Like me, you can pin your hopes on the 2022 VW Microbus: https://www.caranddriver.com/volkswagen/microbus

> I've been waiting years for an electric minivan. The moment someone comes out with one, I'm turning in my current minivan, which I love, for an all electric van.

Bad news: while you can still buy minivans, they're being phased out in favor of SUVs. Dodge just put the nail in the coffin for the Grand Caravan, and production stops this year: https://www.thedrive.com/news/33702/death-of-an-icon-dodge-g...

The investments are in the SUV/CUV segment where profit rates are higher.

>> current minivan

"Current" would actually be a good model name for an electric vehicle.

Ford is launching an electric Transit at the end of 2021 ('22 models.) We have a larger family, so we're hopeful the range, power and cost will be acceptable. Swapping out low MPG large commercial and passenger vans for electric will prevent a lot of gasoline and diesel usage.

IMO this comment is pretty short-sighted.

Gravimetric energy density of batteries tripled between 2010 and 2020 and in the same time period cost went down 87% [1]. By 2030, this plane could easily have a range of 300mi.

[1] https://cleantechnica.com/2020/02/19/bloombergnef-lithium-io...

Above all, the plane, and especially something like Caravan needs to be cheaaaap.

Planes like DHC-3, C208, PC-12, An-2 are all utility aircraft above all. They are sold, and resold until they can't fly, and then they get cannibalised, rebuilt, and made to fly again, and when nothing would really be left of the plane, it will be sold to places like Africa, or Latin America.

One of the biggest problem for makers of such aircrafts is the second hand market getting too big.

There is zero demand for brand new An-2s, but the second hand market is surreally big. Same for DHC-3, Caravans, and Pilatuses seem to be joining that category too soon.

It becomes more and more feasible the shorter the flight is, since the 'turnaround' time on the ground starts to become longer than the actual flight time. That's why Harbour Air, which operates ~20 minute seaplane flights from Vancouver, will probably one of the first airlines to operate electric aircraft in commercial service.

https://www.harbourair.com/about/corporate-responsibility/go...

It's probably longer than required for passenger flights. The Caravan is 9-13 passengers (depending), plus a little baggage. Wouldn't be hard to unload/load 10 people in less than 30 mn. However the question is how many small commuter airlines are operating a flight with repeated as-fast-as-possible turn around?

Cargo configuration, certainly seems like you could charge it faster than a load/unload.

The thing about fast turn around's is that planes only make money when flying. However a big part of flying is the expense of fuel. So if you can make your hour flight in $12 of electricity, that brings the cost way down. That offsets the cost of sitting on the ground for an extra X minutes.

Also gotta take into account the electric versions reduced need and cost of maintenance. So there is reduced aircraft downtime for less maintenance, and it costs less each time. Overall, that probably greatly increases the time available to fly and therefor the profit potential for the plane.

Regular 208 spends 150 kg per hour, which is microscopic by aviation standards. A piston An-2 spends the same, but in super expensive avgas, and flies half as slow. A more comparable DHC-3 flies a bit faster, at 135 kg per hour, again, avgas.

1000 kg of LFP cell will hold you in the air for just 20 minutes

Doesn't a full battery carry more electrons and is therefore heavier?

I think the floating aircraft with electric propulsion and solar is the way to go.

Props still make significant noise, especially at takeoff RPM.

A friend of mine owned a house under the approach path to a medium-volume reliever airport (KBED). All of the piston airplanes that flew overhead were perfectly pleasant (at least to me), but the jets were notably more annoying.

Carrying more power/noise, more speed, and more disturbance to stay flying while dirtied up, the difference was night and day. I suspect the PT-6 powered C208 would already fall on the “not so annoying” side of that spectrum (closer to the piston props than the turbojets’ noise profile), so changing fuel might not provide that much relief to those who bought houses near airports.

Considering the rate at which the general aviation fleet turns over (~none in ~forever), and that the typical Cessna is flying around with a World War 2 engine or its closely related descendant, I predict that it will be roughly infinity years before people who live at the ends of airports stop cursing the noises.

Of course, if they just outlaw 100LL avgas and pass some noise regulations the problem will solve itself.

Not true; the only aircraft that does what you describe is a glider. Any propeller will generate a lot of noise, the tips of the blades get close to the sound barrier. Disclaimer: pilot here, I did fly gliders and I fly propeller planes regularly.

I love the sound of airplanes and all things airplane related. I think you may have just given me a great tip as to where to buy real estate. Thanks!