The X1 aircraft is comparable in size to a small regional airliner and can achieve a maximum takeoff weight exceeding 25,000 pounds with the help of four wing-mounted electric motors. The battery-electric propulsion system delivered more than one megawatt of power during the maiden flight.
@[email protected] for short distances that would be better served by a train.
@[email protected]
That is not an option for islands or sometimes a train has to go the long way around, due to large bodies of water. Korea - Japan or something like Greece - southern Italy are interesting flights for example.
you can’t cover the ground with rails. air travel does have uses trains cannot meet.
@[email protected]
@[email protected] I specified short distances. By the take you get to the airport an hour early the train has covered a fairly long distance. Nobody wants to live near an airport as airplanes are inherently noisy, but trains are quiet.
With small airplanes, you get to choose departure time. Electric airplanes can make this affordable to more people.
@[email protected]
@[email protected] Only if you personally own the airplane and either are the pilot, or can afford to pay the pilot. Most pilots are not sole owners their airplane and only get to choose departure time if there is one available when they want to go (there are many ways to rent or be part owners of an airplane.)
There are commercial small airplane services with various business models. All the affordable ones are just small airlines: they run scheduled flights and you book a seat (which sell out) in advance for when the run happens.
I don’t think most people will ever find small airplanes affordable. I’m paying $600/month (plus insurance and taxes) for the privilege of having a car that I can use on demand - even though I normally ride my bike, this is the price I need to pay to ensure I can get to some of the more distant places in my city. I do not have a runway in my backyard so having an airplane doesn’t save me from having to also have that car payment to get to the airport (even if I did have a runway, most of my friends do not). Which is to say assuming they can get the cost of a used airplane down to a used car it still is a large expense that I doubt most people could afford.
Electric aircrafts can be cheaper to run, and therefore available to more people. This relationship is quite simple and straightforward.
@[email protected]
@[email protected]
Sure they can be cheaper. However they are still going to be expensive. I doubt they will ever get to car costs. (A 50 year old Cesna will still sell for more than $50k). Cheaper fuel is useful, but fuel and maintenance is only a small part of the cost of owning an airplane. You still need airports and pilots - both of which are somewhat costly. Farmers can land in a field - but most of us don’t have that much space. Even the rich tend to not have that much space around their mansions (they might around the second house in the country). You can get a pilots license, but it is a lot of training and most people won’t.
So pedantically you are correct. A few people who want a regular airplane but are just far enough out on the margins will be able to afford this. A few routes that commercial airlines can’t quiet cover now become viable. However for the vast majority I don’t see this as making any difference.
Not only “pedantically”, also: strictly. Fuel and maintenance are a significant part of operating an aircraft, and that is what relates to this EV forum.
Perhaps you can find friends on a thread discussing airport and pilot costs instead of EVs. Dismissing the usefulness of electrification on an EV forum makes you look out of line.
Have you lived next to a track where trains travel frequently? The noise is mostly ok, however the vibrations are not. I would not live closer than 1 km or so from the track, otherwise you feel the house vibrate every time a train passes. Good luck if the trains pass each hour, especially during the nights.
Airports are worse tho, I’ll give you that.
It the make a small airport electrics only, the airport can be right inside the city.
I have spent my entire childhood in a house at a mere 125m away from the train tracks, with trains passing 8 times per hour (excl. freight which also passes every now and then). You could faintly hear them if you were in the garden, but never in a bothersome way. I have not once felt anything vibrate from a passing train. Maybe this is different for poorly built houses? But it really shouldn’t be an issue.
Could be that the house or ground type is different. I also lived there for only a few months, which could be too short to get used to it. Would not choose to live close to frequently used tracks again though.
I would think that house was from the cheaper end though, which could explain things.
@[email protected]
@[email protected] @[email protected]
That is very much a it depends. Freight trains are like that, as are passenger trains on steel bridges, or anything with a large diesel engine. However we know how to make tracks that are not like that. Concrete bridges dampen vibration well. Elective EMUs are also much quieter.
This is true. Though some areas with harsh terrain will benefit from this
Only poors take trains
no, the poors drive cars and sit in traffic for hours, it’s why they’re poor.
@[email protected] only in places with terrible trains. Rich people the world over take trains when they are good. A lot of the rich in places like NYC or Tokyo take trains. Of course the rich have options, some so show off with limos and the like, but when they want to blend in the train works.
@[email protected] @[email protected]
In London people moan about public transport being awful, but plenty of rich people and celebrities take the train anyway. There was a newspaper article a few years ago about a court case that finished and both parties and their lawyers and the judge all ran into each other at the train station again.
i still can’t afford a train cabin
@[email protected]
@[email protected] @[email protected]
A train cabin is significantly cheaper than an airplane.
For me personally, not including the travel to Chicago, it would be 225USD for a less than 5 hour flight from Chicago to Seattle, while the smallest cabin (“roomette”) on an Amtrak would cost 1400USD and take over 46 hours. Even the coach is 280USD.
Edit: I’m seeing the bit about short trips now; I thought that the comment I was replying to was about travel in general. Chicago to Detroit would only be 35USD for ~6h on Amtrak coach (no cabin offered), flight price would be the same as Chicago-Seattle. Train would be cheaper in this case, though without a cabin.
@[email protected]
@[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] compare Amtrak pulling your personal car vs owning a personal train.
Though Chicago to Seattle is a long distance trip where flying beats the train even with ideal service. If you were asking about going to indianapolis instead the train should be both cheaper and faster That it isn’t is a reflection on how bad Amtrak is not trains in general.