Bankruptcy SAS orders fictitious battery plane – Document

In a press release SAS reports that they have placed an order for two electric ES-30 aircraft from Swedish Heart Aerospace, which they hope to put into operational use in 2028. At the same time, Heart Aerospace itself reports that they have included Air Canada and Saab as shareholders. The climate-focused management in Widerøe has also placed the company’s future in the investment in electric aircraft, and is open to cooperation with Heart.

It must mean that battery planes are now a success, like that Norwegian media produce it, and soon we will fly emission-free in Norway as the glossy websites show? Well, we allow ourselves to be professionally skeptical, as the press always should be. Here’s why:

There are no commercial battery powered aircraft

Document has repeatedly questioned the constant happy reports about investing in electric planes, both her, her, her and especially her, after the Avinor boss himself crashed a battery plane and almost took the life of State Secretary Aase Marthe Johansen Horrigmo from the Ministry of Local Government and Modernization. He was not the first to crash.

That airplanes with electric motors can fly, no one disputes, but it proves it does not automatically that it is a good idea or safe. On the contrary: the experiments with battery planes do not show how good this solution is – they rather show where marginal and dangerous this alleged “climate solution” is.

The truth is, we’re nowhere near flying electric yet, and it’s not because electric motors can’t spin propellers. It is because of flight safety. Why other media do not pick up on our concern can only be explained by the fact that they are more concerned with spreading climate propaganda than ensuring your safety as a passenger.

Who is Heart Aerospace?

Heart Aerospace is based at Säve Airport outside Gothenburg, has approx. 130 employees and are constantly looking for more engineers who can build planes, because this is no small task to undertake: Building a two-seater experimental plane can be done in your own garage. Building a multi-engine electric machine for commercial passenger transport is another matter entirely.

Commercial aircraft are subject to an extreme safety regime down to every last nut and screw. Everything is quality assured to the extreme, and everything must be documented according to strict rules. Developing new solutions and parts and components for aircraft therefore costs crazy sums, and everything has to go through a long-term approval and certification program that will ensure the lives of everyone on board. Because yes: A bad screw can kill 100 passengers.

This is the reason why aircraft factories and engine suppliers prefer to further develop existing solutions, as Boeing did with the 737, which first flew in the 1960s. Starting from scratch, as Boeing did with its Dreamliner, is much more expensive and complicated. The Dreamliner was announced in 2003, flew for the first time in 2009 and received type approval in 2011, but still had several quality problems that created major difficulties and costs. And Boeing has extensive experience in building aircraft. Heart Aerospace has not.

Battery airplanes mean reinventing flight

The most important thing when it comes to flying is NOT to achieve silly political climate goals, as the Widerøe and Avinor bosses seem to think. The very, very, VERY important thing is that people don’t get killed. The pursuit of electric planes says a lot about what a sick, monomaniacal obsession climate policy has become, because nothing else seems to matter. We MUST get into electric planes, whatever the cost, because otherwise we can’t reach our climate goals.

See also  In China you get a free pig when you buy a house | NOW

Is it important to you when the airplane doors close? .

This task is much bigger than the politicians understand: Heart Aerospace is not only going to build a new plane, but deals with battery planes that weigh the same when it lands as when it takes off, and will always operate at maximum weight – something that all pilots in the world try to avoid. They know that when the effect decreases without the weight, it becomes more and more dangerous. In addition, the proposed aircraft will have a hybrid system with turbo generators.

All this means building a stronger structure with stronger undercarriage, which increases weight, which in turn requires larger wings and more powerful engines, which in turn creates even more weight. And that is for heavy, space-consuming batteries are inserted instead of light fuel.

Heart Aerospace has therefore undertaken to develop new wings, engines, fuselage, undercarriage and control systems, and make everything work together with a newly developed energy system, based on zero experience. But making metal fly is actually the easiest part of the task, because anything flies, as long as it gets enough speed. How they will ensure safety is a headache that is not touched upon at all.

The most important thing about flying is not saving CO2, but saving lives

Flying is dangerous. There are great forces, extreme assumptions and far down to the ground. Throughout over 100 years of aviation, the focus has been unilaterally on making flying safer and safer. And safety extends far beyond the aircraft itself. The uninitiated only see the plane. What they does not see, the regulations and safety regime commercial aircraft are surrounded by, and which actually keep people alive.

Operational limitations and procedures say something about how aircraft behave in the environment in which they are located, and include all movements by aircraft. As a pilot, you must be able to calculate exactly how much weight you can take on board, how long a runway you need, how much fuel you need, what safety margins you need in relation to wind, weather, pressure, temperature, altitude and speed. Pilots have tables and numbers to calculate all these parameters, and these numbers are absolute. They do not vary and you can trust them. When the calculations say you need 1130 meters of runway, you need that. Not 1100 or 1200.

Electric aircraft will not have the advantage of more efficient engines at altitude, and must therefore fly lower in thicker air, with higher energy consumption. Even worse: They will have varying amounts of fuel depending on how old and worn the batteries are, and how cold the batteries are during flight. This makes the operational limitations so variable that they become impossible to calculate with 100 percent certainty – which in turn means that battery aircraft will hopefully never be approved for commercial operation.

See also  Russia Chases and Repels British Spy Plane with MiG-31

That all official permits and approvals already exist in 2028 for a completely new aircraft type, which will operate in a completely new way, appears completely utopian. It’s advertising, not fact. That will not happen.

Several aspects of the ES-30 raise critical questions

The ONLY advantage of electric airplanes is that they emit less plant-based CO2. There are no other good reasons to risk money, life and health to build heavy battery aircraft that will fly low and slow. If climate policy is so important, wouldn’t it be much smarter to make today’s safe aircraft run on renewable fuel – instead of building something completely new from scratch? Or what?

I have studied the websites and technical specifications that Heart Aerospace themselves have published, and it raises many concerns. The four-engine ES-30 is said to have room for 30 passengers – which in itself is short of what the market demands of short-haul aircraft. It should be able to fly 200 kilometers on battery only, and 400 km on hybrid operation, have a maximum flight height of 20,000 feet, and it should be able to be recharged in just half an hour, claims that should set several alarm bells ringing.

Even more alarming is that it is not a well-known aircraft factory with long experience behind this project. In addition, there is not a peep about how many batteries they should bring up, and what this machine should actually weigh, and that is hardly accidental:

The math doesn’t bode well for the ES-30

A fully loaded Widerøe Dash 8-100 weighs 15.5 tonnes, has room for around 40 passengers and uses approx. 600 liters of Jet A-1 on a one-hour flight, which corresponds to approx. 420 kilos of fuel. Each liter of fuel contains around 9.6 kWh of energy per litres, which means that the energy consumption on a one-hour flight is approx. 5760 kWh, regardless of the fact that much is lost in pure heat.

The best batteries today weigh around 6 kg per kWh. A battery that could give the Dash 8-100 the same amount of energy as jet fuel would weigh 34.5 tonnes – compared to the fuel’s 0.42 tonnes. It will increase the aircraft’s weight from 15 to 50 tonnes – i.e. as much as a Boeing 737 – and the advertising images from Heart Aerospace do not show an aircraft of that size.

Now, it is true that electric operation is more efficient than fuel, but still much of the current is lost in heat both during charging and operation. Complicating the aircraft with hybrid operation does not solve this series of problems either. And stop for a moment: An invariable rule in aviation is that all aircraft must have a large fuel safety margin. Weather and events may force the aircraft to go to an alternate airport, or to circle. This safety margin for small aircraft is a full 45 minutes. If you land with less fuel than that, you risk losing your flight licence. Fortunately, it is that strict.

See also  Microsoft reverse upgrade: Win11 battery life test is not as good as Win10 | XFastest News

If the ES30 is to have a “reserve tank” of 45 minutes at all times, this battery alone will weigh 25 tonnes pure “dead weight” in addition to the operating battery of 34.5 tonnes! And then you realize how ridiculous and dangerous the dream of electric battery planes actually is. Nevertheless, the management in Avinor and Widerøe is completely convinced that this will be in place before 2030. This lack of security focus is completely incomprehensible.

Just another climate fraud in the hunt for climate subsidies?

All pilots know that heavy aircraft are dangerous. Easiest possible is the golden rule. The math and the problems with operational constraints show that the ES-30 will never enter commercial service, if it ever gets off the ground and has the capacity to carry passengers.

So why is SAS ordering these battery planes? Well, bankrupt SAS has not done that. They have only entered a reservation to show their support and interest, primarily to mollify climate-conscious politicians who can give SAS more public money if they signal that they support a “green shift”. SAS is fighting for its life again, and is using every trick it can think of – and Heart Aerospace is good at deflecting critical questions.

When accessing the websites of one is easily overwhelmed by advertising images that show how the ES-30 dances among the clouds. There is also no shortage of promises to create green, cheap and easily accessible transport for everyone, as well as a news feed that shows that this is a great success that is really moving forward. Gothenburg in Sweden will become a hotbed for the green aviation of the future. Hurray! But is it true? Is it real?

Advertising images and visions do not make promises true

Visionary websites full of advertising images are the rule for green businesses that need subsidies. The wind power industry are experts in this, and we saw the same around the Nikola hydrogen truck. It was a scam. Most editors accept these “visions” completely uncritically, such as NRK. However, we never allow ourselves to be impressed by photo montages and claims, and over several years we have uncovered a clear pattern when it comes to so-called “climate solutions”:

The huge support schemes and subsidies for “climate measures” from the authorities are without filter, responsibility or control, and act as flypaper for unscrupulous fraudsters with big visions. We do not have figures on how many “climate visions” have received public support and uncritical praise from politicians and the media, only to go bankrupt – after the founders have run away with share gains. And this in turn creates great scope for economic collusion and pure corruption.

We should not claim that Heart Aerospace is pure climate fraud, as Nikola was – but since we are the only national newspaper in Norway that actually does the job as a critical press organ, this “vision” fits very well into a pattern we have seen many times for. Support us with a subscription so we can pursue the case.

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.