BeechTalk - BT - From planes to beer cans (Raptor Aircraft)

Username Protected · **Posted:** 09 Aug 2014, 00:22

I don't think Beech, Cessna or Piper have to much to worry about. Here's a cold fact airplanes that don't look like normal airplanes DON'T SELL period. Look at the Piaggio on paper it kicks the B200 (B250's) ass. On the sales report it's not even a blip.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 09 Aug 2014, 00:57

Sounds like a far fetched hypothetical. Shooting for the sky!

Username Protected · **Posted:** 09 Aug 2014, 01:22

Username Protected wrote:

Sounds like a far fetched hypothetical. Shooting for the sky!

That's what they said about Wilbur and Orville. :lol:

Username Protected · **Posted:** 09 Aug 2014, 01:36

Perhaps, but they had to believe it once they saw it.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 09 Aug 2014, 02:06

Ok I have to say..... LOP. It must make fuel.......

Username Protected · **Posted:** 09 Aug 2014, 05:54

Username Protected wrote:

I think Jim Bede would hesitate to claim those performance figures...

I was looking really hard for Jim's name as I read that BS . . .

Username Protected · **Posted:** 09 Aug 2014, 09:01

If you go to the website and read.........has a feel like some kid wrote it.
No facts..........just a lot of promises. Who knows..... :crazy:

Username Protected · **Posted:** 09 Aug 2014, 09:50

I was hoping to trade up from my moller sky car. But being fully automated, it has escaped my garage.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 09 Aug 2014, 10:36

Username Protected wrote:

Are all those Barons, Dukes, Cessna, Pipers all about to see their value drop to their weight in beer cans?

Well, if they were to suddenly drop radically in value, then it would mean that another aircraft has arrived that has capabilities that will transform the private aviation industry as we have known it for the last 50 years.

So what would those transformative performances look like?

How about this:

1) Cruise speed 285Kts
2) Cruise altitude 25,000 ft (Pressurized)
3) Cruise consumption 7 US gals per hour (Diesel or Jet A1)
4) Range 5,000+ nm
5) State of the art glass cockpit
6) Seating 4 through 6

Would such an aircraft give you pause for thought about the economic viability of what you fly today?

Now transformation of an industry does not usually happen overnight but rather occurs because developments in a variety of seemingly independent technologies can now be innovatively bundled and create a "giant leap forward" in performance / price ratios.

Jonathan

==============

Sounds like bubble gum pipe dream airplane!

However the aircraft values dropping that will stay with us. By how much?
I think for the person inclined we can easily come up with a baseline figure, for general aviation in the aggregate and for each individual model.
Factors are:
1. cost of fuel per flight hr, per median income
2. Pilot population v/s number of aircraft.
3. Divide number of pilots by airplanes
4. factor pilot community into any point of future time
5. If for every 20 pilots there is one airplane with a median income of x and cost of fuel of Y. We can pretty much figure out anything we want to know.
It is not looking good. Your pipe dream airplane on the above scale is probably in the 2000/1 or higher pilot category and will do nothing to invigorate genAv. Its on par with a Bonanza of $900K. Airplanes of this $ort are in fact an economic and cultural disaster for aviation. They only lend credence to the idea that it is an elitist sport and should be treated with contempt and envy, and not deserving of any public support and funding.
***********

On the plus side every year I am getting ever closer to being able to afford a usable twin and on the minus side is? will it happens before I die from old age......

:scratch:

Username Protected · **Posted:** 09 Aug 2014, 11:15

Username Protected wrote:

Are all those Barons, Dukes, Cessna, Pipers all about to see their value drop to their weight in beer cans?

Well, if they were to suddenly drop radically in value, then it would mean that another aircraft has arrived that has capabilities that will transform the private aviation industry as we have known it for the last 50 years.

So what would those transformative performances look like?

How about this:

1) Cruise speed 285Kts
2) Cruise altitude 25,000 ft (Pressurized)
3) Cruise consumption 7 US gals per hour (Diesel or Jet A1)
4) Range 5,000+ nm
5) State of the art glass cockpit
6) Seating 4 through 6

Would such an aircraft give you pause for thought about the economic viability of what you fly today?

Now transformation of an industry does not usually happen overnight but rather occurs because developments in a variety of seemingly independent technologies can now be innovatively bundled and create a "giant leap forward" in performance / price ratios.

The early bundling of technologies tends to first occur on the margins, draws much sceptiscm and attracts only a few early adopters / enthusiasts. However as the basic innovations are tinkered with and improved upon (and Americans are the worlds greatest tinkerers and improvers) then market acceptance grows rapidly.

So is there any evidence of such innovative bundling in the general aviation industry to produce transformative performances? Perhaps. Check out the Raptor (flying in 24 months) on the following link and lets hear your opinion - how much will your Beechcraft/Cessna/Piper be worth in 5 years time?

http://www.raptor-aircraft.com/pricing.html

Jonathan

As long as they're at it why don't they add folding wings and make it drivable so you don't need to worry about crew cars or rentals.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 09 Aug 2014, 18:28

Username Protected wrote:

Are all those Barons, Dukes, Cessna, Pipers all about to see their value drop to their weight in beer cans?

Well, if they were to suddenly drop radically in value, then it would mean that another aircraft has arrived that has capabilities that will transform the private aviation industry as we have known it for the last 50 years.

So what would those transformative performances look like?

How about this:

1) Cruise speed 285Kts
2) Cruise altitude 25,000 ft (Pressurized)
3) Cruise consumption 7 US gals per hour (Diesel or Jet A1)
4) Range 5,000+ nm
5) State of the art glass cockpit
6) Seating 4 through 6

Would such an aircraft give you pause for thought about the economic viability of what you fly today?

Now transformation of an industry does not usually happen overnight but rather occurs because developments in a variety of seemingly independent technologies can now be innovatively bundled and create a "giant leap forward" in performance / price ratios.

Jonathan

==============

Sounds like bubble gum pipe dream airplane!

However the aircraft values dropping that will stay with us. By how much?
I think for the person inclined we can easily come up with a baseline figure, for general aviation in the aggregate and for each individual model.
Factors are:
1. cost of fuel per flight hr, per median income
2. Pilot population v/s number of aircraft.
3. Divide number of pilots by airplanes
4. factor pilot community into any point of future time
5. If for every 20 pilots there is one airplane with a median income of x and cost of fuel of Y. We can pretty much figure out anything we want to know.
It is not looking good. Your pipe dream airplane on the above scale is probably in the 2000/1 or higher pilot category and will do nothing to invigorate genAv. Its on par with a Bonanza of $900K. Airplanes of this $ort are in fact an economic and cultural disaster for aviation. They only lend credence to the idea that it is an elitist sport and should be treated with contempt and envy, and not deserving of any public support and funding.
***********

On the plus side every year I am getting ever closer to being able to afford a usable twin and on the minus side is? will it happens before I die from old age......

:scratch:

Username Protected · **Posted:** 09 Aug 2014, 19:29

Username Protected wrote:

So the question arises with convergent development of new diesel engines, airframe construction materials and methods, falling avionics prices with higher capabilities and so on is there not a case to be made that the emergence of a transformative airplane for GA is imminent?

Until the physics of the atmosphere or the basic of thermodynamics change, we're not likely to see quantum leaps in performance. 10-20% is nice, 50% on an individual parameter changes the game for sure (that's 182 to A36TN speed), but overall, you're dealing with some pretty fundamental physical tradeoffs that make it hard to make quantum gains in all of those parameters simultaneously. Going 285kts down in the low teens requires prodigious power (and associated fuel consumption figures). Going into the low flight levels requires pressurization and a lot more demands placed onto the pilot. Even the low 20s aren't an especially friendly environment, but the mid-20s are less hospitable. Creating a wing with low enough drag to tick over 285KTAS at a cruise power setting will likely give you a wing with poor low-speed handling and/or requiring a lot of runway and high approach speeds. If those are over 61KIAS Vs0 in a single, you need to demonstrate equivalent safety, etc.

Beech, Cessna, Mooney, and Piper aren't full of idiots as designers. Aviation is an arena full of pretty well-established tradeoffs and when I see people making claims that would make good ol' JB blush and hesitate, my BS meter is pinned to the right.

4-6 seats, 5000nm, at 285KTAS on 7gph? Not in my lifetime... Or yours...

Username Protected · **Posted:** 09 Aug 2014, 19:56

Username Protected wrote:

So the question arises with convergent development of new diesel engines, airframe construction materials and methods, falling avionics prices with higher capabilities and so on is there not a case to be made that the emergence of a transformative airplane for GA is imminent?

Until the physics of the atmosphere or the basic of thermodynamics change, we're not likely to see quantum leaps in performance. 10-20% is nice, 50% on an individual parameter changes the game for sure (that's 182 to A36TN speed), but overall, you're dealing with some pretty fundamental physical tradeoffs that make it hard to make quantum gains in all of those parameters simultaneously. Going 285kts down in the low teens requires prodigious power (and associated fuel consumption figures). Going into the low flight levels requires pressurization and a lot more demands placed onto the pilot. Even the low 20s aren't an especially friendly environment, but the mid-20s are less hospitable. Creating a wing with low enough drag to tick over 285KTAS at a cruise power setting will likely give you a wing with poor low-speed handling and/or requiring a lot of runway and high approach speeds. If those are over 61KIAS Vs0 in a single, you need to demonstrate equivalent safety, etc.

Beech, Cessna, Mooney, and Piper aren't full of idiots as designers. Aviation is an arena full of pretty well-established tradeoffs and when I see people making claims that would make good ol' JB blush and hesitate, my BS meter is pinned to the right.

4-6 seats, 5000nm, at 285KTAS on 7gph? Not in my lifetime... Or yours...

Username Protected · **Posted:** 09 Aug 2014, 22:41

Username Protected wrote:

So the question arises with convergent development of new diesel engines, airframe construction materials and methods, falling avionics prices with higher capabilities and so on is there not a case to be made that the emergence of a transformative airplane for GA is imminent?

Until the physics of the atmosphere or the basic of thermodynamics change, we're not likely to see quantum leaps in performance. 10-20% is nice, 50% on an individual parameter changes the game for sure (that's 182 to A36TN speed), but overall, you're dealing with some pretty fundamental physical tradeoffs that make it hard to make quantum gains in all of those parameters simultaneously. Going 285kts down in the low teens requires prodigious power (and associated fuel consumption figures). Going into the low flight levels requires pressurization and a lot more demands placed onto the pilot. Even the low 20s aren't an especially friendly environment, but the mid-20s are less hospitable. Creating a wing with low enough drag to tick over 285KTAS at a cruise power setting will likely give you a wing with poor low-speed handling and/or requiring a lot of runway and high approach speeds. If those are over 61KIAS Vs0 in a single, you need to demonstrate equivalent safety, etc.

Beech, Cessna, Mooney, and Piper aren't full of idiots as designers. Aviation is an arena full of pretty well-established tradeoffs and when I see people making claims that would make good ol' JB blush and hesitate, my BS meter is pinned to the right.

4-6 seats, 5000nm, at 285KTAS on 7gph? Not in my lifetime... Or yours...

Username Protected · **Posted:** 09 Aug 2014, 22:46

And, does anyone remember the Porshel Equator? Stunning performance like this one, too, and amphibious, too. Great plane. I had their brochure and was saving up.

How many of those do you see flying?