Logic is irrelevant with respect to climate change. It’s a form of mass psychosis which is magnified by emotional tribalism. Pointing out the flaws in this grand conversion plan will get you skewered by wide eyed ideologues who refuse to acknowledge basic physics.
They can’t destroy general aviation quickly enough.
Then there is also the weight of the battery, controller, cooling system and large gauge copper wiring. These can weight over 1,000 lb, depending on kWhr needed.
FYI, the Tesla 100 kWhr battery weighs 1,100 lb.!
I’m always impressed how the armchair experts here at AVweb know so much more about electric power (and climate change) than the people who are putting their money and their careers into them full-time.
Good pull, as the young ones say.
In the Middle Ages, the guilds and cartels controlling a given industry would use the crown and the church to stifle innovations they feared threatened their members.
In present day Long Beach, CA, you can observe the same thing with the unions using the labor laws to keep automation out of the port. Only now, it’s called “progressive” to support their efforts. It’s rational to fear innovation and possible lost jobs, but it seems even more crazy to invoke progress than it did for our ancestors to invoke God.
From the blog on this very site about 100UL, it seems us folks in the flying business, with only about a century of existence have already “progressed” to Middle Age thinking.
Sparky the Wonder Cherokee!
Nice.
You mean politicians?
(Had to steal their thunder)
I’m all for people putting their own time and money into these projects.
Here’s what’s confusing me: There are training planes made in Canada that could be more easily made to work for this.
If you are using government money, you’d think you’d support the local team.
The first thing to notice is they are doing this with “free” government a.k.a. tax payer money. It is amazing what can be proposed and maybe even accomplished with enough free money.
With respect to the ICE powered aircraft and fuel fires, carrying a 1,000 lb Li-ion battery is also a significant fire hazard in a crash. If you don’t think so just check out some Youtube videos.
As for flight schools, the electric power option makes operational sense, but then what happens to pilots who end up with ICE planes. A big part of learning to fly is power plant management and operations and electric is very different from ICE power.
Politicians? They ain’t doing diddly.
I’m talking about the entrepreneurs and engineers and scientists who are actually doing stuff.
Bingo! They’re two different airplanes.
I don’t have an issue with people developing packages that will really only be practical in the next generation of batteries. I have an issue with gov’t money used for it, but if it allows people to get around the pattern for $20/hr I don’t have an issue with it at all.
Not much different to teach people to do turns and patterns in an electric or a fixed pitch prop. Neither prepares one for a high performance or turbine, but simplifies the acquisition of the other stick and rudder skills.
It’s a joke. If you are one who believes that all the electric aircraft projects are wastes of other people’s money, then you think the people putting their time and money into them are only the politicians (and I guess con men).
I guess this means it wasn’t funny. Darn.
As far as reacting to new technologies, first there will have to be new technology.
There have been electric vehicles around longer that gas ones.
There have been electric airplanes too.
Making an old crate airplane fly like an old crate airplane with batteries is not a leap in technology nor new technology. Change for change sake is not progress at all.
No problem. My sense of humor has taken a beating in recent years.
@Daniel T.
I’m with you- I’d also like to make the change eventually for my PA28-151, but this is at least 10+ years away as you mentioned. Right about the time when I’ll need an MOH. I’ll be second in line behind you I suppose.
The peanut gallery appear to be adjusting their tinfoil hats accordingly based on the usual responses from the usual crowd.
Likely rude and unproductive like much of his content, and rightly removed.
By far the best way to destroy GA is to assume that things will always be as they always have been and thus refuse to adapt. Cheers to CAE, Piper, and so many others who are trying new things and recognizing that the world of the future looks different from the world of yesterday.
Assuming it actually comes to pass that they actually put a few in service, it would be interesting to hear an unbiased account of what the real-world operational experience turns out to be. Doubtful that information would ever surface though.
Pish-Posh! You will read about it here.
Oh ye of little faith. ???
“…especially if they can solve the quick charge problem…”
What problem? Unobtanium-ion batteries re-charge in less than two minutes.