I kid. Helicopters are my first love. I've been enamored with them since a kid living near Ft. Bragg/Pope Air Force base.

All our vehicles have the GPS in the headunit, i don't use a portable GPS, and almost never use my phone for navigation. I feel I'm more "street aware" than most, but do find myself depending a little heavier on the GPS directions than I used to.

Used to be if I drove anywhere once using a map or written directions, I would never need them again. Not so much any more. I was never good at giving directions though because I have always navigated more by landmarks then by street names.

Absolutely, that's basically "last year's model" in airplane years. In fact I don't think I've ever flown anything newer than about 10 years old. Even the one I just bought is 15 years old.

I always use Waze even if I know where I'm going. You can't see around corners and if the traffic is building up it's nice to get off the exit before and sit in stop and go. Then again I have long commute so it matters more.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Many of the newest cars do not have GPS and maps as they are out of date when delivered. Phones are directly linked to the head unit. Android auto and apple maps, and things like Waze will display on the head unit. They are current and will even give road conditions, police, wrecks and detours.

I've had zero luck trying to use Waze, although I know a lot of people who love it and swear by it. Every time we've tried to use it on a trip or whatever it lead us into situations worse than what we were in, or took us down very bad country roads.

I have a long commute as well (40 miles each way) but for the most part it's country roads with few accidents. When there is one, I know the alternate routes.

Oh yeah Waze will take you down back ass roads but it's only when the highway average speed gets down below about 30mph. At that point it's better to go direct than the long way.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Since this thread is so far OT, I'll post this unrelated story:

Harbour Air successfully flies world’s first electric commercial aircraft (VIDEO)

https://www.victoriabuzz.com/2019/12...ircraft-video/

I'd miss the sights, sounds, smells and oil leaks of the standard 450-hp, nine-cylinder Pratt & Whitney R-985 Wasp Junior radial engine.

nothing says success like a total-loss oiling system!

It makes some sense for the short haul flights that Harbour Air does, gets the technology into a bigger commercial arena. have to wonder about recharging times. Commercial air flight is all about turn-around time. I couldn't find anything saying how long it takes this to recharge.

I do too. :cheers:


Choppers are the coolest.

I wondered about that too, plus useful load, flight into known icing prevalent there, cold weather performance degradation and airworthiness in general with the battery weight presumably in the wings. Not to mention how an electric motor is affected in a marine environment. The CEO hints at new battery tech on the horizon suitable for this application.

He also said the e fleet will have 30' + 30' reserve endurance that will accommodate most of their 500,000 annual passengers but will be all certification testing at first before converting the entire fleet. He said it'll save operating expense by having a longer TBO than even the turbines.

The CEO bio is pretty cool. A visionary as passionate about flight as he is extreme mountain biking. And drove a Toyota truck.

https://www.bcbusiness.ca/greg-mcdougall-float-king

https://www.vancouverisawesome.com/v...-world-1942948

Well, I figure in a conversion you could put weight in the wings equal to the landing fuel weight minus some fudge factor. Of course that means you are always carrying that weight around, so it's costing you to fly the weight, plus you can't use "fuel" to help with weight and balance on shorter flights.

For a conversion you are going to have to have a plane with a pretty steep fuel capacity to get anything useful out of the conversion. You certainly couldn't do it in a small plane. The reason it works in larger planes is because you can get enough batteries in there to be useful.

For example, mine is a two seater that will fly 4 hours with reserve on the 27 gallons on-board. Given that a Tesla Model S battery back weighs 1,200lbs, you aren't going to get much range out of converting mine to battery given the 162 pound weight of the fuel capacity. You might be able to taxi it to the end of the runway.

I'm not accounting for the lighter engine, etc you'd get with the conversion, but in the end its all marginal, and not even worth considering for any practical purpose.

Eviation says they'll get almost 600NM out of their 3,600kg battery pack in their 9+2 jet. Not sure a 2,500 lb useful load is really an 11 seat aircraft with 227lbs per passenger (including luggage, etc) particularly when you can't adjust fuel to accommodate but they are at least doing it right, designing the plane from the ground up.

(And yes I realize my conversion description is oversimplified, but I think its a starting point to show its probably not practical under a certain size)

Your plane sounds amazingly efficient. Don't keep us guessing (Van's Aircraft)!?