RAAus Press Release

[Admin]

Recreational Aviation Australia Inc has approved possibly Australia’s first fully electric aircraft for normal flight.

 

In doing so Recreational Aviation Australia has placed the Australian Aviation Industry in the forefront of aviation technology.

 

The aircraft is an electric engine powered parachute manufactured by Aerochute Industries Australia, based in Melbourne. The aircraft is similar to the popular 2 stroke engine powered parachutes currently used safely and efficiently in Australia and throughout the world. The ‘electric aircraft’ is capable of taking two people for a comfortable quiet flying experience which is emission free in flight, unlike the common piston engines used in most small aircraft.

 

The motor propeller combination has the potential to be utilised in a large number of small aircraft throughout the world.

 

Recreational Aviation Australia has a mandate to promote safe affordable alternatives to the current aircraft propulsion systems and other aviation activities to ensure recreational aviation in Australia is a world leader.

 

Steve Tizzard

 

Chief Executive Officer

 

RA-Aus

 

Work 02 6280 4700

 

 

[monty]

Thanks for the info Ian,

 

Do you know what sort of HP and Running Time the engine has.

 

Thanks again

 

Monty

 

 

[Admin]

I will try and get more details monty

 

 

[Ding]

Electric flight

 

Hi guys,

 

There is a company, I think in the US, that has had an electric trike for a while now. They are developing an electric conventional aircraft using the trike as the test bed. There were some reports on it from Oshkosh and the company has a good website, if only I could remember what it was. There is also video on Youtube.

 

Length of flight really comes down to the battery being used, and the weight seems to be the enemy. But, as always, there only needs to be a market to push development along, so who knows whats around the corner.

 

The ideal would be for 3-4 hrs of flight, then a recharge time similar to the time it takes for a toilet break and a cup of coffee, and we will all be flying electrically.

 

Cheers,

 

Ding.

 

 

[Guest Crezzi]

This might be the one you are thinking of Flightstar Sportplanes

 

Theres also some interesting developments in the UK Cambridge University Engineering Department: News item

 

Cheers

 

John

 

 

[sseeker]

I know that Sonex is developing an electric engine that can output the same amount of HP as the Jabiru 2200 motor (or 3300 I don't remember). The electric engine is very small but the batteries take up a significant amount of space and only last for 1 hour at cruise & about 20 minutes at full power.

 

-Andrew

 

 

[Admin]

Remember this Question Of The Week:

 

http://www.recreationalflying.com/forum/question-week/30532-what-level-performance-would-tempt-you-go-electric.html

 

 

[dazza 38]

Their is a electric glider going to boonah in the near future. Not sure when, but i think it is the ninth or tenth production A/c.Currently two a/c prototypes are still in testing. It is the one we looked at a while back here on this site, the one from china.Cheers

 

 

[Ultralights]

emissions free........ just dont look at the exhaust stack of that power station over there.. though i would love to convert my Vampire to electric power, only haveing a 503 with 30 ltrs fuel capacity only gives my 2 hrs anyway, and if the battery can weigh the same as 30 ltrs of fuel, then no issue there.

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

Patience people, it will not be very far off where you will be able to by a 'kit' to convert just about any aircraft that is out now. several european and at least one chinese company are already working on it. Once they have there own specific complete product, like Yuneecs neat twin seater, are estabilished in production then conversion products will happen. general electric in the US have started a division specifically for future applications of manned aircraft. The whole electric scene is about to come to rapid boil very soon. just hope the economy hangs in there.

 

right about electric not being as squeeky clean as it first seems to be. Not only in burning fossil fuel to make the power to recharge your batteries you will reel at the amount of energy for the material in the batteries alone that is mined in canada and shipped for processing in china then shipped again for manufacture of the battery itself and then shipped again as a final product. Then you have to undo the whole process to dispose of the battery. But then never having to do another oil, filter, plugs, change EVER again would more than help to offset that.

 

ozzie

 

 

[Guest burbles1]

Congrats to RA-Aus for being so forward-looking and willing to experiment with new technology to advance aviation. Now, what's next ... perhaps the Terrafugia roadable aircraft?

 

 

[DarkSarcasm]

I can just imagine it, there'll be be a big power board in the middle of the circuit and everyone will be doing circuits with extension cords. I guess that's one way to keep everyone to a standard circuit size! :big_grin:

 

Then you could pull the plug and watch everyone try and force land at once...you can just stand there holding the plug and smiling. :devil:

 

 

[winsor68]

Judging from my experience with electric model aeroplanes you will not be disappointed by the noise of electric aircraft... I suspect they will sound like a really efficient turbine. Remember most of the noise coming from you aircraft is from the prop.

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

Electric engines for basically silent. they are absolutley smooth with no vibration. All the noise and vibration will come soley from the prop with a bit of a soft buzz coming from the controller. Using electric power will see a whole new field in propellor development commence. Electric engines have no peak power or torque curve they produce max torque at <1 rpm. so there will not be any compromise in matching prop to performance curves. higher delivered power at lower rpms will see noise made by propellors drop to levels unattainable with conventional fossil powered engines.

 

Gee be real nice to in the future, if my 'super' hangs in there, to walk out to the shed grab the battery pack off the charger and then have to decide whether to stick it in my aircraft, fishing boat or that wicked looking 150mph road bike i saw on the TT coverage.

 

Ozzie

 

 

[Chucky]

Here's something to think about....Just imagine an aircraft with wings made with Solar Panels built into the top surface. You have all that surface area looking skywards, so you may as well take advantage of it.

 

 

[Guest Crezzi]

Here's something to think about....Just imagine an aircraft with wings made with Solar Panels built into the top surface. You have all that surface area looking skywards, so you may as well take advantage of it.

Something like this ? SOLAR IMPULSE - AROUND THE WORLD IN A SOLAR AIRPLANE

 

Cheers

 

John

 

 

[Gibbo]

Here's something to think about....Just imagine an aircraft with wings made with Solar Panels built into the top surface. You have all that surface area looking skywards, so you may as well take advantage of it.

Covering the Jab 170 wing area in photovoltaic cells would give about 1.3kw in perfect weather for about 7 hours per day (when new!). It would be good for a range extender / recharger only.

 

How how about a 1/10th scale version of a B-36?... Six pusher electric motors with rocket assisted takeoff.

 

 

[Thalass]

I've been wondering about this for a while, ever since I saw that yuneec thing. I was wondering about whether the one engine - one prop rule applies to on-board generators.

 

If the electric motor drives the prop, but a small (say, 500cc) engine drives a generator to keep the batteries topped up. Since the engine is small, and is only driving a generator, it can run at a constant rpm in it's most efficient range, so it'll still be more efficient than an engine driving a prop at various rpm ranges. The same applies to cars.

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

I've been wondering about this for a while, ever since I saw that yuneec thing. I was wondering about whether the one engine - one prop rule applies to on-board generators. If the electric motor drives the prop, but a small (say, 500cc) engine drives a generator to keep the batteries topped up. Since the engine is small, and is only driving a generator, it can run at a constant rpm in it's most efficient range, so it'll still be more efficient than an engine driving a prop at various rpm ranges. The same applies to cars.

Hybrids>>> weight would be the issue even using an inverter type generator. a honda 2200w 100cc uses just under 4 lts an hr running at full power output. i have two of these units. weight is around 20kg each. the wattage of your motor will be far greater than what you can produce.

 

the drag created by air turbines is greater than the power they produce.

 

sorry there is no free ride using the current science available.

 

should be interesting to see what the designers have to say at airventure this year.

 

 

[Thalass]

I certainly agree that the drag from a ram air turbine or similar would be greater than the power it produces. The same sort of thing is suggested by people with cars: "Why don't you put a generator on the back wheels while you drive the front wheels with a motor?" To which the correct response is "Can you stand with both feet in a bucket and pull yourself off the ground?"

 

However, other than weight, an on board genset shouldn't be much problem. The generator doesn't have to produce the full 100hp all the time. In fact the best way to do it would be to have the generator/engine combination only large enough to produce slightly more power than what your motor consumes at cruise. Then have a battery pack only large enough to provide the difference for takeoff and climb. With a smaller pack the weight wouldn't be so great.

 

This is, of course, much more complex than a straight EV or straight petrol aircraft, but it ought to be much more efficient.

 

The only example of this that I can think off the top of my head is a Rav4 EV built by toyota for a few years in the USA. It was capable of travelling "highway speeds" but only for a short distance (about 50km, if I recall correctly), so a few clever owners built a genset trailer with a motorcycle engine, fuel tank, and generator on board. This produced enough power to drive at ~110km/h for hours, and in fact was still more fuel efficient than a regular petrol Rav4 of the same year.

 

Anyway, it would be an interesting challenge. Especially with the tough weight limit on an RAA Aircraft. And aerodynamics play a much bigger part in an aircraft. A jabiru might be easier than a drifter.

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

Are there any Australian manufacturers that are currently working on a dedicated electric or a conversion of a current model?

 

 

[jetjr]

Isnt this concept headed toward a powered sailplane setup?

 

Engine for launch and not required for cruise.

 

Everytime you transfer energy you loose some, ie petrol generator to battery to electric motor has significant inefficiencies. May be better to drive directly on petrol.

 

Small gennies dont make much power. 2kwhr from 20 kg +fuel genny. Plane maybe using 45kw/hr in cruise - not sure about these numbers though?

 

Burning coal to create electricity is fairly efficient I think, and bigger the better. Thats why coal fired power is too good to get rid of despite its dirty habits.

 

Better battery technology will be the beginning of electric drive cars and everything else.

 

Keeping track of remaining power can prove difficult too.

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

A lot will depend on the efficiency of the design light and clean will obviously use less power to maintain level flight at a higher cruise speed than a dirty draggy airframe and slow wing section. have a look at the Yuneec design. very much a powered sailplane in it's design. Good battery design is a must and will become lighter and greater in their storage capabilities but will still need improvment on the rate of charge and discharge capabilities. brushless motors are the way to go. and the controlllers are improving steadily. good controllers keep a good eye on your batteries and will via a display show how much power you have and will give adequate time warning in advance of shutting down. the controllers can also be programed to suit each individual motor and airframe/prop for perfect match.

 

 

[Guest davidh10]

...Burning coal to create electricity is fairly efficient I think, and bigger the better. Thats why coal fired power is too good to get rid of despite its dirty habits.

...

I'm not sure it is all that efficient... Just look at all that steam that the greenies photograph rising from cooling towers every time they talk about pollution :kboom: (they don't photograph the actual smoke stacks because it wouldn't be as impressive)

 

Coal generated electricity is prevalent because:-

 

• When you dig up the coal nextdoor to the power station it is really cheap.
   
   
  
• Cost of the infrastructure for coal fired generators, compared to other power generation methods is cheap.
   
   
  
• It is one of the few current technologies that can deliver base load power.
   
   
  

 

 

Given that nobody wants atomic power in Oz, geothermal is the only base load option that is looking good for minimal emissions, but has a long way to go before it will support any noticable percentage of our power needs. Even the atomic power option was only forecast to produce enough power to supply the growth in electricity usage, by the time it was built and commissioned.