Re:Solar Impulse lands in California after Pacific crossing
by Gravityloss on Sunday April 24, 2016 @02:40PM
(#11560787)
Well, 1/100 the cargo and 1/10 the speed means you need 1000 solar planes for every kerosene plane for the same route revenue. If we assume they cost the same to buy since they are the same size. And that doesn't take into account night flying etc...
Much better to have the solar panels on land and do synthetic kerosene for planes.
Ships go half the speed of Solar Impulse, but they have a lot more payload per dollar invested.
I accept that Solar does not work to supplement the onboard generator used for electrical power on jets due to weight and night time flights. At the same time solar is ~1% the fuel cost for that amount of power for 20 years. They say they can scale this up 50x and carry 50 people. IMO, it would be better to build cargo only craft in that size range as this is far to slow outside of sight seeing in VFR.
Not to mention wind. That said if you can say double the solar power and add significant altitude and speed that's much more viable. I am assuming this is significantly worse than the best possible solar aircraft we could build in say 30 years.