The Future Planes Of Airbus: Zero Emission Hydrogen Aircraft

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 19 май 2021
  • In late 2020, Airbus released a proposal for a series of zero-emission aircraft which could set it apart as a leading manufacturer in this arena. The plane-maker has since revealed more about its plans, its commitment to hydrogen, and its timetable for development. But… What are the concepts it is currently considering, and can they become a reality? Could they change the aviation industry as we know it?
    With thanks to our video sources: bit.ly/3v6m5Af
    Simple Flying:
    Visit our website where we publish 150-200 news stories per week: simpleflying.com/
    Listen to our weekly podcast: simpleflying.com/podcast/
    Download our iOS & Android app: simpleflying.com/simple-flyin...
    Daily email digest sign up: simpleflying.com/daily-digest/
    Check out our main RUclips channel: / @simpleflyingnews
    Follow us on social media:
    Instagram: / simpleflyingnews
    Twitter: / simple_flying
    Facebook: / simpleflyingnews
    Linkedin: / 33222643
    #aviation #flight #avgeek #airlines #flying
    #Aviation #Flight #Avgeek #Flying

Комментарии • 79

  • @Sanginius23
    @Sanginius23 3 года назад +41

    There are already hydrogen Trains in Germany and dozends more are on order. This technology is coming big

    • @markiangooley
      @markiangooley 3 года назад +7

      Northern Germany has excess solar and wind power that it can’t store. Usually it’s sold at a loss to other countries. If giant batteries aren’t practical, using it to make hydrogen is perhaps the only practical choice.

    • @topiasr628
      @topiasr628 2 года назад +1

      As Markian pointed out the only places wherein Hydrogen is a viable solution (and not causing a net positive carbon emission) are in places that have an excess of unstoreable renewable energy. Place like that are the Orkneys, Northern Germany, and the American plaines. Hydrogen production is a VERY energy intensive process

  • @napoleonibonaparte7198
    @napoleonibonaparte7198 3 года назад +32

    We powered the Industrial Revolution with coal, the last century with oil, the next should be renewables or hydrogen.

    • @edwardnorton5693
      @edwardnorton5693 2 года назад +3

      Where is the energy going to come from? Hydrogen has to be made. Energy is required to make hydrogen. Hydrogen is not really an energy source, it is more of an energy carrier, just like a battery.

    • @Felix11010
      @Felix11010 Год назад +1

      @@edwardnorton5693 in the future (at least around the time those planes are released) electricity created from renewables should be abundant enough that it will be economically viable to mass produce hydrogen fuel.

    • @theorangeoof926
      @theorangeoof926 Год назад

      Hopefully, in this century we are powered by nuclear fusion.

    • @samuelitooooo
      @samuelitooooo Год назад

      Nuclear though. (Alongside renewables)

  • @Jet-Pack
    @Jet-Pack 3 года назад +17

    I really like the blended wing body design, it looks a lot like a bird.
    Really looking forward to hop into a zero emission aircraft for short haul flights :)

  • @DTHAEW
    @DTHAEW 3 года назад +5

    Great Video share with us the future expectations

  • @Luke_Go
    @Luke_Go 3 года назад +9

    Image if Boeing could invest some $10 billion into it's future instead of cleaning up it's past mistakes.

    • @abshivkumar2549
      @abshivkumar2549 3 года назад

      I mean the 777x and the 737max are great and maybe the 797 aka nma could have this technology

    • @Luke_Go
      @Luke_Go 3 года назад +2

      @@abshivkumar2549 At Airbus this technology could come with their next airplanes. Boeing, however, is spending the needed research money on 777x and 737max compensation payments and other quality issues that are typical of Boeing airplanes (i.e. stopping all 787- deliveries)

    • @abshivkumar2549
      @abshivkumar2549 3 года назад

      @@Luke_Go well the 797 could change that

    • @Luke_Go
      @Luke_Go 3 года назад

      @@abshivkumar2549 The 797 will not replace every airplane that Boeing currently sells (and has problems with).....

  • @GeoStreber
    @GeoStreber Год назад +2

    I wonder what the naming scheme for these will be?
    Since the current ones are all Airbus A3..., and the military transporter is the A400M, maybe they should call these three A510, 520 and 530....

  • @asherclement
    @asherclement 3 года назад +2

    Very intresting video

  • @B51217
    @B51217 3 года назад

    Awesome and Nice video 👍☺️

  • @G-546
    @G-546 3 года назад +3

    I think that electric turboprops could work. Although they would need longer runways they would be quieter making them great for airlines in the US and Euroupe. If they were quieter they could fly routes like London-Paris, Boston-Washington DC, Seattle-Vancouver, and more. All of those routes have buisness travel demand so quiet, frequent flights could win over passengers

  • @AtliTobiasson
    @AtliTobiasson Год назад

    The blended wing fuselage is the only one that makes sense

  • @cskvision
    @cskvision 3 года назад +4

    Boeing must get a competing product concept going too. Otherwise they’ll be playing catch-up with Airbus again or left in the dust entirely

    • @G-546
      @G-546 3 года назад +1

      Boeing will probably play catch up for a long time. I would not be surprised if Boeing announced a 797 NMA plane in 2023 when they compete designing and begin delivering the 777X. In 2023 Airbus would be close to delivering the A321XLR

    • @andret4403
      @andret4403 3 года назад

      There is no catch up. These plane are part of a Airbus dog and pony show for the environmentalist and to get government money. Blended wing tend to be fundimentally aerodynamic unstable and FAR regulation requires aircraft to be aerodynamically stable. Then there is a long list of engineering reasons why blended wing aircraft isn't practical. It's sexy looking and makes for great PR. Short haul pressurized hydrogen fuel cells has the best chance but I believe SAFs will be cheaper and maybe more environmentally friendly. Cryogenic hydrogen in high cycle commercial aircraft is just not practical or likely safe. This come from having done engineering design of cryogenic hydrogen vents for a launch vehicle and years of design work on commercial turbofan jets. I just don't see it safe considering the wear and tear of high cycle aircraft. Maybe change my mind if there are full scale crash tests demonstration. Boeing already has enough experience with hydrogen to know SAFs are the right path.

    • @G-546
      @G-546 3 года назад

      @@andret4403 yeah some of the pictures are just sci-fi renderings. Electric planes will probably take the form in propeller planes with short range and high maintenance.

    • @Yassified3425
      @Yassified3425 2 года назад

      Don't worry. Boeing will probably just put new engines on the 737 that burns this type of fuel and call it a new plane.

  • @richliou22
    @richliou22 2 года назад +2

    Why would airbus choose to combust hydrogen rather than use fuel cells? Combusting hydrogen is roughly only 25% efficient, while fuel cells is about 50% efficient (twice the amount). Airbus should use fuel cells with distributed electric propulsion, especially on that turboprop. Laziness.

    • @m4a1mag
      @m4a1mag Год назад

      Ok but fuel cells are heavier and u cant dump cells to make weight lighter , so in return hydrogen is more efficient

  • @bettinaschatz
    @bettinaschatz Год назад

    That is good idea. I hope the planes fly from Europe to America, Africa, Australia and Asia. In the future should go more by train in Germany, France, Austria, Switzerland, etc.

  • @patrickjr11
    @patrickjr11 2 года назад +1

    Unfortunately, what this means is that airlines will miss net zero 2050 by a very big margin. Hydrogen jets or turboprop conversions are not zero emissions, and with so many aircraft in service, it will impossible to replace them all with actual zero emissions planes by then. The other critical problem is infrastructure. There won't be enough renewable energy or suitable water supplies available at most airports, so I have a feeling a business as usual scenario for airlines is virtually impossible.

  • @prieten49
    @prieten49 Год назад

    Judging by the size of that door on that wingjet, there is absolutely no way 200 passengers could fit in that small body. Yes, other videos show a hypothetical interior with lots of seats but that won't fit into such a small airplane.

  • @p.s.224
    @p.s.224 3 года назад +5

    This blended wing concept looks kinda cool, but if they don‘t manage to put in some sort of a window for passengers to look out of, I am not interested in ever flying in it.

    • @CasaiTX
      @CasaiTX 3 года назад +4

      I believe it will have cameras and screens on the insude

    • @spongebubatz
      @spongebubatz 3 года назад +3

      @@CasaiTX which I‘d hate tbh

    • @Dave_Sisson
      @Dave_Sisson 3 года назад +5

      I suspect you have never flown on 10 seat wide plane like a B777, A350 or the lower deck of an A380? Only 20% of passengers have window seats and the people in the middle see nothing. Yet they are more popular with passengers than smaller wide body or narrow body planes.

    • @CARBONHAWK1
      @CARBONHAWK1 3 года назад

      It looks atrocious imho

  • @baj_shl
    @baj_shl 3 года назад

    *laughs in the Hindenburg crash* jokes apart it’s great

  • @udbwgcydhqjf
    @udbwgcydhqjf Год назад

    The other one they proposed was an a380

  • @earthsteward9
    @earthsteward9 9 месяцев назад

    If a company could develop a hydrogen fuel cell propeller airplane that can fly New York to Paris at 800km/h and carry 300+ passengers, they should get a Nobel prize

  • @stickynorth
    @stickynorth 2 года назад

    I really think hydrogen is the fuel of the future when it comes to transportation sectors where battery electric just doesn't cut it. However I don't think Airbus or even Boeing will be THE pioneer in the industry. I have a feeling companies like Universal Hydrogen who convert existing aircraft to run on hydrogen will be the true innovators for some time before it can be fully established that there's a viable commercial market for larger and longer aircraft than those like the Dash 8/ATR 72 regional routes workhorses...

  • @kimmccloy2379
    @kimmccloy2379 2 года назад

    I have been on a plane 3 times. I won't fly until we have zero emission planes. Can we make it 2030 please?!

  • @sethtan715
    @sethtan715 3 года назад +2

    Is possible for nuclear powered planes like warships and submarines?

    • @majorborngusfluunduch8694
      @majorborngusfluunduch8694 2 года назад +1

      It is possible. Nuclear Reactors were mounted and run on planes in the 50s, but they didn't power the planes' engines. The concern back then was that the planes might spew radiation from the engines as they flew. I'm sure the geniuses at Boeing and Airbus could find a solution to this if they put their minds to it but good luck convincing the hippies that it might be worth even investigating.

    • @sethtan715
      @sethtan715 2 года назад +1

      @@majorborngusfluunduch8694 oh ok. thanks

  • @Quintinius31
    @Quintinius31 3 года назад +4

    Althrough really good in efficiency, blended wing design are an engineering and safety nightmare.
    Good luck evacuating 200 passengers with 2 doors.

    • @sunspot42
      @sunspot42 3 года назад +3

      Why would you be limited to two doors? Most of these concepts limit or do away with windows, meaning you open up more space for doors - including floor and ceiling hatches for emergency evacuations.

  • @tomahawk1556
    @tomahawk1556 3 года назад

    Happy that Aircraft Manufacturers are going Green to Save Whatever Left on planet Earth! 🌍 We already have battery powered Drones! Sad part is that , by 2035 ... Many who's reading this might not with us anymore ... 🕯🌷🌿

  • @aviationix
    @aviationix 2 года назад

    Im typing this upsiqe bown

  • @kylek1556
    @kylek1556 2 года назад +1

    No such thing as zero emissions. Let’s just be honest and say less emissions.

  • @Phos9
    @Phos9 3 года назад +2

    Hydrogen aircraft? I hear they had one back in the 1930’s, I should look up how that went.
    Jokes aside, this is interesting, but hydrogen always comes with many challenges.

  • @velocity8005
    @velocity8005 3 года назад +1

    The blended wing plane just can’t happen

  • @ask_sharma
    @ask_sharma 3 года назад +1

    If we use Hydrogen instead the aviation fuel to propep a gas turbine, it is not a "green" way at all, as it produces NOx a lot. I mean really A LOT!!

    • @scanida5070
      @scanida5070 3 года назад +1

      It depends on how you produce it, just like with electricity...

    • @andret4403
      @andret4403 3 года назад +1

      @@scanida5070 no nox is result of burning nitrogen rich air in engine combustion. Design of engines combustion section can minimize it but you still have it. Point is hydrogen isn't squeaky clean as it is presented.

  • @jd14305
    @jd14305 3 года назад +4

    Please cover videos about Boeing and other manufacturers also

    • @ryanblower9257
      @ryanblower9257 3 года назад +5

      They will when Boeing and other airlines come out with new and exciting news like this not oh look the max is back.

    • @neilpickup237
      @neilpickup237 3 года назад +2

      I think it is reasonable to expect that Boeing will have little to announce, and therefore be reported on, at least in the short-term as most of their resources are probably (or at least should be) tied up in firefighting and resolving the mess they have got themselves into. Thanks in large to Boeing, Embraer, probably the only remaining Western manufacturer of any size are in trouble, and Bombardier having sold most of their aircraft business off are unlikely to have anything newsworthy. That leaves the Russians and the Chinese, who tend to follow, what Airbus and Boeing do, rather than innovate.

    • @andret4403
      @andret4403 3 года назад

      Boeing did recently announce plans to only pursue SAFs saying in nutshell hydrogen isn't practical. They probably actually listened to their rocket side of business telling aircraft side "Are you crazy!"

  • @calbob750
    @calbob750 3 года назад

    Kinda looks like that UFO seen over the East Coast.

  • @TheJohngibel
    @TheJohngibel 3 года назад +3

    While a Flying Wing would be really cool, one, I doubt it will happen anytime in the next 100 years, and two, after Airbus screwed so many airports with the modifications they wasted millions on for the A380, how many do you think will jump up and rush to make modifications again to handle a flying wing ??

    • @KyrilPG
      @KyrilPG 3 года назад +4

      Airports weren't screwed by Airbus as you said. That's pure urban legend.
      In fact they repayed themselves several folds with taxes and rents as A380 modifications were far from being the costliest change they did in the past 20 years. Most airports used A380 modifications as an excuse to enlarge retail / duty free areas and make even more money.
      Apart from one or two exceptions that only received a couple A380's, almost all A380 modded airports emerged as benefiting from the change.
      Most of what costs in A380 compatibility is also required by 777's as triple seven's are more runway killers than A380's are. Runway and taxiway reinforcements and maintenance for the 777 were the most expensive in the category of aircraft related modifications, far more expensive than adding a third jetway for the upper deck. The other main expenses posts for airports in the 2 last decades were not aircraft related but on security equipment and payroll.
      Extra jetways at A380 gates were amortized in a couple years tops at most airports and do not require constant maintenance like the runways do. The most expensive aircraft to accommodate for airports in the long term (past 2 years) is the 777-300 as it constantly degrades runways and taxiways far more than any other aircraft with more weight concentrated on a far smaller footprint. Also the jet blast of 773's GE-90 engines goes farther than any other engine and required airport modifications too, both in construction and operations.
      And don't forget other aircrafts which require at least 3 power carts at the gates...
      So no, airports don't hold a grudge on Airbus for the A380, they spent to accommodate it as they spend to accommodate any other aircrafts and have earned back their investment back multiple folds.
      And last: airports customers are airlines and passengers, not Airbus or Boeing so the decision to accommodate a given aircraft is made upon airlines' request, not manufacturers.

    • @godisacorgi9835
      @godisacorgi9835 3 года назад +2

      I don't think it will be any wider than a typical 777 or A380 which are accepted pretty much everywhere.

    • @soravulpis96
      @soravulpis96 3 года назад +1

      @@godisacorgi9835 yes, but this isn’t a A380 or a 777. This blended wing body design has the passenger capacity of an A321 at best.
      Airports and airlines would still have to figure out how to accommodate these very wide aircraft designs.

  • @michaelc1624
    @michaelc1624 3 года назад +2

    The story would have been more credible if they had shared what other airplane manufacturers are doing for Zero Emissions, not just Airbus. Airbus is not the only game in town. This video appears more like an Airbus paid promotion or advertisement using Airbus B-roll material.

    • @scanida5070
      @scanida5070 3 года назад +3

      The title says: “The future planes of *Airbus”* so naturally it’s only going to be about Airbus’ planes...

    • @michaelc1624
      @michaelc1624 3 года назад

      @@scanida5070 Good point. Still would have been a more credible story if it were broadened to be more inclusive.

  • @gooner72
    @gooner72 3 года назад +3

    I'm a combustion engine purist so this absolutely horrifies me, I feel the same about cars going green.
    If aircraft and cars lose their proper combustion engines, they will lose their souls in my opinion..... can anyone tell me that you would be happy with a Ferrari or Mustang without their fantastic noise from their specific V12 or V8 petrol engines?

    • @vegguid
      @vegguid 3 года назад +5

      But I personally like the idea of not drowning which is a bit more important :P

    • @abshivkumar2549
      @abshivkumar2549 3 года назад +1

      @@vegguid and not polluting the environment
      Ps. Why would I rev a Lamborghini if I buy a volswagon id 3

  • @lxcien4867
    @lxcien4867 3 года назад +1

    I don't like the weird long range one...

  • @AnilKumar2051MCM
    @AnilKumar2051MCM Год назад

    We are starting a Free Online Moon City Mission Schools in the world in 2025.Age 10 to 14 Years

  • @ATIMELINEOFAVIATION
    @ATIMELINEOFAVIATION 3 года назад

    The Hindenburg has entered the chat

  • @josephcullen2512
    @josephcullen2512 3 года назад

    Only electric turbine aircraft are impressive

  • @theshadowman1398
    @theshadowman1398 3 года назад +1

    They can sod off with those electric nonsense

  • @REIBODERA
    @REIBODERA 3 года назад +4

    FAKE Airbus propaganda

  • @Busty95
    @Busty95 2 месяца назад +1

    My Honest Opinion on The Blended Wing Body Aircraft.
    The plane is incredibly ugly by its design. The traditional aircraft designs look better against the background of their beautiful and beautiful expression. In relation to the Blended Wing Body Aircraft, which most of all looks like a pacifier that has had 2 finger bones mounted on it where the tips have just been broken out of joint.
    It also has no windows, which I personally cannot accept as I need to sit by a window seat during a flight. And being able to document and record what happens along the way, as it is part of my experience of travelling.
    I also didn't think that the aircraft manufacturers think about the people who either suffer from a fear of flying or the people who are going out to fly for the first time and who might need a window to look out of in order to follow involved in what is happening outside.
    I hope that any Airbus Employees or Employees from other Aircraft Factories see this message and possibly ask their bosses to either drop these ugly planes, or at least put some windows in them, because if not these planes have windows fitted in them if they are put into service then I wouldn't put my feet aboard them.
    I hope that there are people out there who agree with me and have the same attitude towards these planes, and if you do, please leave a like in the comment section.
    And to those of you who thought I was overreacting and thought I should relax a bit in terms of my opinion on these planes, I don't care.