NASA says electric aircraft technology isn't ready for prime time and its much-hyped X-57 Maxwell test aircraft will never fly. The $87 million program (including $47 million in cost overruns) will wind up at the end of this year, and the knowledge gained by trying to get the plane into the air will be available for anyone who can apply it to their project.
I had seen Al’s presentation for the accident many years ago.
His show is the best I have ever witnessed as his presentation captured your attention for the entire show. Fantastic use of crew assets and wonderful completion of the situation.
When the tower cleared him to land they told him runway choice is yours and his response was, “you want to be fussy and make it a runway”.
There were several hundred people at the show and you could hear a pin drop for over an hour.
I have told many people over the years if you ever get a chance to attend his presentation do not miss it.
Rest In Peace
Ken Fortnam
Aircraft Tech
Windham Maine
When Captain Haynes did his presentation in Wichita back in the mid-90’s, we expected a crowd of maybe 150 or so, and made arrangements for a single ballroom at the hotel. Over 600 showed up. We had to triple the venue by opening up the 2 adjacent ballrooms, and still it was standing-room-only. No matter, though, because by the end we were ALL standing–out of respect for this amazing airman, his humility, and his professionalism. Before there was a “Miracle on the Hudson” there was a miracle in Sioux City; both wrought by airmen cut from the same cloth. May this industry be forever blessed by men and women of such extraordinary talent!
Captain Al, I like you remember the 111 that did not go home to their families that day. I have strived to learn the lessons you taught of that day and I thank you. God’s speed.
Maybe these guys should have first read the AVWeb Comment section, where the majority of the chorus noted that electric and electric/hybrid flying isn’t quite “there” yet.
Battery technology will never be advanced enough for economically viable aircraft. There may be some niche aircraft where it will be viable, but neither battery powered airliners or even practical trainers will ever exist.
The issue is energy density which needs to increase by roughly an order of magnitude for batteries to be viable and replace fossil fuel, and that is never going to happen.
Battery technology is about 200 years old and lithium battery technology is about 100 years old. The first attempt at lithium batteries a hundred years ago was abandoned because no one could figure out how to keep a battery of any decent size from self destructing. That issue was, more or less, solved by putting smart controllers inside the battery, not though any astounding break through in electrochemistry or materials. Battery technology is mature technology and the most optimistic improvement possible is about a factor of 2, which will be fantastic for cars and trucks but will do little to nothing for airplanes. You may not like physics, but it is the law.
Likewise, electric motor technology is about 200 years old, is mature technology, and motor efficiency passed 98% some years ago. There is no room left for improvement there.
The bottom line is batteries are a dead end for airplanes.
Wow, $87 million dollars to figure out what was pretty obvious from the start. Your tax dollars in action! Maybe they should have let Elon Musk work on that for them. Oh, wait, he already did that for cars. But even he said that electric airplanes were not there yet.
Having spent most – 27 years – of my 38 year professional aviation ‘life’ on and around Edwards AFB, I can attest to the wastefulness of Government entities who manage by throwing massive amounts of money at projects. The military and NASA are no different than the society, in general. They get goofy ideas in their heads and have the power to turn those ideas into projects funded by – you know – you and I. At NASA Dryden cum Armstrong, they’ve done some good things over the years but now the younger folks are stepping up with the electric propulsion “syndrome” as I like to call it. THIS fiasco is a perfect example.
Just yesterday, I attended the Midwest Renewable Energy Assn ‘Fair’ in WI since it was nearby and I have an interest in PV. As I entered, I thought I’d entered a time warp … people wearing tie-dyed T-shirts, man buns, beads and the usual accoutrements of the 60’s and 70’s … only now they’re trying to power the world with electrons to ‘save it.’ Prius’ and Leafs were everywhere. In some areas, this is smart. In others … NOT so smart. Electric airplanes would be at the top of the wasteful list, for me. They have to defeat gravity in addition to motive forces. One guy never flinched when he told me I could build a PV patio cover for a mere $200K and the Government – of THIS fiasco – would give me a pile of money to help pay for it. Just who is authorizing these massive expenditures? In this X-57 instance, $87M with a $47M overrun is GROSS MISMANAGEMENT of resources!. And no ones head at NASA Armstrong will roll for it.
Next up … the X-59 ‘boondoggle’ to find out if the general population is offended by a reduction in the sonic boom overpressure. Ultimately, they want to – AGAIN – build supersonic airliners. Maybe they didn’t hear about the SST or the Concorde? Further, the massive drag of a supersonic airplane has to be overcome by thrust – DUH! – which equates to fuel consumption. Maybe THEY haven’t heard that THEY had a program 20 years ago called SSBD (Shaped Sonic Boom Demo) right there at Dryden? Why are they now trying to find out if they’ll peep off the people with sonic booms? Those folks at NASA have lost their minds. Let Boom Aerospace do it.
So in one office at NASA Armstrong, “hippies” have spent $87M trying to build a 14 motor electric contraption which – as others have pointed out – many of us correctly poo poo’ed. Are they gonna write a tech report that says battery energy density ain’t up to the task? Their goal was to ‘save’ the planet using electric propulsion … they failed. In the adjacent office, some people have spent three times as much – $247M – on another single airplane trying fly wealthy people around the globe at supersonic speeds while using global warming spewing engines. What the hell is going on at NASA Armstrong? Whoever is running that place needs to get a grip on expendatures and program efforts! They’ve spent nearly a third of a BILLION bucks for two airplanes … neither of which has flown, one now won’t and the other will help pollute the atmosphere. Geesh!
Oh well … I’m sure Tecnam and Lockheed are smiling? Now if we could just convince Cubcrafters to abandon their goofy electric blown flap idea and focus on shareholder value. PT Barnum was right Now that I think about it, so was Burt Rutan with HIS disdain for both NASA and Government flight test. I’m with him.
Yep, Raf … I’m STILL waiting for my Bye Aerospace (#22) pop-in electric powerplant for my 172. 'Ol George pulled a fast one with that fiasco. Glad I didn’t invest.
If the ‘hot air’ from all of these projects could be funneled into a balloon, maybe THAT would work? Just today, I’m hearing all the air conditioners in Texas is running their grid to pieces. Maybe these people oughta dedicate their efforts toward affordable PV systems … THAT would work.
When Tesla first introduced the Roadster in 2008, I thought nobody would ever buy an electric car. It’s just an expensive toy. I just bought an electric car in 2023. And it is awesome, even with it’s limited range and charging inconvenience.
Everyone is right, the battery technology isn’t there yet. But it will be. And the reason is not anything to do with aviation. The economics of the automotive battery will fix this.
Now that I think about it, so was Burt Rutan with HIS disdain for both NASA and Government flight test. I’m with him.