An electric engined BAe 146?

The Crewroom for non-FS related stuff, fun and general chat.

Moderators: Guru's, The Ministry

User avatar
Paul K
Red Arrows
Red Arrows
Posts: 7835
Joined: 12 Jun 2005, 16:41
Location: Norfolk UK

Re: An electric engined BAe 146?

Post by Paul K »

Dev One wrote:
07 Nov 2021, 00:18
Paul K wrote:
06 Nov 2021, 23:23
Thanks for that, Kevin - all good info. :agree: 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
Goodness knows, Keith. LNG is considered a clean alternative; four of my ships were LNG tankers that used the cargo boil-off to fire the steam boilers, and very good it was too. Trouble is, it's still a fossil fuel. As for wind power, I can't see these huge modern ships ever carrying enough sail to move them along.

Maybe a shift away from large ships to trans / inter-continental railways is a possibility. Theoretically, you can already travel by land from the Bering Sea coast of Russia and China to the Middle East, down through Africa to Cape Town, and to almost anywhere in Europe. Connect Alaska to Russia, and then you can go all the way down to Cape Horn. Link up Indonesia through to New Guinea and then Australia by tunnel. Do all that, and the gaps can be filled in by much smaller vessels than we have now, acting like 'feeder' ships to and from the main rail terminals. We'd still need fossil fuel-powered aircraft for remote islands, but the global rail system would be powered by electricity from renewable sources.

There you go, all sorted - shouldn't cost too much. :lol:

User avatar
FlyTexas
Red Arrows
Red Arrows
Posts: 7151
Joined: 26 Jun 2004, 10:18
Location: Texas

Re: An electric engined BAe 146?

Post by FlyTexas »

...or we could go 'old school' and build hybrid (wind/human) powered ships. Wind is free, and humans are definitely a renewable resource. :lol: And mankind would be much healthier. ;)
Image

Brian

User avatar
Paul K
Red Arrows
Red Arrows
Posts: 7835
Joined: 12 Jun 2005, 16:41
Location: Norfolk UK

Re: An electric engined BAe 146?

Post by Paul K »

:lol: :lol: :lol: And with new digital technology, you could speed or slow down by adjusting the drum machine.

User avatar
FlyTexas
Red Arrows
Red Arrows
Posts: 7151
Joined: 26 Jun 2004, 10:18
Location: Texas

Re: An electric engined BAe 146?

Post by FlyTexas »

Paul K wrote:
07 Nov 2021, 20:27
:lol: :lol: :lol: And with new digital technology, you could speed or slow down by adjusting the drum machine.
:rofl: :thumbsup:

Brian

User avatar
Motormouse
Concorde
Concorde
Posts: 1347
Joined: 09 Sep 2004, 22:03
Location: In a Hangar

Re: An electric engined BAe 146?

Post by Motormouse »

Kevin Farnell wrote:
06 Nov 2021, 21:55
Paul K wrote:
06 Nov 2021, 17:26
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
You might want to look here
https://www.zeroavia.com/ uses exactly same hydrogen fuel technology as Toyota are using on their car

https://www.toyota.co.uk/new-cars/mirai/



The technology for handling liquefied gases in aviation has been around for years... liquid oxygen converters on aeroplanes and liquid oxygen tanks were a staple of RAF airfields going back to the 1960's

Ttfn

Pete
An Elephant is a Mouse designed to
a government specification.

Dev One
Vintage Pair
Vintage Pair
Posts: 2591
Joined: 10 Jul 2009, 08:33
Location: Chacombe about 2 mile east of M40 J11

Re: An electric engined BAe 146?

Post by Dev One »

How about a OBHGS instead of an OBOGS? ( On Board Hydrogen Generator System) - wonder if one exists?
Keith

User avatar
FlyTexas
Red Arrows
Red Arrows
Posts: 7151
Joined: 26 Jun 2004, 10:18
Location: Texas

Re: An electric engined BAe 146?

Post by FlyTexas »

I read this in an article published today...

The firm has made great progress over the last few years due to the development of its propulsion system for an all-electric commercial plane. Components include “a high-efficiency, high-power-density inverter and a 2 MW (2,700 HP) motor.”

"a high-efficiency, high-power-density inverter" :dunno:

Brian

User avatar
Paul K
Red Arrows
Red Arrows
Posts: 7835
Joined: 12 Jun 2005, 16:41
Location: Norfolk UK

Re: An electric engined BAe 146?

Post by Paul K »

FlyTexas wrote:
07 Nov 2021, 23:56
"a high-efficiency, high-power-density inverter" :dunno:
An inverter converts DC to AC, but what "power density" means is anyone's guess. *-)

Maybe Mr. Airboatr will know.

User avatar
airboatr
Red Arrows
Red Arrows
Posts: 6839
Joined: 25 Oct 2007, 07:17

Re: An electric engined BAe 146?

Post by airboatr »

Michael Jackson thought A B C was easy as 1 2 3.... But that just ain't so.

Next question

User avatar
Paul K
Red Arrows
Red Arrows
Posts: 7835
Joined: 12 Jun 2005, 16:41
Location: Norfolk UK

Re: An electric engined BAe 146?

Post by Paul K »

:lol: :lol: Fair enough.

Post Reply