Back to News
Advertisement
Advertisement

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion Sentiment

75% Positive

Analyzed from 709 words in the discussion.

Trending Topics

#power#engine#hybrid#electric#fuel#car#gas#efficient#cruise#motor

Discussion (20 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

avidiax•about 1 hour ago
I think there are startups making a similar sort of engine for general aviation. It's good to see that there is development of the same idea for commercial aviation.

This isn't like a hybrid car. It's a parallel hybrid, where the gas engine is just big enough for efficient cruise at altitude, and the electric motor/generator provides extra power for takeoff and ascent (or go-around power), and then charges slowly during cruise if needed.

This means that the battery is quite small and light, having only enough charge to take off and get to altitude.

I suspect that this system probably improves safety as well, if architected properly. If one or both of the gas engines fail, so long as they are not seized, that electric motor can still provide some power for diversion.

SoftTalker•about 1 hour ago
The fuel burn of take-off and climb substantially lightens the aircraft for cruise. Electric batteries have no such effect, you're carrying all that dead weight for the rest of the flight. This reduces the passenger or cargo capacity of the aircraft, which reduces potential revenue.

And what if you need two go-arounds?

arijun•21 minutes ago
> you're carrying all that dead weight for the rest of the flight

If you're recharging the batteries for extra go-arounds during landing, they are as dead weight as the fuel you would otherwise reserve for that purpose. And if you have 30% more efficient engines, meaning less fuel and smaller engines, it's possible you could come out ahead, weight-wise.

> what if you need two go-arounds

I assume that a go-around requires less sustained power output than a full climb from takeoff, so you will probably get more than one go-around anyway, and we don't know how much over-capacity they're designing for. In any case, any design will require tradeoffs in safety, and having more engine-out capabilities might improve safety enough to overcome the higher risk with go-arounds.

Not saying this project is will work out or that you're even wrong necessarily (this could be the equivalent of a concept car for Pratt & Whitney).

dmitrygr•8 minutes ago
> I assume that a go-around requires less sustained power output than a full climb from takeoff,

No.

Source 1: PE = mgh

Source 2: am pilot

0cf8612b2e1e•about 1 hour ago
Energy density of liquid fuels cannot be beat by batteries, so this is not competitive if you are looking to maximize cargo. However, there are plenty of short haul flights: private jets, island hopping, regional routes where you need to move little mass.
xattt•44 minutes ago
Exactly. A hybrid passenger car can tolerate unpredictable power output that may come with an auxiliary power setup that may or may not be available when stronger dynamics are called for.

A plane doesn’t have this luxury and needs predictable output. The fossil fuel engine either needs a sacrificial “overboost” mode for emergencies (at the cost of wear/long-term longevity), or has to be sized for full power at the ultimate cost of efficiency.

Tade0•24 minutes ago
On anything but very short flights most of the fuel is spent on cruising.
hobonation•32 minutes ago
Valid.

Perhaps it's not all negative: the electric portion could give a pilot a bit more glide than the gas portion dies.

idontwantthis•14 minutes ago
Hybrid cars are mostly parallel hybrids. Only the Chevy Volt comes to mind as a serial hybrid.
kspacewalk2•36 minutes ago
>This isn't like a hybrid car. It's a parallel hybrid, where the gas engine is just big enough for efficient cruise at altitude, and the electric motor/generator provides extra power for takeoff and ascent (or go-around power), and then charges slowly during cruise if needed.

Isn't that exactly what hybrid cars (e.g. Prius) are? Extremely efficient gas engine for highway cruising, but insufficient for acceleration, which is aided by electric motors?

Tade0•26 minutes ago
The Prius uses a planetary gear set to blend power of the engine with that of the two motor-generators.

Both the engine and motors are used at all speeds. Particularly during highway acceleration the entire assembly rotates in the same direction.

dgfl•6 minutes ago
This is a great related watch if you have some time to kill: https://youtu.be/KnUFH5GX_fI
arijun•33 minutes ago
The Prius is in series, or something like it.
idontwantthis•16 minutes ago
No it’s not. The majority of power comes from the engine. It drives the electric motor mechanically, using it as a transmission. It is not just charging the battery.
Someone•about 2 hours ago
Not “30% fuel efficiency”, but an improvement of 30%.

FTA: “The project aims to demonstrate up to 30% improved fuel efficiency for a typical 250-nautical-mile regional turboprop mission”

c0n5pir4cy•about 1 hour ago
I was so confused by the title - I thought jets were fairly efficient at ~40%-50% of theoretical maximum and turbofans can't be that far behind. It would maybe make sense for a single prop aircraft.

30% improvement makes much more sense.

mschuster91•8 minutes ago
1300 HP electric engine power, now that's an achievement.

I do wonder if prop engines can act as "windmills" (similar to turbine engines, which often in accidents still have been found to provide a bit of hydraulic power), which means regenerative braking could be used instead of speedbrakes.

paunchy•1 minute ago
I've seen references to this capability in reporting elsewhere. It's less useful in an aircraft than a car because you can gradually descend, reducing power proportionally as you're preparing to land. But I'm guessing this is part of where the claimed 30% improvement in efficiency comes from.
soperj•about 1 hour ago
Only AI stories show up now, so they had to call it an Ai craft I guess.