MIT researchers are developing a new megawatt electric motor that could power the future...

Jimmy2x

Posts: 238   +29
Staff
Something to look forward to: Hybrid and fully electric vehicles have revolutionized transportation and driven changes in everything from emissions standards to charging infrastructures. While aviation engineers have attempted to bring similar innovation to the skies, they've been faced with numerous size and power delivery challenges that prevent practical large-scale application and adoption. Thanks to recent breakthroughs by a team of MIT engineers, we may soon find ourselves one step closer to large-scale electrically powered air travel.

One of electrically-assisted flight's limiting factors is the supporting technologies required to create enough power for sustained flight without incurring massive penalties to weight and mobility.

Current smaller scale applications use electric motors capable of generating hundreds of kilowatts of power supported by a large number of batteries, greatly increasing the aircraft's weight while decreasing its potential payload. For example, Heart Aerospace's 19-passenger aircraft, the ES-30, is designed to carry approximately 3.5 tons of batteries to support a 250 mile flight.

Engineers from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology have taken a major step toward solving this problem by designing the components to support a 1-megawatt motor capable of electrifying larger aircraft. According to MIT's news release, engineers have successfully designed and tested the major components of the motor and conducted computational analysis to prove that the components are capable of working together to generate one megawatt of power while maintaining a footprint similar to currently available smaller motors.

According to the team's engineers, the new megawatt electric motor could be paired with a battery or a fuel cell to power a plane's propellers on their own by converting the stored electrical energy into mechanical energy. For even larger applications, the electric motor could augment a traditional turbofan jet engine to run as a hybrid propulsion system.

While the breakthroughs are a huge step toward electrifying the skies on a larger scale, the team at MIT aren't the first to try their hand at electric-powered flight. The first electrically powered aircraft, the Tissandier Electric Airship, made its debut on October 8, 1883. Since then, dozens of prototypes, attempts, and small-scale production electric aircraft have graced the skies.

One of the most recent breakthroughs came last year, when Eviation's Alice made its first successful flight as an all-electric passenger jet. Since then, the company has received more than $4 billion in orders, further cementing the industry's demand for an electrically-powered alternative.

The breakthroughs in power delivery mark an exciting milestone in aviation technology. But with an industry target of net zero emissions by 2050, additional advances in fuels, engines, energy storage, and other supporting systems are needed to meet the carbon reduction target. As of 2021, aviation technologies accounted for more than two percent of global CO2 emissions.

Permalink to story.

 
On one end of things I think that electric planes are silly because of the engineering challenges associated with them, on the other I wonder how we'll look at chemical energy storage in the future if we solve all those problems.
 
I really hope these battery and electrical power advancements are successful (come close to having similar performance characteristics as traditional fuels in terms of weight, volume, capacity, power output, etc.). There's so much potential for them in so many use cases if they are. It will take a long time to get there, but I expect we will.
 
This is a non-starter. Electric is great for shorter ranges but there just isn't enough energy density in battery technology to allow for range of any note. Private aviation may have this in their future, but commercial aviation has nothing to worry about.

(energy density of JP1 is over 13,000Whr/kg while even the best batteries can't get to 300)
 
Unfortunately we're a long way from battery technology that can replace jet fuel, and I mean a _long_ way. The weight of batteries will be an issue for decades to come and intercontinental travel may never be possible using electric planes. If batteries could suddenly store 10x the energy at the same weight it still wouldn't be anywhere close to the energy density of jet fuel. Never mind getting that kind of improvement in battery capacity, we'll be lucky to double or at best triple what we have now in the next decade or beyond.
 
Electric is a no go for planes due to weight, and hybrid is very dumb due to added complexity weight and minimal savings in fuel and emissions

Sure develop ments like this are cool, but maybe not for a plane, especially not at that power rating, a current 777 GE genx engine develops about 23 megawatts of equivalent power during cruise, never mind take off where it is at its highest loading, so seemingly a motor like this would be for much lighter planes anyway (which have the converse problem of having no space for batteries, so the point is moot)
 
Yep...EV's are taking the country by storm. Why, as of 2022, EV's make up under 1% of all vehicles in the US. Juat think, in another 10 years they might even make up 4%. Think of what this means for long distance plane travel.
 
On one end of things I think that electric planes are silly because of the engineering challenges associated with them, on the other I wonder how we'll look at chemical energy storage in the future if we solve all those problems.
Every journey starts with the first step. We can't start with the 10th.

In any case, Hydrogen turbines (not to be confused with Hydrogen fuel cells) will probably be the weapon of choice for the foreseeable future. Long range, battery powered planes... probably centuries away, unfortunately.

It's still an important thing to do, and we'll get there eventually. Some important and interesting reads:

https://aviation.stackexchange.com/a/26919/68819
https://www.theverge.com/2022/11/29/23483889/rolls-royce-easyjet-hydrogen-fuel-jet-engine-test
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen-powered_aircraft#Emissions_and_environmental_impact
 
Yep...EV's are taking the country by storm. Why, as of 2022, EV's make up under 1% of all vehicles in the US. Juat think, in another 10 years they might even make up 4%. Think of what this means for long distance plane travel.

It was 5.7% for 2022, up 65% YoY.

https://cleantechnica.com/2023/02/25/us-electric-car-sales-increased-65-in-2022/

2023Q1 is at 7.1%, up 66% YoY.

https://cleantechnica.com/2023/04/27/us-electric-vehicle-sales-up-66-in-1st-quarter/

It's also worth noting that the US is a distant third behind China (29.1%) and Europe (12.1%). It's not that BEVs are bad, it's that Americans are too uninformed, stubborn, yet so confident at stating (false) facts. Your comment being a great example at that.

Also noteworthy is the fact that in total volume, ICEV already peaked in 2017 and it'll never return to those numbers. So the market is growing, but ICEV sales are shrinking, and will continue to shrink down to zero, both percentage and amount sold.

So yeah, feel free to keep talking cr@p about electric cars. Won't change a thing. But one day you'll go to a dealer and get slapped in the face by the hard reality that they don't sell any gas guzzlers anymore. Or there won't even be any dealer to talk about in the first place, because everyone hates dealers, carmakers and customers included, and they're all switching to direct (electric) sales wherever possible.
 
It was 5.7% for 2022, up 65% YoY.

https://cleantechnica.com/2023/02/25/us-electric-car-sales-increased-65-in-2022/

2023Q1 is at 7.1%, up 66% YoY.

https://cleantechnica.com/2023/04/27/us-electric-vehicle-sales-up-66-in-1st-quarter/

It's also worth noting that the US is a distant third behind China (29.1%) and Europe (12.1%). It's not that BEVs are bad, it's that Americans are too uninformed, stubborn, yet so confident at stating (false) facts. Your comment being a great example at that.

Also noteworthy is the fact that in total volume, ICEV already peaked in 2017 and it'll never return to those numbers. So the market is growing, but ICEV sales are shrinking, and will continue to shrink down to zero, both percentage and amount sold.

So yeah, feel free to keep talking cr@p about electric cars. Won't change a thing. But one day you'll go to a dealer and get slapped in the face by the hard reality that they don't sell any gas guzzlers anymore. Or there won't even be any dealer to talk about in the first place, because everyone hates dealers, carmakers and customers included, and they're all switching to direct (electric) sales wherever possible.
It's amazing how smug the ignorant sound. America is not europe (where most countries are small enough to drive across on a single charge), and its not china (where driver licenses are handed out via lottery system and the vast majority cannot gain access to purchase a vehicle). Like it or not there are significant problems with electric cars, from lack of range to extreme repair costs to utter lack of charging infrastructure. Maybe your own bias is preventing you from understanding these issues. Just a thought.
 
250 miles of range isn't a lot, either. that's 30-45 minutes of flight and how long does it take to charge?

Imagine how much CO2 can be saved by just keeping it into national/international flights. 250 = 400KM. Per comparison that would be a fully CO2 neutral flight from Brussels to Paris. Or Lisbon (Portugal) to Madrid.
 
Imagine how much CO2 can be saved by just keeping it into national/international flights. 250 = 400KM. Per comparison that would be a fully CO2 neutral flight from Brussels to Paris. Or Lisbon (Portugal) to Madrid.

Good grief, the distance from Lisbon to Madrid is over 625KM and the distance from Brussels to Paris is 313KM. Even if there were batteries that could manage to allow a plane to travel those distances (and there aren't), the weight and size of such batteries would be so large as to only allow enough room on the plane for the pilot and no one else. With the current state of battery technology it's ridiculous to even discuss battery powered planes for mass transit.
 
It's amazing how smug the ignorant sound. America is not europe (where most countries are small enough to drive across on a single charge), and its not china (where driver licenses are handed out via lottery system and the vast majority cannot gain access to purchase a vehicle). Like it or not there are significant problems with electric cars, from lack of range to extreme repair costs to utter lack of charging infrastructure. Maybe your own bias is preventing you from understanding these issues. Just a thought.
Smug? Stating the hard numbers with sources is smug now? How? If you don't like things the way they are, that's your personal problem, not my "smugness". You can keep denying and downplaying it, but it won't change anything. The smugness came from the comment I responded to, with the dense sarcasm that had nothing to do with what is actually going on.

No one said BEVs are perfect. Reading comprehension, dude.

If you can't comprehend the fact that "less than 1%" does not equal to 7.1%, I don't know what else to say to you. It's an order of magnitude of a difference, yet people try to push a narrative that's factually wrong. Have fun laughing off BEVs, but reality will catch up to you sooner or later.
 
Instead of messing with these silly batteries (that the majority of the minerals to make them come from the CCP), they should be working on some sort of FUEL CELL, or nuclear power.
 
Every journey starts with the first step. We can't start with the 10th.

In any case, Hydrogen turbines (not to be confused with Hydrogen fuel cells) will probably be the weapon of choice for the foreseeable future. Long range, battery powered planes... probably centuries away, unfortunately.

It's still an important thing to do, and we'll get there eventually. Some important and interesting reads:

https://aviation.stackexchange.com/a/26919/68819
https://www.theverge.com/2022/11/29/23483889/rolls-royce-easyjet-hydrogen-fuel-jet-engine-test
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen-powered_aircraft#Emissions_and_environmental_impact

No one is arguing that we don't do research and look for better ways. As with nuclear fusion power, research started long ago, we're making extremely slow progress, but progress none the less, and we need to keep trying.

My problem, as with the beginning of the article, is we continue to sell electric vehicles as the total solution to climate, energy, and all of our transportation. So much so, that we're now trying to regulate hydrocarbon fuels out RIGHT NOW, regulate the things that use them (ICE cars, stoves, furnaces), and punish the companies that produce them and lower refining and exploration.

EV's are practical for set of the population that fit their use profile and can afford them. But forcing us into them right now with regulation and causing massive increases in gasoline and diesel prices, will be a painful and massive economic disaster. Would be the same as closing power plants upon the discovery of small scale fusion success. Making a breakthrough does not translate to the large scale power needs of our country.
 
It was 5.7% for 2022, up 65% YoY.

https://cleantechnica.com/2023/02/25/us-electric-car-sales-increased-65-in-2022/

2023Q1 is at 7.1%, up 66% YoY.

https://cleantechnica.com/2023/04/27/us-electric-vehicle-sales-up-66-in-1st-quarter/

It's also worth noting that the US is a distant third behind China (29.1%) and Europe (12.1%). It's not that BEVs are bad, it's that Americans are too uninformed, stubborn, yet so confident at stating (false) facts. Your comment being a great example at that.

Also noteworthy is the fact that in total volume, ICEV already peaked in 2017 and it'll never return to those numbers. So the market is growing, but ICEV sales are shrinking, and will continue to shrink down to zero, both percentage and amount sold.

So yeah, feel free to keep talking cr@p about electric cars. Won't change a thing. But one day you'll go to a dealer and get slapped in the face by the hard reality that they don't sell any gas guzzlers anymore. Or there won't even be any dealer to talk about in the first place, because everyone hates dealers, carmakers and customers included, and they're all switching to direct (electric) sales wherever possible.

Your talking about new vehicle sales....Most articles talk about the fact that EV sales are up 60% last year while ICE were down 18% but car sales were down dramatically last year except for the luxury segment and those who absolutely had to buy for the most part. That's your numbers...Mine are how many out of the entire number of vehicles on the road. Remember...a 100% increase is great, but not so great if you go from 5 to 10
 
Smug? Stating the hard numbers with sources is smug now? How? If you don't like things the way they are, that's your personal problem, not my "smugness". You can keep denying and downplaying it, but it won't change anything. The smugness came from the comment I responded to, with the dense sarcasm that had nothing to do with what is actually going on.

No one said BEVs are perfect. Reading comprehension, dude.

If you can't comprehend the fact that "less than 1%" does not equal to 7.1%, I don't know what else to say to you. It's an order of magnitude of a difference, yet people try to push a narrative that's factually wrong. Have fun laughing off BEVs, but reality will catch up to you sooner or later.

Understand something, looking at only numbers from sites that support your point of view and never reading and/or dismissing any contrary information does nothing for your credibility. Almost all sites (and the view of this website for one) always discuss all of the benefits and none of the reality WITHOUT lying or making up facts. Quoting sales number are great, but are a very far cry to from demonstrating acceptance and progress in the public as a whole.

1% is ALL OF THE VEHICLES ON THE ROAD IN THE US. In other words, cars and light trucks actually owned and driven in the country, NOT sale numbers for 20xs year.
I verified this number through several sites, Took me 20 min because all anyone wants to talk about is sales. Most recent article was from a PRO EV article from Car and Driver which was 1% of 250 million cars on the road.

I've been in the car business my whole life and have driven just about every major manufacturers cars, including Tesla. My wife's hybrid gets 30% more range than my v8 car with a fuel tank half of the size. An EV would never work for us with our driving needs, nothing more, nothing less. And like most people, I can't afford them either.
 
Last edited:
EV's are practical for set of the population that fit their use profile and can afford them. But forcing us into them right now with regulation and causing massive increases in gasoline and diesel prices, will be a painful and massive economic disaster.
I hope we realize sooner rather than later that we do not have the right to ruin the world just because we are in a hurry and don't want to make a stop once every few hours of driving or because it seems cheaper to burn coal/gas/forests. If we need to stop burning stuff, and regulation is one way of achieving it, so be it. No pain, no gain.
 
I hope we realize sooner rather than later that we do not have the right to ruin the world just because we are in a hurry and don't want to make a stop once every few hours of driving or because it seems cheaper to burn coal/gas/forests. If we need to stop burning stuff, and regulation is one way of achieving it, so be it. No pain, no gain.

It's not about that. Glad you think the economy is driven by family trips. How about this, most of the climate warriors that act more like cultist, have no earthly idea about either how and economy works or how much of it is dependent on fossil fuels. Instead of stopping a few hours, let's just live without fresh vegetables, since they are trucked by climate controlled trailers, all on fossil fuels. However the meat industry also either becoming extinct or hundreds of dollars a pound would probably be a good thing in your eyes. (no or expensive feed, fewer farms, same lack of viable transportation). Why worry about planes, we just won't fly! Sound like Utopia to me.

Let's just shut down the oil companies tomorrow. The world will never mind the inconvenience...And think of the carbon savings due to starvation, death from freezing, poverty, 250 million cars parked forever. Sign me up.
 
250 miles of range isn't a lot, either. that's 30-45 minutes of flight and how long does it take to charge?
So, how about NYC to LA:
About a dozen hops where passengers can play tourist while charging the plane.
Of it you're in more of a hurry, take a train?
 
"The greenest journey is one that isn't made at all." Eventually the governments of the world will just now allow you and me to travel, and if you can it will be on government provided transit "solutions".

And yeah... batteries aren't going to cut it and it doesn't appear they ever will, to be honest. There are challenges with hydrogen but it has a REAL chance at becoming mainstream in the next 25 years. Yes you need energy to make the fuel but that can be done on-site at airports and with mostly green methods like solar electrolysis.

So as it has been said already here, unless there is an AMAZING breakthrough with battery tech where we can get 30x storage capacity with reduced weight and charge times, it isn't going to happen. And unless we make some other breakthrough with other means like fusion or nuclear or something we haven't really thought of yet, hydrogen will be the winner. It may take 50+ years to get there but I believe it will... It is still "greener" than burning oil as long as you don't use the dirtier production methods.
 
Back