I wonder if there's an airplane in the world that lost weight from the prototype to the production version.

Actually i think he can fix most of what is wrong with it.
Not likely he can drop 1000 lbs, but hundreds are likely.
If it can perform like a velocity and will pressurize it likely will sell. Once he has a conforming prototype and knows how to build it.

Would that be the fastest RV, the 8/8A at 184 knots, or the 4 seat 14A that rips along at 171 knots?

If he’s resigned himself to a 150 knot cruise speed, he might as well hang it up now.

I think he (or someone competent) could get 500+ pounds of weight savings, but that would still be a pathetic useful load. Maybe 1 person, and no bags with full fuel? 3 people and one hour of fuel plus reserves?

The “if” in your third sentence is a huge one. He is going to need either close to triple the thrust he has now, or cut a significant amount of drag, or a combination of both, in order to match the performance of a Velocity. That’s a Grand Canyon sized performance gap to cross at this stage!

If it misses by 50% that will be:
Max speed 150
Cruise speed 115
Max altitude 12,500
Stall speed 97
Take off distance 1650
Climb rate 800
Those numbers certainly are going to reinvigorate GA.

So I'm curious as to whether he's taken it up into the mid-teens yet. Tuned out for a minute.

If he can get 130-140 KIAS up there it will be trueing out at 160+ which isn't awful, but it's not earth shattering.

The Lancair IV-P is the comparison at this point for what he has - a pressurized 4 seater home built. If he gets even close in a Jet-A burning powerplant at under $200k to build, he'll have orders.

Mid teens???

He hasn’t had it up to the mid-naughts.

Mid teens???

He hasn’t had it up to the mid-naughts.

Almost five years, TWO HUNDRED AND ELEVEN pages of posts brought about by nothing more than outrageous claims. And some people wonder why our politics are "unsettled".

Times like this I wish I hadn't quit drinking.

All in good humor boys, all in good humor.

But I love you all.

Jg

I've been keeping up with Peter's videos and watching this thread for a couple of years now. I never posted in the thread until yesterday. It's seemed like others more qualified than I have been pointing out the problems and shortcomings better than I could. I've had nothing to add.

It appears to me now that the way this project is going to resolve is becoming clear. The plane does not appear to be a death trap. The engine and re-drive appear to work, though it's too early to tell if it's going to be reliable enough for an aircraft. But, we know the plane flies and is reasonably stable. So in that sense, it's a success.

The problem is that its performance isn't good enough to justify its existence. Maybe once he tests it up at higher altitudes, it will turn in a TAS that's reasonable for cross country travel. But with the climb rate, it would take nearly an hour to get to 20,000'.

I think Peter can probably trim a lot of weight out of it, but not enough to give it a useful load that's "useful".

I'm still holding out a thin hope that something commercially viable might come out of this, but it's not looking good.

Jack

Let’s look at it from a different angle; if we say that right now it is at Max Gross, then this is how it performs at that upper limit. Is that good enough, regardless of what it’s carrying? If he trims a thousand pounds off and you replace it with people and fuel would it be a good airplane?

I think an airplane has to do a lot of things fairly well, or one or two things very well, in order to sell.

What does the Raptor do well? It's great for shoulder room. That's probably not enough.

I think an airplane has to do a lot of things fairly well, or one or two things very well, in order to sell.

What does the Raptor do well? It's great for shoulder room. That's probably not enough.

I think an airplane has to do a lot of things fairly well, or one or two things very well, in order to sell.

What does the Raptor do well? It's great for shoulder room. That's probably not enough.