Ce site web utilise des cookies. En utilisant et en naviguant davantage sur ce site, vous acceptez cela.
Rejeter
Saviez-vous que le suivi des vols FlightAware est soutenu par la publicité ?
Vous pouvez nous aider à garder FlightAware gratuit en autorisant les annonces de FlightAware.com. Nous travaillons dur pour que notre publicité reste pertinente et discrète afin de créer une expérience formidable. Il est facile et rapide de mettre les annonces en liste blanche sur FlightAware ou d’examiner nos comptes premium.
Rejeter
Back to Squawk list
  • 26

World’s first all electric commercial plane is set for takeoff in Richmond, BC, Canada

Soumis
 
BC’s Harbour Air is working to get regulatory approval for the world’s first all electric commercial plane. (www.cbc.ca) Plus d'info...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]


KobeHunte
Kobe Hunte 1
Good that they are getting somewhere with electric planes. But it was stated recently that a full passenger jet will take over 20 years more to develop.
wopri
Wolfgang Prigge 2
Yes, even electric flights of 2 hours will take Many years to be a reality. Harbour Air on the other hand has many of their scheduled flights at 30 minutes or less, making them a ideal candidate for the introduction of electric commercial planes. As, among others, they serve the islands between Vancouver and Vancouver Island, they also have the clientele for this experiment. Some people say for example that Saltspring Island is the last holdout of the hippies of the 70ties, and for them the noise reduction and the reduction in air pollution is probably a good marketing argument.

Harbour Air claims to be the largest operator of seaplanes in the world.
rapidwolve
rapidwolve 1
If the little Beaver does as it should, and the flight is a success, I am betting Greg will get Ballard's ear and swap out those batteries for their fuel cell
yr2012
matt jensen -5
It won't be needed in 20 yrs. We have the tech now - it won't improve any further than today.
patstphens1174
Richard Fox -7
+Kobe Hunte Don't be a baby, this tech is coming whether or not you're able to get over your emotional attachment to dino juice and BROOMM BROMM!! Youe second sentence is clearly an attempt to calm yourself, but regardless, an electric future is imminent. Maybe consider another career if its gonna' be too hard for you. :)
canuck44
canuck44 -3
I will be so happy when the Climate Change Hoax is finally disproven and we can go on to normal living with reliable technology. It should be interesting to hear where the electricity and lithium originate and why they need to change the batteries out after each flight to avoid hours of turn around time unless we are using hybrid technology with the horrible fossil fuels.

I understand the alarmists have a back up plan when Climate Change (nee; Global Warming, nee Global cooling) is put to rest like the ozone hole and we can move on to the next "man made" crisis "Continental Drift".
TorstenHoff
Torsten Hoff 3
Getting these aircraft turned around won’t require battery swaps or hours of recharging. High-voltage charging systems should be able to fully charge the batteries in about 30 minutes.
rapidwolve
rapidwolve 1
Just curious why you think it's a hoax?
wopri
Wolfgang Prigge 1
Of course it would be a shame to get lower operating costs, lower maintenance costs, less noise and less air pollution in places like Victoria Harbour, right downtown, in front of the Legislative Assembly, and all that for naught.
cowboybob
cowboybob 0
Kittyhawk? hardly....

Electric might have it's place in operations such as this...but long haul, that's quite another story. It's not a matter of making bigger planes that work (fly), it's a matter of range vs. load that makes any sense....as many may know, batteries don't get lighter as you empty them, so you are dragging that dead weight the entire route. And the ability to adjust loading based on payload desired is not easy schlepping batteries about (they're heavy maybe?), but suppose they can get it to the point of loading/unloading them with the luggage...not trivial it would seem.

Improvements in battery technology will help some, but the current chemistries will certainly have their limits. They'll need something else more radical to make a dent in jet engine powered technology over the breadth of the market. Now....having worked in rocket science for a good while, put a fuel cell in this bad boy and you might get onto something...quick...but alas, it uses cryogenic hydrogen/oxygen which much be produced, much like jet fuel and distributed....like electricity. Nothing is easy...or free. Electric powered Everything Will Not "save the world" from whatever it is that it needs saving from, so relax and enjoy the ride...heh.

Let's see how Harbor does with this little venture over time...let the market decide if it lives or dies...I won't be swayed by greenies spewing talking points.
bentwing60
bentwing60 0
I guess I beat MH to the punch here that the Boeing 787 fleet was grounded shortly after its intro. due to Li.Ion battery fires. The fix was a stainless steel containment box that, together with the battery, probably weighs more than the conventional battery it replaced. NBAA still has several current advisories for corporate ops. relating to said battery issues, particularly loose batteries in inaccessible stowage.

Not to be the nanny, but unintended or unenvisioned consequences in aviation can be expensive and fatal. If you don't believe that just ax anybody here that has been beatin the merde out of Boeing over the MAX and two airplanes that both hit the deck with the throttles at 94%.

Sorry for the drift, but I hope it starts just east of mexifornia John.
wopri
Wolfgang Prigge 2
I guess that’s why they use a NASA designed battery that’s not the best in energy density, but has proven to be very safe on spacecraft.
bentwing60
bentwing60 -1
You make a valid point, as usual, but I didn't miss the Challenger or Columbia events either.
wopri
Wolfgang Prigge 1
Was there a battery involved in those two accidents?
bentwing60
bentwing60 0
No, but NASA validation of the technology was and let's just say that I don't consider NASA to be the current pinnacle of innovation any more than many here seem to consider Boeing in the same light.

Technology, sometimes it leads to the stars, sometimes it leads to the dirt.
wopri
Wolfgang Prigge 1
Ok, I understand what you mean, and I agree with the general thrust of your argument, but as far as batteries are concerned, NASA has a pretty good track record. Maybe because most of the basic development was done some time ago when the proportion bean counters to engineers was better.
sparkie624
sparkie624 -4
And Electric Float Plane... Hmm... Water and Electricity do not make good companions... Taking off from a runway is a bad enough... Don't think I will get getting on one anytime soon.
rapidwolve
rapidwolve 3
Umm..what about all the electric autos on the road...they run through rain and snow all the time.
sparkie624
sparkie624 -1
I think they are a Fire Hazard.... If they catch on fire, due to the composition of the batteries (Lithium Polymer) they have the tendency to catch on fire... Water WILL NOT put these fires out. Only way to put them out is to disconnect them and if they internally short they cannot be put out and can explode... Tesla even released a training video to show them how to cut the battery Cable and to cut people out of the car... Keep in mind, that most localities are not equipped to put out this kind of fire... Further more, being in the air and the battery catches fire.... No thanks.... Keep in mind we are talking about the same type of battery that took the UPS Plane down near Dubai..

I think this is an accident that is waiting to happen... In my opinion if that plane catches fire that you have a slim chance of landing in time... It would be a Burning Hell.. Forgive the terminology!
rapidwolve
rapidwolve 1
Ummm...I do not know where u got info from, but worse thing u can do, in a Li-ion or Li-Po battery fire, is try disconnecting them. Tesla's training video is not something I agree on at all, and I've worked on Hybrid technology. Most times, if its a small Li-Po/Li-ion battery that is on fire a Class C is good, but all localities have Class D equipment to snuff out magnesium etc fires and they will extinguish a Li-Po/Li-ion fire..it is not the metal but the evap gases that are ablaze. And 1 is mandated to be carried on the aircraft. Same for 787's...they use, Li-Po/Li-ion technology as well as do other craft.
And no, the batteries that took down the UPS plane were not well insulated toughened shell cases like these units, and with your thinking, best get rid of that cell phone, tablet computer, watch, laptop etc as they all have Li-Po/Li-ion batteries in them.
sparkie624
sparkie624 -1
You you are flying along in that plane... The Battery catches Fire... You are at 3500 feet or so... How are you going to out it out... Most planes that size does not have an extinguisher system for the battery!
rapidwolve
rapidwolve 2
The battery catches fire? It suffocates itself while sealed in it's chamber...why do you think Boeing took the LiPo 787 batteries and placed them inside a chamber? So if a problem arose, the oxygen would be consumed too quickly to allow a bad situation worse.
And yes, 1 of the mandates is a Class D extinguisher be aboard.
KobeHunte
Kobe Hunte 2
I am sure that they won't let the water and the electricity mesh.
sparkie624
sparkie624 0
Just add a little salt and they will mix great!
MrWidgeon
Bill Bailey 1
I too have wondered about that.

Se connecter

Vous n'avez pas de compte? Inscrivez-vous maintenant (gratuitement) pour des fonctionnalités personnalisées, des alertes de vols, et plus encore!