|
|
|
|
|
by aphextron
2751 days ago
|
|
>Why is that? Variable pitch props have nothing to do with engine type. They're variable to be more efficient depending on RPM and speed. Variable pitch props have everything to do with engine type. They exist because turbine and piston engines have a very specific power/torque curve which requires them to operate at certain RPMs for certain conditions to achieve peak efficiency. With electric motors you have no need for this because you get a constant increase of efficiency across the entire power curve. >Not really. A lot of flight controls are boosted with hydraulics, and thrust reversers are for increasing drag (descending faster or slowing down.) None of these depend on engine type. Thrust reversers have nothing to do with descending faster or slowing down in flight, they are used solely for landing retardation. But an electric aircraft wouldn't even need thrust reversers. You literally just reverse the propeller immediately at full power when touching down. You can even save on less flaps required because the motors will be able to "windmill" on the descent and slow the aircraft as well as regen power. |
|
There's also the engine-out design case, it's much easier to add prop feathering than add more power to the operating engines.
This design doesn't make a lot of sense, the props are located at literally the maximum arm from centerline, which requires bigger control surfaces for engine-out design (heavier and more drag) and gives very little ground clearance in crosswind landings. On the economics side, fuel costs are a small part of operating light turboprops/jets. The biggest costs are airplane depreciation/capital and crew. The real breakthrough would be an autonomous turbine plane that could eliminate crew cost and achieve 2000 hours/year utilization (versus ~200 for some privately-owned jets).