Went to a demo/presentation of the electric Pipstrel this morning at Cannes LFMD. Good news: it flies. Bad news: …for 30 minutes, then takes 1h30 to recharge. Strictly speaking that means you have to declare a fuel emergency on the takeoff roll. To fly it from Aix to Cannes (70nm or so) they had to make two recharge stops along the way. They wanted to take it to Nice LFMN – 13 nm! – to show it to the Prince of Monaco, but it can’t do it, with the possible holding time while the jets land.
So nice try, but not really ready for prime time.
Strictly speaking that means you have to declare a fuel emergency on the takeoff roll. To fly it from Aix to Cannes (70nm or so) they had to make two recharge stops along the way. They wanted to take it to Nice LFMN – 13 nm! – to show it to the Prince of Monaco, but it can’t do it, with the possible holding time while the jets land.
That’s absolutely hilarious!
But somebody is buying these. It must be schools flying circuits, and if you buy four then you can have one always in the air, and very much cheaper than with avgas, and in reality it is not quite as bad because the ones being charged are being charged while the last student is preparing or debriefing.
However, this really shows how much better batteries have to get before electric flight is viable in any form for A-B. Something like 10x better, and that’s not even remotely on the horizon.
I just read the web page about it. The claim is that it is part of the “Velis training system”, i.e. they make proper airplanes with the same airframe. The answer to the question “what is the range?” is “that is not an appropriate question to ask”. Honest.
I don’t see how a plane that can only be flown for 25% of the time can ever be economically viable. When I was learning to fly, even flights of simple pattern work were typically 0.8 – 1.0 hours.
I guess schools buy one or two so they can say how green they are. Then use proper airplanes to teach people to fly.
Those specifications seem very different from those on the website
Is there a reason for the discrepancy?
Surely any aircraft has to be able to fly to the next airfield in case the runway is closed whilst it is in the air.
johnh wrote:
So nice try, but not really ready for prime time.
Judging by sales numbers they obviously are prime time right now. 30 min isn’t much, but I guess that is 30 minutes endurance at cruise. In the circuit it will last 50-100% longer.
Funny thing. Due to certification (I assume, and to prevent super high cost) all the flight instruments are analogue. Not exactly what you expect from a state of the art electric plane 
The non certified versions have glass, and probably also is much lighter.
The website says 50 mins with reserves, not 30 mins. They actually flew it for about 25 mins, twice round the pattern with – I presume – a bit of a detour each time.
The airframe is the same as the Pipistrel Virus, which has been pretty successful. But Vne for the Virus is 168 KIAS, whereas for the Velia it’s 108 KIAS. I wonder why.
In the circuit it will last a lot less because you have climbs which need a lot more power, but AFAIK they aren’t recovering anything during a descent.
Fear not, it’s happening in the land of the free as well, KRHV (Reid-Hillview Airport of Santa Clara County, San Jose, California, USA) announced they will stop selling 100LL on Dec 31st. They are keeping other forms of liquid fuels available, including UL and Jet, but it is happening. Soon we’ll be brewing our own 100LL ;-)
KRHV announced they will stop selling 100LL on Dec 31st
Yes, a friend of mine is based there – not for much longer – and told me. I imagine it will be an exodus of all the non-trainer planes that are there. Given the city has been trying for ages to close the airport so they can build high-density condos and shopping malls, I imagine that’s precisely the idea.
johnh wrote:
The website says 50 mins with reserves, not 30 mins. They actually flew it for about 25 mins, twice round the pattern with – I presume – a bit of a detour each time.
The number I saw on the website was 60mins plus reserves but it had the time-honoured ‘up to’ qualifier next to it. Which means it is just about theoretically achievable in laboratory conditions and almost impossible to replicate in the real world. It probably means something like a brand new battery will, in warm-ish conditions, turn the prop for 60 minutes (plus reserves) using the minimum power necessary to sustain flight with the aircraft very lightly loaded, with no account taken of takeoff and climb usage. Much like a traditional POH give endurance and range numbers for an impossible scenario where every drop of useable fuel is consumed in the cruise.
They don’t say what the reserves are. It won’t be more than 30 minutes, and probably less. 30 mins might just be acceptable if you’re not leaving the pattern, but it is not really an acceptable A-to-B reserve. If another aircraft in the pattern crashes and the runway is closed, you’re in a bit of trouble.
