Continue Discussion - visit the forum 13 replies
December 2024

tommy

I wonder what an annual would cost? I wonder what a prop overhaul, engine overhaul and other perishables would cost? Interesting and valid questions, huh? My wild ass guess is the costs would be bit more than conventional aircraft of similar type.

2 replies
December 2024

joe5

Does anyone know if they have done any lightning strike testing? I can only imagine what a surge like that might do to these engines and batteries.

December 2024

Fr8_Dog

Are you crazy? How could this thing possibly be practical, or lead to anything reasonably practical?

Signed,
Orville and Wilbur’s neighbor

December 2024

tommy

Money drives everything, including and especially innovation.

Signed,
the neighbors on the other side, the Ford’s.

December 2024

Bill_B

They just discovered synchro-phasing propellers reduces cabin noise? I had synchro-phasing on aircraft back in the 70s and yes it reduced cabin noise or at least took the drum beat out.

December 2024 ▶ tommy

Samuel_Drake

My educated guess is that the annual would be much less. This is based on owning an electric car (Chevy Bolt). In 95,000 miles and 5.5 years, the only maintenance other than tires has been to replace the rear wiper blade and add wiper fluid. There is no scheduled maintenance.

2 replies
December 2024 ▶ Samuel_Drake

rpstrong

Except you also have the turbo-prop to be taken care of.

OK, lets assume that this is a production model and the big prop is gone.

Yes, annual cost per motor should be much less than for ICE - but you do have a bunch of them. And, of course, the turbo-generator will have its own annual cost.

Another cost cutting feature: fixed bladed props.

I wonder what the TBO or TBR is for the electrics?

December 2024

Larry_S

MY question is … NASA Armstrong worked on the X-57 ‘Maxwell’ for years, spent (wasted) nearly $100M of our tax money and got nowhere … not even a flying machine. Oh Elon … Oh Vivek … are ya listening?

These folks are – among other things – highlighting the ineptitude of NASA IMHO. Good on 'em for at least doing the testing of a REAL machine vs. the vaporware we keep seeing all over the place. I don’t see this technology going anywhere short term but LONG term … who knows. That they’re saying the payback / useful date is 2050 is REALISTIC, too. Ain’t gonna happen tomorrow. Don’t believe me … ask Mary Barra, CEO of GM, who just cancelled the electric taxi.

December 2024 ▶ Samuel_Drake

jbmcnamee

Yes, but the difference is that (fortunately) you don’t have the FAA telling you how to drive or maintain your electric car. I’m sure they will manage to overdo the maintenance and inspection requirements, especially since this is a totally new design. Can’t be too careful, you know! :roll_eyes:

December 2024

dcmarotta

This announcement came a bit too late to be included with the other stories one often sees on April 1st…

December 2024

Dennis_C

Wonder what the useful load is on that thing is… the 6 electric motors, the heavy gauge wiring to the motors, the turbo-generator, and fuel. Also, the large electrical currents to power the motors is really scary to me. An electrical fire at one motor on one wing could start a spectacular fire which could take out the whole wing. Yee-Haw!! Ride 'em cowboy.

December 2024 ▶ tommy

Fast-Doc

The battery is a limited life perishable part and replacement would probably be a deal breaker.

1 reply
December 2024 ▶ Fast-Doc

rpstrong

A key benefit of the hybrid system is that the battery plays a far smaller role in the power train and can be much smaller, lighter, and cheaper.

It can add a bit of extra power for short periods of time (e.g., takeoffs) but in cruise, it serves as a buffer between the turbo-generator and the electric system; does not need high storage capacity.