Re: Engine/motor
Posted: Mon May 07, 2018 6:40 pm
https://youtu.be/fiu8TFnXYFY German built where they allow light sport to have electric motors
The discussion forum for Sport Pilots and Light Sport Aircraft
https://sportpilottalk.com/
Did you just contradicted you own argument? People who try them love electric vehicles. I have an electric car, a Bolt, and never want to go back to gasoline. There are just too many benefits to the electric. Does if fit all my needs? No, but it fits 90% of them far far better than a gas guzzler and I can rent (and have) for long trips and still come out ahead. I predict this is where flight training will go with electric. Pattern work and short lessons in electric because it's WAY cheaper and longer flights in a conventionally powered plane. I think the economics will force this to happen at some point a few years down the road. The cost of the battery is pretty prohibited in a car, but is comparable to an aircraft engine and should have a much longer life between overhaul/replacement. The electric motor is essentially maintenance free. The wear and tear on the airframe is a lot less because there is little to no vibration. The cost of fuel for a 1 hour flight should be around one dollar.TimTaylor wrote:This discussion reminds me of the Tesla. It's a great car (I think), but it doesn't seem like a lot of people are willing to pay a high price for a great car with a limited range. They are getting better, however. My oncologist has a model S and paid $250,000 cash in advance for one of these to be delivered in 2020:
https://www.tesla.com/roadster
He also has a Ford GT.
No, I didn't. How many Bolts do we see driving around? How many people want to rent a car every time they want to go somewhere? Again, the current electric technology may be marginally acceptable for a flight school who wants to train in 1 hour increments, but that's it. To be commercially successful for most pilots, electric airplanes are going to need to get quite a bit better in terms of range, endurance, and useful load with larger/more batteries. How can anyone argue that is not the case? It's wishful thinking that may happen some day. Maybe not.rsteele wrote:Did you just contradicted you own argument? I have an electric car, a BoltTimTaylor wrote:This discussion reminds me of the Tesla. It's a great car (I think), but it doesn't seem like a lot of people are willing to pay a high price for a great car with a limited range. They are getting better, however. My oncologist has a model S and paid $250,000 cash in advance for one of these to be delivered in 2020:
https://www.tesla.com/roadster
He also has a Ford GT.
I agree that the technology has a ways to go to make electric aircraft acceptable to a large majority, but the current rule is stopping what is currently available from being used. If the rules won't let you use the marginally acceptable aircraft that are already available, why bother developing anything else?TimTaylor wrote: No, I didn't. How many Bolts do we see driving around? How many people want to rent a car every time they want to go somewhere? Again, the current electric technology may be marginally acceptable for a flight school who wants to train in 1 hour increments, but that's it. To be commercially successful for most pilots, electric airplanes are going to need to get quite a bit better in terms of range, endurance, and useful load with larger/more batteries. How can anyone argue that is not the case? It's wishful thinking that may happen some day. Maybe not.
My point is, the FAA is not the problem. The current state of the technology is the problem.
Are you taking up a collection?TimTaylor wrote:Or send $500,000 to Essential Consultants LLC and it will be done tomorrow.
No, I'm not a crook or traitor. But, I will be switching from AT&T U-Verse to Charter Spectrum.drseti wrote:Are you taking up a collection?TimTaylor wrote:Or send $500,000 to Essential Consultants LLC and it will be done tomorrow.