Bye Aerospace Electric Updates

Homebuilt Aircraft & Kit Plane Forum

Help Support Homebuilt Aircraft & Kit Plane Forum:

Status
Not open for further replies.

Jay Kempf

Curmudgeon in Training (CIT)
Joined
Apr 13, 2009
Messages
4,513
Location
Warren, VT USA
I find it funny that people on an aircraft forums are talking about carbo
Maybe we should let the free market determine the value of things like "safety" or "clean" or "quality" instead of it being mandated by our elected officials? If EV works, let it stand on merit and let the market judge.

I know where "clean" or "sustainable" falls on my personal list of requirements.
Can't let the market decide if the "new" technology is heavily subsidized what looks like indefinitely into an unfair advantage.

Ditto on prioritizing the list of requirements.
 

rv7charlie

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2014
Messages
2,830
Location
Pocahontas MS
Tell you what. Ask the coal industry and the oil companies if they want an unsubsidized playing field. God's Own Crawfish never backed up as fast as they'll be moving. How many repetitions does it take for 'traditionalists' to realize that their status quo is MASSIVELY subsidized?

Do you like the hardware you use to communicate here? Thank the subsidized space race, back in the late '50s & early '60s. Like the drugs that keep you healthy, or at least alive? Thank subsidized drug research. etc etc etc etc
 

rv6ejguy

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 26, 2012
Messages
4,752
Location
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Yeah, we tried that. We got asbestos, oil spills, child labor, LA smog, a hole in the ozone layer, and the Triangle Shirtwaist factory fire. Somehow it turned out that for a lot of things, government regulation is absolutely necessary to prevent the Tragedy of the Commons.
Regulation and law is already in place. I was not saying to eliminate that and go back to the wild west, environmentally. I was suggesting for governments to take their hands off pushing this through with taxpayer dollars with no knowledge of the science. Let the private sector promote, finance and build the stuff. The gov can assist with timely permits and making sure the private sector does all this lawfully, with state/ federal oversight.

Usually with governments directly involved in many projects, they may crash and burn along with lots of tax dollars. Seems CA is rather heavily taxed and regulated already. Lots of businesses packing up and moving to another state. Tesla even followed suit and moved their headquarters to TX recently. This seems like a sign that the state is doing something wrong. Eliminating your corporate tax base places more tax load on citizens.

"How can we assist?", directed at interested parties would be a better way to accomplish things than pushing out some nonsensical vision by officials who know nothing of the technicalities to make said vision happen.
 

rv7charlie

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2014
Messages
2,830
Location
Pocahontas MS
I'm confused. How is encouraging private development of cleaner, but initially more expensive alternatives through subsidized rebates on developers' or consumers' purchase prices *not* what you're describing? What part of permitting for privately funded installations of solar, wind, etc doesn't meet your criteria?
 

Vigilant1

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2011
Messages
7,643
Location
US
The government approach in many cases is to pick a favored technology (electric cars, solar power, etc) and subsidize it. A more free market approach would be to set a goal, put the required incentives in place, and let businesses and consumers decide which technology works best in each case. Don't pick winners and losers, banning technology A and showering subsidies on technology B.
 

Toobuilder

Well-Known Member
Log Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2010
Messages
5,556
Location
Mojave, Ca
Yeah, we tried that. We got asbestos, oil spills, child labor, LA smog, a hole in the ozone layer, and the Triangle Shirtwaist factory fire. Somehow it turned out that for a lot of things, government regulation is absolutely necessary to prevent the Tragedy of the Commons.
And you forgot about an unprecidented rise in industrial power, generation of wealth, and increased standard of living the likes of which the world has never seen. The free market created the American Dream - but thanks to artificial market manipulation by Government and organized labor, we are but a shell of our former glory. Just coasting on the last remaining embers of Capitalism.

And while some of the things you mention above are actually true, all can be managed by the free will of the consumer. Dont like child labor? Then vote with the wallet. Make that element untennable in the market and drive change through natural market forces. Of course, the reality is that the problem simply shifts overseas, where children are today digging ore for the bateries in all our electric gizmos or working in sweatshops for your overpriced clothing that used to be manufactured in the US.

After 50 plus years on this earth, all the time being lied to by the government about the next ice age, end of oil, melted polar ice caps, or (insert disaster scenario of the week here) "within this decade" and still being just fine, my "concern for the environment" is pretty **** low on my list of things to worry about. What I do want to focus on is continuing to jump in my airplane and go where I want, when I want, and as often as I want without having to ask permission. I also dont want to pay some artificial penalty because the government is trying to modify my behavior. I will pick the propulsion system that fits my mission needs and it will make that cut based on technical merit alone. If electric is it, bring it on. If not, then Ill stick with the tried and true.
 

Dan Thomas

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2008
Messages
6,986
Regulation and law is already in place. I was not saying to eliminate that and go back to the wild west, environmentally. I was suggesting for governments to take their hands off pushing this through with taxpayer dollars with no knowledge of the science.
That there. The noisy folks that have no idea where electricity comes from, or how much power is needed to generate it, are the ones that get the ears of the politicians, and we end up with expensive failures. Just look at the Germany now, reopening old coal-fired powerplants to try to survive this winter, along with the UK.

We need more nuclear power, yet some places are closing their existing plants. It's a whole lot easier to keep one going, maybe even with newer, safer technology, than to get a new one built. The obstacles are huge.
 

proppastie

Well-Known Member
Log Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2012
Messages
5,573
Location
NJ
How long do you suppose it takes
That is not a technical question but rather a political one......you need a power plant....I am sure there are plenty of working designs sitting in file cabinets ready to start construction. I am pretty sure the capitalist system will rise to the occasion when the political will is there.....You can bet we will not let the our children (the children the children what about the children) suffer without air-conditioning or heat.
 

Saville

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2014
Messages
473
Location
Boston Ma
EVs are............... better for the environment from a carbon footprint (well documented, but still not zero, just less).....
Show us the calculations you did to arrive at that conclusion. Be sure to include Every. Single. aspect of energy use ,
and all the losses incured at each step of the process, to create the electricity you want to use to power the airplane.

And do the same for ICE for an equivalent system.
 

John.Roo

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2013
Messages
1,530
Location
Letohrad / Czech Republic
Sorry for interrupting this political "fight". Just.... has somebody updates about Bye Aerospace electric airplanes? ;) Info about any other electric airplane will be probably also OK...
I am sure that if you use good old "google" you can find many better forums where is raging fight about how ecological is each type of energy production. And don´t forget to look also for forums about ecological, sustainable and environmental friendly oil extraction ;)

By the way...
Geiger Engineering upgraded website about prototypes using his electric propulsion systems. Looks interesting....
 

rv6ejguy

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 26, 2012
Messages
4,752
Location
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
This took a vector off from a discussion about realistic battery performance and weight to complete a useful GA mission to how we'd charge said batteries if tech was adopted on a wide basis, replacing ICE. That's a fair question. The answer is- neither the required battery performance or generating/ distribution structure is in place at this time nor is it likely to be any time soon.

Short hops/ training around your home airport and back to charge at your hangar/ base is the mostly likely scenario in the next 5-10 years. This could work for some people and if it does, I say go for it. It's fascinating technology, sure to evolve as time goes on. I'll be watching how/ if Bye meets their lofty predictions.
 
Last edited:

Scottiniowa

Member
Joined
Nov 29, 2021
Messages
24
Location
Clarksville, Iowa
Even if the material is dated, And that can happen with changing events, every day. I won't deny that changes are taking place.

But the on the so called dated material-
It really bashes most of the "popular things" but ARE they popular because of how they come about? (read- labor, machine purchases, infrastructure items) all of which pay huge amount of taxes, into the government economy. And keep the world moving, sometimes when the top is spinning it is pretty hard to toss things out,

SO, the tax collecting-.dispensing people maintain their job with the above taxation, Yes, those that promote this green, also seemingly behind the scenes are promoting the furthest from GREEN.

It would be sad, if they (the political people) didn't know that, but SADDER still if they did. Behind the screen of GREEN, could be considered GREED.

ON the recycling thing, A question should perhaps should be considered? Are we recycling, because it actually is producing more recycled material at less cost than producing new, or is this just another business model, that is proving all the things that govt political figures want? (new jobs, new purchases, more taxes, more economy spinning agenda, and of course it sounds good too.)

I am not trying to be negative here, but rather, viewing much of this from both sides.
 

speedracer

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2020
Messages
319
Hey, how about cutting up the windmill blades and burning them in our wood stoves to heat our homes? Epoxy burns much hotter than wood, fiberglass cloth.... not. Hey.... just kidding.
 

BJC

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2013
Messages
14,943
Location
97FL, Florida, USA
Are we recycling, because it actually is producing more recycled material at less cost than producing new, or is this just another business model, that is proving all the things that govt political figures want?
I haven’t look at current costs, but back when burning garbage to generate “free electricity” was all the rage, reality was that burning was economical in some locations due to limited space for land fills, but adding the generation resulted in negative benefits. One government employee and advocate privately admitted that the “free electricity” was nothing more than a politically expedient sales pitch.

Additionally, the garbage burners lacked emissions controls, emitted so nasty stuff.

Several places where I have lived operated, at additional cost, segregated collection systems for paper and plastic. They did that to make citizens feel good. It wasn’t recycled, because it wasn’t / isn’t economical.

Now for the tie to HBA. The largest airpark in this area, once the winter residence of Steve Wittman, is a couple of miles from a huge land fill. All the birds that congregate there can be a hazard to safe flying. Be careful out thrre.


BJC
 

wktaylor

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 5, 2003
Messages
431
Location
Midwest USA
"Do not let perfection is the enemy of good" ... probably should read... "Do not let perfection be the enemy of good"

However, I have always preferred the quotes...

"Perfect is the enemy of good" [translated from Italian, attributed to Voltaire, ~1770]

"Better-than is the enemy of good-enough!" [Russian military saying]

"Better a diamond with a flaw than a pebble without."
[Confucius]

Of course, the following quote... since I'm an engineer... makes me somewhat uneasy…

There comes a time to shoot the engineers and get-on with production.” [Soviet WWII era saying]
 

lelievre12

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2020
Messages
167
This took a vector off from a discussion about realistic battery performance and weight to complete a useful GA mission to how we'd charge said batteries if tech was adopted on a wide basis, replacing ICE. That's a fair question. The answer is- neither the required battery performance or generating/ distribution structure is in place at this time nor is it likely to be any time soon.

Short hops/ training around your home airport and back to charge at your hangar/ base is the mostly likely scenario in the next 5-10 years. This could work for some people and if it does, I say go for it. It's fascinating technology, sure to evolve as time goes on. I'll be watching how/ if Bye meets their lofty predictions.
I have worked most of my life in the clean-tech industry including a solar biofuel company. In that company we looked at Co2 cracking and/or biomass pyrolysis (using solar energy) to get CO + H2. Thence water/gas-shift or solar reformation and Fischer Tropsch method into subsequent heavier octanes such as Gasoline or Diesel. Direct fuels production from chemistry and sunshine.

Germany flew most of its aviation using these methods during WWII so nothing new here. What is different is that Germany used coal as its source of carbon for the octane whereas in the future we can use CO2 or biomass for the same carbon atoms. Regulation is important here because coal and gas remain a cheaper source for this carbon and so to avoid hundreds more years of liquid fuels production from coal and gas after oil runs out, we must regulate just a little to ensure that the externality costs of using these 'dirty' sources are priced into the raw material cost so that the advantages of cleaner sources can be monetized by industry.

The other option is to run aviation on plant/animal sourced biofuels. Many jet engine makers already have certified their engines on biofuels or biofuel blends so again, this is a drop-in replacement for fossil. Not quite as clean as present sources of bio-fuels are limited and/or dirty (eg Palm Oil). However another start-up I was also involved in built large algae farms in Australia which proved the scalable viability of algae based biofuel production. Here is yet another 'clean' technology awaiting $100/barrel.

The bottom line is that once oil gets passed $100/barrel or so, these 'alternative' methods will begin to enter the market, not because they are 'clean' but because they can be cheaper. And so aviation can continue to perfect present technology in the comfort that 'clean' liquid fuels will soon be readily available as drop-in replacements. No massive leaps of technology required. Just pricing signals to the market to invest in the transition.

Where are batteries in all of this? Nowhere.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top