Comments on: ElectraFlyer-C electric mini plane makes flying cheaper than driving

By: hunter walton

hunter walton — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 23:02:50 +0000

is there any possible way that i can buy the motor only

By: Tom

Tom — Wed, 27 May 2009 05:43:06 +0000

I wonder what kind of armament this plane can be equipped with……..air to air? fifty cal.? potatoe gun? I think the idea of an electric plane is great….. I simply prefer the time-honored power of a gut rumbling internal combustion engine over the humble (and meak) whisper of a ceiling fan to pull me around the sky. Constant speed prop?…… lets not get hasty……. maybe in a few years.

By: Scott Moody

Scott Moody — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 16:07:59 +0000

The ElectraFlyer-C is only a prototype aircraft and will not be sold as a production plane nor as a kit. EAC is, however, working on the 2-place model that will be sold as an LSA (if FAA classification is approved) and also as a kit.

The good news is, the one and only ElectraFlyer-C will be auctioned off very soon. Keep an eye on the website for more details http://www.electraflyer.com.

By: dave

dave — Wed, 11 Feb 2009 18:15:55 +0000

Wow !! Thank God we dont give out pilot certificates as easy as Driver License’s. Can you image all the dumbass Earthling, Killing them selfs, for godsake stay out of my airspace

By: l_reason

l_reason — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 19:57:15 +0000

What a fantastic little plane! All the similar comparable light single place aircraft that cruise at 70mph are burning 10-25 l/hr. I would love to see a light 2 place plane powered one or two light electric motors. If its possible to achieve a two hour range and 80mph it would make a fantastic primary trainer for new pilots. With the right aircraft design you could replace the batteries after flights to shorten the turn around time. I think flight schools would jump at the opportunity to have electric planes. I’m an aircraft owner, airline pilot and flight instructor.

The Wright Flyer was more or less a useless aeroplane, but not a bad start.

By: huhwha

huhwha — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 13:16:11 +0000

Random: How about a helicopter instead? Or some type of VTOL implementation?

And a chart showing the efficiency curve with respect to weight of cargo would be great. Unfortunately, in these systems, the variance of the passenger can make a big difference to performance… at least, I would presume. (with/without parachute, 120lb vs 180lb pilot, etc = efficiency variance)

By: mike

mike — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 22:02:04 +0000

It’s not fair to compare it to the costs of a car – any car. The comparison is to the cost to operate a regular airplane. With constantly rising gas, many people have trouble continuing it as a hobby. It becomes too costly. This is what brough Ultralights out in the 80’s to 90’s. I’m just glad to see the power to weight ratios are getting to where a plane can be powered for a decent time frame. Things should only improve with demand.

By: Don

Don — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 16:17:40 +0000

Wow, looks like they breathed new life into the Monnett Moni design. Wonder how long before we see electric J-3s? LOL. I think it’s going to be limited to single place unless electric motors get alot more powerful and batteries alot lighter….

By: coyote

coyote — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 12:23:16 +0000

Where’d I put my daughter’s booster seat?

By: Kwoff.com

Kwoff.com — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 11:56:30 +0000

ElectraFlyer – environment-friendly aircraft with electric motor for under 30k…

The ElectraFlyer C, an electric ultralight plane available now if you want to plonk down 21000 $ max, bang it all up together, and take it on a relatively silent 2 hour flight….

By: linus

linus — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 09:17:56 +0000

I want to know its payload capacity.
I’m afraid it is much smaller than cars’.
Is it really enviroment-friendly?

By: aweba

aweba — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 04:08:48 +0000

The price list on the website looks like it doesn’t include avionics. I can’t tell you how much that is, but it is a meaningful monetary part of any plane purchase.

“ykjay,”
A problem with the ‘quick swap’ option would likely be weight. This is an ultralight and it only carries one passenger. Batteries are heavy, and distance on planes is always limited by weight. You never know if the thing could even take off with extra weight from batteries, or if it has space to carry them for that matter.

By: Andy

Andy — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 02:08:24 +0000

Yes, maybe cheaper in the long run, but count in the flying lessons required to be certified and you have a pretty hefty starting cost. Airtime is very expensive.

By: Donny

Donny — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 01:58:25 +0000

I like all the math, but the biggest expense as I see itn is parking. My driveway leaves something to be desired, a runway.

By: Jon

Jon — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 23:22:23 +0000

Put some thin-film photo-voltaics on the roof/wings. First to fly around the world in a day wins!

By: dkraft

dkraft — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 23:17:28 +0000

YO ! Green farts.

the batteries are $4500 and last for 100 cycles. Put that in your “not in my back yard” equation and SMOKE IT..

I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again –

“The electric mile will ALWAYS be more expensive to the environment and your wallet than the petroleum mile.”

Case Closed.

again.

By: pete

pete — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 22:29:47 +0000

With a top speed of 90 mph, this is definitely not an ultralight. According to the electraflyer.com web site, they already have an airworthiness certificate (but just the “experimental” required for flight testing, which they haven’t done yet and which would be required for a full “normal” or “utility” category certificate). So this is a “real” airplane (ultralights are too, but not from a regulatory point of view ).

Of course, as a real airplane, it means you need a pilot certificate of some sort to fly it. But it’s small and slow enough that the simple Sport Pilot certificate would do. If you can really get one of these for $20K, or even $30K, I predict it’s going to be a big hit.

It remains to be seen whether that’s the actual price though. The batteries alone are going to be expensive, probably five figures.

There have been lots of “revolutionary” aircraft announced. Most never fly, never mind make it to the marketplace. I’m not holding by breath, but if ElectraFlyer can prove the concept, this sounds like a wonderful plane and I won’t be able to wait to fly one.

By: RickyBender

RickyBender — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 21:56:35 +0000

I’d buy one and then fly it instead of driving and like land it and stuff.

By: Jeff

Jeff — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 21:50:35 +0000

Even if it does cost more to operate than a Prius or comparable econobox, it’s an AIRPLANE, man. You get the fun of flying an airplane coupled with operating costs people can actually live with. What’s not to love?

Lately my aircraft has been burning 15 gallons per hour of 100LL Avgas to do around 150 kts / 172 mph. This would be a great lower-cost option for people who want to fly for fun without breaking the bank.

By: James = tard

James = tard — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 21:25:13 +0000

James you might be retarded.. The point was to emphisize how cheap this plane operates, not to compare it to cars.

By: Reg Spyder

Reg Spyder — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 21:15:36 +0000

Luke, the price per mile here includes replacing the expensive L-Ion battery pack after 1000 cycles. This accounts for the bulk of the cost. In your example with the prius you only take into account fuel costs. Add in the same battery replacement cost and it’s much greater than this plane.

By: Susan

Susan — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 21:01:58 +0000

lol who wouldn’t opt for the parachute?????? T_T

By: Mat

Mat — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 20:48:47 +0000

Sriram,
There are a fair amount of runways all over the US, most are General Aviation only, take a look at any aviation chart.

I would be interested to see if you could add solar panels to the wings and keep it up longer.

By: James

James — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 20:43:35 +0000

This should not be compared to a Prius, it should be compared to an all-electric car. Unfortunately there are no major manufacturers that sell all-electric cars in the USA right now. In the next few years we should start seeing “plugin” hybrids, but in the meantime, this plane would compare poorly to a home-built pure electric conversion, which can be done for as little as $10,000.

By: Donny

Donny — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 20:40:53 +0000

I would think you would mean it can be charged through a 110 or 220 V(olt) socket- not a 110 or 220 W(att) socket. Right?

By: yossarian

yossarian — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 20:31:58 +0000

sorry, don’t you mean a 110/220 V socket? Volts not Watts.

By: Candide

Candide — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 20:26:42 +0000

Neat.
Sorry to say, but you mixed up Watts and Volts (110V and 220V).
Thanks for the story anyway.

By: Jeff Woods

Jeff Woods — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 20:18:15 +0000

Wow, Nice. I think I will sell my Cessna 172 and buy one of those. Looks like fun.

Jiff
http://www.anonymize.us.tc

By: Joe

Joe — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 20:17:51 +0000

Luke, it’s not cheaper than driving a Prius, but it is cheaper than driving any non-hybrid car.

By: Scott

Scott — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 19:37:02 +0000

Luke, you missed that it was $6.20 per hour not mile. So, at a cruising speed of 70mph that would break down to about $.09 per mile. A HUGE difference.