Have a chat with this guy!

I love the E500, too. So sad it never took off in greater numbers. Walter Extra sold the rights to some Chinese conglomerate and nobody's heard a word since. Not sure how many were built, but probably less than 10. IFR certified in Europe, but was never FAA certified for instruments, so if you fly one here you can only do VFR.

To be certified, about 750K barebones. That would be the current list with no bells and whistles and a VFR six pack.

To be certified, about 750K barebones. That would be the current list, pulling out the G1000 and accessories with no bells and whistles and a VFR six pack.

Have a chat with this guy!

I think improved engines would automatically allow improved aircraft. A high reliability piston engine that can run on auto fuel would be a game changer.

The reliability has to come from better process control. From what I can tell, a correctly manufactured and assembled aircraft piston engine is extremely reliable - most of the problems seem to come from defects.

FDAC with auto-fuel could probably compensate for most of the performance loss from the lower octane and should be able to provide the pilot with estimated takeoff performance for the current conditions.

there is an engine being developed in south Africa a 280 to 320 hp 120 degree six using all grades of gasoline, that would fit in the niche for more hp than available presently from Rotax

they are currently putting one on an aircraft in the US but it is not flying yet.
Adept
https://flyadept.co.za/

there will be a representative in the evolution booth most of the week at Airventure. ask for Lee Brinley

They also claimed "next year" for about 25 years. I only see 5 flights and the I think their best cruise speed is less than 160kts.

They seem to be VERY proud of thier engines. Granted we need the reliability and utility of more power. (I would need 2). I dont see them going on the average GA plane in America.

from the stand point of who will want them, as long as there is 100 octane aviation fuel in the US and the present engines are supported, it will be almost impossible to justify getting rid of our present technology. in the US the cost of the conversion in a certified aircraft is prohibitive and negates any real savings.

where 100 is not available overseas that is where this engine or a Jet a fueled diesel will be the best choice

the Adept engine will be good for experimentals or orphans in the US like my Seabee where there is no good legacy engine choice



They seem to be VERY proud of thier engines. Granted we need the reliability and utility of more power. (I would need 2). I dont see them going on the average GA plane in America.

^^
These engines are likely as expensive as the equivalent 300 SHP turboprop I want on my plane.

A sleek composite twin with a 340 cessna sized cabin, but a GTSIO-520 with fadec and 240ish kts. Also has to have a belted potty...4MM

Columbia 400 with a parachute.
If I am dreaming a bit then add pressurization in addition to chute and a Lycoming engine vs Continental.

I believe there is a lancair es-p for sale. Pretty much a Columbia 400 with pressurization...

I'm a big fan of eclipse, though I tend to root for underdogs. Still though, it would be neat to see them come out with a new airplane as a multiengine alternative to the SF50. The assets were somewhat recently purchased out of the second bankruptcy, so maybe with some new funding they can make a go of it given how depreciated the tooling/IP is.

Would also be great to see a modern reincarnation of something with a T-bone sized cabin, though I suppose that already exists as the Tecnam P2012 Traveller. Doesn't look as good, but kind of does the same thing.