Electric aircraft propulsion company magniX has acquired the use of a rare four-engine turboprop airliner as part of the next phase of NASA's Electrified Powertrain Flight Demonstration program. Eventually the De Havilland Dash-7 will have two of its four engines replaced with magniX electric motors and that will cut fuel consumption and emissions by 40 percent. “Integrating our game-changing electric powertrains into a regional airliner such as the Dash 7 represents a major step forward in bringing electric solutions into the business of aviation," said magniX CEO Reed Macdonald.
I remain completely baffled by the notion of ‘hybrid aircraft’. If you pose the question “What are the advantages of hybrid aircraft” through the interweb the principal response is ‘improved fuel efficiency’ with figures ranging from 5% to 40%. Mention is also made of the similarities between hybrid aircraft and hybrid road vehicles. Ignoring hydrogen (and the hopeless impracticality of this ‘fuel’ ever achieving any significant penetration into sustainable transport) for the moment my main thought is that for road going vehicles the hybrid may well offer a significant improvement in fuel efficiency on the basis that a large proportion of this type of vehicle spend a large proportion of their time in stop-go traffic. A hybrid system can go along way to level the fuel demand on the ICE allowing it to operate only at its most efficient speed whenever it is actually on and thus leave the stop-go bit to the hugely more efficient electric motor and batteries. But even then a 10% improvement is a realistic figure and, realistically, simply not worth the massive extra complexity - and cost (including servicing costs) - of introducing an ICE into an EV. Besides which all the research done on the subject indicates that hybrid drivers rarely actually ever plug them in (assuming they even have this capability).
In an aircraft, aside from takeoff it pretty much by definition sits at a fixed RPM for the entire duration of the flight thereby giving little opportunity for the hybrid drivetrain to do its thing.
I am therefore left with the conclusion that the whole idea is a complete white elephant and, on a more cynical note, is just a bunch of deluded (at best) individuals making a fortune on ill-conceived government/tax-payer-funded green-wash.
At Airventure 24 I walked up to the MagniX people and asked how long it took to fly the display Beavers to Oshkosh. They looked at me like I was a ‘Martian’ and said, “We took them apart and trucked them here.” Then I asked how much the battery weighed. Their answer, “6000 pounds.” I rest my case! (Sigh!)
NASA needs to be put on financial diet ! They’re wasting money on this nutty electrification of airplanes idea!
Rating Comparison: Electric Aircraft vs. Conventional Aircraft (1-10 Scale)
1. Environmental Impact
Electric Aircraft: 10/10
Strengths: Zero emissions during flight, significantly reducing carbon footprint. Minimal noise pollution.
Conventional Aircraft: 2/10
Weaknesses: High carbon emissions and significant noise pollution.
2. Operating Costs
Electric Aircraft: 8/10
Strengths: Lower operating costs due to reduced fuel use and simpler maintenance. High initial investment is a downside.
Conventional Aircraft: 6/10
Weaknesses: Higher fuel costs and more complex maintenance, though established cost structures provide some advantage.
3. Range and Versatility
Electric Aircraft: 4/10
Weaknesses: Limited range and payload capacity, best suited for short-haul flights.
Conventional Aircraft: 10/10
Strengths: Can handle long-haul flights with significant payload and passenger capacity. Highly versatile.
4. Infrastructure Availability
Electric Aircraft: 4/10
Weaknesses: Emerging charging infrastructure, with limited availability at airports.
Conventional Aircraft: 10/10
Strengths: Well-established refueling and maintenance infrastructure globally.
5. Technological Maturity
Electric Aircraft: 4/10
Weaknesses: Technology still maturing, with ongoing development needed in batteries and certification. High initial costs.
Conventional Aircraft: 10/10
Strengths: Decades of refinement, proven reliability, and well-established regulatory frameworks.
6. Adoption and Scalability
Electric Aircraft: 4/10
Weaknesses: Slow adoption due to high costs, infrastructure challenges, and regulatory hurdles. Limited scalability.
Conventional Aircraft: 10/10
Strengths: Widespread adoption with a global fleet. Scalable across various market segments.
Overall Rating
Electric Aircraft: 6/10
Summary: Electric aircraft excel in environmental impact and offer potential cost savings, but are limited by range, infrastructure, and technological maturity. Best suited for niche markets and short-haul routes.
Conventional Aircraft: 9/10
Summary: Conventional aircraft lead in range, versatility, infrastructure, and technological maturity, though they fall short on environmental impact.
Wow. Time flies. Didn’t realize Dash 7s were a but gone. Air Wisconsin flew the heck out of them in and our of ORD. Very versatile. And gotta say, looking at that electric motor, certainly a simple device compared to gas or jet. All of which has nothing to do with anything.
Conventional aircraft lead in range, versatility, infrastructure, and technological maturity, though they fall short on environmental impact.?
Once one realizes that the concentration of atmospheric co2 going from 0.040% to 0.041% is not raising atmospheric temperatures (and thus is not the cause of reported surface warming) then there is no foundation for claiming environmental impact.
But since coupling a non-warming atmosphere to a reported surface temperature rise is a good ruse to employ a lot of engineers to “solve the problem”, then I guess Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg in the 5th Element was correct. Manufacture a problem and then Engineers can feed their families working on solutions.
I chuckled at this recent comment made on the YouTube video of Air Tindi’s (Canadian) Dash 7’s:
“I was a Captain on the Dash 7 for Pan Am Express for several years. The fleet was part of Ransom Airlines that used it flying into Washington National. Their trick, and one that Pan Am adapted, was to land on a “stub” runway that crossed the active runway. We could therefore operate without a landing slot as our operations (VFR) did not require being added to the lineup of other airliners vying for a landing slot in this very busy airport. There were many captains of other airliners that would nervously ask the controller “What’s that aircraft doing landing on the crossing runway?” The tower would calmly explain that “the Dash 7 will hold short of your runway, cleared to land”. Loved that airplane.”
Air Willy loved to be versatile. As a controller at ORD, you ask and they could do it, including climb good. I think maybe my favorite plane up there. And then our hundreds of Short Vans. I see a Blue Canoe in your picture. I was a USAF controller also. I was in the USAF Aero Clubs and always hoped we would get a Blue Canoe. Never happened. But I enjoyed the surplus T-34s.
Enjoyed your reply coming out of ORD. Great airspace. Air Willy sure could do and gave us great ROC. The Short Skyvan, I was not too familiar with, but they operated regularly out of POU in NY. Yes, the great straight tail Blue Canoe Cessna U-3, straight tail. We had them in the 111th Tactical Air Support Group (Air National Guard), NAS Willow Grove, PA. My cousin who was a LTC in regular AF routinely flew theT-34’s in his AF Aero Club. Loved it, and many are still around and of course flying daily.
Not advocating one way or the other, but as an engineer with experience designing engines I know that a small engine running at 100% throttle will be more efficient than a larger one running at 60-70% throttle producing the same horsepower due to pumping losses. Some modern automobiles mitigate this with infinitely variable valve lift. A hybrid aircraft should be able to run a smaller engine in cruise and use the electric engine to supplement the power at takeoff / climb.
You can see similar benefits in hybrid automobiles. Although the massive improvement is in the city-cycle fuel economy, the highway economy of hybrid automobiles is also better than the highway economy of the equivalent non-hybrid version. Highway driving at constant speed is similar to cruise in an airplane.
Huge waste of money. Sounds more like a program to appease the government. The weight of batteries negates the useful load of the airplane. Makes no sense at all. It’s just an exercise in futility. The technology in today’s batteries isn’t there yet for aircraft. And may never be. It’s even very marginal for cars as well.
Totally agree with you, Roger. The Dash 7 could come down final at anything between 220 and 70 knots. Put them in any sequence and adjust as needed. They frequently landed on a 3000 foot crossing runway and held short of the longer one. I remember on one occasion with a 25 knot headwind they landed and turned off at the 700’ stub taxiway! True STOL for such a large plane.
At least this is purely a “demonstration program” rather than one of the myriad VTOL inter-city aircraft being “announced” as supposedly almost ready to market. Still, I do also agree with the view that a hybrid electric/combustion combo isn’t a very good match for the flight profile of your basic air transport application, which prioritizes range & speed above all.
I think the comparison can easily be nudged in favour of conventional aircraft technology if more modern, high efficiency turboprops are used for shorter haul flights instead of twinjets. As for costs I agree that swapping out electric motors is not a big deal, however, finding and swapping out questionable batteries and their associated control hardware might be a lot more costly than anticipated. Are we going to see a rate of refinement in electric propulsion similar to these last 15 years or so? I think the “low hanging fruit” has already been picked and the development curve will more resemble a flatline than an asymptotic curve. We’ll see, don’t hold your breath on this one.
Those “Short Skyvans” out of POU were actually Short SD30s, a much larger and more capable airplane than the Skyvan, though very similar in appearance. They were operated by Command Airways, which became one of the first American Eagle commuter codeshares. As a Piedmont Commuter, we competed with them on the ALB-LGA segment, along with Business Express (Delta), Bar Harbor (Eastern), and Mall Airways (Trash Airways, Inc).
Thank you for your highly informative reply regarding the SD-30’s operating out of POU for Command Airways. Now there is a name I have not heard in decades! I did not know that Command became one of the first AE codeshares. But come to think back on it-I do now seem to recall AE operating SD-30’s, possibly? What equipment did Piedmont Commuter operate on the ALB - LGA leg beside the Dash-7?
I haven’t heard it for a while, either. I grew up in Poughkeepsie, and I remember when its three gates were actual gates, about 6 - 8 feet apart, in the three foot chain link fence separating the ramp from the single floor, single room terminal.
There was a land fill under the approach path where we used to go plinking with our .22s, lashed to our Schwinns . . . those were the days!
Command Airlines was founded by Kingsley G. Morse (1931–1993), who was the airline’s sole CEO during its entire existence.
The company was established as Mid-Hudson Airlines in 1951 At its peak in 1988, Command Airways had 538 employees and 15 aircraft serving 13 airports.
In 1984 it began transitioning into operating in affiliation with American Airlines, much like AmericanConnection did. By maintaining independent management and separate ownership, it continued to do business in its own colors as Command Airways, although its fleet was primarily dedicated for American Airlines operations.
This permitted Command to gain marketing presence associated only usually with much larger airline carriers.
Command was one of the first regional airlines to carry the American Eagle brand when it became a part of the American Eagle system which included repainting their entire fleet under the American Eagle banner.
This rebranding process of regional airlines commenced around 1985 and accelerated when American Airlines parent company began purchasing a number of smaller regional carriers after the bankruptcy (December 1987) of one of its affiliate partners named AVAir which was operating similarly to Command Airways.
During its existence, Command Airways operated the Short 330, the Short 360-300, the Beech 99 Airliner, the De Havilland Canada DHC-6 Twin Otter starting in 1976 and the ATR-42 beginning in 1986.
Its hub was at the Dutchess County Airport near Poughkeepsie, which Command Airways CEO Kingsley Morse strongly supported in the 1970s, in preference to Stewart Airport to the west of Newburgh.
Dutchess County Airport POU no longer has scheduled commercial airline service.