Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 12-09-2019, 10:35 PM   #21
Guru
 
ssobol's Avatar
 
City: Southwest MI
Vessel Name: Sobelle
Vessel Model: C-Dory 22 Cruiser
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 1,229
Quote:
Originally Posted by rsn48 View Post
The flights will be short, I don't think Seattle will be serviced. So flights to and from Vancouver and Vancouver Island. The flight to Nanaimo may be 20 minutes and that probably includes ground time.
An Israeli company is developing an electric 9 place aircraft with a range of 650 miles. Supposedly going to fly in the next year or so.

Not a seaplane though.
ssobol is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2019, 11:46 PM   #22
Guru
 
sbu22's Avatar
 
City: New Orleans
Vessel Name: Panache
Vessel Model: Viking 43 Double Cabin '76
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,253
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ski in NC View Post
At some point there will be a hard wall as to how much electrical energy can be stored in a battery. We may be close to that now. I'm not expecting an order of magnitude improvement in batt capacity. Would be thrilled if we did, but not expecting it.
its a physical chemistry problem. There is a hard thermodynamic threshold for the energy density (mega-joules/kilogram) of a given medium. Crude oil calculates to about 50 mj/kg of chemical potential energy. Lead acid batteries = 0.1, LiO = 0.5.

Even exotic storage processes are thermo limited. There's a good summary of the subject at https://thebulletin.org/2009/01/the-...ge-technology/ .
sbu22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2019, 12:10 AM   #23
Guru
 
rochepoint's Avatar
 
City: Sidney BC Canada
Vessel Name: RochePoint
Vessel Model: 1985 Cheer Men PT38 Sedan
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,744
She is flying, initial testing on the Fraser River.......
Attached Thumbnails
Harbour Air.jpg  
__________________
Cheers
Mike
MV RochePoint
rochepoint is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2019, 12:43 AM   #24
DDW
Guru
 
City: San Francisco
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 3,094
Quote:
Originally Posted by sbu22 View Post
its a physical chemistry problem. There is a hard thermodynamic threshold for the energy density (mega-joules/kilogram) of a given medium. Crude oil calculates to about 50 mj/kg of chemical potential energy. Lead acid batteries = 0.1, LiO = 0.5.

Even exotic storage processes are thermo limited. There's a good summary of the subject at https://thebulletin.org/2009/01/the-...ge-technology/ .
Yes, the raw energy density difference is 2 orders of magnitude. However one must also consider the conversion efficiency which is 90%+ in electric and 30% or less in internal combustion. That's why I said one order of magnitude.

Another issue in airplanes: you have to carry the fuel you burn, but half way through the flight it's half gone. Batteries, you carry for the whole flight and have to land with them. Part of the flight is less efficient, even if batteries were on par. Commercial jets do not land with a full load of fuel, it is considered unsafe. Nothing to do with fire risk, it's just the weight.

Getting a battery powered plane type certified for passengers is probably a 10 year regulatory effort if all is ready to go and tested today.

There are some of the reasons this isn't going to happen by Christmas.
DDW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2019, 01:35 AM   #25
Guru
 
ssobol's Avatar
 
City: Southwest MI
Vessel Name: Sobelle
Vessel Model: C-Dory 22 Cruiser
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 1,229
Quote:
Originally Posted by DDW View Post
...Commercial jets do not land with a full load of fuel, it is considered unsafe. Nothing to do with fire risk, it's just the weight. ...
Current commercial aircraft always land lighter than they takeoff because some of the fuel is always consumed just getting off the ground. However, they COULD be designed to land at the same weight as when they take off, they just aren't. Further, any commercial aircraft can land at any possible weight the plane can be. A bit more care is needed if it is heavy, that's all. Sort of like driving your truck when towing your boat vs. when not towing anything.

All that is required is an inspection after a landing heavier than the max landing weight. If the inspection is passed, the plane is good to go. Newer planes will automatically generate a maintenance message indicating when an overweight (or hard landing) inspection is required.
ssobol is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2019, 05:16 AM   #26
FF
Guru
 
FF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 22,553
" However, they COULD be designed to land at the same weight as when they take off, they just aren't."


They aren't because some air ports charge for each landing at the max weight the aircraft is certified land at.
FF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2019, 11:18 AM   #27
Guru
 
ssobol's Avatar
 
City: Southwest MI
Vessel Name: Sobelle
Vessel Model: C-Dory 22 Cruiser
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 1,229
Quote:
Originally Posted by FF View Post
" However, they COULD be designed to land at the same weight as when they take off, they just aren't."


They aren't because some air ports charge for each landing at the max weight the aircraft is certified land at.
But that is an economics reason and has nothing to do with physical design constraints or safety.
ssobol is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2019, 11:27 AM   #28
Guru
 
diver dave's Avatar
 
City: Palm Coast, FL
Vessel Name: Coquina
Vessel Model: Lagoon 380
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 2,570
When the wheels blow out plugs go due to braking heat, that is considered a safety issue for the ground crew. Still, safer than the easiest alternative.
diver dave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2019, 11:58 AM   #29
DDW
Guru
 
City: San Francisco
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 3,094
The aircraft would need to be designed to land at max gross weight every time. Airframe, brakes, gear, etc. It will be heavier (not as efficient) and probably require more runway as a result. Not insurmountable, just another factor that electrics have to overcome. Anyway, that is for commercial jet type aircraft, and battery powered 737s are a very long way down the road, if ever.

Even sailplanes don't land at full gross weight. Racing gliders are ballasted with water to make them fly faster, but the ballast is always dumped (per the op manual) prior to landing except in an emergency. The water ballast - like the fuel in a jet - is in the wings to have minimum impact on spar loads. A hard landing with full fuel is like pulling inverted Gs - designers don't like the idea.
DDW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2019, 01:49 PM   #30
Guru
 
rochepoint's Avatar
 
City: Sidney BC Canada
Vessel Name: RochePoint
Vessel Model: 1985 Cheer Men PT38 Sedan
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,744
The Harbour Air ePlane successfully completed its first flight this morning in Richmond BC......
Attached Thumbnails
Screen Shot 2019-12-10 at 11.45.13 AM.jpg  
__________________
Cheers
Mike
MV RochePoint
rochepoint is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2019, 03:55 PM   #31
Guru
 
firehoser75's Avatar
 
City: Nanaimo
Vessel Name: former owner of "Pilitak"
Vessel Model: Nordic Tug 37
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 1,703
My neighbour is a retired commercial pilot with hundreds (if not more) of hours experience flying "Beavers" in his early career. He does not see an issue with using an electric powered float plane for short hops.
As to the weight issue (I am not a pilot and only speaking from what I think is "common sense"), float planes often take off and land multiple times on one trip. Often the first landing will be with the plane fully fueled (only a small amount burned) and loaded with a full load, so based on that, (and not knowing the actual weight differences between the electric and the conventional versions or any "adjustments" that may have been necessary to the aircraft) I wonder if the weight added? (don't know but suspect the electric would be heavier due to the batteries) for landings would really be a major issue? I think I will ask my pilot friend next time I see him to get an informed opinion.
Just some thoughts,
Tom
__________________
Tom
Nanaimo, BC
firehoser75 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2019, 04:07 PM   #32
DDW
Guru
 
City: San Francisco
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 3,094
The weight issue was more about commercial jets. Beavers land and take off at gross weight with no problem. On a Beaver I'd think the challenge is more about getting sufficient duration to be useful, and turn around time (refueling vs. recharging). The duration at current technology will be about 1/10 what is possible with Avgas. Recharging will take a long time, like overnight, vs. 10 minutes to refuel. So even if the duration is sufficient for short hops, the turn around time may be too long to be viable. On self launch sailplanes (electrics have been commercially available for 10 years) a 10 minute engine run takes 8 hours of charge time to replace. That is state of the art. There are faster charging technologies, but they require active cooling and are hard on cycle life.

Float planes in general and Beavers in particular are not particularly efficient airplanes, and not great candidates for early conversion to electric.
DDW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2019, 04:21 PM   #33
Senior Member
 
BrianSmith's Avatar
 
City: Wherever Smartini is
Vessel Name: Smartini
Vessel Model: 2002 Kristen 52' Flybridge Trawler
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 487
Quote:
Originally Posted by DDW View Post
Float planes in general and Beavers in particular are not particularly efficient airplanes, and not great candidates for early conversion to electric.
And yet, a company whose main business is flying Beavers on floats has decided that it makes perfect sense to convert their entire fleet to electric. I'm guessing they know something we don't.

I, for one, love the idea, and hope we'll see more and more electric planes in all aspects of aviation. There are a number of electric trainers available for sale today, and virtually every major aircraft manufacturer is doing research on electric flight. It's gonna happen.
BrianSmith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2019, 06:10 PM   #34
Guru
 
firehoser75's Avatar
 
City: Nanaimo
Vessel Name: former owner of "Pilitak"
Vessel Model: Nordic Tug 37
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 1,703
I agree with BrianSmith. Harbour Air, which operates a lot of flights daily out of my home port (Nanaimo, BC, Canada) is planning on potentially switching over to electric on all of their Beavers (at least so they say now before the first one is actually "put into service"). However, I would be surprised if they have not considered this from all angles of their business (but I have been surprised before).

I am hopeful of two things (from a somewhat selfish POV). I am hopeful it will reduce the soot (and oily film) that accumulates on my boat quite quickly, especially in the spring and summer when they are flying in and out several flights per hour, and also that the new engines will be quieter than the fuel driven engines.

I do not know how fast they can recharge or the range they can achieve on a single charge.
__________________
Tom
Nanaimo, BC
firehoser75 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2019, 08:06 PM   #35
DDW
Guru
 
City: San Francisco
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 3,094
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianSmith View Post
And yet, a company whose main business is flying Beavers on floats has decided that it makes perfect sense to convert their entire fleet to electric. I'm guessing they know something we don't.
I love the idea too, but I'll bet a six pack against anyone that it won't happen in the next 5 years. At least one beer that it won't be in the next 10. I don't think I'd bet on 20 - a lot can happen in 20.

I wish then luck, but one only has to go back and look at all the articles in Popular Mechanics from the 50's through the 90's to see something like 90%+ failed tech predictions.
DDW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2019, 09:34 PM   #36
Guru
 
oscar's Avatar
 
City: Bethlehem, PA
Vessel Name: Lady Kay V
Vessel Model: 1978 Hatteras 53MY
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 1,098
I don't have the energy to type it all up, but with a few exceptions there's a whole lot of bad information up here. And why the hell bring politics in to it?

The point of MLW/MTOW (Max Landing Weight versus Max Takeoff Weight) is a valid one, for large commercial aircraft. Not an issue yet, and certainly no factor here.

The Beaver on floats is about as efficient as a 76 Impala with a four barrel big block. Where is Bert Rutan when you need him... oh yeah.... he's focused on the space thing. Someone needs to put this technology into something carbon fiber. Half the drag and half the weight. But that would take even longer to get certified. Good luck with that.

This is not going to carry a paying passenger for at least two years. IF the Feds even sign off on it. They are not the most forward thinking people. Whether it works or not matters little.

That said, for the Harbor Air mission profile it could make sense, depending on the charge time. Airplanes need to fly to make money. Not sit on the ground charging.

We're getting there, and the RATE of change is increasing.

What makes me talk like this? 33 years of flying.
__________________
https://ladykay.blog/
oscar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2019, 09:57 PM   #37
TF Site Team/Forum Founder
 
Baker's Avatar
 
City: League City, Tx
Vessel Name: Floatsome & Jetsome
Vessel Model: Meridian 411
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 7,332
I'm with Ski on this one.....ain't gonna happen anytime soon. And I am willing to bet there is a SIGNIFICANT amount of grant money or sponsorship or whatever....I seriously doubt HA is footing the bill entirely by themselves. Cars have not got to the point where it is a break even business and they are not even fighting gravity and the FAA!!
__________________
Prairie 29...Perkins 4236...Sold
Mainship Pilot 30...Yanmar 4LHA-STP...Sold
Carver 356...T-Cummins 330B...Sold
Meridian 411...T-Cummins 450C
Baker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2019, 10:24 PM   #38
Guru
 
SteveK's Avatar
 
City: Gulf Islands, BC Canada
Vessel Name: Sea Sanctuary
Vessel Model: Bayliner 4588
Join Date: Jul 2019
Posts: 5,017
a video
https://globalnews.ca/video/6278729/...t-in-richmond/
__________________
SteveK
You only need one working engine. That is why I have two.
Sea Sanctuary-new to me 1992 Bayliner 4588
SteveK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2019, 06:16 AM   #39
Senior Member
 
BrianSmith's Avatar
 
City: Wherever Smartini is
Vessel Name: Smartini
Vessel Model: 2002 Kristen 52' Flybridge Trawler
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 487
DDW, I'll take that bet. I'll put it on my calendar for three years from now, for the early pay-off. Warning - I like GOOD beer!

Here's another short-hop carrier who is also making a commitment to electric:
https://www.avweb.com/aviation-news/...tric-airliner/
BrianSmith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2019, 08:57 AM   #40
Guru
 
City: Carefree, Arizona
Vessel Name: sunchaser V
Vessel Model: DeFever 48 (sold)
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 10,186
McDougal, the very bright founder of Harbor Air, said the prototype Beaver now under certification testing will have a range of about 30 minutes with a 30 minute reserve. Distances to their common routes from Vancouver seem pretty well limited then unless charging stations are added at the short hop end.
sunchaser is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


» Trawler Port Captains
Port Captains are TF volunteers who can serve as local guides or assist with local arrangements and information. Search below to locate Port Captains near your destination. To learn more about this program read here: TF Port Captain Program





All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:13 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2006 - 2012