Posted on 07/31/2019 3:57:54 PM PDT by amorphous
While the vision of whisking passengers between rooftops in aircraft capable of vertical takeoff has largely solidified in the general shape of multiple rotors, some with airfoils and others without, the question of how to power this new kind of aircraft is less so. Some envision pure electric with lots of high-capacity batteries; others believe batteries alone will never be ready to produce the power required, and pitch hybrid designs—with a fossil-fueled engine producing electricity to assist the motors during some or all phases of flight.
However, one recent entrant in the field of some 150 such aircraft being developed stays out of that fray: The Skai eVTOL by Alakai Technologies promises to use a hydrogen fuel cell to generate electricity on the fly to power the six-rotor, five-place aircraft.
A tank of liquid hydrogen in the aircraft could propel it up to about 100 knots for up to 400 miles or four hours, carrying up to 1,000 pounds, according to Bruce Holmes, Ph.D., a director at Alakai. The electricity is produced via a hydrogen fuel cell—similar to the technology used to propel spacecraft like the Apollo ships that took the first men to the moon back in 1969.
A fuel cell is relatively simple: A fan propels gaseous hydrogen from the top of the liquid tank and mixes the elemental gas with ambient air through the fuel cell. The hydrogen passes through a platinum screen and in doing so loses an electron and produces electricity. The only emissions are water and heat. Holmes said because the hydrogen boils in typical ambient conditions, about 1 percent per day is lost—even with the best tankage technology available.
The resulting heat can be used for warming the vehicle. The cold liquid hydrogen can be used for cooling the cabin and is pumped beneath the six motors to help cool them.
Skai will use fuel cells from Hydrogenics, which is being acquired by a subsidiary of diesel-engine manufacturer Cummins.
The liquid hydrogen is stored on the aircraft at about 150 psi. Fueling infrastructure is not in place at airports, yet. However, Holmes envisions it being much like hydrogen fueling stations for cars cropping up in California and five other states as well as nine other countries, all of which are participating in a coordinated international effort to expand the use of hydrogen-powered electric propulsion. Refueling times will be as little as 10 minutes.
In addition to the six redundant rotor systems, Skai is slated to include an airframe parachute and will be designed to be piloted from the ground, piloted from the aircraft, and capable of autonomous operation. The company is proposing an aggressive certification plan that calls for a type certificate, perhaps as soon as the fourth quarter of 2020. Holmes expects military versions will be flying soon, and that experience, he believes, will help the FAA get comfortable with the vehicle’s simple design features—especially since, other than the rotors, about the only moving part is the fan in the fuel cell. Three conforming prototypes will be built for the certification process.
With hydrogen sourced through renewable resources such as hydropower, wind, and solar, and with the fuel cell 95 percent reusable and 99 percent recyclable, Holmes said the aircraft will be much more environmentally friendly than aircraft using batteries or fossil fuels. A fuel cell has a 20,000-hour life-cycle, he said.
OK, and where are all the filling stations so I can rush right out and buy one and take that cross country trip I have been dreaming of?
No need to be curious. The market has made its choice and aircraft turbines burn kerosene - cheap, safe, efficient and a high specific energy density (btus/lb).
“OK, and where are all the filling stations so I can rush right out and buy one and take that cross country trip I have been dreaming of?”
Yeah. There won’t be either unless hydrogen cars sell more.
There are some now, of course, and the time and cost are comparable to gas.
Unlike charging a battery.
Had me wondering what the Saturn V burned. Looks like the upper stages used hydrogen, while the main stage burned kerosene.
Agree...
Interesting that this was posited in the article as an alternative fuel for Aircraft...
Let that sink in
I understand that it is a viable fuel, but it is also extremely volatile
That’s why we switched from Hydrogen to Helium
Not true. Hydrogen boils at -423 F. Because of heat leakage into the tanks there will be a. constant steady conversion of hydrogen liquid to hydrogen gas. So you won’t be able to keep it in an enclosed garage without some sort of venting system. You also won’t be able to leave it while you go on a trip and Expect anything but an empty tank when you get back.
Most economical, given a better way of storing 'em, would be electrons themselves. Storage capacity of batteries and capacitors are steadily improving.
And that is with brand new seals and O-rings in place.
Challenger failed in '86 due to bad O-rings.
On the solid fuel booster joint, not on the external tank which contained the LH2 and LO2.
Hydrogen sure does put rockets in orbit. I am sure it could do the same for cars.
No, not really. The hydrogen must be under pressure, the gasoline does not.
Thanks
p
:)
It was still a bad O-ring...that was known at the time before launch.
-——————————————————————\
But what really brought down the Shuttle was sheer bad luck. If the burn-thru had happened anywhere in the 270-degree arc facing away from the ET, the Shuttle would have made orbit with no problems, even with the burn-thru.
Only the bad luck that the burn-thru was facing inwards towards the ET and the mounting brace was the problem.
Lol, right you are and should be a placard requirement for every side of this machine.
The leakage is due to the small atomic size of hydrogen, or you would get the same thing with liquid oxygen.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.