## Green Flight Challenge to award total purse of $1.65M, funded by NASA ##### 17 September 2011 From September 25 through October 1, electric and hybrid-powered aircraft teams will compete for the “Green Flight Challenge (GFC) sponsored by Google” at the Charles M. Schulz Sonoma County Airport. A total purse of$1,650,000, funded by NASA, will be awarded. The CAFE (Comparative Aircraft Flight Efficiency) Foundation will conduct the multi-day flight competition in which aircraft must demonstrate at least 100 mph and 200 passenger mpg on a 200 mile flight.

The dedication of the first Electric Aircraft Charging Station, a facility sponsored by Google and powered by more than 115 kW of geothermal energy, will occur at noon on 1 October at the CAFE Flight Test Center.

All GFC aircraft will be displayed free to the public at the Google Green Flight Challenge Exposition hosted by NASA at Moffett Field from 9 am to 4 pm on 3 October 2011, where a noon ceremony is planned to announce the winners. The Google Green Flight Challenge Exposition will include more than 22 exhibits by companies specializing in the technologies related to the future of green aviation. These will range from vertical takeoff personal aircraft, autonomous vehicles, fast prototyping equipment, advanced motors, propellers and more.

Sounds interesting but I do not understand the logic behind electric powered flight.

It would seem that there is little chance for regeneration during city, stop-and-go driving.

During the descent, ram turbines could be deployed, but that adds cost and weight and charging up the batteries at the end of the flight will add little or no range.

Is the idea to use it for just short hop air taxies?

Even hydrogen-electric would not seem much better than synthetic fuels, and even if it is, by then elecric motors will have evolved "on the ground" without this.

Maybe concentrate on high specific power to weight Diesels with low cost injectors and run them rich so we can put the PM up where it reduces ACC and increases ACCC (Aircraft Caused Climate Cooling).

TT, consider the premium on aviation fuel, the hundreds of ICE moving parts, the required reliability and forced maintenance/engine overhauls, the noise, pollution..

A one-moving-part electric motor and even a single hour of flight time and quick charge/battery swap would be a Godsend to pilot training and affordable recreational flying at a fraction of the ICE costs.

OK, I was thinking just commercial.

I suppose there would be some significant niches for training or sport as well as private or commercial short hop.

And the high “parts” cost of batteries would not translate since AC engines and systems are quite expensive (both for private and commercial) due certification and inspections, which would likely be much lower due to the simplicity of a BEV.

The comments to this entry are closed.