SonicFlyer

rickair7777

Smart move. Eventually global warming concerns will outweigh the pax inherent fear and loathing of crop-dusters.

SonicFlyer

You must be a huge fan of the film "Idiocracy"

ABXAirOfficer

Electric planes are the next big thing. Turboprops are dated

TransWorld

I always wonder if an electric plane could ever be ETOPS certified.

tallpilot

I think we need one more product cycle of 'sustainable aviation fuel' powered turbines before battery technology has the energy density necessary to provide comparable range.

I'm a proud member of the props are for boats club but the reality is they have their place for certain missions. I flew full Q400s out of Aspen which makes a lot more economic sense than half full CRJ700s.

​​

bajthejino

Chicks dig beta-those big props will be droppin' P's left and right.

rickair7777

"Energy density" for this discussion is actually specific energy, ie energy per unit mass.

Energy density (energy per volume) also matters for aviation but energy density is the real kicker...

Batteries will never have energy density comparable to kerosene. Chemistry is based on physics... electron valance energy isn't changing, at least not in this reality. There are no big surprises left in the stable (non-radioactive) areas of periodic table, or Newtonian physics.

Max *theoretical* specific energy for electro-chemical storage is ballpark 1000 WH/Kg. Current battery technology can actually utilize maybe 250 WH/Kg. That's at the cell level, you lose some in the packaging and battery management. Maybe they can get that up to 800WH/Kg someday?

Kerosene's specific energy is 12,000 WH/Kg...

Batteries can *someday* plausibly be used for smallish regional aircraft on stage lengths of a maybe a couple hundred NM. Bigger or longer than that, an you need liquid fuels.

H2 has a very good specific energy, better than kerosene actually. But it falls short on *energy density*... it takes up a huge volume, so you need a huge airframe to hold that volume, and that's heavy and expensive, so you need more fuel, etc.

Remember the Saturn V? That burned kerosene. Space shuttle on the hand burned H2, and needed that big orange external tank to carry enough.




Yes they absolutely have a practical niche, they were phased out because pax didn't like them. A new generation with an emphasis on low noise and vibration might be a renaissance.

Excargodog

Perhaps, but flying them out of large airports where you have an hour or two wait between being able to park and getting through TSA and then a long wait taxiing out will surely limit their utility.

A car doing 60 mph can beat many regionals on a two hundred mile trip when you consider all the delays.

OOfff

not many people book only a 200 mile flight. That’s usually only one segment of several.