3 ms·
That’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 ai
by Toutouxc 1mo ago
That’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 1mo 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 1mo agoThe electric plane isn’t a 737, the fuselage looks quite slender.