Myth: Passive Cooling Is More Effective
There’s a common technical misconception that passive cooling—venting hot air and drawing in cooler air from outside—is better or more cost-efficient than active cooling systems. At first glance, it seems simpler. But in real-world conditions, especially in warmer climates, passive cooling struggles to deliver consistent, safe performance.
Why Passive Cooling Falls Short
AERODIUM’s CTO, Arnis Rubīns, broke it down in the video below. In many parts of the world—including Western Europe and the U.S.—summer temperatures frequently hit 30–40°C. In those conditions, passive systems simply can’t cool the tunnel air effectively. The result? Overheated tunnels, uncomfortable flyers, and potentially unsafe operating conditions.
Active cooling, on the other hand, uses heat exchangers inside the turning vanes to actively regulate air temperature. This closed-loop system ensures more stable performance regardless of outdoor conditions.
Real-World Results: Active Cooling Wins
In side-by-side tests, AERODIUM found that active cooling systems not only provided better temperature control but also reduced power consumption by up to 30%. They’re also significantly quieter, which is a major plus for tunnels in urban or residential locations. The takeaway: passive cooling might be fine in cool climates—but for consistent, high-performance flying in a modern tunnel, active cooling is the smart choice.