Boeing's Electric Taxi Motor

Just another tit on the aircraft's Jet-A tanks.

Jim



"Bucky" wrote in message
oups.com...
wrote:
It's probably some kind of ultra high voltage DC pancake motor that
would require it's own special APU to power it.

What powers an APU? diesel fuel or something?

"N93332" wrote in message ...
"sfb" wrote in message news:NcHMe.7384$rR4.2590@trnddc08...
Where will you find the BTUs to charge the tugs? Isn't the theory that the plane has free amps to spare either from
an APU that must be running anyway or batteries charged off the main engines while flying much like free heat to warm
your automobile.

"N93332" wrote in message ...
Just brainstorming so this may be a completely wrong idea.

Ok, some way to electrically connect the tug to the jet to use the jet's 'free' amps? Charge the tug while it is
tugging?


Or the other way around; power the plane from the tug until engine start...

wrote

What they are going to find in the end, is that putting some kind of
electric taxi system on the individual aircraft is going to backfire
and cost them seat and cargo capacity that outweighs the supposed saved
fuel costs.

I suspect that the electric taxi concept is to be used in precision taxi
movements, and pushbacks, to avoid jet blast issues. I don't think that
they would plan on doing long distance and/or higher speed taxi movements.
Smaller motors with much gearing could mean a pretty small unit, and wires.
It would mean that they could delay engine start, and also shut down
earlier. The APU will already be running anyway, right?

Unless someone knows more than has been mentioned here, all we are doing is
speculating on the configuration, and use. What results is bound to be a
WAG.

The whole idea of Boeing's new generation of planes, is to use the jet
engines for propulsion; only, and eliminate bleed air being used for a
bazillion other uses, thus stealing thrust and efficiency. It makes great
sense to me. It boggles my mind to see how much bleed air is used to run an
air cycle machines.
--
Jim in NC

"Bucky" wrote

What powers an APU? diesel fuel or something?

It is just a small jet engine, running a shaft for auxiliary power use, and
power generation. I can't imagine why an additional dedicated APU would be
necessary for the electric taxi motor.
--
Jim in NC

Morgans wrote:
"Bucky" wrote

What powers an APU? diesel fuel or something?

It is just a small jet engine, running a shaft for auxiliary power use, and
power generation. I can't imagine why an additional dedicated APU would be
necessary for the electric taxi motor.
--
Jim in NC

Most APU's are already loaded up to nearly their max output. I have yet
to be on a jet with an APU that provide enough electrical power for
everything on the aircraft as well as enough air for the air
conditioner packs.

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...

BOEING CO. has tested an electric motor that could allow
commercial jets to taxi around airports without using their
engines or ground-based towing vehicles, the company said.

SNIP

Kinda OT, but IIRC, the XB-70 Valkerye (sp?) had electric motors that "spun
up" the mains just before touchdown so that they didn't shear the tires off
the wheels upon landing.

I don't think these motors helped it taxi however.

Jay Beckman - PP/ASEL
Arizona Cloudbusters
Chandler, AZ

wrote:
It's probably some kind of ultra high voltage DC pancake motor

No, the Chorus motors are far from being DC. They use phase manipulation
to get substantially higher torque (than traditional technologies) at low
speeds. Taxiing seems like a very good fit.

--kyler

wrote:

What they are going to find in the end, is that putting some kind of
electric taxi system on the individual aircraft is going to backfire
and cost them seat and cargo capacity that outweighs the supposed saved
fuel costs.

Silly Boeing, paying all those engineers, when the answer is freely
available on Usenet. ;-)
--
Alex -- Replace "nospam" with "mail" to reply by email. Checked infrequently.

And those of us on usenet seeing a possible breakthrough in engineering
technology saying, "why the hell did I spend all that time in engineering
school when these uninformed idiots comparing 1950s technology on usenet
have all the answers".

Jim


"alexy" wrote in message
...
wrote:


Silly Boeing, paying all those engineers, when the answer is freely
available on Usenet. ;-)

Well, if you went to school in the 50's, that was the current technology
then, so that is what you were taught. Some might say, old habits die hard!

RST Engineering wrote:
And those of us on usenet seeing a possible breakthrough in engineering
technology saying, "why the hell did I spend all that time in engineering
school when these uninformed idiots comparing 1950s technology on usenet
have all the answers".

wrote:
Silly Boeing, paying all those engineers, when the answer is freely
available on Usenet. ;-)