Commercially Viable Electric Aircraft

Not yet.
But they're creeping up on it.
Still gonna be interested to see what exemptions the FAA puts in Part 23 for these things. They've got Rule 65, already, but that's nowhere near enough as yet, IMO.
Still a lot of contenders jockeying for position (and investors!) in this arena.
 
I guess it’s all in the definition. I’m more of a fixed wing kinda guy as I like the idea of not being totally dependent on motors to stay in the air. There have been a couple of electric ultra lights that have really piqued my interest. But they are not what I’d call hobby priced :)

Right now reminds me of the early 80’s when ultra lights exploded on to the scene with literally hundreds of designs. Only to have the really stupid designs and people take down the whole industry. Its interesting to see some of my favorite designs like the Lazair make a comeback with electric. The power plants were part of the problem with ultra lights and electric might be a solution. Electric has really made an impact on R/C aircraft.
 
ultra lights that have really piqued my interest
The problem with ultra light machines is they fall like a rock. IMHO
I know two guys that are no longer with us due to the engines quitting on their ultra lights.
Sad really.
 
The problem with ultra light machines is they fall like a rock. IMHO
I know two guys that are no longer with us due to the engines quitting on their ultra lights.
Sad really.
I've had two "unscheduled landings" in ultralights.
Still getting older.
Lots of designs.
Lots of different pilots.
Lots of situations.
 
I've had two "unscheduled landings" in ultralights.
Please forgive me as I know not of what I speak.
Do they drop like a rock or can you drift down like a kite?
 
I guess it’s all in the definition.
It is exactly that, you're right.
"Commerical" means one thing to the average reader (or investor) and specific thing to the FAA.
"Airworthy", likewise. All these airplane words mean something very particular to the FAA and the tend to get smeared by journalists and Publicity releases, alike.
 
Please forgive me as I know not of what I speak.
Do they drop like a rock or can you drift down like a kite?
Everything that flies can "glide in". Doesn't mean you can survive the spot you land (rocks, stumps, water, powerlines, etc) but the aircraft will glide to get you there. Ultralight, 747, fighter, they all have a 'glide'. Even a helicopter can glide in its own pathetic way. Some are very steep, maybe what people would say like a rock. Most fighter planes are really bad at gliding. But they have ALL been tested for exactly that. It can and has been done.
If there's a structural failure, then all bets are off.
Say, a paraglider. If the canopy collapses, it's a rock (with a streamer).
Fixed wing - overload a spar and kink the wing, it tumbles in. No lift all the way down.
But if the only problem is an engine failure, everything will glide - just never to the spot you'd like them to glide.
Sadly, one of the biggest problems in an engine-out condition is the pilot trying to "extend the glide". This is a natural and universal human reaction and is very, very difficult to overcome in a clutch. This results in a stall.
Stall means there's not enough lift. Sometimes one wing (spin) and sometimes both. Back to being a rock. Stall recovery is strenuously taught, but the catch is you gotta have enough altitude to recover. This is why takeoff and especially landing stalls are nearly always injurious or fatal.
I'm not saying you know not of what you speak. I'm just saying there's a lot of factors in a lot of situations.
 
Everything that flies can "glide in". Doesn't mean you can survive the spot you land (rocks, stumps, water, powerlines, etc) but the aircraft will glide to get you there. Ultralight, 747, fighter, they all have a 'glide'. Even a helicopter can glide in its own pathetic way. Some are very steep, maybe what people would say like a rock. Most fighter planes are really bad at gliding. But they have ALL been tested for exactly that. It can and has been done.
If there's a structural failure, then all bets are off.
Say, a paraglider. If the canopy collapses, it's a rock (with a streamer).
Fixed wing - overload a spar and kink the wing, it tumbles in. No lift all the way down.
But if the only problem is an engine failure, everything will glide - just never to the spot you'd like them to glide.
Sadly, one of the biggest problems in an engine-out condition is the pilot trying to "extend the glide". This is a natural and universal human reaction and is very, very difficult to overcome in a clutch. This results in a stall.
Stall means there's not enough lift. Sometimes one wing (spin) and sometimes both. Back to being a rock. Stall recovery is strenuously taught, but the catch is you gotta have enough altitude to recover. This is why takeoff and especially landing stalls are nearly always injurious or fatal.
I'm not saying you know not of what you speak. I'm just saying there's a lot of factors in a lot of situations.
Man Wrat you EXACTLY nailed it. All the ultra lights that I got reliable feedback on that “dropped like a rock” augered in because of structural failure. Like Wrat said, if you lost the engine but not your head, you had glide time. And depending on the ultra light almost the sink rate of a full on glider.

Having gone through school to be an A&P I had an appreciation of structure and was never going to get my tender butt in one that was all wire and spit. That’s why I liked the Lazair. No guy wires, no spit. And especially no silly bending of surfaces in lieu of actual control surfaces. And full three axis control. And two engines, albeit small ones but it could maintain level flight with just one. And it was designed as a slope soarer. You could shut off the engines and restart, if you were that nuts. Had pull chords in the cockpit.
 
Back
Top