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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
How Beat The High Cost Of Fuel: The ElectraFlyer-C
Larry Dighera wrote:
On Sun, 22 Jun 2008 14:52:16 GMT, "Vaughn Simon" wrote in : "Stealth Pilot" wrote in message .. . my tailwind requires 74hp to cruise at 120 knots. it takes me two days to fly across australia. Of course, the typical light airplane flight probably does not even involve X-country flight. A 2-hour electric airplane would be just fine for the typical 1 to 1.5 hour training mission. Of course, that same plane would need to be ready to fly the next training student/renter within 20 or 30 minutes. Given what we know about today's battery technology, time required for recharging may be a big problem. Vaughn Fortunately, in that service multiple battery packs could be used to overcome down time due to recharging. Yeah, right. The typical car battery pack costs about $3k to $5k, do you think an airplane battery pack will be cheaper? How many battery packs do you think the typical FBO is going to be able to buy? The best of batteries only last about 5 years, so every 5 years or so the FBO has to replace all those batteries. Real economic winner there. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
How Beat The High Cost Of Fuel: The ElectraFlyer-C
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
How Beat The High Cost Of Fuel: The ElectraFlyer-C
Frank Olson wrote:
wrote: Larry Dighera wrote: On Sun, 22 Jun 2008 14:52:16 GMT, "Vaughn Simon" wrote in : "Stealth Pilot" wrote in message ... my tailwind requires 74hp to cruise at 120 knots. it takes me two days to fly across australia. Of course, the typical light airplane flight probably does not even involve X-country flight. A 2-hour electric airplane would be just fine for the typical 1 to 1.5 hour training mission. Of course, that same plane would need to be ready to fly the next training student/renter within 20 or 30 minutes. Given what we know about today's battery technology, time required for recharging may be a big problem. Vaughn Fortunately, in that service multiple battery packs could be used to overcome down time due to recharging. Yeah, right. The typical car battery pack costs about $3k to $5k, do you think an airplane battery pack will be cheaper? How many battery packs do you think the typical FBO is going to be able to buy? The best of batteries only last about 5 years, so every 5 years or so the FBO has to replace all those batteries. Real economic winner there. Actually, the cost of replacing the battery packs (after five years) will run around $5000.00. Since car packs are $3k to $5k, what makes you think an airplane rated pack will be the same price? That's $1000.00 a year plus the cost for multiple recharges @$.60 per charge... If you put 100 hours on the old "Hobbs" every year that's the equivalent of paying about $10.30 an hour for fuel... What's a gallon of 100/130 down your way?? Except you pay for fuel on a continuous basis over time. You have to buy and pay for the batteries in one lump, right now. Oh, sure, you could take out a loan and spread the payments over 5 years, but now you've added interest on the loan to the cost of the batteries. Then there's the savings on maintenance... The prop is a composite material with no time life. Irrelevant. Composite props already exist and are already used on conventional gas engines. The "engine" (electric motor) doesn't have a TBO rating. Nonsense, an electric motor has a life limit. It may turn out to be longer than a gas engine, but that is unknown at this time. When you factor all the costs of operating a typical two place single (like a Cessna 152), a $5000.00 battery pack is "peanuts". Do you pay no attention to what you write? You were talking about FBO's and having swap out battery packs to keep the airplanes in the air. So it isn't A $5000 battery pack, it is 3 or 4 $5000 battery packs. What's more, if you put more time on the machine and use a trickle charger which won't stress the battery, your operating cost will only increase by the number of charges (@ $.60 per)... And using a trickle charger means you need even more battery packs at $5000 per copy to keep the airplanes flying. So let's say you "double" the number of hours in the air... The "fuel" cost factored over 200 hours now drops to $5.30 an hour. Yikes!!! :-) Yikes!!! indeed. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
How Beat The High Cost Of Fuel: The ElectraFlyer-C
|
#15
|
|||
|
|||
How Beat The High Cost Of Fuel: The ElectraFlyer-C
On Jun 22, 2:35*pm, wrote:
You have to buy and pay for the batteries in one lump, right now. I read somewhere that the companies that are working on battery packs for "Pluggable Hybrid" cars are considering leasing them. Perhaps that will be an option for aviation batteries as well (if and when they become available). Dave |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
How Beat The High Cost Of Fuel: The ElectraFlyer-C
Dave wrote:
On Jun 22, 2:35?pm, wrote: You have to buy and pay for the batteries in one lump, right now. I read somewhere that the companies that are working on battery packs for "Pluggable Hybrid" cars are considering leasing them. Perhaps that will be an option for aviation batteries as well (if and when they become available). It would be a smart move. The average family would have a better chance of coming up the the $100 or so a month than the would the whole $5k in one lump. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
How Beat The High Cost Of Fuel: The ElectraFlyer-C
Frank Olson wrote:
Look at their website... http://www.electraflyer.com/prices.html. Heck... even their most expensive battery pack is "peanuts" compared to the price you're going to pay for fuel for five years... I did. For $4400 to $8500 you get a battery pack for a single place ultralight you will have to replace every 5 years or so whether you fly or not. What's your fuel consumption now?? It's not going to change over five years (unless you upgrade to a bigger plane)... What *is* going to change is the cost per gallon. Except my airplane if 4 place, not 1, and I can fly it into any airport, which you can't do with an ultralight, so the comparison is apples and lug wrenches. Everyone that owns an aircraft knows how to budget. "Lump sum" payments like propeller overhauls, engine overhauls... I set aside the dollars for all these items for every hour I put on the Hobbs... Don't you?? Mind you I fly a medium twin (Piper Aerostar) and I don't like "lump sum" payments anymore than you do. Then you should have no problem with $4400 to $8500 every five years for a 1 place ultralight. What loan?? You buy the batteries with the aircraft. You budget for replacement five years down the road (and add about 10 - 20 percent for "contingencies") The original thread was about FBO's having spare battery packs to keep the airplanes flying between student/renters. Please learn to read. It isn't when you factor in a contingency for something like a rock or bird strike... Not much chance of a rock of bird strike with a 1 place ultralight; the prop is high and the birds are faster. Heh... Not on any of the conventional aircraft I've flown. I split my time between a Cessna 185 on amphib floats and a Piper Aerostar. That just means you don't have much experience. And I would hardly call a 1 place ultralight a conventional aircraft. Correct... There hasn't been a "TBO" set yet... So let's factor in that cost as well... An electric motor is a pretty simple device compared to even a normally aspirated IO-540... True, but totally irrelevant. I try to keep things simple. We were comparing the cost of fuel. I threw in the other stuff to make a point. The cost your FBO is going to charge on maintaining an electric motor over a reciprocating engine is going to be "peanuts". I'm sure the local FBO's are going to be standing in line to buy 1 place ultralights. Swapping the battery pack looks like something even my grand daughter will be able to do... in a few years. :-) Totally irrelevant to the cost of keeping the spares on hand. Nope. It's "one" battery pack... Not if you have to have spares on hand so the next renter can fly the airplane without having to wait for the batteries to charge. Huh?? You use a trickle charge to maintain the charge on the battery (between uses), not to say... go cross country with the aircraft. Huh my ass. The original thread was that FBO's would keep precharged battery packs on hand so the next customer can fly the plane without waiting hours for the pack to recharge. But that is rather moot as there are few FBO'x that are going to be able to rent 1 place ultralights and zero that will be able to provide training in them. And all the little birdies sing "cheap, cheap, cheap!" :-) If you are seeing little birdies, I would suggest seeing a doctor. Spending $4400 to $8500 every five years on batteries to fly a 1 place ultralight is not what I would call cheap. Most 1 place ultralights burn less in gas in terms of dollars in a year than I spend on french fries. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
How Beat The High Cost Of Fuel: The ElectraFlyer-C
wrote:
Frank Olson wrote: Look at their website... http://www.electraflyer.com/prices.html. Heck... even their most expensive battery pack is "peanuts" compared to the price you're going to pay for fuel for five years... I did. For $4400 to $8500 you get a battery pack for a single place ultralight you will have to replace every 5 years or so whether you fly or not. It's called "operational expenses". :-) What's your fuel consumption now?? It's not going to change over five years (unless you upgrade to a bigger plane)... What *is* going to change is the cost per gallon. Except my airplane if 4 place, not 1, and I can fly it into any airport, which you can't do with an ultralight, so the comparison is apples and lug wrenches. Ya gots me there. Everyone that owns an aircraft knows how to budget. "Lump sum" payments like propeller overhauls, engine overhauls... I set aside the dollars for all these items for every hour I put on the Hobbs... Don't you?? Mind you I fly a medium twin (Piper Aerostar) and I don't like "lump sum" payments anymore than you do. Then you should have no problem with $4400 to $8500 every five years for a 1 place ultralight. I'm waiting for the twin version. :-) What loan?? You buy the batteries with the aircraft. You budget for replacement five years down the road (and add about 10 - 20 percent for "contingencies") The original thread was about FBO's having spare battery packs to keep the airplanes flying between student/renters. Hmmmm... I must be blind. I can't seem to find that reference in the OP. Please learn to read. Check... It isn't when you factor in a contingency for something like a rock or bird strike... Not much chance of a rock of bird strike with a 1 place ultralight; the prop is high and the birds are faster. Good points. Although I've witnessed a couple of bird strikes... Heh... Not on any of the conventional aircraft I've flown. I split my time between a Cessna 185 on amphib floats and a Piper Aerostar. That just means you don't have much experience. ??? And I would hardly call a 1 place ultralight a conventional aircraft. Hmmm... wings, undercarriage, tail, cockpit... Looks a lot like a "conventional aircraft" to me... Correct... There hasn't been a "TBO" set yet... So let's factor in that cost as well... An electric motor is a pretty simple device compared to even a normally aspirated IO-540... True, but totally irrelevant. To what?? I try to keep things simple. We were comparing the cost of fuel. I threw in the other stuff to make a point. The cost your FBO is going to charge on maintaining an electric motor over a reciprocating engine is going to be "peanuts". I'm sure the local FBO's are going to be standing in line to buy 1 place ultralights. You're not looking at the "big picture". This aircraft represents the future of general aviation. We don't have a limitless supply of oil, and we have to do something to reduce our carbon emissions. Swapping the battery pack looks like something even my grand daughter will be able to do... in a few years. :-) Totally irrelevant to the cost of keeping the spares on hand. "Spares" which you could swap between aircraft on the same flight line. Nope. It's "one" battery pack... Not if you have to have spares on hand so the next renter can fly the airplane without having to wait for the batteries to charge. It looks to me like the "cost" of the aircraft may very well prove to be in reach of the "average Joe". Who needs to "rent" when you can "own". Huh?? You use a trickle charge to maintain the charge on the battery (between uses), not to say... go cross country with the aircraft. Huh my ass. Sorry... I don't swing that way. The original thread was that FBO's would keep precharged battery packs on hand so the next customer can fly the plane without waiting hours for the pack to recharge. The original post said nothing of the sort. The thread "digressed" (much like this series of responses). But that is rather moot as there are few FBO'x that are going to be able to rent 1 place ultralights and zero that will be able to provide training in them. Check. And all the little birdies sing "cheap, cheap, cheap!" :-) If you are seeing little birdies, I would suggest seeing a doctor. I see birdies everywhere. And my vision is just fine. Spending $4400 to $8500 every five years on batteries to fly a 1 place ultralight is not what I would call cheap. No... but with advances in technology, the four place electric plane is just around the corner. And who knows?? It could even be solar powered... :-) Most 1 place ultralights burn less in gas in terms of dollars in a year than I spend on french fries. I suppose... And a lot of them even use two stroke weed whacker engines... Yech!!! |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
How Beat The High Cost Of Fuel: The ElectraFlyer-C
On Sun, 22 Jun 2008 18:35:02 GMT, wrote:
Frank Olson wrote: wrote: Larry Dighera wrote: On Sun, 22 Jun 2008 14:52:16 GMT, "Vaughn Simon" wrote in : "Stealth Pilot" wrote in message ... my tailwind requires 74hp to cruise at 120 knots. it takes me two days to fly across australia. Of course, the typical light airplane flight probably does not even involve X-country flight. A 2-hour electric airplane would be just fine for the typical 1 to 1.5 hour training mission. Of course, that same plane would need to be ready to fly the next training student/renter within 20 or 30 minutes. Given what we know about today's battery technology, time required for recharging may be a big problem. chomp Then there's the savings on maintenance... The prop is a composite material with no time life. Irrelevant. Composite props already exist and are already used on conventional gas engines. sorry that factor is relevant for a different reason. combustion engines produce power in pulses that flog the daylights out of a prop. an electric motor produces a more continuous supply of force to the prop. so on that basis the prop would have an easier time of it. so probably will the airframe. The "engine" (electric motor) doesn't have a TBO rating. Nonsense, an electric motor has a life limit. It may turn out to be longer than a gas engine, but that is unknown at this time. When you factor all the costs of operating a typical two place single (like a Cessna 152), a $5000.00 battery pack is "peanuts". Do you pay no attention to what you write? You were talking about FBO's and having swap out battery packs to keep the airplanes in the air. So it isn't A $5000 battery pack, it is 3 or 4 $5000 battery packs. What's more, if you put more time on the machine and use a trickle charger which won't stress the battery, your operating cost will only increase by the number of charges (@ $.60 per)... And using a trickle charger means you need even more battery packs at $5000 per copy to keep the airplanes flying. So let's say you "double" the number of hours in the air... The "fuel" cost factored over 200 hours now drops to $5.30 an hour. Yikes!!! :-) Yikes!!! indeed. this argument is like the one for valve sound systems vs digital systems. eventually digital won hands down after a few years of developing it. this is the start of a technology. if these guys can develop a weight competitive system that delivers just 100hp continuously for days at a time then they will have a huge market. potentially the entire world's private aviation market. of course they'll probably ignore that and just go for the commercial market. Stealth Pilot |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Fighting the high cost of flying | Jay Honeck[_2_] | Piloting | 31 | June 11th 08 11:30 AM |
High Cost of Sportplanes | Gordon Arnaut | Home Built | 110 | November 18th 05 10:02 AM |
Fix the high cost [Was:] High Cost of Sportplanes | Evan Carew | Home Built | 40 | October 8th 05 04:05 AM |
These are not YOUR airplanes - Was: High Cost of Sportplanes | Lakeview Bill | Home Built | 28 | September 21st 05 01:37 PM |
Talk about the high cost of aviation! | C J Campbell | Piloting | 15 | August 12th 03 04:09 AM |