http://spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=48920

It looks like testing on electric aircraft is ramping up. I know that batteries are a restriction to utility right now, but I wonder what prevents a hybrid with a fuel powered generator, small battery, and many electric motors like this. I'm also curious how much takeoff performance is improved with the induced lift.

Confusing to me is they call it a hybrid but say it will only be battery powered.

Looks like it runs on diesel. :-)

Those small props are going to have to really whine to get any thrust. In the video, they said "it sounds like angry bees".

Mike C.

The article said the 14 wing motors would only be used for takeoff and that the two larger ones at either end would be the only ones used in cruise. I assumed that meant the 14 would be feathered in cruise, but seeing how small those props are I wonder.

The cool thing is that you can do torque vectoring with this wing. You can aid the wing in slow flight by having some props produce an airflow over ailerons, or they can prevent and inboard stall or help with directional stability, or her get out of a spin etc. The military had lots of fighters that had blown air leading edges to increase slow flight capability. This design could do something similar and will probably have fantastic slow flight capabilities. In fact, my guess is, you can make this wing not stall at all.

But no, electric aircraft will never fly, there is no future in electric propulsion and tractor engines with tractor magnetos is the way forward...

and it's a little squarish, but maybe lopresti will come out with some mods to clean it up

I have no knowledge of what they are doing, but my first thought is to run the other motors in cruise at an rpm that results in zero thrust with the little fixed-pitch props. Drag and motor amps would be minimal in that scenario

Not in your lifetime. Physics just isn't there. Sorry.

The best we might get 20-30 years from now is hybrid systems, turbine driving generator that drive a multitude of traction motors. The generator, wiring, controllers, and motors are all added weight over a direct drive system, so the benefits of multi motor configurations has to be compelling.


Your plane has a tractor engines and magnetos? What for?

Mine doesn't. :-)

Mike C.

It's not. I know, this is very counter intuitive.

On my airplane, it takes 14-18% power (~115 HP) to make my prop have zero thrust. This is used for simulated engine out practice.

The reason is blade twist means you can't have zero AOA over the entire blade span. Some parts will be forward thrust, some will be backward thrust, and those two parts cancel at simulated zero thrust power settings.

Mike C.

NIL: HUGE difference between what CAN be done with a "NASA" sized budget versus an commercially feasible solution for a small consumer market like GA.

Fuel Cell powered GA in near future ? ABSOLUTELY, but only in POC form, we're decades away from any economically feasible solutions.

Am I the only one wondering why a government agency is developing a private aircraft? I mean, I do realize the government is awash in our money. I especially like that they bought a new plane and plan to replace the wings and engine. Really?

Reminds me of a headline I saw in The Onion just this morning:

"NASA announces bold plan to still exist in 2045"