My spies tell me Jabiru has been sold

[turboplanner]

3 hours ago, sfGnome said:

No. I'm saying that everyone has stated their case over and over, and clearly no one is going to change their mind. For this reason only, the discussion has become pointless. In fact, even this reply is pointless, so I'll stop.

There have been plenty of side claims and discussions but some of us are focused on key aspects of driveline and equipment ofr aircraft.

[turboplanner]

.

Edited December 1, 2023 by turboplanner

[kasper]

23 hours ago, turboplanner said:

Here's the de-Social Media-ised original Daily Mail story I posted.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-12769167/Hyundai-Ioniq-5-road-trip-Melbourne-Sydney-expensive-slow.html

 

Source: Daily Mail Australia

Journalist: Belinda Cleary

Published: 21:19 AEDT 20/11/23

Updated: 10:24 AEDT 21/11/23

 

As you can see some of the story is backed up by the photos, and the trip distances, Stop locations, charge times, and amounts are shown.

 

If anyone believes these have been tailored or falsified, you should contact the Australian Press Council on this link: https://presscouncil.org.au/

There's a link to help you make your comments which will be adjudicated and the adjudication published.

 

I'd be interested to see the results.

 

The 'evidence' in the mail story is clearly false.

 

Two charges at Avenel for $69 is the givaway - that's only 260km of driving for $69 of electric - NOT POSSIBLE

For example the BYD Seal uses 16kw/100km ... that would be around 41.6kw of electric ... that would put the KWh price for those recharges at around $1.65 ... and that is NOT what you actually pay ... at worst with Chargefox its around $0.45

 

Real life - real cars - in 'normal' use - absolutely debunk these anti-EV false stories.

 

For the vast majority of driving EVs are already operational viable. 

The acquisition costs of the EV are a hurdle BUT this Mail story is pure falseholds to present an anti-EV position

[turboplanner]

Just now, kasper said:

The 'evidence' in the mail story is clearly false.

 

Two charges at Avenel for $69 is the givaway - that's only 260km of driving for $69 of electric - NOT POSSIBLE

For example the BYD Seal uses 16kw/100km ... that would be around 41.6kw of electric ... that would put the KWh price for those recharges at around $1.65 ... and that is NOT what you actually pay ... at worst with Chargefox its around $0.45

 

Real life - real cars - in 'normal' use - absolutely debunk these anti-EV false stories.

 

For the vast majority of driving EVs are already operational viable. 

The acquisition costs of the EV are a hurdle BUT this Mail story is pure falseholds to present an anti-EV position

The towns were approached from the north and the south which confuses things.  Not saying there's not a mistake in their but that might be the reason.   kW/100k is not a constant, varies considerably in accordance with coefficient of resistance, speed, winds etc. I'm doing some work on power demand in the next week or so.

[kasper]

9 minutes ago, turboplanner said:

The towns were approached from the north and the south which confuses things.  Not saying there's not a mistake in their but that might be the reason.   kW/100k is not a constant, varies considerably in accordance with coefficient of resistance, speed, winds etc. I'm doing some work on power demand in the next week or so.

Agreed that power per 100km varies.

 

However, the 16kw/100km I use in debunking IS the actual 110kph consumption use on highway of the BYD Seal last week ... been there, done it, seen the consumption and also know that road fast chargers are NOT $1.65/wkh.

 

The Mail story cannot hold up internally at all.  It is a hatchet job on EVs

 

Oh and that's before you consider that her petrol costs of $70 one way equates to around 3.8l/100 ... love to see even a 2011 Corolla get that mileage on that trip ... and its not a comparable car either ... medium large SUV EV vs small petrol car.

 

Its a hatchet job

 

Edited December 1, 2023 by kasper

[turboplanner]

2 hours ago, FlyBoy1960 said:

I know that if I have the vehicle out of chill mode into sport mode, if I have the air conditioning set below 20° and if I have the sentry mode activated to run 24-hours every day it uses quite a bit of battery.

One piece of information that would be handy in looking at an aircraft is the extra battery drain for AC, so it would be interesting to compare highway segments (a) with AC off for % battery drain over a known distance vs a hot day with the AC set at the temp you would set it for in a flight and what the battery drain would be then. In an AC where your primary interest is in range, it might be possible to lower flight power drain to allow for AC drain.

[facthunter]

A NEW thread has been started.   Nev

[turboplanner]

5 minutes ago, kasper said:

Agreed that power per 100km varies.

 

However, the 16kw/100km I use in debunking IS the actual 110kph consumption use on highway of the BYD Seal last week

There will be a difference with 100 km/hr and a difference with the speed of head winds and a difference with quartering winds and a difference with grade.   We test vehicles with an odometer, compass heading, altimeter and ASI.

[kasper]

1 minute ago, turboplanner said:

There will be a difference with 100 km/hr and a difference with the speed of head winds and a difference with quartering winds and a difference with grade.   We test vehicles with an odometer, compass heading, altimeter and ASI.

Agreed, BUT a 150km round trip Newcastle to Singleton last week mostly at 110kph with aircon on and just cruising along returned 16kw/100km. 

As EVs are really WORST consumers of electric/km at higher speed I think my real world is a fair worst case.

 

I have also driven the Ioniq5 and its nice but I do not know its actual kw/100.  I discounted it from my to buy consideration after a short drive when NRMA brought a fleet of EVs to town for members to try out. 

[turboplanner]

44 minutes ago, kasper said:

Agreed, BUT a 150km round trip Newcastle to Singleton last week mostly at 110kph with aircon on and just cruising along returned 16kw/100km. 

As EVs are really WORST consumers of electric/km at higher speed I think my real world is a fair worst case.

 

I have also driven the Ioniq5 and its nice but I do not know its actual kw/100.  I discounted it from my to buy consideration after a short drive when NRMA brought a fleet of EVs to town for members to try out. 

I ran some airpower calcs to show variations and why people who drive locally don't have range issues.

Base on the BYD frontal area (decode your own for an aircraft):

 

SPEED                   AIRPOWER DEMAND (power required just to push wind out of the way)

50 km/hr               4 kW

60 km/hr               8 kW

80 km/hr              18 kW

100 km/hr             35 kW

110 kM/hr              47 kW

 

10 knot headwind at 110 km/hr 61 kW

10 knot tailwind at 110 km/hr 35 kW

Quartering wind at 110 km/hr more than head wind.

 

So on the Highway cycle two people driving the same car on different days can get substantially different battery drain rate.

 

These speeds roughly equate with our Australian speed zones, so you can see that the further out from the innner cities we go the bigger the battery drain and that can be multiplied by longer and longer travel distances, so if we want do plan to cover the various cycles, we have to plan for this, and  take the emotion and agenda out of it.    

 

 

 

[kgwilson]

It doesn't matter if you provide real world experience, anyone who has pre conceived ideas will believe whatever supports those. The daily mail article was clearly false & I said so & especially the 31/2 hours of charging time

 

I subscribe to the MG EVs community forum and on return from Noosa to home in Corindi Beach I posted the actual stats for the return trip.

 

"Topped up at the Evie charger about 50 meters from where I was staying in Noosaville last night while I had dinner & left at lunch time today with 96% charge. I needed a pee at Chinderah but carried on to Ballina where there is a BP pulse 75kW charger. SOC was about 19% & by the time I'd had a comfort stop & snack it had charged up to 80% & I left for home.

 

"I set the car on ECO, OPD & LKA off with the Aircon on all the way. Total distance was 491 km & 15.8 kWh/100km. I'd say 80% of the trip was at 110 km/h with a couple of slow road works for 5-6km & the rest 100km/h other than the starts & stops. 35% SOC when I arrived home."

[BrendAn]

On 30/11/2023 at 10:58 AM, facthunter said:

Hydrocarbon fuels are going to get much more expensive, less available and cause wars. We are energy Junkies. Australia has so much sun.  Arrays of solar panels don't ruin any land. You could grow things and graze animals under it  and the energy from the sun comes here anyhow, With nuclear you add more heat and we've seen the risks with Putin's careless and irresponsible actions re the world largest Nuclear Plant in Ukraine.  Lots of this stuff has a 1/2 life of 30,000 years and one microgram of plutonium in you anywhere means death. Nev

why don't you go for a drive up the hume and have a look at the solar farm near benalla. prime beef country lost to miles of solar panels and they are still building it.

[BrendAn]

Inside Australia’s newest Hydrogen Refuelling Station _ News.html

[kgwilson]

Studies have already been done. Crops are sown & harvested and stock are quite happily grazing under and around solar farms. Google it. There are heaps of real world examples in Australiua

[coljones]

1 hour ago, BrendAn said:

...... prime beef country lost to miles of solar panels.....

And around cities, prime agricultural land turned into solar farms with housing built underneath.  Farmers are entitled to get the best price for their land and in this case land bought or leased would be at the best price.  This is much better than going slowly broke or waiting for the vultures to turn up and selling out for a song to the farmer next door.

[turboplanner]

3 hours ago, coljones said:

And around cities, prime agricultural land turned into solar farms with housing built underneath.  Farmers are entitled to get the best price for their land and in this case land bought or leased would be at the best price.  This is much better than going slowly broke or waiting for the vultures to turn up and selling out for a song to the farmer next door.

The Agribusiness industry direction is amalgamating Ma and Pa farms into much bigger ones, then installing huge rotary irrigators. If you google-earth up the east coast you'll see these big green circles as they expand. You can't grow productive produce or grass in the shade.

 

The Victorian Government dream of solving their shrinking power station issue by putting a power station on every roof has crashed.

 

However, there's plenty of non productive land in every State. Much of South Australia is outside the "Goyder Line" where there's not enough rainfall to conduct any type of high-volume farming.

 

So you don't have to go to the extreme of building houses under solar "farms". The red centre offers dirt cheap land.

 

The problem is that:

 

(a) both wind and solar are intermittant and

(b) both wind and solar are like a car without an accelerator; even with the wind blowing or the sun shining, you can't ramp up power from Base to Peak for a very hot day or a very cold night; only coal-fired or nuclear can do that.

 

With Solar/wind you would have to build a massive grid capable of Peak Power at a massive prime cost, just for the extreme weather - it's not viable.

 

If you translate that to EV, we will not have the available power to run EV across the board, let alone elctric aircraft.

 

Which is why my argument is "why even get involved with electric aircraft if our governments don't consider the PM and NOx emissions concentrated or voluminous enough to warrant emission controls and CO2 not voluminous enough to warrant investigation and regulation?

 

The figures I've done indicate we could certainly achieve a full hour's flight with 40 minutes reserve, but why would you spend all that money when the result could not be measured?

 

 

Edited December 1, 2023 by turboplanner

[BrendAn]

8 hours ago, kgwilson said:

Studies have already been done. Crops are sown & harvested and stock are quite happily grazing under and around solar farms. Google it. There are heaps of real world examples in Australiua

Why do I need to google something I looked at yesterday. There is no way livestock could fit under that solar farm . The panels are only a metre off the ground. Same as the new one at Carrum downs.

Edited December 1, 2023 by BrendAn

[kgwilson]

You don't. I just thought you may be interested to find that solar and agriculture can co-exist productively together. In this particular instance the owner has decided not to do this. Possibly this is due to the fact that it would cost a bit more to raise the panels higher or most likely that the income from solar is pretty much guaranteed whereas prices for meat swing wildly and getting worse with the large weather changes we have been seeing in the past few years.

[aro]

15 hours ago, turboplanner said:

I ran some airpower calcs to show variations and why people who drive locally don't have range issues.

Base on the BYD frontal area (decode your own for an aircraft):

 

SPEED                   AIRPOWER DEMAND (power required just to push wind out of the way)

50 km/hr               4 kW

60 km/hr               8 kW

80 km/hr              18 kW

100 km/hr             35 kW

110 kM/hr              47 kW

 

These seem way too high. If you use an engine BSFC figure of e.g. 250g/kWh, 35 kW at 100km/h is equivalent to about 12litres per 100km.

 

Probably half that is more common. 6 litres/100km gives 17.5 kW at 100km/h and 17.5 kW/h for 100km. Pretty close to the 16 kw/h for 100km originally stated.

[jackc]

Sorry, looks like I have stumbled into an EV forum?

cheers from,

 

The Coal Roller 🙂 

[facthunter]

There is now  a new forum for this subject under the Proper heading , but NO ,It still carries on under the" Has Jabiru been sold" Heading.  That's why I'm not further commenting HERE.  Nev

[turboplanner]

8 minutes ago, facthunter said:

There is now  a new forum for this subject under the Proper heading , but NO ,It still carries on under the" Has Jabiru been sold" Heading.  That's why I'm not further commenting HERE.  Nev

 

That's Ok, you have a specific thread to comment in.

 

Yes this thread started out about spies and none of the people posting here opted to say who the person was that bought in, his background and why it's a great gain for Jabiru. Most of us know anyway, so the conversation moved to electric aircraft and particularly endurance and we've managed to pull together a lot of engine data which gives up a better understanding of what would be required to increase electric motor range.

 

So far we've bult up a lot of detail, and I don't want to lose that as we have in the past.

 

 

[facthunter]

Earlier on you argued for the Opposite case and proposed  a new topic be created..It does need a tidy up. Can't the content be transferred over?  The longer it goes on like this the sillier it looks. Pilots are supposed to be good at making the right decisions.  Nev

[turboplanner]

1 hour ago, aro said:

 

These seem way too high. If you use an engine BSFC figure of e.g. 250g/kWh, 35 kW at 100km/h is equivalent to about 12litres per 100km.

 

Probably half that is more common. 6 litres/100km gives 17.5 kW at 100km/h and 17.5 kW/h for 100km. Pretty close to the 16 kw/h for 100km originally stated.

They will be; you can't directly get from airpower, which is the power required just to push the wind out of the way to fuel consumption there are other factors such as aerodynamic coefficient and fuel map/chart in the ICE engine.

 

The figures I quoted were just to show the exponential power demand as you go faster or hit headwinds.

 

That's all you need to know to understand that for circuit training, each sector of the circuit has to be calculated separately, which we mentioned some time ago.

 

With the Product and Application factors known and a fuel map we can calculate, for a specific vehicle, fuel consumption down to one decimal place. Where I previously mentioned using ASI, altimeter etc, allowed me to send the data to the US for that particular shift on that particular route with that particular wind direction, together with the prevailing wind for that location, and accurately repeat the resulting fuel calculation for that tanker shift on that route.

 

An ICE engine supplies power in a different way to an electric motor which provides an instant response (I'm on the record as saying the four Japanese trucks I drove in Japan in the mid 90's performed like 5 litre V8s. Not surprisingly just about eveyone who drives and EV comments on this.

 

As a result of this difference in supplying the right foot with power there's a difference when you start looking at range, and BEV seems to drain exponentially faster when more power or load is demanded, so again going back to the training aircraft we're looking for bencmarks; do we scrap AC? do we lighten one area and fit more battery capacity etc. It would be nice to know some benchmarks. 

[cooperplace]

9 minutes ago, facthunter said:

Pilots are supposed to be good at making the right decisions.

Yes but if you put 4 pilots together you'll get 5 strongly held views!