A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Piloting
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

The new Electric Cessna 172



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #10  
Old December 31st 12, 12:55 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Orval Fairbairn
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 824
Default The new Electric Cessna 172

In article ,
Vaughn wrote:

On 12/30/2012 1:16 PM, wrote:
If you look at the wing area of a 172 and calculate how much power you
can get, you find they aren't much good for charging the battery either
unless you go days between flights.


Agree. However, if someone wants to own a $200,000 plane and just wants
to fly it for an hour or so once a week it might work. Are there any
folks like that? Yes! But few of them would admit that to themselves
before buying a plane. It's a behavior they drift into later.

I can tell you that most of the non-FBO planes at my local airport
seldom fly. Even some of the FBO leasbacks sit unused for days at a time.


Also, solar panels aren't terribly vulnerable to hail. Otherwise, there
would be little point in mounting them on rooftops.

Rooftop solar panels are mounted at the latitude of the location to
receive maximum power, so a hailstone will hit at an angle of about 30
to 45 degrees from most of the US and tend to glance off.

The solar panels on a wing are going to be horizontal and will take a
direct hit from a hailstone.

There are many places in the US where it is not unusual for hailstones
to dent the tops of cars.


I have watched my share of hail, and seldom does it fall at a 90 degree
angle, so I doubt your theory. My home's panels are mounted at a less
than optimum angle because I am quite worried about hurricane winds and
not worried at all about hail, even though hail happens here.

Today's solar panels aren't glass and aren't terribly fragile. A
rooftop isn't a terribly friendly environment, yet panels last for
decades. I would judge that most PV panels are less prone to hail damage
than a typical aluminum wing skin, certainly no more.

Still, we agree that solar panels on a wing make little sense. They
would be costly, they would add little to the usefulness of the plane,
and they would add weight and complexity.

Also, nobody has remarked on those little wind turbines. Yes, I know
that they are an attempt to recover energy from the wingtip vortex, but
those things will add weight and drag. It would make far more sense to
reduce the vortex with winglets or a better wing design.

Further, adding blades to a prop is unlikely to improve its efficiency.

When you add the questionable solar panels, the questionable prop, and
the questionable wind turbines, I find myself thinking "vaporware".

Vaughn


.... and balonium technology!
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Electric jets where are You? nrepeb General Aviation 5 March 13th 11 08:56 PM
FS: Electric tow Bug Dout General Aviation 0 October 16th 10 06:27 PM
6CH Electric RC Helicopter for $169 GTY Rotorcraft 0 October 27th 05 08:59 PM
Electric RC Helicopter for $83 NYPT Man Home Built 0 October 24th 05 06:47 PM
Electric DG Robbie S. Owning 0 March 19th 05 03:20 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:36 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.