Rolls-Royce Exits Electric Propulsion To Focus On Core Businesses (aerotime.aero) 93
Rolls-Royce announced plans to sell its electric flight division to focus on its core businesses. AeroTime reports: The sale of the electric business division could bring in between 1 and 1.5 billion pounds to Rolls-Royce coffers. In this regard, Rolls-Royce is betting on sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) as the main driver of decarbonization for the aviation industry. All of Rolls-Royce's in-production engine types will be able to run on 100% SAF. The engine maker is optimistic about its new UltraFan, an improved efficiency engine technology which was successfully tested earlier in 2023. Rolls-Royce expects UltraFan engines to power both widebody and narrowbody aircraft in the future. Rolls-Royce also noted that it sees opportunities in the executive aviation segment and is targeting 8-9% growth in Pearl engine deliveries.
Rolls-Royce is currently in the middle of a restructuring program to turn itself around and boost profitability. The pandemic had a strong impact on the engine maker, as the company's service revenues depend heavily on the number of hours engines are in use. [CEO Tufan Erginbilgic] said he expected the group to increase its profits to the 2.5-2.8 billion pound range, up from the 0.65 billion pound profit it reported in 2022. The civilian aerospace division is expected to make the largest contribution to this turnaround and reach profit margins of 15 to 17% by 2027 (compared to the group's goal of 13-15%), up from the meagre 2.5% it reported for the last fiscal year. New submitter HammerOn1024 comments: "They are SELLING not shutting down, so keep the harping to a dull roar please."
Rolls-Royce is currently in the middle of a restructuring program to turn itself around and boost profitability. The pandemic had a strong impact on the engine maker, as the company's service revenues depend heavily on the number of hours engines are in use. [CEO Tufan Erginbilgic] said he expected the group to increase its profits to the 2.5-2.8 billion pound range, up from the 0.65 billion pound profit it reported in 2022. The civilian aerospace division is expected to make the largest contribution to this turnaround and reach profit margins of 15 to 17% by 2027 (compared to the group's goal of 13-15%), up from the meagre 2.5% it reported for the last fiscal year. New submitter HammerOn1024 comments: "They are SELLING not shutting down, so keep the harping to a dull roar please."
Electric Flight (Score:1)
Re:Electric Flight (Score:4, Informative)
In combination with stargates, the puddle-jumper is a pretty capable interstellar exploration spacecraft, with basic combat and stealth capabilities. Not too shabby.
Re: (Score:3)
In combination with stargates, the puddle-jumper is a pretty capable interstellar exploration spacecraft, with basic combat and stealth capabilities. Not too shabby.
Interplanetary... They do not have their own means of FTL travel so are dependent on either a gate or larger ship to reach another solar system.
Re: (Score:2)
"In combination with stargates" ...
Granted, the presence of a stargate somehow implies "already explored", but Destiny killed that implication.
Re: (Score:2)
Well there is the optional trim package with FTL capabilities. But at only a 2,000ly distance, it's enough to give anyone range anxiety.
Re: (Score:2)
In combination with stargates, the puddle-jumper is a pretty capable interstellar exploration spacecraft, with basic combat and stealth capabilities. Not too shabby.
It's ability to explore underwater has even been proven. Use underwater is perhaps best reserved for emergencies but possible.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Depends on how battery technology advances though its unlikely ever to get close to the energy density of fossil fuels. Bit even a doubling of density would make short haul flight in small planes far more viable.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Indeed. Half of all flights in America are under 500 miles, considered the viable range for battery-powered aircraft.
Double that to 1000 miles, and that's a big chunk of the market.
Re:Electric Flight (Score:4, Insightful)
which is great, until the weather or some other event has you circling the airport for hours or returning to the origin airport for reasons...
I was with in 50 miles of landing in CLE once, and they turned around and flew all the way back to Charlotte because weather. Because the airlines don't want to dump 100 people in Akron because they will never find seats on other flights for them.
Just because the range is enough for most flights does not mean its actually adequate for the commercial business.
Re: (Score:3)
" Because the airlines don't want to dump 100 people in Akron because they will never find seats on other flights for them."
Unless the plane that took them there buggers off without them then I don't see the problem landing at some midway airport. Wait until the weather clears then take off again.
Re: (Score:2)
That does not solve their problem at all. They need to be able to rebook those passengers on other routes. That is much easier if you can disperse them onto N next hops at a major hub.
Sure the plane that brought them can stay but now few of those people can go anywhere until that plane goes somewhere and it probable needs to go to its intended destination because welp they were not going to fly it home empty.
So now all of those passengers are stuck rather being able to take open seats on across a large nu
Re: (Score:2)
You comment lacks any logic. You seem to assume the passengers would prefer to be taken all the way home only to be booked on flights that don't go to their original destinations. I can assure you most would prefer to stop part way they continue on when possible whether by plane or some other mode of transport.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
RTF: They're talking about high-efficiency engines that run on SAF, instead of fossil fuels. Whether or not this is just the latest buzzterm for biofuels, which are a terrible waste of resources remains to be seen.
When I see "sustainable aviation fuel" I think of "e-fuels".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
I recall a project run out of the US Air Force to experiment with bio-fuels but I haven't seen anything on it lately. The US Navy is experimenting with an "e-fuel" that allows for the production of a carbon neutral jet fuel that can be produced on a nuclear powered ship at sea. I remember while in the US Army all the trucks ran on 80% bio-diesel, which while not used as an aviation fuel it does demonstrate the pot
Re: (Score:2)
We don't want "eat or heat", "food or fuel", or whatever is the catchy term for food crops competing for res
Re: (Score:2)
For most applications, biofuels are a bad idea. Long distance plane flights are possibly an exception. Batteries are unlikely to have enough density for many years, if ever, so using a chemical fuel is essential. If you want to decarbonize long distance air travel, finding an alternative to fossil fuel is the only option. It remains to be seen whether that will end up being biofuel or a synthetic fuel made directly from CO2. Both are possible.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
High temperature solid oxide fuel cells can have very high power density. For simple fuels like hydrogen/methane/ammonia/formic-acid an electrical approach might be superior to combustion in an airplane, where needing to get the fuel cell to operating temperature isn't really a problem.
Those simple fuels will likely be used if we are going to reach net zero without just ending civilization.
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
Re:Electric Flight (Score:5, Insightful)
True. We should just end all flights for normal people so the rich and connected can continue to fly in to climate conferences in exotic places to party and discuss what else the rest of us don't need.
How come a major climate conference has never been held in a place like Iowa? Weirrrrrrd!
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Lemme know when the next HypocriteClimateCon is in Iowa. I'll buy you a beer.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You may not be but I assume you're not the rich and connected flying to 5+ star places on private jets to party it up with local hookers, eat the best food, drink the best wine to decide what the rest of us don't need.
If you are then hook a bro up!
Where I live the train to my area isn't completed yet but I'd be happy to take it if/when it met my travel needs. But this isn't about train vs plane. This is about powerful people telling everyone else they need anything while they continue to live lifestyles e
Re: (Score:2)
Re: the hypocrisy of the rich, are you arguing against the inevitable outcomes of capitalism?
Re: (Score:2)
No this is not a result of capitalism. This is cronyism and bad government not responsible to the governed.
I wasn't asking to have sex with you. That's not what the phrase means in that context and grammatical structure but why don't you? What's wrong with gay sex?
Re: (Score:2)
Capitalism, by design, increases wealth inequality, which typically leads to corruption, regulatory capture, & subversion of democracy (AKA "cronyism and bad government not responsible to the governed" - Did you mean to say "responsive"?). You can witness this happening everywhere you see capitalism as the most privileged economic model. Social democracy in Europe is supposed to "soften" these effects but even
Re: (Score:2)
Capitalism by design brings more wealth to those who work harder or smarter.
Wealth inequality is a result of people themselves not being equal.
I meant to say responsible. Responsive would mean they take into account what the people want or ask for. It also implies (to me) that the power resides in the government and the governed are chattel. Responsible in this context means they do whatever the fuck they want with no regard for the people from whom they derive their power and authority. The people are
Re: (Score:2)
Economics (Score:3)
Ending civilisation? How necessary to sustain civilisation do you think most flights are these days?
I don't know. You also don't know. You have no idea what ending air travel would do to the international economy, nor do I. For one thing, the economies of most tourist-destination islands in the Caribbean and Pacific would probably implode.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
How necessary to sustain civilisation do you think most flights are these days?
At least a 7.
Re: (Score:1)
I think it is more realistic than "sustainable" aircraft fuel, especially if you consider how power hungry aircraft are, and that growing biofuel means not growing crops on the same land.
When I say realistic, I mean realistic for short flights (within the US, or within Europe, for example). For sustainable long flights, airships are much more realistic, which have a large enough surface area for solar voltaic help for the batteries. Especially when they fly above the clouds.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Electric Flight (Score:5, Insightful)
Sure, if you're going really long distances, flying makes more sense, but it also makes sense to cut down on aviation significantly with good high-speed rail networks.
Re: (Score:3)
Sure, if you're going really long distances, flying makes more sense, but it also makes sense to cut down on aviation significantly with good high-speed rail networks.
The California HSR will cost $100B, three times the original budget, and take 30 years to complete. Many predict it will be canceled before completion as it continues to bleed red ink.
After California's debacle, it's unlikely anyone else will attempt to build a new HSR line in America.
Re: (Score:2)
Just opened: https://www.railway-technology... [railway-technology.com]
From the linked story: Miami to Orlando in approximately three hours. From Google Maps: automobile drive time, Miami to Orlando: 3hr 44 min. Sorry; that's not "high speed" rail, that's just a train.
Breaking ground soon: https://www.fox5vegas.com/2023... [fox5vegas.com]
From the linked story> Trains will take passengers from Las Vegas to Rancho Cucamonga in just two hours and ten minutes. Also from the story: Brightline’s all-electric trains will travel 218 miles along the median of Interstate 15 at speeds of nearly 200 miles per hour. Hmm. 218 miles at 200 mph should g
Re: (Score:2)
The part of the route that passed review is a 49 mile stretch running @ 140mph.
"
Brightline West – Cajon Pass High-Speed Rail Project
Brightline West, the Project Sponsor, proposes to construct and operate the Cajon Pass High-Speed Rail Project (Project), a 49-mile train system capable of reaching a top speed of approximately 140 miles per hour (mph) between Victor Valley, California, and Rancho Cucamonga, California. The Project includes two railway stations—one in Hesperia, and one in Rancho Cuc
Re: (Score:3)
California HSR's main purpose is to fill the bank accounts of the right people. The guys who wrote the proposition put in safeguards that supposed to scrap the whole thing when it deviated from the purpose (it has to have certain average speed and other milestone), but those were happily waved by the SEIU control courts and here we are.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I can declare any project or technology dead by cherry picking stupid corrupt examples.
Re:Electric Flight (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Electric Flight (Score:4, Insightful)
I think it is more realistic than "sustainable" aircraft fuel, especially if you consider how power hungry aircraft are, and that growing biofuel means not growing crops on the same land.
SAF isn't just biofuels, it also covers synthetic fuels made from electricity, water and CO2. This is obviously not very energy efficient, but if we end up having to massively over-supply wind power to cope with its worst-case capacity factor, we might end up having power to spare much of the time.
Re: (Score:2)
For sustainable long flights, airships are much more realistic, which have a large enough surface area for solar voltaic help for the batteries.
Run some numbers on how much power comes from solar PV, compared to the power consumed by even an airship, and I suspect that you will find this is not realistic. The use of batteries is not likely realistic because of the mass per unit of energy.
I recently watched a few YouTube videos on how airships can hold some promise for moving cargo cheaply from point to point but this is not likely something people would consider for passenger service. There might be airship flights where the goal isn't to get som
Re: (Score:1)
Run some numbers on how much power comes from solar PV, compared to the power consumed by even an airship, and I suspect that you will find this is not realistic. ...
Just lolz
This Airship: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org] has 6 180 kW (240 hp) engines.
That is roughly 50% more than a Tesla Model S.
Length nearly 200m, diameter 24m, circumference roughly 75m.
So the surface is give or take 1400sqm. Paintable solar "cells" are in the 10% efficiency range. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.co... [wiley.com]
Over land the upper si
I've seen this before! (Score:5, Insightful)
Spinning off a business isn't anything particularly special, the thing to watch is where to key management end up. If they go with the new electrical offshoot, then it's clear that the old business is destined to ride off into the sunset, meanwhile the electrical part is where they think the growth is. When it comes to non-consumer brands, the name is more or less meaningless. Reputation is important, but being called "Rolls-Royce" bears no weight in business decisions, so I wouldn't be surprised if the offshoot abandons the brand recognition.
This has happened a few times in the automotive industry, because investment in combustion powertrains has pretty much died off, so some companies have split themselves up, and kept the name with the old established hydrocarbon reliant parts of the business, while the spun off section is profitable and has a somewhat more resilient business, fit for the future.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Spinning off a business isn't anything particularly special, the thing to watch is where to key management end up. If they go with the new electrical offshoot, then it's clear that the old business is destined to ride off into the sunset
Rolls-Royce's CEO has spent his entire career in the oil and gas industry. I will bet my first born son that he's not going to join the new electrical offshoot.
Re: (Score:2)
Burying their heads in the sand (Score:2, Troll)
Biofuel doesn't scale.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
hydrogen is a joke, except for rocket stages...
the logistics of using it are just bonkers, considering you are talking cryofuels
Re: (Score:2)
Cryogenic methane is used at large scale for trucks.
Re: (Score:2)
hydrogen is a joke, except for rocket stages...
H2 doesn't even make much sense for rockets. SpaceX brought costs way down with liquid CH4.
Re: (Score:2)
H2 doesn't even make much sense for rockets. SpaceX brought costs way down with liquid CH4.
What.
The falcon 9 uses RP-1, a rocket fuel formulation developed by other people.
Starship uses methane, but that hasn't actually brought any costs down what with never having made it to orbit.
Re: (Score:2)
Fill us in on your solution for where all the electricity will come from to generate enough of it to replace kerosene. And no, plastering the entire planet in solar farms and wind turbines is not the solution.
Re: (Score:2)
Nuclear OR a very small part of North-African/Middle-East/Australian deserts filled with thin film PV with minimal mounting hardware (Maybe American deserts too, but you will need to put some tree huggers under the sand).
Re: (Score:2)
You want to wipe out how many endangered species to cover the ecosystem with PV?
Re: (Score:1)
It would be very easy to space them apart well enough to prevent that, and necessary for maintenance anyway. This is a classic straw-man argument.
Re: (Score:2)
One way to avoid the tree huggers is to build the solar farms across the border in Sonora and Chihuahua.
The sun is brighter and labor is cheaper.
There's a huge solar panel factory in Juarez.
Re: (Score:2)
Hmm...would the US really want to put any significant source of our energy, especially for flights in Mexico where it could/would quickly be at the mercy of the Drug Cartels down there?
Sounds like a huge national security concern right off to bat.
Re: (Score:1)
You would not have to plaster the whole thing. An area approximately the size of the US state of Georgia should be sufficient.
Re: (Score:3)
Hydrogen creates more problems than it fixes.
Production, transportation, storage.
All of it depends on tech that for the past 2 decades we've been told 'is only a few years away'.
The reality is it will take at least 50 years still.
Currently most hydrogen is made from fossil fuel and has zero environmental benefits.
Even if you make it using electricity from solar/wind it's still a very wasteful way to use that electricity.
So even after those 50 years what you end up with it something that only works financial
Re: (Score:3)
10 years of looming commercial extinction due to net zero deadlines will accomplish more than 100 years of status quo preserving value signalling.
Re: (Score:2)
https://www.iea.org/policies/1... [iea.org]
If you think that kind of EU lawmaking is easily ignored look at the impact NOx limit laws are having in Netherlands and Belgium.
Re: (Score:1)
You are out of the loop.
Everything regarding H2 has improved dramatically the last 30 years,
Re:Burying their heads in the sand (Score:4, Insightful)
Biofuel doesn't scale.
True, but planes, especially the type of planes RR make engines for are especially sensitive to energy density (volumetric and mass). And you get the additional benefit of fuel, that the weight goes away as you use it up, which is not the case for batteries. Thing is about 40% of a modern aircraft (like the A350) weight at takeoff is fuel, compared to a few percent for cars for example.
With sufficient energy, you can pull CO2 out of the air and synthesize fuels from the carbon there and hydrogen from water. The US navy has been investigating it a lot, since their operations are currently limited by the need to refuel their planes and smaller ships.
Some pretty radical change in something is going to be require, either a drastic reduction in long haul flights, radical new battery tech or vast improvements in synfuel plus the renrewables infrastructure to go along with it.
We'll see, I guess.
I can see why RR are selling the division though. It's all about motors and batteries etc and they don't have the resources to strongly compete there, especially with the whole automotive sector an a bunch of others already doing that. If electric rives take off then they'll most likely use high efficiency ducted fans which RR are very good at making.
Re: (Score:3)
Synthetic fuel will very unlikely be long chain hydrocarbons for mainstream use. They won't be able to compete with simpler fuels.
Re: (Score:2)
Synthetic fuel will very unlikely be long chain hydrocarbons for mainstream use. They won't be able to compete with simpler fuels.
Gas turbines can burn methane just fine, but simpler fuels do come with other problems. Kerosene (Jet-A) an gasoline (Jet-B) type fuels hit a number of sweet spots between heavier and lighter fuels. Hydrocarbons much lighter than gasoline start running into problems with low boiling points and needing compression or having low volumetric energy density.
Alcohol (maybe butanol) cou
Re: (Score:2)
Alcohols are hygroscopic which means they will pick up water from the air making their energy per volume
Re: (Score:1)
Alcohols are hygroscopic which means they will pick up water from the air making their energy per volume even worse.
When inside of a tank of an airplane?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
This climate emergency is a golden opportunity for us to build some useful infrastructure. We need to invest in moving away from fossil fuels, and here is a great way to do it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Wait till some idiot terrorist groups start bombing trains, especially the high speed ones where they make the whole thing go flying off the tracks with their higher density of people on board.....and see how long before the same draconian TSA type security is put in place everywhere.
You know high speed rail has been a thing for decades, right?
It's quite hard to blow up a train, people have even tried.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Well, thing is...it hasn't been a big deal in the US.
I fear, as soon as it became a widespread, popular thing in the US...it would then become a major target here...and if here, then it would spread to other countries too.
Re: Burying their heads in the sand (Score:2)
"Wait till some idiot terrorist groups start bombing trains"
If they were going to do that they would be bombing airports now.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Admittedly it's been a while but I'm seeing airport style security being implemented at bus stops. It sounds like rail is also adopting security checks too. If bus and rail are implementing airport style security measures, and the delays and inconvenience that come with that, then expect people to fly or drive instead.
I'm not sure why bus and rail are thinking it wise to implement more security but I have a guess. I'm reluctant to go into details on what the causes may be as that's likely to take this do
Re: (Score:3)
"we aren't seeing the time and cost advantages of taking bus, rail, or whatever instead of flying that was promised" - Yes, we are.
"air travel could find means to improve the check-in time, reduce flight delays" - Let me know when that happens.
"Trains may work in Europe but in the USA they haven't done very well. Perhaps the longer distances are a problem." - Nope. The distances are fine. The USA has implemented some
Re: (Score:2)
Desert, seawater, algae.
Sandia NREL figured out in the 1980s that the process would be profitable with oil at $50/barrel. It's at $80 now.
Re: (Score:2)
$50 in 1980s dollars?
Re: (Score:2)
I have considered open ponds using seawater to avoid the fresh water limits. The problem AFAICS is the need to continually refresh massive amounts of it to fight evaporation, you can't just replenish what is lost because then the salinity just keeps rising.
If you refresh a ton of water, regardless of energy requirements to do it, it becomes hard to keep a closed nutrient cycle and you really don't want to continually be losing nutrients other than what comes from the air. I don't think open ponds can work a
Re: (Score:2)
I think the answer is to combine it with direct solar thermal/optical desalination, now that we know that light can drive evaporation we should be able to make that much cheaper.