Nice I'm a retired Mechanic with 15 years on Aircraft, After years of being exposed to chemicals and pollutants, listening to ICE, Jet and Turbine engines it must be delightful to listen and work around an Electric Aircraft minus all that previously mentioned nastiness.
Flight schools are the optimal usage, short flights, high frequency. And you could even use the charging time to help people get acclimated to the cockpit and doing their checklists.
Right now yes. But those planes are running on five year old technology currently. Not even close to state of the art. That Pipistrel plane has a fairly modest wh/kg ratio. Not even close to state of the art. Doubling or tripling its range is very feasible. 500wh/kg is on the market right now but not in anything that has been certified yet. That just takes time. By the time that happens, the state of the art will have moved on to 750/wh/kg or even kw/kg type ranges. So, mostly this is going to take a lot of people by surprise because they aren't following the battery market. But it's basically going to happen on a fairly predictable schedule. In ten years or so, there will be lots of short haul commercial flight that is battery electric. Long haul is going to take a bit longer but it will come as well.
@@JillesvanGurp The aviation industry is extremely slow to make significant changes, especially to develop new planes, mostly because of extremely strict regulations, but also very low production numbers, compared to for example cars. The Cessna 172 is the worlds most produced aircraft, all categories, ever, and some 44,000 units had been produced a few years ago, since 1955, and it is still in production, so now maybe around 50,000 in total, since 1955. That's less than a thousand units per year on average, even if you discount the few years it wasn't produced. The batteries can be changed, easily, whenever there's better batteries available, and the Velis Electro doesn't use the exact same batteries as when it was first developed, which was mentioned in the video. High energy density is great, but there are other aspects that are important, as safety, longevity and charge/discharge rate. The amprius 500 Wh/kg battery has a life expectancy of 150 cycles, and max continuous charge and discharge rate of 0.1C, meaning, you can't use or charge more than 10% of the capacity per hour. That means for the Velis Electro, to be able to use say 25 kW continuously, they would need to have 250 kWh of capacity, at 500 Wh/kg, that's 500 kg. 500 kg is more than that plane weighs, including currently used batteries, and having 500 kg battery cells, plus packaging, would make the payload capacity negative. In other words, a max 0.1C charge/discharge rate means a plane would have to be designed for at least 10 hours of flight for those batteries to be meaningful, that's ballpark 3 times more range per kg of batteries as the Velis Electro. A plane would have to be huge for a given payload to achieve that, and for commercial use 10 hour charge time would require swapping the batteries instead of charging in the planes, and 2 sets of ultra expensive packs for each plane in operation, one in use and one charging. Batteries are getting better, but on average per year, it's a few percent overall improvement that reach the market, except when some some important factors are sacrificed to reach some absurd specific capability. Super low power density, 120 cycles, and probably absurd cost on top of that, and questionable safety isn't great for aircraft, even with 500 Wh/kg energy density on cell level.
It'd be great to see that take off. I'd like to learn to fly, but I've gotten very used to not burning gas most days, and it just feels wrong to start back as a hobby.
@@JillesvanGurp Its not going to take anyone by a surprise because everyone wants better and better battery tech. Even if we had the technology to produce kw/kg batteries today, it would take years to propagate it to mainstream markets so that everyone can reap the benefits of that tech.
I've done a skydive at Dunkeswell. That little plane was up and down dozens of times a day. If that could be made electric, what a fantastic upgrade it'd be. One day.
Did my first static jumps there. It was quite funny. The instructors were ex-Royal Marines. One got chatting to my father who was a Para in WW2. The RM suddenly shouted ‘oh s**t’ , vaulted over the fence by the control tower and charged across the DZ to help someone due to land … then! He made it😀
I've only jumped out of a plane once, but I definitely remember the noise was an issue. The loud sounds interfere with communication and are unpleasant. An EV plane would make skydiving more enjoyable.
Some 94 Scottish islands are permanently inhabited, of which 89 are offshore islands. As an alternative to slow ferry trips, short journeys electric flight seems a no brainer to me.
There's a definite elegance in having these small electric general aviation planes omit the usual level 2 charger and charge exclusively from DC fast charging. No point in carrying around all that extra weight, especially because these only fly between a small number of purpose-built locations (runways) where installing the charging infrastructure is trivial.
Reminds me of the 1st and 2nd Gen EVs (cars) - getting there, but not quite there for mainstream yet. Give it a few years with these trail blazers, and electric powered flight will become commonplace. Great Stuff!
Yep. I still remember my 1st gen LEAF, charging all night and then making a pit stop on the way to work to charge more, and it still felt like a futuristic space car. Now I've got a Bolt, and it still hits me sometimes when I see 81 miles of range, because that used to be the "max" number in the old days. Looking forward to seeing where this all goes.
You're about to take off, and you tell your passenger "I've crashed one of these things before"! Probably not the best time for sharing that information.
I remember a friend in NSW that used to investigate light air craft crashes, and he told me it is not a matter of if, but when. He also hastily added that most crashes are not that horrendous. He was also a pilot. and I think he still is. ( I hope ) 😃
I read about this one a couple of years ago. ‘’Harbour Air made history by introducing the world’s first all-electric commercial aircraft, known as the ePlane. This remarkable aircraft is a six-seater DHC-2 de Havilland Beaver powered by a 750hp electric propulsion system. The ePlane successfully completed its inaugural flight at the Harbour Air Seaplanes terminal in Vancouver, Canada, back in December 2019. The flight was piloted by Harbour Air’s CEO and founder, Greg McDougall1. The company’s commitment to sustainability and environmental responsibility drove them to embark on this groundbreaking project. By transitioning their fleet of seaplanes to electric power, Harbour Air aims to make a significant difference for our planet, moving from carbon-neutral to carbon-zero operations”
That was BIG NEWS back in 2019. Sadly there seems to be no significant advances since. I just came from their website and had to really dig to even find mention of anything about electric flight, and it was only talking about what they achieved 5 years ago.
Harbour Air signed last year to acquire 50 Magnix engines, and currently hope to obtain Transport Canada certification to operate their fleet from 2026. It's taking longer to get the certification than they hoped, but they're still moving forward.
@@AC-van68 Im in Van too and this is exciting. They have run a couple of years of test flights on the E-beaver. This is perfect for their routes which are short hops. A point of note was the pilots comments on the great torque on the takeoffs...
They are waiting for certification, and the aviation authority postponed them again... it's not a technical problem to get electric airplanes flying, it's our overregulated, sometimes completely absurd way of dealing with new stuff. Compare that with some moron driving 150 miles, crashing, killing 5 people.... a short headline, next day its fogotten and nothing get's changed, but if you want to build an electric aircraft, they torture you with a thousend stupid ideas what you need to proof and what needs to be tested and certified until you are broke, before you can legally fly with it.
Super cool electric aviation! Also like Imogen alluded to we're starting to see rhe real world feedback that most don't have a clue of. The example here is electric cars bringing battery costs down while increasing energy density and also second life batteries used at end of a single phase line. Zero grid retrofit. I call BS on those that say it's too expensive to update the grid to make everything electric... Sabine Hossenfelder and every grid operator who see $$$ from a centralised electricity generation and expensive upgrade projects.
I like to think that maybe we can make an electric plane that is good for circuit training. Only needs an endurance of around 90 minutes to 2 hours at most as it's going to be used for 60 mins of takeoff and landing practice.
@@nickthegriffin Nobody has claimed it's progress in terms of range when compared with an old Cessna 150 (which I have flown). The progress is that it is now demonstrated that you can fly a plane without using fossil fuels. A very limited use aircraft but nevertheless an aircraft that could have some specific economically viable uses even today. No doubt the 150 mile cross country requirement could be met with extra landings.
@@nickthegriffin 1770. Nicolas-Joseph Cugnot builds the first steam-powered carriage, with a theoretical top speed of 4.8 miles per hour, but typically moved at around 2.25 mph. I'll bet people at the time were asking what the point of it is when their horses could pull carriages much faster and for longer distances.
I’m thinking that solid state will be the future of ultra lights like the Pipistrel. I owned a Jabiru J200 for 15 years and the idea of almost no servicing, no mags and no Avgas is quite appealing. 3300 Jabiru engine was a bugger to get going on really cold days and the battery was tiny. Imagine just a throttle and maybe auto prop pitch controller. I must say I did prefer the control stick in the middle next to the pilots right hand rather than between the legs. Made no difference to control but made getting in and out the craft a lot easier.
I was fortunate enough to fly this in Voss last year at the European Skydiving Championship and I was awesome! Flared it too early and almost missed the runway! It’s so light that I was told I had to slip it to land it, which was loads of fun :)
Thanks for another great episode. Loved the backing track during the take-off phase. Will be interesting to see where electric flight gets to in the next few years
It should be pointed out that electric flight (like electric cars) is NOT new. In October 1973 a converted glider flew for 9 minutes powered by Nickel-Cadmium (NiCad) batteries. This was the first manned electric aircraft to fly under it's own power. You may not be impressed with that, but it's an electric flight moment equivalent to the Wright Brothers first flight. Just think, it's been 51 years since this electric plane took it's first short flight. Within 50 years of the Wright Brothers taking off Boeing were flying the 377 Stratocruiser Airliner that could carry 100 passengers. That is a marker of how much progress could be made with electric flight within one generation.
The future of electic aviation is very exciting. Obviously the energy density issue is the big problem to solve but that is for big companies to take on.
Great to see another episode on electric flight, and the developments since the last episode with Robert’s bumpy flight 😂. Also good to see the HAV Airlander mentioned - they’re moving ahead well, with production close to starting on commercial sale aircraft, and a contract for 10 or more ships for Air Nostrum in Spain. Was kind of your pilot to mention that he’d crashed one of the planes as you were taxing to take off - nothing like putting you at ease! 😂
I loved this video, I sat in the plane last year at Harrogate show, it really is a cosy fit for two! Imogen can test the jet ski that flies Out of the water please ! I think Robert is a bit elderly and Jack might be too tall. You are just the right size!
Love this, great work and excellent explanation/coverage. I based my final year dissertation on the Pipistrel electric aircraft and the overall benefits if used for initial flight training (CO2 emissions - mixed grid charging vs Avgas/Avtur).
If there's a hangar to put solar panels on, providing the amount of energy needed to charge a few small light electric planes shouldn't have to be an issue. Especially for planes that typically requires daylight to be flown, and are mostly flown recreationally, meaning the correlation between generation of solar power and use of power for charging should be about as strong as for air conditioning. Some batteries are still required unless there's a grid connection that can handle the difference in generation and use at any given moment, but it shouldn't be too difficult to generate much more than the overall amount of energy required onsite in most cases.
Cool report.... I am jealous of Imogen for all those cool experiences 🙂 awesome office your have.. It seems we will see more commercial application for planes when the energy density reaches ~1000Wh/Kg.... Love the idea though... turn a switch and just go, power, no fumes.
Intriguing update! 🤩👍 Reminds me of some similar development over the yesrs here in Germany. Will have a look for an update right now. Will be such a grest improvement for aviation an thus our climate. 😍
@FullyChargedShow Please check in on and give us an update on: "B.C.’s Harbour Air aims to buy 50 electric engines to convert seaplane fleet" when you get to Canada this year.
Aerodromes must not shun electric aviation. With the uncertain future of hydrocarbon based liquid fuel such as AVGAS 100L the opportunity to host any form of electric aviation brings much needed revenue in the form of hangarage fees, handling charges, landing fees and electrons. As the petrol engine saved the horse, the electric aircraft will save general aviation.
Way hay my garden is now famously immortalised on the in flight footage, shall i tell the neighbours too? 😁 Spitfire flying over today so its a little louder than the Pipistrel. Great show and great reporting as ever. C U all again sooon :-)
I am glad that Fully Charged is aware of the HAV Airlander 10. Does this mean that there will be a visit to their new Production Facility as it gets built later this year? I do hope so!
Nice to start with the small planes and even 20 seaters could go via hubs for further travel?? Nice and quiet, no pollution and no tyre damage and pollution or a huge Road Network to upkeep!! Flying could be the future!!
Great thing about electricity is that it's always same. You don't have to have different grades or prices for different vehicles or class of vehicles 😅
@@BikeFlips Strictly speaking, the electricity is the same. You can change voltage and wattage simply enough, but is a major operation to alter diesel, gasoline and kerosene.
Does this plane have regenerative braking? Descending contains a lot of gravitational potential energy and swapping propeller from powering mode to generator mode seems like maybe not that stupid idea?
These small aerodromes would be perfect for larger sized solar arrays, either ground or rooftop mounted, since there's usually plenty of unused available space, the pairing of which with large battery storage should enable the adoption of small electric aircraft to move quicker and make 'fueling up' so much cheaper than that of the current liquid aviation fuels.
@@MrAdopado Perhaps you are not from the UK, therefore you would be unaware that coal in this country provides 1% or less of the electricity mix and by the end of 2024, that pose plant will permanently close. That's the most diplomatic way I can think of to counter your ridiculous & massively incorrect assertion.
@@pinkelephants1421 My sarcastic reference to coal was to highlight your own silly points! Of course the UK hardly uses any coal ... we've only one coal power station left and that is due to close later this year (Ratcliffe on Soar). I monitor grid generation on a daily basis so I am fully aware of the coal situation! Let's get back to your comment about the solar farm beside the aerodrome ... if you understand how the grid works you will also know that whether the solar farm is directly owned by the aerodrome or not its power will be being distributed in that locality so the electric plane chargers will effectively be benefiting from solar power. Your first comment in this thread was "These small aerodromes would be perfect for larger sized solar arrays.." and I simply pointed out that there is indeed a solar farm beside the aerodrome and that you could even see it on the video.
An ultralight is a great proof of concept but for some more serious range the battery has to be a large fraction of the takeoff weight, like 50-60%, not 25%. Hope to see some slightly bigger models soon. 10 min contingency really forces you to stay close to the airport, usually the contingency has to be 45 min but then the planned flight time would be 15 min...
With regard to the charging infrastructure for aviation, it would seem like a good idea to use the apron of the airfield to erect a solar array to charge the battery banks for the chargers .
I think electric planes will be handy for short hop flights, especially if airports are equipped with chargers to support them. I'm thinking places with a lot of renewables - solar or wind like the Orkneys where electric would mean not having to ship fuel to these places, or only using it as a last resort. I don't think electric is viable for normal passenger travel yet where weight and range would be limiting factors until higher density batteries start appearing.
The lithium-air battery developed by Argonne National Labs was reported to have 1000 Wh/kg and 1000 cycles over 16 months ago and has improved since. There's a full description of their polymeric ceramic electrolyte on the ANL website news page.
Yes, at bench scale all kinds of amazing things are possible. The vast vast majority of lab developments, no matter how good they sound in press releases, will simply never make it to production. And that can be for any number of reasons including the fact that some things simply don't scale well, all the way to the more practical fact that a step change in technology is often much more easy to implement in existing production facilities than a massive leap, to the fact that some cutting edge technologies are just so expensive to scale that no-one outside of say the Space sector can afford it. CATL can get batteries to production, that is what is important.
@@patreekotime4578 Well let's see if Airbus can throw enough cash at hydrogen R&D to power an airliner. They claim that they will have got one in the air by 2035. Who knows?
@@patreekotime4578 this is a common sentiment but there isn't necessarily a lot of truth in it. Part of it is just people with unrealistic expectations about time scales wanting instant satisfaction after they read about a thing being possible. People are spoiled but some things just take more time. The certification process for aviation is pretty brutal. It takes years. That pipistrel you saw in the video is running on pre-covid technology. That's just how long it takes to get stuff in the air. Those batteries are nothing special compared to most EVs on the road. right now. And those are nothing special to the state of the art which has more than double the energy density at 500wh/kg. And that's stuff that went into production more than a year ago. Imagine that pipistel with a 1000wh/kg battery instead of the
I hope there are plans to instal a charger at Sandown Airport in the Isle of Wight. Not so much for locals, but I understand it is a popular destination for day flights to keep flying hours up. (There is a requirement that you fly a certain number of hours each year to keep the qualification valid. If you don't have enough flying time, you have to re-qualify).
Flexible lightweight solar panels on available surface area of a wing/aerofoil should be the only way to go for augmenting range. Then ofc retractable landing gear, and more attention to aero overall could make that existing plane alot more practical.
It seems pilot training is the killer app for this plane which should be a great mindset enabler for electric aviation's future. Here in NZ, we have some larger planes on order for courier services. It's started.
Where is the nearest flying school to Lincolnshire which uses electric aeroplanes? I'm interested in seeing one and buying a demonstration flight in it. Thanks.
I would guess that it's nominally 400 Volts, because that is the most common voltage in electric road vehicles. 800 Volts is beginning to be deployed, but it's still a small part of the market.
All the specs are on their site! "The 57.6kW liquid cooled electric engine provides power to the aircraft. The power is delivered by 345 VDC electric system built around a liquid-cooled in-house developed high performance battery system, which includes two Pipistrel PB345V119E-L batteries connected in parallel, installed in a redundant 2-unit arrangement, total nominal capacity 20 kWh. Crashworthy, thermal runaway inhibiting, HIRF/EMI tolerant. One battery pack is located in the nose of the airplane and the second behind the cabin. This ensures redundancy of the power source: in case of battery failure, the malfunctioning battery would get automatically disconnected from the system. A single battery is capable of standalone operation and has enough power capability to support climbing and continuation of flight."
It would appear that landing is actually harder than with the ICE engine. The pilot appeared to be constantly having to adjust the throttle setting all the way through the touchdown. This would make sense if the propeller has "engine braking/battery recharging". It wouldn't be as simple is simply pulling the power off on your Cessna, letting the prop "idle" and then gliding down for your last 10-20 feet. Instead, it looked like the pilot had to worry about getting the throttle setting "just right" all the way down - as just pulling power fully off looked like it was creating actual drag as from an electric motor trying to harvest power back into the battery. Am I wrong?
Yea, not sure what he was doing. The original plane this was based on is a powered glider. Should be able to cut power soon as runway is made and glide down like a normal light aircraft. Maybe he was floating on purpose to taxi off the end. Or maybe he really wanted a smooth landing for the camera.
Normal for light aircraft. The slight changes in the wind have a larger effect on an aircraft that is both flying quite slow, and is quite light. That means the pilot has to adjust power constantly. Happens in an ICE light aircraft too.
I wouldn't be surprised if he was trying to touch down at a specific spot for the camera. I've be very surprised if the designers had made the plane harder than necessary to fly, and regen braking is a bit pointless on a plane because you don't change speed much.
An earlier version called the Alpha, did have a special prop that allowed regenerative descent which recovered 13% of the energy in circuit flying. Complexity and homologation difficulties made this option not possible on the commercial Velis version.
10:20 22kW of DC charging or 3 phase AC charging? Edit: They talk more about the connector at 1:22 "GBT conntector" Looks like GB/T 20234.3-2015, based on the the "GB/T charging standard" Wikipedia page.
The charger would take 22kW 3-phase AC from the grid and convert it to 22kW DC for the plane. To save weight, the plane does not have an onboard charger capable of accepting AC.
Harbour Air in Vancouver you mean? Yes they've been testing their retrofitted E-Beaver for a couple of years with great results. They plan to convert their fleet as they do seaplane short hops.
Harbour Air's "eBeaver"? Yes, but it isn't a passenger aircraft yet. The first conversion has no passenger capacity and the second conversion hasn't flown yet.
How many electric aircraft are currently registered in the UK? And in Europe? Great to see additional electric aircraft are working towards certification. Was a bit surprised that the connector being used was not Megawatt Charging System (MCS), which will be the default for big-rig trucks. This would seem to be a solution that would continue to be useful as the size of electric aircraft grows and evolves.
@@MrAdopado the choice of and existing DC-only connector type (GB/T) which was not in use in Europe for cars (like CCS2) was deliberate - Pipistrel didn't want non-aviation hargers used for the aircraft, and not many people would want ground vehicles competing with aircraft for use of airside chargers.
I'm pretty sure that we need to rethink the propulsion method to go with electric. Perhaps similar to Dyson hair dryer & blade jet hand dryer stuck on the tail. Or forcing blade airstream out through a slit on top of the wing so it follows coanda effect creating air vacuum and lift and propulsion. Remember I said it here first
one additional development will be perovskite solar cells without stiff silicon and more than 25% efficiency. without the need of very plane surfaces and you can apply them on the whole wing and fuselage. for a plane like the pipistrel electric, you get additional 2kW of power on a sunny day which increases the range by 10%. maybe 15% in 10 years from now. it is not much but it is not nothing and it fully charges itself in two days.
I reckon that pilot needs an extra wide cabin to accommodate his hair! 😃 Great to see aviation electrification progressing. I think the Pipistrel is like the early Nissan Leaf - about the same range and charge rates. So we can expect to see similar progress in range and charging rates compared to cars as time passes. With the Pipestrel, if the next student is ready for their flying lesson, you don't really want the aircraft idle for an hour. Does the current Pipistrel still have the swappable battery packs? If so, can those chargers work with the battery packs off the aircraft? And one important figure they didn't give us, how many pence per KWh are they charging for aircraft to use those chargers?
The FAA has just granted Textron eAviation’s Pipistrel an exemption from the light sport aircraft (LSA) regulations, allowing the company’s Velis Electro electric-powered airplane to operate under LSA regulations in the U.S. This means that flight training schools and individual pilots can now fly the Velis Electro without restrictions.
@@waynerussell6401 now I wonder when one will be available at my local flight school... I've been asking and the personnel act like it's way over budget.
So is the idea at the moment that these are for hopping over somewhere for like a meeting then coming back? Travel 15 minutes, charge an hour, travel back?
Electric planes seem more suited as a machine to have a bit of fun in, and I'm all for that For commercial operations though, the tech may struggle to complete with its fueled counterpart
I’m very hopeful Solid State batteries like Quantum Scape can help electrify all the old Cessna and Piper 4 seaters at some point. Could really make flying cheaper and more reasonable to fly more regularly.
@@The18107j if the people who do solar walkways and solar roads can diversify into solar runways and solar taxiways then these little airports would have more power than they would ever need.
@@matthewbaynham6286 Putting solar next to the runway would be a better idea. Runways can take a lot of force, and there is a lot of empty space around the runway. Rooftops would also work.
I think some commercial airports already do, although the electricity generated is just used to help power the airport building, not the actual airplanes. On the grassy area between runways, I'm not sure if that would be legal or safe. They have to account for the fact that an errant plane might veer off the runway and smash right into them, which is why this area has no trees in it.
For commercial aviation, regardless of the energy source/storage onboard the aircraft, I imagine some sort of maglev rail gun being used to handle taxi and acceleration to takeoff speed. Based on the estimates I have seen, this could reduce the energy storage requirement onboard the plane by 5-10%. This would both make battery electric and fuel cell aircraft more broadly viable and also would represent a meaningful reduction in emissions and/or production requirement for hydrocarbon fueled aircraft. Would require some standards and engineering, but it seems like details and not breakthrough technology.
Well said! And what about the advances in the in wheel motor space? Now they can be 10-20+hp per kg and with built in braking systems? Maybe ev planes could use these to taxi&accelerate to takeoff speeds, but also regen massively upon landing? 🤔
By the time you have changed airplane design to enable a rail gun launch, besides all the risks and huge costs involved, you're looking at 10+ years development time (design + testing + approval + implementation). By that time battery density per kg has increased by more than that improvement. Also don't forget that there will be a weight increase on the airplane to enable a safe launch system installed, increasing energy usage. There's also a lot more maintenance required for such a system, there's more risk involved in crosswind and with possible decoupling issues and the amount of airports will be hugely limited. I think money is much better spent in improving the battery technology quicker.
Looking at these electric planes they are very similar to ICE powered planes. I wonder if there are any benefits to changing that design so that battery can be placed in a different place or structured differently. Same like Tesla did in their designs
I don't think they can replace airliners. you would probably need 100 of them to replace a single day, 1,300 at a airport like Heathrow an that would 103,000 flights a day.
I really dont get that whole thing. I personally dont want to see the skies looking like the roads full of personal transport VTOLs. I would actually rather see better ground transport like high speed rail.
Switching to more efficient airframe designs, such as flying wings (Think Northrop B-21 or N-9M), could help to reduce emission immediately (by ~30%, I believe). Pairing a more efficient and already existing airframe technology with battery electric technologies could really give these companies the leg up they have been looking for without necessarily inventing anything new. I'm curious why, beyond hesitancy surrounding safety issues of a non-conventional airframe design, these companies haven't tried that avenue? Edit: spelling
Building and certifying a new commercial airplane is an extremely long process, most startup companies just can't do it at all and all of the entrenched industry players, which have consolidated down to about four companies, have no interest in going through the full certification when they can try to pass off every innovation as just a variant of an existing model and attempt to bypass it. This is one of the reasons Boeing is in the state it's in.
Stability and controllability especially in the yaw axis are limited in these types of aircraft, especially if you think about smaller aircraft with such design, also visibility isn't great and landing will be way more difficult than a Chesna. Talking about commercial passenger aviation I can imagine the sheer wingspan of the aircraft becoming a problem since it won't be compatible with existing passenger boarding gateways. Also think about pressurization, in a fighter/bomber aircraft you only need to pressurize the cockpit, in a passenger plane you need to pressurize the whole passenger compartment. Last thing is cost, developing a whole new type of aircraft is incredibly expensive and difficult, look at Boing, they can't even develop a proper aircraft, anymore, because they are cutting costs wherever possible.
@@LastWish90 Adverse yaw problems were solved by adding vertical stabilizers, so there no excessive stability and controllability issues. Visibility issues are no lesser or greater than in conventional aircraft. Wingspan isn't so much an issue with existing airport infrastructure so much as taxing equipment and jet bridges. Area needed to be pressurized in a flying wing's cabin would be lesser or equal to conventional designs. While developing a commercial flying wing that could carry an equivalent amount of passengers to modern airliners would be novel, the designs have been around for many decades and are well refine. The B-2 bomber serves as a good example of this.
@@jamesengland7461 So is the Auto industry as we are discovering with their rejection or back tracking on electrification. One company - start up - is eating their lunch. "I’m so dying to do a supersonic, electric VOTL jet, but adding more work will make my 🧠 🧨" 10:39 AM · Oct 8, 2021 Musk on X. "I have a design for a plane. The exciting thing to do would be some kind of electric vertical takeoff and landing, supersonic jet. The interesting thing about an electric plane is that you want to go as high as possible but you need a certain energy density in the battery pack because you have to overcome gravitational potential energy. Once you’ve overcome gravitational potential energy and you’re at a high altitude, the energy you use in cruise is very low, and then you can recapture a large part of your gravitational potential energy on the way down. The higher you go, the faster you will go for the same amount of energy. And at a certain altitude you can go supersonic with less energy-per-mile - quite a lot less energy per mile - than aircraft at 35,000 feet.” Musk on Rogan interview.
Nice I'm a retired Mechanic with 15 years on Aircraft, After years of being exposed to chemicals and pollutants, listening to ICE, Jet and Turbine engines it must be delightful to listen and work around an Electric Aircraft minus all that previously mentioned nastiness.
Great to hear someone with all that experience in fossil-fuel based aviation being so open minded and welcoming to new tech. 👍
@@EugeneLambert
I avoid all those chemicals after 46 years of being a mechanic they have taken a toll on me.
It's amazing never getting your hands dirty!
This.
OMG
Flight schools are the optimal usage, short flights, high frequency. And you could even use the charging time to help people get acclimated to the cockpit and doing their checklists.
Right now yes. But those planes are running on five year old technology currently. Not even close to state of the art. That Pipistrel plane has a fairly modest wh/kg ratio. Not even close to state of the art. Doubling or tripling its range is very feasible. 500wh/kg is on the market right now but not in anything that has been certified yet. That just takes time. By the time that happens, the state of the art will have moved on to 750/wh/kg or even kw/kg type ranges. So, mostly this is going to take a lot of people by surprise because they aren't following the battery market. But it's basically going to happen on a fairly predictable schedule. In ten years or so, there will be lots of short haul commercial flight that is battery electric. Long haul is going to take a bit longer but it will come as well.
@@JillesvanGurp The aviation industry is extremely slow to make significant changes, especially to develop new planes, mostly because of extremely strict regulations, but also very low production numbers, compared to for example cars. The Cessna 172 is the worlds most produced aircraft, all categories, ever, and some 44,000 units had been produced a few years ago, since 1955, and it is still in production, so now maybe around 50,000 in total, since 1955. That's less than a thousand units per year on average, even if you discount the few years it wasn't produced.
The batteries can be changed, easily, whenever there's better batteries available, and the Velis Electro doesn't use the exact same batteries as when it was first developed, which was mentioned in the video.
High energy density is great, but there are other aspects that are important, as safety, longevity and charge/discharge rate. The amprius 500 Wh/kg battery has a life expectancy of 150 cycles, and max continuous charge and discharge rate of 0.1C, meaning, you can't use or charge more than 10% of the capacity per hour. That means for the Velis Electro, to be able to use say 25 kW continuously, they would need to have 250 kWh of capacity, at 500 Wh/kg, that's 500 kg. 500 kg is more than that plane weighs, including currently used batteries, and having 500 kg battery cells, plus packaging, would make the payload capacity negative.
In other words, a max 0.1C charge/discharge rate means a plane would have to be designed for at least 10 hours of flight for those batteries to be meaningful, that's ballpark 3 times more range per kg of batteries as the Velis Electro. A plane would have to be huge for a given payload to achieve that, and for commercial use 10 hour charge time would require swapping the batteries instead of charging in the planes, and 2 sets of ultra expensive packs for each plane in operation, one in use and one charging.
Batteries are getting better, but on average per year, it's a few percent overall improvement that reach the market, except when some some important factors are sacrificed to reach some absurd specific capability. Super low power density, 120 cycles, and probably absurd cost on top of that, and questionable safety isn't great for aircraft, even with 500 Wh/kg energy density on cell level.
It'd be great to see that take off. I'd like to learn to fly, but I've gotten very used to not burning gas most days, and it just feels wrong to start back as a hobby.
@@JillesvanGurp Its not going to take anyone by a surprise because everyone wants better and better battery tech. Even if we had the technology to produce kw/kg batteries today, it would take years to propagate it to mainstream markets so that everyone can reap the benefits of that tech.
@@robertcowher You should check out electric paragliders. They're getting really popular really fast.
I've done a skydive at Dunkeswell. That little plane was up and down dozens of times a day. If that could be made electric, what a fantastic upgrade it'd be. One day.
Did my first static jumps there. It was quite funny. The instructors were ex-Royal Marines. One got chatting to my father who was a Para in WW2. The RM suddenly shouted ‘oh s**t’ , vaulted over the fence by the control tower and charged across the DZ to help someone due to land … then! He made it😀
But ... would the charge last that long without a visit to the recharging point?
@@t1n4444 It could visit the recharging point every time it lands, dozens of times a day.
@@The18107j
Indeed it could.
I've only jumped out of a plane once, but I definitely remember the noise was an issue. The loud sounds interfere with communication and are unpleasant. An EV plane would make skydiving more enjoyable.
Some 94 Scottish islands are permanently inhabited, of which 89 are offshore islands. As an alternative to slow ferry trips, short journeys electric flight seems a no brainer to me.
There's a definite elegance in having these small electric general aviation planes omit the usual level 2 charger and charge exclusively from DC fast charging. No point in carrying around all that extra weight, especially because these only fly between a small number of purpose-built locations (runways) where installing the charging infrastructure is trivial.
Someone in the know a few years ago predicted in 2040 large planes would have electric engines. 16 years from now doesn't seem impossible.
Ah, don't worry, Robert's used to rough flights from the Starbug in Red Dwarf.
Shame that going to Red Alert meant changing the bulb. 😁
Reminds me of the 1st and 2nd Gen EVs (cars) - getting there, but not quite there for mainstream yet. Give it a few years with these trail blazers, and electric powered flight will become commonplace. Great Stuff!
Yep. I still remember my 1st gen LEAF, charging all night and then making a pit stop on the way to work to charge more, and it still felt like a futuristic space car. Now I've got a Bolt, and it still hits me sometimes when I see 81 miles of range, because that used to be the "max" number in the old days. Looking forward to seeing where this all goes.
You're about to take off, and you tell your passenger "I've crashed one of these things before"! Probably not the best time for sharing that information.
I remember a friend in NSW that used to investigate light air craft crashes, and he told me it is not a matter of if, but when. He also hastily added that most crashes are not that horrendous. He was also a pilot. and I think he still is. ( I hope ) 😃
I read about this one a couple of years ago.
‘’Harbour Air made history by introducing the world’s first all-electric commercial aircraft, known as the ePlane. This remarkable aircraft is a six-seater DHC-2 de Havilland Beaver powered by a 750hp electric propulsion system. The ePlane successfully completed its inaugural flight at the Harbour Air Seaplanes terminal in Vancouver, Canada, back in December 2019. The flight was piloted by Harbour Air’s CEO and founder, Greg McDougall1. The company’s commitment to sustainability and environmental responsibility drove them to embark on this groundbreaking project. By transitioning their fleet of seaplanes to electric power, Harbour Air aims to make a significant difference for our planet, moving from carbon-neutral to carbon-zero operations”
There’s a Fully Charged video on it!
That was BIG NEWS back in 2019. Sadly there seems to be no significant advances since. I just came from their website and had to really dig to even find mention of anything about electric flight, and it was only talking about what they achieved 5 years ago.
Harbour Air signed last year to acquire 50 Magnix engines, and currently hope to obtain Transport Canada certification to operate their fleet from 2026. It's taking longer to get the certification than they hoped, but they're still moving forward.
@@AC-van68 Im in Van too and this is exciting. They have run a couple of years of test flights on the E-beaver. This is perfect for their routes which are short hops. A point of note was the pilots comments on the great torque on the takeoffs...
They are waiting for certification, and the aviation authority postponed them again... it's not a technical problem to get electric airplanes flying, it's our overregulated, sometimes completely absurd way of dealing with new stuff.
Compare that with some moron driving 150 miles, crashing, killing 5 people.... a short headline, next day its fogotten and nothing get's changed, but if you want to build an electric aircraft, they torture you with a thousend stupid ideas what you need to proof and what needs to be tested and certified until you are broke, before you can legally fly with it.
Super cool electric aviation! Also like Imogen alluded to we're starting to see rhe real world feedback that most don't have a clue of. The example here is electric cars bringing battery costs down while increasing energy density and also second life batteries used at end of a single phase line. Zero grid retrofit. I call BS on those that say it's too expensive to update the grid to make everything electric... Sabine Hossenfelder and every grid operator who see $$$ from a centralised electricity generation and expensive upgrade projects.
I like to think that maybe we can make an electric plane that is good for circuit training. Only needs an endurance of around 90 minutes to 2 hours at most as it's going to be used for 60 mins of takeoff and landing practice.
10-15 minutes is plenty enough for Air RB (;
@@nickthegriffin Nobody has claimed it's progress in terms of range when compared with an old Cessna 150 (which I have flown). The progress is that it is now demonstrated that you can fly a plane without using fossil fuels. A very limited use aircraft but nevertheless an aircraft that could have some specific economically viable uses even today. No doubt the 150 mile cross country requirement could be met with extra landings.
@@nickthegriffin 1770. Nicolas-Joseph Cugnot builds the first steam-powered carriage, with a theoretical top speed of 4.8 miles per hour, but typically moved at around 2.25 mph. I'll bet people at the time were asking what the point of it is when their horses could pull carriages much faster and for longer distances.
I’m thinking that solid state will be the future of ultra lights like the Pipistrel. I owned a Jabiru J200 for 15 years and the idea of almost no servicing, no mags and no Avgas is quite appealing. 3300 Jabiru engine was a bugger to get going on really cold days and the battery was tiny. Imagine just a throttle and maybe auto prop pitch controller. I must say I did prefer the control stick in the middle next to the pilots right hand rather than between the legs. Made no difference to control but made getting in and out the craft a lot easier.
I was fortunate enough to fly this in Voss last year at the European Skydiving Championship and I was awesome! Flared it too early and almost missed the runway! It’s so light that I was told I had to slip it to land it, which was loads of fun :)
Thank you for that big picture summary in the middle of the clip Imogen, it really helped 👍
Thanks for another great episode. Loved the backing track during the take-off phase. Will be interesting to see where electric flight gets to in the next few years
It should be pointed out that electric flight (like electric cars) is NOT new. In October 1973 a converted glider flew for 9 minutes powered by Nickel-Cadmium (NiCad) batteries. This was the first manned electric aircraft to fly under it's own power. You may not be impressed with that, but it's an electric flight moment equivalent to the Wright Brothers first flight. Just think, it's been 51 years since this electric plane took it's first short flight. Within 50 years of the Wright Brothers taking off Boeing were flying the 377 Stratocruiser Airliner that could carry 100 passengers. That is a marker of how much progress could be made with electric flight within one generation.
Done quite a few military exercises at Dunkeswell, great to see electric planes there as well
The best presented and put together show I've seen for a long time. Thank you.
The future of electic aviation is very exciting. Obviously the energy density issue is the big problem to solve but that is for big companies to take on.
Great to see another episode on electric flight, and the developments since the last episode with Robert’s bumpy flight 😂. Also good to see the HAV Airlander mentioned - they’re moving ahead well, with production close to starting on commercial sale aircraft, and a contract for 10 or more ships for Air Nostrum in Spain. Was kind of your pilot to mention that he’d crashed one of the planes as you were taxing to take off - nothing like putting you at ease! 😂
I loved this video, I sat in the plane last year at Harrogate show, it really is a cosy fit for two! Imogen can test the jet ski that flies Out of the water please ! I think Robert is a bit elderly and Jack might be too tall. You are just the right size!
Cool! I love to see these developments! I think Imogen was squeezing her hands to tightly at takeoff that some of her finger tips turned white…! 😬😂
i love electric aviation. currently developing 💫
Love this, great work and excellent explanation/coverage. I based my final year dissertation on the Pipistrel electric aircraft and the overall benefits if used for initial flight training (CO2 emissions - mixed grid charging vs Avgas/Avtur).
If there's a hangar to put solar panels on, providing the amount of energy needed to charge a few small light electric planes shouldn't have to be an issue. Especially for planes that typically requires daylight to be flown, and are mostly flown recreationally, meaning the correlation between generation of solar power and use of power for charging should be about as strong as for air conditioning.
Some batteries are still required unless there's a grid connection that can handle the difference in generation and use at any given moment, but it shouldn't be too difficult to generate much more than the overall amount of energy required onsite in most cases.
Cool report.... I am jealous of Imogen for all those cool experiences 🙂 awesome office your have..
It seems we will see more commercial application for planes when the energy density reaches ~1000Wh/Kg.... Love the idea though... turn a switch and just go, power, no fumes.
That is a great and uplifting video. Keep it up following electric aviation…
Thank you for the podcast, the Highlander p. S kindness is always free.😊😊
Intriguing update! 🤩👍
Reminds me of some similar development over the yesrs here in Germany.
Will have a look for an update right now. Will be such a grest improvement for aviation an thus our climate. 😍
@FullyChargedShow Please check in on and give us an update on: "B.C.’s Harbour Air aims to buy 50 electric engines to convert seaplane fleet" when you get to Canada this year.
Owned a Tesla since 2020, and just started on my private pilot license. I can't wait till electric aviation really takes off!
Aerodromes must not shun electric aviation. With the uncertain future of hydrocarbon based liquid fuel such as AVGAS 100L the opportunity to host any form of electric aviation brings much needed revenue in the form of hangarage fees, handling charges, landing fees and electrons. As the petrol engine saved the horse, the electric aircraft will save general aviation.
"It's a bit hard to miss the Isle of Wight" - I dunno, I probably could. I can't find my backside with both hands and a map.
US Air Force is testing electric powered flight just up the road from me, in Florida.. They had a multi rotor and have a Pipistrel they are testing.
"Have a lovely coffee and lunch" What better use of an hour can one think of?
Way hay my garden is now famously immortalised on the in flight footage, shall i tell the neighbours too? 😁 Spitfire flying over today so its a little louder than the Pipistrel. Great show and great reporting as ever. C U all again sooon :-)
I am glad that Fully Charged is aware of the HAV Airlander 10. Does this mean that there will be a visit to their new Production Facility as it gets built later this year?
I do hope so!
Establishing a charging network should come first. This is the challenge in the USA. As I was always told, all good things in good time.
Nice to start with the small planes and even 20 seaters could go via hubs for further travel?? Nice and quiet, no pollution and no tyre damage and pollution or a huge Road Network to upkeep!! Flying could be the future!!
So basically the Pipistrel is an flying first gen Zoe with a tiny 20 kWh battery😅
This makes me re-think pilot license again, cost of flight , greener energy.
Great thing about electricity is that it's always same. You don't have to have different grades or prices for different vehicles or class of vehicles 😅
True... as long as the plug and socket fit. 😉
Have you heard of CHADEMO? That electricity is different.
@@BikeFlips Strictly speaking, the electricity is the same. You can change voltage and wattage simply enough, but is a major operation to alter diesel, gasoline and kerosene.
@@martythemartian99 - it's OK, I was joking :P
@@BikeFlips AAAAAARGH! I fell for it 😵
Does this plane have regenerative braking? Descending contains a lot of gravitational potential energy and swapping propeller from powering mode to generator mode seems like maybe not that stupid idea?
The only problem with that idea that I can see would be if the "braking" would slow the plane down TOO fast.
These small aerodromes would be perfect for larger sized solar arrays, either ground or rooftop mounted, since there's usually plenty of unused available space, the pairing of which with large battery storage should enable the adoption of small electric aircraft to move quicker and make 'fueling up' so much cheaper than that of the current liquid aviation fuels.
There was a solar farm visible on this video ...
@@MrAdopado But that doesn't automatically mean it was the electricity supply for that particular aerodrome.
@@pinkelephants1421 OK ... it was powered by coal. Give me a break.
@@MrAdopado Perhaps you are not from the UK, therefore you would be unaware that coal in this country provides 1% or less of the electricity mix and by the end of 2024, that pose plant will permanently close. That's the most diplomatic way I can think of to counter your ridiculous & massively incorrect assertion.
@@pinkelephants1421 My sarcastic reference to coal was to highlight your own silly points! Of course the UK hardly uses any coal ... we've only one coal power station left and that is due to close later this year (Ratcliffe on Soar). I monitor grid generation on a daily basis so I am fully aware of the coal situation! Let's get back to your comment about the solar farm beside the aerodrome ... if you understand how the grid works you will also know that whether the solar farm is directly owned by the aerodrome or not its power will be being distributed in that locality so the electric plane chargers will effectively be benefiting from solar power. Your first comment in this thread was "These small aerodromes would be perfect for larger sized solar arrays.." and I simply pointed out that there is indeed a solar farm beside the aerodrome and that you could even see it on the video.
Really excited for this space.
An ultralight is a great proof of concept but for some more serious range the battery has to be a large fraction of the takeoff weight, like 50-60%, not 25%. Hope to see some slightly bigger models soon. 10 min contingency really forces you to stay close to the airport, usually the contingency has to be 45 min but then the planned flight time would be 15 min...
That will come in time as battery energy density improves. But, in the meantime, you've got to start somewhere.
That Allye SES unit looks small enough to be truck mounted and serve as a mobile charger.
With regard to the charging infrastructure for aviation, it would seem like a good idea to use the apron of the airfield to erect a solar array to charge the battery banks for the chargers .
I think electric planes will be handy for short hop flights, especially if airports are equipped with chargers to support them. I'm thinking places with a lot of renewables - solar or wind like the Orkneys where electric would mean not having to ship fuel to these places, or only using it as a last resort. I don't think electric is viable for normal passenger travel yet where weight and range would be limiting factors until higher density batteries start appearing.
The lithium-air battery developed by Argonne National Labs was reported to have 1000 Wh/kg and 1000 cycles over 16 months ago and has improved since. There's a full description of their polymeric ceramic electrolyte on the ANL website news page.
Yes, at bench scale all kinds of amazing things are possible. The vast vast majority of lab developments, no matter how good they sound in press releases, will simply never make it to production. And that can be for any number of reasons including the fact that some things simply don't scale well, all the way to the more practical fact that a step change in technology is often much more easy to implement in existing production facilities than a massive leap, to the fact that some cutting edge technologies are just so expensive to scale that no-one outside of say the Space sector can afford it. CATL can get batteries to production, that is what is important.
@@patreekotime4578 Did you have any wonton soup today???
@@patreekotime4578
Well let's see if Airbus can throw enough cash at hydrogen R&D to power an airliner.
They claim that they will have got one in the air by 2035.
Who knows?
@@patreekotime4578 this is a common sentiment but there isn't necessarily a lot of truth in it. Part of it is just people with unrealistic expectations about time scales wanting instant satisfaction after they read about a thing being possible. People are spoiled but some things just take more time. The certification process for aviation is pretty brutal. It takes years. That pipistrel you saw in the video is running on pre-covid technology. That's just how long it takes to get stuff in the air. Those batteries are nothing special compared to most EVs on the road. right now. And those are nothing special to the state of the art which has more than double the energy density at 500wh/kg. And that's stuff that went into production more than a year ago. Imagine that pipistel with a 1000wh/kg battery instead of the
@@tomlakosh1833 Is that some kind of r@cist nonsense?
Interesting to see 'Eaton' on the charging station. Those who know ICE cars, OEM and aftermarket, will understand why! :D
I hope there are plans to instal a charger at Sandown Airport in the Isle of Wight. Not so much for locals, but I understand it is a popular destination for day flights to keep flying hours up. (There is a requirement that you fly a certain number of hours each year to keep the qualification valid. If you don't have enough flying time, you have to re-qualify).
I believe there is charger installed there already 👍
Flexible lightweight solar panels on available surface area of a wing/aerofoil should be the only way to go for augmenting range. Then ofc retractable landing gear, and more attention to aero overall could make that existing plane alot more practical.
It seems pilot training is the killer app for this plane which should be a great mindset enabler for electric aviation's future. Here in NZ, we have some larger planes on order for courier services. It's started.
Where is the nearest flying school to Lincolnshire which uses electric aeroplanes? I'm interested in seeing one and buying a demonstration flight in it. Thanks.
So for their 20kWh battery, it can fly up to 90 nautical miles. What's the Voltage tho, would love to know the specs of the battery
I would guess that it's nominally 400 Volts, because that is the most common voltage in electric road vehicles. 800 Volts is beginning to be deployed, but it's still a small part of the market.
All the specs are on their site! "The 57.6kW liquid cooled electric engine provides power to the aircraft.
The power is delivered by 345 VDC electric system built around a liquid-cooled in-house developed high performance battery system, which includes two Pipistrel PB345V119E-L batteries connected in parallel, installed in a redundant 2-unit arrangement, total nominal capacity 20 kWh. Crashworthy, thermal runaway inhibiting, HIRF/EMI tolerant.
One battery pack is located in the nose of the airplane and the second behind the cabin. This ensures redundancy of the power source: in case of battery failure, the malfunctioning battery would get automatically disconnected from the system. A single battery is capable of standalone operation and has enough power capability to support climbing and continuation of flight."
great episode. This feels like the future!
this is excellent, very good. the range will get better as battery technology provides larger energy density.
It would appear that landing is actually harder than with the ICE engine. The pilot appeared to be constantly having to adjust the throttle setting all the way through the touchdown. This would make sense if the propeller has "engine braking/battery recharging". It wouldn't be as simple is simply pulling the power off on your Cessna, letting the prop "idle" and then gliding down for your last 10-20 feet. Instead, it looked like the pilot had to worry about getting the throttle setting "just right" all the way down - as just pulling power fully off looked like it was creating actual drag as from an electric motor trying to harvest power back into the battery. Am I wrong?
Totally wrong
Yea, not sure what he was doing. The original plane this was based on is a powered glider. Should be able to cut power soon as runway is made and glide down like a normal light aircraft. Maybe he was floating on purpose to taxi off the end. Or maybe he really wanted a smooth landing for the camera.
Normal for light aircraft. The slight changes in the wind have a larger effect on an aircraft that is both flying quite slow, and is quite light. That means the pilot has to adjust power constantly. Happens in an ICE light aircraft too.
I wouldn't be surprised if he was trying to touch down at a specific spot for the camera. I've be very surprised if the designers had made the plane harder than necessary to fly, and regen braking is a bit pointless on a plane because you don't change speed much.
An earlier version called the Alpha, did have a special prop that allowed regenerative descent which recovered 13% of the energy in circuit flying. Complexity and homologation difficulties made this option not possible on the commercial Velis version.
10:20 22kW of DC charging or 3 phase AC charging?
Edit: They talk more about the connector at 1:22 "GBT conntector" Looks like GB/T 20234.3-2015, based on the the "GB/T charging standard" Wikipedia page.
The charger would take 22kW 3-phase AC from the grid and convert it to 22kW DC for the plane. To save weight, the plane does not have an onboard charger capable of accepting AC.
Very interesting. Have you seen the passenger electric plane in Canada?
Harbour Air in Vancouver you mean? Yes they've been testing their retrofitted E-Beaver for a couple of years with great results. They plan to convert their fleet as they do seaplane short hops.
Harbour Air's "eBeaver"? Yes, but it isn't a passenger aircraft yet. The first conversion has no passenger capacity and the second conversion hasn't flown yet.
Is it possible for these planes to glide for a bit to extend the flight, or is it not the right design.
Also very nice landing!
Imogen. Awesome.
I saw some large roof area there with no solar! :-)
E is perfect for skydiving
Or as a glider tow plane perhaps.
How many electric aircraft are currently registered in the UK? And in Europe?
Great to see additional electric aircraft are working towards certification.
Was a bit surprised that the connector being used was not Megawatt Charging System (MCS), which will be the default for big-rig trucks. This would seem to be a solution that would continue to be useful as the size of electric aircraft grows and evolves.
Car rapid chargers are CCS in UK and Europe so I would have expected them to be using that ... then literally use the same hardware.
MCS is not used for light aircraft for the same reason that MCS is not used for cars.
@@MrAdopado the choice of and existing DC-only connector type (GB/T) which was not in use in Europe for cars (like CCS2) was deliberate - Pipistrel didn't want non-aviation hargers used for the aircraft, and not many people would want ground vehicles competing with aircraft for use of airside chargers.
Fantastic
I'm pretty sure that we need to rethink the propulsion method to go with electric.
Perhaps similar to Dyson hair dryer & blade jet hand dryer stuck on the tail.
Or forcing blade airstream out through a slit on top of the wing so it follows coanda effect creating air vacuum and lift and propulsion.
Remember I said it here first
Why would using less efficient lift and propulsion systems be needed for electric aviation?
one additional development will be perovskite solar cells without stiff silicon and more than 25% efficiency. without the need of very plane surfaces and you can apply them on the whole wing and fuselage.
for a plane like the pipistrel electric, you get additional 2kW of power on a sunny day which increases the range by 10%. maybe 15% in 10 years from now. it is not much but it is not nothing and it fully charges itself in two days.
I reckon that pilot needs an extra wide cabin to accommodate his hair! 😃 Great to see aviation electrification progressing. I think the Pipistrel is like the early Nissan Leaf - about the same range and charge rates. So we can expect to see similar progress in range and charging rates compared to cars as time passes. With the Pipestrel, if the next student is ready for their flying lesson, you don't really want the aircraft idle for an hour. Does the current Pipistrel still have the swappable battery packs? If so, can those chargers work with the battery packs off the aircraft? And one important figure they didn't give us, how many pence per KWh are they charging for aircraft to use those chargers?
Might be good for things like nearmaps and other mapping
Your much braver than I am, love the idea of an electric flight though, was it much quieter than a normal prop plane?
69dB
On short hops I think electric is safer. Electric motors are very reliable.
wonder how long until they are in the states..
The FAA has just granted Textron eAviation’s Pipistrel an exemption from the light sport aircraft (LSA) regulations, allowing the company’s Velis Electro electric-powered airplane to operate under LSA regulations in the U.S. This means that flight training schools and individual pilots can now fly the Velis Electro without restrictions.
@@waynerussell6401 now I wonder when one will be available at my local flight school... I've been asking and the personnel act like it's way over budget.
So is the idea at the moment that these are for hopping over somewhere for like a meeting then coming back? Travel 15 minutes, charge an hour, travel back?
Electric planes seem more suited as a machine to have a bit of fun in, and I'm all for that
For commercial operations though, the tech may struggle to complete with its fueled counterpart
I’m very hopeful Solid State batteries like Quantum Scape can help electrify all the old Cessna and Piper 4 seaters at some point. Could really make flying cheaper and more reasonable to fly more regularly.
First, you have to think of a happy little thought. It's easier than pie!
So why aren't they putting solar over all the hangers?
All those hangers will have a lot of roof space to put some massive solar arrays.
The airfield near me has about 60kW of solar on the hangars. They don't even have electric aircraft or car chargers.
@@The18107j if the people who do solar walkways and solar roads can diversify into solar runways and solar taxiways then these little airports would have more power than they would ever need.
@@matthewbaynham6286 Putting solar next to the runway would be a better idea. Runways can take a lot of force, and there is a lot of empty space around the runway. Rooftops would also work.
@@The18107j cheaper too
I think some commercial airports already do, although the electricity generated is just used to help power the airport building, not the actual airplanes.
On the grassy area between runways, I'm not sure if that would be legal or safe. They have to account for the fact that an errant plane might veer off the runway and smash right into them, which is why this area has no trees in it.
Thanks
For commercial aviation, regardless of the energy source/storage onboard the aircraft, I imagine some sort of maglev rail gun being used to handle taxi and acceleration to takeoff speed. Based on the estimates I have seen, this could reduce the energy storage requirement onboard the plane by 5-10%. This would both make battery electric and fuel cell aircraft more broadly viable and also would represent a meaningful reduction in emissions and/or production requirement for hydrocarbon fueled aircraft. Would require some standards and engineering, but it seems like details and not breakthrough technology.
Well said! And what about the advances in the in wheel motor space? Now they can be 10-20+hp per kg and with built in braking systems?
Maybe ev planes could use these to taxi&accelerate to takeoff speeds, but also regen massively upon landing? 🤔
By the time you have changed airplane design to enable a rail gun launch, besides all the risks and huge costs involved, you're looking at 10+ years development time (design + testing + approval + implementation). By that time battery density per kg has increased by more than that improvement. Also don't forget that there will be a weight increase on the airplane to enable a safe launch system installed, increasing energy usage. There's also a lot more maintenance required for such a system, there's more risk involved in crosswind and with possible decoupling issues and the amount of airports will be hugely limited. I think money is much better spent in improving the battery technology quicker.
@@emilenossin5098
Can't see Granny surviving such a takeoff.
@@t1n4444 It doesn't need to be Carrier levels of acceleration. The runways at airports are much longer.
Even so, granny may wet herself.😄
Generally there is a lot of empty space at airports. A solar array to charge the battery should be possible.
Aren’t airfields idea for Solar & battery storage. Lot of roof space on plane garages!!! , as long as you can limit the reflectivity of the panels
Panels with less reflectivity would also glean more energy from diffuse sources, too.
What’s the price point for these planes?
Can you do commercial pleasure flights in this aircraft?
Skydiving or gliding should be in a way that it spins the propeller and charges like regenerative braking.
Very cool 🙃
love the pants.
Beta Technologies based in Vermont, USA has been building a public electric aviation charging network since well before Aerovolt. It already uses CCS.
It’s not a public network, the ALIA isn’t certified so for testing only.
Brilliant
Looking at these electric planes they are very similar to ICE powered planes. I wonder if there are any benefits to changing that design so that battery can be placed in a different place or structured differently. Same like Tesla did in their designs
Just so I understand... is that a Chademo charger or something else?
It's a GBT connector. It's likely that aircraft will be moving to the CCS standard instead.
It's a GB/T 20234.3 connector, which is the standard type used for DC charging in China.
Small, pilotless VTOL aircraft are the future for a huge percentage of all flights.
I don't think they can replace airliners. you would probably need 100 of them to replace a single day, 1,300 at a airport like Heathrow an that would 103,000 flights a day.
I really dont get that whole thing. I personally dont want to see the skies looking like the roads full of personal transport VTOLs. I would actually rather see better ground transport like high speed rail.
Could this be at the Farnborough show?
Interesting but I’d like an update in a year 🙏
🔥🔥
They should check with Aptera. Put some of their solar cells on that plane.
Switching to more efficient airframe designs, such as flying wings (Think Northrop B-21 or N-9M), could help to reduce emission immediately (by ~30%, I believe). Pairing a more efficient and already existing airframe technology with battery electric technologies could really give these companies the leg up they have been looking for without necessarily inventing anything new. I'm curious why, beyond hesitancy surrounding safety issues of a non-conventional airframe design, these companies haven't tried that avenue?
Edit: spelling
Building and certifying a new commercial airplane is an extremely long process, most startup companies just can't do it at all and all of the entrenched industry players, which have consolidated down to about four companies, have no interest in going through the full certification when they can try to pass off every innovation as just a variant of an existing model and attempt to bypass it. This is one of the reasons Boeing is in the state it's in.
Stability and controllability especially in the yaw axis are limited in these types of aircraft, especially if you think about smaller aircraft with such design, also visibility isn't great and landing will be way more difficult than a Chesna.
Talking about commercial passenger aviation I can imagine the sheer wingspan of the aircraft becoming a problem since it won't be compatible with existing passenger boarding gateways.
Also think about pressurization, in a fighter/bomber aircraft you only need to pressurize the cockpit, in a passenger plane you need to pressurize the whole passenger compartment.
Last thing is cost, developing a whole new type of aircraft is incredibly expensive and difficult, look at Boing, they can't even develop a proper aircraft, anymore, because they are cutting costs wherever possible.
You're correct; it's hesitancy. The aircraft industry is actually EXTREMELY traditionalist and resistant to change.
@@LastWish90 Adverse yaw problems were solved by adding vertical stabilizers, so there no excessive stability and controllability issues. Visibility issues are no lesser or greater than in conventional aircraft. Wingspan isn't so much an issue with existing airport infrastructure so much as taxing equipment and jet bridges. Area needed to be pressurized in a flying wing's cabin would be lesser or equal to conventional designs. While developing a commercial flying wing that could carry an equivalent amount of passengers to modern airliners would be novel, the designs have been around for many decades and are well refine. The B-2 bomber serves as a good example of this.
@@jamesengland7461 So is the Auto industry as we are discovering with their rejection or back tracking on electrification. One company - start up - is eating their lunch. "I’m so dying to do a supersonic, electric VOTL jet, but adding more work will make my 🧠 🧨"
10:39 AM · Oct 8, 2021 Musk on X. "I have a design for a plane. The exciting thing to do would be some kind of electric vertical takeoff and landing, supersonic jet. The interesting thing about an electric plane is that you want to go as high as possible but you need a certain energy density in the battery pack because you have to overcome gravitational potential energy. Once you’ve overcome gravitational potential energy and you’re at a high altitude, the energy you use in cruise is very low, and then you can recapture a large part of your gravitational potential energy on the way down. The higher you go, the faster you will go for the same amount of energy. And at a certain altitude you can go supersonic with less energy-per-mile - quite a lot less energy per mile - than aircraft at 35,000 feet.”
Musk on Rogan interview.
I am so buying a private jet when this releases
i doubt you could afford
Well, excuse me, I guess.
...You're probably right, but you shouldn't be guessing!
@@Navoii. guess so