RJMAZ wrote:JonesNL wrote:I think a A220-500 and A322 make even more sense then before, as fuel consumption per passenger will be more important then ever. Aviation fuel costs are through the roof and Schiphol in Amsterdam has adjusted landing and handling fees to the fuel consumption. Many other airports in Europe are sure to follow...
Both of these aircraft would be optimised for routes below 1,000nm. What happens when they ban all non hybrid/electric aircraft on routes below 1,000nm?
I've seen you saying this in multiple threads, but I think we're operating from entirely different notebooks here. Quite simply, as no current reasonable hybrid-electric or electric flying vehicle exists, nobody in their right mind would be banning air travel.
That's North Korea level of pariah statehood right there. So... we want to go to rural France on business, but the only option is trains after Paris? Maybe the business trip is out.
France has already banned domestic flights under 2 hours. Dates to ban new petrol/diesel cars only came in once Tesla and co showed that electric vehicles are perfectly usable. The rest of the automotive industry was then forced to produce EV's. As soon as the first decent hybrid/electric aircraft takes flight all of Europe will set a date to ban/tax A320/737 aircraft on flights under 2 hours. Boeing and Airbus know it is only a matter of time.
With
exceptions, and France has a positively enormous high speed rail system. There's a difference between inducing further innovation in electronic drives and new electric car development, and literally
banning or exorbitantly taxing a huge driver of business. Airlines might not make a lot of money, but many people travel regularly, and that travel helps the economy. No doubt
millions of jobs are sustained by the conventions and business tourism industry of the US alone - similar elsewhere, this isn't a phenomenon.
10 years ago you would be crazy if you even suggested a petrol/diesel ban on cars.
You still are. The only electric vehicle company that has made scale or been successful enough to be a common sighting on the road averages $48k/unit on their cheapest model. That's simply not ever going to be affordable for 50% or more of people in the US; I'm sure numbers in Europe would be similar.
I can't see anyone else besides Tesla showing the world electric aviation is possible. After Starship is fully operational around 2025 SpaceX will swing some aerospace engineers over to Tesla. Around 2030 they will unveil their electric VTOL prototype and no doubt they will land it in front of a crowd of thousands of people. Governments around the world will begin to set dates to phase out the old technology.
This unfortunately isn't happening either. A drivetrain on a Tesla Model S does not make an aircraft engine. And, if there's this new 9 seat VTOL transport or whatever it turns out to be, which fleet of VTOL Uber drivers will be flying it? The staffing issues are most pronounced in the US, but they must be prevalent elsewhere too. I admire that you are optimistic that innovations are coming in this area, but there's just no evidence, and not enough incentives for either a manufacturer to pony up the development money, or for a regulator to force them. There needs to be a sea change in the way we are incentivizing development - companies will not be entering aerospace on a whim due to the certification costs, industry uncertainty, and long development cycle. Existing big aerospace companies like B&A are rehashing their historically successful frames and don't seem to want to do anything cleansheet... maybe just buy a Brazilian or Canadian vendor and warm over their product. It feels like brain-drain.
And my $0.02 is the A321neo gets a new wing and can fly to the Moon and back. Does 39k vs 33k at the same weight with the same engines, so it burns less and can go even more places on the same tank of gas. CVG-CMN or whatever you want to try for a few weeks becomes possible - airlines love the flexibility and the A21N becomes more ubiquitous than the 757. You don't need to innovate - McDonalds doesn't change the Big Mac. Does this help with carbon emissions? Definitely not, but most other industries aren't doing anything, so why would a manufacturer bend now?
