Posted on 01/12/2024 10:40:39 PM PST by Red Badger
Elysian says the world is vastly underestimating the capabilities of battery-electric airlinersElysian Aircraft
A Dutch startup says everyone's hugely underestimating the potential of battery-electric aircraft – that it's possible to build large battery-electric airliners covering distances most assume we'll need hydrogen for. Elysian plans to prove it.
The company doesn't believe it'll need some giant leap in batteries to do it, either; it says it can take 90 passengers some 800 km (497 miles) using a pack with 360 Wh/kg. Amprius, meanwhile, was shipping 450-Wh/kg cells back in 2022, and Chinese giant CATL launched a 500-Wh/kg "condensed" battery last year. Assuming some improvements, Elysian says it'll hit 1,000-km (621-mile) range figures, at which point the E9X aircraft could feasibly cover around 50% of all scheduled commercial flights.
It's quite a leap from the conventional thinking, which assumes that batteries are far too heavy to build airliners around, and really only suitable for small aircraft flying sub-400-km (250-mile) routes. Indeed, most of the action in clean aviation over the last several years has been in the gaseous hydrogen space, with liquid hydrogen a few years behind that and other solutions like ammonia popping up around the fringes.
(Excerpt) Read more at newatlas.com ...
AVIATION PING!...............
Interesting, but…
I’ll check in again when articles like this don’t have the words; “underestimate”, “potential”, ”assume”, “possible”, “plans”, “believe”, “says it can”.
I’m noticing that the article doesn’t have the words ‘noncombustible’, ‘noninflammable’ and ‘nonexplosive’.
Who wants rechargeable planes? Fly Norelco, eh, no thanks.
Did I miss speed claims?
And when it catches fire in mid-air flight... Will they provide parachutes, or are they an extra charge?
Only first class....................
What with the difference between what I’ve seen claimed for EVs and what reality is, I wouldn’t trust them for 500 miles.
Every effort to make air travel more green, is effort that was not put into safety and reliability. Combine that with DEI aircrews and you have a big problem.
Uh huh, go right ahead. Let me know when they’ve got something. 90 passengers? That many? Wow.
Batteries take up a lot of room and weight!..............
Bull.
S**t.
CC
I’ve been joking about that grim possibility from the EV tech fetishists.
After story of cars which never were able to reach the stated EV manufacturers’ claims of range due to cold or hot or humid weather-——
Speaker system on EV jet airliner over the Atlantic Ocean:
“This is your pilot. Our AI system has alerted us the range for this trip will not be attained. We again remind you your seat cushion can be used as a flotation device.”
Hard pass. We know jet aircraft are safe and reliable when properly maintained and it is well established, how they handle, how far they can fly our remaining fuel, etc. Another example of just because you can theoretically, does it mean you should.
“The analysis assumes a 25% packaging overhead, a maximum depth of discharge of 90% in case of emergency and retiring the battery when it has 90% capacity left, which corresponds to about 1,500 flight cycles. Batteries would be replaced every 6-12 months, and the maximum charging time is 45 min.”
This thing is financially a dead horse. They make lots of statements without additional backing. Seems like a pump-n-dump stock operation to me.
Luckily I am old enough that I will never have to experience this.
Batteries LOVE cold. EV’s are great in the winter - NOT.
Altitude is COLD.
I’ll pass.
With this arctic blast, Canadians are finding out just how useless their EV’s are
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.