Flying within your abilities.

Mike C.

I think the Cirrus training program started in 2012 that had such a large impact on the safety record basically taught this one lesson: you can get into trouble and we will show you several examples.

This bursts the invincible bubble surrounding the chute, which means, ironically enough, a program design to teach pilots to use it early actually results in pilots needing it less often. The earlier you reach your risk tolerance in a flight, the more options you have to not use the chute.

Mike C.

Gweduck was at Oshkosh, nice looking plane.

A seaplane (especially a twin) really needs a reliable start.
Hot IO520 is not reliable. They need an EFI motor...

Maybe, but maybe not. Compared to a pure electric, which we know won't cut it for range in the flight profiles we currently enjoy, hybrids are a middle ground.

https://www.avweb.com/air-shows-events/ ... wk-dhk180/

Imagine a Jet-A burning airplane with a DeltaHawk or something similar as a generator, and electric motors for motive power. It would bring a lot of extra redundancies that we don't currently have with single-engine piston airplanes, and some great operational benefits too.

Imagine being able to run the generator as an APU (as is done on larger aircraft) with the airplane powered up and the AC/Heat working while you loaded up/waited for passengers without having to have a prop turning. Would also open up higher peak power levels without sacrificing range. All good things.

Not saying it's gonna happen tomorrow, but I think we'll see viable hybrid concepts before we see pure electrics. I'm not ready to sell my airplane and start building a hybrid RV-10 in the garage, but we might start seeing that architecture in the next 10-20 yr.

I think about the WL now and again.

With modern cameras and displays, I'd add as needed to allow for aft-facing rear seaters to choose views of crew and/or fwd.

A modern reinterpretation of the the WL with some attemps to make mfg easier would sure be cool.

Maybe, but maybe not. Compared to a pure electric, which we know won't cut it for range in the flight profiles we currently enjoy, hybrids are a middle ground.

https://www.avweb.com/air-shows-events/ ... wk-dhk180/

Imagine a Jet-A burning airplane with a DeltaHawk or something similar as a generator, and electric motors for motive power. It would bring a lot of extra redundancies that we don't currently have with single-engine piston airplanes, and some great operational benefits too.

Imagine being able to run the generator as an APU (as is done on larger aircraft) with the airplane powered up and the AC/Heat working while you loaded up/waited for passengers without having to have a prop turning. Would also open up higher peak power levels without sacrificing range. All good things.

Not saying it's gonna happen tomorrow, but I think we'll see viable hybrid concepts before we see pure electrics. I'm not ready to sell my airplane and start building a hybrid RV-10 in the garage, but we might start seeing that architecture in the next 10-20 yr.

starts ~ 2:17, direct link
https://youtu.be/JVVGgswXfcQ?t=137

And how much spare for contingencies?

Humans have an amazing propensity to screw up, so while normal ops may only require 5 mins at “takeoff” power, what happens after the screwup where someone leaves the thing unplugged and they only have 30 secs of battery? Or after they’ve used their 5 mins and then need a go around? Or…?

I like the idea. But it seems to me the concept of a fundamentally underpowered engine with a very limited boost has some problems it needs to overcome.

Same thing that happens when someone takes off with 1/4 full tanks because they thought they filled it up last week: NTSB report.

I also like the idea and think we'll see it within 5 years in the experimental world. There will be plenty of DOH! accidents but some good progress toward long-term development will be made.

And how much spare for contingencies?

Humans have an amazing propensity to screw up, so while normal ops may only require 5 mins at “takeoff” power, what happens after the screwup where someone leaves the thing unplugged and they only have 30 secs of battery? Or after they’ve used their 5 mins and then need a go around? Or…?

I like the idea. But it seems to me the concept of a fundamentally underpowered engine with a very limited boost has some problems it needs to overcome.

I like the idea of a hybrid electric. But you don't need the reliability or torque of an aircraft engine for that application. you could use a much cheaper higher rpm gas or auto diesel to charge the batteries using cheaper fuel. Would be heavier and less efficient, but if built from the ground up could work. Still going to have its lunch eaten by an equivalently sized straight Avgas, diesel or turbine aircraft. Batteries and electric engines in aircraft are a solution looking for a problem.

Imagine a Jet-A burning airplane with a DeltaHawk or something similar as a generator, and electric motors for motive power. It would bring a lot of extra redundancies that we don't currently have with single-engine piston airplanes, and some great operational benefits too.

Imagine being able to run the generator as an APU (as is done on larger aircraft) with the airplane powered up and the AC/Heat working while you loaded up/waited for passengers without having to have a prop turning. Would also open up higher peak power levels without sacrificing range. All good things.

Not saying it's gonna happen tomorrow, but I think we'll see viable hybrid concepts before we see pure electrics. I'm not ready to sell my airplane and start building a hybrid RV-10 in the garage, but we might start seeing that architecture in the next 10-20 yr.[/quote]

Why are the current EVTOL makers like Archer, Volocopter, Lilium etc not doing this just as a prototype form. The unmanned prototypes could have hundreds of hours on them instead of minutes. Leading to reliable manned prototypes out flying in the system VFR/IFR. Hot/cold/humid/dusty/salt air. This type of service testing is needed in all weather conditions and to prove reliability of the control software, motors, propellers and airframe.

Then.... when/if battery tech/cost gets to the level they need the whole thing is proven with many hours fleet history. Even if the whole contraption takes up all the passenger compartment other than pilot seat just to get the airframe/power system/controls reliable and well tested.


Experimental powerplant and airframe have historically been tough. Then add in experimental control system and very unconventional configurations...

They all seem to be pushing mass transit on demand. But after seeing general publics conduct in Ubers, subways, buses. Treatment of rental cars, rental anything for that matter.

How will that play out in a lightly built airframe cabin?

Same thing that happens when someone takes off with 1/4 full tanks because they thought they filled it up last week: NTSB report.

I also like the idea and think we'll see it within 5 years in the experimental world. There will be plenty of DOH! accidents but some good progress toward long-term development will be made.

I just had flashbacks to rummaging through the kitchen junk drawer for the 2 D Cell flashlight when the lights went out. Flick the switch, and the light comes on dimly...whaddya do? You take the D's out, polish the terminals with a little spit, put 'em back in, and see if you can get enough light out of it to find the blown fuse.

It'll be just like that, but in the air.

Looks like they're finally offering it as a kit now. Would be so cool to have, but let's see what pricing will be...

https://www.kitplanes.com/gweduck-a-go/