MartinW

I would disagree with your choice of the word "ever". Might be 20, 30 years or more but it will happen. I posted a video above of the Electra. Pretty much done and dusted. The flight schools will be whisking students into the air in no time. So yes, not mainstream as in widespread, but as I mentioned above, we have solid state battery tech on the way that will triple endurance and slash charge time. When that happens electric aircraft will start to infiltrate areas other than just flight schools. Beyond that, pretty amazing advances in the pipeline. Companies and univ

It's just a sexy name. Choosing a sexy name doesn't imply the company is unscrupulous. I've read a lot about the aircraft in question and company over the last few days. I've not seen anyone cast doubt on the companies credibility based on their choice of the word jet. It is of course your right to have that opinion though, so fair enough.

Don't ask me why your quote is at the bottom Alan, I have no idea. Very true, when we charge an electric vehicle it's possible that the electricity is derived from a less than environmentally friendly power station. Internal combustion engines are notoriously inefficient though. Thus, there's still often a saving in terms of emissions as a result of charging from the mains. It's a complex equation, it can depend on the country in question and how they generate electricity, even the time of day the vehicle is charged. In China for example where power is mostly generated from coal it

In regard to pure electric aircraft, maintenance and fuel costs are rock bottom. You're talking about $5 an hour operating cost for lets say the "Sun Flyer" (intended for flight schools) compared to $73 an hour for a Cessna 172. The Alpha Electra for example cuts the cost of pilot training by a whopping 70%. Not hard to see why flight schools are so interested. Does that mean we will see a 747 sized aircraft all electric any time soon? No, definitely not. It's been estimated that a 747 sized aircraft, all electric, with today's battery tech would fly for just 10 minutes. It'll be a couple of d

So if you jump in your plane and fly, lets say, 800 nautical miles, how much will it cost you? And you wouldn't fancy paying half that much? And half the emissions? Pardon me, forget the last bit.

To be honest I'm not bothered what they call it. They can call it a turbo sausage if they like. It's just a name. Not exactly like the image above. The Lilium engine has a front compressor fan, so it, err, compresses. Perhaps we should invent a new name. I suggest... "engine that sucks in air compresses it and then pushes it out of the back but the front fan is not turned by a turbine". Should trip of the tongue nicely.

I certainly do remember. Flung across the Stratford road and crushed by a passing lorry. I won't be doing that with my new galaxy S8.

The world needs cheap, clean aviation, so yes it's clearly needs-driven, thus leading somewhere. There are numerous electric and hybrid projects like this worldwide, some close to fruition, some not, some are partly government funded, some are not. Government support of the aircraft industry isn't new. So just because there may be government funding involved I don't believe we should assume the funding will suddenly be withdrawn and all of the projects in question destined to fail. Some clearly will fail, some won't. Of the projects we've mentioned here...

Nice video. Sums up the state of play for electric aircraft nicely. I knew the Airbus E-Fan project was the first stage on the road to hybrid technology and I mentioned Pipistrel above, but I didn't know they too were involved in hybrid research. Apparently last year they powered up the most powerful hybrid electric power-train yet. http://www.hypstair.eu/most-powerful-hybrid-electric-powertrain-powers-up/ http://www.pipistrel.si/plane/panthera/overview

Very true, It'll be a while before electric aircraft achieve the sort of performance you mention. To be expected though, it's early days for the technology. Progress is being made, especially in terms of battery tech. The inventor of the lithium-ion battery for example, (Professor John Goodenough) at the grand old age of 97 has one-upped himself. He's come up with an all solid state battery that beats lithium-ion by a mile. Three times the energy density, not combustible, charges fast (minutes not hours) and has a much longer lifespan. There are other battery technologies in the pipeline too.

https://lilium.com/ 300 km range. 300 km/h. All electric.

What follows is probably more information that you're interested in but just in case it's useful for you or others... Temperature: 54 degrees under load is actually very cool and not an issue at all. I recall TJ Max for the 6600K is actually 105 degrees. At TJ Max the CPU will reduce it's frequency and voltage to prevent damage. Thus, at 54 degrees you are well clear of throttling or indeed shutdown. Things have changed somewhat now that many of us [ not me, I don't sim anymore] are using add-on's that favour the GPU more, plus we are all using higher resolution

I have a Tesla showroom locally. Had the pleasure of sitting in a Tesla at the weekend, 400 mile range and 0-60 in 3.2 seconds. Tesla call it "scary mode". Fantastic for the motoring most of us do in the UK, but not so good for your annual holiday to Cornwall. Tesla charging stations are free to use, but you'll have trouble finding them. The extra weight of the batteries isn't an issue. The batteries in the Tesla are actually a structural component. If you removed the battery pack you would need to add extra metal to the structure. Hydrogen fuel cells are something lik

Over the past decade, the worlds major car manufacturers have conducted a lot of expensive research in regard to IC engines that burn hydrogen. It sounds like a great idea of course, the most abundant element in the universe, doesn't emit toxic or greenhouse gas emissions [at least not directly], but the drawback is inefficiency. Ford, Mazda and BMW are the only manufactures that haven't abandoned the hydrogen powered IC engine and all have scaled back their research. Everyone else working on hydrogen has adopted the fuel cell. Modifications are required of course to allow an IC engine to run

This was at the weekend, in Cambridgeshire. Landing gear failed to deploy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Y5iqnhoo4o

It may be that when the service is first introduced, it's far from nationwide. Could just be a few locations where the service is available. Therefore not as many warehouses as you think required. I don't think Amazon have ever said that upon introduction, we will see a huge worldwide network of fulfilment centres, 10 miles from every customer. I think we have to remember, that Bezos made it clear back in 2013, that it would be quite a few years before the service was fully up and running. By that time we can expect better energy density form our batteries. I envisage, upon the services in

Up to now, Amazon's "secret" models have been tested in an undisclosed location in Canada. However, the FAA, a couple of months ago, gave them permission for the first tests with the latest prototypes outdoors in the US. The challenge Amazon face is convincing the FAA that the drones can safely be flown beyond line of sight. So it will be some time [unless they abandon the concept] before we find out if this is feasible or not. As for warehouses, back in 2013, the company ramped up considerably it's $13.9 billion warehouse building spree. I agree regarding Prime Air warehouses, one w

I only installed the critical updates, so missed out on the icon.

I'm building a new PC in a couple of months, probably a Skylake system. To be honest, despite the updates always on issue, I will still go for W10 I think. Not too concerned about flight sim, as I's not using the sim much these days. Like you say Microsoft may well add the option to turn off updates with enough negative feedback. Or some bright spark will find a way round it unofficially.

I have a feeling, that in time, the F-35B will be highly regarded. it might not have the range and payload of a conventional carrier aircraft, F-18 or Rafale, but it will do everything the UK needs it to do in my opinion. Given that a British company were heavily involved in the F-35's development, not a chance in hell of the UK ever opting for the Rafale. The Rafale technology demonstrator was built way back in 1986. Not sure what kind of upgrades they've added, but I can guarantee it won't be as sophisticated as the F-35. Neither aircraft are 100% stealthy of course.

Well initially that's correct. It is a tiny market. Small packages, premium service. Within 30 minutes of the delivery centre. However, technology advances. It "might" be a small step on a journey that will lead to something more of us can benefit from. Rather than seeing it as a ploy, or as some have suggested a tax dodge, I see it as a forward thinking company that emphasises expansion, embracing a new technology. We can't expect them to master the new drone technology and fill our skies with super intelligent, hyper reliable mega drones that make millions of dollars in one foul swoop.

Previously it was suspected it might be the case. Apparently its fact now.

Oh dear, thanks Microsoft. Seems W10 updates will be automatically on whether you like it or not. For the Home edition, auto updates must be on according to the licence terms. Personally, I like to install them manually so I have complete control. If there's a dodgy patch released you are screwed. Only the Enterprise version will resemble what we have now. http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/07/windows-10-updates-to-be-automatic-and-mandatory-for-home-users/

Because lorries are slow, and drones are super fast, 30 minutes. That's the point apparently. Radio controlled helicopters have been around for a while yes, but the technology to guide a drone onto someone's drive autonomously, and to avoid obstacles on said drive, and to do so economically with battery power rather than liquid fuel, hasn't till now. This is for small packages only, it has never been intended for your garden furniture.

That's a very misleading statement. Of course they don't make significant profits. Amazon are famous for their "no profits growth model", It's a deliberate strategy. Amazon are well known for focusing on expanding their business rather than profits. Amazon spend billions on research, development and expansion. You may not agree with their zero profit maximum expansion strategy, but they are quite happy with it and it seems to be working for them. Why Amazon has no profit, and why it works. http://ben-evans.com/benedictevans/2014/9/4/why-amazon-has-no-profits-and-why-it-works?curator=M