Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet

Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals

Electric powerplants ... 2

Status
Not open for further replies.

rb1957

Aerospace
Apr 15, 2005
15,595
0
36
CA
From Flight ...
"Harbour Air plans to buy 50 Magnix propulsion systems for envisioned all-electric fleet".

Harbour Air, out of Vancouver, have been trailing an electric powered Beaver for some time. Seems there's enough of a commercial case that they want to expand their operation. I don't believe TCCA has approved the electric powerplant.

"Hoffen wir mal, dass alles gut geht !"
General Paulus, Nov 1942, outside Stalingrad after the launch of Operation Uranus.
 
Replies continue below

Recommended for you

Russ,
You don't want to know, you just don't.
It's not the electric propulsion, really. It's the batteries.

I've spoken with several members of the ASTM international committee on lithium batteries, and you would shake your head. They're getting nowhere, spinning their wheels, and making up new directions to wander off in.

TC, FAA, EASA, have all washed their hands of the rule-making responsibility that they've traditionally had. So as long as ASTM has their TM's stuck up their AS's this isn't going anywhere.

Eviation has the same problem (well, that's one among many it seems). I bet Joby well get into the same pinch, soon, too.
 
I've heard the e-Beaver was "full" of batteries, but then there's no economic model there so why buy 50 of them ? Just to bob in the water ?

I think there can be a market of electric motors, but battery technology is very far behind. But you have to create a market to push the change (in battery technology).

Even if they got one reasonable flight per day (per morning, ie 2 flights a day) that'd be a start. Maybe they need a tonne of government support ... it's probably a better waste of our money than many others !? But I am wondering how TC would certify this powerplant ? Maybe "Experimental" ?


"Hoffen wir mal, dass alles gut geht !"
General Paulus, Nov 1942, outside Stalingrad after the launch of Operation Uranus.
 
beamed microwave power ?

"Hoffen wir mal, dass alles gut geht !"
General Paulus, Nov 1942, outside Stalingrad after the launch of Operation Uranus.
 
beamed microwave power ?

For a single plane, possibly, but only for a short range; although, I suppose the beamer could be mounted on a truck and follow the plane ;-)

For multiple planes, you'd be throwing a huge amount of power into empty air; although, it's possible you could build a phased array and time/space division multiplex the power transmission, but you'd still need truckloads of transmitters and radars for precision pointing.

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list
 
never let reality get in the way of a silly idea ...

"Hoffen wir mal, dass alles gut geht !"
General Paulus, Nov 1942, outside Stalingrad after the launch of Operation Uranus.
 
I'd wonder, for a short-hop airline like Harbour Air, if a hybrid powerplant might make sense: high power from battery assist for takeoffs, with cruise power supplied by IC engine directly?

As far as an "experimental" power plant - can they sell tickets and carry passengers with an "experimental" plane? I thought that was verboten per FAA rules...but HA operates in Canadia...
 
@btb ... they may be able to carry cargo on "experimental" ticket.

@greg ... yeah, odd they want 50 more ... to bob around in the harbour ?

"Hoffen wir mal, dass alles gut geht !"
General Paulus, Nov 1942, outside Stalingrad after the launch of Operation Uranus.
 
In the US there are government grants available for green stuff. Maybe Canada too?

A ploy for a grant to get free money to keep employees busy without needing to worry about bothersome realities like tangible, value-adding results?
 
I'm sure there are ... "money for nothing ..."

"Hoffen wir mal, dass alles gut geht !"
General Paulus, Nov 1942, outside Stalingrad after the launch of Operation Uranus.
 
who knows ? we've discovered that problem, so finding a solution should be possible ... but what about the issues we don't know about yet ?

I don't see how this can get certified, but with enough testing and political pressure I'm sure it can get done ...

"Hoffen wir mal, dass alles gut geht !"
General Paulus, Nov 1942, outside Stalingrad after the launch of Operation Uranus.
 
rb1957 said:
I don't see how this can get certified

Imagine an alternate reality timeline where some technology other than oil-reliant propulsion evolved first.

If, in that timeline, someone proposed a new propulsion system that relied on tanks of inflammable liquid fuel being carried on board you'd probably be saying the same things.

"Airplanes full of gasoline? That's crazy!"

Beware of Status Quo Bias.

Electric propulsion can be (should be) certified by following the same hazard, failure mode and safety analysis and mitigation processes as are (should be) applied to any new device or technology.

Perhaps (probably even likely) the mitigation for battery thermal runaway is a new battery technology that doesn't have that problem.

Lot's of people are already working toward that new technology. Probably most of these speculative electric aircraft companies are betting that the needed batteries will come, and are working now to get all the other pieces into place. It's a race to be first to market with a viable aircraft, electric engine, etc. when the batteries arrive.
 
I quite agree. Gasoline powered IC engines evolved without much recognition of the risks, or if the risks were appreciated then their mitigations were unsuccessful, eg TWA800, Aloha 243.

Knowing what we do now, how can you even attempt an SSA without having "catastrophic" outcomes ?

And certification is only one hurdle, right now there economic value of electric powerplants is very limited.

Though paradoxically (quixotically ?) I think we should be doing this, to create a bigger market for electric PPs, to drive innovation for better batteries and systems.

"Hoffen wir mal, dass alles gut geht !"
General Paulus, Nov 1942, outside Stalingrad after the launch of Operation Uranus.
 
Somewhere I have an aero textbook from the early 1920's it comments that gasoline engines are a horrible fire risk, but it is expected that it will be replaced by diesel engines in the next few years.


Hmmm for Harbour Air, I wonder if the numbers would look any worse using a boilerless steam engine instead, just get a charge of steam from the dockside at each end.


 
MintJulep said:
Well, jet and turbine fuel is roughly as close to diesel as it is to gasoline,
Yip, but at the rate of technology change for the aeronautics industry that point in time, 15 to 20 years was a very long time. The quoted textbook was obsolete within a decade, while ones printed in 1935 still contrubes significantly to industry now (bruhn comes to mind).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top