Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Electric planes

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
They probably are but that's not what Maxwell actually has. They are talking about cell level energy density, pack level will be much lower.
I'm guessing pack density will much higher than it is for batteries. Ultracapacitors should have almost zero charge/discharge losses, so heating and cooling hardware would be much reduced or eliminated. This eliminates one of the major reasons that Tesla uses cylindrical cells, so ultracapacitive battery packs could use a square form factor that optimizes space. They are also much more tolerant to heat and cold, making installation in a plane that reaches high altitudes much easier because they don't need insulation.
 
Ultracapacitors should have almost zero charge/discharge losses, so heating and cooling hardware would be much reduced or eliminated. This eliminates one of the major reasons that Tesla uses cylindrical cells, so ultracapacitive battery packs could use a square form factor that optimizes space. They are also much more tolerant to heat and cold, making installation in a plane that reaches high altitudes much easier because they don't need insulation.
My understanding is more the opposite, that caps are affected by the cold, and they have high self discharge loss, so they waste energy when sitting. As for the cylindrical form factor, most caps use the cylindrical form factor for a reason.
 
Late notice, but some may be interested:

13th Annual Electric Aircraft Symposium Lands in Oshkosh

Two dozen of the world’s leading electric aircraft developers and technology experts will be speaking at the CAFE Foundation’s 13th Annual Electric Aircraft Symposium (EAS) at the University of Wisconsin Oshkosh, on July 20-21 — the weekend prior to the Experimental Aircraft Association’s (EAA) AirVenture 2019.

This year’s EAS speakers include the following:
  • Yolanka Wulff, Executive Director, CAFE Foundation
  • Mike Hirschberg, Executive Director, Vertical Flight Society
  • Ryan Naru, Vehicle Standards Engineer, Uber Technologies
  • Willi Tacke, Founder and Organizer, e-flight-expo; CEO, Flying Pages GmbH
  • Gilles Rosenberger, CEO, Faraday Aerospace
  • Todd Hodges, Engineer (Retired), NASA Langley Research Center
  • Tom Gunnarson, Lead of Regulatory Affairs, Kitty Hawk
  • Gregory Bowles, Head of Government Affairs, Joby Aviation
  • Kevin Noertker, Co-Founder & CEO, Ampaire
  • George Bye, CEO, Bye Aerospace
  • Omer Bar-Yohay, Co-Founder & CEO, Eviation
  • Bruno Mombrinie, Founder & CEO, Metro Hop
  • Rob Bulaga, President, Trek Aerospace
  • David Ullman, Emeritus Professor Mechanical Design, Oregon State University
 
Good question (that more experts have wondered about).

It seems that those Technical University of Munich graduates started thinking about nicely integrating electric thrusters into a reasonably conventional airframe. So, those thrusters had to be small and multiple to provide adequate oomph.

Unless the Lilium guys will change the fundamental principle on which their VTOL craft was based, I don't see this ever taking off the ground, with a few hundred miles range AND enough batteries AND passengers on board. So, like I stated before, go figure why people are that stupid to invest 90 million.

The fundamental issue is that you have to compensate for the fact that small-diameter fans have limited thrust. So, you have to churn out more kW's... which is demanding in the battery dept.
The first flight just took place:
 
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: ggr and swaltner
A few comments:

It's an electric plane: Very cool!

The jets appear to be just electric fans inside housings. Is that all the difference between a jet and a propeller? One has 2 or 3 or 4 or 5 blades out in the open, and the other has many blades inside a housing?

They say they are moving toward a world where anybody can fly. Flying an airplane requires far more skill than driving a car. It requires many hours of training, which is expensive and few people will take the time for. If you computerize it so it is completely self-flying and bring the cost down to where "anybody can fly it" the skies would be far too crowded. An electric plane is a great idea. "A plane in every garage" is futuristic balderdash. And there is no reason to unite these two entirely separate concepts. Futuristic airheads have been promising flying cars since long before electric transportation was in the public's mind. And they've never, ever, gotten anything right.
 
If you computerize it so it is completely self-flying and bring the cost down to where "anybody can fly it" the skies would be far too crowded. An electric plane is a great idea. "A plane in every garage" is futuristic balderdash. And there is no reason to unite these two entirely separate concepts. Futuristic airheads have been promising flying cars since long before electric transportation was in the public's mind. And they've never, ever, gotten anything right.
Flying is going to be far more energy intensive than driving because of the power needed for ascent (unless somehow you can make them LTA without the bulk), so for the foreseeable future the only way to get around the excess energy use is to carry enough people/cargo in a plane. For individuals to have a plane two things are necessary (assuming the take off energy issue is fixed). One: No human controls at all. Two: A system of sky roads that the flight AI uses to map a route. A corollary from this is that all private planes would have to be switched to AI control. Commercial airlines wouldn't because they fly at a much higher altitude. Seems as if there are almost insurmountable hurdles without some technological breakthroughs.
 
...Seems as if there are almost insurmountable hurdles without some technological breakthroughs.

Yep, It ain't gonna happen in my lifetime. And the energy and cost will forever keep it out of reach for ordinary folks. The super rich can already charter a helicopter with a pilot. Or the upper middle class can learn to fly a plane if they're dedicated enough.

The thing is, it's really great that they're building an electric plane that someone with a pilot's license can get certified to fly. They make themselves sound like crackpots when they bring in the flying-car fantasy of everybody commuting to work in one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Solor
It's not a "car" if it cannot drive within a lane on the road. That thing looks far too wide, with its propellers way out to the side, to be able to drive on the road.

It's not a flying car. It's a big quad-copter. If it ends up being less expensive than a helicopter there could be a market for it.
 
Great place to listen to Music, no?;)

Can't wait for commuters on my block to use daily !

Electric cars are just too silent.
I'm sure some politician, if he is just given enough campaign money, will require electric vehicles to make ICE car sounds, right?

o_O
 
Last edited:
After attending AirVenture and talking to the folks in the FAA building once again, I need to retract my previous statements about there being restrictions on electric aircraft carrying passengers. The FAA gave me a copy of the operating limitations for one of the Pipistrel Taurus Electro aircraft that is certified here in the US. Of note:

  • Registered as Experimental/Exhibition - same as many aircraft that are flown in airshows
  • Phase 1/2 flight testing like Amateur-Built aircraft, but Phase 1 is only 10 hours (statement #19 below)
  • No passengers during Phase 1 (#20)
  • No passengers during an airshow/ or on a movie set while in Phase 2 (#27)
  • Passengers allowed at other times in Phase 2 (#27)
The last two pages of the operating limitations are as follows:

Screen Shot 2019-08-11 at 7.50.08 AM.png

Screen Shot 2019-08-11 at 7.50.19 AM.png
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Brando and daniel
I just got home from visiting a Pipistrel Taurus Electro owner in Texas to go for a demo ride in his glider. I met him in July of last year at the Pipistrel booth in Oshkosh. They had his brand new airplane on display in their booth with him taking ownership at the end of the show. We've been talking on the phone recently about gliders in general and the Taurus Electro as I work on earning my glider rating. His is only the 3rd Taurus Electro located in the US. Over the last year, he's become familiar with the new airplane and let the previous glider collect dust in the hangar, so it's up for sale.

For those not totally familiar with the glider (I've mentioned it previously here), the Taurus Electro is a self-launching battery-powered glider. Since it's designed to be a soaring glider, with a relatively high-performance 41:1 glide ratio, it has a relatively small battery, roughly 10 kWh. This is enough energy to takeoff and climb to 8,000'. The normal profile is that you takeoff and climb to about 2,000' and then shutdown and stow the motor while you search for thermals and have a little extra energy saved in the battery for a 2nd takeoff later in the day or a "save" to keep from "landing out" (somewhere other than an airport) and avoid the danger of an off-field landing and the hassle of taking apart the glider and hauling it back to an airport.

The primary goal of this trip was to confirm that the Taurus Electro lives up to the promises of the marketing literature. The noise with the motor running was fairly low, but we still used headphones. Obviously, there was no engine exhaust noise, but there there was a little vibration/noise through the airframe and noise from the prop. The noise was low enough, that many would consider the headphones optional. While GoPro cameras sometimes have really funky audio, the YouTube videos are pretty representative of the cabin noise. All the preflight checks of the drive system are handled by the on-board computer, so no need for an engine runup. Takeoff roll was brisk and even with us just a little shy of the max gross weight, we were soon climbing at over 500 fpm. At 200' altitude, the power was reduced from takeoff power, then at about 500' altitude, we hooked a thermal, so he started circling over the airport and lowered the motor power even further. It only takes about 3 kW of motor power to maintain level flight without thermals. It wasn't the greatest day for soaring, so we took 15 minutes milling around at relatively low power looking for lift before we got up to 2000'. At this point, we shutdown the motor. The twist knob throttle goes to 0, the automatic brake stops the prop vertically and then you flip the switch to stow the motor after which, the drive electronics can be fully shutdown. 15 seconds for the whole process. We consumed 33% of the battery pack for our leisurely takeoff climb.

We proceeded to fly around the area for a little over 2 hours. Eventually climbing to over 5,000' agl (the base of the broken cloud layer) on the thermals that were available. I haven't talked about cross flying with my glider instructor yet, just working on earning the initial rating right now, so he gave a little guidance on general techniques. I've seen a bunch of videos on the topic of soaring, but it was great to get some guidance from someone that's been flying gliders for over 50 years. The idea of cross-country flying in a glider makes a little more sense now. At one point, we were 4,000' up and soaring/circling in a thermal with 5 vultures. All of us up together, just passing time enjoying the joy of flight. In a powered airplane, birds dive away from you, but in a glider, they just keep milling about their day. As we descended back down, we redeployed to motor just to prove that this works. Slow to 50 kts, activate the electronics, deploy the motor, turn up the throttle. Super easy to deploy/retract the motor in flight. Compared to the two-stroke engines many motor gliders had previously used, the electric drive is great because there is no warm-up/cool-down procedure as the motor is extended/retracted.

This flight is going to be an expensive one. It just confirmed what I had hoped would be the case with this glider. I've been wanting this glider for a few years and now, it's pretty much inevitable that I'll buy one. The only real question now is the schedule on when it will happen. Kind of depends upon the what the actual purchase price works out to be. Their prices at airshows are significantly different than the retail prices poster on the web site. At least the US Dollar has been getting stronger compared to the Euro, to that's been helping drive the price down over the last several years.

For the current battery technology (energy density), the glider seems like one of the only airframes that electric power is really viable for. The glider doesn't need a lot of energy in the batteries because once you're up in the air a couple thousand feet, you can find thermals and extract energy out of the air itself. The single-person capabilities of the Taurus Electro (two main wheels allow you to taxi around the airport without a wing walker; no need to a tow-plane pilot or winch operator) and the super-low operating costs (our 2.2 hour flight cost about 15 cents for electricity) make this a great aircraft.