14 ms·

Vancouver seaplane company to resume test flights with electric plane

195 points by seryoiupfurds 6y ago

amacalac 6y ago
I'm interested to see how quiet it's going to be over the skies of downtown Vancouver and Victoria if they manage to get the whole fleet to electric
- acwan93 6y ago
  Do electric planes make any difference in terms of noise? When an electric vehicle is in motion most of the noise I can tell are from the tires. A electric powered propeller plane would most likely still have most of its noise generated by the propeller, not the internal combustion engine. I presume the same is with jets.
  - bdamm 6y ago
    High torque at lower RPMs is still an untapped potential of electrification for aviation. Having more options for placement of propeller (behind the rudder, for example, where a larger and slower propeller could be placed) is huge. NASA is also experimenting with many small propellers placed ahead of the wings which can result in higher efficiency at cruise, but unfortunately doing their most work when the plane is flying slowest (just before landing). We'll see! But many exciting possibilities.
  - jillesvangurp 6y ago
    Yes in several ways: - No noise when idling and more fine grained control over power. You can't tell apart a plane that is idling from one that is completely off with electric. Some turbo props on the other hand provide so much thrust when idling that you need to be on the brakes or it will start moving to quickly during taxiing. So, that amounts to a lot less noise for electrical planes while the plane is on the airport (i.e. where noise matters the most). - Not all propellers are made the same. They are generally matched to torque and rpm that can be provided by the engine. With an electric engine you'd have a wider range of both as the engine torque and rpm are more easily controlled. That means you can optimize for performance, noise, or both more easily. - Generally propellers get noisy when their tips break the speed of sound. Bigger propellers mean this happens at lower RPM. Smaller propellers can spin faster without having their tips breaking the sound barrier. Electrical engines can be small and light; meaning that you can choose to have a lot of smaller, less noisy ones instead of the big noisy ones. Also, because they can deliver more torque, you can increase the number of blades on the propeller to deliver more thrust and power at lower rpm (at the cost of more drag). - The frequency of the noise matters too. High pitched noise doesn't carry very far. Low pitched noise can be heard miles away. Like the noise of tonnes of kerosine being burned when a big jet takes off. Not a thing with electric. Big combustion engines can be similarly noisy. It's part of what makes them sound so exciting. You are right they won't be whisper silent but they will be a lot more silent overall, and noisy far less often (only when they need to; basically during take off).
- SkyPuncher 6y ago
  There's a video in the article. Sounds a little bit quieter, but still a lot of prop noise.
  - alex_duf 6y ago
    I think there's a helicopter around so it's really hard to judge
- baybal2 6y ago
  I only see benefits given that electric powertrain is much more reliable, and quieter than piston engines, and that engines have much higher chance to stall on takeoff.
  - bdamm 6y ago
    Aero engines are exceptionally reliable and don't "stall". However, electric does have advantages; less costly to maintain (theoretically; this still needs to be actually proven) and the pilots will like the high torque available at lower RPMs. This can allow designs with slower propellers that in turn will lower prop noise.
    - baybal2 6y ago
      Big jet engines, and turboprops are. Small jet engines, turboprops, and piston engines stall many times more frequently.
      - steffan 6y ago
        I think you're misinterpreting reports of stall-related incidents as being an engine stall, but the most common accidents are related to 'aerodynamic stall'. Engine stalls are virtually unheard-of.
        baybal2 6y ago
        > Engine stalls are virtually unheard-of. They do, and quite often https://airfactsjournal.com/2018/10/the-bad-news-and-good-news-about-engine-failures/ https://airfactsjournal.com/2018/10/the-bad-news-and-good-ne...
        steffan 6y ago
        The article does point out this: “And by far the most common reason piston engines quit is because they don’t receive fuel, either due to fuel starvation (the airplane has fuel but it doesn’t make it to the engine) or fuel exhaustion (the airplane truly ran out of it). These two causes account for over one-third of engine failure accidents”
- notatoad 6y ago
  It's been a few years since I was out on the coast, but I don't remember float plane noise being that significant of a factor in the city. The people who live near the harbours they land at in the gulf islands, or on that lake in Whistler are going to be pretty happy though.
- TheRealPomax 6y ago
  It's still going to be a propeller punching its way through air. The explosions may be gone, but prop noise isn't going anywhere.
  - dan_quixote 6y ago
    As a Seattle resident in a common float plane flight path, the piston engines can be quite loud. You can hear them inside with windows/doors closed and moderate household noises (like a shower or washing machine).
jeffreyrogers 6y ago
Projects like these are neat, but I don't understand where the money for them comes from. At least electric cars had a use case that was achievable from the start (driving around locally) and are now usable for pretty much any kind of driving people want to do (maybe cross-country road trips are still challenging). But these electric planes are just clearly worse than conventional planes. The batteries take up a lot of weight and weigh the same at the start of the flight as at the end, and while I'm sure battery technology will continue to improve, the weight issue is going to be a problem for a long time. Trying to pursue this commercially just seems like a quick way to lose a lot of money. Edit: I'm not saying it won't work, just that it will be significantly more expensive than a conventional plane for the same performance for a long time to come.
- ortusdux 6y ago
  The best use case I have heard is flight schools. Last time I quoted lessons, half the cost was the fuel.
  - Scoundreller 6y ago
    Spitballing a few more potential applications: Just imagine how cheap getting your multi-engine qualifications will become. Floatplane cert could become a lot cheaper too.
  - francoisp 6y ago
    I wonder if the rating would be electric only after a while... I would imagine that the various authorities would create a different license, like for seaplanes and IFR. It would make some sense as mis-managing the fuel-air mixture on a small piston plane can lead to catastrophic failure. (frozen carb for ex)
    - bdamm 6y ago
      It makes sense to me that moving from electric to piston would require an endorsement. Asking for a rating seems like overkill.
arecurrence 6y ago
The seaplane area in Vancouver stinks during the summer. I am very much looking forward to electrification eliminating that strong diesel smell. If there's enough planes transiting you can even see the haze (dozens of seaplanes use that terminal).
- eloff 6y ago
  They don't run on diesel, but I think the kind of aviation fuel small planes use is pretty nasty. I've also heard it is still leaded, not sure if that's the case here or not. Many of the boats nearby in the marina do use diesel, for some of the large ones, maybe even the high sulfur bunker crude which is nasty stuff.
  - Naac 6y ago
    Other than the Hackernews comment from a couple days ago suggesting this, do you have an links to sources saying these seaplanes use leaded fuels? I'm not disagreeing, I just want to make sure we're talking about real things and not starting rumors.
    - andrewmunsell 6y ago
      I'm not familiar with the specific model of seaplane referenced here, but 100LL avgas is commonly used in small planes (and the LL stands for low-lead) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avgas https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avgas
    - phaemon 6y ago
      Apparently they were supposed to be phased out by 2018 but it's been delayed: https://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets/news_story.cfm?newsId=14754 https://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets/news_story.cfm?newsId=1...
    - bluGill 6y ago
      100 low-lead is a common aviation fuel. Most small aircraft use it. Piston engines generally use that, while jets of course use jet fuel. There are piston engine that run on jet fuel (often diesel), but they are rare and just starting to come out. I don't know about sea planes though. My guess is they use lead because that is the best educated guess. edit: others are claiming that these planes are mostly turboprops which would then use lead free jet fuel.
cvaidya1986 6y ago
Electric planes will be one of the major drivers of reducing emissions, we all need them as soon as possible!
- TheRealPomax 6y ago
  Not these ones, though. They're certainly going to reduce emissions in the local area, but their solution inherently cannot scale up. Their planes are tiny, and their flights are super short. It's basically as different from regular commercial flights as you can get, while still working with airplanes.
  - mixmastamyk 6y ago
    These types of trips are very dirty however, so reducing them has a bigger impact than it would seem at first.
    - TheRealPomax 6y ago
      But not a "major" impact. The vastly bigger problem where Harbour Air operates is "real" flights (because it's the YVR area) and cargo shipping (because it's also the port of Vancouver). And for this area specifically, it'd be nice if we stopped having a giant, uncovered piles of sulphur pellets, full of sulphur powder from being dumped in piles, literally getting dispersed every second there's even the faintest amount of wind. Which, given that it's the pacific north west, is "every second of every day".
- saberdancer 6y ago
  We need electric cows!
  - cvaidya1986 6y ago
    Mooooores law
- elihu 6y ago
  Unfortunately we don't really have the battery technology for this to work for long range flights, like the commercial flights that make up the bulk of air traffic carbon emissions. I expect the best near-term solution is just to find a way to synthesize jet fuel (or something that works equivalently) on a large scale from something other than fossil fuels. I don't know what the state-of-the-art is in synthetic fuels. Another option would be to find a way to transfer electricity to a moving aircraft so it could recharge in the air, but I have difficulty imagining how that could be made to work (microwaves? high-power lasers and solar panels? wires held aloft by zeppelins?), especially within the constraints of modern technology.
sradman 6y ago
> The problem with lithium batteries is they are heavy... McDougall says battery technology is advancing quickly and he expects them to be even lighter and more powerful, as his project gets closer to flying commercially. > Antweiler says Harbour Air is in the "sweet spot" in the industry as its flights are short, meaning battery technology as it stands today makes the project viable.
timonoko 6y ago
One must think about seagulls and how they effortlessly stay airborne for hours. Every single feather has nerve endings and muscles for optimal aerodynamical performance. Also Neal Stephenson describes how a wingwoman departs from a space station in orbit and lands on terra firma and goes back only utilizing air currents. Totally believable me thinks.
- Robotbeat 6y ago
  Sailplanes effectively do this. The new high performance sailplane Nixus actually uses fly-by-wire to do microadjustments to optimize aerodynamic performance analogous to what you said, although skilled pilots can do similar. https://www.flyingmag.com/nixus-fly-by-wire-glider-takes-flight/ https://www.flyingmag.com/nixus-fly-by-wire-glider-takes-fli... Future long distance electric aircraft will resemble sailplanes.
- outworlder 6y ago
  > Also Neal Stephenson describes how a wingwoman departs from a space station in orbit and lands on terra firma and goes back only utilizing air currents Goes back where? To orbit, using air currents? That's physically impossible.
  - timonoko 6y ago
    Be amazed: The orbit station is a "giant space wheel", whose central mass is in orbit, but has rotating pods synchronized with earths rotation, some 100 km below. There are some issues with centrifugal forces (which Neal also describes), but otherwise all the wingwoman has to do is to reach the altitude and speed of this pod. The energy needed to move this person from the pod to the central station comes from the sol and is quite miniscule.
throwawaysea 6y ago
FYI, the Vancouver company here operates the flights and owns the aircraft. But the electric propulsion bits comes from a company in Washington state in the US (and before that they were located in Australia). The article mentions "Seattle area", which is true but a bit imprecise/misleading. MagniX is located in Redmond, and they're moving their headquarters and manufacturing further North, to Everett, where Boeing's big factories are located (https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/electric-aviation-startup-magnix-opens-new-headquarters-and-production-facility-in-everett https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/elect...). MagniX is also selling their electric propulsion products to other airlines (see https://www.geekwire.com/2020/magnix-universal-hydrogen-team-electric-airplane-conversion/ https://www.geekwire.com/2020/magnix-universal-hydrogen-team...).
- TheRealPomax 6y ago
  To be fair, it's not like you can tell Redmond isn't just more Seattle on a map. Same for Everett: everything from Lakewood to Everett is just "Seattle" to everyone except for the folks that live/work there.
- walrus01 6y ago
  also worth mentioning, that I think the reason why MagnaX is in its location is proximity to Kenmore Air, which is one of the most experienced and high-volume aircraft workshops that has a specialty niche business in retrofits, repairs and upgrades of Beavers, Turbo Beavers, Otters and Twin Otters. It's located at the north end of lake Washington.
ogre_codes 6y ago
This is more or less the idea platform for aircraft electrification. - Short distances means they can use smaller batteries. - In small aircraft noise is a big problem. I'm skeptical we are ready for larger scale aircraft electrification, but for some specific uses like this, it makes sense.
jermaustin1 6y ago
I've been seeing these news articles popup every few weeks. Some new startup is flying with an electric motor and batteries. It always leaves me wondering, why are so many of these GA retrofits going with batteries instead of a hydrogen power plant? Is it just "simplicity" or are they betting that batteries are going to shed substantial weight in the coming years?
- na85 6y ago
  I'd wager it's because a lot of them fly to places where electricity is widely available but pressurized hydrogen refueling is not.
- jillesvangurp 6y ago
  Procuring hydrogen, hydrogen fuel cells, or hydrogen storage is a bit of an unsolved problem. The infrastructure is simply not there. Also I don't think there are aviation rated fuel cells available yet. And storing lots of hydrogen under high pressure is also a bit of a weight issue for planes given it requires extreme pressures and heavy duty tanks. Also, there's the cost of fuel. Hydrogen is not cheap. Electricity is. And that's before you consider the infrastructure. A battery can be plugged in anywhere you can get electricity. Which is pretty much everywhere. Hydrogen requires (currently) non existent supply chains, transport, storage, pumping, etc. infrastructure. There are some decent batteries on the market and better ones are on the way. Also, there's a difference between shoving a tonne of battery into an existing plane and using e.g. structural batteries to strengthen the fuselage of a purposely designed plane. So, yes, you should expect some improvements in range with the coming few years as technology, designs, and thinking evolves. I think 2-3X range improvement is basically a given in the next 15 years or so. Current electric planes actually flying use technology that was certified years ago (it's a slow process) that are hardly state of the art at this point.
  - Hypx 6y ago
    https://www.renewableenergymagazine.com/hydrogen/protium-secures-funding-to-develop-pathway-for-20210125 https://www.renewableenergymagazine.com/hydrogen/protium-sec... You're probably out of date with your info. Hydrogen based aircraft are happening now.
emptybits 6y ago
I know there will still be prop noise galore but this is great. I lived in Coal Harbour across from their water runways for years. It was my every-morning wakeup call whether I needed it or not. Aside: If you are in the Vancouver area, I recommend taking one of these flights, internal combustion or not. To/from Victoria, for example. The views are just stunning, especially over the Gulf Islands -- better than any high elevation or large plane window seat can give you. As a longtime resident, it's still goosebump gorgeous.
- stevewillows 6y ago
  These flights are awesome! I had to go to the island earlier this year and wanted to avoid the ferries at all costs. Like you said, that region is goosebump gorgeous. The flights are fairly cheap, too, all things considered.
  - starky 6y ago
    I've started using Harbour Air for my trips over to Vancouver Island quite frequently over the past few years. At one point I did the calculation and taking the floatplane ends up saving me 3-4 hours of travel time, all for about an additional cost of $70 (versus taking the bus out to the ferry and being a walk on), even less if I consider that my trips are frequently Friday evenings and I end up having to grab dinner on the way or on the ferry.
    - stevewillows 6y ago
      right! its way better. Especially in these times where the ferries have limited capacity. It simply isn't worth the hassle. The location of the planes is really convenient, too. I've always hated the ferries anyway, but now that I've seen the light of Harbour Air, there's no going back.
      - starky 6y ago
        It was fine when they were allowing people to stay in their vehicles on the lower car deck and when it was nice enough to just go sit on the sun deck. But I was officially done with the ferries when I went over in October, the number of people on the ferry coupled with the idiots over at Transport Canada making people leave their cars meant it was far to crowded for me to feel safe. The terminal being incredibly convenient makes the flight even more justified. I'd much rather take the Canada Line and then walk for a few minutes than having to line up early for a standing room only bus that goes out to the ferry terminal.
skanga 6y ago
What is the battery solution in use here?

195 points by seryoiupfurds 6y ago

I'm interested to see how quiet it's going to be over the skies of downtown Vancouver and Victoria if they manage to get the whole fleet to electric

acwan93 6y ago
Do electric planes make any difference in terms of noise? When an electric vehicle is in motion most of the noise I can tell are from the tires. A electric powered propeller plane would most likely still have most of its noise generated by the propeller, not the internal combustion engine. I presume the same is with jets.
- bdamm 6y ago
  High torque at lower RPMs is still an untapped potential of electrification for aviation. Having more options for placement of propeller (behind the rudder, for example, where a larger and slower propeller could be placed) is huge. NASA is also experimenting with many small propellers placed ahead of the wings which can result in higher efficiency at cruise, but unfortunately doing their most work when the plane is flying slowest (just before landing). We'll see! But many exciting possibilities.
- jillesvangurp 6y ago
  Yes in several ways: - No noise when idling and more fine grained control over power. You can't tell apart a plane that is idling from one that is completely off with electric. Some turbo props on the other hand provide so much thrust when idling that you need to be on the brakes or it will start moving to quickly during taxiing. So, that amounts to a lot less noise for electrical planes while the plane is on the airport (i.e. where noise matters the most). - Not all propellers are made the same. They are generally matched to torque and rpm that can be provided by the engine. With an electric engine you'd have a wider range of both as the engine torque and rpm are more easily controlled. That means you can optimize for performance, noise, or both more easily. - Generally propellers get noisy when their tips break the speed of sound. Bigger propellers mean this happens at lower RPM. Smaller propellers can spin faster without having their tips breaking the sound barrier. Electrical engines can be small and light; meaning that you can choose to have a lot of smaller, less noisy ones instead of the big noisy ones. Also, because they can deliver more torque, you can increase the number of blades on the propeller to deliver more thrust and power at lower rpm (at the cost of more drag). - The frequency of the noise matters too. High pitched noise doesn't carry very far. Low pitched noise can be heard miles away. Like the noise of tonnes of kerosine being burned when a big jet takes off. Not a thing with electric. Big combustion engines can be similarly noisy. It's part of what makes them sound so exciting. You are right they won't be whisper silent but they will be a lot more silent overall, and noisy far less often (only when they need to; basically during take off).
SkyPuncher 6y ago
There's a video in the article. Sounds a little bit quieter, but still a lot of prop noise.
- alex_duf 6y ago
  I think there's a helicopter around so it's really hard to judge
baybal2 6y ago
I only see benefits given that electric powertrain is much more reliable, and quieter than piston engines, and that engines have much higher chance to stall on takeoff.
- bdamm 6y ago
  Aero engines are exceptionally reliable and don't "stall". However, electric does have advantages; less costly to maintain (theoretically; this still needs to be actually proven) and the pilots will like the high torque available at lower RPMs. This can allow designs with slower propellers that in turn will lower prop noise.
  - baybal2 6y ago
    Big jet engines, and turboprops are. Small jet engines, turboprops, and piston engines stall many times more frequently.
    - steffan 6y ago
      I think you're misinterpreting reports of stall-related incidents as being an engine stall, but the most common accidents are related to 'aerodynamic stall'. Engine stalls are virtually unheard-of.
      - baybal2 6y ago
        > Engine stalls are virtually unheard-of. They do, and quite often https://airfactsjournal.com/2018/10/the-bad-news-and-good-news-about-engine-failures/ https://airfactsjournal.com/2018/10/the-bad-news-and-good-ne...
        steffan 6y ago
        The article does point out this: “And by far the most common reason piston engines quit is because they don’t receive fuel, either due to fuel starvation (the airplane has fuel but it doesn’t make it to the engine) or fuel exhaustion (the airplane truly ran out of it). These two causes account for over one-third of engine failure accidents”
notatoad 6y ago
It's been a few years since I was out on the coast, but I don't remember float plane noise being that significant of a factor in the city. The people who live near the harbours they land at in the gulf islands, or on that lake in Whistler are going to be pretty happy though.
TheRealPomax 6y ago
It's still going to be a propeller punching its way through air. The explosions may be gone, but prop noise isn't going anywhere.
- dan_quixote 6y ago
  As a Seattle resident in a common float plane flight path, the piston engines can be quite loud. You can hear them inside with windows/doors closed and moderate household noises (like a shower or washing machine).

jeffreyrogers 6y ago

Projects like these are neat, but I don't understand where the money for them comes from. At least electric cars had a use case that was achievable from the start (driving around locally) and are now usable for pretty much any kind of driving people want to do (maybe cross-country road trips are still challenging). But these electric planes are just clearly worse than conventional planes. The batteries take up a lot of weight and weigh the same at the start of the flight as at the end, and while I'm sure battery technology will continue to improve, the weight issue is going to be a problem for a long time. Trying to pursue this commercially just seems like a quick way to lose a lot of money. Edit: I'm not saying it won't work, just that it will be significantly more expensive than a conventional plane for the same performance for a long time to come.

ortusdux 6y ago
The best use case I have heard is flight schools. Last time I quoted lessons, half the cost was the fuel.
- Scoundreller 6y ago
  Spitballing a few more potential applications: Just imagine how cheap getting your multi-engine qualifications will become. Floatplane cert could become a lot cheaper too.
- francoisp 6y ago
  I wonder if the rating would be electric only after a while... I would imagine that the various authorities would create a different license, like for seaplanes and IFR. It would make some sense as mis-managing the fuel-air mixture on a small piston plane can lead to catastrophic failure. (frozen carb for ex)
  - bdamm 6y ago
    It makes sense to me that moving from electric to piston would require an endorsement. Asking for a rating seems like overkill.

arecurrence 6y ago

The seaplane area in Vancouver stinks during the summer. I am very much looking forward to electrification eliminating that strong diesel smell. If there's enough planes transiting you can even see the haze (dozens of seaplanes use that terminal).

eloff 6y ago
They don't run on diesel, but I think the kind of aviation fuel small planes use is pretty nasty. I've also heard it is still leaded, not sure if that's the case here or not. Many of the boats nearby in the marina do use diesel, for some of the large ones, maybe even the high sulfur bunker crude which is nasty stuff.
- Naac 6y ago
  Other than the Hackernews comment from a couple days ago suggesting this, do you have an links to sources saying these seaplanes use leaded fuels? I'm not disagreeing, I just want to make sure we're talking about real things and not starting rumors.
  - andrewmunsell 6y ago
    I'm not familiar with the specific model of seaplane referenced here, but 100LL avgas is commonly used in small planes (and the LL stands for low-lead) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avgas https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avgas
  - phaemon 6y ago
    Apparently they were supposed to be phased out by 2018 but it's been delayed: https://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets/news_story.cfm?newsId=14754 https://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets/news_story.cfm?newsId=1...
  - bluGill 6y ago
    100 low-lead is a common aviation fuel. Most small aircraft use it. Piston engines generally use that, while jets of course use jet fuel. There are piston engine that run on jet fuel (often diesel), but they are rare and just starting to come out. I don't know about sea planes though. My guess is they use lead because that is the best educated guess. edit: others are claiming that these planes are mostly turboprops which would then use lead free jet fuel.

cvaidya1986 6y ago

Electric planes will be one of the major drivers of reducing emissions, we all need them as soon as possible!

TheRealPomax 6y ago
Not these ones, though. They're certainly going to reduce emissions in the local area, but their solution inherently cannot scale up. Their planes are tiny, and their flights are super short. It's basically as different from regular commercial flights as you can get, while still working with airplanes.
- mixmastamyk 6y ago
  These types of trips are very dirty however, so reducing them has a bigger impact than it would seem at first.
  - TheRealPomax 6y ago
    But not a "major" impact. The vastly bigger problem where Harbour Air operates is "real" flights (because it's the YVR area) and cargo shipping (because it's also the port of Vancouver). And for this area specifically, it'd be nice if we stopped having a giant, uncovered piles of sulphur pellets, full of sulphur powder from being dumped in piles, literally getting dispersed every second there's even the faintest amount of wind. Which, given that it's the pacific north west, is "every second of every day".
saberdancer 6y ago
We need electric cows!
- cvaidya1986 6y ago
  Mooooores law
elihu 6y ago
Unfortunately we don't really have the battery technology for this to work for long range flights, like the commercial flights that make up the bulk of air traffic carbon emissions. I expect the best near-term solution is just to find a way to synthesize jet fuel (or something that works equivalently) on a large scale from something other than fossil fuels. I don't know what the state-of-the-art is in synthetic fuels. Another option would be to find a way to transfer electricity to a moving aircraft so it could recharge in the air, but I have difficulty imagining how that could be made to work (microwaves? high-power lasers and solar panels? wires held aloft by zeppelins?), especially within the constraints of modern technology.

sradman 6y ago

> The problem with lithium batteries is they are heavy... McDougall says battery technology is advancing quickly and he expects them to be even lighter and more powerful, as his project gets closer to flying commercially. > Antweiler says Harbour Air is in the "sweet spot" in the industry as its flights are short, meaning battery technology as it stands today makes the project viable.

timonoko 6y ago

One must think about seagulls and how they effortlessly stay airborne for hours. Every single feather has nerve endings and muscles for optimal aerodynamical performance. Also Neal Stephenson describes how a wingwoman departs from a space station in orbit and lands on terra firma and goes back only utilizing air currents. Totally believable me thinks.

Robotbeat 6y ago
Sailplanes effectively do this. The new high performance sailplane Nixus actually uses fly-by-wire to do microadjustments to optimize aerodynamic performance analogous to what you said, although skilled pilots can do similar. https://www.flyingmag.com/nixus-fly-by-wire-glider-takes-flight/ https://www.flyingmag.com/nixus-fly-by-wire-glider-takes-fli... Future long distance electric aircraft will resemble sailplanes.
outworlder 6y ago
> Also Neal Stephenson describes how a wingwoman departs from a space station in orbit and lands on terra firma and goes back only utilizing air currents Goes back where? To orbit, using air currents? That's physically impossible.
- timonoko 6y ago
  Be amazed: The orbit station is a "giant space wheel", whose central mass is in orbit, but has rotating pods synchronized with earths rotation, some 100 km below. There are some issues with centrifugal forces (which Neal also describes), but otherwise all the wingwoman has to do is to reach the altitude and speed of this pod. The energy needed to move this person from the pod to the central station comes from the sol and is quite miniscule.

throwawaysea 6y ago

FYI, the Vancouver company here operates the flights and owns the aircraft. But the electric propulsion bits comes from a company in Washington state in the US (and before that they were located in Australia). The article mentions "Seattle area", which is true but a bit imprecise/misleading. MagniX is located in Redmond, and they're moving their headquarters and manufacturing further North, to Everett, where Boeing's big factories are located (https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/electric-aviation-startup-magnix-opens-new-headquarters-and-production-facility-in-everett https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/elect...). MagniX is also selling their electric propulsion products to other airlines (see https://www.geekwire.com/2020/magnix-universal-hydrogen-team-electric-airplane-conversion/ https://www.geekwire.com/2020/magnix-universal-hydrogen-team...).

TheRealPomax 6y ago
To be fair, it's not like you can tell Redmond isn't just more Seattle on a map. Same for Everett: everything from Lakewood to Everett is just "Seattle" to everyone except for the folks that live/work there.
walrus01 6y ago
also worth mentioning, that I think the reason why MagnaX is in its location is proximity to Kenmore Air, which is one of the most experienced and high-volume aircraft workshops that has a specialty niche business in retrofits, repairs and upgrades of Beavers, Turbo Beavers, Otters and Twin Otters. It's located at the north end of lake Washington.

ogre_codes 6y ago

This is more or less the idea platform for aircraft electrification. - Short distances means they can use smaller batteries. - In small aircraft noise is a big problem. I'm skeptical we are ready for larger scale aircraft electrification, but for some specific uses like this, it makes sense.

jermaustin1 6y ago

I've been seeing these news articles popup every few weeks. Some new startup is flying with an electric motor and batteries. It always leaves me wondering, why are so many of these GA retrofits going with batteries instead of a hydrogen power plant? Is it just "simplicity" or are they betting that batteries are going to shed substantial weight in the coming years?

na85 6y ago
I'd wager it's because a lot of them fly to places where electricity is widely available but pressurized hydrogen refueling is not.
jillesvangurp 6y ago
Procuring hydrogen, hydrogen fuel cells, or hydrogen storage is a bit of an unsolved problem. The infrastructure is simply not there. Also I don't think there are aviation rated fuel cells available yet. And storing lots of hydrogen under high pressure is also a bit of a weight issue for planes given it requires extreme pressures and heavy duty tanks. Also, there's the cost of fuel. Hydrogen is not cheap. Electricity is. And that's before you consider the infrastructure. A battery can be plugged in anywhere you can get electricity. Which is pretty much everywhere. Hydrogen requires (currently) non existent supply chains, transport, storage, pumping, etc. infrastructure. There are some decent batteries on the market and better ones are on the way. Also, there's a difference between shoving a tonne of battery into an existing plane and using e.g. structural batteries to strengthen the fuselage of a purposely designed plane. So, yes, you should expect some improvements in range with the coming few years as technology, designs, and thinking evolves. I think 2-3X range improvement is basically a given in the next 15 years or so. Current electric planes actually flying use technology that was certified years ago (it's a slow process) that are hardly state of the art at this point.
- Hypx 6y ago
  https://www.renewableenergymagazine.com/hydrogen/protium-secures-funding-to-develop-pathway-for-20210125 https://www.renewableenergymagazine.com/hydrogen/protium-sec... You're probably out of date with your info. Hydrogen based aircraft are happening now.

emptybits 6y ago

I know there will still be prop noise galore but this is great. I lived in Coal Harbour across from their water runways for years. It was my every-morning wakeup call whether I needed it or not. Aside: If you are in the Vancouver area, I recommend taking one of these flights, internal combustion or not. To/from Victoria, for example. The views are just stunning, especially over the Gulf Islands -- better than any high elevation or large plane window seat can give you. As a longtime resident, it's still goosebump gorgeous.

stevewillows 6y ago
These flights are awesome! I had to go to the island earlier this year and wanted to avoid the ferries at all costs. Like you said, that region is goosebump gorgeous. The flights are fairly cheap, too, all things considered.
- starky 6y ago
  I've started using Harbour Air for my trips over to Vancouver Island quite frequently over the past few years. At one point I did the calculation and taking the floatplane ends up saving me 3-4 hours of travel time, all for about an additional cost of $70 (versus taking the bus out to the ferry and being a walk on), even less if I consider that my trips are frequently Friday evenings and I end up having to grab dinner on the way or on the ferry.
  - stevewillows 6y ago
    right! its way better. Especially in these times where the ferries have limited capacity. It simply isn't worth the hassle. The location of the planes is really convenient, too. I've always hated the ferries anyway, but now that I've seen the light of Harbour Air, there's no going back.
    - starky 6y ago
      It was fine when they were allowing people to stay in their vehicles on the lower car deck and when it was nice enough to just go sit on the sun deck. But I was officially done with the ferries when I went over in October, the number of people on the ferry coupled with the idiots over at Transport Canada making people leave their cars meant it was far to crowded for me to feel safe. The terminal being incredibly convenient makes the flight even more justified. I'd much rather take the Canada Line and then walk for a few minutes than having to line up early for a standing room only bus that goes out to the ferry terminal.

skanga 6y ago

What is the battery solution in use here?