Haven't seen any updates on the DarkAero is some time. Are they still kicking?

They sent out an end of year update email. Still working hard, with an extremely high level of testing and engineering. Seems like they've built up a successful business alongside the development of the aircraft itself which bodes well for their resilience.

I'm getting monthly updates in the email

Looks like their 'side' business became less side and more main and airplane development is the new side gig for them. Good from financial standpoint, not so good for the timeline.

I'm getting monthly updates in the email

Looks like their 'side' business became less side and more main and airplane development is the new side gig for them. Good from financial standpoint, not so good for the timeline.

Search UL power engine, piston and injection failures.

I'm not sure how long Dark Aero has had their engine but like other experimental engine companies it looks like it is possible a lot of testing is done by the unknowing UL Power customers after the company makes changes.

Of course there are a lot of really messed up installations in the homebuilt world also even with established kits so that may be partially to blame.

Rotax, Continental and especially Lycoming new parts are also defective so I have no idea what the best route is. I guess take your best guess. Maybe sitting on an engine for a while before installing while building is the way to go so you can see if major issues crop up in others near the Serial number range before your test flight.

.

as of a few days ago, they still got a little frontage shop on ronald reagan drive in madison, right up the road from MSN airport

I hate to be a skeptic. This plane is clearly beautifully made, the design and testing effort that's gone into this is amazing.

That said, it's tiny. You can always go fast with a tiny airframe, just look at Lancair. I wonder how many Americans will actually fit in this?

Also, ULpower engines might have a problem becoming widely accepted. I used to own one and I liked it, but no way did it make the advertised horsepower. Also, both of the fairly high profile ULpower conversion (the twin velocity and the Dutch RV7 PH-MNX) have both had serious crashes due to engine failure. I'm certainly much happier in my Lycosaurus powered spam can than I was in my ULpowered aircraft.

There's a commonly held belief that any new aircraft design that's based on a just as new engine design is doomed to failure. New engine on an existing airframe or a new airframe with a proven engine is tough enough but combining the two stacks the deck against success.

put it to you like this... the one guy building it used to be a college gymnast...

Enough. Everybody was bitching about Icon and somehow they sold over 200 of them already, this will be the same. If they certify it it will sell well enough.

Same thing with the engine. ULPower has been around for a day or two. Is it as popular as Rotax or Lycoming/Conti? No, definitely not here in US. But it's hardly 'unproven' powerplant.

Right. The certified and experimental markets have both perennially rewarded passenger comfort over maximum efficiency.

Look at how Van's offerings have evolved since the RV-3.

This is a neat project and a good demonstration of the pedigree of their services, but it has virtually no market.

It reminds me of a (somehow) less substantial Questair Venture.

If they achieve the claimed specs or even get close to 2 occupants, 275 mph cruise, 1700 nm range and 750 lb useful load that will be quite an accomplishment and there will be a market for it assuming a fairly normal people can fit inside it.

I'm interested if those specs are met, AND if the engine isn't a weak link, which I suspect it could be.