VansAirForceForums  
Home > VansAirForceForums

-POSTING RULES
-Advertise in here!
- Today's Posts | Insert Pics

Keep VAF Going
Donate methods

Point your
camera app here
to donate fast.

  #31  
Old 01-26-2021, 11:30 AM
blaplante blaplante is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Southern California
Posts: 169
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowflake View Post
Long duration of continuous power, yes, but not maximum. Who cruises at full throttle? If you do, there's at least one other way to be more efficient in the air...
Who does? I do.

I'm out west, and clearing the mountains to go anywhere significant means I'm at 10,000'. At 8000' DA I'm at 75% power. Now, since I'm in the SW, a standard temp day is rare. On my last long XC I was up at 12,500 (trying to stay above thermals), with a DA of 16,000.

Now, if I still lived in Minn, the situation would be different....
__________________
RV6A in phase 2 as of April 2016
Donation made Oct 2020
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 01-26-2021, 11:41 AM
Mike S's Avatar
Mike S Mike S is offline
Senior Curmudgeon
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Dayton Airpark, NV A34
Posts: 15,706
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowflake View Post
Who cruises at full throttle?
Folks with a C/S prop.
__________________
Mike Starkey
VAF 909

Rv-10, N210LM.

Flying as of 12/4/2010

Phase 1 done, 2/4/2011

Sold after 240+ wonderful hours of flight.

"Flying the airplane is more important than radioing your plight to a person on the ground incapable of understanding or doing anything about it."
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 01-26-2021, 07:00 PM
airguy's Avatar
airguy airguy is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Garden City, Tx
Posts: 5,318
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowflake View Post
Long duration of continuous power, yes, but not maximum. Who cruises at full throttle? If you do, there's at least one other way to be more efficient in the air...
From takeoff threshold until top of descent, nearly every flight for me.

I didn't build a fast plane to fly it slow.

Only reason to pull it back is heavy turbulence or trying to stretch range - and I installed additional fuel tankage so I don't have to stretch range.
__________________
Greg Niehues - SEL, IFR, Repairman Cert.
Garden City, TX VAF 2021 dues paid
N16GN flying 750 hrs and counting; IO360, SDS, WWRV200, Dynon HDX, IFD440
Built an off-plan RV9A with too much fuel and too much HP. Should drop dead any minute now.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 02-09-2021, 04:15 PM
MGR1977 MGR1977 is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Location: Seattle
Posts: 30
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skysailor View Post
Electric vehicles produce carbon emissions but they do it remotely. Generating and transmitting the electricity to charge your electric vehicle is the reason. Solar and wind simply do no produce affordable power in sufficient quantities to be a viable source yet. Nuclear power generation can but with another set of issues.
Yeah, so I have to disagree with you on this one. This is simply not true. I grew up on a farm where all of our power was generated by wind. And later by solar as well. In the 70's and 80's. This was for powering anything from the lights, to the drill, to the welder etc. Of course there was a battery bank and inverter too. But the principle remains.

What you're saying is actually just some company that wants to put a spin onto something because they have some commercial reason to do so. Nowadays there are entire countries that, for some days of the year, run their entire grid off of solar or wind. Oh and solar and wind are cheaper than just about anything else out there even taking capital expenditure into account. Of course you have to have some sort of storage bank in the grid to store excess capacity (when there's too much wind) and release it again when there's too little. Goes without saying. If you have an interconnected, efficient national grid (like any modern nation should have), this is easily and economically achieved through hydro electrical storage dams.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 02-09-2021, 04:26 PM
MGR1977 MGR1977 is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Location: Seattle
Posts: 30
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Avgas View Post
There are numerous new battery technologies in the pipeline that offer higher energy density than the current generation Li-ion. But they just donít tick all the other boxes.
Maybe not with traditional batteries that we generally think about but have you heard of fuel cells...? Both hydrogen fuel and methanol fuel cells... The methanol fuels cell especially is an interesting development. Very high energy density, you fill it up like a normal gas tank, it converts the methanol straight into electricity, a little bit of CO2 emissions but nothing major, no issues with "battery life", Intrinsically safe (well at least as safe as flying around with Avgas in your tanks), and widely available. Couple this with an electric motor with only 4 moving parts, with an energy conversion efficiency of 97% vs. a Lycoming's 30% and it makes for an interesting solution. The technology hasn't been scaled yet, but watch this space.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 02-09-2021, 06:05 PM
Mike S's Avatar
Mike S Mike S is offline
Senior Curmudgeon
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Dayton Airpark, NV A34
Posts: 15,706
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MGR1977 View Post
you fill it up like a normal gas tank, it converts the methanol straight into electricity,
Isnt methanol corrosive to alum?

What capacity is there to manufacture it, what is the capacity to distribute it.

Storage issues?
__________________
Mike Starkey
VAF 909

Rv-10, N210LM.

Flying as of 12/4/2010

Phase 1 done, 2/4/2011

Sold after 240+ wonderful hours of flight.

"Flying the airplane is more important than radioing your plight to a person on the ground incapable of understanding or doing anything about it."
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 02-09-2021, 08:38 PM
David Z David Z is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Thunder Bay Ontario
Posts: 487
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MGR1977 View Post
Yeah, so I have to disagree with you on this one. This is simply not true. I grew up on a farm where all of our power was generated by wind. And later by solar as well. In the 70's and 80's. This was for powering anything from the lights, to the drill, to the welder etc. Of course there was a battery bank and inverter too. But the principle remains.

What you're saying is actually just some company that wants to put a spin onto something because they have some commercial reason to do so. Nowadays there are entire countries that, for some days of the year, run their entire grid off of solar or wind. Oh and solar and wind are cheaper than just about anything else out there even taking capital expenditure into account. Of course you have to have some sort of storage bank in the grid to store excess capacity (when there's too much wind) and release it again when there's too little. Goes without saying. If you have an interconnected, efficient national grid (like any modern nation should have), this is easily and economically achieved through hydro electrical storage dams.
A significant portion of the electricity of Canada and US Eastern seaboard comes from hydroelectric dams. A good chunk of it is nuclear too.
__________________
RV-8
Empennage Passed Pre-close Inspection
Wings mostly done
Fuselage started
83126
Dash 8 day job is financing the RV-8
Donation till September 2021
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 02-09-2021, 08:39 PM
airguy's Avatar
airguy airguy is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Garden City, Tx
Posts: 5,318
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike S View Post
Isnt methanol corrosive to alum?
The chemical methanol itself - no.

The method used to produce it, where the product is acidic, yes. That's what started the old wives tales about ethanol being corrosive to aluminum decades ago. It's not - when pure - but the old (no longer used) production methods frequently turned out an acidic product, which WAS corrosive to aluminum. Same applies here to methanol.
__________________
Greg Niehues - SEL, IFR, Repairman Cert.
Garden City, TX VAF 2021 dues paid
N16GN flying 750 hrs and counting; IO360, SDS, WWRV200, Dynon HDX, IFD440
Built an off-plan RV9A with too much fuel and too much HP. Should drop dead any minute now.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 02-09-2021, 08:54 PM
Captain Avgas Captain Avgas is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 1,921
Default Donít hold your breath.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MGR1977 View Post
Maybe not with traditional batteries that we generally think about but have you heard of fuel cells...? Both hydrogen fuel and methanol fuel cells... The methanol fuels cell especially is an interesting development. Very high energy density, you fill it up like a normal gas tank, it converts the methanol straight into electricity, a little bit of CO2 emissions but nothing major, no issues with "battery life", Intrinsically safe (well at least as safe as flying around with Avgas in your tanks), and widely available. Couple this with an electric motor with only 4 moving parts, with an energy conversion efficiency of 97% vs. a Lycoming's 30% and it makes for an interesting solution. The technology hasn't been scaled yet, but watch this space.
Fuel cells are in fact a very old technology. The first hydrogen fuel cells to be used commercially were in the 1960s during the NASA Gemini program. Methanol fuel cells date back to the 1990s. Both technologies have intrinsic limitations which have proven difficult to overcome despite huge amounts of research over a long period of time. In the year 2012 alone the US granted almost 1000 patents on fuel cell developments. Donít hold your breath waiting for the big breakthrough on fuel cells.
__________________
Youíre only as good as your last landing
Bob Barrow
RV7A
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 02-09-2021, 10:33 PM
MGR1977 MGR1977 is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Location: Seattle
Posts: 30
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Avgas View Post
Fuel cells are in fact a very old technology. The first hydrogen fuel cells to be used commercially were in the 1960s during the NASA Gemini program. Methanol fuel cells date back to the 1990s. Both technologies have intrinsic limitations which have proven difficult to overcome despite huge amounts of research over a long period of time. In the year 2012 alone the US granted almost 1000 patents on fuel cell developments. Donít hold your breath waiting for the big breakthrough on fuel cells.
Here you go - https://www.carscoops.com/2020/03/53...-costs-455000/ An electric German sports car with a range of 820kms on a full 65 liter Methanol tank. I'm not saying that this can be implemented exactly like it is into a light plane and I'm also not saying that it will happen in the next 5 years, but it does show proof of concept.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:59 PM.


The VAFForums come to you courtesy Delta Romeo, LLC. By viewing and participating in them you agree to build your plane using standardized methods and practices and to fly it safely and in accordance with the laws governing the country you are located in.