4 ms·
This is cool indeed, but don't get too excited - this is a puff piece touting (220, not 300) preorders that aren't yet real orders and might never be. The plan
by Alupis 8y ago
This is cool indeed, but don't get too excited - this is a puff piece touting (220, not 300) preorders that aren't yet real orders and might never be.
The plane is not FAA certified yet (the first and only prototype flew in February), and the 4 seater (which accounts for half of the 220 preorders) won't fly until 2022, and then will have to seek FAA certification too.[1]
Electric motors and batteries have a long way to go to even come close to power density and weight of kerosene or gasoline aviation engines.[2] Batteries also don't get lighter with reduced charge - something most aircraft rely on with designs and efficiency (ie. 500lbs of batteries weigh the same when nearly empty).
It's also notoriously difficult and extremely expensive to certify new engine types for general aviation commercial pre-built's - which is part of the reason majority of modern GA aircraft still use very old engine designs (just not worth the investment from the manufactures). You can't just show it works... it has to be proven to work in a number of extreme situations and for very long duration with extreme reliability.
Getting a new engine type into an Experimental Type Aircraft is much, much easier...
I'd also hope the motor electrical system is fully isolated and separate from the aircraft's other electrical systems (maybe I missed it, but I haven't seen anything discussing this so far). Electrical problems happen, and losing all systems plus the motor at the same time would seriously jeopardize the safety of this aircraft.
I wish Bye and his company the best, but I'm skeptical.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bye_Aerospace_eFlyer_2 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bye_Aerospace_eFlyer_2
[2] https://aviation.stackexchange.com/a/26919/2294 https://aviation.stackexchange.com/a/26919/2294
- ip26 8y agoI left [2] unexpectedly excited for fuel cell flight perhaps with some form of battery or capacitor boost for takeoff. If it's a cap, you could even charge it while the plane taxis if an electric hookup was onerous.
- AWildC182 8y agoThis. Don't get your hopes up until you see Experimental Amateur Built kit-planes running electric motors. There are already electric trainers on the market but FAA certification is a bitch...unless you're Boeing :)
- Robotbeat 8y agoI have seen experimental amateur built kit planes running electric motors.
- AWildC182 8y agoAlmost nobody uses them outside of some niche designs and gliders.
- Alupis 8y agoYou've probably seen a couple... but it's super rare still for all the same reasons listed above.
- CompelTechnic 8y agoThe things Peter Sripol does on youtube are amazing. He built an ultralight electric aircraft using model-building techniques.
- imglorp 8y ago> losing all systems plus the motor at the same time would seriously jeopardize the safety of this aircraft The 2-seater is VFR only, assuming with conventional mechanical control surface linkages. So if you lose thrust, you're basically a glider at that point, needing only backup steam airspeed and altitude, and maybe a yaw string, to land safely. The electronics don't buy you much at that point.
- Alupis 8y agoVFR is the most dangerous situation to lose all systems in your aircraft. You're low to the ground, and relatively slow... and may or may-not have radar following or even be near a controlled airport. You'll have a pretty short maximum glide distance, and won't be able to communicate your emergency nor intentions. Engine-out's happen in GA, sure, but a total loss is pretty rare. Bye and his company will have to prove beyond doubt his design is at least as good as existing decade's old, super-proven designs.
- phillc73 8y ago> VFR is the most dangerous situation to lose all systems in your aircraft. You're low to the ground, and relatively slow... I disagree. You don't have to be low to the ground to fly VFR. You could be at 10,000 feet. You don't have to be slow to fly VFR. You could be flying VFR in a turboprop twin and pushing 250 knots. If I was going to lose all systems, I'd also prefer to be flying in VFR conditions where I can see the ground and have a chance of choosing somewhere to make an emergency landing, rather than, for example, over mountainous terrain in cloud. Every GA pilot is taught and needs to practice engine out emergency landings in order to pass their bi-annual flight tests.
- Tuxer 8y agoI would WAY rather lose my engine and instruments in VFR conditions (where I can see the ground and see where I'm going) compared to IFR, where I can't see where I'm going and I'm relying on my instruments to navigate. This is why IFR certification (more dangerous and skilled) is an addon that takes dozens of hours to complete initial training for, and then requires Instrument Proficiency Checks every 6 months to keep current on.
- Reason077 8y agoElectric trainers (initially) and short-haul passenger aircraft (in a decade or so?) will succeed simply because operating cost savings make them extremely compelling. Not just fuel savings, but reduced maintenance costs and increased reliability. As for electric isolation? Yes, if electric aircraft work like electric vehicles, the high-voltage system that powers the motors is completely separate from the low-voltage system that powers the electronics.
- sandworm101 8y agoIncreased reliability isn't a big deal for modern commercial carriers. Engine reliability is very close to 100%, with little gains to be made. The real increase is in getting the same near-perfect reliability at decreased maintenance costs.
- Reason077 8y agoSure, they’re very reliable in flight. But it’s likely that electric motors will significantly increase service intervals (lowering maintenance costs) and increase dispatch reliability (ie: delays because service/maintenance is required).
- Tuxer 8y agoThis is wrong on many levels: 1) General aviation doesn't rely at all on the weight difference from fuel burn for flight planning (I am IFR certified and fly Cirrus SR22s). My fuel not burning in my wings wouldn't change anything, as I'm constrained by takeoff weight not by landing weight, and I don't climb into the flight-levels high enough for my current weight to matter (that would require FL22 or above, and I like my breathable oxygen). 2) General aviation certification, while expensive, is far from the cost of commercial cert, especially for VFR aircraft. There is no reason why they can't certify an electric aircraft, and they have funding from Subaru's investment fund. Pipistrel (electro) did it for their ultralight. 3) Of course the motor's electrical system is separate from the aircraft's other electrical system, that's aircraft certification 101 (being able to through the master switch deactivate alternator but not battery power). On top of that 12v instrumentation is (obviously) on a different power level than an electric engine, so the batteries will be different. IFR certification will require 2 instrumentation power source backups (like BAT1/BAT2 on my cirrus) which really isn't a problem, when you've put a 92kWh battery on a plane you can put 2 0.5kWh batteries as redundancy. (for what it's worth, I'm currently waiting to buy an eFlyer 4).
- bdash 8y agoBatteries not getting lighter with reduced charge is relevant in that it's not uncommon to trade reduced range for increased payload by carrying less gas. With batteries having a fixed weight, you don't have the ability to make that trade-off in an electric aircraft.
- AWildC182 8y agoThese battery systems are usually designed to be modular so you can add/remove/quickly swap them. Think server rack like trays full of battery packs that you can chose to partially or fully populate scattered around the airframe
- outworlder 8y agoEh... are you going to be able to do that without an A&P? You can only do that at the start of your trip (unless you want them shipped to your destination, I guess).
- chr1 8y ago> batteries have a long way to go to even come close to power density and weight of kerosene or gasoline aviation engines. It is possible to use hydrogen or kerosene based fuel cells instead of batteries http://figures-of-speech.com/2018/04/fuel-cell.htm http://figures-of-speech.com/2018/04/fuel-cell.htm. Another advantage of electric airplanes is that for them it would be much easier to takeoff and land vertically.
- mrfusion 8y agoNot with that attitude you won’t!
- Razengan 8y ago> (ie. 500lbs of batteries weigh the same when nearly empty). Would better solar-powered charging help, to charge the batteries while they're being used? I imagine it would be perfect for planes since they almost always have relatively unobstructed access to sunlight.