How do the aviation nerds here feel about electric planes?
>>1735136i'm fine with them although I'm upset that people aren't getting invested in the whole wireless energy transfer concept again. it literally solves the main current problem of electric aircraft (weight of batteries) and could serve as a wonderful transitional technology while we wait for future more reliable ways to store electricity
>>1735142Elaborate on this wireless transfer
>>1735136Sounds amazing for shorter regional flights, also would greatly benefit communities on islands, mountain ranges, and similarly difficult terrain. Iirc some are already being used for this purposeI can't imagine electric replacing jets for long-haul for a good while however
>>1735151OP here, that’s what I think. For puddle jumps we need electric planes and high speed rail.
>>1735145The basic concept is that instead of having batteries or fuel cells, aircraft can use microwaves or other electromagnetic radiation beamed from imfrastructure. this energy can then be received via a rectenna and used as electricity to power an electric motor.Main flaws in this technology is that it requires supplimentary ground based infrastructure, which increase initial costs of production. it can also be argued that this technology violates the very concept of aircraft because it makes planes more dependent on imfrastructure, whereas many people would argue that plane and flight are a liberation of our earhtly chains. but maybe It's a bit dramatic.Also the only real life implimentation of it i can think of was the SHARP canadian flying antennae concept.However the benefits can potentially improve the performance and efficiency of aircraft as it helps reduce weigth and by extention can increase the payload of said plane.
i just realise I've written infrastructure with an M 2 times. this disproves everything I just said
>>1735159Wouldn't beams of high-energy microwaves cause problems though? If only to other aircrafts and the people inside.
>>1735162probably! thats why SHARP used low energy microwaves, presumably so that it didnt explode birds or planes that flew between it and the ground relay platform
>>1735159Very interesting thanks.
we need batteries with more capacity and faster charging, maybe also wing integrated photovoltaics
>>1735159Jesus Christ this would be terribly inefficient.
>>1735167Maybe if you get conversion efficiency up to 75-80% so see you in 60 years.
>>1735199ooga booga my monkey brain thinks its cool so i shall ignore your silly meanderings about practicality
We need more e waste! That’s exactly how to make the transportation industry more green and eco friendly
>>1735201why do you believe this?
>>1735142There’s no investment in long range wireless power because it makes stealing power far too easy. You WILL use the wire.
What if the wireless power was just used for something like takeoff, where tons of energy is expended in a small area close to the ground?
>>1735243may as well use a steam catapult
>>1735213guys guys hey what if we used the least dense power source by volume and weightit would revolutionise air travel
really excited for airships to come back desu
Electrofuels seem more viable, or just flattening the amazon so you can fuel everything with corn
>>1735223So the future are trolleyplanes?
>>1735151250,000 kg of lithium batteries to move a 80,000 kg 737 from NYC to Phoenix.
>>1735159Imagine all the roasted birds, Top Kek
>>1735278How many times?
>>1735278oh man to be a Lithium Merchant right now
>>1735304Hydrogen isn't feasible until blended wing body airliners. So you don't lose revenue generation space to the tanks.
>>1735304Is carbon capture even real?
>>1735136Are they going to be less noisy?
>>1735388the age of the bulky aircraft is at hand>>1735392some of it can be capturedbut putting and keeping it under ground is the suspect part
>>1735167Wing integrated photovoltaics wouldn’t do jack shit. You need solar farms.Lots of potential for solar panels on hangars and airports though.
>>1735401>but putting and keeping it under ground is the suspect partLol really? Where "carbon" already comes from? Dolt.
>>1735136Get a real plane cheater
>>1735213it's fine, we're making lithium mines for future generations
>>1735257Why did they completely disappear? I used to see blimps all the time in the 90s/early 00s here in western leafland and now nothing.
>>1735459helium spensive and non-renewable now.we've actually exhausted most natural deposits and have to distill it out of natural gas.
>>1735446its not going to stay thereidiot
>>1735285>Imagine all the roasted birdsnot my problem
>>1735463Helium can be made by fusion in your garage.
>>1735223>>1735263this made me laugh a l2ot, thanks anon :)
Why not make giant elevators for gliders?
>>1735422why do you believe this?
>>1735528holy fuck i hate this now
>>1735481Only if the plug fails, imbecile.
>>1735820Which it will, Shill
>>1735544Do you know how much energy is required to move a plane at a reasonable speed vs. how much energy there is in sunlight.
>>1735854But thermal gliders are fun
>>1735422can lift its own weight + pilot and a small amount of battery'sclimbs during the day, descends at night while discharging its battery's to maintain air speed
>>1735862also moves at a ridiculously slow speed, can't be pressurized, freezing temperatures, can't carry anything, bare minimum instruments...let's try sticking to real things, not guinness record one-offs
>>1735868>trying to reason with EV cultistsThey refuse to understand why people don't want to use batteries as energy storage.They're hopeless.
electric planes, honestly I expected better of this board (don't know why). dumbest fucking thing I've ever seen on here
>>1735884maybe if you read the thread you'll realize most of us are aware that they're dumb shit, you arrogant prick
>>1735885typical retarded electric plane ideologue. embarrassed to use the same board as you
>>1735886>can't even read>doesn't even like the boardbye now
>>1735868I'm merely here to demonstrate the "power" of solar energy at its peak performance>tfw its wider than every runway it encounters
>>1735862what i dont understand about solar impulse is that they took the safe option of doing a glider design but wouldn't it make more sense to take a wing conviguration that maximises wing area? I'm not sure tho maybe that would affect the performance or range of the plane
>>1735422>Lots of potential for solar panels on hangars and airports though.they could almost generate enough power for the lights inside the hanger or airport. Almost.
>>1735214>why do you believe this?different anon but 1 horsepower is 745 wattsLets say a little tiny cesna 172 with 180 hp thats 134100 watts of electricity. 3x5 solar panels are 250watts. you need 536 solar panels to power a cesna.You need 8046 square feet of solar panels running at peak output to power a cesna 172 that only has a 36 foot wing span. You will need around 7900 square feet if additional area for solar panels on the plane. this doesn't even include the extra weight of storing energy in batteries.>>1735136what is the current rage? beyond take off and landing? Can't be able to fly more than an hour right now?
>>1735892RCTestFlight has recently made a delta wing RC Solar plane using that choice:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1OGrDvInUAYSolar for jets only needs to function as a range extender for daytime.
>>1735888you're not even allowed to post about bicycles here you loser. janny slave
>>1735892I would guess they have gone for ease of construction and the greatest amount of lift at the lowest possible speed,there are some high aspect gliders with a slight sweep to their wing, but apparently this is not so good at lower speeds, and the yaw stability it brings can be achieved by dihedral.in theory a shape of wing could be used to reduce but not completely eliminate the need for a tail plane,the benefit being that although there will be less control over pitch, there will also be less drag generated.a blended wing body has the fuselage as a lifting body and the outer wings supercritical,but this type seems to be more about the internal volume of the craft rather than its surface area.
>>1735854do you know? can you tell us?
>>1735159>yes we should just aim stupid strong microwaves with enough energy to literally keep an airplane in the sky at an airplane filled with potentially hundreds of people
>>1737631You probably also have a powerful microwave emitter at home. Something that is able to roast chickens in minutes.And yet flimsy metal cage is all it takes to protect you from that frequency of EM waves. Its the same for airplanes that are also hit from time to time with lightnings.
>>1735159what if they just send text messages with downloadable batteries?
>>1735159>beamedDO you really think these waves can be 'beamed' in a laser-like fashion?
>>1737631>>1737674Microwaves are also on the longer wavelength side of the visible spectrum. The dangerous waves are on the shorter range. Picture as an example, xrays, gamma rays, and ultraviolet rays are the ones with a small enough wavelength to actually fuck up your DNA and cause cancer.
>>1735136With current battery tech, the electric plane can economically be competitive on short distances and in most cases superior due to less maintenance costs. It actually opens up a lot of routes in mountains / islands that weren't possible before.As interesting as that is, the expected improvements in batteries over the next 10 years start opening medium distance routes that high speed rail currently occupies. The cost of the equipment is lower and is cheaper to maintain. What is really cases the energy used/passenger can actually be more efficient that high speed rail which makes it redundant.
>>1735136>How do the aviation nerds here feel about electric planes?Going to add hundreds to thousands to a tickets cost and holidays will again be for the stinking rich and big businesses.
>>1735136badass but im more interested in microlights / ultralights, i dont really give a shit about rich people shit no matter how impressive it iselectric paramotors like the open ppg are far more exitingan electric chinook would be my dream plane
electric motor gliders are cool as fuck and already a well established area of electric aviation
>>1738084>Headwing above 50 km/hGuess we cannot move today son.
>>1738210agree that thing is retarded, i love airships but they are never being used for heavy lifting, atleast not on earth, whoever "designed" this shit is a moron
>>1735142Efficiency will be in the toilet. Convert the energy, send it through the air, reconvert it. And that’s without taking into consideration any other practical restraints.
>>1735142wireless electricity is a complete meme, maybe one day we might find a way but currently all we can do is put in a shitload of energy of which only a tiny amount ever reaches the targetweve tried electromagnetic induction (that garbage gimmick phones use) weve tried beaming radiation like microwaves, weve tried lasers aimed at solar panels, none of it worksin all cases most of the energy we put in just gets converted into heat and wasted and it only works at all at very short distanceswe just have to keep waiting for batteries and other technologies to improvedont worry tho compare modern battery tech to literally 20 years ago, its improving exponentially wel get therealso FUCK JANNIES
>>1735136exactly what records is it breaking because thats not very fast even by prop plane standards, spitfires went twice that, is this just the record for electrics?
>>1738374I mean my phone wireless charges fine just make that bigger. Electric charging roads are currently in development too.
>>1738414your phone needs to be placed on a pad that converts more electricity into heat than is put into the phone, its a retarded gimmick that isnt useful for anything and definitely not planes
>>1738203Commoner-pilled and checked.
>>1738456>commoner pilledeven if i was stinking fucking rich id still want a canadian ultralight (canadian ones are the best)whats freedom when you can only take off and land on athousand feet of runway?when you need a license and abillion restrictions and laws, air traffic control and all that bullshiti want a plane i can get in, blast the throttle, be off the ground an 2 seconds and be climbing at a 45 degree angle, go wherever i want and then pick a random patch of dirt barely big enough to land a helicopter on to slam her down onthats freedom, yes ultralights are poor people planes but thats like seeing a motorcycle as a poor persons car, they are what planes are supposed to be, actually freeing and funultralight master race
>>1737893you're a fucking retardlets leave it at that
>>1735304Why cant they use nuclear reaction directly? Isn't that one of the "problems" with water reactors that the intense neutron radiation tends to split it in large quantities of H2 and O2?
>>1739614seems like it would be a co morbid benefit>problemsiirc Zirconium does not play nicely with large quantity's of Hydrogenhttps://www.zircon-association.org/zirconium%E2%80%99s-essential-role-in-nuclear-engineering.htmlhttps://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/safety-and-security/safety-of-plants/appendices/fukushima-reactor-background.aspxmore modern reactor types are likely better at managing this "idk"
>>1735136after being forced to learn about piston carburated a/c that I'll never fly after training, I'm livid. absolutely livid.
>>1739730rest easy knowing that you need not fear 100 year old aircraft's
>>1735159>>1735142the main problem with microwave power transmission is that it doesn't work at these scales>>1738229Efficiency of the conversion/deconversion is not the problem. Atmospheric permeability and inverse square losses are.
>>1739763hehe, made me kek anon
>>1737888The concept is completely impractical, but for your specific question yes RF can be beamed. Yagi antennas are one example.
how about giant ass solar powered dirigible drones flying up high in the atmosphere with high bypass electric jet engines intentionally designed to have an oversized condensation trail. have a whole fleet of them and you could increase the planets albedo
>>1740563this thing is based as hell
>>1740983That can take you up to 20 miles but then what? Also last I heard we were heading towards a helium shortage. Not because of the scamdemic, its captured during mining.https://coolcosmos.ipac.caltech.edu/ask/243-Could-a-helium-balloon-float-all-the-way-up-into-space-
>>1735136It's great for short range flights. Especially for island nations like Maldives, The Philipines, or Indonesia.
>>1735854Sunlight is 1000W/m2 under full sun. I don't know how much an airplane needs. Not that anon btw.
>>1737893mirin how many applications electromagnetic radiation has
>>1744267A Cessna 172 is 160 hp or 119,000 W. It has a wing area of 174 sq ft or 16.2 sq m.
>>1735136Electric planes look pretty challenging to manufacture and that around-the-world solar plane was a complicated design too.
>>1735136Seems cool, but imagine the lithium fires. Some asshole is going to crash one outside Tahoe and all of California is going to burn down.
>>1735136It absolutely makes no fucking sense to build ev aircraft.Apart from technological curiosity and some very short recreational flight it is basically impossible to make it work. I don’t really have energy to counter every pr bullshit about electric planes but being an undergrad aerospace engineering student I can tell you that the idea itself is completely flawed and against all engineering practices in designing aircraft. Doesn’t matter that it won’t be used to leech money from investors - but the result will always be an aircraft that is much more expensive, worse in performance (can’t express how much really - shitton is probably the the closest I can think of) and unsafe.Nuclear powered aircraft can be considered an ev - and it actually makes sense but it would require gigantic aircraft to make it work - for which there currently is no need.‘Working’ wireless energy transfer is a mess - impossible to obtain with current technology; microwaves would damage electronics and well, people.
>>1744321>>1744337>>1744360They’re just going to keep developing, refining, and perfecting, and you’re just gonna keep on seething.
>>1744321To be fair so are jet engines.
You will not be allowed to travel outside of your assigned work and consumption sector.We'll tell you "it's for the earth", but frankly we just don't want to see your ugly selves ruining the view. We're going to the stars with the resources available on the planet, and you aren't invited.
>>1744361Reminds of the retards who said electric vehicles would never take off. Meanwhile every major car company has been changing their supply lines to focus on electric vehicles for the last 5 years.
>>1735136A very few things are more retarded than electric flight.Storing electricity is still an unsolved, serious problem. Energy density per pound ratio is ugly at best, and batteries output degrade with temperature, usage scenario, and other factors (while your combustion engine can get 100% power until the last drop of propellant).What if your engines lose power during a flight?(also, their weight will be the same until landing)Batteries will eventually get better. Say, 10%, 20%, 30% more. May be the discharge curve will be flattened. Maybe they will perform better below 0°F or above 100°F.But they won't ever be able to make electric flight comparable to normal flight.Yes, I know, some sci-fi revolution about storing electric energy in small, light packages, could change that. Until then, electric flight will be either for toys, or a meme.
>>1735136oh boy, can't wait til my chinesium lithium battery bursts into flames mid-flight
>>1738374is it really? to me it feels more like battery tech has been stagnating for years, maybe its even at its peak performance now. for years the only way to add capacity is making the battery bigger
>>1735136heavy batteries biggest obstacle, but otherwise really cool. electric motors are capable of doing wild shit like instant torque, increasing/decreasing RPM at will with no fucks given, etc.im curious though, is hydrogen fuel cell a btter alternative, or still heavy as fuck?
>>1747268>instant torquelies, although on an aircraft or a boat this does not matter
Cold fusion is likely to become a practical reality within the next 20-30 years. Once that occurs it's only a matter of time before we can have miniaturized fusion reactors on airplanes. The only reason why this hasn't happened yet is Airbus and Boeing lobbying to keep threats out of the market. They don't want anyone to challenge the duopoly.
>>1747271>liesproofs? even if not instant it's much better than ICE anyway
>>1747314torque stall is not a significant factorI just find that misrepresentation put forth by marketing types to be irritating
amazing how /n/ is fucking retarded enough to believe in electric planes as a viable technology. every poster in this thread is a high school drop out retard making $70 a week begging
>>1735401what the fuck is that abomination? Wouldn't it be better to make a zeppelin with solar panel coat?
>>1738204Do you need a PPL for motor gliders?
>>1735159It's a blimp train, tho instead of a blimp it's an electric plane and instead of a train - a semi with an electromagnetic radiation beam device.L M A O
>>1735892Long skinny wing is the best in every way except structural integrity.As for electric planes, no maintenance sounds great, but up north here ease of maintenance is something to consider.Also, with how much energy is in gas per pound I don't see how electric can compare. Particularly with the issue of temperature, and the inherent range of flying. Maybe it's all just a matter of efficiency, and technological improvements. I'm sure it will happen some day, just can't imagine soon. A fully loaded airline is still more efficient per passenger mile than a Honda civic or whatever
>>1738204I know a lot about self-launching sailplanes and this does not seem like a good idea to me. Can't possibly be as efficient as single-use solid fuel motors or small turbines.
>plane gets struck by lightning>gains 10% speed