@muzero2642 why's it inflexible? And why expensive if you don't have to buy fuel? What does size matter if it's only replacing small planes that do short distances? Genuinely asking, would like to learn
@@muzero2642 Electricity from hydro in the Nordic countries is almost free, much cheaper than jet fuel. The reduction in pollution, and CO₂ emissions, is also very welcome. And, if they can dispense with the jet engines, a vastly reduced maintenance cost.
Thanks for the update. I saw here at the SAS Conscious Travelers event at Säve beginning of August this summer. A lot more has happened since I was there.
I figured they’d start development with all the cutting-edge tech, instead, they’ve put together a mockup mostly from standard parts, complete with passenger seats, while the real innovation is just promises. Makes me wonder if this will really take off.
It's not a prototype but rather a demonstrator (a mockup as you say), basically just a platform for various technical tests related to electric propulsion.
@@ThunderboltDragonI was wondering about that, because the structure and other things don't look suitable for flight. Thanks - another difference in US English.
@@ThunderboltDragon That’s my point-it doesn’t really look like a platform for technical testing; it seems more like something set up to impress potential investors over a glass of champagne.
So cool, when I was a kid I dreamed of manufacturing a hybrid aircraft just like that, unfortunately the aircraft manufacturer made it first just as before I could in the future. Still cool tho
For some reason this Hybrid system makes so much sense when it comes to next gen aircraft design. Especially for these STOL remote airports. And since there is no good replacements for the Dash 8-100 and 200 series or Dash 7. Only competitor would be Dornier with their 328Eco which is coming up but isnt a Hybrid though.
Amazingly Brilliant! Thank you for sharing this video. I need 50 of these electric- hybrid propulsion aircraft in my place now! Greetings from Madang, Papua New Guinea!
I think it’s a winning 🥇 idea and concept. I especially like the hybrid approach rather than a full EV. That will enable Heart to sell the aircraft to airlines that may not yet have the electrical infrastructure needed in their airport to support it. I see they also said that this demonstrator unit has allowed them to work through some design issues and the final model will be extended. It sounds to me like they have a way to go, and they know it. I wish Heart ❤️ good luck for their first flight next year. Then it won’t be long until full certification after that hopefully 🙏. I hope they have their assembly line plant underway. As for disability access and support. I know some airports here in New Zealand have constructed ramps that allow wheelchair passengers the ability to board turboprop aircraft (ATR 72 and Dash 8) unaided or with assistance upon request.
Cool project! I have so many questions like: Will the gas turbine engines also generate electricity & will those props be used as drag to slow down the plane, say on landing with regenerative power going to the batteries? Will the gas propellers fold away or just be feathered? Why not have racks of batteries to slide in & out at airports when needed. I know I don't need answers/replies, its just some excited thoughts...
I don't know why it should be a problem with PRM. The front door looks CRJ. Assistance lifts should be able to get close and use a mobile ramp to load the passenger with wheelchair. At least from what I can see. Regarding the 4 tons battery in the aft compartment the dispatcher better not mess up CG and load calculations for cargo because this thing is a tilt machine ! Looks promising. I wish them success 👍🏻 Thanks for sharing FR24 ✈
Why not swappable batteries and limit the risk of burning down the aircraft while charging. Plus you can take off in less than hour like regular refueling and passengers boarding
Please forgive me but I'm just an old carpet installer. Who LOVES plans. Electric is awesome and the way of the future and your hybrid rocks. But I'm querys. Has any body thought to put some type of battery protection for the people. Love your plane
can the turbo props generate power for the electric system like a range extender in a hybrid - or have an APU inboard to generate additional power when required. A few hundred kilos of APU & fuel might work in conjunction with the "4 tonnes of batteries"
Adds weight and complexity. Its a turboprop with a small amount of electric, so its complex enough. The 'perfect' electric plane was their original 19 seater , this is the 3rd iteration but still will cost more to run than a 30 seater TP
have a lot of questions about the X1 in the Video it says that it has two turboprop engines i can not see any airintake and outlets all four nacelles ar equal on the video . Another question about the cockpit i coludn`t see any standby instruments . And i take one more question in this comment the main door should the have more fittings if the cabin are pressurized
I'm curious about the performance differences between electrical engines and fossil fuel-powered ones in engine-out scenarios. I'm also curious about how they plan to handle battery replacement or maintenance.
They only work intheis configuration which is electric adjacent by much higher running costs. batterys only last 2000 cycles. So 5 charges per day thats 400 days
Is this a clean sheet design? Are they developing a new airframe, a new fbw system and a new hybrid propulsion system all at the same time? Any one of those is a huge challenge. Oh and EVS, HUD, Steep and every other bell and whistle.... hmmmm. I hope there is some very deep pockets with a great deal of patience.
looks like it. they won´t be developing everything from scratch though, for example the avionics. also they have a partnership with BAE. I think those folks know what they´re doing and this demonstrator looks very promising
@@kidneybone1534 I guess you've never worked in aircraft development. Avionics is the least of their challenges. A new airframe with a new FBW alone takes years and billions with an off the shelf engine. They want to develop a new propulsion system, and a HUD and steep capability and and and... they have a decade of work ahead of them in which they will be hemorrhaging money. The $175 million they've raise won't last a year.
Current newer airplanees have became much more efficient. Engine technologies have evolved over the years. Carrying battery is carrying additional weights. Experiments should not be stopped.
now we need a plane to go invincible. i guess my only issue with this is knowing which is safer to use and how expensive or cheap it is to get on it to travel.
I was thinking that they wouldn't want the cost of developing an air-frame. Electrifying an existing air-frame would be massively cheaper. Optimising for maximum range, and certification, will be the main challenges. Battery, motor and electrical power control system technologies are well understood and mature.
@@AnthonyCartmell Mature ? Why are they changing their configuration every 2 years - this is the 3rd iteration- and then saying its only years away from flight. Each time the electric use per flight has gone down They will run out of money guaranteed
Originally the Fuselage and some systems were going to be based on the Saab 340 - the prototype was even going to use an old Saab 340 fuse. It still looks like the fuselage structure will be licensed from Saab somehow.
it has nothing to do with the dornier, except general layout like high wing, t-tail and 3 abreast cabin. if you look closely, i hey don´t even closely look alike. as the host said it is a clean sheet design, so a completely new design.
it´s a 30-seater regional plane, there´s not much space to begin with. for big bags or suitcases there´s the aft cargo compartment so the space in the cabin should be more than enough
Yeah but it needs to be able to take the 7 kg stock standard trolley bag in the cabin somehow. No one likes checking in the one standard cabin bag your legally allowed to take in the cabin. The aircraft needs to be able to keep up with modern day cabin standards bottomline as modern day airline competition is hard work.@@kidneybone1534
@@simiot1 Hybrid cars are terrible, way more parts that need servicing. In Norway pretty much all new cars sold are electric now. Hybrid planes does make sense, for now at least.
I was thinking about this, but I believe they're on the right track in simplicity and weight reduction with a modular concept. From what I'm seeing, they could be isolating the fuel and turbines to the outboard wing sections, no need to run large gauge electric wires, fuel lines (systems), hydraulic lines and of course the heafty bleed systems throughout the entire aircraft. This aircraft, at its heart, is all electric. Keeping the HV cable runs minimal to the onboard sections while completely isolating the hybrid components to the outboard sections as stand alone backup propulsion.
It looks a lot like a Dornier 328. I was part of the initial Sales/Marketing team for both the SF-340 and Dornier 328. There is not much actual data or numbers I could find on this aircraft. The usual issue with electric aircraft is the weight of the batteries. A new 9 seat electric aircraft that has about 8,000lb of batteries would need 40,000lb to compete with an all turbine machine payload/range. It amazes me that people think it is zero emissions since for every 1,000 lb of a lithium battery requires moving and refining 500,000 lb of ore which requires a great deal of fossil fuel. The anti-ice/deice will require power. What is the procedure for critical the engine on take-off? Will this be the same battery in the exploding EV's, (certification)? I wish them well but the only way I think it would work is if the European Governments legislates Hybrid aircraft by a certain date. We see how well that is working in Europe.
I wonder why the choice of putting the standard, jet-fuel engines on the outboard position. Conceivably, fuel-burning engines are not as reliable as electric motors, so the more probable chance of a fueled engine failure event would be less critical if the failed engine was on a more inboard position. Surely they thought of this and I'm missing something.
Maybe to keep high energy engine components that could enter the cabin and breach batteries / critical systems as far away from them as possible? Those inner core turbine blades carry a great deal of energy, things get really mess when they let go.
seems overly complicated for not a lot of benefits. If they used electronics directly into the engine, they could achieve the efficiency gains necessary and at a much lower cost with less maintenance required. Instead of using a heavy inefficient battery system that functions as a added failure point.
@ Combustion, fossil fuel engines produce heat, electricity and mechanical movement in various stages of the process to ignition and movement such of the shaft or gears. There’s already widely used and well understood ways of using the movement of gears to produce electricity through electrical converter either in between the engine and gear box or as a unit that functions as a gear box and converter of the mechanical force into electricity by the rotary motion. Well used principle in turbo fan engines for the continuous combustion process in the core of the engine. Also well used in the maritime industry by use of parallel hybrid systems for diesel engines. Also there’s new turbo fan engine research and prototyping of where the core instead of using combustion uses electric gear boxes what get their power from the combustion process of the aircraft APU and uses that to start the engines. Once these eletric geared turbo fan engines start running they heat with the friction of air going through the core to drive a internal turbine that accelerates the fan movement and functions the same way as a common start up process for a any other turbo fan. Much less fuel used while taxing or idle and the efficiency gains of having electricity for gears means that more fuel is conserved. It’s a easy way to lower emissions, cost, maintenance and overall weight by only requiring batteries for auxiliary systems or additional direct instantaneous boost to the gears in the core. Right now batteries are simply not good enough for weight restricted applications and hydrogen carries the same problems as batteries in weight and size while not being widely available enough or cheap enough. that’s without considering that hydrogen comes from mostly fossil fuels and green hydrogen infrastructure and supply chain has had little development in the last 15 years since it became a serious topic of discussion. It would be great to have all electric aircrafts by now but battery technologies so far have not developed enough to gain a meaningful development for industrial applications in large scale and hydrogen is practically a joke by how little has been done for R&D and industrial planning of green hydrogen.
@ The best thing to do this decade is to reduce the inefficiencies of current technologies without a penalty in cost or operational complexity and invest heavily on further development of key technologies for the climate change transition in industrial development.
@ The problem with that is that new efficient turbo fan engines weight anywhere from 2 to 6 tons each. even the smallest engine for turbo prop doesn’t weight less than 1 ton, with the added complication of less power and higher noise of operation. The batteries require extra structural reinforcement (more weight and less space) and additional space for the batteries that are also fire risk for the people in the cabin since it’s often sharing the same space inside the fuselage as passengers. The added efficiency of having the batteries does not out perform the added cost in expensive batteries, less space for passengers, added maintenance for the batteries that last less than the engines themselves. Simply not good enough or practical enough for all the people who have to take care of operations in the airports and the owners who need to spent even more time taking care of structural stress from battery weight and increasing degradation making the aircraft less and less efficient. Simply modernising engines to take advantage of new material science and electronic hardware is far more practical, efficient and safer than just adding batteries for the sake of it. Batteries are great, now the technology has evolved enough that batteries can easily and safely be used as generators for when that extra electricity is used but batteries are not good enough currently to be used as a primary source of continuous energy in high energy demand capacities. Batteries work great in cars or keeping the lights on in a storm but they do at a relative low voltage. High voltage, energy intensive applications such as moving a turbo fan, propeller or 1 ton shafts are simply too much for batteries that are not made to the size of a house. small batteries are not good enough for high continuous voltages and big batteries that are good enough for high continuous voltages aren’t suitable for weight and size constricted applications (specially not when paired with other already sizeable and weighty mechanical systems)
It's very cool they are making their own but why not a single piece carbon fiber fuselage construction with no frames or stringers, just a shell. And make it teardrop instead of straight cylinder body for aerodynamics and rigidity as just a shell. Low wing for short simple landing gear, no massive belly or wing fairing like they have here because they just copied an ATR42. It should be plenty possible to have 400km battery range, they really should emphasize pure battery operation and if they must they can have a small turbine generator as range extender. The end of the aircraft might be an obvious place for it. Just enough power for cruise flight or even a tiny bit below cruise power. Just a 2mm carbon fiber shell can hold 10 bar pressure and weigh around 600kg. Without frames etc you don't waste a lot of cross section so it can be thinner for the same cabin size. Lighter more aerodynamic really matters for efficiency. Optimization is king. You could even skip windows and use digital windows. As a battery plane a big part of its mass should be battery. Not a conventional old heavy plane with a touch of batteries. I wouldn't be surprised if 1000km range was possible with today's batteries. Optimization is really really important for all aspects.
So it's a jet plane with some electric motors on it? I was surprised when I heard "jet fuel", was expecting an all-electric motor plane with a diesel (more go per kg) generator for backup energy.
I was watching on my Apple TV, and the subtitle option was not available. Sometimes contact providers create a special subtitle stream that can be played along the content French people speaking English is difficult even for UA-cam automatic subtitling!
Electric planes, even hybrids, are absolutely pointless - the additional weight of the batteries alone will severely interfere with the planes performance. That's not even considering the added drag from the additional traditional outboard engines. Then consider how unstable lithium ion batteries are.
NOT GREEN AVIATION... but GREENER Aviation. Something that is "GREEN", has NO carbon footprint... this aircraft will still have a huge carbon footprint.
How to fly without wings AntiGravity Air Taxi Work base on Gravity just spinning by using Battery can fly in bad weather, plunge in the ocean even in outer space Can lift more than 100 Ton
@@mrbushpilot You have to leave 20% charge at end of each flight . At 5 cycles of recharge per day they will last 400 days, less if you use that reserve . The heaviness is a major problem because the same energy from fuel is much much lighter. Because of aerodynamic theory , extra weight increases drag from lift.
Wow could this be any more rough, generic components everywhere and not even the engine solution ready. Seems like your typical e-startup venture designed to take lots of other people’s money
It's like a microwave oven or an air fryer. Great at doing one particular job but cannot compete with the 'one size fits all' gas oven which people who can only afford one appliance will buy. It has taken decades to design the most efficient way of moving hundreds of people thousands of miles - by using fossil fuels. Even with modern technology it is going to prove impossible to replace such proven technologies in just a few short years. The physics of energy density mean that batteries will never be as efficient as fossil fuels. We don't know what future discoveries and inventions will bring but for now these aircraft are a poor compromise over what is possible. Only politics and climate alarmism are providing the incentive to make these craft: both of which are surrounded by much skepticism..
My biggest question is Why? No chance in you-know-where that MOST people will ever climb aboard one of these. We cant even keep the like of Tesla's, Lightnings, Volts and Leafs from catching fire. At least those passengers and drivers can bail before things get too hot. Not in an airplane....
@@planespeaking Good answer to a good question however we do not know what suppression systems are onboard. I detect a political bent to Joy's comment. That gets us nowhere. History shows we can never predict beforehand technologies that will win out.
Maybe a stupid idea ... what about having an external wind turbine fitted to the rear of the aircraft that would recharge the batteries when the plane is flying using fuel only ?
It’s not truly “green” if you’re charging batteries with coal plants, nuclear or natural gas. Also, batteries weigh a lot more than fuel so you’re reducing the max payload.
Different problems for different people to solve. These are trying to improve the airplane side of things. Others are trying to increase clean(er) energy sources.
Perfect for many islands. 150km from RNN to CPH, 190km from VBY to BMA, to name a couple of routes local to Heart Aerospace.
The economics will be terrible on such a small capacity, expensive, inflexible aircraft.
@muzero2642 why's it inflexible? And why expensive if you don't have to buy fuel? What does size matter if it's only replacing small planes that do short distances? Genuinely asking, would like to learn
@@muzero2642 Electricity from hydro in the Nordic countries is almost free, much cheaper than jet fuel. The reduction in pollution, and CO₂ emissions, is also very welcome. And, if they can dispense with the jet engines, a vastly reduced maintenance cost.
@@muzero2642 That is completely false.
@@muzero2642 Way to show everyone you know nothing about economics
Best concept I've seen in a long while! Thanks Gab!
Thanks for the update. I saw here at the SAS Conscious Travelers event at Säve beginning of August this summer. A lot more has happened since I was there.
A fascinating view behind the scenes in a new branch of aviation manufacture. Thank you.
I figured they’d start development with all the cutting-edge tech, instead, they’ve put together a mockup mostly from standard parts, complete with passenger seats, while the real innovation is just promises. Makes me wonder if this will really take off.
It's not a prototype but rather a demonstrator (a mockup as you say), basically just a platform for various technical tests related to electric propulsion.
@@ThunderboltDragonI was wondering about that, because the structure and other things don't look suitable for flight. Thanks - another difference in US English.
@@ThunderboltDragon That’s my point-it doesn’t really look like a platform for technical testing; it seems more like something set up to impress potential investors over a glass of champagne.
Excuse me? I did the CAM/CNC for over 200 unique parts in that plane.
@@LionelAkram And how many parts does a plane have?
So cool, when I was a kid I dreamed of manufacturing a hybrid aircraft just like that, unfortunately the aircraft manufacturer made it first just as before I could in the future.
Still cool tho
You really dreamed precisely of making this?
@ChrisCokeRobinson there's still more, kind of something wild. The only thing I remember is a custom agricultural plane
@@CasuallyYobudwilson I wouldn’t say it’s too late. There’s always something new to be built. Airbus didn’t come up with the jet airliner, did they?
For some reason this Hybrid system makes so much sense when it comes to next gen aircraft design. Especially for these STOL remote airports. And since there is no good replacements for the Dash 8-100 and 200 series or Dash 7. Only competitor would be Dornier with their 328Eco which is coming up but isnt a Hybrid though.
Exciting to watch! Looking forward to seeing the test flight! 😍
I'll be piloting the ES-30 next week! In MSFS 2024, that is.
Me too
Great overview
This design has great potential. Pure electric motors with av gas backup generator make practical sense. Ditch the IC engines in the wings completely.
If it’s going too be all electrical I would add a apu
Electrical actuators is a huge leap!
How good to see the DHC7 make a comeback with a 21st century makeover!
😃
Why am I not surprised to see @Flyairtindi here in the comments 😅
The Dash 7 was a 4 engine 50 seat STOL aircraft that never broke even due to its' niche concept.
Amazingly Brilliant! Thank you for sharing this video. I need 50 of these electric- hybrid propulsion aircraft in my place now! Greetings from Madang, Papua New Guinea!
Pls show the plane most of the time!
I think it’s a winning 🥇 idea and concept. I especially like the hybrid approach rather than a full EV. That will enable Heart to sell the aircraft to airlines that may not yet have the electrical infrastructure needed in their airport to support it.
I see they also said that this demonstrator unit has allowed them to work through some design issues and the final model will be extended. It sounds to me like they have a way to go, and they know it. I wish Heart ❤️ good luck for their first flight next year. Then it won’t be long until full certification after that hopefully 🙏. I hope they have their assembly line plant underway.
As for disability access and support. I know some airports here in New Zealand have constructed ramps that allow wheelchair passengers the ability to board turboprop aircraft (ATR 72 and Dash 8) unaided or with assistance upon request.
Cool project! I have so many questions like: Will the gas turbine engines also generate electricity & will those props be used as drag to slow down the plane, say on landing with regenerative power going to the batteries? Will the gas propellers fold away or just be feathered? Why not have racks of batteries to slide in & out at airports when needed.
I know I don't need answers/replies, its just some excited thoughts...
The Turboprops won't generate electricity for the batteries.
Electric awesome wonder performance
I don't know why it should be a problem with PRM. The front door looks CRJ. Assistance lifts should be able to get close and use a mobile ramp to load the passenger with wheelchair. At least from what I can see.
Regarding the 4 tons battery in the aft compartment the dispatcher better not mess up CG and load calculations for cargo because this thing is a tilt machine !
Looks promising. I wish them success 👍🏻 Thanks for sharing FR24 ✈
Why not swappable batteries and limit the risk of burning down the aircraft while charging. Plus you can take off in less than hour like regular refueling and passengers boarding
Battery weight is 4 tons? Hopefully batteries will evolve to become lighter and more efficient by the time this aircraft is ready.
Please forgive me but I'm just an old carpet installer. Who LOVES plans. Electric is awesome and the way of the future and your hybrid rocks. But I'm querys. Has any body thought to put some type of battery protection for the people. Love your plane
Parachutes
Great work
can the turbo props generate power for the electric system like a range extender in a hybrid - or have an APU inboard to generate additional power when required. A few hundred kilos of APU & fuel might work in conjunction with the "4 tonnes of batteries"
I think the turbine engines charge the battery system while flying then switch over during flight the soup option is also good too
Solar Panel - Full Body Energy Production - Exterior n Interior is Possible - A FEG !
Nice looking airplane! I wonder how its performance compare to competitor’s
Sweden again showing itself as Europe’s main advance post for advanced industrial incremental innovation.
are they looking into self-regeneration of electric in-flight?
Adds weight and complexity. Its a turboprop with a small amount of electric, so its complex enough. The 'perfect' electric plane was their original 19 seater , this is the 3rd iteration but still will cost more to run than a 30 seater TP
the best plane for island hopping at the azores
have a lot of questions about the X1 in the Video it says that it has two turboprop engines i can not see any airintake and outlets all four nacelles ar equal on the video . Another question about the cockpit i coludn`t see any standby instruments . And i take one more question in this comment the main door should the have more fittings if the cabin are pressurized
Wish you'd pointed at the aircraft instead of the guy pointing at it.
So ... Was it an everything bagel?😅. Nice plane. Get to experience it in flight simulator 24
I'm curious about the performance differences between electrical engines and fossil fuel-powered ones in engine-out scenarios. I'm also curious about how they plan to handle battery replacement or maintenance.
They only work intheis configuration which is electric adjacent by much higher running costs. batterys only last 2000 cycles. So 5 charges per day thats 400 days
@@ztevkonrad6329 damn that's too low
Wonder what would be the range if they scrapped fuel instalation and engines
Guy points at screen…camera doesn’t move to show screen 🤦🏻♂️
Is this a clean sheet design? Are they developing a new airframe, a new fbw system and a new hybrid propulsion system all at the same time? Any one of those is a huge challenge. Oh and EVS, HUD, Steep and every other bell and whistle.... hmmmm. I hope there is some very deep pockets with a great deal of patience.
looks like it. they won´t be developing everything from scratch though, for example the avionics. also they have a partnership with BAE. I think those folks know what they´re doing and this demonstrator looks very promising
@@kidneybone1534 I guess you've never worked in aircraft development. Avionics is the least of their challenges. A new airframe with a new FBW alone takes years and billions with an off the shelf engine. They want to develop a new propulsion system, and a HUD and steep capability and and and... they have a decade of work ahead of them in which they will be hemorrhaging money. The $175 million they've raise won't last a year.
Current newer airplanees have became much more efficient. Engine technologies have evolved over the years. Carrying battery is carrying additional weights. Experiments should not be stopped.
now we need a plane to go invincible. i guess my only issue with this is knowing which is safer to use and how expensive or cheap it is to get on it to travel.
That looks like a Do328. Have they an agreement with Dornier?
I was thinking that they wouldn't want the cost of developing an air-frame. Electrifying an existing air-frame would be massively cheaper. Optimising for maximum range, and certification, will be the main challenges. Battery, motor and electrical power control system technologies are well understood and mature.
@@AnthonyCartmell Mature ? Why are they changing their configuration every 2 years - this is the 3rd iteration- and then saying its only years away from flight. Each time the electric use per flight has gone down
They will run out of money guaranteed
Originally the Fuselage and some systems were going to be based on the Saab 340 - the prototype was even going to use an old Saab 340 fuse. It still looks like the fuselage structure will be licensed from Saab somehow.
@@plhought No.
it has nothing to do with the dornier, except general layout like high wing, t-tail and 3 abreast cabin. if you look closely, i hey don´t even closely look alike. as the host said it is a clean sheet design, so a completely new design.
I like where this is going...giggidy
Hmmmm I hope they polish up that cabin a little those overhead bins look a little small.
it´s a 30-seater regional plane, there´s not much space to begin with. for big bags or suitcases there´s the aft cargo compartment so the space in the cabin should be more than enough
Yeah but it needs to be able to take the 7 kg stock standard trolley bag in the cabin somehow. No one likes checking in the one standard cabin bag your legally allowed to take in the cabin. The aircraft needs to be able to keep up with modern day cabin standards bottomline as modern day airline competition is hard work.@@kidneybone1534
Hybrid vehicle sales are increasing more rapidly than EV sales, so this hybrid approach make sense for the near term.
Hybrid is the way to go when it comes to the carbon footprint of full EV's. Hybrids tend to pay for themselves much faster.
@@simiot1 Hybrid cars are terrible, way more parts that need servicing. In Norway pretty much all new cars sold are electric now.
Hybrid planes does make sense, for now at least.
🔝🔝🔝
👍
The hybrid only needs 2 propeller engines not 4 to be more efficient. Don't you think?😮
Agreed, make each engine have a gas turbine and electric motor in one nacelles
Yes 2 engines hybrid and apu would be better
I was thinking about this, but I believe they're on the right track in simplicity and weight reduction with a modular concept.
From what I'm seeing, they could be isolating the fuel and turbines to the outboard wing sections, no need to run large gauge electric wires, fuel lines (systems), hydraulic lines and of course the heafty bleed systems throughout the entire aircraft. This aircraft, at its heart, is all electric. Keeping the HV cable runs minimal to the onboard sections while completely isolating the hybrid components to the outboard sections as stand alone backup propulsion.
Unless we use fission, we only trade mobile for stationary polluters...
BS
@beyondfossil Want to elaborate genius?
is that just straight up an airbus sidestick and tiller lol
It looks a lot like a Dornier 328. I was part of the initial Sales/Marketing team for both the SF-340 and Dornier 328. There is not much actual data or numbers I could find on this aircraft. The usual issue with electric aircraft is the weight of the batteries. A new 9 seat electric aircraft that has about 8,000lb of batteries would need 40,000lb to compete with an all turbine machine payload/range. It amazes me that people think it is zero emissions since for every 1,000 lb of a lithium battery requires moving and refining 500,000 lb of ore which requires a great deal of fossil fuel. The anti-ice/deice will require power. What is the procedure for critical the engine on take-off? Will this be the same battery in the exploding EV's, (certification)? I wish them well but the only way I think it would work is if the European Governments legislates Hybrid aircraft by a certain date. We see how well that is working in Europe.
They are electric motors, not engines - engines burn a fuel, motors do not.
"a device that changes electricity or fuel into movement and makes a machine work" - cambridge dictionary
When I use the google search engine, how much fuel does it burn?
Hot Plane
If you really want to make this to help the world, make the batteries exchangeable and uniform by default. It's faster I think?
there are people who want to make money - and some actually develop future planes - for example stol electra
I wonder why the choice of putting the standard, jet-fuel engines on the outboard position. Conceivably, fuel-burning engines are not as reliable as electric motors, so the more probable chance of a fueled engine failure event would be less critical if the failed engine was on a more inboard position.
Surely they thought of this and I'm missing something.
Weight perhaps, of the motor/ gearbox and power cabling to them being heavier than fuel tubing control system wiring. Or aerodynamics adverse yaw.
Maybe to keep high energy engine components that could enter the cabin and breach batteries / critical systems as far away from them as possible? Those inner core turbine blades carry a great deal of energy, things get really mess when they let go.
@@planespeaking Weight of the engines would be greater.
In emergency even ATC can fly electric plane.
seems overly complicated for not a lot of benefits.
If they used electronics directly into the engine, they could achieve the efficiency gains necessary and at a much lower cost with less maintenance required.
Instead of using a heavy inefficient battery system that functions as a added failure point.
and where exactly would that power come from if not from the batteries?
@ Combustion, fossil fuel engines produce heat, electricity and mechanical movement in various stages of the process to ignition and movement such of the shaft or gears.
There’s already widely used and well understood ways of using the movement of gears to produce electricity through electrical converter either in between the engine and gear box or as a unit that functions as a gear box and converter of the mechanical force into electricity by the rotary motion.
Well used principle in turbo fan engines for the continuous combustion process in the core of the engine.
Also well used in the maritime industry by use of parallel hybrid systems for diesel engines.
Also there’s new turbo fan engine research and prototyping of where the core instead of using combustion uses electric gear boxes what get their power from the combustion process of the aircraft APU and uses that to start the engines.
Once these eletric geared turbo fan engines start running they heat with the friction of air going through the core to drive a internal turbine that accelerates the fan movement and functions the same way as a common start up process for a any other turbo fan.
Much less fuel used while taxing or idle and the efficiency gains of having electricity for gears means that more fuel is conserved.
It’s a easy way to lower emissions, cost, maintenance and overall weight by only requiring batteries for auxiliary systems or additional direct instantaneous boost to the gears in the core.
Right now batteries are simply not good enough for weight restricted applications and hydrogen carries the same problems as batteries in weight and size while not being widely available enough or cheap enough.
that’s without considering that hydrogen comes from mostly fossil fuels and green hydrogen infrastructure and supply chain has had little development in the last 15 years since it became a serious topic of discussion.
It would be great to have all electric aircrafts by now but battery technologies so far have not developed enough to gain a meaningful development for industrial applications in large scale and hydrogen is practically a joke by how little has been done for R&D and industrial planning of green hydrogen.
@ The best thing to do this decade is to reduce the inefficiencies of current technologies without a penalty in cost or operational complexity and invest heavily on further development of key technologies for the climate change transition in industrial development.
@@CharlieZenenour which is exactly what Heart Aerospace is doing.
@ The problem with that is that new efficient turbo fan engines weight anywhere from 2 to 6 tons each.
even the smallest engine for turbo prop doesn’t weight less than 1 ton, with the added complication of less power and higher noise of operation.
The batteries require extra structural reinforcement (more weight and less space) and additional space for the batteries that are also fire risk for the people in the cabin since it’s often sharing the same space inside the fuselage as passengers.
The added efficiency of having the batteries does not out perform the added cost in expensive batteries, less space for passengers, added maintenance for the batteries that last less than the engines themselves.
Simply not good enough or practical enough for all the people who have to take care of operations in the airports and the owners who need to spent even more time taking care of structural stress from battery weight and increasing degradation making the aircraft less and less efficient.
Simply modernising engines to take advantage of new material science and electronic hardware is far more practical, efficient and safer than just adding batteries for the sake of it.
Batteries are great, now the technology has evolved enough that batteries can easily and safely be used as generators for when that extra electricity is used but batteries are not good enough currently to be used as a primary source of continuous energy in high energy demand capacities.
Batteries work great in cars or keeping the lights on in a storm but they do at a relative low voltage.
High voltage, energy intensive applications such as moving a turbo fan, propeller or 1 ton shafts are simply too much for batteries that are not made to the size of a house.
small batteries are not good enough for high continuous voltages and big batteries that are good enough for high continuous voltages aren’t suitable for weight and size constricted applications (specially not when paired with other already sizeable and weighty mechanical systems)
It's very cool they are making their own but why not a single piece carbon fiber fuselage construction with no frames or stringers, just a shell. And make it teardrop instead of straight cylinder body for aerodynamics and rigidity as just a shell. Low wing for short simple landing gear, no massive belly or wing fairing like they have here because they just copied an ATR42.
It should be plenty possible to have 400km battery range, they really should emphasize pure battery operation and if they must they can have a small turbine generator as range extender. The end of the aircraft might be an obvious place for it. Just enough power for cruise flight or even a tiny bit below cruise power. Just a 2mm carbon fiber shell can hold 10 bar pressure and weigh around 600kg. Without frames etc you don't waste a lot of cross section so it can be thinner for the same cabin size. Lighter more aerodynamic really matters for efficiency. Optimization is king. You could even skip windows and use digital windows. As a battery plane a big part of its mass should be battery. Not a conventional old heavy plane with a touch of batteries. I wouldn't be surprised if 1000km range was possible with today's batteries. Optimization is really really important for all aspects.
Why not use composite it will reduce the weight
The entire fuselage is composite.
It looks like an RJ145, but there is no lav at the back of the cabin.
So it's a jet plane with some electric motors on it? I was surprised when I heard "jet fuel", was expecting an all-electric motor plane with a diesel (more go per kg) generator for backup energy.
Isn’t that an ATR body?
An ATR with a Dash-8 nose !
No it’s a smaller fuselage ATR is 2-2 on each side
It would have been nice with English subtitles.
Click on the subtitle icon on the screen.
I was watching on my Apple TV, and the subtitle option was not available. Sometimes contact providers create a special subtitle stream that can be played along the content French people speaking English is difficult even for UA-cam automatic subtitling!
Electric planes, even hybrids, are absolutely pointless - the additional weight of the batteries alone will severely interfere with the planes performance. That's not even considering the added drag from the additional traditional outboard engines. Then consider how unstable lithium ion batteries are.
NOT GREEN AVIATION... but GREENER Aviation.
Something that is "GREEN", has NO carbon footprint... this aircraft will still have a huge carbon footprint.
How to fly without wings
AntiGravity Air Taxi
Work base on Gravity just spinning by using Battery
can fly in bad weather, plunge in the ocean even in outer space
Can lift more than 100 Ton
Do batteries get lighter once they're empty???...
No.
NEXT!!!...
Do they get heavier when full?
@@mrbushpilot You have to leave 20% charge at end of each flight . At 5 cycles of recharge per day they will last 400 days, less if you use that reserve .
The heaviness is a major problem because the same energy from fuel is much much lighter.
Because of aerodynamic theory , extra weight increases drag from lift.
Vaporware
BS.. this is just to collect more “grant” money..
Wow could this be any more rough, generic components everywhere and not even the engine solution ready. Seems like your typical e-startup venture designed to take lots of other people’s money
They have got further than Boom though.
Where is all the electricity going to come from!?
I am sure there won't be any meaningful electric airplane market in the coming 50, 60 years
The pilots will want full tanks, forget the damn batteries.
What is with this mugshot style of filming? I needed to push my chair back from the screen...
Not much more than mockups. Won't fly within a year.
So disappointed of this video... little French student engineer explaining futile details of Aviation.
This thing is gonna plummet like a lead balloon
... complete bullshit - sorry ... as bullshity as battery trucks, or batterie cargo ships ...
It's a hybrid, and a mockup.
Considering the Tesla truck is way better than other trucks, your point is stupid
@@user-js5gy1kj1l No, it's a demonstrator.
The hybrid system must be: the power supply will be powered by turbine and the propulsion system is powered by electric..
It's like a microwave oven or an air fryer. Great at doing one particular job but cannot compete with the 'one size fits all' gas oven which people who can only afford one appliance will buy. It has taken decades to design the most efficient way of moving hundreds of people thousands of miles - by using fossil fuels. Even with modern technology it is going to prove impossible to replace such proven technologies in just a few short years. The physics of energy density mean that batteries will never be as efficient as fossil fuels. We don't know what future discoveries and inventions will bring but for now these aircraft are a poor compromise over what is possible. Only politics and climate alarmism are providing the incentive to make these craft: both of which are surrounded by much skepticism..
Well said, I read these glowing comments and wonder where someone who understands this is a huge scam is.
Wasted grant money.
Shit joy stick again ...
Again no safety 🛟🦺😂
This happens when a TecnoBro discovered the Dash7
This won't be ready for 10 years, and probably will not work, but nice try. (satire)
The same thing was said to wright brothers
@derrickamudavi9640 look what became of them. (Satire)
Ski jumper fly as far without wing's (satire)
My biggest question is Why? No chance in you-know-where that MOST people will ever climb aboard one of these. We cant even keep the like of Tesla's, Lightnings, Volts and Leafs from catching fire. At least those passengers and drivers can bail before things get too hot. Not in an airplane....
How many will catch fire? Lithium ion battery fires are a warning to consumers that have become the elephant in the room.
Because no fossil fuel powered plane has ever exploded in a ball of flame?
Have you checked the number of fires on cars and planes with regular fuel?
@@planespeaking Good answer to a good question however we do not know what suppression systems are onboard. I detect a political bent to Joy's comment. That gets us nowhere. History shows we can never predict beforehand technologies that will win out.
Maybe a stupid idea ... what about having an external wind turbine fitted to the rear of the aircraft that would recharge the batteries when the plane is flying using fuel only ?
Lol! Why not just use a perpetual motion machine?
I think Newton would have something to say
It’s not truly “green” if you’re charging batteries with coal plants, nuclear or natural gas. Also, batteries weigh a lot more than fuel so you’re reducing the max payload.
How is nuclear not green? Its not omitting one single gram of CO2
Electric motors are way more efficient than ice or jet turbines. Also what if you're charging using wind or solar?
Theres always this guy/girl ^
Dont be like this.
Different problems for different people to solve. These are trying to improve the airplane side of things. Others are trying to increase clean(er) energy sources.
The Swedish grid can handle that;)
I am a person with a disability
Stupid idea.....No need for this joke of an airplane
The old Luddites never really go away. The wold's premier underachievers!!
Stupid idea? Please explain how you’ve moved humans forward? I’ll get my popcorn Elon 👍🏻
Very insightful comment. I learned a lot from you Dave. Thank you for sharing your expertise.
That is just an opinion, please leave this project to the Professional's
so not fully electric, HYBRID
The boogey man co2 delusion is getting out of hand, seems plants do not use it anymore.
The only delusional thing around here is you.
You must have done lots of research. Care to mention your credentials and studies?
If you produce more than what's being consumed, then you'll have more of it. You really have to try very hard to not understand something so simple.
@😂ca09z
....and the Earth is flat.