Board index FlightGear Multiplayer events Virtual airlines

EchoAir Group

Discussion relating to virtual airlines.

Re: EchoAir Group

Postby D-ECHO » Tue Nov 24, 2015 6:06 pm

Hi MIG29pilot,
how long would it take you to build the new one?
Regards
D-ECHO
PS: thanks, legoboy
User avatar
D-ECHO
 
Posts: 1553
Joined: Sat May 09, 2015 12:31 pm

Re: EchoAir Group

Postby MIG29pilot » Tue Nov 24, 2015 7:09 pm

I'd say about 6 months due to lack of an assembly line. The last assembly line was dismantled.
User avatar
MIG29pilot
 
Posts: 1454
Joined: Tue May 19, 2015 4:03 pm
Location: 6 feet under Snow
Callsign: MIG29pilot
Version: 3.7nightly
OS: Windows 10

Re: EchoAir Group

Postby D-ECHO » Wed Nov 25, 2015 4:47 pm

MSA-S23 wrote in Mon Nov 23, 2015 6:29 pm:Also, I am going to be modifying the PropPower, as hydrogen fuel is very expensive. She'll run on StarJet's current Biofuel mix.

Am I allowed to ask what that Biofuel mix is mixed of?
User avatar
D-ECHO
 
Posts: 1553
Joined: Sat May 09, 2015 12:31 pm

Re: EchoAir Group

Postby MSA-S23 » Wed Nov 25, 2015 5:03 pm

Part biokerosene and bio-oils made from waste, part standard aviation kerosene. Exact formula is kept secret.

Cheers,

Ash
MSA-S23
 
Posts: 478
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2014 6:45 pm
Location: Flying high...in the sky...
Callsign: UpAndAway

Re: EchoAir Group

Postby D-ECHO » Wed Nov 25, 2015 5:11 pm

We are at the moment developing a project to run a electrolyse "factory" with solar energy, somewhere in Nevada, that could be distributed easily to Vancouver, and would be cheaper than normal hydrogen.

How much is your biofuel per liter?
User avatar
D-ECHO
 
Posts: 1553
Joined: Sat May 09, 2015 12:31 pm

Re: EchoAir Group

Postby MSA-S23 » Wed Nov 25, 2015 5:33 pm

Currently, approximately 25-30% more then standard jet kerosene, depending on the airport. Currently, only 4 of our Boeing 787-8 Dreamliners and 7 of our A330-200s have been modified to handle our Bio-Kerosene mix.
MSA-S23
 
Posts: 478
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2014 6:45 pm
Location: Flying high...in the sky...
Callsign: UpAndAway

Re: EchoAir Group

Postby D-ECHO » Wed Nov 25, 2015 5:44 pm

Well, so I don't really understand why you think hydrogen fuel is so much more expensive, as e.g. seen on this website:
http://heshydrogen.com/hydrogen-fuel-cost-vs-gasoline/
User avatar
D-ECHO
 
Posts: 1553
Joined: Sat May 09, 2015 12:31 pm

Re: EchoAir Group

Postby MSA-S23 » Wed Nov 25, 2015 6:08 pm

Because it's ridiculously expensive to get the hydrogen out of the water. I think that website is incorrect; I watched a BBC documentary on this, and it said it was extremely expensive to pull off anything like this.
MSA-S23
 
Posts: 478
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2014 6:45 pm
Location: Flying high...in the sky...
Callsign: UpAndAway

Re: EchoAir Group

Postby wkitty42 » Thu Nov 26, 2015 1:30 am

hunh? folks are doing this hydrogen extraction in cars... it can't be that expensive...
"You get more air close to the ground," said Angalo. "I read that in a book. You get lots of air low down, and not much when you go up."
"Why not?" said Gurder.
"Dunno. It's frightened of heights, I guess."
User avatar
wkitty42
 
Posts: 5757
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2015 3:46 pm
Location: central NC, USA
Callsign: wk42
Version: git next
OS: Kubuntu 14.04.5

Re: EchoAir Group

Postby MIG29pilot » Fri Nov 27, 2015 4:17 pm

No, they aren't. Hydrogen cars get their fuel pumped in, and fuel cells are a completely different sphere.
User avatar
MIG29pilot
 
Posts: 1454
Joined: Tue May 19, 2015 4:03 pm
Location: 6 feet under Snow
Callsign: MIG29pilot
Version: 3.7nightly
OS: Windows 10

Re: EchoAir Group

Postby wkitty42 » Sat Nov 28, 2015 4:19 pm

you should do more research... i'm not talking about commercial entities... i'm talking about the shade-tree mechanics doing it on their own... the guys who did the first propane and old restaurant frying oil fueled vehicles... the stuff that came along before bio-diesel was a thing...
"You get more air close to the ground," said Angalo. "I read that in a book. You get lots of air low down, and not much when you go up."
"Why not?" said Gurder.
"Dunno. It's frightened of heights, I guess."
User avatar
wkitty42
 
Posts: 5757
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2015 3:46 pm
Location: central NC, USA
Callsign: wk42
Version: git next
OS: Kubuntu 14.04.5

Re: EchoAir Group

Postby D-ECHO » Sat Nov 28, 2015 4:49 pm

However, we will be able to offer you, MSA-S23, the hydrogen fuel produced in our "solar farms" for a price that is very close to what standart JET A1 costs.
Image
User avatar
D-ECHO
 
Posts: 1553
Joined: Sat May 09, 2015 12:31 pm

Re: EchoAir Group

Postby Buckaroo » Sat Nov 28, 2015 6:56 pm

The vast majority of commercial hydrogen production comes not from electrolysis but from reformation of hydrocarbons, primarily natural gas. Electrolysis, despite being the method we all know from grade school, is the least efficient method by a huge margin. That chart quoted above shows 32.9 kWh/kg of H2, but that's wishful thinking. Realistic costs are about double that. Even given a bargain basement price for electricity, you're still looking at a cost that's approximately 5 times that of reformation techniques.

There's a lot of research trying to bring the cost of electrolysis down, but there's a long way to go to make it competitive. Sure, solar cells, wind farms, solar collectors, et. al. are great and improvements are happening at a good pace, but they all have issues that make them expensive to manufacture or maintenance intensive or land intensive or rare-earth intensive, etc. It's simply much more efficient to make hydrogen directly from hydrocarbons, rather than burn the hydrocarbons to make electricity to power electrolysis to produce H2 from water. The problem with producing H2 from hydrocarbons is you get lots of greenhouse gases as a byproduct.

Another issue is storage. Hydrogen is notoriously difficult and dangerous to store, especially long-term, which translates to high costs. Petroleum fuels are easy to store. Diesel fuels are nice due to low vapor pressure-- it doesn't ignite easily, a friendly trait when working around the stuff particularly in marine environments where things tends to collect in bilges and poorly ventilated compartments.

Let's say hydrogen fuel somehow becomes cheap and clean to produce. Hydrogen is still a lousy fuel in terms of energy density. That translates to weight and volume. Hydrogen fueled electric vehicles can give great economy but require considerable weight for fuel cells, compressed hydrogen tanks, batteries, electric motors, etc. And liquid hydrogen requires much more volume than petroleum-based fuels. For aircraft, weight and volume are everything.

There's a lot of cool and useful hydrogen tech being developed for terrific applications, but no commercial airline exec looking to purchase his third beach-front property is going to seriously consider hydrogen powered aircraft.

-Buck
Callsign: Buckaro(o)
Author: Lockheed 1049H Constellation, Grumman Goose, MD-81, Edgley Optica, Velocity XL RG, YASim Guide
User avatar
Buckaroo
 
Posts: 475
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 6:45 am
Location: Bloomington IN USA
Callsign: Buckaro(o)
Version: 2.10
OS: Windows & Linux

Re: EchoAir Group

Postby D-ECHO » Sun Nov 29, 2015 6:54 am

Buckaroo wrote in Sat Nov 28, 2015 6:56 pm:Let's say hydrogen fuel somehow becomes cheap and clean to produce. Hydrogen is still a lousy fuel in terms of energy density. That translates to weight and volume. Hydrogen fueled electric vehicles can give great economy but require considerable weight for fuel cells, compressed hydrogen tanks, batteries, electric motors, etc. And liquid hydrogen requires much more volume than petroleum-based fuels. For aircraft, weight and volume are everything.

There are compressed hydrogen fuel tank systems with an empty weight of only about 20kg as far as I remember. For sure, petroleum-based fuels have a higher fuel density but hydrogen fuel compressed by about 70 percent (which is pretty realistic) comes already pretty close to petroleum-based fuel. And (again, as far as I remember), fuel cells are even more effective than normal motors.
:arrow: I'm not sure at all, my thinking is almost fully based on a few paper articles I read and it is possible that I messed up some things or even everything. :wink:

Buckaroo wrote in Sat Nov 28, 2015 6:56 pm:That's wishful thinking.

One can still dream...
;)
Regards
User avatar
D-ECHO
 
Posts: 1553
Joined: Sat May 09, 2015 12:31 pm

Re: EchoAir Group

Postby KIWI34 » Tue Dec 01, 2015 3:07 am

Turnit wrote in Tue Nov 24, 2015 2:15 am:Do you think you could make a long range version of that aircraft, with a range of 8,000 nm?


that is just under the max range of a 777-200 Long Range model flying M.84@very high altitudes
Callsigns : KIWI34 , CHT0054 ( seasonal )
Aircraft : 787-9 ( ANZ serving Asia, LAN serving South America )
Want to know where I'm flying ? i always file a flight plan for every flight on :
http://flightgear-atc.alwaysdata.net/index.php5
KIWI34
 
Posts: 405
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2014 7:17 am
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Callsign: KIWI34
Version: 3.4
OS: Mac OSX 10.11.12

PreviousNext

Return to Virtual airlines

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest