Slashdot Mirror


Solar-Powered Plane to Fly Around the World

securitas writes "The BBC's Carolyn Fry reports on the Solar Impulse project, a plan to circumnavigate the globe in a solar-powered airplane. Adventurers Brian Jones and Dr. Bertrand Piccard, who were the first people to circumnavigate the globe in a balloon in 1999, are behind the Solar Impulse project. The project is proceeding to the design stage after a feasability study determined that the solar-powered airplane concept is a viable idea. While other solar-powered planes like the Helios prototype have relied on a secondary power source (fuel cells), this project will be powered by solar energy alone. Batteries will store energy received in daylight hours to fly all night. The first prototype is scheduled for launch in 2006."

108 comments

  1. Fly around the world in that? by Leffe · · Score: 0, Offtopic
    The plane uses a new solar electric propulsion system which converts solar energy its panels into motion via the expulsion of ions.

    Solar electric propulsion is hardly new. It's been used for getting communications satellites out to their final geosynchronous orbits for a number of years now, and NASA demonstrated using solar-powered ion engines for interplanetary primary propulsion on Deep Space 1 [nasa.gov] back in '98.

    What ESA is claiming is new about this mission is that they'll be combining ion propulsion with gravity assist maneuvers. AFAIK that hasn't really been done yet (although I know some guys at JPL who're working on it), and given how difficult it can be to work out low-thrust trajectories in the first place I would imagine that successfully throwing gravity assists into the mix would be a significant acheivement.

    1. Re:Fly around the world in that? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Troll on, brother.

      Troll on for all time!

  2. Re:FP! by Leffe · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I first read about this sort of thing back in the 1970s. Proposals back then focused on constructing huge satellites (think 5 miles by 5 miles or 10 KM by 10 KM) in geosynchronous orbit. Energy would be beamed to earth via microwaves or lasers.

    Planes could be powered via laser pointed at various reception devices (photovoltaic, steam generators, etc.).

    Clouds would not be a major problem. Just pick a frequency that penetrated the clouds fairly easily. Or, in the case of airplanes, fly above the clouds.

    For lots more information, just Google "Space Solar Power" [google.com].

  3. What about... by Film11 · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Let me get this straight. Solar powered planes? How would this work in say a flight from London to America? It takes about a day in which the sun goes down. What will happen when the sun goes down? Will it crash? Will it run on reserve batteries? I'm not the world's most intelligent person, but I'm wondering how this will catch on...

    --
    ):
    1. Re:What about... by ThePlasticSurgeon · · Score: 1

      During the day it would take some of the energy received from the sun and store it in the batteries. It would then use this energy at night.

    2. Re:What about... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      And..
      is this to be a manned flight? All previous solar-powered flights were unmanned and remote-controlled, since the weight factor makes manned flight impractical, due to the small power available to a solar craft.

    3. Re:What about... by Amiga+Lover · · Score: 5, Funny

      Big spotlights on the ground shining up at the plane as it goes by!

      The spotlights will be powered by a combination of coal powered power stations in urban areas, ancient russian nuclear reactors... and furnaces powered by burning kittens.

      But the light is enviro friendly!

    4. Re:What about... by fastidious+edward · · Score: 1

      Solar powered planes zig-zag their vector, gaining altitude and some distance in daylight hours but at sundown going directly to where sunrise will be, maximum warp (hey, the guy is called Picard!) but losing altitude. Repeat, repeat until destinaion.

      --

      karma karma karma karma karma chameleon, you come and go, you come and go.
    5. Re:What about... by MillionthMonkey · · Score: 1

      I'm not the world's most intelligent person, but I'm wondering how this will catch on...

      Catch on? It doesn't need to catch on. This is not so much a product as a stunt. Think of Sir Richard Branson's balloon trip across the Atlantic.

      From TFA:
      The aim will be to deliberately use the project as a communication platform for the concept of renewable energy, and so generate public enthusiasm in favour of sustainable development.

      This is exactly the kind of thing you might do when you're rich and have more money than you know what to do with. And we poor folk occasionally get treated to the spectacle of goofy rich guys stranded in some unpleasant place waiting to be rescued, so it works out for everybody.

    6. Re:What about... by rijrunner · · Score: 4, Informative

      No reason why it wouldn't be manned.

      They state a 60 meter wingspan. That would like be about 6 meters wide, if they keep a 10-1 ratio. The ground and sea also reflect a certain percentage of solar energy. Overall, it looks to me that the would have about 360m^2 of direct sunlight potential and about the same amount of reflected sunlight.

      The solar power is about 1.3kw/m^2. That is 460KW of direct energy. If they get a 30% reflection on the underside, that is another 140KW of potential energy. About 600KW total. Figure about 15% efficiency and you get about 90KW of power. That is about 120 HP, which is the same power as the rear engine of used on Voyager on it's round the world flight. Electric engines have an advantage here in that they don't lose power with altitude, so their effective engine power at altitude would be higher than that used on Voyager.
      Voyager only required two engines for take-off and to provide a secondary engine in case of problems with the first. The weight here will be constant throughout, so they will not need a second engine for take-off. (Voyager was basically a flying fuel tank on take-off and needed 300HP to take-off on it's runway. Once airborne, it only needed 110HP. Without all the fuel on board, 110HP was enough for take-off).

      Also, solar panel efficiency improves with a slight reduction in temperature, so they might manage better solar efficiency.

      Hmm. There is a dodge I wonder if they have considered. One of the problems with that they are doing is the weight. They have a background in ballooning. I wonder if they have considered incorporating sealed helium bladders in the wings and other areas that are not going to be occupied by people. If they can lower the effective density of the aircraft, then they will effectively lower it's weight. Not sure if it is worth the effort though. The other would be use open those sections to the air, then allow the heat from the solar panels heat the inner wings also effectively lowering the density of the aircraft, but this would not be as effective.

    7. Re:What about... by mpe · · Score: 2, Informative

      No reason why it wouldn't be manned.

      Especially given that the pictures show what look like cockpit windows :)

      They state a 60 meter wingspan. That would like be about 6 meters wide, if they keep a 10-1 ratio. The ground and sea also reflect a certain percentage of solar energy. Overall, it looks to me that the would have about 360m^2 of direct sunlight potential and about the same amount of reflected sunlight.

      There is also the fuselage and the horizontal stabaliser.

      Voyager only required two engines for take-off and to provide a secondary engine in case of problems with the first. The weight here will be constant throughout, so they will not need a second engine for take-off. (Voyager was basically a flying fuel tank on take-off and needed 300HP to take-off on it's runway.

      Constant weight throughout the flight means also that the trim does not need altering to compensate for burning fuel.

    8. Re:What about... by Johnno74 · · Score: 1

      "I wonder if they have considered incorporating sealed helium bladders in the wings and other areas that are not going to be occupied by people."

      Hmm I don't think its very simple to contain helium for a long period in anything other than a thick-walled metal cylinder. Doesn't helium just "leak through" most things within a few days/weeks, due to the very small atomic size? I know this is the problem with transporting/storing hydrogen, and I'd be surprised if this isn't the case with helium. Think about a helium-filled party baloon - goes flat in a couple of days.

    9. Re:What about... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hope it gets hit by lightning and flies around in little fart circles and then lands in a sewage treatment pond... and sinks to the bottom with the rest of the turds.

  4. MOD PARENT DOWN, PLEASE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The parent is obviously pasted from the anti-slash.org database. Please mod the karma whore parent into the ground.

  5. Flying at night? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    "Batteries will store energy received in daylight hours to fly all night."

    Why not just fly the other drection and stay in the sunlight?

    1. Re:Flying at night? by MillionthMonkey · · Score: 1

      Why not just fly the other drection and stay in the sunlight?

      It's not often I get to ask this politely... what planet are you on? This one rotates too fast (1670 km/hr at the equator, 670 km/hr at the Artic/Antarctic Circles). I don't know how fast this flimsy looking plane will travel but consider the speed of sound at sea level is 1225 km/hr. You can extend daylight hours by flying in an easterly direction but you probably couldn't avoid the night entirely in this thing.

    2. Re:Flying at night? by zCyl · · Score: 4, Funny

      "Batteries will store energy received in daylight hours to fly all night."

      Why not just fly the other drection and stay in the sunlight?


      Earth's circumference: around 24,000 miles.

      Hours in a day: around 24.

      Speed of Earth's rotation at surface: around 1,000 miles per hour.

      Look on your face as the sun goes wooshing past your solar plane: priceless.

    3. Re:Flying at night? by AGMW · · Score: 1
      Why not just fly the other drection and stay in the sunlight?

      Perhaps not as silly as it first sounds ...

      Fly with the sun during the day, to maximise the sunlight hours, then turn around and fly the other way during the night, to minimise the night, and about turn at dawn again to continue. Net gain in the desired direction with maximum sunlight.

      Obviously, this increases the distance actually travelled and time taken, but if the objective is simply to fly around the world using solar powered flight, that doesn't really matter.

      --
      Eclectic beats from Leeds, UK
      handmadehands.co.uk
    4. Re:Flying at night? by Virtex · · Score: 1

      Speed of Earth's rotation at surface: around 1,000 miles per hour

      This is true at the equator, but as you get closer to the poles, the speed will reduce. At the north and south poles, there will only be rotation. Since London is quite a bit north of the equator, the speed of the Earth below will be less than 1,000 mph.

      --
      For every post, there is an equal and opposite re-post.
    5. Re:Flying at night? by jonbryce · · Score: 1

      When Concorde was around you could arrive in New York earlier than you left London.

      In any case, you could start your journey early in the morning local time, and arrive in the evening local time, which would allow you to fly slower than the earth's rotation and still stay in daylight.

    6. Re:Flying at night? by skeptikos · · Score: 1

      Why not just fly the other drection and stay in the sunlight?

      1- You cannot fly fast enough. (as many other posters said)

      2- If you are thinking about enjoying a longer day, consider that you will also suffer a longer night :)

    7. Re:Flying at night? by semi-ambivalent · · Score: 1

      "2- If you are thinking about enjoying a longer day, consider that you will also suffer a longer night :)"

      Buddy boy, we're _all_ going to suffer a longer night. :(

    8. Re:Flying at night? by mpe · · Score: 1

      This is true at the equator, but as you get closer to the poles, the speed will reduce. At the north and south poles, there will only be rotation. Since London is quite a bit north of the equator, the speed of the Earth below will be less than 1,000 mph.

      Still in excess of 600 mph...

    9. Re:Flying at night? by mpe · · Score: 1

      When Concorde was around you could arrive in New York earlier than you left London.

      This is because Concorde could cruise at twice the speed of sound. In older to do this it required 4 thirsty afterburning turbojet engines.

      In any case, you could start your journey early in the morning local time, and arrive in the evening local time, which would allow you to fly slower than the earth's rotation and still stay in daylight.

      This won't work over any distance without a plane which can fly at something close to the speed of sound. This plane does not have the right wing shape to do this.

    10. Re:Flying at night? by mpe · · Score: 1

      It's not often I get to ask this politely... what planet are you on? This one rotates too fast (1670 km/hr at the equator, 670 km/hr at the Artic/Antarctic Circles).

      So long as it's summer chasing the sun ceases to be an issue within the Artic/Antartic Circles :)

      I don't know how fast this flimsy looking plane will travel but consider the speed of sound at sea level is 1225 km/hr.

      There is no way this plane is designed to travel at anything close to the speed of sound. Even if it has a reasonable top speed it may well have poor acceleration.

    11. Re:Flying at night? by skeptikos · · Score: 1

      > Why not just fly the other drection and stay in the sunlight?
      >
      >1- You cannot fly fast enough. (as many other posters said)
      >
      >2- If you are thinking about enjoying a longer day, consider that you will also suffer a longer night :)

      Ah, when I submitted the previous message it stroke me:
      The idea is to make the night shorter. If the beast flies at only 160Kph, which is reasonable considering its size, the length of the night (going east)is about 20% shorter than duration of the night when you go west. This means you can get rid of 20% of your weight in batteries.

    12. Re:Flying at night? by bojanb · · Score: 1

      It'll be interesting to see what they mean by circumnavigating. For example, circumnavigating in the baloon doesn't mean you have to fly 40.000 km around the world, but rather travel all 360 degrees below/above a ceratin lattitude. So if you're flying at 45 degrees lat., you need to cross almost 50% less distance, and you'd still be 'going around the world'.

      In other words, if they fly during the summer and just keep at a certain lattitude, days will be much longer than nights and the feat would be easier to accomplish.

      Also, why use batteries at all when plane's potential energy can be used as a form of storage? Just climb during the day when there is sunlight and glide without power at night. No need for heavy batteries!

    13. Re:Flying at night? by rifter · · Score: 1

      "It's not often I get to ask this politely... what planet are you on? This one rotates too fast (1670 km/hr at the equator, 670 km/hr at the Artic/Antarctic Circles)."

      So long as it's summer chasing the sun ceases to be an issue within the Artic/Antartic Circles :)

      But when it is summer in the arctic it is winter in the antarctic, and vice versa....

    14. Re:Flying at night? by soft_guy · · Score: 1

      Why not just put landing gear for water on the plane and then land (in the ocean or wherever) at night?

      --
      Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
  6. Flying close to summer? by tindur · · Score: 2, Insightful

    How would it be to fly close to the pole that has summer. There the night is very short. And the distance is short.

    1. Re:Flying close to summer? by Ianoo · · Score: 1

      Well, circumnavigation around the equator should be fairly easy to calculate since they get 12 hours of daylight pretty much the whole year around.

      Obviously the team will need to compensate for when it's going to be day or night, but this won't be hard. Though I doubt the thing will fly around the globe in 24 hours - most likely it'll have rechargable batteries for the nighttime.

    2. Re:Flying close to summer? by fastidious+edward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Despite light through most of the 24 hours, the light is weak (i.e., not Saharan sun beams) so wouldn't be as much use as sunlight nearer the equator.

      --

      karma karma karma karma karma chameleon, you come and go, you come and go.
    3. Re:Flying close to summer? by rijrunner · · Score: 1

      Because to fly around the earth completely, they would then have to fly across the Pole that is in winter on the next leg.. If you just go from equator to pole and pack you.ve only done half the trip.

      (The other issue that the the sun would slowly edge downward onto the horizon and would not be hitting the panels directly reducing the amount of energy available. The formula is actually rather brutal, but the main driver is the sine of the angle of incidence times 1.3KW/m^2).

  7. MOD PARENT DOWN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The second [google.com] after the link is because it's pasted. You don't see the parent crediting where the post was pasted from, either. Mod it down. It's a karma whore. Thanks, mods.

  8. Verne/Nellie Bly/Around the World in 80 Days by dpbsmith · · Score: 3, Interesting

    You're probably thinking of journalist Nellie Bly (pseudonym of Elizabeth Jane Cochrane), who left New York on November 14, 1889 and returned on January 25, 1890, beating Phileas Fogg's fictional journey by over a week. Phileas Fogg was a character in Jules Verne's novel "Around the World in 80 Days," published in 1872.

    [now drifting irremediably OT] "Around the World in 80 Days" was a hell of a good movie, based on Verne's novel, which was released in 1956. It was filmed in Todd-AO--one of a handful of movies filmed in that process. It was spectacular and gorgeous and a lot of fun to watch. It had quite a cast, David Niven as Phileas Fogg and Cantinflas as Passepartout. Only bad part was that the theme, which was quite catchy, had become a hit tune and had been played on the radio so often that by the time I saw the film--this was in the days when movies stayed in theatres for more than a couple of weeks, and in the case of Cinerama and Todd-AO spectaculars it could have been months--everybody was thoroughly sick of the theme music.

  9. MOD THE PARENT DOWN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's a blatant karma whore, and is NOT informative.

  10. Batteries, you dummy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    The solar cells will charge batteries. The batteries will power a bank of flashlights that will keep the wings illuminated at night.

  11. HOW THE FUCK IS THE PARENT INSIGHTFUL? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's pasted from the anti-slash database, which you can tell because of the second [google.com] after the link. Also, all he did was post a couple bs and link to a Google search page.

    Mod it down.

  12. offtopic??!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    this is offtopic, how?? it's about as ontopic as it can possibly get. what are the moderators smoking?

    this system is truly a piece of shit.

    1. Re:offtopic??!! by UserGoogol · · Score: 1

      Because the plane DOESN'T use that kind of propulsion.

      --
      "Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity." -- Hanlon's Razor
  13. What's the diff? by blueberry(4*atan(1)) · · Score: 4, Insightful
    While other solar-powered planes like the Helios prototype have relied on a secondary power source (fuel cells), this project will be powered by solar energy alone. Batteries will store energy received in daylight hours to fly all night.

    Helios used fuel cells to *store* energy from the solar cells in a closed system. This new project uses *batteries* to perform the same function. Therefore, the phrase this project will be powered by solar energy alone is not correct in implying there is anything significantly different than the Helios.

    (BTW, I did some minor work on the Helios fuel cells)

    1. Re:What's the diff? by penguin7of9 · · Score: 1

      According to its official site, Helios used both regenerative and non-regenerative fuel cells. This uses only regenerative power sources (solar charged batteries).

  14. PARENT IS NOT INFORMATIVE! MOD DOWN! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's pasted out of the anti-slash database. You can tell this by the second [google.com] after the link.

    And it's NOT informative, because all the link is, is a link to a Google search page. That's not at all informative.

    1. Re:PARENT IS NOT INFORMATIVE! MOD DOWN! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      So what the fuck do you care?

      It's on topic even IF it's cut-and-pasted. You should be modded, not the parent.

      It's you groupthink enforcing assholes who should be modded down.

  15. Solar power? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When will people learn?

  16. Re:FP! by Zocalo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Don't know about the 1970's, but I sure remember reading about it at the end of November. Hmm. The story makes Slashdot on the day of the announcement, and the BBC is a month behind? Maybe it's not as bad around here as some would have us believe... ;)

    --
    UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
  17. God wants oil, gas and coal! by October_30th · · Score: 3, Funny
    When will people learn?

    Indeed.

    Everybody knows that the God wants us to burn oil, gas and coal.

    Bomb anyone who thinks to the contrary.

    --
    The owls are not what they seem
    1. Re:God wants oil, gas and coal! by MajorDick · · Score: 1

      HERE HERE !

      When was the last time your nipples got hard listening to an electric motor, now a 2000hp Supercharged hemi with open headers is something that will make your brain itch.

    2. Re:God wants oil, gas and coal! by elFarto+the+2nd · · Score: 1

      ...and where do you think oil, gas and coal get it's energy from?

      Regards
      elFarto

    3. Re:God wants oil, gas and coal! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's "Hear, hear!", you dildo.
      What are you, some kind of major dick?

  18. So WHAT ? by MajorDick · · Score: 0, Troll

    I mean really, WHY ? Just because they think they can ? What are the possible implication in a commercial market ? NONE.... Now if someone said they were going to fly around the world on NATURAL GAS, or Cow Shit, that would be cool. Seriously, a LNG plane would be cool, and there are a lot of reasons to do it, but SOLAR is NOT going to be powering any transport planes in the near future. AND its not like they are tryinh to exploit a new avenue of solar energy conversion, same old technology thats been around for 50 years. THEN again its not like there was much use in cirumnavgating the globe in a balloon.....

    1. Re:So WHAT ? by rcw-home · · Score: 5, Insightful
      I mean really, WHY ? Just because they think they can? What are the possible implication in a commercial market?

      If a manned solar-powered plane can fly around the world, then one could conclude that an unmanned solar-powered plane could reliably operate for indefinate periods of time above a city or region while carrying a substantial payload.

      We can create controllable aircraft that don't ever have to land. That's huge.

      Such a plane could function as the equivalent of a local communications satellite, with the latency benefits of not being thousands of miles away in geosync orbit. It could transmit and receive line-of-sight microwave communications with hundreds of thousands of people. It could relay data to other planes hundreds of miles away. It would also be several orders of magnitude less expensive to fly, and would be maintainable.

      Businesses are spending hundreds, sometimes thousands, of dollars a month on reliable private communications between their offices in the same city. There is definately a market for this.

    2. Re:So WHAT ? by InfiniteWisdom · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Thw Wright brother's flyer did not transport any cargo. The first artificial satellite did nothing other than send a radio beep. The first digital computer filled a large room and was about as powerful as the processor in your wristwatch.

      Things start small. Get a clue.

    3. Re:So WHAT ? by rijrunner · · Score: 1

      Also, it can be replaced within a couple hours in case of problems.

    4. Re:So WHAT ? by mpe · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I mean really, WHY ? Just because they think they can ? What are the possible implication in a commercial market ? NONE....

      A plane which can fly around the world on solar power means that it can stay in the air indefinitly. Such a plane could perform functions carried out by comsats, but would be a lot cheaper and potentially recoverable for servicing and upgrading.

      Now if someone said they were going to fly around the world on NATURAL GAS, or Cow Shit, that would be cool. Seriously, a LNG plane would be cool, and there are a lot of reasons to do it,

      You could power a plane on compressed methane, except that the tankage you'd need is more complex and heavier than the liquid fuels used now.

      but SOLAR is NOT going to be powering any transport planes in the near future.

      A large part of the takeoff weight of a plane is fuel.

    5. Re:So WHAT ? by mpe · · Score: 1

      Such a plane could function as the equivalent of a local communications satellite, with the latency benefits of not being thousands of miles away in geosync orbit.

      Also a lot easier and cheaper to get it where it needs to be. In order to launch a comsat you need to place a complex and expensive machine on top of another machine made up mostly of explosives. You are also constrained by the schedule of the launching company.

  19. MOD PARENT SIDEWAYS ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    moderation on crack (tm)

  20. I hope they plan to do this in under 24 hours by BallPeenHammer · · Score: 1
    I hope they plan to do this in under 24 hours.

    1. Re:I hope they plan to do this in under 24 hours by merlin_jim · · Score: 1

      I hope they plan to do this in under 24 hours

      Actually, they have up to 36 hours in which to do it (assuming the flight happens on an equinox)

      Take off right at dawn, heading west. If you land at the same longitude as your departure point 36 hours later, you will land just as the sun is setting, and you will not have been in darkness at all.

      Of course, if you could increase power by 50%, then you could do it indefinitely, because the sun would not appear to move in the sky to you.

      Of course, since they have batteries, they won't have to worry about such a timetable and the logistics involved, not to mention the power it takes to go at the speeds required...

      --
      I am disrespectful to dirt! Can you see that I am serious?!
  21. fuel cells != batteries? by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    Aren't fuel cells batteries?

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:fuel cells != batteries? by lommer · · Score: 3, Informative

      In one sense they are in that hydrogen is usually seen as an energy storage mechanism rather than a source (i.e. there aren't many natural sources of pure hydrogen). However, the relevance to this article is that the hydrogen fuel cells on helios were filled with hydrogen on the ground before takeoff, not filled with hydrogen during flight (presumably from electrolyzed water vapour, the electricity being provided by the solar cells). These batteries will be charged by the solar cells during flight.

    2. Re:fuel cells != batteries? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They could tank????
      They could just put the plane on the ground and let it fill until takeoff?
      Then what is the difference?

  22. Use solar power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    ...and where do you think oil, gas and coal get it's energy from?

    And if we can utilize it directly, who do you think will lose? Why is OPEC already negotiating for subsidies to "guarantee the profitability of their business" in the face of environmental restrictions?

    Fuck OPEC. Fuck the arabs. Use solar power.

  23. Huh? by rcw-home · · Score: 2, Informative
    The plane uses a new solar electric propulsion system which converts solar energy its panels into motion via the expulsion of ions.

    Where is this a quote from? The article and site show an aircraft with traditional propellers on its tail.

    What ESA is claiming is new about this mission

    European Space Agency? Where were they mentioned?

    is that they'll be combining ion propulsion with gravity assist maneuvers

    Aircraft, as a rule, do not perform gravity assist maneuvers. It's a horrible faux paus.

    The parent was likely cut-n-pasted from somewhere else. Moderate appropriately.

  24. Old News - Stuff that mattered by Dolphinzilla · · Score: 2, Informative

    Back for a return engagement..

    Around the World in a Solar Plane

  25. Piccards by pcraven · · Score: 2, Informative

    The Piccards are well known for scientific exploration and adventure. Bertrand went around the world in the a balloon. The Piccard family is known as the inventor of the modern hot air balloon. Here is info on Don Piccard, one of his relatives. The bathyscaphe used to explore deep ocean areas was developed by Auguste Piccard. I've had the pleasure of speaking with Don Piccard before. Great family all around.

    1. Re:Piccards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Not to mention Jean-Luc, the famous starship captain.

    2. Re:Piccards by Xpilot · · Score: 1

      Jean-Luc Picard, captain of the Enterprise was named after Jean Piccard, grand-uncle of Bertrand Piccard.

      --
      "Backups are for wimps. Real men upload their data to an FTP site and have everyone else mirror it." -- Linus Torvalds
  26. WTF? by lommer · · Score: 1

    Please mod this troll down (see his user page for numerous first posts and other trolls). This plane doesn't use ion engines, doesn't have anything to do with the ESA, and doesn't go into outer space and therefore can't be using gravity assist maneuvers.

  27. Use solar, wind, hydro for what they're good for by Tau+Zero · · Score: 1
    Why is OPEC already negotiating for subsidies to "guarantee the profitability of their business" in the face of environmental restrictions?
    Are they really? If you should decide to come back (why not log in?), please provide a link to something which mentions where OPEC is asking for subsidies.
    Fuck OPEC. Fuck the arabs. Use solar power.
    Actually, using solar power would DE-fuck the Arabs. If you've looked at the economics of nations which depend on extractive industries vs. those which manufacture, create and sell services or other productive pursuits, the latter do much better than the former. (Venezuela was just about the richest country in S. America, until oil was discovered and exploited there. Now it's just about the poorest. Venezuela, Nigeria, Iraq, and a host of other oil-exporting nations kept going in and out of dictatorship while the private sector and the middle class it supported withered. This is not a coincidence.) Getting rid of our oil demand would only fuck the dictators; the requirement to depend on commerce and invention for sustenance would force the Arab world to throw off the shackles. (And we'd get cleaner skies, cities and seas out of the deal.)

    If you look at how much energy we use vs. how much renewable energy is available, it looks like a no-brainer to switch. The problem is that renewables are typically unavailable when, where and as desired. If there's a solution, it will begin with using the sun, wind, water and whatnot when they're working and only fall back to stuff like petroleum when (nighttime, dry season, calm conditions) and where (long-haul driving, northern climates in winter) the other stuff isn't available.

    --
    Time is Nature's way of keeping everything from happening at once... the bitch.
  28. Old story! by rduke15 · · Score: 2, Funny

    This has already been discussed on /.

    But maybe I could get even better karma by reposting my old comments into this new thread?

  29. Not a bad idea actually! by Laglorden · · Score: 1

    Fly west, when night comes, turn your plane around and fly towards the approacing dawn (east), this way you reduce the nighttime and increase daylight :)

    If time isn't of importance... wonder if they thought about this...

    1. Re:Not a bad idea actually! by zCyl · · Score: 1

      Fly west, when night comes, turn your plane around and fly towards the approacing dawn (east), this way you reduce the nighttime and increase daylight :)

      If your plane keeps a constant speed, this would of course result in getting nowhere.

      It's rather simple really, fly east to keep the nighttime slightly shorter, because the extra weight of batteries contributes significantly to the inefficiency of the plane. So the ideal flight path minimizes battery requirements. During the daytime the solar panels can probably charge the batteries in much less than a full day while still flying (since adding extra solar panels contributes less weight than adding extra batteries), so continuing to fly east during the day does not harm much.

    2. Re:Not a bad idea actually! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not really because when you are flying with the sun even though you can't keep you are still traveling with it so your day will be a little longer. And you travel towards the sun at night it two will be shorter so you might end up with 14 hours of traveling west time and only 10 hours of traveling east. If it were me though I would wait for a day with a wicked jet stream then ride it for all it's worth.

  30. Re:Use solar, wind, hydro for what they're good fo by rhetoric · · Score: 1

    If you look at how much energy we use vs. how much renewable energy is available, it looks like a no-brainer to switch. The problem is that renewables are typically unavailable when, where and as desired. If there's a solution, it will begin with using the sun, wind, water and whatnot when they're working and only fall back to stuff like petroleum when (nighttime, dry season, calm conditions) and where (long-haul driving, northern climates in winter) the other stuff isn't available.

    This could and should already be happening, but the real dictators (the few immensely rich people who essentially own everything on earth) obviously don't want it to while there is still money to be made from oil, etc. These same people own almost all the media. Two plus two.. God Bless America LOL.

    from PR Watch: "Topics such as energy conservation have been noticeably missing from public discussions of strategies needed for America to achieve energy self-reliance. Patriotism and self-sacrifice may be the rhetoric of the day, but apparently self-sacrifice cannot be allowed to include giving up gas-guzzling SUVs."

    Just quit buying it.

    --

    "where words meet intent, lies rhetoric's lament"
  31. Let's just hope... by eraserewind · · Score: 1

    ...that America and New Zealand don't refuse them use of their sunlight. Don't want to encourage these tourists after all.

  32. Thanks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thanks for the link, it's bookmarked.

  33. I'd like to see them use flywheels for energy by drinkypoo · · Score: 1
    ...storage. I know that the heavier a flywheel is, the more energy it can store, and the heavier an aircraft is, the more energy it takes to run it, so I'm not sure how well this really would work, though it has the advantage that it will take a long time to wear out. You might need multiple counterrotating flywheels or something, if you have two motors then you can put them in the same place as the motors. Batteries are annoying because they are toxic and wear out somewhat rapidly. In this situation it is assumed that you will probably be following strange charge cycles and batteries don't like that, they like you to be consistent (and some of them like to be partially discharged, and some like to be fully discharged.)

    Anyway anyone have any idea about the feasibility of this idea? From what I can tell some flywheels have better power density than batteries.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    1. Re:I'd like to see them use flywheels for energy by Timbotronic · · Score: 1
      Way too heavy to carry on board and not really the right way to use a flywheel. They're great for providing short bursts of acceleration, but the constant drag on a propellor would stop a flywheel pretty quick. They're better in cars where weight is less of a problem and you can efficiently spin them up again with regenerative braking.

      However, you could definately power up a ground based flywheel from the plane's solar panels. It could then winch the plane up to takeoff speed and possibly the first few 1000ft where maximum power is required.

      --

      One of these days I'm moving to Theory - everything works there

  34. semi-related question by utexaspunk · · Score: 1

    just wondering... are there any electrical alternatives to jet engines that would provide similar speed? if we ever got entirely off fossil fuels, how would passenger jets work?

    1. Re:semi-related question by Timbotronic · · Score: 1
      The best bet at this stage is liquid hydrogen. Airbus are already looking into it.

      It won't be completely clean though, there'll still be some nitrogen oxides (leading to acid rain) produced from combustion with the air. The other down side is they'll need bigger tanks because liquid hydrogen occupies significantly more volume than Kerosene, despite having greater power density.

      --

      One of these days I'm moving to Theory - everything works there

    2. Re:semi-related question by hakr89 · · Score: 1

      a jet engine will run off of pure hydrogen gas...using technology similar to what they are implementing in hydrogen-powered cars

  35. Re: Nighttime by some+guy+I+know · · Score: 1
    What will happen when the sun goes down?
    Captain Picard will use the energy stored in the Dilithium crystals. ...

    Oh, wait, that's Dr. Piccard, not Captain Picard.
    Never mind.
    --
    Those who sacrifice security to condemn liberty deserve to repeat history or something. - Benjamin Santayana
  36. Fly All Night... by mmortal03 · · Score: 1
    I liked this part of the article:
    "The design incorporates a computerised body vest," explains Jones. "If there's stress on part of the wing, the pilot would feel pressure on one side of his body. "Equally, if the pilot is stressed the plane would sense this and only feed him must-know information."
    Sounds like something they should implement for wives.

    Oh, and this:
    Batteries will store energy received in daylight hours to fly all night.
    Then, batteries will store energy received in nightlight hours to fly all day...right? Uh no.

    So....seriously, depending on the time of year and where they circumnavigate, say they get 12 hours of daylight; how is this thing gonna get 24 hours worth of flight out of that? I would be very interested to know.
  37. OPEC wants compensation for clean energy use by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    You can find it find it here.

    Saudi Arabia and other oil producing countries argued that a planned fund under the U.N.'s Kyoto protocol on reining in climate change should also compensate oil exporters for losses if consumers shift to clean energy like wind or solar power.
  38. Bring a Parachute by PPGMD · · Score: 1
    People were saying that about the Helios, but you will find in the non-frontpage article (search is down so can't find it) I practically predicted that it will crash, not because of a lose of energy, but because thunderstorms can reach up wards of 50,000 ft, pop up quickly, and can wreck havoc on a 747, you think a long thin winged solar plane will work much better?

    I wouldn't want one of those over my house, especially in a state like Texas or Florida where storms are an everyday fact of life.

    1. Re:Bring a Parachute by nakedsource · · Score: 1

      You are right. NASA tried an unmanned prototype that flew around at approx 12 knots over Hawaii. It crashed because of weather.