![[Credit: magniX]](https://www.kitplanes.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Magnix-1024x682.jpg)
MagniX, the technology company developing fully-integrated powertrains for the aviation industry, introduced on Tuesday the magniAIR, an electric engine targeted initially towards the kitbuilding community.
As part of the launch, the company announced that it is integrating the engine, as part of a full magniX powertrain, into a homebuilt Van’s RV-10, with the first flight scheduled for later this year. The RV-10 is currently being displayed at Sun ‘n Fun in Lakeland, Florida, along with a range of other magniX products.
The company said that the magniAIR is expected to be available for purchase in 2027 and will lower the cost of operation by reducing fuel usage and maintenance requirements when compared with traditional combustion engines. Implementation will initially be available to kit builders, recreational flyers, and flight training operations.
“We are very excited to bring the marvel of electric flight to a new segment of the market,” Reed Macdonald, CEO of magniX, said in a news release. “MagniAIR electric engines coupled with our industry-leading Samson batteries can be used for any application currently powered by a 120-175 kW piston engine. Thanks to magniX’s full powertrain, integration is simple and cost effective, bringing electric flight to kit plane builders and enthusiasts.”
MagniX also aims to take advantage of the FAA’s Modernization of Special Airworthiness Certification (MOSAIC) rules that redefine light sport aircraft (LSA), allowing for a broader range of uses. As the aviation industry continues to trend more and more towards electronic innovation, the company stated that its prime application is pointed toward the electrification of flight trainers and to bring down the costs associated with obtaining a pilot’s license.
“Many training aircraft in use today were manufactured in the 1970s,” said Ben Loxton, vice president of new product development at magniX. “Fuel prices and maintenance costs are causing the cost of flight training to rise at the same time as the industry faces an acute shortage of pilots. MagniAIR offers to reduce the expense of flight training and other small aircraft applications with a lower cost of operation, reduced maintenance, and zero carbon emissions.”
I would like to see the details as I don’t see how you could do significant pattern work, let alone the required cross country training in an airplane like this. Here are some back of the envelope calculations.
The 260 HP engine in the RV-10 is 194 kW in electrical output terms. Even at a low 60% power output, that is 116 kW of electrical power. A typical Tesla long range battery pack is about 80 kWh in capacity and weighs around 1,000 lbs in round figures. At 116 kW consumption, that is only 41 minutes of flight time. And at full throttle, a Tesla size battery pack would be depleted in 25 minutes.
I realize some of the weight of a Tesla pack is structure for the car, but I doubt you can remove more than half the weight of a Tesla pack and keep the same capacity and safety features such as cooling and BMS functions. So, even if you double the above numbers, the useful time of operation on a full charge is pretty meager.
And even a 1,000 lb battery pack isn’t feasible in an airplane with at best 1,200 lbs of useful load. What am I missing here?
I found some prelim specs: For trainer motor: MagniAIR (175 kW)
• Power output: 175 kW
• Motor weight: 55 kg
• Battery: Samson (300 Wh/kg pack-level; up to 400 Wh/kg cells). Capacity scalable (e.g., 50-100+ kWh typical for GA). Weight depends on chosen kWh (e.g., 50 kWh ≈ 167 kg at 300 Wh/kg).
And this battery can supposedly power the motor to 175 kW. It is limited by the motor and can discharge at a higher rate, supposedly. I don’t know for how long it can maintain peak power.
A peak power continuous with the 50 kwh battery you’ve got about a 15 minutes
battery plus motor would weigh about 225 kg. so you’re already about 100 kg above the weight of an o-320
1200Lbs useful load with an O-540 that weighs roughly 450Lbs. The electric motor weighs 120Lbs. It sounds like the initial mission would be strictly training, so no back seats or other accouterments required for cross country flight with multiple passengers. I don’t know what their battery plant weighs to do the math from there. Perhaps they would shoot for a gross weight increase with limitations for flying in turbulent air.
Seems feasible for short range XC and pattern work. It would require infrastructure at “neighboring” airports to be able to recharge. I think that was also the case for the Pipistrel electric trainer, which had an almost glider-like airframe.
You’ve got to start somewhere; the first aircraft wasn’t an f-35, after all. I’m no expert, and these are simply my observations.
If you believe the magniX website, then their equivalent 80kWh battery will weigh less than 600 lbs, which is interesting. You also subtract the weight of the traditional engine, engine accessories, fuel tank, etc, and then add in the weight of the electric motor, then the numbers also look interesting. The run-time capacity is always the biggest hurdle of these designs, so I am keeping my eye on it. Also, the Pipistrel.
Yasa has developed an axial-flux electric motor with a blinding 1000 HP (750 kW) peak, 350 kW (469 HP) continuous, and weighing 18lb (12kg). Doughnut Labs has developed a solid-state battery with a claimed 400 Wh/kg. Replacing full-loaded tanks with the equivalent battery weight and a fraction of the combustion engine with an electric motor, an inverter, and a battery now seems very feasible. Watch this space!
An electric car achieves acceptable range by weighing 2000 pounds more than an ICE car. Cost is 1.5 times an ICE car. What makes you think an electric airplane is feasible in 2027? It’s snake oil.
Current battery densities is more like 250-350Wh/kg for semi-solid state batteries. If i remember right energy density for petrol or Avgas is over 750Wh/kg
100LL avgas has 112,000 btu per gallon, which is 1,200 Wh/Kg.
So, Li-ion batteries have a much lower energy density.
An hour’s worth of gas is 14gallons. That is only 84lbs. Add that to the engine weight and then you have your weight target for the battery and electric motor.
I would like to see a kit to put an electric motor conversion on an Ercoupe or perhaps a Navion.
50 gallons of fuel weighs 325 pounds. I am sure that batteries will be about the same weight as fuel.
I love innovation! I would absolutely love an electric aircraft just from the safety perspective alone. We measure engine failure rates in 100,000 hours, but with electric motors that number is in the million range. Unfortunately, we’ve all been disappointed so many times with GA innovation that gives a glimpse of hope only for the project to stall and end just as they are going to make the big announcement. Remember, Terrafugia, Eviation Alice, Zunum Aero, Airbus E-Fan, Lilium, Universal Hydrogen? All these showed incredible potential, some had huge funding and then funding quit and that was it. This article is much too quick to jump at anything concrete. I looked at the aircraft, it got there with a Lycoming in the cowl. The electric propulsion is on a stand. This is years behind proven designs that went dead. I saw the Pipistrel Panthera at Sun n Fun. Textron, why did you even bring it there? Textron seems clear they will easily kill a project if it doesn’t make substantial financial sense. Even if it gives the public another option, keeps some workers with a job if it doesn’t bring money to the few at the top, it’s dead. Textron killed an incredible innovative company when they purchased it. Look what Textron did with Columbia! Call this a rant, but reading this article just reminds me of another hyped project that has other internal objectives. Is the DarkAero project next? Did the boys get enough attention and now they have found someone giving them real work?
Comments are closed.