4 ms·
> A 737 has a lower drag coefficient than my car Drag coefficient is about the shape and needs to be multiplied by area to get drag. Your car is a lot smaller
by echoangle 27d ago
> A 737 has a lower drag coefficient than my car
Drag coefficient is about the shape and needs to be multiplied by area to get drag. Your car is a lot smaller when viewed from the front than a 737.
And there's no way a plane flying at the speed it does has the same drag losses as two EVs.
- Toutouxc 27d agoThat’s why I approximated the fuselage as two EVS (the frontal area) and I only looked up the drag coefficient of a 737 because it’s a well-known narrow-body airliner. I don’t know what speeds they flew, but AFAIK most maiden flights are very tame. My point stands, low hundreds of kilowatthours of energy seems like the right ballpark.
- echoangle 27d ago> That’s why I approximated the fuselage as two EVS (the frontal area) Have you ever seen a car and a plane? The Tesla model x has a frontal area of 2.6 sqm and a 737 fuselage alone, without any wings is already 11 sqm. With all attachments it’s at least 20 sqm. And half of the energy for altitude gain and half for drag is way too optimistic. The flight cost more than $5 in energy.
- Toutouxc 27d agoThe electric plane isn’t a 737, the fuselage looks quite slender.