Should Tesla buy Mooney?

[Kmac]

7 hours ago, Utah20Gflyer said:

I don't see Elon being interested in a company that basically produces a 60 year old aircraft design.  Yes, for the vintage Mooney's are excellent airplanes but they aren't state of the art.  Elon didn't try to repurpose the Saturn V rocket or retrofit a Chevy to be an electric vehicle.  I don't see him wanting to try to repurpose a Mooney.   There are just too many compromises needed to retrofit an existing product versus a clean sheet design.  

 

7 hours ago, MooneyMitch said:

As the young SpaceX engineer that provided our tour of the rocket factory said, Elon will use an object if it already exists and it is applicable. Otherwise, if it doesn’t exist, he will create it (that’s been quite obvious)!

Being the progressive technologist that he is, even if he purchased Mooney, I would be most surprised if found the current M20 airframe applicable, or useable.

 

4 hours ago, Boilermonkey said:

EVTOL and GA are really different markets.  I can see him entering eVTOL to create a new transportation service for the mass market.  I don’t see him entering a niche market with  such a small number of total customers (certified pilots).  

Just because a design is old doesn't mean it is outdated or unusable.  I chose to stay on the Mooney type certificate to save thousands of hours of research, development and certification issues.  It is nearly impossible to certify a new aircraft in today's day and age, especially a new electric aircraft.  Mooney's type certificate is well proven and will last decades.  Tesla's still use steel and aluminum while the vehicles still roll on tires.  Elon didn't reinvent the wheel and I think it is a waste to do so here.

EVTOL aircraft require substantially more energy than straight and level flight.  I think if you will be able to afford an EVTOL aircraft in the future you would already be flying around in a helicopter.  At least in GA you are already targeting an existing pool of potential customers.

 

Mooney's two door carbon cabin really helps update the aircraft...

 

[A64Pilot]

I’ve not watched the video but will try to dispel some misunderstandings.

First believe it or not but the Tesla uses several methods of heat the battery for Supercharging, even i’m Florida, yes hest is the number one enemy of a battery, but apparently a hot NCA pack will accept current much faster then a cool one, so Tesla jests it’s battery as it navigates to a Supercharger station, if you out the charging station into the nav screen, if it doesn’t know it’s going to a charge station then it doesn’t heat  the pack of course and charging is slower.

‘Anytime a large current is either drawn from or put into a battery heat is released, to climb to a high altitude it will require a large current draw, which will heat the pack, it’s not hard or insulate the pack and keep heat in even in real cold ambient temps.

‘The current model 3’s heat pump has 12, yes 12 different operating modes where it can either store heat or remove heat from the pack to warm the car, as the battery pack masses about 1,000 lbs that makes sense, but many of the operating modes has it operating a a COP of 1, which is the same level of efficiency of simple electric resistance heating which confuses me. Resistance heating is 100% efficient, but a heat pump as it doesn’t make heat but moves it, can be way more than 100% efficient.

This explains the heat pump pretty well, but sit down read it, it’s a lot to absorb.

https://insideevs.com/news/452464/tesla-model-y-heat-pump-system-details/

Bottom line, don’t discount Elon’s Engineering staff, they have a way of coming up with ways that don’t bend the laws of physics, but ways to trick them and make things work in what most of us consider an impossible way. Years ago it may have been Boeing but I don’t remember who, but vertical landing rockets were being experimented with and I thought it silly, no way you could carry enough fuel to pull that off, but I sat on my boat and watched the first launch of the Falcon heavy and watched the two boosters land.

[Kmac]

27 minutes ago, GeeBee said:

Wait until you get the airplane above 10K with the temps below zero and watch the "range-o-meter" drop down to 100nm. Right now below zero most electric vehicles suffer between 50 and 68% range reduction, because you have to run the heater in the cabin. Teslas do better with a reverse cycle climate unit, but even they loose 20%. Those reverse cycle units will be about 60 pounds off your payload. Now add a cooling system which is also required and payload starts suffering real quick. Pipistrel has found their electric trainer to be less that what they thought and it is in the LSA territory. A serious cross country electric airplane is decades away. Not saying it will not happen, but not soon, not even in ten years.

 

I can agree with that somewhat but in my personal experience I usually fly when the weather is nice.  I don't want to fly to the beach for the day when it is below freezing.  My Mooney wouldn't even start below 40°F without preheating the engine.  I often would just wait for a warmer day to fly instead.  In the winter I really only try to stay current and an electric aircraft would be fine for local flights, especially at reduced power settings.  The Tesla powered Mooney that I propose would certainly be able to fly for a few hours even in colder temperatures...

Tesla's navigation software could include the temperature at altitude variable that you mention.  If it is more efficient to fly at a lower altitude or even add NM to remain in warmer temperatures to extend range that could be included.

[dylanac]

This forum was the last place I thought I would run into fanboys. As an engineer, I embrace new technology but don't confuse Elon with actual geniuses. He's a great salesman, nothing more. As others have said, batteries of a compatible energy density needed for planes are still far out. Also, as much as I love the Mooney design, it is far too expensive and technical of a design to mass produce cheaply these days. You would be better starting from the ground up.

[A64Pilot]

A pretty simple way to handle the cold aircraft problem is how Tesla already handles the super cold car problem, that is by what they call “preconditioning”, the car while still plugged into the grid will preheat itself if necessary or cool the cabin or whatever is necessary, while it’s still plugged in, then when you leave, your leaving in a already heated or cooled battery and cabin. The problem is with electric cars parked on the side of the road, they get cold soaked and it takes significant power to heat up a 1,000 lb battery and the interior of a car, and that power has to come from the battery of course as there is no other source

A HUGE mistake is being made with the Government and the media  about electric cars, they both are pushing for “charging infrastructure” and fast charging as the holy grail, where that’s not how an EV is really or best used. The best use of an EV is in mild climates by people with garages that charge at home. Only a very few people actually have use of more than a coil of hundred miles of range very often at all, the vast majority of people drive less than 100 miles a day, so leaving every morning with a fully charged battery gives most way more range than they need, so the smart ones only charge to 80% or less to extend the packs life, and never “ Supercharge” which also cuts into a packs life.

An electric vehicle is not for everyone, but I maintain it is for most.

So a electric aircraft could have a decently well insulated battery, that’s preheated prior to flight and the heat that the pack produces because high amperage is withdrawn from it can keep it warm, it’s likely that in cold weather that pack thermal management could be easier than hot weather.

However currently batteries are just too heavy to be realistic for aircraft.

Gasoline has 33.7 KWH of power per gallon, my model 3 has a 50 KWH battery pack, but can travel 250 miles on it, which is the energy equal of 1.5 gls of gas, that’s not some hype, it’s what we are actually achieving, with my Wife driving who just drives normally and uses heat and AC to stay comfortable.

How is that possible? That’s 166 MPG? It’s because the model 3 is about 95% efficient with its power use where an internal combustion motor is way less efficient.

If anyone is curious, this screenshot is every single charge the car has ever had and a total actual cost, so it’s cost us $180 in electricity to drive close to 4800 miles.

Figure out yourself what it cost in gas to drive your current vehicle 4800 miles.

Edited March 7, 2022 by A64Pilot

[Kmac]

34 minutes ago, dylanac said:

This forum was the last place I thought I would run into fanboys. As an engineer, I embrace new technology but don't confuse Elon with actual geniuses. He's a great salesman, nothing more. As others have said, batteries of a compatible energy density needed for planes are still far out. Also, as much as I love the Mooney design, it is far too expensive and technical of a design to mass produce cheaply these days. You would be better starting from the ground up.

Not to get stuck on a word but I guess I became a fanboy when I actually experienced the electric drivetrain (that was an eGolf).  You do not need to be a genius to have good ideas.  You don't even need to be a great salesman if you can build something people want, and something people can actually have.  Tesla actually has vehicles on the market that people wait months to buy.  I just saw my first Rivian in the wild a few days ago...how many years has that been in the works?  How many years have you heard of Nikoli, Lucid, etc. but you still can't even buy them.

I agree that an electric airplane could be "better" from the ground up.  It isn't even the money that is needed to create a new type certificate, it's the years and years of work basically wasted on it to design something marginally "better" and get almost no reward for it.  If you go back to the drawing board it seems you will be drawing forever...

[A64Pilot]

Elon’s “genius” in my opinion is being smart enough to hire a whole groups of very smart Engineers and I assume pay them well, as opposed to a whole entourages of “Executives” with huge salaries, which is what most companies seem to do.

Further he doesn’t have enough sense to not try impossible things, not all pan out, his tunnel with Tesla’s driving around in circles surely isn’t as efficient as a Subway?

But enough of his foolishness pays out to make him very wealthy.

[MooneyMitch]

1 hour ago, Kmac said:

It is nearly impossible to certify a new aircraft in today's day and age, especially a new electric aircraft. 

People have underestimated Musk, repeatedly, and still do. 

[A64Pilot]

Elon didn’t come close to “inventing” the electric car, Henry Ford’s wife drove one for instance, he just built the first modern viable one, but GM actually did before Tesla.

GM’s EV1 was a viable automobile once it got NImh batteries, but too much money could be made by continuing to build what the infrastructure already existed for ICE powered vehicles.

I believe Tesla became successful by building what amounts to a hot rod car, the Damn thing is FAST, our standard range Model 3 is slightly quicker in the quarter mile than a Ferrari Testarosa for example and it’s the cheap, slow Tesla, the Plaid is insane, it’s faster than anything including Japanese Superbikes.

Until Tesla most thought of EV’s being like golf carts, being tiny little dog slow econoboxes, who wants that? But many Tesla’s will easily whip a Corvette in stop light games, and do so silently with no wheel spin.

On edit, you know how in a normal car if you stomp the go fast pedal there is a slight delay while it down shifts then another as the engine builds RPM, then an increasing surge of building acceleration as the engine climbs to its power band?

In an electric there is none of that. acceleration is instant, it’s like flipping a light switch, instantly the max power is there, no build up. no surge, no noise, just neck snapping acceleration.

If your a motor head like we are, go drive one, you will be hooked and walk away with a big grin on your face.

We are motörhead’s, my Wife’s last three cars prior to the Tesla were two Z28’s and a Cadillac CTS-V.

Then add in that the Tesla has a 50/50 weight distribution and since you sit on the battery and the whole drive train is lower than the top of the tire it corners very flat, but does so not by having a very stiff suspension but by low CG.

Then it requires pretty much zero scheduled maintenance and to dive it 75 miles a day cost $2 what’s not to like?

Edited March 7, 2022 by A64Pilot

[Kmac]

With a Tesla you are not just buying an electric car.  You are buying into a technology company and buying part of the charging infrastructure.  Tesla's charging infrastructure at airports would go a long way to making electric aircraft viable...

[Kmac]

2 minutes ago, 1980Mooney said:

EV's are efficient but not as efficient as you claim.  You are doing an apples and oranges comparison - you are comparing the energy (gasoline) feeding a piston powered car with the with the energy coming out of the power plant going into an EV car (after most energy is lost up the power plant stack or cooling towers).  2/3 of the energy feeding a gas or coal fired turbine power plant on average is lost (i.e. 33% efficiency).  You should be comparing the gasoline energy feeding the piston car with the energy feeding the power plant turbine. 

On that energy equivalent basis the Tesla is getting closer to 55 MPG.  That is respectable.  The efficiency of a power plant is better than a piston car and regenerative braking is a big help.  Also the cost energy generated in a power plant is less than energy produced from gasoline.  Your 4,800 miles at 55 MPG would use 87 gallons of gasolie - at $3.50/gal (historical) that is over $300 (vs your $180).  As gasoline goes to $4 and above the Tesla looks better and better.

EV's make great sense - let's just keep the numbers real.

I disagree with this... In your calculations shouldn't you then subtract the energy used in the refining process for the gas?

[A64Pilot]

17 minutes ago, 1980Mooney said:

 

EV's make great sense - let's just keep the numbers real.

Thete are huge losses in drilling for, transporting and refining fossil fuels too, but frankly I don’t care.

I’m not a greenie nor a tree hugger, the only number that’s relevant to me is the $180 per 4,800 miles one.

However the energy content of a gallon of gas is 33.7 KWH. A model three Tesla IS actually roughly 95% efficient, I’m talking the car, not the system that makes and delivers the power, just as we don’t include those numbers for an ICE car.

 

On edit, the Wife drives 75 miles every day to work, that along with whatever we drive on weekends cost us $60 per month.

To drive our Miata would cost 4.25 times that, just including fuel

Edited March 7, 2022 by A64Pilot

[Ron McBride]

1 hour ago, A64Pilot said:

A pretty simple way to handle the cold aircraft problem is how Tesla already handles the super cold car problem, that is by what they call “preconditioning”, the car while still plugged into the grid will preheat itself if necessary or cool the cabin or whatever is necessary, while it’s still plugged in, then when you leave, your leaving in a already heated or cooled battery and cabin. The problem is with electric cars parked on the side of the road, they get cold soaked and it takes significant power to heat up a 1,000 lb battery and the interior of a car, and that power has to come from the battery of course as there is no other source

A HUGE mistake is being made with the Government and the media  about electric cars, they both are pushing for “charging infrastructure” and fast charging as the holy grail, where that’s not how an EV is really or best used. The best use of an EV is in mild climates by people with garages that charge at home. Only a very few people actually have use of more than a coil of hundred miles of range very often at all, the vast majority of people drive less than 100 miles a day, so leaving every morning with a fully charged battery gives most way more range than they need, so the smart ones only charge to 80% or less to extend the packs life, and never “ Supercharge” which also cuts into a packs life.

An electric vehicle is not for everyone, but I maintain it is for most.

So a electric aircraft could have a decently well insulated battery, that’s preheated prior to flight and the heat that the pack produces because high amperage is withdrawn from it can keep it warm, it’s likely that in cold weather that pack thermal management could be easier than hot weather.

However currently batteries are just too heavy to be realistic for aircraft.

Gasoline has 33.7 KWH of power per gallon, my model 3 has a 50 KWH battery pack, but can travel 250 miles on it, which is the energy equal of 1.5 gls of gas, that’s not some hype, it’s what we are actually achieving, with my Wife driving who just drives normally and uses heat and AC to stay comfortable.

How is that possible? That’s 166 MPG? It’s because the model 3 is about 95% efficient with its power use where an internal combustion motor is way less efficient.

If anyone is curious, this screenshot is every single charge the car has ever had and a total actual cost, so it’s cost us $180 in electricity to drive close to 4800 miles.

Figure out yourself what it cost in gas to drive your current vehicle 4800 miles.

Do you get a special rate from your electric provider?    Did you have to upgrade your home electric panel? 
 

[dylanac]

45 minutes ago, Kmac said:

Not to get stuck on a word but I guess I became a fanboy when I actually experienced the electric drivetrain (that was an eGolf).  You do not need to be a genius to have good ideas.  You don't even need to be a great salesman if you can build something people want, and something people can actually have.  Tesla actually has vehicles on the market that people wait months to buy.  I just saw my first Rivian in the wild a few days ago...how many years has that been in the works?  How many years have you heard of Nikoli, Lucid, etc. but you still can't even buy them.

I agree that an electric airplane could be "better" from the ground up.  It isn't even the money that is needed to create a new type certificate, it's the years and years of work basically wasted on it to design something marginally "better" and get almost no reward for it.  If you go back to the drawing board it seems you will be drawing forever...

I understand completely, having driven Teslas before. They're impressive and have made great progress over the last decade. It will be very exciting to see what the next decade brings.

Electric airplanes are going to be built from the ground up to be economic. Modern Moonies are great from an efficiency standpoint but with the weight of batteries, composite is almost a requirement. Additionally, the upfront cost of creating a new airframe will absolutely pay off. As I mentioned before: with the steel roll cage, flush mount rivets, etc., the M20 airframe is extremely expensive and labor-intensive to produce. Skilled labor is few and far between these days and no one produces products like this by hand. Back in the 50s and 60s, labor was cheap so it wasn't a problem. As we moved into the 70s Mooney realized that the only way to make money was to take this very expensive airframe and pair with with expensive avionics and engines and sell an even higher-performant airplane. The margins on the M20J were simply not large enough. Look at what they've made now: the Acclaim and Ovation are all larger, high performance planes with big 6-cylinder engines, fancy avionics, oxygen, and FIKI in many cases. By now though, the M20 is at or near the end of its production life. At the end of the day it still has more in common with a 1950s Mooney than it does something like a Cirrus. (sorry if the C word is not allowed here). While they are making improvements such as the composite fuselage covering, you can only milk a design for so long. Even with the bigger and bigger engines it just does not make financial sense to produce. That's why Mooney as a company has been for sale since it was last bought and they aren't producing new airframes anymore. Cirrus was able to make this work by designing these features into the plane to begin with, so it doesn't have abysmal useful load. Mooney had no choice but to add them to their existing plane.

The beauty of the M20 design is exactly it's downfall: it was too well built. We have all seen the photos of the steel cage saving lives, and the stories of these planes surviving 10Gs. They truly are excellent airframes. But Al was an engineer, not a businessman. Unfortunately, the design was never made to be profitable. It was made to be perfect. That comes at a cost, especially 70 years later with rampant inflation, labor shortages, and a general lack of pride in one's work.

[Kmac]

4 minutes ago, Ron McBride said:

Do you get a special rate from your electric provider?    Did you have to upgrade your home electric panel? 
 

I have 200 amp service at my home.  I added two 32 amp chargers for my Tesla's.  I did remove my electric dryer and made it propane and installed the breaker for the electric vehicles there.  I shop for my electricity and every few months lock in the cheapest rate I can find.

[A64Pilot]

15 minutes ago, Ron McBride said:

Do you get a special rate from your electric provider?    Did you have to upgrade your home electric panel? 
 

No, and zero tax incentives on buying the car either, no subsidies of any kind. installed the charger right beside of the CB panel in the garage, took 15 min. You can set the charge rate, I have one turned down to 25 amps and at that setting it takes two hours to charge the car daily as it’s only used 1/3 of the battery capacity, I have it set to charge at 10 PM. but you a set it to be charged at a scheduled leave time to and the car will determine when it needs to charge to be ready when you leave.

My rate is fixed at 14C per KWH, I can’t shop rates and there are no peak times etc, just 14c 24/7

There are other things to, there is no motor that needs to run you never need to get into a hot or cold car either, when we go shopping here in Fl I leave the AC on so we get into a 71f car when we are through shopping, or leave the dog in the car without worrying too.

Car comes with a mobile charger that you can plug into most any receptacle, like a drier outlet for example, you can use a regular wall outlet, but that’s a trickle charge, can’t get much power out of a 110V outlet.

 

Edited March 7, 2022 by A64Pilot

[A64Pilot]

The ugly bottom line is that something like 90% of the money made in GA manufacturing every year is from Biz jets, there just really isn’t a significant GA market for little airplanes anymore, They're only about  3% or less ALL piston is less than 4%, for many reasons, but it’s not from a lack of money, I discovered that watching many, many million dollar Sportfisherman bellying up to the pump buying thousands of dollars of diesel at each fill up.

Edited March 7, 2022 by A64Pilot

[EricJ]

1 hour ago, dylanac said:

This forum was the last place I thought I would run into fanboys. As an engineer, I embrace new technology but don't confuse Elon with actual geniuses. He's a great salesman, nothing more. As others have said, batteries of a compatible energy density needed for planes are still far out. Also, as much as I love the Mooney design, it is far too expensive and technical of a design to mass produce cheaply these days. You would be better starting from the ground up.

Musk's main talent is salesemanship and self promotion.   Look how many people think he's smart!   He's not, but he's charismatic and knows how to manipulate people, which is a long proven formula for mediocre people becoming "great".   He is the king of overpromise and underdeliver with existing technology repackaged to look cool.

I was going to say earlier that the only real way to make Musk do anything with Mooney is to find a way to spin it so that he can get a big ego boost out of it, but I think that's too tall of an order given the other tools for that that he has at his disposal.   Otherwise it ain't gonna happen.

 

[GeeBee]

2 hours ago, Kmac said:

I can agree with that somewhat but in my personal experience I usually fly when the weather is nice.  I don't want to fly to the beach for the day when it is below freezing.  My Mooney wouldn't even start below 40°F without preheating the engine.  I often would just wait for a warmer day to fly instead.  In the winter I really only try to stay current and an electric aircraft would be fine for local flights, especially at reduced power settings.  The Tesla powered Mooney that I propose would certainly be able to fly for a few hours even in colder temperatures...

Tesla's navigation software could include the temperature at altitude variable that you mention.  If it is more efficient to fly at a lower altitude or even add NM to remain in warmer temperatures to extend range that could be included.

You are talking about a very hobbled aircraft that would not sell well. Do not confuse your personal use as a market.

 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, EricJ said:

Musk's main talent is salesemanship and self promotion.   Look how many people think he's smart!   He's not, but he's charismatic and knows how to manipulate people, which is a long proven formula for mediocre people becoming "great".   He is the king of overpromise and underdeliver with existing technology repackaged to look cool.

I was going to say earlier that the only real way to make Musk do anything with Mooney is to find a way to spin it so that he can get a big ego boost out of it, but I think that's too tall of an order given the other tools for that that he has at his disposal.   Otherwise it ain't gonna happen.

 

Insert another famous name instead of Musk, and everything fits as well.

Clarence

[EricJ]

26 minutes ago, M20Doc said:

Insert another famous name instead of Musk, and everything fits as well.

Clarence

There are many names that work!   But, yeah, that one, too...   

[Kmac]

58 minutes ago, EricJ said:

Musk's main talent is salesemanship and self promotion.   Look how many people think he's smart!   He's not, but he's charismatic and knows how to manipulate people, which is a long proven formula for mediocre people becoming "great".   He is the king of overpromise and underdeliver with existing technology repackaged to look cool.

I was going to say earlier that the only real way to make Musk do anything with Mooney is to find a way to spin it so that he can get a big ego boost out of it, but I think that's too tall of an order given the other tools for that that he has at his disposal.   Otherwise it ain't gonna happen.

 

Somewhat of the reason that I posted here.  Is there enough interest in GA to gain his attention?  It would be very difficult for a schlub like me to gain his attention or point him in a direction I want him to look.  I've read that probably the best way to gain his attention is to bring his attention to it on Twitter or some other social media outlet.  I'm sorry to say but Mooneyspace is the extent of my social media presence...   I'm not sure if he is a member here...if he is he is not using his real name

[A64Pilot]

Reminds me of when I bought a Prius in 2010, there were a great many who said I’d be buying a battery every couple of years and all kinds of other reasons why it wouldn’t work and there were even “experts” who wrote articles proving how a Humvee was “greener” than a Prius.

‘I didn’t care how green it was or wasn’t, I was after low cost of operating and ownership and at the time nothing was cheaper to own and drive than a Prius, now I believe that’s changed to an EV.

I don’t care about what it does or doesn’t do to the Whales or Polar Bears or whatever, I do however want safety, reliability, fun to drive and enjoy technology, at a price I can afford and think is reasonable, for me that’s a Model 3, safety wise it’s the safest car of its size, moreso than a Volvo or Lexus, Mercedes etc. it outperforms almost everything and seems to be way far away the cheapest to own and drive, I’ll know in 250,000 miles or so.

 

We drove the Prius for 270,000 miles before we traded it for the Tesla, sure it had essentially no value left, but it still had its original battery and if you figured the cost differential of fuel into it, it was a free car and then some. Cost of ownership amounted to oil changes, tires, one wheel bearing kit, front shocks, tires, coolant changes and I did have to replace the brakes once.

 

Edited March 7, 2022 by A64Pilot

[A64Pilot]

You know when I think about every label we put on our Mooney’s as to why we like them, fast, efficient, safe, handles well etc., everyone of those labels also fit a Tesla.

[haymak3r]

23 hours ago, A64Pilot said:

Actually Elon and company have run the numbers on energy density required to make an electric aircraft viable, and we aren’t close yet. He published it quite awhile ago, I believe he’s wanting to build something similar to a biz jet but not sure.

The 4680 cell is really an upsized 2170 which is really noting more than a big 18650 which is what he started with, a very good flashlight battery.

The numbers are the size of the battery the 18650 is 18mm x 65mm, 21 x 70 and now 46 x 80 other then scaling them up and tabless construction there isn’t much difference, the reason why a 4680 is “better” is primarily because it takes a lot less of them to make a pack, and there is some increase in energy density per cubic inch of cell as there is less open space. But primarily it’s a cost savings and ease of manufacturing thing.

Cells have been a bottleneck in production which has been greatly eased since this year when all Tesla standard range cars get the Chinese made prismatic LifePo4 battery packs.

”Prismatic” cells like all of the major auto manufacturers are using is more likely the future, but for aviation pouch cells may be it.

A major issue with batteries is if you pull high power from them, then you had better have a very good thermal management system, the early Tesla’s could go like stink in a 1/4 mile but didn’t do so good on the Nuremberg ring, the later model 3’s however are doing well in the ring.

One interesting thing to me, while all of the major auto manufacturers haven’t been able to produce autos due to a chip shortage, Tesla almost doubled production last year, makes one wonder.

4680 cells are nothing like previous cells? There are key differences that provide HUGE benefits to EV's. I don't think they are good for an EV airplane, but the tech is good. Tesla is not like legacy auto. We must adopt EV airplanes IMO. Right now though? No way. Energy density needs to somehow be doubled, and costs much be reduced in half. Maybe someday... What NEEDS to happen is the continued transition to a sustainable EV industry, so that we have more avgas for our mooney's.