Taking a look how far the aviation industry has gotten in the development of electric airplanes. Which of these do you think is the most advanced?

I’m very satisfied and professionally description of every Ev thank you

@automotiveterritory

2 жыл бұрын

Glad you like them! Which of these is your top pick?

The problem with short range air taxis is that under about 25-50 miles, a ground transportation is far less hassle. This is because aircraft must take off from designated landing spots and can't just land anywhere. Getting to such designated landing spots in itself is a minor hassle, plus any wait in line, ticketing, etc...making ground transportation superior for under 50 miles. That means each short range aircraft must spend an hour or so recharging after each taxi service, making it completely uneconomical.

@Zuckerpuppekopf

3 жыл бұрын

Basically, air taxis are very niche. For example, it might work in a large city from a skyscraper top to a suburban airport on a sub-50 mile fare, but only if that city has sufficient traffic congestion to make ground transportation worse. Outside of that, it would have almost zero economical function.

@automotiveterritory

3 жыл бұрын

These are very likely to be used as an attraction or in recreation. Other applications of this technology would still require a lot of work.

@neutrino78x

2 жыл бұрын

I would definitely be a buyer for the service from San Jose to San Francisco in 15 min. Driving is one hour as is the express Caltrain. It's a trip that people in Silicon Valley make quite often. Since I don't drive it would make a quick trip to Fresno (electric air taxi SJ to SFO, airliner from SFO to Fresno), then YARTS bus the next morning to Yosemite! :) Or just a quick trip to SFO to watch a movie in IMAX on the original 100 foot diagonal screen (33 m). :)

So that Slovenian electric trainer plane is the only one in production and certified? I liked the most Alice model and Lilium 5-seater.

@automotiveterritory

3 жыл бұрын

It is, for now.

@stefanweilhartner4415

3 жыл бұрын

alice in wonderland is just purely made up with battery tech that does not exist

@rangefreewords

2 жыл бұрын

​Suffice to say they should have by now, a year since your comment, what foreseeable battery capacity is for the next 10 years in terms of range unless they consider hydrogen fuel cells which double the range in terms of vehicles when compared to Tesla.

Thanks for the video!

@automotiveterritory

3 жыл бұрын

Glad it was helpful! How did you like the lineup?

0:28 Most of the noise comes from the propeller. Checkout Pipistrel's electric prototype.

@stefanweilhartner4415

3 жыл бұрын

i would not consider it as a prototype anymore. for flight training it is perfect and cheap

@ralphpremici7632

3 жыл бұрын

Pipistrel the bat...lol

It’s great to see so many EV options in the works. 👍🏻

@automotiveterritory

2 жыл бұрын

Which of these did you like the most?

น่าจะถอดแบตเตอรี่สับเปลี่ยน เป็นการทำเวลานะครับ

I like the Siemen E- Flyer for the side by side cockpit, endurance, and sleek looks. Glide ratio not mentioned...but with a 38’ wingspan, it must be amoungst the top competitors. Looking forward to better lifespan of batteries, which is coming...electric cars have proven themselves, airplanes won’t be far behind.

The velis electro is exciting. Id like to see an electric cub with sufficient range and setup for stol

@automotiveterritory

3 жыл бұрын

It would be nice for sure.

Awesome 😀👍

Alice Aviation looks like it could be a winner.

@automotiveterritory

2 жыл бұрын

It's a nice model indeed

Wow thanks ur channel is awesome

@automotiveterritory

3 жыл бұрын

Glad you enjoy it! Which of these models is your favorite?

@user-gn9qo1qi2o

3 жыл бұрын

@@automotiveterritory all of them ))

Vtol electrics are game changing.

@automotiveterritory

3 жыл бұрын

Which of these do you think has the best potential?

Looking forward to more.

@automotiveterritory

3 жыл бұрын

Would make a follow up release as soon as there are news about other models.

I think it's a brilliant tactic to continue to build for leasing aircraft built to fly a squadron of 20 aircraft or under an experimental ticket providing results back to the command center to update their flight test data. This would suffice toward their pilot training and the upscale in the market.

Yeah,these are great and all but what about over time wiring faults?

Wish they would give an example of audio in the cockpit ... Just how quiet are they ...

@user-do5zk6jh1k

3 жыл бұрын

Still loud for sure. I've flown gliders and they get pretty loud at 60 knots and most general aviation planes fly around 100-150 knots. Add in the noise from the propeller chopping up the air and you have a plane that's only slightly quieter than most modern general aviation planes.

Cool!

@automotiveterritory

2 жыл бұрын

Which of these did you like the most?

เพื่อนการใช้งานต่อเนื้อง ครับ

A lot of these seem a bit far-fetched, but most of them actually have flying prototypes, which gives me a lot more confidence of them leading somewhere. As for the Blackfly, it seems they are trying to comply with US ultralight aircraft restrictions, hence the lower-performance US version, but would they also sell the higher performance longer range one in the US for use by licensed pilots? I sometimes see airplanes' potential choked back by a desire to comply with the ultralight or light sport rules, they could do so much more if they made a version for licensed pilots or non-sport pilots that didn't fit into those rules. The Blackfly seems so weird at first glance, but it actually makes a lot of sense and is a really elegant solution. I'd love to have one to commute to work, would be absolutely perfect for that. Especially if I were to get my dream job - for Bye Aerospace also mentioned in this video, would be a bit of a drive or train ride to get there.

@midgetman4206

2 жыл бұрын

If they aim higher, the available target customers is reduced. Starting with the classes that are more lenient with their rules and easier for the average person to obtain is kinda the only way for these risky, expensive, and limited performance aircraft to have any chance to succeed. But that also means some will be restricted to where they can fly (for now), which is a good and bad thing. Good because it prevents the novice from unnecessarily risking people's wellbeing, but then that means the tasks they can do are reduced. Which brings me to this question, what is your dream job? Because if the job location is away from heavily populated areas then you just might be able to fly there like you so dream. But why wait? There are ultralights already on the market like the autogyros that have STOL capabilities

@quillmaurer6563

2 жыл бұрын

@@midgetman4206 I would hope the training requirements for these would be pretty strict regardless. Not to mention these things are surely going to be really expensive. So relative to that I think the cost and difficulty of earning a pilot's license to go with it wouldn't be that huge, and a lot could be gained if freed from the constraints of the ultralight category. Having a pilot's license would make the whole thing a hell of a lot safer too, as a pilot myself I don't like this idea of joe-blow hopping into one of these things with no knowledge of aeronautics, airspace, rules and regulations, instruction, and how to properly fly, as many of them seem to be touting. A sport pilot rating would really be a good idea. For comparison, cars require licenses, something smaller and simpler (the car equivalent of an ultralight), a motorcycle, not only still requires a license but requires a special license beyond a driver's license - because it's just as if not more capable of killing someone. I will grant that there might be other problems just beyond trying to make it (dangerously) easy for buyers - certification of the aircraft itself. The FAA is notoriously behind the times on just about everything, and probably wouldn't have any category for a VTOL multi-rotor with wings. Is it a rotorcraft? An airplane? "Power-lift" (a category that does exist, I believe created decades ago in belief that tilt-rotors would become common, however no civilian tilt-rotors have ever been on the market hence there's no aircraft for it to apply to)? The FAA would probably make any requirements both for pilot and aircraft excessively strict, probably putting it in the same category as a hypothetical civilian version of the V-22 Osprey, meaning having it as anything other than an ultralight - free from their regulation - would be unfeasible. On the other hand, I see that attitude of bypassing the FAA rather than working with them a little frightening, the attitude by these companies is that they're building an overgrown drone with a seat on it rather than a manned aircraft. What really needs to happen is for the FAA to acknowledge and work around this new class of aircraft, come up with safety standards and licensing requirements (hopefully relatively easy but sufficient to actually ensure pilot competence), and work with manufacturers to create something safe. As for my own case - at the moment I'm unemployed ("Get an engineering degree they said. You'll get a job they said...") but think I'd likely end up with a job on the far side of the city, a difficult commute through heavy traffic. If I got a job somewhere I drive through countryside to get to (as my last noteworthy job was, actually a lovely drive) I'd see less need to fly as I can drive or ride my motorcycle without too much traffic to deal with. The populated areas an ultralight can't fly over is where this is needed most - as an urban transport that can fly over traffic. The thought has crossed my mind of getting (or building) one of those tiny single-seat helicopters for that purpose, but those have some drawbacks compared to this design. If I were to do so, even if the helicopter is light enough to qualify as an ultralight I'd still probably earn a helicopter license, and register the aircraft as an experimental, both because it would make me a safer pilot of the thing and it would allow me to fly over the city, where it would be most useful.

@midgetman4206

2 жыл бұрын

@@quillmaurer6563 Yeah, most of what I said (though it may be from someone who has no experience or much knowledge) is because I know that there's regulations that must be followed, even they are anything but the best. The comparison to ground vehicles is understandable but it isn't 1:1. The regulations imposed on them such as requiring a license to operate is quite easily sidestepped, and even then a good amount of people who are licensed to drive don't deserve said license. One thing that is similar to cars is that used aircraft tend to be significantly cheaper and available. Both fields need improvement. If, and hopefully, they do update what's inplace (preferable that everything, and I mean it all, not just the FAA) then I can see these being a wonderful addition. I would personally use a hybrid electric that functions similarly to that of road use vehicles, a twin coaxial tilt-duct usually referred to as a dualcopter (but with wings as well. Kinda like you said, a V-22 but instead the ducts would have two axis of rotation. Why? Because moving side to side sounds awesome. Instead of buying it though, since I doubt anything as lucrative as what I want will ever hit the market, I'll try to make it sometime in the distant future. Wish me luck)

@quillmaurer6563

2 жыл бұрын

@@midgetman4206 That would be cool to build - it might be interesting to see if the homebuilt/Experimental markets might work with these things. Possibly so, given their overall simplicity, and that more advanced batteries, motors, and electronics are all becoming much more capable and cheaper. Overall let's hope the FAA is able to adapt to new ideas, markets, aircraft types, and so on, so that they can be a part of this revolution rather than standing in it's way.

PRICE: TBD I see too much and that is a shame. Thanks for the video and stay safe ✌️

@automotiveterritory

3 жыл бұрын

It's going to take some time for these to become available for purchase.

@stefanweilhartner4415

3 жыл бұрын

the pipistrel electric is affordable. while it is more expensive than the ICE variants to buy, the operation costs are way cheaper, especially maintenance.

Pretty cool VTOL Aircraft! 😉 I’ve been flying Electric RC Aircraft for over 20 years. May the torch be with you! 😂😂😂🤣🤣🤣

Que bueno que ya aiga aviones eléctricos pero mas puede el cambio climático que las decisiones de los hombres buen vídeo territory

@reyalfonsomorenocardenas2873

3 жыл бұрын

De masiado tarde pero gracias

LOVE them all!!

@automotiveterritory

3 жыл бұрын

So glad to hear that!

Small light planes like the pipistrel are a great idea but the question nobody has answered yet: what’s the life of the battery pack before an overhaul is needed? I seriously doubt even with the saving in fuel and oil that it is more economic than an ordinary av gas plane.

@automotiveterritory

3 жыл бұрын

The battery life depends on the frequency of use, charging scenarios and presence of cooling/heating.

@Bob_Adkins

2 жыл бұрын

Battery life is about 800 gentle cycles. No overhaul is necessary, anyone can just change out the pack in 30 minutes. I imagine used packs have pretty good value.

All are interesting.

@automotiveterritory

3 жыл бұрын

Which of these do you think has the biggest potential?

COOL

@automotiveterritory

3 жыл бұрын

Which one did you like the most?

Getting there

@automotiveterritory

3 жыл бұрын

Which of the models do you think is the closest to getting there?

Would putting solar pannels on the wings improve their range?

@automotiveterritory

2 жыл бұрын

Nope. Solar panels are way to inefficient. Check out Solar Impulse 2. That things is far from a viable aircraft for passenger transportation

@Bob_Adkins

2 жыл бұрын

Sure, but not much.You can fit round about 600w of panels on a fair-sized wing. Over a 1/2 hour flight the panels would produce about 300wh of power. That's pretty trivial when flying but it would easily run all the avionics. Pretty sure you can slowly taxi a light plane on 600w.

These are gonna need to up thier range if they expect to be commercially viable.

@automotiveterritory

3 жыл бұрын

The new battery technology is long overdue. Hopefully it will help making a breakthrough in the industry when it comes.

A "tail dragger?" I thought we gave that up in 1955

@user-do5zk6jh1k

3 жыл бұрын

Tail draggers are harder to taxi, but having one small tail wheel saves weight.

I like the blackfly. Never say it in the video, but it can land in water.

@automotiveterritory

3 жыл бұрын

Nice remark, thanks.

The last stats I heard say that production of an electric car has a 7:4 greater carbon impact than production of a conventional IC automobile, and that it takes a good 2 years of usage for the reduced emissions to make up for it. I'm not convinced battery technology - i.e. energy density, cost of production, safety, and sustainability are where they need to be yet for this to be completely viable.

@neutrino78x

2 жыл бұрын

Really? Even with $7/gallon gasoline you're going to say that electric cars aren't viable? You won't even be able to buy a new one in California in 2035. The law here requires that all new model year cars sold in California in 2035 will be zero emission. I don't see how the production of it would have greater carbon impact. The process of assembling the car is the same.

This remains the future of travel.

How about an extremely light weight and aerodynamic airship, that only requires energy to power it from A to B. In reality, it would resolve many safety issues.

@stefanweilhartner4415

3 жыл бұрын

what a brilliant idea to make airplanes lightweight.

@wilsjane

3 жыл бұрын

@@stefanweilhartner4415 If they filled parts of it with helium, making it almost zero weight without the passengers, not only would it use very little energy to fly, in event of any failure, it should glide down to the ground without a catastrophic crash. It may have to be quite large, but with modern lightweight carbon fibers, the concept should be possible. Gliders land without killing anyone.

@chrisbraid2907

2 жыл бұрын

@@wilsjane alternatively they could have a mix of Hydrogen and Helium Cells for lift , utilising some of the hydrogen for fuel when reserves were needed.

How about freight trains? Those gonna be battery electric also?

@automotiveterritory

Жыл бұрын

If they figure out how to make efficient hydrogen powertrains, they might as well be electric.

The world is changing now guy 😜

@automotiveterritory

3 жыл бұрын

True. Which of these models is the most promising for you?

@EventsX2ShibaInu

3 жыл бұрын

I was try to make a small airplane now 😁

Closer to "zero emissions"? Sounds like Hopium. Got any all-in (full life-cycle) numbers or hydrocarbon usage for conventional vs. electric? That lithium doesn't mine itself, and most electric power is still generated by coal. I had to snort at the Caravan with the ONE TON battery! Still, a slick video, enjoyable, informative.

Why not use mixture of batteries & helium canister placed underneath the batteries in order to reduce extra batteries weight (to get them levitating) in flight and when landing withdrawn back into (in pressurise form) in the canister. That way you can have as many batteries as needed to increase the range without increasing the oveall weight of the plane.

@automotiveterritory

3 жыл бұрын

Does technology like this exist already?

@tanoshi4300

3 жыл бұрын

yes, it was used in many blimps, but the can would weigh more in the end

I want to buy one of these aircraft for my kids to play with.

@automotiveterritory

2 жыл бұрын

Well, these do require extensive training to be operated.

@jamesburns2232

2 жыл бұрын

@@automotiveterritory Nah!

the lilium jet would probably be better with fewer number but larger ducted fans- all these little ones create a lot more drag than necessary

@automotiveterritory

3 жыл бұрын

Won't it make the wings wider?

and as always, noone knows how egine progress ends up defining design, so phps in a decade or two, ppl are visually accustomed to very different solutions, and might condider these amazing marvels 'old school'

@automotiveterritory

2 жыл бұрын

Great point! We are very likely to see a shift in the way our transport is designed.

If a dash8 400 used 100% of its useful load for the best batteries currently in production it could fly 26 minutes of cruise no reserve. Battery tech is 20 years from moving out of novelty aircraft even for hybrid designs and 50 years from general use viable for all electric.

The P2 Xcursion definitely needs more press. It’s like an Icon A5, but actually good

@automotiveterritory

3 жыл бұрын

I'm glad I promoted it here then ;)

@PistonAvatarGuy

3 жыл бұрын

There's nothing wrong with the Icon A5, all of the accidents involving the aircraft were a result of pilots flying in an extremely unsafe manner. The P2 doesn't even look stable in flight and it's power plant makes absolutely no sense.

@xpeterson

3 жыл бұрын

@@PistonAvatarGuy The Icon is heavy and underpowered. It weighs more than most light sport planes, while having the same engine. On top of that, being a pusher prop, only about half the prop is in clean air. Similar airplanes like the Searey and the Super Petrel keep more of the prop in clean air, which combined with their much lower weight, gives takeoff distances that are half of what Icon needs. These design flaws are evident with the massive oversized VGs they had to start adding to the side of the fuselage. No plane is safe with a bad pilot, but an underpowered plane vs a not underpowered plane can make the difference between a decent pilot surviving a mistake or not.

@PistonAvatarGuy

3 жыл бұрын

@@xpeterson That's all true, but the P2 looks to be far, FAR worse in basically every way possible. I just don't understand what your assertions were based on.

@xpeterson

3 жыл бұрын

@@PistonAvatarGuy It has a more powerful motor, the prop is in clean air, its aerodynamically streamlined instead of aesthetically streamlined (I do like how the Icon looks mind you), its aerodynamically clean, can use more of its fuselage for carrying capability, has front entry and egress, has reverse (if you are a seaplane pilot, you know how much of a game changer this is), etc. Its still a prototype so very little can be definitively stated about it. But from a purely blue print look at how both aircraft were designed, the xcursion comes out way ahead in my book

2:16. UFO 🛸 in background

@automotiveterritory

3 жыл бұрын

Wow, mind blown ;)

Can i drive whit them from my farm to city?

@automotiveterritory

3 жыл бұрын

Depends on your local regulations.

Haven't seen any innovations yet. Need to think outside the box. Using a airfoil as a method of perpulsion would have been interesting at first however one would realize it's limitations . It should be scrapped. How much money has been dumped combined? How about unlimited range ? And size ? ........ Again need to re think and look outside the box. There are a lot of things over looked. Thanks for the vid.

@automotiveterritory

3 жыл бұрын

The idea of low emission flight is a long way from being finalized, let alone turned into reality. The video just represents the most recent attempts that were made to get moving in the right direction.

@davidkatuin4527

3 жыл бұрын

@@automotiveterritory well I thought the video was great, it pointed out that you could stick millions of dollars into something that you could confirm on paper. That is , it wouldn't work. At least not commercially. So there is a challenge there . I don't think I would start by building something that doesn't work. So it definitely makes me think that maybe I should contribute . At least an approachable idea that any one with an engineering degree could move forward successfully. Thanks for the reply.

Edison generator is the realistic solution to electric power airplanes. If you need anything let me know what you need.

X k tanto misterio que no disen cuanto cuesta un avion asi tengo 10 mil dokares me alcansa para comprarlo

Electric motors can be used for vertical takeoffs and landings but nothing more than that makes sense.

@stefanweilhartner4415

3 жыл бұрын

the pipistrel electric shows otherwise. and i guess the battery tech is already (out)dated

These represent that humans are smart. Am I right

@automotiveterritory

3 жыл бұрын

True. When do you think we'd be able to have regular electric aircraft flying in the sky?

@machahitheshkumarreddy4334

3 жыл бұрын

@@automotiveterritory not these. But in future every family has an object in which we can fly

@stevefisher2553

3 жыл бұрын

Well......

@stefanweilhartner4415

3 жыл бұрын

@@automotiveterritory this is just a matter of battery energy density. in the pipistrel electric we probably have around 200Wh/kg at cell level. in 2021 you will be able to buy cells with about 300Wh/kg. if pipistrel will update their battery, they will probably get a range of 75-80 minutes. this will be a viable start to go from training flights to other applications. you can guess at least 5% increase in energy density development per year and about 5% reduction in cost per year. these are more conservative values than they where in the last few years.

Maybe someone will invent an Electric Plane that runs from the Electricity in the Clouds? Like the Alice Eviation fly near a Thunderstorm become the first Lighting Catcher charge that 7 minute battery full instantly without landing....Just a Thought.

@automotiveterritory

3 жыл бұрын

Sadly, only Iron Man could do it by recharging from Thor's hammer, but he passed away :(

@TUHANbukanorangARAB

3 жыл бұрын

@@automotiveterritory Jarvis: "Power at 400% capacity." Tony Stark: "How about that?"

Electric planes are great for light sport aircraft bit hydrogen needs attention

What about electric planes with regenerative gliding.

@automotiveterritory

3 жыл бұрын

Are there any models that have this feature already?

@ralphpremici7632

3 жыл бұрын

@@automotiveterritory not yet, but they should.

Not possible for commercial plane. weight of the batteries.

@automotiveterritory

3 жыл бұрын

What if some sort of a hybrid system is used?

@JamesPetrycia-zj7yq

3 жыл бұрын

@@automotiveterritory That means more weight, how much weight could they carry on board, All electric planes are very light

How is this automotive territory? Mine does not fly.

Where is dealer

The narrator's English is too distorted. I couldn't understand about 1/3 of what he was saying.

The emissions only occur when charging the batteries I guess...

@automotiveterritory

Жыл бұрын

How about solar / wind charging?

Ducted fans built into the wings is the way forward VTOL is extremely wasteful of energy.

The V tol technoligy can be robosized by 5g much better then electric cars du,ll you can not bump into things in air must less. More space in all dimensions. So you can create a world sized covered network by membership and lower the costeds. So transportion more out of the private sphere into the public sphere is the future I think. Because les roads are needed and less input into the invirement.

Inevitable? That’s a silly word to use . As if the future was evident.

@automotiveterritory

3 жыл бұрын

Pretty evident if you track down science fiction of the past

It use to be at least in the US the EAA would be ahead of the big companies with new ideas and aircraft. Now it is extremely hard to source motors, battery management systems, and some what batteries because the suppliers are so large they won't deal with the small guy. Big mistake, let the small guy innovate and experiment at their expense and offer feedback, compared to try and make a "small fortune" from the iffy promise of the glitzy computer generated next best thing. Places like Slovenia are way ahead of the US in this area. No doubt, no thanks to the US litigious bent.

Gasoline pollutes so much less than coal this should clean things right up.

Why can't the battery recharge in flight like a gas powered car can?

@automotiveterritory

3 жыл бұрын

What do you mean?

why do you have problems with cooling?

@automotiveterritory

3 жыл бұрын

What do you mean?

@Jkauppa

3 жыл бұрын

@@automotiveterritory electric motors with huge rotors next to them should not have to mention "water cooling"

Why aren't you working with anti gravity technology instead of electricity

Yeah I would still much rather have a regular 4 seter Cessna

These electric airplanes like electric cars don't impress me much because they don't have much range. Taking a cross country trip would be like talking a cross country trip In a model A Ford. It would take to long.

@automotiveterritory

3 жыл бұрын

That's true. But the idea that all-electric flight is already a thing is fascinating, isn't it?

The technology is great, but stating they are "clean" has been countered and demonstrated as false on several occasions. 1) mining the lithium leads to toxic destruction of the soil, and long-standing scaring of the geological area from which it is resources from. It also leads to more carbon emissions per unit than a typical fossil fuel counterpart. 2) all supplies (plastics, wiring, assembly, transportation of supplies, etc ...) For the battery alone also have a net emission of carbon that overwhelms any environmental "benefit." 3) recycling the battery is also carbon intensive. Love the technology, love the innovation, and can't wait to see more of it, but when someone is advertising it as a "clean" propulsion, they lose credibility.

I really like those But sadly they’re still a bit to expensive for their functions

@automotiveterritory

3 жыл бұрын

But they seem to have gotten far enough already, don't they?

@kiemenkevin9624

3 жыл бұрын

Yeah but a used Cessna Skyhawk could outpace and outrange them for like 20-30k

@kiemenkevin9624

3 жыл бұрын

My only real hope lies in magnix with their engine swaps for an normal price

@stefanweilhartner4415

3 жыл бұрын

the pipistrel electric has shown that it much cheaper on the long run. the fuel cost savings are nice but the maintenance cost savings are the real advantage

Zero emissions? Right....

@automotiveterritory

2 жыл бұрын

Zero emissions. The electricity could also come from renewable resources.

!!!!!!!!!!

I think hydrogen would work best for the aviation industry

@automotiveterritory

2 жыл бұрын

It may. Still, FCEV powertrains need to overcome some obstacles to become universally accepted.

ADD HIHG DENSITY SOLAR PANELS FOR BETER RANGE OR EVEN UNLIMITED RANGE ,,LAND RECHARGE AND FLY, LAND RECHARGE AND FLY AND ON AND ON .

@automotiveterritory

3 жыл бұрын

Do you think that solar panels are efficient enough to completely recharge the battery on the go?

@shirishag75able

3 жыл бұрын

@@automotiveterritory hopefully lot will happen in couple of years as electric cars become more and more mainstream the benefit of all R&D will go into the electric airplanes. There are always technologies which we do not know or anticipate or even materials which could completely change the game. For e.g. things like Perovskite Solar Cells and others could completely change the game. Here's wishing for a better tomorrow :)

@wilsjane

3 жыл бұрын

@@automotiveterritory People seem to forget that the energy from a solar panel can never exceed the energy falling onto it from the sun. I cannot imagine this being more than about 5% of the energy needed to remain airborne, let alone charge the batteries. All to often, people let their imagination run away and ignore the laws of physics.

@automotiveterritory

3 жыл бұрын

Agreed

@stefanweilhartner4415

3 жыл бұрын

@@automotiveterritory good silicon based solar cells have an efficiency of about 22%. we will get cheap perovskit 3-layer solar cells with an efficiency of over 30% in a few years. that could be a significant amount of energy to be economical und boost the range by 20%

Zero emissions "flying" is not zero emissions. The electricity that is used to charge the batteries likely comes from fossil fuels. Electric planes are cool, just don't oversell them...

@automotiveterritory

3 жыл бұрын

How about alternative sources of energy?

Zero emissions. Hmm. How do you charge the battery???? Must be with solar or wind right? Same with electric auto. ???? Hydrogen. That’s the way forward. FYI

@automotiveterritory

3 жыл бұрын

Well, electricity is used in production of hydrogen fuel cells too, isn't it?

@stefanweilhartner4415

3 жыл бұрын

hydrogen is perfect for wasting energy. but for mobility you want to save energy to make it cheap and environmentally friendly. this is why BEVs grow in market share +60% every year because the development speed for BEVs is high which reflects in signifikant price drops.

There is nothing green about batteries.

@automotiveterritory

3 жыл бұрын

Treat the aircraft as a whole. Batteries will be recycled and improved to be greener soon

@stefanweilhartner4415

3 жыл бұрын

that would be right for battery tech of the 80s but not for actual battery tech and reusage/recycling.

@tomkitchen2764

3 жыл бұрын

Not from what i have read Stefan.@@stefanweilhartner4415

Never going to happen. There is no increase in battery density since the invention of Lithium-Ion-Batteries, which happened more than 30 years ago. If you calculate the power consumption of a passenger jet, the battery needed to allow an A320 2h flights would be heavier than the MTOW of every plane in existence. Electric flight does not allow anything but small, air-taxi operations. And even the air taxi use is out of the window as they will never be allowed to fly in urban areas. They will never be allowed to start or land anywhere but on registered airfields.

@automotiveterritory

3 жыл бұрын

How about other battery technologies besides Li-ion?

@Nyruami

3 жыл бұрын

@@automotiveterritory yes, which one? Do you mean the purely fictional Zn-Air, or do you mean Sodium-Ion or Zn-Ion, which both do have advantages in terms of security, but are less energy-dense and thereby would even weigh more? Having planes fly with their own fusion reactors is more likely than having a battery-powered airliner.

@automotiveterritory

3 жыл бұрын

I see potential in Solid state batteries, hydrogen fuel cell technology and simple hybrid-electric planes

@Nyruami

3 жыл бұрын

@@automotiveterritory Well, solid-state batteries will reach lesser energy density than li-ion, about 1,1 kWh / kg vs 1,5 kWh / kg Li-Ion is way too heavy to build an airliner that flies electric, so solid-state will be even less suited. What we would need would be a battery with around 10 kWh / kg to even think about that. Such a battery would then again be an enormous hazard, if you short circuit it, the energy density is roughly the same as C4, so simply short-circuiting a battery would suffice to blow up an airplane. You just need to watch KZread videos about what happens when you short-circuit a Li-ion battery to imagine what would happen with 8 times the explosive power. Hydrogen fuel cells don´t make any sense. The Germans invented a way to store hydrogen without the danger that is normally connected to it, the store it in a gel, with about 10 times the energy density of liquid hydrogen. The gel isn´t flammable and both getting the hydrogen into the gel as well as getting it out of it is a very simple chemical reaction. The gel is reuseable several ten thousand times. So why use hydrogen in fuel cells, when you can simply burn hydrogen in engines that need only very slight adaptations, using all the infrastructure that is already in place? This simple invention and the fact that better batteries are purely fictional are the reasons why there will never be an electric revolution. We can stick with well-known technology, don´t have to adapt our infrastructure for trillions of dollars and the only guy who will have problems with that is Elon Musk.

Moore's Law applied to batteries says compared to lithium batteries the next gen battery will have twice the charge at half the weight and cost. Each generation of batteries seems to take 10 years. Therefore electric planes will require solar panel wraps and fuel cell range extender Technology to break into the regional commute market. Although the VTOL fans could be useful on hybrid bush planes Imagine a Beaver that could land vertically when needed

@kennethhawley1063

3 жыл бұрын

Moore's law cannot be applied to batteries. Battery energy density is limited by the laws of physics to only a small fraction of the energy density of fossil fuels.

@jeremytaylor3532

3 жыл бұрын

@@kennethhawley1063 Dear Ken: The Laws of Physics also restricted the size and density of computer circuits until work arounds werer found to create each new generation. And in the future we will see optical and quantum computing that will outdo anything we have 2day. In a like manner power storage, solar and battery and fuel cell tech will advance when enough money and brain power is applied. One needs to apply Heinleins Law to your statement to see that New Ideas always Trump old fuddy duddies who say it can't be done. I assure you it will happen and you will look like the great scientist who said if you go over thirty miles an hour the air will be sucked out of your lungs.

@stefanweilhartner4415

3 жыл бұрын

in the last 10 years of BEVs we had around 5% of energy density growth per year and at the same time 5% lower costs per year. i don't see massive changes in these numbers for the next 10 years.

@jeremytaylor3532

3 жыл бұрын

@@stefanweilhartner4415 Well 5 percent per year for 10 years is 163% over a decade I believe the number has been closer to 6.5% which gives you about 200% / decade if you average back to lead acid Technology. This was with oil companies amd car companies stifling advances in electric storage. If it was not for demand from portable laptops driving the last wave of development we would probably still be using nickel cadmium. Nevertheless energy storage will not be limited to chemical storage. I can envision complementary technologies such as harddrive tech leading to microflywheel storage or capacitor storage for braking and restart. Hydrogen or other fuel cells for extended range. Forming batteries in layers like they make computer chips. Or spraying alternate layers to form the plates like the layers of a tree rather than rolling them up Spray on multilayer solar cell paint that works in different wavelengths to give increased efficiency. As a coating on wings or the whole plane or car. Use of batteries to actually form part of car or airplane frames to reduce total system weight rather than just battery weight. Cheaper Materials used in batteries such as Aluminum alloys with iron slag alloys. Or improved microlayering of battery plates. And improved high temperature superconductors and magnet technologies that lead to electric motors with double the power and half the weight. Artificial Intelligent super finite element analysis plane design leading to planes which incorporate the best qualities of many old designs. DNA research may provide clues from mother nature as to how electric eels store energy or our own nerve cells work. All of the things I have mentioned are currently in development. But obviously I see the future thru a glass darkly. There are sure to be technologies out there that I cannot imagine like zero point or cold fusion turning out to be real. Again I refer you to Heinlein''s Law. Technology will march forward on multiple fronts. Anything is possible And the future shall be what we collectively make it.

@stefanweilhartner4415

3 жыл бұрын

@@jeremytaylor3532 you are probably right about that 6,5% (and the rest too). i just took a bit more conservative number to use this for conservative future predictions. while solar cells with 22% of efficiency is not an advantage on every car, it might be an interesting option to boost the range on busses. when we get to multilayer perovskit solar cells with over 30% of efficiency then this is a more interesting option to put on cars. it will happen when production costs come down. ICE vehicles will be more expensive in 2023 anyway. then things are changing with incredible speed and then advances made in BEVs will leak more and more into the aviation industry too and push the development from there

Todos los datos son erroneos

could you have put any more ads? gheeze

Still seems not quite practical, more of a statement for the ultra wealthy just like the Roadster et al.

Too adds

I'm sorry to dislike this Video but most of these electric aircraft have been flying for some time. I was hoping to see new aircraft, which there were a couple of.

@automotiveterritory

3 жыл бұрын

Fair enough. I did my best to bring the latest news. Glad that at least a part of the lineup was fresh info to you.

evidation has no airplane any longer.

@automotiveterritory

2 жыл бұрын

They did change the design, but the development is still ongoing, no bankruptcy or halting of operations

Fantasy land. Hydrogen fuel in about 15-20 years time. Forget solid cells.

@automotiveterritory

2 жыл бұрын

Don't your agree that solid cells are still viable for smaller planes?

JOKE !!!

Electrical does NOT mean zero emission. On the contrary.

Hydrogen is the future.

@automotiveterritory

3 жыл бұрын

It could be good for aircraft but how about road cars?

@wilsjane

3 жыл бұрын

Although it is a clean fuel with good calorific output, the major problem is that it does not liquefy when compressed. As a result, the amount of energy needed to compress it at every stage from production to use, is in excess of the calorific value of the hydrogen itself.

@stefanweilhartner4415

3 жыл бұрын

Hydrogen was the future, not "is"

@wilsjane

3 жыл бұрын

@@stefanweilhartner4415 The problem with hydrogen is that it does not liquefy when compressed. This results in huge amounts of energy being consumed at every stage of storage, distribution and final use. The energy consumed in compression, often exceeds the calorific value of the fuel.

@jhh631

3 жыл бұрын

Synthetic and sustainable hydrocarbon fuels are the future. Because fuels like hydrogen is very hard to store and unstable so safety will be a concern

How long have they been playing with electric prototypes? A long, long, long time. Just not practical. Airplanes are not a major drain on the earth's resources.

@stefanweilhartner4415

3 жыл бұрын

in the case of the pipistrel electric, your statement is not true.

I keep asking - and the silence is deafening. I don't even get trolls - why not. So I guess everybody in this electric Utopia has Ostrich Syndrome. Lets bury our heads and the problem will not be there anymore because we can't see it with our heads buried. If a load is applied to one end of a wire, then for WORK to be done, there must be generation to match that load and the LOSSES involved as well. So Every electric device requires generation. The more devices, the more generation. So if we reach this fantasy electric Utopia, I keep asking about the matching increase in generation. I never hear a word about this generation. Greenies don't like Power stations being built, rivers dammed, coal burned, nuclear stations running, and those "alternatives" of solar, wind, tide are not constant. They also mess up the environment, interfere with wild-life, spoil scenery, require constant maintenance, and more. So where are these planned power generator plans? They are essential before you plug in your "electric this or that". Now about electric planes. If they are electricly pressurised, then the batteries must also drive the heavy load of a compressor. What about electric de-icing? And what about cabin heating? There is a great difference between batteries for Demo-circuits and an electric plane which can account itself in all the conditions a piston or turbine plane has to deal with routinely. So do point out the REALISTIC generation plans which would make this viable. I'm also interested in the batteries which would enable an electric plane to cope with ice, altitude, and unanticipated extended flight because of diversion/s.

@roytee3127

3 жыл бұрын

OK, I've got a little time Generation: There's not just "a wire" - there's a whole national electric power grid (well, 2 grids, but that's another matter). The wind is always blowing somewhere. Drive across the American Heartland and you'll see field after field after field full of huge wind generators. The sun shines a lot during the day Tides are always going in and out. We can keep a few dinosaur power plants for backup when the main generation isn't enough. BTW - my household gets all its electric power from a 100% wind supplier. Batteries: Cabin compression takes a tiny load compared to flight De-icing is - or should be - for a small period of time, on rare occasions There's plenty of heat generated by the motor & control electronics; more than enough to heat the cabin. If they're clever, engineers will figure out how use waste heat for extra power generation for things like cabin pressure and de-icing. Batteries are a work in progress. Engineers are constantly making improvements Diversion: Provision for diversion is built into a flight plan, even with fossil fuel

@kiwikeith7633

3 жыл бұрын

@@roytee3127 So you are claiming that your power grid has such spare capacity right now that it can not only carry its current loads - BUT it can also power your nations traction and aviation needs? I doubt that very much. My Wire analogy reduced the issue to it simplest form. Never the less it holds good.

@roytee3127

3 жыл бұрын

@@kiwikeith7633 We can build more if we want to. The U. S. has been innovative and forward-looking in the past. We could do it again.

@kiwikeith7633

3 жыл бұрын

@@roytee3127 So if you build (presumably wind-farms & solar arrays - that takes land. It will imapct agriculture, food production and wildlife, not to mention pollute your once beautiful scenery. What a price. Also I think you previous comment made light of "Line-losses" and motors ( as needed to run compressors" draw more power that I think you trivialising mention suggests. Now don't get me wrong. I congratulate you on being the first to counter me. Thats is great. It shows I have engaged you. I like the idea of an aircraft which has a quiet motor which can be turned on at the flick of a switch. But its not just planes is it.Look at Tesla, its busses, trucks on top of cars and delivery vehicles. Its a demand for energy which keeps the world's flees of oil tankers and bulk coal carriers busy transporting immense loads. Its a hell of a lot to put on any existing grid. Its also a demand which alternative generation is unlikely to come even close to meeting. I favour nuclear actually - and have me eye on Thorium salt reactors. These can produce sufficient power without our countries being demolished to be populated by endless windmills and solar arrays. Perhaps it is an overlooked factor in the efficiency equation for fossil fueled aero engines, in that the heat they produce can be utilised for extra benefits around the plane. The issue of generation is important if electric vehicles are to be a success.

@roytee3127

3 жыл бұрын

@@kiwikeith7633 Source of energy - I think that's the prime issue you're talking about: where are we going to get the energy for electric transportation? A quick google search indicates that 28% of all energy use in the U. S. currently goes into transportation www.eia.gov/energyexplained/use-of-energy/transportation.php It seems to me that by the time we have a really large demand for electric power in transportation, that we'll be able to make up, say, half of that. Boost efficiency by 10% and we're mostly there. As for ruining the land - most of the U. S. is empty. Wind generation farms co-exist with agricultural farming (I've seen it). At any rate, we wouldn't need all that much land. www.freeingenergy.com/how-much-solar-would-it-take-to-power-the-u-s/#:~:text=Given%20the%20U.S.%20consumes%20about%204%20petawatt%20hours,Google%20Maps.%20How%20much%20are%2021%2C250%20square%20miles%3F (And in the U. S. we don't need to be farming as much land as we're farming now.) As for Thorium salt reactors, I've heard about them for years. I'm not opposed to nuclear power per se - my local utility has a reactor - but their operators are often too sloppy to operate them safely. All this applies to the U. S. If you're British, as I surmise, your landscape may have different issues.

Alice. Dude, no offense but this is probably one of the worst videos to listen to on KZread. Write a script and I’ll read of for you!

JESUS Loves YOU ALL. JESUS died for the sins of everyone. JESUS went to hell for us all and after 3 days JESUS rose from the dead to give eternal life to anyone who will believe and follow JESUS to the END. (John 3:15-17/1st Corinthians 15:1-4 NKJV)

@mauricegold9377

3 жыл бұрын

Troll alert, everyone. If Jesus save, then sign him up for a soccer-team that is doing badly.

@stevefisher2553

3 жыл бұрын

Dinosaurs.....

@stefanweilhartner4415

3 жыл бұрын

what a stupid dude. he should have invented something useful for mankind. i have a lot of wonderful wine makers here in austria that make delicious wine from water. and what value does it have that someone dies for me when he raises up from the dead anyway. that happens to me too every other weekend after long nights.