DeLand Sport Showcase: Pipistrel Velis Electric Trainer Debuts
Вставка
- Опубліковано 13 лис 2021
- Slovenian airplane maker Pipistrel certified the first commercial-use electric airplane last year and is finding some buyers in Europe. Even as the Velis model trickles into the U.S. on a demonstration basis, it's not clear when it will be certified by U.S. regulators. In this video shot at the DeLand Sport Aviation Showcase, Pipistrel rep Andy Chan updates us on where the airplane stands with regard to deliveries, even as technical details on battery and motor TBOs remain difficult to pin down.
- Авто та транспорт
A little bit more expensive? It's more than twice as expensive as an Alpha Trainer! It doesn't matter if the operating costs are zero, that thing is never going to make financial sense.
Honestly think it's a good start and I hope they keep going down this path in the future....but an hour of flight time (or 50 minutes as he states at 6:16) and then 40 minutes of charging is just too low for training. If you're only using it to teach pattern work and landings that's one thing...but even then you're then going to have students use a different (and probably much larger / different) aircraft for everything else...and that aircraft will handle pattern and landing differently than this...especially if it's a low wing like a piper warrior or 180 that a lot of school usually have in their fleet. This means they'll have to do extra training on top of their current training to be proficient in both, which is a lot of extra work and stress for a new student to handle on top of their PPL training. I know they also said you can have charging stations at various other airports strategically placed to compensate for this but that still seems unreasonable given the rate of charge and total flight time available as it opens the door to more variables like weather to play a bigger role in the fight as you'll need plan around that extra 40/80 minutes of downtime you will have to do now that you wouldn't have had to with a normal trainer. I do hope they get larger / better batteries in the future though...cuz I'd personally love to see all electric aircraft become the standard across the board.
Yeah I don't think anyone will buy this because of the problems you listed. Also many flight schools as far as I'm aware have reserves beyond poh minimums. Meaning you could possibly need a 45 minute reserve or even an hour which would only leave you with 30 minutes of flight time.
@@patriotsfan1236 Yup...also all of that assumes you're the first in line to land...there's been quite a few times I've gotten bumped behind 3-5 other people just cuz of the pecking order or bad timing and spent 15-20 minutes being vectored around before landing. If that happened toward the end of a flight, you would be using a large chunk of your reserves on top whatever you already used and you might end up having to declare an emergency just to land for just doing a few simple traffic patterns...
Correct. and do not expect that batteries will improve ore than they are now. The tech is mature and there is just no unobtanium to be found.
People also seem to be ignoring how ridiculously expensive this airplane is compared to the Alpha Trainer.
Yes... we need more old farts telling us how things cannot be done. Answer me one thing - why does this plane becomes popular in Europe?
For flight schools, the benefit of lower operating costs will be diminished by the 1:1 recharge time. An honest 8 hour day of productivity will be reduced to 4 hours. Of course, while the bird is recharging, the instructor can squeeze out another hour of ground training.
Or schools can just buy 2 planes...
@@remigiuszbloch Like they're cheap too
@@remigiuszbloch @ $250K each. Ridiculous.
@@alpenglow1235 yup, that's too much for private owner. I guess you pay for adopting that technology, you can feel better when you go to sleep that you are helping progress. Also you can put it on lease and just deduct cost of plane from taxes in EU [as most companies do]. You can also use it as part of your marketing strategy.
Hey Pauls back! How you doin bud!!
With 1hr flight times and $250k purchase costs they're not there yet, but they're getting close. If you look at how electric cars have progressed over the past decade, I think this will be the standard for new-build trainers within the next decade.
When did the show take place in DeLand?
Just after DeTakeoff.....
Batteries are pretty small compared to a car: 2x11 kWh (22 kWh) versus 60 kWh or so in a car. This'll probably need 40 kWh for a 2+ hour range. Hope in 5 years or so that 40 kWh solid state batteries will be available at the same weight as the current ones.
Two other things I think I'll like. First, should be a lot more reliable that a piston single. Good enough for mountains at night? (doubtful)
Also, I bet it's nice to have full torque within 1/10 of a second of applying full throttle.
0:59, what a legend, can stay focused with a WASP on his thumb!
Its actually has a 25 min flight limit.
Best thing that has ever happened to flight training
That's the future.... Well done Pipistrel
1 hr flight times are the future? I really hope not lol. Great concept. Worthless aircraft imo.
@@failingtheturingtest4381 the market will speak. I've worked at a flight school and I'm telling you now it's not practical. The wright brothers were innovating. Making thir aircrafts better. Almost nothing is better about this aircraft other than the lack of noise it creates.that is not innovative IMO. It's awesome it's being developed. Awesome they are putting r&d into aircraft like this. But in its current configuration it's very lacking compared to a petrol powered version for training. CFI s will have their hours cut in half. I stand by the statement that it's not practical in the slightest.
@@failingtheturingtest4381 Moving forward with tech that is mature and won't change anymore?
You just can not compare that with the Wright brothers as they were starting with new tech. Batteries are from the 1970-80's, fully grown with all the problems they carry. Dead end.
@@patriotsfan1236 You seriously think the battery technology will not improve ?
@@johannes914 no? I never said that. But It's going to take a giant lead in battery tech. New kinds of batteries not more efficient batteries. They plan to market this aircraft in its current configuration and I think it will not sell well with some of the problems that aren't addressed at the moment.
1 hr flight time? Not even practical for training. Even when the FAA approves this. What profitable flight school would ever buy this in its current configuration. 1hr of time with the student and then several blocks of time not being able to fly because its charging. Cross countries wouldn't even be possible. Cool experiment though. Many flight school rental requirements have lower fuel reserves than what's allowed in the poh for insurance requirements. For example many schools have a 45 minute reserve giving the plane only 45 minutes of flight time. Some have one hour reserves at night for private pilots. 10-15 for runup and taxi back. That leaves you with about 15-30 minutes of actual flying in some situations. I think Flight schools will logically compensate for the downtime of the aircraft in its rental rate if any of them ever bought this. The idea is awesome but this is more of a prototype because in my opinion it is not practical in the slightest.
With electric, taxiing will use a tiny amount of energy. When you're waiting at a holding point, the prop even stops. And there is no run up. Battery life is heavily dependent on use - I hope the 1 hour estimate is based on traffic patterns, which represent the highest energy use.
Dude, it’s new technology. They’re doing great. I give them props for progressing this much. Don’t forget, it took from 1854 discovery of the internal combustion engine to 1902 for first powered flight to happen. Things take time, we just happen to live in a time where most of the hard work was done before we were born :)
@@Mr_Bones. I'm not saying it's not an awesome concept. Not practical at all.
@@markmuir7338 true. Same with current air cooled ice engine. I'm really not sure how much power they use on the ground For sure less obviously.
@@markmuir7338 I'm going to say it's not based on traffic pattern simply because weather aircraft factors feeling like that usually 75% Cruise numbers or endurance numbers
I just really really hope the throttle to prop response is akin to petrol, otherwise this may be a bad trainer?
Just software, they could probably even program carb icing into it if they wanted 😂
Response will be much, much better.
It's odd that you would be concerned about this. You should probably stay away from jets.
Look at how fast electric cars receive torque. Same idea.
@@alpenglow1235 i think you misunderstood me. Take your average pilot new in training. You want them flying over your house in a jet? Thats my point. Most wannabe pilots typically suck at flying off the bat. Why would you want to make it that much less likely for them to experience normal aviation? Electric planes are going to be awsome, but are they of typical flight characteristics akin to most private aircraft? If not, they would not make good trainers in my opinion.
@@josh3771 i think youre absolutely right. That brings up one other thought though. No maintenance right? Whats stopping you from jtagging and flashing your pipistril airplane with tesla truck firmware? XD
I think they should use range extenders like they're starting to use in Tesla cars
Slowly moving forward. Good luck.
Nice they finally got a electric full-size plane now. Let’s see how long is gonna last
They've been out for years. It's only the FAA that's been holding it up. Pipistrel been a commercial flight training aircraft in Australia for nearly a decade.
@@gasdive yeah but not the electric ones.
@@patriotsfan1236 electric ones since 2017.
@@patriotsfan1236 so not nearly a decade (memory fail there) only about half a decade.
@@gasdive oh ok. I didn’t know
notice how much he dodges the cost
batteries ain't it yet
love all these electric planes
two major problems with batteries, cost and lifespan (not to mention chemical fires).
at the current rate, these lithium ion batteries are expected to lose a majority of range within 6 years
that's an awful lot of money to spend every 6-8 years, for what benefit exactly?
saving the planet? we don't even recycle the majority of batteries as it is
(6-8 years is the maximum for cars btw, having students in this would be a nightmare)
Cool video, you have to subscribe right away. ,,
Way to go
That plane turns the $100 hamburger back to $50.
No. They are saying it has the same powerplant / battery overhaul cost as the rotax . Think about it. You would save on fuel 3.5 gallons of fuel per hr (about 15$ currently) but you still need to do annuals, 100hrs, and then financially compensate for the extra hour of downtime after every flight. Another 15k for a ground charging station. It would be about the same price to operate but with extremely reduced capabilities for a flight school.
@@patriotsfan1236 "They are saying it has the same powerplant / battery overhaul cost as the rotax ."
And that's actually total BS, the batteries have a much shorter lifespan and are around twice as expensive as a completely new Rotax engine. The aircraft is also much more expensive to buy than the Rotax powered equivalent.
That’s not enough range
Range really isn’t an issue when the primary mission set is pattern training…
@@DavidLHadley Well, it does when the airport shuts down for some stupid reason and the thing flies there with 15% batt left and nowhere to go...
@@DavidLHadley the real question is do you really think flight schools would buy a plane just for pattern use only? 0_o
@@DavidLHadley a trainer needs to be able to do legal cross countries
In years to come rental cost should come down.
Nothing in aviation will be cheap.
By the time flight training is cheap, we’ll have anti-gravity hover cars 😂
Not for me.
Maybe, should be, might be, hopefully. All we ever hear from these unicorn salesmen. Also he needs to be reminded to take his sun glasses off when addressing and audience even an indirect one. Very bad manners. Book him Dano!
Wow! Use fossil fuels to produce the electricity to charge the batteries in your e-aircraft. That's an impressive idea.
Even if that were true, that path is still more efficient than burning gas in an engine... And it has other advantages. Grid gets cleaner -> plane gets cleaner. Simple.
Even if the carbon footprint was exactly the same to that of a gas engine. Zero vibration, no oil changes and zero power loss at altitude. Sounds terrible to me…….🙄
Even so electric motors can be designed to last much longer than ICE motors. As long as batteries are changed then i think they are more reliable ie safer. I am not saying they will have better range or power to weight. I have been watching this technology for a long time and as a trainer i think it is a solid logical idea. And personally i do not care if they charge it with a wood powered steam locomotive from the 1860s. The idea is to simply try to make it more affordable to get new pilots more hours for less money.
@@Captndarty oil changes take about 15 mins and aren't really expensive. Not really a factor per hr like cost of avgas or annuals.
@@Captndarty 1 hr flight time. This won't ever sell in the us in its current state.