17 Apr 2024, 22:38 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Otto Aviation Celera 500L Flew This Week Posted: 11 Oct 2021, 12:20 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 09/17/15 Posts: 153 Post Likes: +150 Location: LIMG / EDDK
Aircraft: PA-28 / C172
|
|
Username Protected wrote: If you could put higher rated engines in Avanti... Anthony, have you noticed the Avanti II 950 SHP spec'd engines (-66B) are just limited to 850 by the prop torque / rpm limit? Please don't try anything at home! BTW, another thread has been "branded" by Piaggio!
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Otto Aviation Celera 500L Flew This Week Posted: 11 Oct 2021, 13:27 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 09/17/15 Posts: 153 Post Likes: +150 Location: LIMG / EDDK
Aircraft: PA-28 / C172
|
|
Username Protected wrote: https://discover.garmin.com/en-US/autonomi/ Garmin Autoland is a system designed to be used in EMERGENCY situations where one is more than happy to trade the chance of dying with the risk of failure because of a reduced system reliability and development safety. After all, what can go worse if the Autoland fails? You already are in a pilot incapacitation situation... It is not a system intended to be always used at every approach. In addition to the limitations of the AFM, I would be very curious to see the FAA/EASA Certification Review Items (CRI), the System Safety Assessment (SSA), the Functional Hazard Analysis (FHA) and the Reliability (RAMS) numbers of the Autoland system. Sure that nobody will ever show those. [EDIT] Still, I do recognize the technical challenges behind the Garmin Autoland system, and I'm fascinated by it. But always try to look behind marketing and be aware of the context.
Last edited on 11 Oct 2021, 13:47, edited 2 times in total.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Otto Aviation Celera 500L Flew This Week Posted: 11 Oct 2021, 13:43 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 10/18/11 Posts: 1031 Post Likes: +587
Aircraft: Seabee Aerostar 700
|
|
to really develop a new manufacturer in a market a real or perceive substantial advantage need to be offered by the product.
It will be interesting to see if the Celera can actually do this with its diesel powered laminar flow design.
we can look at the past market to perhaps see what is needed to accomplish this.
the Cirrus is an example, even though in reality it is not that revolutionary in its performance. but in the potential owner universe, the fact that it was a "new" aircraft, was composite and had an airframe parachute as standard separated it from legacy aircraft. even when a bonanza is brought up to "new" capability with new engine and the latest avionics offered equivalent performance at much lower cost. A large group of buyers saw its advantages and voted with their$ and a substantial new aircraft company was born.
Diesel engine technology offers that same dramatic improvement operating on a fuel available world with substantially lower cost in the rest of the world and because of the compression engine's much higher efficiency. The diesel will offer equivalent performance compared to the turboprops at 1/2 the purchase, maintenance and fuel cost of the turbo prop engine
It will be a dramatic enough improvement that it will be a successful technology and offer a whole new performance capability. However it will take a huge investment to make the engines reliable and built in large enough volumes to be a cost improvement over present day technology.
EPS appears to perhaps on a route to being resurrected as General atomics seems pushing to actually finish the development on the 350 to 450 hp weight and size competitive engine. RED as talked about above seems to have several engines operating in the prototype airframe stage. Continental has several offerings that seem to be in the process of being installed in test airframes.
Revolutionary aircraft designs seem to follow the development of new propulsion technologies and I think Diesel engine will promote a new class of aircraft capability
If we get battery storage technology 2 to 4X better than existing technology it potentially will push a whole new category of electric powered aircraft.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Otto Aviation Celera 500L Flew This Week Posted: 11 Oct 2021, 15:45 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/30/09 Posts: 3353 Post Likes: +1961 Location: $ilicon Vall€y
Aircraft: Columbia 400
|
|
Username Protected wrote: FL500 in a single piston seems absolutely crazy. I am nervous at FL430 with twin jets to feed the bleed air.
I just do not see how thats going to get certified, and even if it does who would want to be up there with that little of power to rely on? You would almost have to have O2 mask on all the time. How long can you stay conscious at FL500 if you have engine failure?
Maybe this was already discussed here as it seems to be a huge hurtle.
Mike Yet it was accomplished in 1936 by a 500hp 9-cylinder radial, twin supercharged engine in a plywood and fabric airplane.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Otto Aviation Celera 500L Flew This Week Posted: 11 Oct 2021, 15:47 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/30/09 Posts: 3353 Post Likes: +1961 Location: $ilicon Vall€y
Aircraft: Columbia 400
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Search by the tail number. ADSB Exchange has their own netw of receivers and does not filter. So either ADSB Exchange has no coverage in the flight test area; or, Celera is using UAT and strictly squawking 1200 (staying out of the flight levels). It is called the PIA program... That's why you do NOT see all the other trade-secret prototype aircraft flying around by their tail numbers either.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Otto Aviation Celera 500L Flew This Week Posted: 11 Oct 2021, 15:50 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/30/09 Posts: 3353 Post Likes: +1961 Location: $ilicon Vall€y
Aircraft: Columbia 400
|
|
Username Protected wrote: A 210, which costs quite a bit less than 5 million. If you look at the impressive numbers, don’t forget to include the climb, which makes this airplane a science experiment for most practical uses.
It is an interesting project I’ll be watching closely, but I really don’t see any business case for it.
Where are the brand new P210's? If it were built brand new, they'd probably be $2M+ and they're not anywhere near as fast (as claimed).
Last edited on 11 Oct 2021, 17:39, edited 1 time in total.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Otto Aviation Celera 500L Flew This Week Posted: 11 Oct 2021, 15:51 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/19/11 Posts: 3303 Post Likes: +1424 Company: Bottom Line Experts Location: KTOL - Toledo, OH
Aircraft: 2004 SR22 G2
|
|
Username Protected wrote: FL500 in a single piston seems absolutely crazy. I am nervous at FL430 with twin jets to feed the bleed air.
I just do not see how thats going to get certified, and even if it does who would want to be up there with that little of power to rely on? You would almost have to have O2 mask on all the time. How long can you stay conscious at FL500 if you have engine failure?
Maybe this was already discussed here as it seems to be a huge hurtle.
Mike Yet it was accomplished in 1936 by a 500hp 9-cylinder radial, twin supercharged engine in a plywood and fabric airplane.
The issue isn't so much that it cannot be done but can it be certified and produced for a reasonable cost. The Epic was certified to 34K ft (TBM is only certified to 31K ft). They accomplished this in certification with a high cabin differential to begin with, low cabin leak rate and dive bomber descent rates during cert demonstration. The high descent rates were possible due to the big 'speed brake' up front. Demonstrating the same from 50K ft with a piston pusher will likely prove to be MUCH more difficult.
_________________ Don Coburn Corporate Expense Reduction Specialist 2004 SR22 G2
Last edited on 11 Oct 2021, 15:58, edited 1 time in total.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Otto Aviation Celera 500L Flew This Week Posted: 11 Oct 2021, 15:55 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 11/19/15 Posts: 1402 Post Likes: +1205 Company: Centurion LV and Eleusis Location: Draper UT KPVU-KVNY
Aircraft: N45AF 501sp Eagle II
|
|
Username Protected wrote: FL500 in a single piston seems absolutely crazy. I am nervous at FL430 with twin jets to feed the bleed air.
I just do not see how thats going to get certified, and even if it does who would want to be up there with that little of power to rely on? You would almost have to have O2 mask on all the time. How long can you stay conscious at FL500 if you have engine failure?
Maybe this was already discussed here as it seems to be a huge hurtle.
Mike Yet it was accomplished in 1936 by a 500hp 9-cylinder radial, twin supercharged engine in a plywood and fabric airplane.
They most likely did not take their family or friends up with them. Haha I didn't say it could not be done at all but I think its crazy for passengers and every day pilots to be at FL500 with a single source of pressurization.
Mike
_________________ InstaGram @Mtpyle company @CenturionLV @eleusisdigitalcanvas race team @strappedracing
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Otto Aviation Celera 500L Flew This Week Posted: 11 Oct 2021, 16:08 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/18/11 Posts: 7689 Post Likes: +3686 Location: Lakeland , Ga
Aircraft: H35, T-41B, Aircoupe
|
|
I think question will be performance at 25-30,000 ft It might in theory be able to do those other things. I doubt they seriously think of certification much higher . Laminar flow works at sea level too.
|
|
Top |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
Terms of Service | Forum FAQ | Contact Us
BeechTalk, LLC is the quintessential Beechcraft Owners & Pilots Group providing a
forum for the discussion of technical, practical, and entertaining issues relating to all Beech aircraft. These include
the Bonanza (both V-tail and straight-tail models), Baron, Debonair, Duke, Twin Bonanza, King Air, Sierra, Skipper, Sport, Sundowner,
Musketeer, Travel Air, Starship, Queen Air, BeechJet, and Premier lines of airplanes, turboprops, and turbojets.
BeechTalk, LLC is not affiliated or endorsed by the Beechcraft Corporation, its subsidiaries, or affiliates.
Beechcraft™, King Air™, and Travel Air™ are the registered trademarks of the Beechcraft Corporation.
Copyright© BeechTalk, LLC 2007-2024
|
|
|
|