World's First Crewed Solid-State Flight Electrifies Aviation's Future
- Reference: 0183782360
- News link: https://hardware.slashdot.org/story/26/06/13/0654225/worlds-first-crewed-solid-state-flight-electrifies-aviations-future
- Source link:
> On June 5, test pilot Miguel Iturmendi lifted off from Zephyrhills Municipal Airport in Florida at the controls of the Helios Horizon -- the first crewed, fixed-wing aircraft ever to fly on solid-state batteries. The flight was neither spectacular in distance nor in duration -- it was a series of short tests to validate the aircraft's weight and balance after the new batteries had been installed -- but it didn't need to be to make history. [...] The Helios Horizon's previous lithium-ion pack delivered 260 Wh/kg (watt-hours per kilogram, a measure of how much energy a battery holds relative to its weight). The new solid-state cells hit 410 Wh/kg, a 60% jump. Chief test pilot and company founder Miguel Iturmendi expects that figure to grow another 40% within two years.
>
> Though the battery pack can be topped up over any AC outlet, no special infrastructure needed, fast-charging is also supported for up to 80% capacity in under 15 minutes. The aircraft also recovers energy in flight through wing-mounted solar panels and a regenerative system that spins the propeller as a wind turbine during glides and descents. "Regenerative flight can significantly extend the aircraft's range," Iturmendi said after the test flights.
>
> The Helios Horizon itself started life as a Pipistrel Taurus motorized glider. Iturmendi's team added proprietary battery management, a custom propulsion stack, thermodynamic controls, and solar panel wing extensions. The aircraft already holds the world altitude record for electric planes in its weight class, having reached 24,000 ft (7,315 m). The next goal is 40,000 ft (12,192 m), commercial cruising altitude, in stratospheric flights planned for later this year.
[1] https://helioshorizon.info/
[2] https://newatlas.com/aircraft/helios-horizon-first-crewed-solid-state-flight-aviation/
I cannot understand... (Score:2)
...why it is so different from [1]this electric airplane [harbourair.com], that is silently serving Canada since 2019.
[1] https://harbourair.com/going-electric/?tab=Specification
Re: (Score:2)
That one probably uses different battery technology. Same as the Alia aircraft by Beta Technologies, which is in use by the Royal Mail in the UK.
The point of using solid state batteries is that they store more energy per kg.
Re: (Score:2)
Solid state batteries. This is also a demo of those.
Re: (Score:2)
The claim is not that this is the first crewed electric plane. It's the first one that uses a solid state battery. And that will increase the range. Harbour Air's planes have a maximum range of 80 miles. Solid state batteries will increase that distance.
Re: (Score:2)
According to the specifications on that website, the planes have maximum power of 750 HP = 500 Kw. If the plane flies for half an hour at this maximum power, it will use 250Kwh. If the batteries have energy density 250Wh/Kg, it will need 1000 Kg of batteries (1200 Kg, if the batteries are discharged to 20%). These planes have payload 500Kg. 1000 Kg of batteries is 2X the payload, which does not seem excessive.
For comparison, a Boeing 787 has fuel capacity of 100 000 Kg, which is 100 times the above batt
Re: (Score:2)
Different battery is the difference. Magnix/Harbour Air is a fantastic project. But the Magnix battery is 300Wh/kg. [1]https://www.magnix.aero/batter... [magnix.aero]
At 410Wh/kg this one is theoretically 36% more power dense by mass.
[1] https://www.magnix.aero/batteries
Battery energy density (Score:4, Insightful)
I think the actual news here is the 410wh/kg battery. It is a good increase over the 300wh/kg top of the line batteries available.
Re: Battery energy density (Score:1)
And the thing that isn't actual news is that it is still practically useless.
Re: (Score:1)
So what? The first computers weren't much good either.
Should they have stopped then?
Re: (Score:2)
The first computers were extremely good, that's why they built them. Before that, [1]tabulating machines [wikipedia.org] were also extremely useful.
If you're going to make an analogy, make it factual.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tabulating_machine
Re: Battery energy density (Score:2)
The first computers were leaps and bounds above the state of the art at the time of their introduction. The state of the art being pencil and paper, (manually calculated) log and trig tables, and maybe a sliderule.
Electric airplanes today are leaps and bounds worse in cost, range, payload capacity than what you could buy commercially almost a century ago.
And some pretty fundamental chemistry principles strongly imply it's gonna stay that way. One of those principles being that burning fuel sheds mass throug
Re: Battery energy density (Score:2)
I keep finding the 350wh/kg number, but 410 does definitely sound like a big improvement.
Re: (Score:2)
> This is the kind of stunt you do if you want people to believe in your vaporware. Instead of releasing actual stats about your battery, or simply building a mass scale factory, you put it into a little airplane. [1]Small commercial electric planes are here now and you can buy them [youtube.com]
That's a cool little plane, for certain, probably good as a trainer, mostly.
> There is no reason to prefer solid state batteries. It's just another battery technology, with charge times, weight, temperature safety ranges, mechanical stress limits, etc. If another battery technology gets you the better numbers in those metrics, then use the other battery technology. If the solid state battery does better, then prefer that.
Exactly. The number of different types of batteries and their use cases is pretty huge. Just chemistry and the electrochemical series.
Right now, everyone is agog about Lithium (something) batteries, with increasing interest in Sodium -ion batteries.
The so called solid state batteries are apparently just Lithium batteries, and haven't lived up to the hype anyhow.
SS Batteries have always sounded pretty Grift-y to me. Soli
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VqF55MjU9jc
HowBow Dat? (Score:1)
So a day or two ago, it was shown that "solid State batteries were only Lithium batteries. But now they are solid state again?
This is a milestone (Score:3)
They are not close to commercial viability. But they made another step in that direction. Some things just need time, sometimes several generations. Still worth doing.
Re: (Score:2)
Making a better battery, or commercializing it, is a milestone. Putting a research battery into an airplane is not a milestone. It's a publicity stunt.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, it is. The thing you are overlooking is that this milestone needs to reach decision makers. These people are not smart and have no understanding of technology. Hence you need to simplify it on the level of a comic or other child-appropriate ways to "tell the story", or research money will dry up. For a case where they did only that and had massive (short-term) success, look at the current LLM insanity.
Not sure they are the first (Score:3)
The Blackfly from Pivotal is crewed and fixed wing. I have passed their flight training program in 2025 and fly a Blackfly occasionally. The crewed and fixed wing part is absolutely true. I think the batteries are LiPo, which are not solid state.
Not only have they been flying crewed for years now, they have delivered aircraft to customers and are being used professionally by an EMS organization to fly the EMT to the patient for faster responses.
I am happy that Helios Horizon is flying and I think electric motor gliders are a great combination of the technology but the only thing that makes this a 'first' is the solid state batteries, and I don't think that's actually a big deal. Just adding qualifiers until you get a new combination and calling it a 'first' (Crewed, fixed-wing, solid state) seems mid at best.
[1]https://aopa.org/news-and-medi... [aopa.org]
[2]http://pivotal.aero/ [pivotal.aero]
[3]https://evtolinsights.com/pivo... [evtolinsights.com]
[1] https://aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2025/april/pilot/blackfly-groupies
[2] http://pivotal.aero/
[3] https://evtolinsights.com/pivotal-launches-evtol-emergency-response-operations-with-hyde-county-north-carolina-and-code-blue-resources/
Silly. (Score:2, Insightful)
The reason no one else has done this is that the electricity stored per ounce of battery is so low. Electronic drones make sense because they do not have to carry anything EXCEPT the battery. But building an electric plane to carry something as heavy as a person? Makes no sense.
We knew it could be done but that it would be economically stupid. It's like building a bicycle out of cardboard. Yes, we can do it, but why????
Someone did this, ok, they have more money than brains.
You want to impress me, ma
Re: Silly. (Score:2)
> It's like building a bicycle out of cardboard. Yes, we can do it, but why????
I don't believe you. Prove it!
Re: Silly. (Score:1)
Get a pen knife and an amazon box and go to town.
No one said the bike had to be rideable.
Re: (Score:3)
Electric airplanes are perfect for flight schools - they are much easier to fly than piston engined aircraft and are far cheaper to operate. The range is not important for that.
And by the way, i seriously doubt that you are important enough for anyone to go out of their way to impress you. Certainly not for an aircraft manufacturer.
Re: (Score:3)
Range is still a bit of an issue, even if you're just doing touch & go's at your local field. You need 1 hour endurance for the lesson, 15-30 minutes alternate fuel (in case you have to divert), and 15 minutes emergency fuel (normally 45 mins, but EASA issued a waiver for electric aircraft). In practice you want an aircraft with at least 2 hours "trip fuel" (the portion used for the planned flight), so that student pilots can complete the cross-country solo flight they are required to fly. Only now a
Re:Silly. (Score:4, Informative)
I'm confused by your point about weight, because it's exactly what is addressed in the summary.
> The new solid-state cells hit 410 Wh/kg, a 60% jump.
A 60% increase in power stored "per ounce" of battery is pretty significant. This isn't going to be the last increase, this is just the very first time solid state batteries have been used in this way.
Drone range has continued to increase. I see no reason range for planes that carry people, couldn't also increase.
Re: (Score:1)
The problem is that this is another "we totally have a solid state battery, honest" claim. We've been seeing this claim for at least last half a decade. They are universally followed by "no details on actual battery chemistry, and absolutely nothing on the solid electrolyte".
If the claimed "solid state" battery ever makes it into public's hands (most never do), someone cuts it open and universally, every single time we found liquid electrolyte inside.
The usual marketing spiel for that battery (if they even
Re: (Score:2)
Two years of testing and development doesn't seem unrealistic. Eventually, *somebody* will do it.
This story might indeed be a PR release without substance. We will all know soon enough.
Re: (Score:2)
eVTOLs are where you'll see this technology first used - then the range required is parking-lot-to-parking-lot, instead of airport-to-airport.
[1]https://beta.team/aircraft [beta.team]
[2]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
[1] https://beta.team/aircraft
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EVTOL
Re: (Score:2)
Such motor gliders do not do six hundred mile gliding flights. The beast of them gets just over 30:1 glide angle. Most do not even have a retractable undercarriage.
Nearly every long flight is done in a glider above 40:1, usually at least 42:1. The best modern gliders that set the records are between 60-70:1 glide ratios.
A major factor is the speed at which best glide is achieved. Motor gliders are usually around 55kts and lucky to be 10:1 at 100kts, whereas ballasted glider only or self launching gliders ca
Re: (Score:2)
Correction, the Taurus is a self launching glider, not a motor glider. It does claim a 41:1 glider ratio. There is still no way it would set any records for distance, due to,its poor high speed glide.
In gliding, a glider with a retractable propeller of a folding prop is referred to as self launching.
Re: (Score:2)
> The reason no one else has done this is that the electricity stored per ounce of battery is so low.
On the contrary, [1]lots of companies [wikipedia.org] have created electric aircraft. It's clear to everyone in the industry that they're going to be important in the future. A few have already moved into production, and many many more are at the prototype stage.
All the existing ones use conventional lithium ion batteries, and yes, low energy density is the main thing holding them back. Which is why this story is such a big deal: 60% higher energy density than the batteries in existing electric aircraft. Somehow you flipp
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_electric_aircraft