109
First test flight of largest all-electric aircraft used just $5 of electricity (arstechnica.com)
submitted 1 week ago by to c/electricvehicles@slrpnk.net
41 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

The X1 aircraft is comparable in size to a small regional airliner and can achieve a maximum takeoff weight exceeding 25,000 pounds with the help of four wing-mounted electric motors. The battery-electric propulsion system delivered more than one megawatt of power during the maiden flight.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 8 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Curious how much fuel would have cost for a comparable flight. Could this make short flights significantly cheaper than they are currently? Or open up the possibility of flying with many short hops in some cases.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 1 week ago (3 children)

    @HerbGrower@slrpnk.net

    @rimu@piefed.social pilots are expensive, and airplanes are also expensive to maintain- unless you skip the regular maintenance. This might be a little cheaper, but it still won't enable short flights for anyone not already rich.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 1 week ago*

    The electric engines are easier to maintain than jet engines. Far less parts, especially not having to deal with fuel pumps and all the safety issues around fuel storage. Not having to withstand the huge temperature differential between the engine combustion and the high altitude air probably helps too.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 1 week ago

    Pretty sure fuel is still a fairly big part of the cost of flying. I wonder how the maintenance compares on an electric plane engine compared to jets too.

    Planes are already cheaper than other options for short distances anyway, going electric would be great for that.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    If you skip the plane and go with a drone style you can drop all the complex hydraulics and just have a dead simple electric motor. A large version with a flying wing shape could work well.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 1 week ago

    @Einskjaldi@lemmy.world

    @rimu@piefed.social @HerbGrower@slrpnk.net

    Those are vastly less efficient than a wing. They are great for slow speed and pin point accuracy at short range, which rarely matters.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago* (1 child)

    If it works you can have a range extender medium size drone at the start and finish for mid air refueling by cable.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

    A 4-seat Cessna 172 burns 8 gallons of 100LL fuel per hour, so 4 gallons in 30 minutes. That fuel costs $7 per gallon at best. 4 gallons times $7 means it costs $28 for 30 minutes. That's roughly $1 per minute for the lightest aircrafts.

    Some fuels are cheaper but they also get burned at a higher rate, so exact numbers depend on many variables.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent