Re: [Aus-soaring] battery power
Whoever, This seems to have come out of left field! Please enlighten me. Bob Ward -Original Message- From: DMcD Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2014 10:39 AM To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] battery power I plan on writing a piece about factory warranties, but I need to use your story below to support the arguments. I would also like to declare that Bob Ward from Queensland has had several unfortunate experiences. It's a difficult situation. On the one hand, it is hard to see why sailplane manufacturers should be held to a different standard to car manufacturers where there does not appear to be any binding standard although there are claims that manufacturers have to keep spares for 7 years. On the other hand, sailplanes frequently have a usable life which is many times longer than a car. This can be a real problem for anything with a motor or electronics. There was an integrated circuit used in '80s synths like the Prophet 8 made by Curtis. I read that 10 years ago, there were only 8 working spares of this chip and they were valued at more than the cost of the complete original synth. The Rotax problem is interesting. Many parts on the DG-400 505 engine are similar or identical to those on the more common 503. It is at least a 25 year old design though the 503 appears to have been in production until 2011 and used in many thousands of ultralights. Fitting a spare from a 503 to a 505 would probably void the certification. While some of DG-400 engine parts are hard to find, DG were still certifying replacement parts such as extend/retract motors and ignition components etc. as recently as 5 years ago to keep DG-400s airborne. The replacement parts are expensive, not because they cost a lot, but because of the cost of getting them re-certified. Frequently, the parts which become obsolete are made by major manufacturers such as Bosch… water pumps, extend/retract motors are good examples. What chance have DG and SH got of making sure Bosch keep making water pumps? The alternative is to use a smaller manufacturer such as DG have done with the 400 extend/retract motor and hope that this size company does not go out of business or get bought out by a larger company who then abandons manufacturing niche items. Where you have an engine connected to some electronics for engine management systems, you do have real problems. At component level, it's unlikely that spares will be available for very long at all so the people who assemble the control unit are going to have to redesign and re-certify it every few years to cope with that. Electric and jet powered gliders are likely to have their own problems, mainly because of the short life-cycle of any of these designs compared with something like a Rotax engine. Probably the problem is certification. If the engines were not certified, they would cost a fraction the price and manufacturers or third parties would be able to reengineer the power plant more easily… an area which is sorely lacking. D ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
Re: [Aus-soaring] battery power
Part of the problem here is the certification process. The logical process is to fit a newer and better engine instead of trying to source parts for the old engine. However that introduces problems with certification and voids any warranty! My preferred solution is to register as experimental and make the improvements. Admittedly that makes the pilot a test pilot! No one is saying that we do not practice a dangerous sport. However we do have crowd sourcing now to solve some of the problems. On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 11:39 AM, DMcD slutsw...@gmail.com wrote: I plan on writing a piece about factory warranties, but I need to use your story below to support the arguments. I would also like to declare that Bob Ward from Queensland has had several unfortunate experiences. It's a difficult situation. On the one hand, it is hard to see why sailplane manufacturers should be held to a different standard to car manufacturers where there does not appear to be any binding standard although there are claims that manufacturers have to keep spares for 7 years. On the other hand, sailplanes frequently have a usable life which is many times longer than a car. This can be a real problem for anything with a motor or electronics. There was an integrated circuit used in '80s synths like the Prophet 8 made by Curtis. I read that 10 years ago, there were only 8 working spares of this chip and they were valued at more than the cost of the complete original synth. The Rotax problem is interesting. Many parts on the DG-400 505 engine are similar or identical to those on the more common 503. It is at least a 25 year old design though the 503 appears to have been in production until 2011 and used in many thousands of ultralights. Fitting a spare from a 503 to a 505 would probably void the certification. While some of DG-400 engine parts are hard to find, DG were still certifying replacement parts such as extend/retract motors and ignition components etc. as recently as 5 years ago to keep DG-400s airborne. The replacement parts are expensive, not because they cost a lot, but because of the cost of getting them re-certified. Frequently, the parts which become obsolete are made by major manufacturers such as Bosch… water pumps, extend/retract motors are good examples. What chance have DG and SH got of making sure Bosch keep making water pumps? The alternative is to use a smaller manufacturer such as DG have done with the 400 extend/retract motor and hope that this size company does not go out of business or get bought out by a larger company who then abandons manufacturing niche items. Where you have an engine connected to some electronics for engine management systems, you do have real problems. At component level, it's unlikely that spares will be available for very long at all so the people who assemble the control unit are going to have to redesign and re-certify it every few years to cope with that. Electric and jet powered gliders are likely to have their own problems, mainly because of the short life-cycle of any of these designs compared with something like a Rotax engine. Probably the problem is certification. If the engines were not certified, they would cost a fraction the price and manufacturers or third parties would be able to reengineer the power plant more easily… an area which is sorely lacking. D ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
Re: [Aus-soaring] battery power
I plan on writing a piece about factory warranties, but I need to use your story below to support the arguments. I would also like to declare that Bob Ward from Queensland has had several unfortunate experiences. It's a difficult situation. On the one hand, it is hard to see why sailplane manufacturers should be held to a different standard to car manufacturers where there does not appear to be any binding standard although there are claims that manufacturers have to keep spares for 7 years. On the other hand, sailplanes frequently have a usable life which is many times longer than a car. This can be a real problem for anything with a motor or electronics. There was an integrated circuit used in '80s synths like the Prophet 8 made by Curtis. I read that 10 years ago, there were only 8 working spares of this chip and they were valued at more than the cost of the complete original synth. The Rotax problem is interesting. Many parts on the DG-400 505 engine are similar or identical to those on the more common 503. It is at least a 25 year old design though the 503 appears to have been in production until 2011 and used in many thousands of ultralights. Fitting a spare from a 503 to a 505 would probably void the certification. While some of DG-400 engine parts are hard to find, DG were still certifying replacement parts such as extend/retract motors and ignition components etc. as recently as 5 years ago to keep DG-400s airborne. The replacement parts are expensive, not because they cost a lot, but because of the cost of getting them re-certified. Frequently, the parts which become obsolete are made by major manufacturers such as Bosch… water pumps, extend/retract motors are good examples. What chance have DG and SH got of making sure Bosch keep making water pumps? The alternative is to use a smaller manufacturer such as DG have done with the 400 extend/retract motor and hope that this size company does not go out of business or get bought out by a larger company who then abandons manufacturing niche items. Where you have an engine connected to some electronics for engine management systems, you do have real problems. At component level, it's unlikely that spares will be available for very long at all so the people who assemble the control unit are going to have to redesign and re-certify it every few years to cope with that. Electric and jet powered gliders are likely to have their own problems, mainly because of the short life-cycle of any of these designs compared with something like a Rotax engine. Probably the problem is certification. If the engines were not certified, they would cost a fraction the price and manufacturers or third parties would be able to reengineer the power plant more easily… an area which is sorely lacking. D ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
Re: [Aus-soaring] battery power
On 26/06/14 8:35 PM, WARD, BOB wendo...@westnet.com.au wrote: Our reply hereunder: HI BOB. I plan on writing a piece about factory warranties, but I need to use your story below to support the arguments. I would also like to declare that Bob Ward from Queensland has had several unfortunate experiences. I will then submit the whole story to Schempp-Hirth (Tilo Holighaus) for comment which I know they will ignore. I have to be reasonably careful dealing with the major manufacturers as they could cut me off at the feet if I am not openly frank and precise in what we publish. We will always need them for new newsworthy articles. Give me your thoughts JOHN Their motors may still be current technology but sadly, factory support for maintaining them is not. A DG 400 with a broken crankshaft was recently rescued from being a conventional launch glider only, by fortuitous sourcing of a second hand crankshaft by a well connected professional workshop. My own, Ventus 2CM suffered a burnt piston when engine was 10 years old with fifty hours engine time. Neither Schempp Hirth or Solo could provide the required spare parts. this engine no longer supported I eventually flew the glider as a self launcher two years later, after locating a small workshop with the capability of making pistons from poured metal. Now my glider is U/S engine again with an U/S water pump. Surprise, surprise, neither Schempp Hirth or solo can supply the simple seal or impeller needed to fix it. It looks likely that I may be able to get the engine airborne again by fitting an electric water pump, as is currently used on the Arcus.All at great cost of course and with no apology or explanation from Schempp Hirth as to why their support of the engine on the Ventus 2CM ceased inside ten years from manufacture. Regards Bob Ward ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
Re: [Aus-soaring] battery power
Hopefully, electric will triumph and we won't be burning non-renewables Where exactly do you figure the energy to recharge the batteries will be coming from?? ROSS _ -Original Message- From: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net [mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] On Behalf Of DMcD Sent: Wednesday, 25 June 2014 10:57 PM To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] battery power I love the ability of the virtual world to spread unsubstantiated gossip, usually with a mindset bend behind it. Well, it certainly allows you to compare second hand values of cars better than one might without a virtual world. And the Priapsis does not look that great. And considering you can get the same or better mileage from a number of other cars of similar size I've got no mindset other than the fact that right now, it's regrettably difficult to see an electric self launcher (ultralight) or sustainer competing with a petrol powered engine. A 30 year old DG-400 or ASH 26 is still a working proposition because their motors are still fairly current technology. When they were new, NiCad batteries were the state of the art and remember how awful they were in most cases. I can clearly remember the bang as my expensive SAFT batteries splatted all over the room courtesy of their state of the art charger. Hopefully, electric will triumph and we won't be burning non-renewables but I for one would not want to spend a lot of money on an electric sailplane right now and the long, long extension cord to recharge it while flying around our non-electric airfields. D ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
Re: [Aus-soaring] battery power
right on!! On 26 June 2014 17:53, Ross McLean ross...@bigpond.net.au wrote: Hopefully, electric will triumph and we won't be burning non-renewables Where exactly do you figure the energy to recharge the batteries will be coming from?? ROSS _ -Original Message- From: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net [mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] On Behalf Of DMcD Sent: Wednesday, 25 June 2014 10:57 PM To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] battery power I love the ability of the virtual world to spread unsubstantiated gossip, usually with a mindset bend behind it. Well, it certainly allows you to compare second hand values of cars better than one might without a virtual world. And the Priapsis does not look that great. And considering you can get the same or better mileage from a number of other cars of similar size I've got no mindset other than the fact that right now, it's regrettably difficult to see an electric self launcher (ultralight) or sustainer competing with a petrol powered engine. A 30 year old DG-400 or ASH 26 is still a working proposition because their motors are still fairly current technology. When they were new, NiCad batteries were the state of the art and remember how awful they were in most cases. I can clearly remember the bang as my expensive SAFT batteries splatted all over the room courtesy of their state of the art charger. Hopefully, electric will triumph and we won't be burning non-renewables but I for one would not want to spend a lot of money on an electric sailplane right now and the long, long extension cord to recharge it while flying around our non-electric airfields. D ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
Re: [Aus-soaring] battery power
Bob I know a god of small engine repair, from chainsaws, GP motorcycles to rotax,s. Contact me off list and I am sure he will be able to help. J Justin Sinclair 17 Queen st. Scarborough Qld 4020 Hm 07 3885 8949 Mob 0421 061 811 Email jjsincl...@optusnet.com.au Sent from my iPad On 26 Jun 2014, at 6:35 pm, Bob Ward wendo...@westnet.com.au wrote: Their motors may still be current technology but sadly, factory support for maintaining them is not. A DG 400 with a broken crankshaft was recently rescued from being a conventional launch glider only, by fortuitous sourcing of a second hand crankshaft by a well connected professional workshop. My own, Ventus 2CM suffered a burnt piston when engine was 10 years old with fifty hours engine time. Neither Schempp Hirth or Solo could provide the required spare parts. this engine no longer supported I eventually flew the glider as a self launcher two years later, after locating a small workshop with the capability of making pistons from poured metal. Now my glider is U/S engine again with an U/S water pump. Surprise, surprise, neither Schempp Hirth or solo can supply the simple seal or impeller needed to fix it. It looks likely that I may be able to get the engine airborne again by fitting an electric water pump, as is currently used on the Arcus.All at great cost of course and with no apology or explanation from Schempp Hirth as to why their support of the engine on the Ventus 2CM ceased inside ten years from manufacture. Regards Bob Ward -Original Message- From: Ross McLean Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2014 5:53 PM To: 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.' Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] battery power Hopefully, electric will triumph and we won't be burning non-renewables Where exactly do you figure the energy to recharge the batteries will be coming from?? ROSS _ -Original Message- From: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net [mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] On Behalf Of DMcD Sent: Wednesday, 25 June 2014 10:57 PM To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] battery power I love the ability of the virtual world to spread unsubstantiated gossip, usually with a mindset bend behind it. Well, it certainly allows you to compare second hand values of cars better than one might without a virtual world. And the Priapsis does not look that great. And considering you can get the same or better mileage from a number of other cars of similar size I've got no mindset other than the fact that right now, it's regrettably difficult to see an electric self launcher (ultralight) or sustainer competing with a petrol powered engine. A 30 year old DG-400 or ASH 26 is still a working proposition because their motors are still fairly current technology. When they were new, NiCad batteries were the state of the art and remember how awful they were in most cases. I can clearly remember the bang as my expensive SAFT batteries splatted all over the room courtesy of their state of the art charger. Hopefully, electric will triumph and we won't be burning non-renewables but I for one would not want to spend a lot of money on an electric sailplane right now and the long, long extension cord to recharge it while flying around our non-electric airfields. D ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
Re: [Aus-soaring] battery power
Where exactly do you figure the energy to recharge the batteries will be coming from?? Wood ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
Re: [Aus-soaring] battery power
Ross McLean wrote: Hopefully, electric will triumph and we won't be burning non-renewables Where exactly do you figure the energy to recharge the batteries will be coming from?? ROSS The vast array of PV solar panels on the hangar roof? Greg O. ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
Re: [Aus-soaring] battery power
The vast array of PV solar panels on the hangar roof? These require burning non renewables for manufacture (mining the metals, processing, transport, installation etc.). Making PV stuff is CO2 intensive, see http://www.lowtechmagazine.com/2008/03/the-ugly-side-o.html ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
Re: [Aus-soaring] battery power
I love the ability of the virtual world to spread unsubstantiated gossip, usually with a mindset bend behind it. My NHW-11 at 280,000 km (13 years) threw the battery code, and a $3,500 replacement now has me expecting to exceed 0.5mill km before the next replacement. Thus, totally in line with conventional vehicle expectation of time use inclusions like transmissions, in this case 2c/km amortisation cost. On 25/06/2014, at 9:48 AM, DMcD wrote: I heard a horror story last week from the owner of a Toyota Priapsis which had a failed battery. The cost of replacement was so high that he had to sell an otherwise roadworthy car for spares. But the lifespan of a Toyota is not the same as a sailplane. ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
Re: [Aus-soaring] battery power
The Prius uses nickel metal hydride batteries and the control system makes sure they cycle between 30% and about 80% charge. That is why they have such a long lifetime. You aren't going to be able to do this in an electric powered sailplane. That said, the replacement cost of a set of batteries for the Antares is I think now around Euro 15000. Not all that bad when you consider the cost of the sailplane. We'll get to see soon how many years the battery packs last in that thing. The problem with cars is: how much do you spend on a 13 year old car which probably is worth only a few thousand dollars? One thought about the ASG32EL 100km range as long as you aren't in the next valley from home in the Alps :-) Nice looking glider though. Aviation is about to get interesting see http://www.jobyaviation.com They've moved away from the earlier tilt wing Sparrowhawk concept. One drone manufacturer has made the drone VTOL by basically strapping an electric quadcopter to it. Hybrid air vehicles make sense that way. Electric, multiply redundant lift motors which only need to run for short periods (hence small batteries) and small piston engines sized for cruise in a vehicle with very small wings as you don't size them for takeoff and landing and low stall speed. Mike At 06:22 PM 25/06/2014, you wrote: I love the ability of the virtual world to spread unsubstantiated gossip, usually with a mindset bend behind it. My NHW-11 at 280,000 km (13 years) threw the battery code, and a $3,500 replacement now has me expecting to exceed 0.5mill km before the next replacement. Thus, totally in line with conventional vehicle expectation of time use inclusions like transmissions, in this case 2c/km amortisation cost. On 25/06/2014, at 9:48 AM, DMcD wrote: I heard a horror story last week from the owner of a Toyota Priapsis which had a failed battery. The cost of replacement was so high that he had to sell an otherwise roadworthy car for spares. But the lifespan of a Toyota is not the same as a sailplane. ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring Borgelt Instruments - design manufacture of quality soaring instrumentation since 1978 www.borgeltinstruments.com tel: 07 4635 5784 overseas: int+61-7-4635 5784 mob: 042835 5784: int+61-42835 5784 P O Box 4607, Toowoomba East, QLD 4350, Australia ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
Re: [Aus-soaring] battery power
On 25/06/2014, at 6:07 PM, Mike Borgelt wrote: The Prius uses nickel metal hydride batteries and the control system makes sure they cycle between 30% and about 80% charge. That is why they have such a long lifetime. You aren't going to be able to do this in an electric powered sailplane. It will be interesting to watch to what degree owner/operators of electric aircraft appreciate the equation: depth of discharge vs recharge longevity = controlled recharge / modest power use / 'long' service life That said, the replacement cost of a set of batteries for the Antares is I think now around Euro 15000. Not all that bad when you consider the cost of the sailplane. We'll get to see soon how many years the battery packs last in that thing. The problem with cars is: how much do you spend on a 13 year old car which probably is worth only a few thousand dollars? The experience (contrary to 'think tank' predictors and mindbend critics) is that fuel efficiency continues to improve as the vehicle ages and 'loosens up' + multi-year low wear and component failure rates. My insurance company tells me the residual value is $8,000. My interest in selling would begin multiples above this. This leads to suggestions that such vehicles have a longer service life than traditional vehicles. Will this also be applicable to electric drive aircraft? It will be interesting to see. ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
Re: [Aus-soaring] battery power
I love the ability of the virtual world to spread unsubstantiated gossip, usually with a mindset bend behind it. Well, it certainly allows you to compare second hand values of cars better than one might without a virtual world. And the Priapsis does not look that great. And considering you can get the same or better mileage from a number of other cars of similar size… I've got no mindset other than the fact that right now, it's regrettably difficult to see an electric self launcher (ultralight) or sustainer competing with a petrol powered engine. A 30 year old DG-400 or ASH 26 is still a working proposition because their motors are still fairly current technology. When they were new, NiCad batteries were the state of the art and remember how awful they were in most cases. I can clearly remember the bang as my expensive SAFT batteries splatted all over the room courtesy of their state of the art charger. Hopefully, electric will triumph and we won't be burning non-renewables but I for one would not want to spend a lot of money on an electric sailplane right now and the long, long extension cord to recharge it while flying around our non-electric airfields. D ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
