RE: Rolls-Royce confirms 1,000hp electric plane
Discussion
I think this is fantastic news - I can't wait to see this reach commercial aircraft - the benefits for the local environment for airports must be a huge opportunity here... I could imagine planes being built for freight only taking this technology first - fixed weights etc etc.
Then all you need is the fuselage to be wrapped in a flexible solar panel like solution as when you get up there - the clouds are often below you so solar could be helpful for a bit of recharging.
Then all you need is the fuselage to be wrapped in a flexible solar panel like solution as when you get up there - the clouds are often below you so solar could be helpful for a bit of recharging.
Edited by oilit on Monday 7th January 21:30
oilit said:
RobDickinson said:
Solar is pointless on cars let alone serious aircraft
I would love to know what the guys from solar impulse think - as they have actually lived thru the exercise?
oilit said:
I think this is fantastic news - I can't wait to see this reach commercial aircraft - the benefits for the local environment for airports must be a huge opportunity here... I could imagine planes being built for freight only taking this technology first - fixed weights etc etc.
Then all you need is the fuselage to be wrapped in a flexible solar panel like solution as when you get up there - the clouds are often below you so solar could be helpful for a bit of recharging.
You might see electric on larger drones capable of carrying people short distances but probably not commercial aircraft in your lifetime. Then all you need is the fuselage to be wrapped in a flexible solar panel like solution as when you get up there - the clouds are often below you so solar could be helpful for a bit of recharging.
Edited by oilit on Monday 7th January 21:30
The larger aircraft would need huge amounts of electricity to power pressurisation and fuel and flight controls and landing gear and passenger entertainment etc etc.
The more electric passenger aircraft flying at the moment like the B787 have four massive generators on the engines and a few lithium ion batteries (which caused the aircraft to be grounded for weeks when they kept catching fire) for a few systems in an emergency.
The electric requirements are much much more than on a small propeller aircraft and they would have to be able to run for hours.
El stovey said:
You might see electric on larger drones capable of carrying people short distances but probably not commercial aircraft in your lifetime.
The larger aircraft would need huge amounts of electricity to power pressurisation and fuel and flight controls and landing gear and passenger entertainment etc etc.
The more electric passenger aircraft flying at the moment like the B787 have four massive generators on the engines and a few lithium ion batteries (which caused the aircraft to be grounded for weeks when they kept catching fire) for a few systems in an emergency.
The electric requirements are much much more than on a small propeller aircraft and they would have to be able to run for hours.
Using present day tech, yes. The larger aircraft would need huge amounts of electricity to power pressurisation and fuel and flight controls and landing gear and passenger entertainment etc etc.
The more electric passenger aircraft flying at the moment like the B787 have four massive generators on the engines and a few lithium ion batteries (which caused the aircraft to be grounded for weeks when they kept catching fire) for a few systems in an emergency.
The electric requirements are much much more than on a small propeller aircraft and they would have to be able to run for hours.
But as has been demonstrated many times before with technology, when we (as a race) really put our minds to it, things progress at an incredible rate.
Electrical energy storage density is the next big area for rapid development, and compared to just a decade ago has already increased significantly. It’s not going to be all that long (relatively) before batteries exceed the energy density of jet fuel, which currently stands at a ratio of 14:1. And it’ll make sense for commercial air travel long before it reaches that point.
Electric aircraft will be designed and configured very differently to fossil fueled aircraft. Electric propulsion systems will allow for more efficient airframe designs with much less drag, and other significant efficiency improvements over fossil fueled aircraft....for example, elimination of the high capacity onboard power generation systems that a modern airliner requires.
Edited by dvs_dave on Tuesday 8th January 05:06
dvs_dave said:
El stovey said:
You might see electric on larger drones capable of carrying people short distances but probably not commercial aircraft in your lifetime.
The larger aircraft would need huge amounts of electricity to power pressurisation and fuel and flight controls and landing gear and passenger entertainment etc etc.
The more electric passenger aircraft flying at the moment like the B787 have four massive generators on the engines and a few lithium ion batteries (which caused the aircraft to be grounded for weeks when they kept catching fire) for a few systems in an emergency.
The electric requirements are much much more than on a small propeller aircraft and they would have to be able to run for hours.
Using present day tech, yes. The larger aircraft would need huge amounts of electricity to power pressurisation and fuel and flight controls and landing gear and passenger entertainment etc etc.
The more electric passenger aircraft flying at the moment like the B787 have four massive generators on the engines and a few lithium ion batteries (which caused the aircraft to be grounded for weeks when they kept catching fire) for a few systems in an emergency.
The electric requirements are much much more than on a small propeller aircraft and they would have to be able to run for hours.
But as has been demonstrated many times before with technology, when we (as a race) really put our minds to it, things progress at an incredible rate.
Electrical energy storage density is the next big area for rapid development, and compared to just a decade ago has already increased significantly. It’s not going to be all that long (relatively) before batteries exceed the energy density of jet fuel, which currently stands at a ratio of 14:1. And it’ll make sense for commercial air travel long before it reaches that point.
Electric aircraft will be designed and configured very differently to fossil fueled aircraft. Electric propulsion systems will allow for more efficient airframe designs with much less drag, and other significant efficiency improvements over fossil fueled aircraft....for example, elimination of the high capacity onboard power generation systems that a modern airliner requires.
Edited by dvs_dave on Tuesday 8th January 05:06
We will certainly see hybrid aircraft, I know we are currently developing and trialing an electric taxi engine (rather than taxi to / form the gate on main engines which is extremely inefficient).
Until batteries massively decrease in weight or hugely increase their energy density long range electric aircraft are a dream > unless you find a method of extremely efficient solar "recharge", but even then I can't see the FAA / CAA signing off on a system that is not guaranteed, certainly not for transatlantic or transpacific flights, which then means you have different aircraft models built on the same production line driving down synergies and costs up, so the focus will be on hybrid systems.
The biggest "drag" on an airframe are the engines, due to required access, checks, replacement, etc, is the main reason they hang down from the wing, you would gain efficiency by integrating them into the airframe but lose the ability for access, repair, overhaul, maintenance, etc > therefore any electric engine would need years of reliability proof before they would be integrated into the airframe, as you would be integrating from day1 of the product conception!
ETA;
Airbus have taken delivery of a new 3000V hybrid a/c.
Stepping up the pace
This plane – registered as G-WEFX – is not just any plane. Meticulous vetting on a set of detailed and crucial criteria was performed in as little as seven weeks to acquire the aircraft destined to become the embodiment of one of the most ambitious Airbus demonstrator projects to date: meet E-Fan X, the world's first 3,000 volt aircraft.
This major milestone achievement comes just one year after Airbus announced it would actively pursue the goal of achieving electric flight for mid-range aircraft. The E-Fan X is the essential stepping stone on that path, as it's the product of converting an existing aircraft into a hybrid-electric propulsion platform.
Electric flight and the game changer
Airbus has spent a lot of time researching electric propulsion over the past years by building E-Fan X smaller siblings eFan and eFan 2.0. The previous iterations were aimed at progressively increasing battery power. However, in 2016 the realisation came that in order to stay ahead of the curve and be first in achieving electric flight for future long range commercial, Airbus needed to radically change its strategy. This meant exponentially increase power supply and disrupt what it considered feasible, and disrupt itself along the way.
The main learnings from the previous eFan programmes serve to steer the roadmap for the E-Fan X: design the aircraft around the battery, increase power capacity exponentially from 400V to 3000V, and create hybrid propulsion as step-stone towards fully electric flight.
The team as well as its trusted external partners have been working tirelessly since early 2018 to push the envelope of technology conversion, engineering and the future of sustainable flight, and the near-term future for E-Fan X is exciting. 2019 Will be a crucial year for the demonstrator as it will need to grow up quickly and be plucked, scanned, weighed, tested, crafted and tested again.
Edited by Lord.Vader on Tuesday 8th January 08:46
Edited by Lord.Vader on Tuesday 8th January 08:54
IforB said:
For a General Aviation Aircraft, that's plenty.
That depends on where you live. It wouldn't be much use in, for example, a big country like South Africa.RobDickinson said:
Whilst ignoring the fundamental advantages....
No power loss at altitude, much higher reliability and much lower operating costs and maintenance.
This looks like a development project testbed more than anything.
Regarding altitude, while pure power output from the motors may be relatively unaffected, surely it's useable thrust that counts? What is the efficiency of the propellers spinning in thin air?No power loss at altitude, much higher reliability and much lower operating costs and maintenance.
This looks like a development project testbed more than anything.
GliderRider said:
Equus said:
And since when was Rolls Royce a Gloucestershire firm?
The project is probably being run from the old Bristol Siddeley site bought by Rolls-Royce in 1966. They produced engines for the Gnat, the Harrier and Concorde amongst others.GliderRider said:
The project is probably being run from the old Bristol Siddeley site bought by Rolls-Royce in 1966. They produced engines for the Gnat, the Harrier and Concorde amongst others.
Ah, so it's a Gloucestershire aviation firm in the same way that BMW is a South Carolina, USA automotive firm, then? I understand now...Equus said:
And since when was Rolls Royce a Gloucestershire firm?
They probably said this because we're developing the platform in Bristol (Filton), which is South Gloucestershire. E-Fan X is being done here too https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_E-Fan_XReally Rolls-Royce is a Derby company, of course, but Defence/Marine/R&D is here.
Edited by Alex_6n2 on Tuesday 8th January 09:06
Couple of things as I understand it:
1) it will be three engine - a pile of three 250kW electric motors on a single shaft driving a single propeller
2) the company making the plane is based in South Gloucestershire (ElectroFlight?) - Rolls-Royce will be doing the power pack to fit into it (and, I think, paying the company making the plane)
more details here - https://www.rolls-royce.com/media/our-stories/inno...
1) it will be three engine - a pile of three 250kW electric motors on a single shaft driving a single propeller
2) the company making the plane is based in South Gloucestershire (ElectroFlight?) - Rolls-Royce will be doing the power pack to fit into it (and, I think, paying the company making the plane)
more details here - https://www.rolls-royce.com/media/our-stories/inno...
Nerdherder said:
I want an autonomously flying EV helicopter or at least the ability to book rides on one into sh
holes like London.
Please don't try and fly out of Gatwick in it. The place will be closed for hours and the Police will stand around deciding if they want to shoot it down or not.holes like London.IforB said:
Thornaby said:
A 200 mile flight! That'll come in handy.
For a General Aviation Aircraft, that's plenty.A typical competition aerobatic sortie is about 15 minutes, assuming no fubars with sequencing folk into the box from the hold (or, on more than one occasion, the competitor went off to the hold and then couldn't find the airfield again...Fenland...or worse still found the wrong airfield - competition at Sleap, sequence flown at Shawbury...no, it wasn't me)...and 50% of winning a competition is actually getting to the venue in the first place - the inevitable scud running in marginal weather to make it to the briefing in time does nothing for your mental composure.
The prospect of knowing absolutely that a) you're going to get to the competition regardless of the weather leading up to it and b) that you're going to be able to get home at the end of it because the aircraft is on a trailer is actually quite reassuring once you've accumulated enough gray hair due to aforementioned scud-running. Of course, the ability to de-rig the aircraft isn't specifically related to electrical power, except that having avgas in the wing tanks rather than batteries would make the process more involved (the small fuselage-mounted aerobatic tank is just a bit too small for an entire sortie without scope for some seriously squeaky underpant moments).
dvs_dave said:
Electric aircraft will be designed and configured very differently to fossil fueled aircraft. Electric propulsion systems will allow for more efficient airframe designs with much less drag, and other significant efficiency improvements over fossil fueled aircraft....for example, elimination of the high capacity onboard power generation systems that a modern airliner requires.
How so? On a modern airliner the fuselage shape is defined by the people, their luggage & the need to pressurise, the wing is shaped to provide the right lift at the right speed, the engine pods by the fan size required to provide thrust & the tail by the stability requirements.There's nothing there that'll change if it's electric powered. OK you can eliminate the power gen systems & APU, but you'll need batteries to store the energy they create, plus back-up systems, so the weight & space will still be used.
Fossil fuelled aircraft could be much more efficient, for example by using a flying wing design, but other requirements - like getting all the passengers off in 90 seconds & hanging the engines in pods for easy maintenance make that impossible.
Fury1630 said:
dvs_dave said:
Electric aircraft will be designed and configured very differently to fossil fueled aircraft. Electric propulsion systems will allow for more efficient airframe designs with much less drag, and other significant efficiency improvements over fossil fueled aircraft....for example, elimination of the high capacity onboard power generation systems that a modern airliner requires.
How so? On a modern airliner the fuselage shape is defined by the people, their luggage & the need to pressurise, the wing is shaped to provide the right lift at the right speed, the engine pods by the fan size required to provide thrust & the tail by the stability requirements.There's nothing there that'll change if it's electric powered. OK you can eliminate the power gen systems & APU, but you'll need batteries to store the energy they create, plus back-up systems, so the weight & space will still be used.
Fossil fuelled aircraft could be much more efficient, for example by using a flying wing design, but other requirements - like getting all the passengers off in 90 seconds & hanging the engines in pods for easy maintenance make that impossible.
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff