I doubt this is true.

The oxysaver cannula has a reservoir right under your nose which stores oxygen and releases when you inhale. The act of inhaling collapses the internal bag giving you the stored oxygen, particularly useful early in the inhalation since that gets deepest in your lungs. The AirBoom cannula doesn't have such a mechanism for "breathing" like that, so some oxygen is wasted during the time you are exhaling. It appears to be a continuous flow device.

Rocket gives no indication as to usage on its web site. In fact, they give no useful data at all. If it was no more oxygen use, you would expect them to claim that, and they don't.

Like I said, I'd like to see a side by side ride in a chamber between the oxysaver cannula and the AirBoom showing O2 levels and oxygen use required, and with a small fan blowing on your face. I'd be shocked if the AirBoom can achieve the same O2 levels at less than double the oxygen requirement, and it may easily be 4 or 5 times as much.

Mike C.

I doubt this is true.

The oxysaver cannula has a reservoir right under your nose which stores oxygen and releases when you inhale. The act of inhaling collapses the internal bag giving you the stored oxygen, particularly useful early in the inhalation since that gets deepest in your lungs. The AirBoom cannula doesn't have such a mechanism for "breathing" like that, so some oxygen is wasted during the time you are exhaling. It appears to be a continuous flow device.

Rocket gives no indication as to usage on its web site. In fact, they give no useful data at all. If it was no more oxygen use, you would expect them to claim that, and they don't.

Like I said, I'd like to see a side by side ride in a chamber between the oxysaver cannula and the AirBoom showing O2 levels and oxygen use required, and with a small fan blowing on your face. I'd be shocked if the AirBoom can achieve the same O2 levels at less than double the oxygen requirement, and it may easily be 4 or 5 times as much.

Mike C.

Mike, is there a thread you can poke into without getting into an unproductive pissing match about semantics with someone ?

I apologize. I played my part in it. I've said my piece. Let's move on.

So sad certification is so costly for new aircraft in the U.S. Lets hope PART 23 Certification re-write happens soon. All the cool designs are going to China. Same as the 5 Seat EPIC that was sold and now is the Primus 150 with the GE Engine. I find the entry door quite more efficient than the Evolution and also fits in smaller hangar. Same as the Extra 500. Range and efficiency were what the Extra was about. I think it is underpowered though....the GE 850 HP Engine might be a better fit for the Airframe & 6 passengers....

This aircraft is already approved under european rules and could have been brought into the US market through a fairly simple process. I just dont think that Extra was big enough of a company for that scope of a project. It is the same delusion that did in Grob Aerospace with the SpN jet project.

My number 1 issue with the Evolution is how you get in. I would love an air stair.

There's no place you can put it without stretching (and possibly widening) the fuselage significantly.

Mike C.

There's no place you can put it without stretching (and possibly widening) the fuselage significantly.

Mike C.