Slashdot Mirror
Boeing Readying Fuel-Cell Aircraft For Tests
Makarand writes "An experimental one-person aircraft built by Boeing and
powered by fuel cells could be ready for trials
in Dec 2003. Once in the air the aircraft will be
propelled by two 25-kilowatt fuel cells and will
still rely on batteries to accelerate before taking off.
If the propulsion system fails for any reason the
aircraft will be capable of gently gliding back to earth.
Boeing also has plans to replace re-chargeable batteries
used on larger airplanes by fuel cells to cut down on pollution."
"Fuel cells are inherently cleaner and quieter than auxiliary power units, have fewer moving parts, and can generate more than twice as much electricity."
This quote makes clear that they are most interested in replacing the APUs that move the hydraulics on the plane wings with something more efficient. They are also trying to demonstrate that fuel cell can power a modified glider, but this is about ultralight plane with anciliary propeller, i.e. extremely weak engine.
Power cells will be always more difficult to operate and heavier than jet engines. No matter what the fuel (not hydrogen, to be sure), I would like to see a fuel cell that can slurp several galons per second of a fuel to provide the necessary lift for a Jumbo.
I doubt that we will ever figure out - and I suspect that even if we did figure out we couldn't do much about it
Remember it's not the descent that kills you, it's the landing.
No it's the sudden stop.
The safer you are the longer it takes to come down. Which means you are not really safe on the ground for a longer time.
So I propose we install rocket boosters in parachutes that bring people down quickly to the a certain point then divert that energy to the horizontal plane reducing the vertical velocity vector to zero. At that height we let the parachute go and people can quickly get to the ground safely. Just watch out for that tree.
The message on the other side of this sig is false.
I'm dumbfounded.... But it's essentially a modified glider, so it could glide back to the ground if the propulsion fails.
That does not make me feel safe, this makes me feel safe. Almost every piston aircraft glides to the ground on such an event - some better than others. Most folks spend tons of time practicing for engine events. Seriously... I'm way to many years into restoring a '58 Stitts and have put more love into that o200 continental engine with the express purpose of NEVER having to land because of engine failures.
Yup, this one is for the marketing department. They might fly it to Oshkosh once, and then trailer it back for a roadshow/museem. Not something I would commute between Minneapolis and Chicago with... or leave the pattern... even it was environmentally friendly.
+++ UGUCAUCGUAUUUCU
You know, if that love you're putting into your engine is just about staying alive, then it's really just self-love.
That, and your complaint is about the glider, not the fuel cell technology. The same could be said for many gliders. Plus, if you calculate for it, you could increase your range by a few miles if you plan to use all of your juice before you hit your target. Or they could equip instruction gliders with these systems, just for emergencies. Then again, the USAFA doesn't have too many glider accidents, and they fly gliders constantly.
On the contrary, the sustained altitude record is already held by a craft which has recently been fitted with a fuel-cell based energy storage system in preparation for this Summer's overhight 50,000 ft. flight.
If I were a betting man, my money would be on wind power and fuel cell storage systems.
Quote:"A US company, Lynntech, has already built fuel cells for uncrewed, long duration surveillance aircraft. But Lynntech's Craig Andrews says it is not feasible to propel anything larger than a light aircraft using current fuel cell technology."
Why are aircraft manufacturers worrying about this? Arn't they in the middle of a...you know, money crunch? The different types of jets that have come along are incredibly fuel efficient--changing aircraft to fuel cells seems more like a ploy to shut up the environmentalists. Like the quote says, this isn't feasible for anything larger than a glider.
I'll be happy to drive a fuel-cell car, but a fuel cell plane seems to be just an old type plane with a propeller and the two stroke engine replaced with an electric motor. No thank you.
Please tell me you're not installing a cirrus chute on a Stitts!
I've been thinking about building a Zodiac and putting a chute on it, but that's a hell of a lot different from a Stitts.
(See http://www.skyshops.org/buildz7days.htm for the obvious reason why I'm considering the Zodiac. )
OK, this is limited to one or two-seater ultralights and powered paragliders. So what? Bring it on! The most annoying aspect of these, for me, is the horrible incessent noise you must suffer all through the flight. You don't even get the limited noise-reduction of an enclosed cockpit.
:-)
I've looked into the possibility of using a fuel cell to power an electrical powerglider, and the main problem was price. Fuel cells are still horribly expensive compared to glorified lawnmower engines
Perhaps if Boeing started making these in large quantities for auxilery power systems for airplanes, we'll get a chance to buy them at a more reasonable cost (maybe used ones).
Most of the noise from a propeller aircraft comes from the props.
A fuel cell would make it quieter, but not quiet
"I'll have a Guinness, no wait, make that a Coors Light" -Grad student I work with, who shall remain anonymous...
Modern piston, turbo-jet, and turbo-fan engines aren't efficient compared to a fuel cell. What they have to offer is high power to weight ratio. Remember, for every weight unit of fuel they burn, they suck in as much as fifteen times that weight in air. What they're really burning is not the Jet-A or Avgas, it's air. That's a hell of a lot of weight they don't have to carry.
Now, fast forward to fuel cells. Yes, their efficiency can be quite high --but they have to carry all their propellant, not just 1/15 of it. Unless someone figures out how to engineer some kind of fuel cell which uses air as a reactant, I just don't see how such a thing will be practical.
Nearly fifty percent of all graduates come from the bottom half of the class!
Nope... just a good set of over sized tires and a helmet. Thought about an emergency chute for me, however.
Cool link, btw. Any idea on cost?
+++ UGUCAUCGUAUUUCU
Does this mean that my next car could be a Boeing?
:-0 Oh know I did it again... oh shit here comes the boss! BYE!
Don't laugh... if these cells can power an aircraft surely they could power a commuter car that holds four.
Does this aircraft have internet access? Sorry I couldn't resist...even thought its futile!