An electric engined BAe 146?

[FlyTexas]

Interesting.
https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtop ... &t=1466593

Brian

[TSR2]

Airbus did (or are doing) a test with one engine electric. The issue with batteries is energy density. (Well one of the issues) and it then becomes the case that only the most comfortably off can afford kit with clean tech. A clean fuel that could be dropped in with mineable conversion would be better.

[airboatr]

I believe gasoline has about 100 times more energy density than lithium ion....

Just food for thought.. it takes ( on average ) about 10 tons of copper ore to produce 200lbs of electrical grade copper.
200lbs of copper will make about 18 100' 3 wire 12awg extension cords.

Or one Tesla car. Actually not quite enough to make one.

[TSR2]

And then when the owners have fast charged it for the first 3 years of its life and the range has dropped to 70 miles, they can pass it on to the minions.

It reminds me of the late 90’s / early naughties, we’re European politicians basically drive (no pun intended) manufactures to make cars with small Diesel engines… 10 years later, air quality is shit in cities because almost 70% of small cars had Diesel engines. Before that, we had the blanket mandate for catalytic converters… Rover and a couple of others had been working on “lean burn” engines, which when coupled with a catalytic converter pumped out more crap than without it.

There isn’t enough lithium to replace even half of the cars on the road.

Politicians can’t see beyond their next election.

[Motormouse]

Actually I think ZeroAvia have a better idea, fuel cells fuelled by hydrogen, to make the electricity on the fly. The tech has been around since the Apollo moon rockets btw.
I was pretty impressed by ZeroAvia test mule when I saw it in action at Cranfield last year, based on Toyota car fuel cell technology. No huge and heavy batteries to charge.

Ttfn

Pete

[Paul K]

Hydrogen is the answer. It even helps the aircraft up.

[Kevin Farnell]

Hydrogen is the answer. It even helps the aircraft up.

It's not that simple. Hydrogen could not be carried as a gas - you'd need fuel tanks the size of a Zeppelin. Carrying Hydrogen as a liquid, would require cryogenic storage facilities at airports, and heavily insulated fuel tanks (even when the outside temperature is -60degC - liquid Hydrogen boils at -253degC). Not to mention the risk of fire/explosion when refuelling. I don't even want to think about an aircraft accident.
A possible alternative, is interstitial metal hydrides. Hydrogen is such a small molecule, that it can diffuse into metals in the same way that water soaks into a sponge. The problem here, is carrying the weight of metal to store the H2.
I do recall reading many years ago (Flight International, I think), that Lockheed had proposed a demonstration round the world cargo service using a liquid Hydrogen fuelled Tristar (the reason I remember it, was that one of the stops was Birmingham UK (BHX/EGBB, my 'home' airport) due to availability of liquid Hydrogen. The artists impression showed a Tristar with two massive overwing fuel tanks. Nothing ever came of the project.

Kevin

[Paul K]

Thanks for that, Kevin - all good info. There doesn't seem to be an easy answer for aircraft at the moment, does there. We'll just have to go back to trans-Atlantic liners.

[Dev One]

Thanks for that, Kevin - all good info. There doesn't seem to be an easy answer for aircraft at the moment, does there. We'll just have to go back to trans-Atlantic liners.

And driven by oil fired boilers or diesel engines? We would have to go back before I K Brunel designed things.....mind you if global warming gets worse then wind power might be King!
Keith

[airboatr]

....mind you if global warming gets worse then wind power might be King!
Keith

I remember an interview David Letterman had with Al Franken.
Al Franken is a comedian/satirist who ran for a seat in the Minnesota senate in '09.
Letterman asked Franken what he planned to do for the people of Minnesota, and help create solutions to global warming and such.

Franken said he thought building windmills would be a great idea since Minnesota is a windy state.
Letterman appeared to be surprised at the idea, and replied, " oh so Minnesota has a lot of wind? Why is that"?
And Franken said, "Because Wisconsin sucks, and The Dakota's Blow".




Letterman wasn't really amused, he was trying to have a somewhat serious interview, but Franken saw an opportunity to reel him in and couldn't resist.


I laughed , the cadence and delivery was very well done.

Anyways.
In '18 Franken was forced to resign after a not so funny idea came back to bite him in his arse.