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.
A little over a month ago, a few electric airplanes were delivered to Fresno, California (my neighborhood) for use in flight training. I was quite excited about this of course. By transitioning to electric flight, obviously the air around airports becomes measurably cleaner, and they're quieter as well.

For reference, here's a news article from when these planes arrived on April 17 at the Fresno airport:
Airplanes that fly on electricity debut at Fresno’s Chandler Airport

Unfortunately, government bureaucracy is keeping them grounded. FAA's antiquated regulations, defining light aircraft as having reciprocating engines, makes it illegal to fly these planes for their intended purpose! Here's an article from last week that explains in more detail:
Electric Airplanes Wait For FAA Approval For Flight Training | Aero-News Network

It takes ages to revise such regulations, but the FAA could quickly grant an exemption so the planes can finally be put into service. It will probably take some amount of public pressure to get them to bother to do so though. It's a real shame for these birds to just be gathering dust when they could be flying - and I'm sure it's discouraging to other flight schools that may be considering adding electric planes to their fleet.

John
 
  • Informative
Reactions: GSP
@johnr, yep, not much has changed since my post in this thread last summer on the electric aircraft up at EAA AirVenture. Electric planes

The Alpha Electro that were recently imported into the US have "government" registrations on them. An example of one of these is FAA Registry - Aircraft - N-Number Inquiry. While government registered aircraft can bypass some of the regulations, there's a lot of restrictions as soon as you carry "persons or property for hire" (ie: flight training).

The hangup with the FAA is that there are a lot of unknowns with electric aircraft. The POH (Pilot Operating Handbook) for aircraft has a bunch of standard information that needs to be provided to the pilot to be able to determine if a particular flight is safe to make. One of these charts is a range chart that shows how far you can fly when you fly at various combinations of altitude, temperature, airspeed, takeoff weight. That's pretty easy for a gas powered aircraft because you know how much gas is in the tank. For an electric airplane, there is no way to definitively tell how much power is in the battery. In addition to the factors for for a gas plane, add in capacity degradation over the life of the battery and the battery temperature among other things. Another chart is the takeoff distance to get off the runway as well as to clear a 50' obstacle. Again, the overall health and immediate state of the battery will impact the results for attempting this. There's been 100+ years of work on gas powered aircraft, so they are well understood. It will take a little bit to determine how to translate this knowledge to electric aircraft. I believe that most electric planes currently flying in the US have an "Experimental/Research & Development" registration on them.

I've lusted after the Pipistrel Taurus Electro for years. If I as a private individual wanted one, it would very likely get registered as "Experimental/Race & Exhibition". Experimental means no commercial/for-pay operations. I couldn't sell rides in the glider to help cover my costs. In Kansas, that also means that I would be paying several thousand dollars per year on property tax because the current exclusions for property tax on aircraft are only: homebuilt (Experimental/Amateur Built) aircraft, antique aircraft (30 years old based of the year of manufacture), or aircraft owned by businesses. This would be a brand-new aircraft for personal use, so no tax exemption, meaning you pay out the nose. Race and Exhibition also requires you file a program letter with the FAA every year telling them when and where you plan on flying the airplane. You're also only allowed to carry required crew members in the aircraft, not passengers. I could claim that a pilot friend is a required crew member, but would have difficulty claiming that a 10 year old child passenger was somehow a required crew member.

Until the FAA, ASTM, GAMA, EAA, AOPA, SSA, etc... all work out the regulations to get these electric powered aircraft licensed under the same LSA (Light Sport Aircraft) rules that their gas-powered brethren are, electric aircraft will get limited use in the US. I wouldn't expect anything to change for another 5 years. While the FAA knows the current rules are an issue, they have just barely started the discussions on the changes that are necessary. The folks from the FAA that I talked to last year were saying that regulations for electric aircraft would likely get rolled into a much larger set of changes to aircraft certification rules that are underway.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Brando and GSP
swaltner,
It was interesting to read your comments on ExExpo not carrying passengers unless they are required crew. Its been my experience that the restriction you mention is a Phase 1 restriction only. Any commercial use requires an LOA but non-paying passengers are perfectly fine.

The electric thing is new and the FAA, as you point out, does not do new well. Weight and Balance should be easier :) and battery deg. is similar to engine performance deg. Its commonly accepted that the 30 year old 172 you rent from the local flight school does not make POH numbers for a pile of reasons including hours on the motor. In one respect, I get the caution. Its a completely different animal which requires understanding and good training/documentation. Introducing it at the flight training level is good in that you can immerse the pilot in the aircraft and its systems from the get go but bad in that any lessons learned are on the backs of students and some on early solos.
 
@lolachampcar, there is more than one kind of experimental aircraft as far as the FAA is concerned. Experimental Amateur Built (EAB, Homebuilt, etc...) are just the most common and. An experimental aircraft is simply one that hasn't cone through the FAA certification process and been granted a type certificate. There is an FAA Order that the person completing the airworthiness inspection works through to build up the Operating Limitations for a specific aircraft. The main types of Experimental aircraft include:

Experimental Amateur Built - This is the most well known (thanks to the EAA - Experimental Aircraft Association) subset of Experimental aircraft and what most people are talking about when just saying Experimental Aircraft. This is applicable where 51% of the construction tasks were completed for recreational and/or entertainment purposes. This has the Phase 1 and Phase 2 as part of the operating limitations. During Phase 1 flight testing, you are limited to a certain flight area (at one point, this was 25 mile radius to the local airport, but with faster aircraft, you can typically get much larger flight test areas) and are unable to carry passengers. The Phase 1 period typically lasts 25 or 40 flight hours. 25 hours is allowed for aircraft that use and engine/propeller combination that is used on a certified aircraft, where 40 hours is required otherwise. Once you've completed the required flight hours, the restrictions on EAB boil down to: not overflying populated areas except for takeoff/landing and no carrying of persons/property for hire. You can get waivers on the 2nd restriction if you want to conduct transition training in your EAB aircraft. The FAA sees the value in aircraft-specific training, so you can do that, with some added paperwork. In recent years, the FAA cracked down on companies that REQUIRED you to come to the factory to "quick-build" your kit and were using the EAB rules to try and skirt the certification rules. Technically, you completed 51% of the tasks, but with the factory assist program being the only option, they weren't really amateur built, which means they weren't able to qualify for this type of airworthiness certificate.

Experimental Research and Development - This is used for a company doing flight testing on a new design that is currently under development. It's also used if your company is testing changes to an existing model of aircraft. As far as I know, this always has a required crew member clause listed in the Operating Limitations. This is generally limited to something that you intend to certify.

Experimental Market Survey - Have an airplane that is under development and you want to take potential passengers for a ride? This is the category for you. A perfect example if this is N58VA. This is owned by Van's Aircraft, but is used to give demo rides to potential kit builders. If you and I built it, the airplane would be EAB. Since the company built it, it isn't eligible for EAB (commercial endeavor, not entertainment/education). Registering it as Experimental Market Survey

Experimental Race - Wanna take a stock P-51 Mustang, clip the wings, chop the canopy down, and add other modifications to reduce drag and make it go faster at the Reno air races? This is the category for you. As far as I know, these always have a required crew member clause listed in the Operating Limitations. Some of the high-performance gliders that come from Europe get registered here.

Experimental Exhibition - Many air show planes are in this category. They tend to be one-off designs, or at least major modifications to existing designs, so it would never be profitable to try and make it through certification using the R&D category. This allows commercial entities the freedom to come up with stuff like the Jet Waco, where you take a biplane with a big radial engine on it and strap an even bigger jet engine on the bottom of it and get a non-military airplane that can accelerate straight up. N2369Q is the N number for the Jet Waco. Again, these likely always have a required crew member clause listed in the Operating Limitations. In the case of the Jet Waco, the person doing the wing walking is a required crew member since the point of the air show performance is to have someone walking on the wing.

It's difficult to tell, but Race/Exhibition may always be used together. The ones I've found in the FAA N-number database are all listed as both Race and Exhibition on the category

So, Experimental is the top level airworthiness classification that just says the aircraft doesn't have a Standard airworthiness certificate. The specific use-case determines which airworthiness category it's in and thus the types of restrictions that are put in the operating limitations. The Operating Limitations are generated by the inspector during the initial inspection and must be carried in the airplane on every flight. The same document is registered with the FAA when all the airworthiness paperwork is submitted. For specific reasons, one could have items normally included in the operating limitations removed for a specific aircraft.

None of these apply to something like the Pipistrel Alpha/Taurus Electro where it's a company selling a fully-constructed electric powered aircraft that someone wants to use to conduct flight training (carrying passengers for hire). The gas-powered Alpha and Taurus are certified using the LSA (Light Sport Aircraft) rules that are totally different than the standard certification rules that someone like Cessna used on the Cessna 172. The LSA rules currently only allow reciprocating engines for power, so the battery/electric version of the airplane isn't currently eligible for an LSA airworthiness certificate. That means you go into one of the Experimental categories other than EAB since it's fully assembled. That means you deal with the limitations imposed by the specific category under Experimental.

Give it a few years and this should be straightened out.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: GSP
@swaltner Glad to hear your more detailed explanation of how the certification process works. I didn't realize how many agencies have to work together on this, and there has to be consensus regarding the required changes to the operating procedures inherent in electric flight. Well there's at least one part of the POH that can be omitted of course - fuel-air mixture! :) So I see electric flight as being in the same place that electric cars were in around 2010. As the battery energy to weight ratio continues to increase, electric planes will gradually become mainstream. They have so many advantages - simpler powertrain, reduced maintenance and higher reliability, not to mention being quieter and pollution-free.
 
swaltner,
I built 44DK a few years back (EAB) and am currently doing a 731 conversion to 139RC and 430J (ExExpo). The Op Limits for both RC and J exclude the second seat being filled only during Phase 1 if the added crew is not required. The second seat can be filled in Phase 1 with required crew and at any time in Phase 2 provided it is not for hire (unless I have an LOA for training). I just found it interesting that you posted otherwise.
 
First congrats on completing an EAB. Such a huge amount of work. In the somewhat near future, I hope to join you with that accomplishment, but it’s already taken WAY longer than I expected/planned.

We’re saying the same thing, just in slightly different ways. A passenger is not the same as a required crew member. I did make the conscious choice to use the word passenger in that sentence regarding the limitations in Phase 1.

I think the rules for Phase 1 changed in late 2014. Before the change, Phase 1 operating limitations really only allowed a single occupant in the aircraft, but I don’t know the exact wording. After the rule change, they allowed for a required crew member, but still not a passenger.

The question becomes, what tasks could you claim require a second person in a single-pilot aircraft like an RV that a GoPro camera (taking notes from the flight) or a bag of sand (adjust the CG) couldn’t accomplish just as well? The FAA has said a CFI for transition training doesn’t count as required crew during Phase 1. If by 731 conversion, you’re talking about adding a turbine engine, you will have a much easier time claiming a 2nd person is a required crew member.
 
The hangup with the FAA is that there are a lot of unknowns with electric aircraft. The POH (Pilot Operating Handbook) for aircraft has a bunch of standard information that needs to be provided to the pilot to be able to determine if a particular flight is safe to make. One of these charts is a range chart that shows how far you can fly when you fly at various combinations of altitude, temperature, airspeed, takeoff weight. That's pretty easy for a gas powered aircraft because you know how much gas is in the tank. For an electric airplane, there is no way to definitively tell how much power is in the battery. In addition to the factors for for a gas plane, add in capacity degradation over the life of the battery and the battery temperature among other things. Another chart is the takeoff distance to get off the runway as well as to clear a 50' obstacle. Again, the overall health and immediate state of the battery will impact the results for attempting this.

Presumably it would be possible to develop the takeoff distance for 50' obstacle chart both when the battery is 80% full, and when it is 50% full. Would that provide the pilot with data that's as good as what the pilot gets for gas airplanes?

Presumably it's also possible to calculate how many kWh are required for a given flight. Is it at least possible to know how many kWh a battery delivered last time it went from fully charged to a voltage that approximates 10% to 20% full, and to know how many cycles it has had since last time that was tested and how much the battery is likely to have degraded over that time?

(And it seems like the Tesla Model S is not any worse than a float gauge in a gas tank at reporting how much power is available.)
 
Norway tests tiny electric plane, sees passenger flights by 2025
OSLO (Reuters) - Norway tested a two-seater electric plane on Monday and predicted a start to passenger flights by 2025 if new aviation technologies match a green shift that has made Norwegians the world’s top buyers of electric cars.
Norway tests tiny electric plane, sees passenger flights by 2025

I think it's just an optimistic airline doing Alpha Electro demos.
Still, at least it's a company actively wanting to electrify.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SwTslaGrl
Still, I see the electric rotorcraft (also known as eVTOL) in the sense that it replaces the helicopter that never grew out to be what it could have been, as the thing of the future. Obviously a lot needs to be solved. Below is what I call the Bigger Picture in personal mobility:

_bridging%2Bthe%2Bgap%2B%25283%2529.jpg
 
How hard would it be to adapt Model 3 batteries and motors to airplanes?

I'm wondering if Home | CubCrafters could be building an electric version with Tesla parts. They seem to have a history of experimenting with different subtle variations of their planes, so perhaps if Tesla / Elon supplied the batteries and motor and funding for the rest of the plane (perhaps a tiny fraction of the cost of Elon's Gulfstream?) and information about how to make the throttle and battery status display work, CubCrafters might be able to figure out the rest of the details of how to build a working electric airplane?

I also think a battery powered variant of BT-67 would be great, but the motors for that might be a bit more complicated; that web page lists an engine with 1424 SHP (not sure if that's the performance of each engine, or the total of both), whereas the performance Model 3 is only 450 HP, so if one was determined to use Model 3 motors for a DC-3 / BT-67 variant, it might be necessary to either have more than one Tesla motor driving each propeller, or to figure out how to add more propellers.
 
Because of the weight I doubt that a salvaged Tesla battery/drive system would be use on an aircraft, however I have wondered why someone has not used a salvaged Nissan Leaf 24 kWh, or even the 30 kWh battery/drive system to power an Airboat in south Florida or LA. I would think that this would work very well. Battery on bottom of boat and much less engine noise when moving.

If I was living in either of these areas and wanted an Airboat I would first find a nice salvaged battery/drive system for a Nissan Leaf for cheap, then build the boat up around the battery pack. I also think I would use Ducted Fans instead of an open prop. I would think this would be much quieter and more efficient. Never did it, so not sure. I have thought that this would be a very good use after the car is salvaged. I first thought about this when our Leaf was rear-ended and the Insurance decided to not repair it.
 
For a Cub, a smaller kilowatt hour rating than the short range Tesla Model 3 might well make sense, but using cells with energy density as high as possible probably also makes sense, which means if cylindrical cells are going to be used in a plane, the Model 3 cells are probably the right size, and perhaps the same battery modules used in the Model 3 might make sense, but the complete Model 3 pack possibly shouldn't be used as is in a two seat airplane design that's intended for mass production.

For a BT-67, which in the turboprop configuration is almost 16,000 pounds empty (one empty BT-67 weighs roughly as much as four copies of the Tesla Model 3), I bet the battery cells equivalent to several long range Model 3 battery packs would be appropriate.

I want to see Tesla provide the same level of support (or perhaps a bit more) to these aircraft manufacturers that Tesla provided to The Boring Company for the mining / construction train that runs on Model 3 batteries and motors.
 
The first commercially available, non-certified production electric aircraft, the Alisport Silent Club self-launching glider plane, flew in 1997. It is optionally driven by a 13 kW (17 hp) DC electric motor running on 40 kg (88 lb) of batteries that store 1.4 kWh of energy.[29]

The first certificate of airworthiness for an electric powered aircraft was granted to the Lange Antares 20E in 2003. Also an electric, self-launching 20-meter glider/sailplane, with a 42-kilowatt DC/DC brushless motor and lithium-ion batteries, it can climb up to 3,000 meters with fully charged cells.[30] The first flight was in 2003. In 2011 the aircraft won the 2011 Berblinger competition.[31] In 2005, Alan Cocconi of AC Propulsion flew, with the assistance of several other pilots, an unmanned airplane named "SoLong" for 48 hours non-stop, propelled entirely by solar energy. This was the first such around-the-clock flight, on energy stored in the batteries mounted on the plane.[32][33]

In 2008, The Boeing Fuel Cell Demonstrator In 2007, the non-profit CAFE Foundation held the first Electric Aircraft Symposium in San Francisco.[34] The Boeing-led FCD (fuel cell demonstrator) project uses a Diamond HK-36 Super Dimona motor glider as a research test bed for a hydrogen fuel cell powered light airplane.[35] Successful flights took place in February and March 2008.[35][36] The first the NASA Green Flight Challenge took place in 2011 and was won by a Pipistrel Taurus G4 on 3 October 2011.[37][38][39]

In 2013 Chip Yates demonstrated that the world's fastest electric plane, a Long ESA, a modified Rutan Long-EZ, could outperform a gasoline-powered Cessna and other aircraft in a series of trials verified by the Fédération Aéronautique Internationale. The Long ESA was found to be less expensive, have a higher maximum speed, and higher rate of climb, partly due to the ability of the aircraft to maintain performance at altitude as no combustion takes place.[40][41] In 2017, Siemens used a modified Extra EA-300 acrobatic airplane, the 330LE, to set two new records: on March 23 at the Dinslaken Schwarze Heide airfield in Germany, the aircraft reached a top speed of around 340 km/h (180 kn) over three kilometers; the next day, it became the first glider towing electric aircraft.[42]

more details (just a small start)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_aircraft#Light_aircraft
 
  • Love
Reactions: daniel
More than a few electric planes being built.
- Aerobatic planes, as they only need fly < what? an hour?
- planes for training - again, only need near an hour flying time
- experimental - AirBus is on third or fourth generation now

Alaska I suspect one of the last places for electrics - below freezing at ground level a big problem - batteries need to be warmer
Distance also a problem.

Google searches will help you find many electric planes.
-