It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Electric aircraft aren't far off, but we need to prepare

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Apr, 28 2019 @ 02:04 AM

originally posted by: Pluginn
a reply to: namehere



A Tesla Model 3 Produces More CO2 than a Diesel Car, Says New Study

A small diesel engine with turbo is most likely 1 of the best options today but diesel = considered as the worst option today lol.

Almost half of the electricity in Germany comes from coal fired power plants. So yes their CO2 values will be pretty crappy.

I remember reading that last year they've produced enough renewable electricity to power every household in the country for a year. The problem is that this production is weather dependent, so they have to sell most of it at peak times under value. They would probably greatly benefit from some kind of storage concept.

posted on Apr, 28 2019 @ 09:02 AM

originally posted by: RadioRobertWhat may be reasonably close for electric-powered aircraft is burning fuel to run a turbine-generator to produce electricity for distributed propulsion electric motors. Turbo-electric might produce some advantages. But practical battery -powered aircraft are a long, long way away. Burning fuel is too light in comparison.

Now, what are the odds of something that complicated even coming close to civilian use?

That said, it would be a fantastic propulsion concept for a fast VTOL or extreme STOL military aircraft with none of the powertrain complications of a tiltrotor nor any of the aerodynamic complications of Sikorsky's coaxial compound helicopters.

The farthest I see battery electric aircraft going is hobbyist helicopters with 30 minute battery endurances that are basically just quadcopters on steroids and become the modern version of hang glider ultralights or powered parachutes, the odd battery-electric LSA, and maybe one or two certified boutique airframes that are basically a battery-powered Cirrus with a similar pricetag, similar performance, and a 100-200 mile range that become the latest surgeon's toys on the flightline.

Oh, that, and the "flying car" Ubers which will be hot stuff for the Bay Area/Manhattan set until they inevitably start killing people.
edit on 28-4-2019 by Barnalby because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 28 2019 @ 04:07 PM
a reply to: Barnalby

It's not all that complicated. I could see commercial use. I don't think you'll see it for general aviation use, but commercial carriers and haulers are already servicing turbines. It would just turn them into generators which also produce thrust. They already do this, but in theory you could use smaller engines producing even less thrust, but a great deal more electric power to power an additional fan or fans. Not terribly different than your car engine driving an alternator go recharge your battery, power your radio, etc. As long as you're looking at subsonic flight, you could get higher efficiencies that way (in theory). I think that's in the cards eventually. Battery-powered flight, not so much.

<< 1   >>

log in