Battery Electric Vehicle News / Enjoying the Transportation Revolution

CKhalvashi

michaels said:

CKhalvashi said:

michaels said:

Martyn1981 said:

Watched the series Hijack with Idris Elba on the weekend (spoiler alert - the plane gets hijacked). And boring soul that I am, I was pondering the introduction of BEV tugs for moving the planes around. Lost track of progress.

So a timely article on planned changes at Munich airport (by 2028). Just seems that a BEV with heavy batts and instant torque would struggle to find a better role than this.

Munich is getting 14 of these 352-ton electric aircraft tractors from Goldhofer

Frequent visitors to Germany’s Munich Airport will be able to breathe a little bit easier soon, thanks to a new deal with the ground support experts at Goldhofer for 14 of its all-electric, 352 ton-rated PHOENIX E aircraft tractors.

Think there have been BEV 'radio controlled car' pushback tractors for smaller jets at UK airports for several years?

British Airways | BRITISH AIRWAYS’ REMOTE-CONTROL PUSHBACK VEHICLES REACH RECORD 100,000 DEPARTURES

I don't believe they're 350t versions though.

Tractors are generally based on aircraft MTOW. As I'm aware, these wouldn't be suitable for the A320 family aircraft that OH flies, which generally has a MTOW of below 100t.

350t will be for A330, A350, 747, 777 and 787-size aircraft. They're common already for smaller types.

OH feels it's funny to have a TOGA flap 3 takeoff after being pushed back by an electric tractor. As SAF becomes more available, this will become less of a problem. Work already is underway on the engine certification for the NEO for a 100% SAF blend. Currently the maximum is 50% and a 40% blend is used due to small tolerances in the fuel at airports this is available.

Flying in general though is actually quite green on an emissions/km basis, especially as emissions fall on European LCCs. I've got trips booked with 2 such airlines, 2 flights of which will be operated on an A321neo with 239 seats to Belgrade (currently about the most sustainable aircraft in the skies), the other 2 are with the 737-8 MAX to Madrid, which has 197 seats in this configuration and is still about 20% more sustainable than previous generation models. Interestingly it would have been cheaper to transfer in Cluj outbound and Budapest inbound for the Madrid (specific dates are needed as I'm going for a specific event). I've chosen the direct routing.

I was looking at this, we generally travel less far so driving in a day is doable and for us taking the EV, especially 4 up, is orders of magnitude less co2 per mile than flying but sadly also nearly an order of magnitude more expensive.

Both of these trips are predominantly for business. I've been invited to meet an Economist with practical experience in an area of business interest in Belgrade and need to meet someone for negotiations on capacity they have and we need somewhere. Madrid is convenient for them and the dates are convenient for me.

Driving these sorts of distances for 4 and 3 days is beyond me these days. 10 years ago it would have been done in a heartbeat.

The Belgrade trip was about £36pp return, the Madrid one about £50. It costs more than that just to get to France, which shouldn't probably be the case.

Magnitio

CKhalvashi said:

michaels said:

CKhalvashi said:

michaels said:

Martyn1981 said:

Watched the series Hijack with Idris Elba on the weekend (spoiler alert - the plane gets hijacked). And boring soul that I am, I was pondering the introduction of BEV tugs for moving the planes around. Lost track of progress.

So a timely article on planned changes at Munich airport (by 2028). Just seems that a BEV with heavy batts and instant torque would struggle to find a better role than this.

Munich is getting 14 of these 352-ton electric aircraft tractors from Goldhofer

Frequent visitors to Germany’s Munich Airport will be able to breathe a little bit easier soon, thanks to a new deal with the ground support experts at Goldhofer for 14 of its all-electric, 352 ton-rated PHOENIX E aircraft tractors.

Think there have been BEV 'radio controlled car' pushback tractors for smaller jets at UK airports for several years?

British Airways | BRITISH AIRWAYS’ REMOTE-CONTROL PUSHBACK VEHICLES REACH RECORD 100,000 DEPARTURES

I don't believe they're 350t versions though.

Tractors are generally based on aircraft MTOW. As I'm aware, these wouldn't be suitable for the A320 family aircraft that OH flies, which generally has a MTOW of below 100t.

350t will be for A330, A350, 747, 777 and 787-size aircraft. They're common already for smaller types.

OH feels it's funny to have a TOGA flap 3 takeoff after being pushed back by an electric tractor. As SAF becomes more available, this will become less of a problem. Work already is underway on the engine certification for the NEO for a 100% SAF blend. Currently the maximum is 50% and a 40% blend is used due to small tolerances in the fuel at airports this is available.

Flying in general though is actually quite green on an emissions/km basis, especially as emissions fall on European LCCs. I've got trips booked with 2 such airlines, 2 flights of which will be operated on an A321neo with 239 seats to Belgrade (currently about the most sustainable aircraft in the skies), the other 2 are with the 737-8 MAX to Madrid, which has 197 seats in this configuration and is still about 20% more sustainable than previous generation models. Interestingly it would have been cheaper to transfer in Cluj outbound and Budapest inbound for the Madrid (specific dates are needed as I'm going for a specific event). I've chosen the direct routing.

I was looking at this, we generally travel less far so driving in a day is doable and for us taking the EV, especially 4 up, is orders of magnitude less co2 per mile than flying but sadly also nearly an order of magnitude more expensive.

Both of these trips are predominantly for business. I've been invited to meet an Economist with practical experience in an area of business interest in Belgrade and need to meet someone for negotiations on capacity they have and we need somewhere. Madrid is convenient for them and the dates are convenient for me.

Driving these sorts of distances for 4 and 3 days is beyond me these days. 10 years ago it would have been done in a heartbeat.

The Belgrade trip was about £36pp return, the Madrid one about £50. It costs more than that just to get to France, which shouldn't probably be the case.

It's even cheaper and more environmentally friendly to use Zoom, Skype, Teams or whatever your preferred conference call software is. I know it's not quite the same as meeting face-to-face, but it is quick and easy.

CKhalvashi

Magnitio said:

CKhalvashi said:

michaels said:

CKhalvashi said:

michaels said:

Martyn1981 said:

Watched the series Hijack with Idris Elba on the weekend (spoiler alert - the plane gets hijacked). And boring soul that I am, I was pondering the introduction of BEV tugs for moving the planes around. Lost track of progress.

So a timely article on planned changes at Munich airport (by 2028). Just seems that a BEV with heavy batts and instant torque would struggle to find a better role than this.

Munich is getting 14 of these 352-ton electric aircraft tractors from Goldhofer

Frequent visitors to Germany’s Munich Airport will be able to breathe a little bit easier soon, thanks to a new deal with the ground support experts at Goldhofer for 14 of its all-electric, 352 ton-rated PHOENIX E aircraft tractors.

Think there have been BEV 'radio controlled car' pushback tractors for smaller jets at UK airports for several years?

British Airways | BRITISH AIRWAYS’ REMOTE-CONTROL PUSHBACK VEHICLES REACH RECORD 100,000 DEPARTURES

I don't believe they're 350t versions though.

Tractors are generally based on aircraft MTOW. As I'm aware, these wouldn't be suitable for the A320 family aircraft that OH flies, which generally has a MTOW of below 100t.

350t will be for A330, A350, 747, 777 and 787-size aircraft. They're common already for smaller types.

OH feels it's funny to have a TOGA flap 3 takeoff after being pushed back by an electric tractor. As SAF becomes more available, this will become less of a problem. Work already is underway on the engine certification for the NEO for a 100% SAF blend. Currently the maximum is 50% and a 40% blend is used due to small tolerances in the fuel at airports this is available.

Flying in general though is actually quite green on an emissions/km basis, especially as emissions fall on European LCCs. I've got trips booked with 2 such airlines, 2 flights of which will be operated on an A321neo with 239 seats to Belgrade (currently about the most sustainable aircraft in the skies), the other 2 are with the 737-8 MAX to Madrid, which has 197 seats in this configuration and is still about 20% more sustainable than previous generation models. Interestingly it would have been cheaper to transfer in Cluj outbound and Budapest inbound for the Madrid (specific dates are needed as I'm going for a specific event). I've chosen the direct routing.

I was looking at this, we generally travel less far so driving in a day is doable and for us taking the EV, especially 4 up, is orders of magnitude less co2 per mile than flying but sadly also nearly an order of magnitude more expensive.

Both of these trips are predominantly for business. I've been invited to meet an Economist with practical experience in an area of business interest in Belgrade and need to meet someone for negotiations on capacity they have and we need somewhere. Madrid is convenient for them and the dates are convenient for me.

Driving these sorts of distances for 4 and 3 days is beyond me these days. 10 years ago it would have been done in a heartbeat.

The Belgrade trip was about £36pp return, the Madrid one about £50. It costs more than that just to get to France, which shouldn't probably be the case.

It's even cheaper and more environmentally friendly to use Zoom, Skype, Teams or whatever your preferred conference call software is. I know it's not quite the same as meeting face-to-face, but it is quick and easy.

I'll PM you to keep the thread on topic.

silverwhistle

CKhalvashi said:

The Belgrade trip was about £36pp return, the Madrid one about £50. It costs more than that just to get to France, which shouldn't probably be the case.

I must admit sometimes transport economics eludes me: my last flight in 2015 was an internal one as it was by far the cheapest way to get to Scotland for a wedding: a zoom or Skype call wouldn't have done it!;-) 

I have hitched almost a dozen helicopter flights in the last few years, so no wonder I don't get transport economics what with a quick flight to The Fighting Cocks for a couple of pints! Last trip to Italy this year in a cheap EV, and you certainly can't get 20 litres of drink and a few kilos of cheese on an Easyjet flight, but the Channel is an expensive bit of water to cross, although The Solent is even more expensive pro-rata.

michaels

silverwhistle said:

CKhalvashi said:

The Belgrade trip was about £36pp return, the Madrid one about £50. It costs more than that just to get to France, which shouldn't probably be the case.

I must admit sometimes transport economics eludes me: my last flight in 2015 was an internal one as it was by far the cheapest way to get to Scotland for a wedding: a zoom or Skype call wouldn't have done it!;-) 

I have hitched almost a dozen helicopter flights in the last few years, so no wonder I don't get transport economics what with a quick flight to The Fighting Cocks for a couple of pints! Last trip to Italy this year in a cheap EV, and you certainly can't get 20 litres of drink and a few kilos of cheese on an Easyjet flight, but the Channel is an expensive bit of water to cross, although The Solent is even more expensive pro-rata.

My DS was in a Gaelic football tournament in Eire for 2 days and we wanted to go and watch.  Would love to have taken the EV for about 10-20% the environmental impact of flying but even factoring airport parking, car hire when we got there etc the flying option for 4 was 25% the costs of the driving option

Coastalwatch

michaels said:

silverwhistle said:

CKhalvashi said:

The Belgrade trip was about £36pp return, the Madrid one about £50. It costs more than that just to get to France, which shouldn't probably be the case.

I must admit sometimes transport economics eludes me: my last flight in 2015 was an internal one as it was by far the cheapest way to get to Scotland for a wedding: a zoom or Skype call wouldn't have done it!;-) 

I have hitched almost a dozen helicopter flights in the last few years, so no wonder I don't get transport economics what with a quick flight to The Fighting Cocks for a couple of pints! Last trip to Italy this year in a cheap EV, and you certainly can't get 20 litres of drink and a few kilos of cheese on an Easyjet flight, but the Channel is an expensive bit of water to cross, although The Solent is even more expensive pro-rata.

My DS was in a Gaelic football tournament in Eire for 2 days and we wanted to go and watch.  Would love to have taken the EV for about 10-20% the environmental impact of flying but even factoring airport parking, car hire when we got there etc the flying option for 4 was 25% the costs of the driving option

Which rather begs the question shouldn't aviation fuel be taxed? After all it certainly adds to CO2 emissions so contributing towards accelerating global warming and with a less realistic timeline for transitioning to cleaner means really ought to be ringing alarm bells for action to be taken.

I can only imagine most of the world is well aware but it seems we've become so conditioned to economics ruling the roost that even the poor old planet and man's very existence upon it plays second fiddle.

Edit, With apologies for taking the enjoyment aspect of the thread somewhat off track.

Grumpy_chap

Coastalwatch said:

Which rather begs the question shouldn't aviation fuel be taxed? 

AIUI, the reason aviation fuel is not taxed is because it is an international commodity and would have to be taxed equally worldwide to avoid airlines simply filling up at whichever airport had the lowest taxation / fuel cost which could be counter-productive from a total fuel / carbon perspective - flying from A to B and back to A all on one fuel load means that the plane has carried additional weight from A to B the first direction of travel.

thevilla

 airlines simply filling up at whichever airport had the lowest taxation / fuel cost which could be counter-productive from a total fuel / carbon perspective -

Didn't BA get called out by whistle blowers for just such a practice a couple of years ago. 'Tankering' is what they called it.

Edit: found it

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-50365362.amp

CKhalvashi

Grumpy_chap said:

Coastalwatch said:

Which rather begs the question shouldn't aviation fuel be taxed? 

AIUI, the reason aviation fuel is not taxed is because it is an international commodity and would have to be taxed equally worldwide to avoid airlines simply filling up at whichever airport had the lowest taxation / fuel cost which could be counter-productive from a total fuel / carbon perspective - flying from A to B and back to A all on one fuel load means that the plane has carried additional weight from A to B the first direction of travel.

There are a number of legitimate reasons for tankering, cost shouldn't be one of them.

The issue is that the more fuel is on board requires additional fuel burn to uplift that fuel. A lot of very long routes have this issue built in to the extent that it's often more efficient to stop somewhere along the way than to carry out the journey non-stop despite aircraft being able to do so.

silverwhistle

Like having a smaller battery EV and charging just a little more often: more efficient than driving a gurt big battery around all the time..