Re:The longest ever flight was 64 days in a Cessna 172 (2021)
by travisjungroth on Monday December 12, 2022 @02:46PM
(#33959214)
Most private pilots will never get to 1800 hours. Even 100 hours per year is a lot.
Re:The longest ever flight was 64 days in a Cessna 172 (2021)
by jeffrallen on Monday December 12, 2022 @04:03PM
(#33960238)
Electric airplanes are already used in training in Europe. They are less expensive to operate on an hourly basis just because of fuel/energy cost. But they are probably also cheaper to overhaul; the Emrax motors in Pipistrels are relatively simple, and it would probably cost less to buy two and swap one out (sending the other one back to Emrax for a new bearings) than to do one thermal engine overhaul. And almost no downtime!
(I work on another electric airplane which will take flight in 2023.)
Re:The longest ever flight was 64 days in a Cessna 172 (2021)
by gavanm on Monday December 12, 2022 @06:18PM
(#33961890)
Is there anything you can share regarding the electric plane? I had a look at your profile and couldn't see any links beyond your keys.
Re:The longest ever flight was 64 days in a Cessna 172 (2021)
by jeffrallen on Tuesday December 13, 2022 @08:09AM
(#33968339)
Pie Aéronefs, s.a. of Switzerland
Re:The longest ever flight was 64 days in a Cessna 172 (2021)
by bitwize on Monday December 12, 2022 @08:22PM
(#33963326)
I've flown an electric plane. Granted it was only about 60 cm long from nose to tail (and I flew it from the ground) but I can speak to its simplicity, low cost, and ready availability of replacement parts compared to ICE-based planes of similar size. :)
Re:The longest ever flight was 64 days in a Cessna 172 (2021)
by yunohn on Monday December 12, 2022 @02:36PM
(#33959110)
Interesting, thanks for the context. TIL!
Re:The longest ever flight was 64 days in a Cessna 172 (2021)
by NovemberWhiskey on Monday December 12, 2022 @02:55PM
(#33959324)
Piston engines like you get in a Cessna 172 are also about the worst-case for overhaul times, since there's so much mechanical complexity and because they're often run at/near maximum rated power for long periods.
Turboprop engines (effectively these are jet engines with propellers attached) like the ubiquitous P&W PT6A have TBOs up to 4,500 or even 6,000 hours.
It'll take a normal private pilot a few years to reach 1800h of operation, so it's more economical if you're not flying the plane continuously for weeks at a time.
But yeah, it's expensive. Owning a plane is expensive. It depends on if it's worth it to you to operate the plane. Small single-engine planes like the Cessna 172 are commonly used for recreation or training. So if you use it often, such frequent overhauls will pay for themselves in terms of safety and reliability.
Maybe when all-electric recreational aircraft become common they won't have to be maintained quite so much...