 |
 |
Electric flight/ Hybrid flight:
| April 5th, 2017 at 2:04:01 PM permalink | |
| Pacomartin Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 1068 Posts: 12569 |
What the article said was Currently more than 95 percent of all U.S. air traffic emanates from only 2 percent of the country’s 5,000 airports. That statement was equally true in 1984 when the Bombardier Dash 8 was first sold Model Q200 / Q300 / Q400 Seats 37 / 50 / 74 Miles 1,295 / 1,063 / 1,282 Mph 333 / 330 / 402 The question is will electric planes with even more limited range make a business model work today that didn't work in 1984. Possibly it will. Turboprops were widely shunned by passengers who were afraid of them. Electric aircraft may be seen as modern. Smartphone apps may make the lack of services at regional airports less of a problem, as you can call for Uber from anywhere. But a real interesting possibility for "walk on walk off" service could be lack of schedules. You simply have a 50 seat aircraft waiting at Ontario airport in LA basin, and the first 50 people that show can fly to North Las Vegas airport. Obviously 100% guarantee of a flight cannot be made. But if the price is inexpensive enough, that may not be a deterrent. Presumably a few smaller electric planes may be available to mop up a few straggling passengers. If such a system can pull significant number of air passengers out of LAX where short flights use valuable runway space, they will make a big difference. |
| April 5th, 2017 at 2:18:27 PM permalink | |
| Fleastiff Member since: Oct 27, 2012 Threads: 62 Posts: 7831 | 1984 didn't have TSA or really bad traffic jams. And the Dash 8 flew from the larger airports but not really at bargain prices. The Dash 8 still made noise and could not really use airports near truly residential areas. The electric model might be combined with a free-floating inventory, so as to allow for an Ontario to Las Vegas trip followed by leave the plane and crew there until some people happen to show up for a flight from Vegas to Ontario. If you fly people quickly and quietly, they show up at smaller airports just to avoid TSA groping and three hour advance arrivals. |
| April 5th, 2017 at 4:11:01 PM permalink | |
| Pacomartin Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 1068 Posts: 12569 | There may be 5000 airports in this country, but only 398 have commercial service with more than 10,000 annual passengers. Let's look at an example of potential point to point flights: Santa Barbara is a wealthy city with a University and airport is ranked #153. Th airport flies to 7 destinations (all Large Airports). Logically you would expect many more passengers than that travelling to other major destinations. As Santa Barbara is a county seat, you would think Sacramento would be a popular destination. Santa Barbara has 7 destinations with the following annual traffic 1 (#7) San Francisco, California 89,000 United 2 (#10) Phoenix–Sky Harbor, Arizona 86,000 American 3 (#2) Los Angeles, California 47,000 United 4 (#6) Denver, Colorado 40,000 United 5 (#13) Seattle/Tacoma, Washington 29,000 Alaska 6 (#30) Portland, Oregon 23,000 Alaska 7 (#4) Dallas/Fort Worth,Texas 11,000 American United to three hubs, American to two hubs, Alaska to two hubs Now eight weekly flights to an airport on a 50 seat plane with 80% load is 16,640 passengers per year. Looking at four fairly large nearby airports that are potential destinations, but are not hubs of the airlines. (#9) LAS 289 mi Las Vegas FAA Large Hub (#27) SAN 192 mi San Diego FAA Large Hub (#41) SJC 234 mi San Jose FAA Medium Hub (#42) SAC 296 mi Sacramento FAA Medium Hub
I would think any one of those four non-hub destinations would have more potential passengers than DFW. But American airlines wants people to fly to DFW because they want them to transfer to international destinations, so there is a business case to include DFW as well as Phoenix. Phoenix has only a limited number of international destinations. None of those four alternative destinations worry about noise. But there is no business case for one or two flights a day. I am skeptical if electric drive is going to make that much difference. |
| April 5th, 2017 at 7:35:15 PM permalink | |
| Fleastiff Member since: Oct 27, 2012 Threads: 62 Posts: 7831 | I see what you mean.. but I do wonder how many people go from Los Angeles to Santa Barbara but really want to go to the wine country near there or some touristy spots nearby or their condos in Goleta and Carpentera or touristy Solvang. Now, the only way would be a private charter to Santa Ynez Airport or something but with quieter planes no one would object to increased traffic closer to the actual destinations instead of flying to Santa Barbara and renting a car to get to where you really want to go. Quiet planes, short runways, small close-in airports, very low load factors .... and direct to where you really want to go rather than some major hub or minor hub. |
| April 5th, 2017 at 9:15:10 PM permalink | |
| Pacomartin Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 1068 Posts: 12569 |
It sounds wonderful to want to charter a ten person electric plane to fly from North San Diego county (MCD) to Santa Ynez (SQA) . MCD is 28 miles from SAN , and SQA is 18 miles from SBA. I'm not saying these electric planes won't be very popular charters with the wealthy environmentally posers. They are electric version of the sexy Piaggio P.180 Avanti which sells itself primarily as being cheaper to operate and environmentally friendly compared to a jet. It is the idea that they will create a point to point small airport business of scheduled flights of less than 700 miles that will take even 1% of the commercial airline service in this country (1%~22,000 daily plane boarding) seems impossible to me. Essentially the lack of jet noise is not going to be sufficient to create an industry that couldn't be created by turboprops and regional jets. |
| January 20th, 2018 at 3:44:29 PM permalink | |
| Fleastiff Member since: Oct 27, 2012 Threads: 62 Posts: 7831 | Slashdot reports all short haul Norway flights will be electric within twenty years. Although present goals envision 1.5 hour flights as being entirely electric it is clear that technology and sport aviation contributions are hoped to extend the capabilities of all electric flight |
| June 25th, 2018 at 5:51:19 AM permalink | |
| Pacomartin Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 1068 Posts: 12569 |
As noted above Norway hopes to have the entire domestic aviation industry electrified by 2040.  Norway's first electric-powered flight took place at Oslo Airport on Monday. (Photo: Avinor) Nine largest airports in Norway (over 1 million passengers) with an 844 mile route and 363 mile route. All but 2 airports are within 330 miles of Oslo (see oval). Easy Jet wants to build airplanes with room for 120 and 220 passengers and a range of 335 miles.  I suspect that trying to electrify all the routes in the country will prove costly. It will prove much easier to build planes that have a 335 mile maximum range.
|
| June 25th, 2018 at 8:14:46 AM permalink | |
| Fleastiff Member since: Oct 27, 2012 Threads: 62 Posts: 7831 | The emphasis is on quality of life. Not some faux "I'm greener than you" nonsense of the pompous posers but a true emphasis on quality of life. Norway wants to avoid noise pollution, jet fumes, long lines that create discord, etc. Its the same thing in the USA wherein you think that short range electric planes will only appeal to the Green Snob crowd. No, it appeals to the communities surrounding the airport who enjoy peace and quiet and might otherwise impose night time curfews on the airport or on jet traffic at the airports or on touch and go landings. Bans on touch and goes curtail flight schools which means FBOs lose money and airport services deteriorate. Small, quiet planes take people where they really want to go and avoid airport bustle, lines and groping. Take a look at the Scandinavian food laws that emphasize local farms rather than imported junk food. Take a look at laws relating to education and prisons. Its an emphasis on quality of life rather than economics. Electric planes are clean and quiet. No fuel pollution. No noise pollution. Suits Norway to a T. Doesn't suit USA bean counters, I'll admit that. Norway's laws don't have to suit USA bean counters or Wall Street investors. Norwegian laws only have to suit those people who live in Norway. That is why electric flight will indeed prosper there. Norwegians will insist that it does. |
| June 25th, 2018 at 8:56:45 AM permalink | |
| beachbumbabs Member since: Sep 3, 2013 Threads: 6 Posts: 1600 | There is a relatively huge market for this in Hawaii. Everything interisland there would qualify, and Hawaii is probably the greenest state. Waters are very treacherous, so any assumption things move easily by ferry or barge (which I had) is sadly mistaken. EVERYTHING flies. I would think, but don't know, that there would be a similar market in Indonesia, Japan, and the Caribbean. Never doubt a small group of concerned citizens can change the world; it's the only thing ever has |
| June 25th, 2018 at 9:04:48 AM permalink | |
| beachbumbabs Member since: Sep 3, 2013 Threads: 6 Posts: 1600 | There is a market, probably, but I'm not totally up to date on this, in and out of highly desirable airports with prohibitive noise abatement procedures in the US. Specifically, DCA and SNA, probably a few others. A jet that's significantly quieter should make at least a few sales to airlines serving those airports. Never doubt a small group of concerned citizens can change the world; it's the only thing ever has |