Some macro thoughts from various perspectives on the nature of human progress in general, and observations on observations made by the copious misanthropists posing as zetetics. The latter melancholy actuality (as demonstrated below), both, obscured by previous grand distinction, and proven to be precisely so not a priori, but ipso facto.

Some macro thoughts from various perspectives on the nature of human progress in general, and observations on observations made by the copious misanthropists posing as zetetics. The latter melancholy actuality (as demonstrated below), both, obscured by previous grand distinction, and proven to be precisely so not a priori, but ipso facto.

Some macro thoughts from various perspectives on the nature of human progress in general, and observations on observations made by the copious misanthropists posing as zetetics. The latter melancholy actuality (as demonstrated below), both, obscured by previous grand distinction, and proven to be precisely so not a priori, but ipso facto.

Some macro thoughts from various perspectives on the nature of human progress in general, and observations on observations made by the copious misanthropists posing as zetetics. The latter melancholy actuality (as demonstrated below), both, obscured by previous grand distinction, and proven to be precisely so not a priori, but ipso facto.

Everyone finds their level in life. It becomes obvious very quickly who is comparing themselves to others, and who is comparing themselves to the best of which they are capable. History showing the former always hate the latter. And some men, even having learned that lesson, forget it and regress. The battle is both, real and never ending.

Expert congressional testimony on integrating and supporting the "tomfoolery" of private initiatives (i.e SpaceX) - Neil Armstrong - Master of Science degree in Aerospace Engineering, numerous honorary PhD's. First man to walk on the moon.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pp5DfNhhGX4&t=4m10s

For the record Neil was dead wrong as demonstrated.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u0-pfzKbh2k

An expert practitioner on experts. (Self-made) billionaire Vinod Khosla on "expert opinion not being better than dart throwing monkeys and why innovation ALWAYS comes from the edges, never the core (of industry or society.)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p7Dai5VyNaA&t=0m48s

Haters gonna hate (from the cheap seats). Doers gonna do

Airspeed is alive
Gauges in the green
V1.. rotate
Positive rate indicated
Gear up
Yaw damper engaged
Welcome to Shangri La
Your ticket stamped and paid for by the doers

Fly Raptor fly

2. Does the Raptor really have a yaw damper?

2. Does the Raptor really have a yaw damper?

Someone give you a thesaurus for your birthday?

He circumnavigated The Sun?

“why innovation ALWAYS comes from the edges, never the core (of industry or society.)“

The problem that you and many other supporters fail to see is that there is no real innovation involved in the Raptor. We already know how these wings make lift. We know how Audi Diesel engines work. We know enough about power to weight ratios and about drag coefficients and the other factors that will define performance. To hit the promised cruise speeds at promised fuel burn he needed an incredible reduction in drag compared to a existing 4-5 seat planes and/or a major improvement in BSFC over existing engine designs. The airframe is clearly not going to deliver big drag reduction over a Velocity and the engine came from an old Audi design that we already know can’t produce the power and efficiency necessary.

For the Raptor to perform as promised, it needed some major innovation. That hasn’t happened and instead we have seen it gain a tremendous amount of weight while simultaneously coming up short on power output. Pointing that out, or the many other engineering concerns, doesn’t make someone anti-innovation or a naysayer. It is called learning from experience and the experience of others.

Hmmm, What do you reckon best deadstick L/D (and at what speed) of the Raptor will be compared to most 4-5 seaters on the market?

I have a sneaking suspicion the polar of this airframe/wing combo is going to be out of sight compared to anything in its class. 25-30/1 would not surprise me depending on best prop feathering.

Just basic thrust/drag/speed/horsepower performance sanity check on the original figures, 300hp at 300 knots at 25,000 feet needs a 2.4 sq.ft. equivalent flat plate area. That is a very skinny airplane! Some of the speediest two seat, unpressurized homebuilts (some canards, Glasairs, and Lancairs) are down around 2 sq.ft. Just for comparison, a Bonanza is about three times that.

Hmmm, What do you reckon best deadstick L/D (and at what speed) of the Raptor will be compared to most 4-5 seaters on the market?

I have a sneaking suspicion the polar of this airframe/wing combo is going to be out of sight compared to anything in its class. 25-30/1 would not surprise me depending on best prop feathering.

Just basic thrust/drag/speed/horsepower performance sanity check on the original figures, 300hp at 300 knots at 25,000 feet needs a 2.4 sq.ft. equivalent flat plate area. That is a very skinny airplane! Some of the speediest two seat, unpressurized homebuilts (some canards, Glasairs, and Lancairs) are down around 2 sq.ft. Just for comparison, a Bonanza is about three times that.