4 ms·

Range is one thing - what is the passenger capacity of these planes?

by bernulli 5y ago

jillesvangurp 5y ago
Wrong metric. Cost per passenger per mile is a better one. The reason big jets are popular is that jets burn lots of fuel, which is expensive. Bigger jets burn fuel a bit more efficiently so the cost per passenger becomes more reasonable. Big battery electric planes are likely not possible with current battery technology. But the good news is that small electrical planes are pretty cheap and the electricity is cheap too. So, instead of buying a big Boeing to save fuel, you could buy a few dozen smaller planes, fly to smaller airports that Boeing would not even be allowed to land, and drop passengers off closer to their destinations.
- bernulli 5y ago
  In addition to calling my question 'wrong' - can you also answer it? Also, if your 'correct' metric were right, then everyone would walk. Does that solve the problems flying does? I don't think so. [edit]: Also, I guess your metric explains why everyone is only taking the bus or train, and private transportation does not exist?
  - blip54321 5y ago
    I'll answer a different question. The major cost of airplanes is engine wear. Engines have a TBO of maybe 2000 hours, which means about a year's worth of flying at 40 hours per week. For a cheap plane like a basic Cessna, the overhaul is the cost of the aircraft. If electric planes are lower-maintenance, for GA purposes, they could be a lot cheaper. The hobby would go from millionaires to ordinary folks. Electric motors don't wear out like combustion ones do.
    - bernulli 5y ago
      Sure, and an engine that wouldn't need any fuel/power at all would be even better - the question is, what is practically/theoretically achievable. But I guess the fact that everyone is avoiding the elementary question of 'how much can a transportation system transport' tells me all I need to know about the practicality here.

4 ms·

Range is one thing - what is the passenger capacity of these planes?

by bernulli 5y ago

Range is one thing - what is the passenger capacity of these planes?

jillesvangurp 5y ago
Wrong metric. Cost per passenger per mile is a better one. The reason big jets are popular is that jets burn lots of fuel, which is expensive. Bigger jets burn fuel a bit more efficiently so the cost per passenger becomes more reasonable. Big battery electric planes are likely not possible with current battery technology. But the good news is that small electrical planes are pretty cheap and the electricity is cheap too. So, instead of buying a big Boeing to save fuel, you could buy a few dozen smaller planes, fly to smaller airports that Boeing would not even be allowed to land, and drop passengers off closer to their destinations.
- bernulli 5y ago
  In addition to calling my question 'wrong' - can you also answer it? Also, if your 'correct' metric were right, then everyone would walk. Does that solve the problems flying does? I don't think so. [edit]: Also, I guess your metric explains why everyone is only taking the bus or train, and private transportation does not exist?
  - blip54321 5y ago
    I'll answer a different question. The major cost of airplanes is engine wear. Engines have a TBO of maybe 2000 hours, which means about a year's worth of flying at 40 hours per week. For a cheap plane like a basic Cessna, the overhaul is the cost of the aircraft. If electric planes are lower-maintenance, for GA purposes, they could be a lot cheaper. The hobby would go from millionaires to ordinary folks. Electric motors don't wear out like combustion ones do.
    - bernulli 5y ago
      Sure, and an engine that wouldn't need any fuel/power at all would be even better - the question is, what is practically/theoretically achievable. But I guess the fact that everyone is avoiding the elementary question of 'how much can a transportation system transport' tells me all I need to know about the practicality here.