See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/349028040

Operational Energy and Power Reserves for Hybrid-electric and Electric

Aircraft

Conference Paper · January 2021

DOI: 10.25967/530149

CITATIONS READS

6 572

2 authors:

Ingmar Geiß Andreas Strohmayer

Deutsche Aircraft Universität Stuttgart
8 PUBLICATIONS 118 CITATIONS 40 PUBLICATIONS 213 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Ingmar Geiß on 04 February 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Deutscher Luft- und Raumfahrtkongress 2020
DocumentID: 530149

OPERATIONAL ENERGY AND POWER RESERVES FOR

HYBRID-ELECTRIC AND ELECTRIC AIRCRAFT
I. Geiß, A. Strohmayer, University of Stuttgart,
Institute of Aircraft Design, Pfaffenwaldring 31, 70569 Stuttgart, Germany

Abstract
Power and energy reserves in hybrid-electric and electric aircraft propulsion systems are required to counter
propulsion component failures and to cope with disorder in flight operations. In the first section of the paper, a
failure of a battery pack or a combustion engine during take-off is considered and an equivalent level of safety
to conventional aircraft is suggested. In the next section, a required energy reserve for a propulsion component
failure during cruise flight is evaluated. Therefore, a range to reach a suitable airport for an emergency landing
is determined for Europe and the USA by calculating the distance to the nearest diversion airport for a mesh
of possible aircraft positions. The median, the 95th percentile and the 99th percentile of this diversion range is
then determined by a cumulative frequency analysis – the investigation is carried out for different runway
lengths which represent different aircraft classes. Furthermore, safety margins are discussed which are
required for flight operation. The same methodology is then applied to determine the operational flight reserve
which is required to reach a suitable alternate airport from a destination airport and the results are discussed.

high-lift system to size a wing for an efficient cruise flight [3].

1. NOMENCLATURE In some applications the integration in the vertical tail can
Symbols increase the integration efficiency of a propeller [4]. To
Circumference of Earth overcome the low specific energy of current battery cells,
hybrid-electric aircraft concepts are investigated to
( ) Cumulative frequency
leverage the advantage of distributed electric propulsion
( ) Number of data points below the threshold and combine it with the superior specific energy of fuel.
Number of data points
Number of battery packs In conventional single-engine aircraft an engine failure is
Number of combustion engines associated with a complete loss of propulsive power. In a
, Maximum rated power of battery system series hybrid-electric aircraft several additional components
, Power of battery system during take-off are placed between the combustion engine and the
Maximum rated power of combustion engines propeller as shown in FIG. 1. All these components are
,
associated with individual failure rates, which increase the
Length of great circle likelihood of the failure mode. Hence, one option to reach
Battery power split during take-off an equivalent level of safety for a series hybrid-electric
aircraft in this class could be that the battery system
Greek symbols provides additional electrical power in case of a combustion
Angle of great circle engine failure. Further, if a combustion engine failure
Longitude occurs during cruise flight, the battery system would need
Latitude to provide energy for a flight to reach a suitable diversion
airport. Several projects are currently realized with a serial
Abbreviations hybrid-electric propulsion system and one combustion
Bat Battery pack engine: e.g. Diamond DA40 Hybrid, Traveller Hybrid and
CS Certification specification e-Genius Hybrid [5].
ICE Internal combustion engine
IFR Instrument flight rules
NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration
OEI One engine inoperative
VFR Visual flight rules

2. INTRODUCTION

Current research aims to exploit the characteristics of

electric motors. These offer e.g. less variation of the
efficiency on partial power settings than combustion
engines and no dependency between rated power and
maximum efficiency. Electric motors are more compact and
lighter than piston engines applied in aviation [1]. As a
result, electric motors are integrated in unconventional
positions of the aircraft e.g. wing tip propellers are expected FIG. 1: Components of conventional and series hybrid-electric
to decrease induced drag or gain propulsive efficiency [2]. propulsion systems
Motors distributed along the wingspan can be utilized as a

©2021 1 doi: 10.25967/530149

 Deutscher Luft- und Raumfahrtkongress 2020

In conventional multi-engine aircraft, a “one-engine-

inoperative” (OEI) scenario is associated with a partial loss
of propulsive power. However, there is no loss of energy
available on-board for propulsion. This is because the fuel
tank, as the energy storage, stays functional after such
event. Contrary, due to the different nature of several
hybrid-electric propulsion systems, an OEI-scenario may be
associated with a loss of power and furthermore only a
fraction of the energy stored in the fuel tank might be usable
for the remaining flight. One example is the aircraft concept
“PEGASUS”, which is investigated by NASA [6], where a FIG. 2: Series hybrid-electric aircraft in CS-23 class: electric
combination of a gas turbine and an electric motor is motor installed in vertical tail, combustion engine with generator
integrated at the wing tip and further electric motors are integrated in the nose cone, battery system installed behind
installed on wing inboard positions and at the aft of the passengers [8]
fuselage. The gas turbines are intended to provide in cruise
flight the required thrust and thereby lowering the induced
drag while achieving an increased range by the use of fuel. No compensation of the power loss is not considered, as
The propellers of the other electric motors, which are the feasibility for certification is questionable because more
installed at the wing, are folded in cruise and do not provide components in a series hybrid-electric propulsion system
thrust. If one gas turbine fails, the electric motors need to contribute to the failure rate. A partial compensation of the
counter the yawing moment which is induced by the power loss might require a multi-engine pilot training, as a
remaining gas turbine and contribute thrust until an take-off with a climb angle of merely 1 % requires detailed
emergency landing has been carried out. flight planning and pilot skills. This would handicap the
introduction of series hybrid aircraft as less pilots would be
The additional required allowances in the propulsion able to fly these aircraft. As a result, full power
system are associated with a mass growth, which increases compensation shall be regarded as the equivalent level of
the energy consumption of the aircraft. Consequently, the safety. Consequently, the power loss of a combustion
aircraft designer shall assume reserves, which are sufficient engine during take-off needs to be compensated by battery
for a safe operation but ensure a minimal mass growth. The power. A battery system consists of several battery packs,
identification of the required reserves shall be the objective which are all connected to the same bus bar. In case of a
of this paper. In the first section, power reserves are failure of an individual battery pack (e.g. due to a failure of
investigated. In the second section, energy reserves are a battery cell) it can be disconnected from the bus bar via a
identified, which might be required for hybrid-electric relay. The housing of a battery pack is required to contain
aircraft. In the third section, distances to alternate airports a fire and to prevent a pack to pack propagation of it. This
are investigated, with the aim to determine suitable values can be realized e.g. with an appropriate firewall and
for hybrid-electric and battery-electric aircraft. separated installation spaces for the battery packs. The
excess power of the battery system needed to compensate
a failure of a combustion engine during take-off, can be
3. POWER RESERVES DURING TAKE-OFF used to compensate a failure of a battery pack as well as
shown in FIG. 3. As a result, no additional battery mass is
Section EHPS.80 of the draft version of the special needed. However, a specific minimum number of battery
condition for electric and hybrid propulsion systems of the packs is necessary.
EASA [7] requires a safety assessment of the propulsion
system. For a series hybrid-electric aircraft, subject to This minimum number of battery packs can be
CS-23, which is propelled by a single electric motor as deduced by requiring that the power loss due to a
shown in FIG. 2 different power reserves for the hybrid- combustion engine failure is equal to the power loss
electric propulsion system are plausible. In case of a failure associated with a failure of a battery pack as described with
of the combustion engine or a failure in the battery system the following equation, where denotes the total
,
during take-off, the following options regarding the power combustion engine power, the number of combustion
loss are possible:
engines and , the total battery power available.
• No compensation of the power loss (similar to current 1
single-engine general aviation aircraft) ∙ , =1 ∙ ,
(1)
• Partial compensation of the power loss to achieve a
positive climb gradient according to CS 23.2120
• Full compensation of the power loss with = ∙ (2)
, ,

©2021 2
 Deutscher Luft- und Raumfahrtkongress 2020

After a failure of a combustion engine during take-off, the

battery system is required to provide power as described
before. Furthermore, sufficient battery capacity is required
to land the aircraft safely after such event. The annex VII of
the European regulation 965/2012 [11] specifies in its
paragraph NCO.OP.125 operational reserves which are
mandatory for normal flight operations. The required
reserve depends on the type of flight operation: reserves for
flights according to "Visual Flight Rules" (VFR) differ from
flights using "Instrument Flight Rules" (IFR). For VFR-flights
in the vicinity of an airfield, it is required to provide reserve
energy for a traffic pattern with a flight time of 10 minutes.
Although this flight time is intended as a normal flight
reserve, it could be a suitable value for the required flight
time after a failure of a combustion engine to safely land the
aircraft by a normally skilled pilot. This flight time would
consequently determine the required battery capacity.

For hybrid-electric aircraft which are propelled by multiple

propellers according to CS-23 / CS-25 similar
FIG. 3: Sizing of a hybrid-electric propulsion system, which can considerations can be carried out, considering the specific
compensate the power loss resulting from a combustion engine or paragraphs e.g. CS 23.2120 and CS 25.121 for the
a battery pack failure propulsion components which generate propulsive power
and for the components which provide electric power e.g.
During the aircraft’s take-off the power is the sum of battery systems, fuel cells and generator systems.
total combustion engine power , and power provided
by the battery system , .
4. ENERGY RESERVES DURING CRUISE
= , + , (3)
FLIGHT
The power split during take-off as defined in [9] and [10]
is given in equation 4. It is a design parameter for hybrid- A failure of a combustion engine in a conventional multi-
electric aircraft and describes which fraction of the required engine aircraft is associated with a loss of propulsive power.
shaft power during take-off is covered by the power of As the remaining combustion engine(s) is/are sized to
the battery system CS-23 or CS-25 to provide power for a climb flight, the
, .
aircraft can continue its cruise flight – in some case with a
,
= (4) reduced flight altitude. Furthermore, the stored fuel
provides sufficient energy to reach an airport for an
The power split is introduced into equation 3 and therein emergency landing. This however is not always the case for
the total combustion engine power is substituted. hybrid-electric aircraft as described in the introduction. If
,
Consequently, a relation between the number of only one combustion engine is installed, the energy stored
combustion engines , power split and required in the on-board fuel cannot be used for the remaining flight.
number of battery packs is deduced as shown in the Hybrid-electric propulsion systems, which are equipped
following equation. with two combustion engines might convert only a fraction
( − 1) ∙ +1 of the energy required for the remaining flight after a failure
≥ (5) of one combustion engine from the fuel. This can be the
1− case if combustion engines are applied, which are
It is shown in TAB. 1 that the required segmentation of the downsized to cruise power for an increased thermal
battery system stays within a feasible range. As only efficiency. Similarly, if the combustion engines are
integer values are acceptable for the number of battery positioned at the wing tips as intended by the hybrid-electric
PEGASUS concept [6], additional electric power is required
packs , the resulting values from the equation are
to compensate the yawing moment of the remaining gas
brought up to a round figure. Evaluating the function for
turbine and provide flight time to reach a suitable diversion
= 1, which equals to a take-off carried out purely by
airport for an emergency landing.
battery power, results in a non-feasible result for the
number of battery packs. This is a theoretical result, which
arises from the assumption that the loss of power due a Generalized data for the distance to such a diversion airport
failed combustion engine shall be equal to the power loss is not available and an educated assumption is non-trivial.
due to a failure of a battery pack. The National Business Aviation Association (NBAA)
provides in its range format [12] an assumption for the
for =1 for =2 distance from a destination airfield to an alternate airfield.
0.0 1 1 This range is part of the required reserve for flights
0.2 2 2 according to Instrument Flight Rules and is assumed to be
0.4 2 3 100 nautical miles for turbo-prop driven business aircraft
0.6 3 4 and 200 nautical miles for jet business aircraft. However,
0.8 5 9 the intent of the range format was to "provide a standard for
TAB. 1: Minimum number of segmentations of the battery system prospective aircraft purchasers to use in comparing the
in order to compensate a battery pack failure during take- performance of various aircraft". It does not state a general
off existence of an alternate airport within the stated ranges.

©2021 3
 Deutscher Luft- und Raumfahrtkongress 2020

The required range of a hybrid-electric aircraft after a failure The data of the airfields is filtered further for different
of a combustion engine or a battery pack is a design runway lengths and specific types of runway surface. As a
parameter which affects the performance of the aircraft. If result, data sets are obtained containing all airports with a
the range is longer than required, the mass and runway length greater than a specific value. The required
consequently, the energy demand of the aircraft will be runway lengths and surfaces are summarized in TAB. 2 and
increased. If the range is below a practical value, the can be related to an exemplary aircraft representing a
operation of the aircraft would be limited. As a result, a more specific aircraft class.
detailed analysis is needed to determine the required value
of this design parameter. The analysis is carried out for Runway Surface of runway Exemplary
Europe and the continental part of the United States of length aircraft
America, which is a key market for general aviation aircraft. 650 m Asphalt, concrete, grass Diamond DA-40,
According to the General Aviation Manufacturers or gravel Pilatus PC-12
Association [13] 62 % of piston-driven airplanes 850 m Asphalt or concrete Beech 1900D
manufactured worldwide were sold to North America in 1000 m Asphalt or concrete ATR-72-600
2018 – 11 % were sold to Europe. 1150 m Asphalt or concrete ATR-42-600
1500 m Asphalt or concrete Airbus A320
4.1. Diversion airports TAB. 2: Landing field lengths and required surface of different
aircraft
For the determination of the required range of a hybrid- In FIG. 5 the influence of the runway length on the number
electric aircraft after a failure of one propulsion component, of airports in the USA is shown. The number of airports is
the position data of suitable diversion airports in the significantly reduced for increased runways lengths.
investigated region is needed. The Aeronautical
Information Publication (AIP) with its chapter Aerodromes
(AD) contains all relevant information of airports and
airfields, which are necessary for pilots to plan and conduct
flights. It contains e.g. latitude, longitude and elevation of
the airfield, length and width of runways as well as radio
frequencies and further operational data. In [14] an
electronic version of the AIP data is available, which was
converted to a MATLAB-compatible format and used for the
further investigation. The data base comprises of e.g.
20,671 civil airfields for the United States of America.
Filtering out heliports, closed airfields, seaplane bases and
airfields without a specification of the runway surface leaves
13,283 airfields for consideration. For the investigated part
of Europe, the AIP was obtained for the 27 member states
of the European Union as well as the United Kingdom,
Norway, Switzerland, the Balkans, Ukraine and Belarus.
Filtering out heliports, military and closed airfields as well
as mountain airfields on glaciers and seaplane bases left
3,808 airports for the investigation.

FIG. 5: Location of airports with a runway length greater than

650 m (above) and greater than 1,500 m (below) in the
investigated part of the USA

4.2. Aircraft positions

As a next step, a mesh of possible aircraft positions over

land was created expressed in latitude and longitude .
Aircraft positions over sea and islands, except Great Britain
and Ireland, were excluded at this stage. The mesh applied
in the calculation consists of positions with a spacing of
1/60° in latitude Δ and longitude Δ , which corresponds to
a spacing of approximately 1 nautical mile. In FIG. 6 an
exemplary mesh is shown with a spacing of 1° in latitude
and longitude. In Europe the mesh was created for latitudes
FIG. 4: Location of airports with a runway length greater than from 36°N to 70°N and for longitudes from 12°W to 25°E.
650 m in Europe

©2021 4
 Deutscher Luft- und Raumfahrtkongress 2020

A cumulative frequency analysis can be performed, where

it is determined how often, in other words, with which
frequency, the distance to the nearest diversion airport is
below a certain value. For the calculation of the cumulative
frequency the results need to be sorted from the lowest to
the highest value. Consequently, the cumulative frequency
( ) can be calculated using the following equation, where
corresponds to the total number of data points and ( )
is the number of data points below the threshold . In FIG. 8
the resulting curve is plotted for the USA and Europe. It can
be deduced that for 95 % of the aircraft positions in the USA
a suitable diversion airport with a runway of at least 650 m
exists within a distance of 44 km. For 99 % of the aircraft
positions this distance increases to 63 km. For the
investigated part of Europe, 95 % and 99 % of the aircraft
positions possess a distance to a suitable airfield of less
than 67 km and 90 km respectively. For a plausibility check,
the mean airport density of the USA is compared to the
mean airport density of Europe, which reveals that in the
USA 0.95 airports with a runway of 650 m or longer exist
FIG. 6: Exemplary visualization of investigated aircraft positions per 1,000 km2 whereas in the investigated part of Europe
in Europe with a spacing of 1° in latitude and longitude – the only 0.48 airports exist per 1,000 km2.
calculation was carried out with a spacing of 1/60°, which results
in a spacing of approximately 1 nautical mile ( ) (8)
( )=

Consequently, the shortest distance of each aircraft

position to the suitable diversion airports is determined, by
calculating the length of the great circle to each individual
airfield using the following equation, where denotes
the circumference of the Earth and describes the angle of
the great circle, and determining the minimum value .
= ∙ (6)

The angle can be calculated by the following equation

[15], where and describe latitude and longitude of the
aircraft position and and denote the coordinates of
the airport. The closest airport is then determined for each
investigated aircraft position.
cos = sin ∙ sin + cos ∙ cos ∙ cos( − ) (7)

The results of the calculation are shown in the histograms

in FIG. 7. The results are categorized in bins where each
bin covers a certain spectrum of distances. E.g. the first bin
contains all distances from zero to five kilometers. By
plotting the number of values contained in each bin, an FIG. 8: Plot of cumulative frequency showing e.g. that for 95 %
estimate of the probability distribution of the continuous of aircraft positions in Europe a suitable airport with a runway
variable can be shown. of at least 650 m is within a distance of approx. 62 km

The maximum error of the calculation is evaluated by

considering the distance of a possible aircraft position,
which is located exactly in between the mesh of aircraft
positions. The distance of the great circle between different
longitudes is highest at the equator and decreases to South
and North Poles. As a result, the maximum error of the
calculation is evaluated at the position which is closest to
the equator, which is the southern coast of Florida with a
latitude of 25°. As the spacing of the positions in latitude
and longitude is 1/60°, the maximum error of the calculation
can be determined to be 1.26 km.

FIG. 7: Results of calculation to determine nearest suitable

airport for emergency landing

©2021 5
 Deutscher Luft- und Raumfahrtkongress 2020

4.3. Results position 46.73°N and 69.98°W in Maine, located at the

border to Canada. Positions with an increased distance to
For the aircraft designer the 95th percentile will be probably a diversion airport can be found as well within the USA, e.g.
of most importance, as it is a suitable compromise between at 42.10°N and 108.22°W in the state of Wyoming.
the possibility to operate the aircraft on the majority of
routes and the additional aircraft mass due to the required Runway Median 95th 99th Max.
energy reserve. FIG. 9 compares the results of the length percentile percentile
95th percentile for different runway lengths and runway 650 m* 15.5 km 44.3 km 63.0 km 124,1 km
surfaces in Europe and the USA. It can be seen that the 850 m 20.9 km 55.3 km 76.4 km 124.1 km
USA possesses a denser network of airports as the 1000 m 22.7 km 57.3 km 77.7 km 142,7 km
distance to a suitable diversion airport is lower than in 1150 m 25.1 km 61.1 km 79.7 km 142.7 km
Europe. Furthermore, it can be seen in FIG. 9 how the 1300 m 29.2 km 68.5 km 89.4 km 148.7 km
distance to a suitable diversion airport rises as the required 1500 m 33.0 km 80.8 km 107.7 km 179.9 km
runway length is increased, which is the result of the fewer TAB. 4: Distance to a suitable diversion airport for investigated
number of airports with long runways. aircraft positions in the USA (*=including grass and gravel
runways)

Furthermore, a safety margin should be applied in order to

derive from the theoretical range of the great circle to a
practical range. A safety factor should be applied in order
to account for a delay of the appropriate pilot reaction in
case of a failure of a propulsion component. In [16] the
response time of 29 general aviation pilots to failures of
autopilot systems has been tested. It was found that
response times for the detection of "slow" failure types can
reach the order of magnitude of 100 seconds. This time can
give an indication, which safety margin is required to allow
for an appropriate pilot response in case of a failure of a
combustion engine in a series hybrid-electric aircraft. For
an aircraft with a cruise speed of e.g. 220 km/h (120 knots),
this equals to a distance of 6.1 km. A further safety factor
should consider adverse head wind conditions, which
increase the energy required to reach the diversion airport.
If e.g. a “moderate breeze” on the Beaufort Scale is taken
FIG. 9: Comparison of 95th percentile distance to diversion as the reference value with wind speeds up to 28 km/h, the
airport for the investigated parts of Europe and the USA flight time of an aircraft with a cruise speed of 220 km/h
depending on required runway length and runway surface would be increased by ~15 % and consequently the
required energy for flight is increased accordingly. When
In TAB. 3 the numerical values for the median, the 95th the aircraft has reached the airport, further flight time is
percentile, 99th percentile and the maximum values for the necessary to carry out a traffic pattern, which depends onto
distance to a diversion airport in Europe are given as a the type of airport. For a typical general aviation aircraft, the
reference. The maximum value for the runway length of additional flight range can be in the order of magnitude of
650 m corresponds to the position 67.22°N and 18.02°E in 5 km. Exemplary, the influence of the additional reserves is
the Swedish part of Lapland, where the closest suitable evaluated for a general aviation aircraft with a cruise speed
airport is Kalixfors airport (ICAO-code: ESUK), which is of 220 km/h and a required landing field length of 650 m.
situated 129.7 km away. The 95-percentile of the distance to a diversion airport in
the USA is 44.3 km. Adding the described factors, the
required flight range would increase to 62.0 km1.
Runway Median 95th 99th Max. Depending on the type of aircraft, flight altitude could be
length percentile percentile used to reduce the energy necessary to reach the suitable
650 m* 23.5 km 66.8 km 90.1 km 129.7 km diversion airport.
850 m 33.6 km 79.1 km 104.6 km 139.1 km
1000 m 35.9 km 84.1 km 110.6 km 156.3 km From the presented data, it can be deduced, that the
1150 m 37.8 km 86.8 km 113.3 km 159.0 km required landing field length and the geographical area of
1300 m 40.4 km 91.4 km 121.2 km 174.3 km application are design parameters in aircraft design which
1500 m 43.5 km 96.4 km 126.9 km 177.9 km might influence the required reserves with its associated
TAB. 3: Distance to a suitable diversion airport for investigated mass growth. As one consequence, high-lift systems with
aircraft positions in Europe (*=including grass and gravel an increased maximum lift coefficient or lower wing
runways) loadings to achieve lower landing field lengths may be more
beneficial for the overall aircraft.
In TAB. 4 the numerical values for the median, the 95th
percentile, 99th percentile and the maximum values for the
USA are given. The maximum value of 124.1 km for airports
with a runway length greater than 650 m corresponds to the

1
6.1 km + (44.3 km) ∙ 1.15 + 5 km = 62.0 km

©2021 6
 Deutscher Luft- und Raumfahrtkongress 2020

5. ENERGY RESERVES AT DESTINATION In TAB. 6 the numerical data for the USA is summarized.
AIRPORT The maximum distance within the US for runway lengths up
to 650 m is the distance from Grand Marais Cook County
In the following section, the distance from a destination Airport, Minnesota, to the suitable alternative Silver Bay
airport to an alternate airport with a suitable runway is Municipal Airport.
determined. This value is expected to have an impact on Runway Median 95th 99th Max.
the performance on purely battery powered aircraft. Due to length percentile percentile
the limited specific energy of current battery cells, the 650 m* 12.5 km 33.9 km 48.5 km 101.5 km
achievable range of these aircraft can be significantly 850 m 23.1 km 49.0 km 68.4 km 124.0 km
reduced when increased reserves are required for the flight 1000 m 25.8 km 52.6 km 74.0 km 124.0 km
operation. Hence, the objective is to identify a minimal 1150 m 27.4 km 58.3 km 80.2 km 124.0 km
reserve which allows a safe operation, but compromises the 1300 m 30.6 km 67.0 km 91.7 km 124.0 km
usable flight range as little as possible. The same 1500 m 32.6 km 74.9 km 104.5 km 171.4 km
methodology as described in the section before is applied.
TAB. 6: Distance from a destination airport in the USA to
In FIG. 10 the determined 95th percentile of the distance to suitable alternative airport (*=including grass and gravel
an alternate airport is plotted for different runway lengths
runways)
and different runway surfaces. It can be seen that the
distance in the USA is between 16 % to 36 % lower than in If airports would be evenly distributed in Europe and the
Europe for all investigated runway lengths. Further, it can USA, the distance from the considered aircraft positions to
be observed, how the distance is increased as the required a diversion airport, investigated in the section before,
runway length rises because less suitable airports are should be lower than the distance from a destination airport
available. to an alternate airport. If the airports however would be
clustered, leaving large areas without any airports, then the
distance from the investigated aircraft position to a
diversion airport should be greater than the distance from a
destination airport to a suitable alternate airport. Comparing
the data for Europe in FIG. 9 and FIG. 10 indicates that a
slight clustering of airports occurs in Europe and the USA.
6. CONCLUSION

A propulsion component failure of a series hybrid-electric

aircraft during take-off was investigated. It was shown that
with the segmentation of the battery system into a specific
number of battery packs, a hybrid-electric propulsion
system can be designed which can handle the failure of a
combustion engine as well as the failure of a battery pack.

Further, the required flight range of a hybrid-electric aircraft

after a failure of a propulsion component during cruise flight
was determined. The aim was to identify the minimum
additional flight range, which enables a safe operation in the
FIG. 10: Comparison of 95th percentile distance to alternate
significant majority of Europe and the USA, but at the same
airport for the investigated parts of Europe and the USA
time influences the performance of the aircraft as little as
possible. Therefore, the data of airports in Europe and the
In TAB. 5 the numerical data for Europe is summarized. The USA was obtained from an electronic version of an
maximum value for runway lengths up to 650 m is the Aeronautical Information Publication (AIP). The data was
distance from Ibiza Airport (ICAO-code: LEIB) in Spain to categorized for different minimum runway lengths, which
the alternate airport in Mallorca (ICAO-code: LEPA). The correspond to different types of aircraft. A mesh of aircraft
maximum for the runway length of 1500 m corresponds to position in Europe and the USA was created and
the airport Sumburgh in Scotland (ICAO code: EGPB) consequently, the distance for each position to the nearest,
where the suitable alternative is Wick Airport (ICAO code: suitable diversion airport was determined. With a
EGPC). cumulative frequency plot, the 95th percentile of this
distance to the nearest diversion airport was determined. It
Runway Median 95th 99th Max.
length percentile percentile
could be shown that in the USA this required flight range is
lower for all runway lengths. Exemplary, the 95th percentile
650 m* 20.0 km 53.3 km 85.6 km 139.5 km
of the distance to the nearest diversion airport with a
850 m 34.5 km 80.5 km 103.2 km 140.4 km
runway length greater than 650 m of any aircraft position in
1000 m 38.2 km 88.0 km 119.9 km 165.8 km
the USA was 44.3 km whereas in Europe the same value
1150 m 41.6 km 93.7 km 125.0 km 165.8 km
increased to 66.8 km. As the determined distances were
1300 m 46.8 km 102.0 km 134.5 km 167.2 km
plain great circle distances, necessary safety margins were
1500 m 49.1 km 112.6 km 140.4 km 188.5 km
discussed covering human factors, adverse wind conditions
TAB. 5: Distance from a destination airport in Europe to and a traffic pattern at the diversion airport.
suitable alternative airport (*=including grass and gravel
runways)
The same methodology was applied in order to determine
the distance from a destination airport to an alternate airport

©2021 7
 Deutscher Luft- und Raumfahrtkongress 2020

with a suitable runway length. The objective was to identify Management Guide,” Washington D.C., 2011.
a minimum distance which allows a safe operation but does
[13] General Aviation Manufacturers Association, “2018
not decrease the flight range for normal operation. Due to Annual Report,” Washington, D.C., 2018.
the limited specific energy of current battery cells, purely
battery powered aircraft would specifically benefit from a [14] “openAIP - Worldwide aviation database,” 24 08
low distance to an alternate airport. Again, the 95th 2020. [Online]. Available: http://openaip.net/.
percentile of the distance in the USA was lower than in [15] I. Agricola and T. Friedrich, Elementargeometrie,
Europe – for all investigated runway lengths. Exemplary, for Wiesbaden: Springer Spektrum, 2015.
airports with a runway length greater than 650 m the [16] D. B. Beringer, “Automation in General Aviation:
distance was in the USA 33.9 km and in Europe 53.3 km. Responses of Pilots to Autopilot and Pitch Trim
The presented data showed, how the distance to an Malfunctions,” Proceedings of the Human Factors
alternate airport is increased as the required runway length and Ergonomics Society 40th Annual Meeting, 1996.
rises because less suitable airports are available. This
indicates the impact of a landing field length of an aircraft to
the corresponding, required operational flight reserves.

7. REFERENCES

[1] D. P. Raymer, Aircraft Design: A Conceptual

Approach - Fifth Edition, Reston, Virginia: American
Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2012.
[2] T. C. A. Stokkermans, S. Nootebos and L. L. M.
Veldhuis, “Analysis and Design of a Small-
ScaleWingtip-Mounted Pusher Propeller,” in AIAA
Aviation 2019 Forum, Dallas, Texas, 2019.
[3] N. K. Borer, M. D. Patterson, J. K. Viken, M. D.
Moore, S. Clarke, M. E. Redifer, R. J. Christie, A. M.
Stoll, A. Dubois, J. Bevirt, A. R. Gibson, T. J. Foster
and P. G. Osterkamp, “Design and Performance of
the NASA SCEPTOR Distributed Electric Propulsion
Flight Demonstrator,” in AIAA Aviation Technology,
Integration, and Operations Conference,
Washington, D. C., 2016.
[4] I. Geiß and R. Voit-Nitschmann, “Sizing of fuel-
based energy systems for electric aircraft,” Journal
of Aerospace Engineering, pp. 2295-2304, 2017.
[5] I. Geiß, S. Notter, A. Strohmayer and W. Fichter,
“Optimized Operation Strategies for Serial Hybrid-
Electric Aircraft,” in AIAA Aviation Technology,
Integration, and Operations Conference, Atlanta,
2018.
[6] K. R. Antcliff and F. M. Capristan, “Conceptual
Design of the Parallel Electric-Gas Architecture with
Synergistic Utilization Scheme (PEGASUS)
Concept,” in American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Denver, Colorado, 2017.
[7] European Union Aviation Safety Agency, “Special
Condition E-19 Electric / Hybrid Propulsion System,”
Cologne, 2020.
[8] A. Strohmayer and I. Geiß, “Eco4 a New Generation
Hybrid-electric Four Place Aircraft,” in E2-Flight
Symposium, Stuttgart, 06.10.2017.
[9] M. Voskuijl, J. van Bogaert and A. G. Rao, “Analysis
and design of hybrid electric regional turboprop
aircraft,” CEAS Aeronautical Journal, pp. 15-25,
2018.
[10] F. D. Finger, C. Braun and C. Bil, “Impact of Battery
Performance on the Initial Sizing of Hybrid-Electric
General Aviation Aircraft,” Journal of Aerospace
Engineering, 2020.
[11] European Commission, “Commission Regulation
(EU) No 965/2012,” Brussels, 2012.
[12] National Business Aviation Association, “NBAA

©2021 8

View publication stats