Electra Aero

Why is every branch of the US military suddenly shelling out for this thing? Have they figured out how to impregnate aircraft composites with egirl pheromones or something? YOU CAN'T FRICK THE PLANE. GAO, T- TELL THEM THEY CAN'T FRICK IT

• US Navy Selects Electra to Design Ship-Based Contested Logistics Aircraft

US Army Awards Electra Contract for Powered Wind Tunnel Test of Contested Logistics eSTOL Aircraft

• Electra to develop ultra-short takeoff plane for Air Force

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    If you think you can't frick it you're not trying hard enough.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      She's no F35, pal. If you ain't bringing enough to share with the class, we got a 2A problem. Stimmies or we riot

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Is this a bot?

        What blew up now?

        Is this?

  2. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    What blew up now?

  3. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Why not just buy Storch?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Who in their right mind would want to frick THAT when you have ELECTRA sitting topside

      You need to check into the medbay?

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Her vs Her friend with "a great personality"

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      > BRAWMAMWAMBRBWBRBWBRBWBRBBRBBR

      https://i.imgur.com/JwiBL0G.jpeg

      Why is every branch of the US military suddenly shelling out for this thing? Have they figured out how to impregnate aircraft composites with egirl pheromones or something? YOU CAN'T FRICK THE PLANE. GAO, T- TELL THEM THEY CAN'T FRICK IT

      • US Navy Selects Electra to Design Ship-Based Contested Logistics Aircraft

      • US Army Awards Electra Contract for Powered Wind Tunnel Test of Contested Logistics eSTOL Aircraft

      • Electra to develop ultra-short takeoff plane for Air Force

      > bzwzbwzwzwwzzwzwzwzwzwzzw

  4. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    But seriously - anyone? What's so special about this one shitter, versus any of the zillions of other eVTOL style things out there at the moment?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      They probably like the idea of having a transport that doesnt need to use fuel, but in a few years realize that batteries are still shit and can the project.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        If range isn't a problem electric motors have far better power-to-weight ratio than piston engines and even most turboshaft engines

        Does this firm have special sauce in that regard? I don't see anything extra shiny in their portfolio. There's such a glut of eVTOL companies with wildly ambitious demonstrators and marketing pitches that I have no idea how / why the big branches are settling on one vendor repeateldy for this.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          The special sauce is they're not evtol, they're hybrid. They take advantage of the P/W of the electric motors for takeoff thrust and use a much smaller conventional engine sized for cruise

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Electro Aero plane is hybrid. It's powered by 600kw turbo generator using normal jet fuel. Electric part is transmission and some battery to boost power during short take off.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >600kw generator in that tiny ass plane
          No

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Safran Helicopter Engines has signed an agreement with Electra to develop the 600 kW electric turbogenerator propulsion system for the prototype of Electra’s nine-passenger hybrid-electric short takeoff and landing (eSTOL) aircraft.
            https://www.electra.aero/news/safran

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            guessing it means it can pull 600kw from the electrical system during takeoff, not that it's a literal 600kw generator. Use your brain

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Turbine engines are extremely power dense in weight and volume.

            https://aviationweek.com/shownews/paris-air-show/safran-helicopter-engines-developing-turbogenerator-electras-estol

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              That turboshaft has a peak output of 850kw.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I'm looking forward to buying one for pennies on the dollar at a government auction, don't ruin the surprise.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      They promote this for the same they promote gay electric cars. They don't intend to actually make them so they are commercially feasible and affordable its just a carrot to dangle in front of moronic normie bug people so they buy into the climate crisis scam.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Biden said the military needed electric vehicles because CO2 bad.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Electra aero runs on jet fuel.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Global oil reserves are predicted to run dry by 2051. Or at least, that's the date when it's no longer economically profitable to tap it. Only airliners and the military will still use oil. Most of us will die of alcoholism before then, but kids born today will be just 26 when that happens. The US is literally the only country investing in electric tanks and ships and shit. They know what's coming. They know they'll need them.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          I miss peak oil boomer's schizo charts plotting ammo vs. gold vs. oil

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Global oil reserves are predicted to run dry by 2051.
          Fear mongering.
          Also there is synthetic oil from coal, and coal reserves are at least another 500 years.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Global oil reserves are predicted to run dry by 2051.
          No they aren't.
          >Or at least, that's the date when it's no longer economically profitable to tap it.
          No it isn't.

          Every single one of these studies begins with "if we never drill a well ever again". They're a fricking psyop to alarm laymen into thinking their kids will freeze unless we buy solar panels and heat pumps. You may as well publish articles about humans going extinct if we all stopped eating (which billions would have to do if oil ran out by the way).

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            They're studies that are based on science. Oil isn't infinite, you know. We're burning it constantly. It will run out eventually. Our militaries must be prepared for this, and they are in fact doing so. They accept reality, and you should too.

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >They're studies that are based on science.
              That all begin with "if we never drill a well ever again"

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                They're based on economics. By 2051 the only oil reserves left will be so deep that and sparce that it won't be profitable to tap them. They'll be tapped only for the fact that nothing else is as energy dense as hydrocarbons.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >They're based on economics.
                That all begin with "if we never drill a well ever again"
                >the only oil reserves left
                The only EXPLORED reserves. Like I said, they ALL begin with "if we never drill a well ever again".

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                You're just repeating yourself. Google the question and see that it's the truth. Please stop saying that oil will be profitable forever.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >You're just repeating yourself.
                You keep having something said to you and it slips off your smooth brain like shit out of a seagull's ass.
                >Please stop saying that oil will be profitable forever.
                Please quote me saying anything remotely approaching that statement once. Oh, and have a nice day.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >They're studies that are based on science.
            That all begin with "if we never drill a well ever again"

            >They're based on economics.
            That all begin with "if we never drill a well ever again"
            >the only oil reserves left
            The only EXPLORED reserves. Like I said, they ALL begin with "if we never drill a well ever again".

            >just drill more wells lol
            that won't help you if there isn't any oil left to drill for, moron. the more wells you drill, the sooner that day comes.
            (but let me guess - just drill le nother well. drill your mother. just drill!)

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >if there isn't any oil left to drill for
              two more weeks

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                why so evasive, anon? are you saying it'll never happen? you could make life easy here: pretend to be an abiotic oil schizo.
                but you won't, you'll reply "two more weeks" again or something because years of using this shithole has left you incapable of engaging seriously with any point. you're too dishonest to admit oil reserves aren't limitless, but more insultingly you're too stupid to pretend that they are.

                don't reply again unless it's a good one.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                two more weeks

                more seriously, even in the event of total oil depletion, it's probably still worth using alternative energy sources to produce synfuel as a dense, storable form of energy compatible with existing engines and logistics chains. So no, we'll never run out of oil, because we can make more. It's not cheap, but nothing would be cheap in a world where literally every hydrocarbon source on Earth decided to stop producing.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                No matter how you slice it, a world without oil will not be able to support our current economy and population. If you take a barrel of oil, calculate its stored energy, then translate that energy to what you'd need to pay a human to expend an equivalent amount of energy, it costs $208,172. A barrel of oil gives us that work for $86, by comparison.

                Can we make synthetic oil? Yes, but the crops for that are crops that you can't use for other things, like food. It takes more energy to make synthetic oil than to mine crude oil, so it's less efficient overall, too. So what will we do? Electric vehicles? There's not enough lithium in the world to make all the batteries needed to replace combustion engines, but at least the lithium can be recycled. We can also use sodium batteries, but those suck and would be relegated to container sized, static units.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >There's not enough lithium in the world to make enough batteries to replace combustion engines
                Wrong, or at least deliberately misleading.

                Global Lithium Availability
                A Constraint for Electric Vehicles?
                Paul W. Gruber, Pablo A. Medina, Gregory A. Keoleian, Stephen E. Kesler, Mark P. Everson, Timothy J. Wallington

                The EROI argument you're making is fine and a worthwhile conversation, but gross exploitable lithium supply probably isn't a constraint for energy transition.

                I will always advocate for nuclear though, since it's the only directly weaponisable energy source. All the other ones have intermediate steps that mean they're not weapons in and of themselves.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Batteries are not immediately weaponizable

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Bigger the better

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Sometimes you just need to get it wet.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >then translate that energy to what you'd need to pay a human to expend an equivalent amount of energy
                This is the most moronic comparison I've ever heard. "We will regress to paying homeless people to run on treadmills" is not a realistic description of post-fossil-fuel economies and makes everything else you say deeply unserious. Procurement should not be driven by your fantasies.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                That's not what he's saying. Just using human labor as a benchmark for the most inefficient work source. That's the one we started with and built on top of, using more and more efficient ones. No one thinks we'll revert to human labor as a primary energy source, it's just the absolute floor for how efficient energy can be.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Unless we literally lose the technology for internal combustion the floor is wood gas

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                No, because the discussion isn't only about the primary energy source, it's about all energy sources that are used, because economics actually works in terms of shifts at the margins when prices change.

                This is because the value you get from a unit of a commodity must at least match the cost you pay for it. The most valuable uses can afford the most for a commodity, the least valuable things the least. When the price of a thing increases the value floor for the possible uses rises, and more possible uses are not economically viable. In reality, commodities vary in price as well as the value of the potential uses, and the cheapest units of a commodity are consumed first, most expensive last, up to the point where the cheapest available unit of commodity is more expensive than the most valuable remaining use. Thus, if you remove many cheap units of a commodity then the remaining units will be reassigned to higher value uses than they were previously used for, and some uses will no longer be economically viable.

                Pretending that all work (in the engineering sense) is fully commoditisable for the sake of explanation, this is why we already use human labor for some things right now. There is never enough available work (ie converted energy) to cover all valuable uses, so some of them are done with the least efficient unit of the commodity (human labor). If work (energy) becomes generally more expensive because the primary source of it changes to a less efficient source, then more work will be done by manual labor and some things that we do now will become too expensive to keep doing (ie, living standards will decline).

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                i always appreciate being passionate about technology but it's important to not assume you have a complete grasp of complex topics. believe it or not, it is not as simple as you make it out to be.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >If you take a barrel of oil, calculate its stored energy, then translate that energy to what you'd need to pay a human to expend an equivalent amount of energy, it costs $208,172. A barrel of oil gives us that work for $86, by comparison.
                Also, this is a comparison of work to energy, correct? The work done with oil is still cheaper, but it's still shifty to compare the work done by one thing to the total energy of another. For the specific topic of discussion (cars), even if it was perfectly efficient to refine oil to gasoline (it's not), car engines themselves are only 50% efficient at best.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                better reply, thank you.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                it's okay anon, we'll hit peak oil very soon!

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          We were supposed to run out of oil a long time ago.
          Every single past prediction about oil has been wrong, simply because no study can realistically account for future technology developments. Oil extraction will keep getting cheaper and previously economically inaccessible reserves will be tapped.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            The thing is that the damned stuff is not growing back. The entire premise hinges on
            >hey maybe we can find some new source and scrape by for next few decades
            Its like being a jobless guy and living of large inherited wealth.
            Money runs out so you start selling israeliteelry. israeliteelry starts running out, you start selling paintings off the wall. Then silver kitchnware goes. Then some of the fancier furniture. Then wooden wall panels.
            And each time you start feeling pressures you reassure yourself:
            >hey, ill just find something else to sell in future if needed and it will be okay
            Without noticing that you spend more and more effort trying to fence the stuff and gain less and less in return.
            And unless you actually get a source of new income, at some point - not tomorrow, not in a month or even a year, but the time will ineviteably come, and you will sit hungry in empty house with bare walls and bare floor, looking at grandfathers rare gun collection and thinking that you could sell them as well.

            Anyway i hope somebody cracks the industrial scale bacterial petroleum synthesis soon.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Global oil reserves are predicted to run dry by 2051.
          No. moron. Thats not how it works.

          We have FOUND enough oil to run to 2051 because once a certain threshold is found, everyone stops looking. Why? Because if someone finds oil all the oil companies have to compete to buy rights to that oil, and there is no point in spending money in 2024 on something you wont use until 2040 or 2050.

          So we have PROVEN reserves to 2051, unproven reserves stretch well beyond that.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Not the anon you're replying to but:
            >This very finite resource is actually infinite
            >Nevermind the damage it causes
            >Nevermind the economic boon and potential available for something much easier to source
            We get it, you're overdosing on Daily Caller, but come on, anon, you can't be this fricking dense.

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              the damage it causes
              All oil was at one point organic matter, organic matter which somehow grew in a world in which all of the carbon was still in the atmosphere/biosphere and had not yet been sequestered in the Earth's crust.
              Carbon sequestration cannot be a 1-way process, it has to be released at some point. Either we can exploit it, or it continues being sequestered until the biosphere is suppressed, or a seismic event causes a massive field to rupture and break it's containment.
              the economic boon
              Then go make billions of dollars. YOU. Go on. If renewable energy is such easy money go and make yourself a billionaire. I'm not even kidding, if you can figure out how to make renewables profitable (without market manipulation and taxing the shit out of people to fake profitability) I'm in your corner.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Are you actually being this dense on purpose?
                Are you actually saying we should be causing tectonic destabilization, which wasn't even brought up? Holy shit.
                >Makes up some shit that was never stated to argue with self
                It's difficult and takes a shitload of investment to go from potential massive boon to an actual massive boon. The same thing had to happen with oil. Decades of investment and research into infrastructure, refinement, storage, delivery, etc. Is this not taught in history classes anymore? I'd ask if you're a dropout, but I remember learning this well before my first pubic hair.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Are you actually saying we should be causing tectonic destabilization
                Oh OK, you're fricking illiterate.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Make moronic statement
                >Act superior when someone calls it out for being a moronic statement
                You are programmed.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                You just have no plan for the future, right? Stop sticking your head in the sand. Oil will not last forever. The day it runs out is within a lifetime. We must adapt soon.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Everything happens because of whoever I cast as my personal bogeyman this week
        >Saving money is BAD
        I say this as someone who has to help care for a family member that is schizophrenic: you need help.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      They probably like the idea of having a transport that doesnt need to use fuel, but in a few years realize that batteries are still shit and can the project.

      Electra aren't focused on an evtol, they're working on a hybrid system allowing you to size your traditional power system for cruise and use electric systems to provide additional power. It's like an electric "afterburner" (separate motors but you get my point). The electric only contracts I suspect they took because they exist, but they're not morons, they know pure evs won't have the range and endurance required

  5. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    If range isn't a problem electric motors have far better power-to-weight ratio than piston engines and even most turboshaft engines

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >If range isn't a problem
      Range is always a problem. No one has ever said "we don't need that much range."

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Range is always a problem, but even a <100km aircraft can be useful if you don't need any maintenance -compared to a piston engine-

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >electric motors have far better power-to-weight ratio than piston engines
      unless you count the fuel/battery

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >unless you count the fuel/battery
        Even taking into account that.
        >300 kw lycoming engine + 3 kg of fuel (100 (very SC) - 300 kg)
        >300 kw gas turbine + 4 kg of fuel (60-120 kg)
        >300 kw electric motor + 10 kwh (80-100 kg)
        The gas turbine is by far the best, piston engines are useless if you don't want waste time maintaining a SC engine. That same 10kwh battery could do +600 kw for a few seconds, just enough for a take off. Electric motors have advantage if range isn't a problem because batteries are far better than mechanical things to generate short peaks of high power, the weight of the (aero)motor itself is negligible.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          I appreciate your effortposting, but it's lost on brainrotted useful idiots who brainwashed themselves into being luddites for the benefit of oil corps.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            NTA
            I have noticed that people love to point out things electric suck at like trucks or airliners and just ignore everything they are great for.
            If you live in a city odds are an electric car will save you money while doing everything you need. I would love one but with our broken housing market I'm going to be renting for life and I'm not putting a charger in someone elses house.

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              EVs are class warfare.
              They are based on the (wrong) premise that everyone has a cozy garage and just plugs it in at night.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            It's not lost on everyone

  6. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I want to see undesirables getting blown up by solar powered UAV's with a practically limitless loiter time. To stop global warming, I mean.

  7. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Boeings butt frickery has them wanting literally any alternative for planes.

  8. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    i dont know what it is but i like it

  9. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Turbines and turboprops are extremely high maintenance engines, so if they can replace trainers with electric planes then ground time gets shorter, crews can be smaller and overall running of the aircraft can be significantly cheaper.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Problem with that is battery charge times. My flight school looked into that and the time it takes to charge a battery was like 4 hours. 4 hours that could be spent flying, making money and training students. You would need replaceable batteries that could sit on a charger while a fresh set was installed and sent flying.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Honestly it's just that electric engines are just efficient, provide a frick ton of torque for not a lot of weight.
        You can effectively have a low power but efficient fuel generator for gliding, yet have the burst of power for takeoff from batteries, and they require way less maintainance.
        Plus you can supplement using nuclear powerplants onboard certain carriers quite literally indefinitely.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Electric motors are wildly efficient and batteries are woefully inadequate at power density. This has always been the tradeoff, barring massive advances in battery technology. You can make lightweight electric planes, but they're always going to be compromises. Another factor - fuel weight decreases as you burn it, battery weight remains the same as they discharge.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        swapping batteries takes 2 minutes

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Turbines and turboprops are extremely high maintenance engines
      Turbines are actually easier to maintain than piston engines. A turbine only has a single moving assembly and typically operates at lower peak temperatures. The issues with turbine are mostly in the materials for the turbine (not compressor) blades and making sure they're slotted, pinned, and balanced properly.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I want to lift same-chan off the ground and watch them struggle powerlessly, kicking feets in their silly sharksuit

      Is this a bot?
      [...]
      Is this?

      >Is this a bot?
      I'm trying to keep a thread about a shitty lil adventure plane alive long enough for someone who knows the grift to show up and tell me whose dick was sucked. It's either planefrickers or poltards. Which would you rather have

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >them

  10. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Why is every branch of the US military suddenly shelling out for this thing?
    How many electric airplanes are there for sale right now? Not many. That's why. When there is more competition in the market a better plane will be selected. This is only ever going to be used in situations where fuel isn't accessible because it kind of sucks.

  11. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Why is every branch of the US military suddenly shelling out for this thing?
    It's the same as everything else. Corrupt politicians want more money from their MIC donors, so they will do what their MIC donors want them to do.

  12. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >8 goddamn engines for such a small plane

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The most american solution possible

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Pdf presentation on this plane
      https://aam-cms.marqui.tech/uploads/aam-portal-cms/originals/2b8e1470-89f8-422f-ba8e-5605920de49b.pdf
      They promise fuel efficiency equivalent of the 23MPG car. It's nice.

      It's blown wing concept.
      https://www.electra.aero/
      Propellers increase air speed around wing at low aircraft speeds so wing produces more lift.
      This is why it's hybrid turbo electric. Mechanical transmission for 8 propellers would be nightmare, but with electric motors it's easy peasy.

  13. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    small props are less efiicient than large props. so, why tf are they using small props

  14. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >all this EV shilling ITT
    homosexuals must have gotten tired of shilling EVs on PrepHole.

  15. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >YOU CAN'T FRICK THE PLANE.
    I'd frick that plane. The 8 prop layout goes crazy.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >8 prop layout
      imagine the blowjobs, heh

  16. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I'm a mechanical engineer. I have upgraded that plane.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Corporate called down. They want to know if you can fix it more. Or maybe it was better? Or bigger...

  17. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I don't know about this one but I do know the Alpha Electro costs ~1/4 as much as a 2 seat cesna per hour including the battery being replaced every 5,000 hours.
    Electric trainers make perfect sense for saving money until your trainees graduate to jets and you have to spend big on flight hours.

  18. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Oil seething
    Solar+wind+hydro (where possible) with a wood gas backup if you're rural enough should be the goal for every single American who owns a home.
    Not because "muh environment", or because oil is gonna run out, but because if the US power grid is 90% decentralized and self-sustaining it's effectively invincible, and as a consumer being energy independent is one less corpoBlack person shackle around your neck.

  19. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Related - kinda

  20. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Why exactly does it need 8 small engines instead of a single big engine? Something to do with electric motor efficiency?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Pdf presentation on this plane
      https://aam-cms.marqui.tech/uploads/aam-portal-cms/originals/2b8e1470-89f8-422f-ba8e-5605920de49b.pdf
      They promise fuel efficiency equivalent of the 23MPG car. It's nice.

      It's blown wing concept.
      https://www.electra.aero/
      Propellers increase air speed around wing at low aircraft speeds so wing produces more lift.
      This is why it's hybrid turbo electric. Mechanical transmission for 8 propellers would be nightmare, but with electric motors it's easy peasy.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I see.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *