of oil."
(from the Manhattan Institute study on the economic cost of "Green
Energy."

https://www.manhattan-institute.org/...volution-near-
impossible

Interesting stuff.

The future of electric air transport may well turn out to be something
like an Airlander with an outer skin covered with lightweight solar cells:
https://www.hybridairvehicles.com/ou.../airlander-10/

The Airlander 10 is a direct derivative of the P-791 project:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hVNV-FFUOnc



--
Martin | martin at
Gregorie | gregorie dot org