He needed to take a few days off before recording the video. He has some technical hurdles to deal with but he's feeling a bit beaten up, and understandably so. I don't like the engine choice. At around 8:45 he starts talking about his 19 year old Audi that's constantly breaking and sucking money all while explaining his choice of this engine. I understand his reasoning, but I'd be concerned about reliability and durability.

I wish him well, he's put a lot into this project.

More bad news from Peter in the latest video (after a high-speed taxi test); jump to 12:50 and watch the rest.

https://youtu.be/ZUcmDFoZIxM

Yikes, no fire suit, no crash helmet!

While Peter spent a lot of time working out the design and build of the prototype using a lot of ingenuity and creativity, basic project management skills using an agile approach might have been more useful. Tackle the biggest challenges and risks first, then refine.

He waited until the prototype is virtually ready for flight (including details like nicely fitted carpet and interior panels, air conditioning and pressurization systems operational) to engage the test pilot who dealt a significant blow killing momentum. Some minimum level of systems must be operational to prove the concept and get airborne, but it seems the order of priority was skewed.

The few iterative tests he performed included the engine runs and the pressurization/seal test and both revealed several problems that needed to be corrected. It's a mystery why he didn't evaluate other project components more thoroughly. Maybe tight on funds? A development version of get-there-itis?

Maybe there will be a flying Raptor some day, but if nothing else the transparency and honesty (at least from what we can see) will be a great lesson to the next person who tries to realize a similar dream.

Edit: Just got thru watching the whole video. The guy was bummed out (so was I) and probably just needs a couple days rest to mentally recoup. I just don’t see the power plant being an issue with test flying. Heck, buy an old airplane and put the engine in it and start putting some hours on the “drivetrain”[/quote]


I strongly suggested this to Peter a couple of years ago. Get the engine running and mount it on a Velocity XL while you work on the air frame. Fly that to Osh as a proof of concept on speed/fuel burn. I don't think he was interested in an incremental approach.

I agree he needs to take a couple days off and go to the beach. Come back and get back to it. Nobody gets it right the first time.

"The only difference between bold and stupid, is success!"

I still am hoping he pulls this off. I feel for him, and love the diesel engine idea!!! Here is wishing you pull it off Bro..............



Cheers,

The other thing I keep thinking is who else posts videos like this throughout the entire build? We don't know what kind of issues other builders had with their prototypes simply because they were not near as public with the process. The down side of this kind of transparency is seeing all the failures you start to loose confidence in both the team and the aircraft itself. I wish he would weigh the thing again. I keep thinking this thing is going to be way to heavy. It was heavy when they weighed it last time and they have added more wiring, brackets, fluids, etc etc etc...

At 2:45 I see a potential serious problem with the clevis in the aileron cable running very close to both the vertical carbon fiber structure and an aluminum tube. I don't know what that tube is carrying but I suspect that a leak might be problematic. In addition the discussion about the pulleys on the floor moving around under load strongly suggests that there was insufficient understanding of the flexing characteristics of the entire structure, something that would concern me as a pilot far more than the single channel ECU.

Why didn't he just start with a Velocity and pressurize it and add a diesel. ?

He wouldn't have gotten nearly as many deposits for that.

This whole thing started because he went to Velocity and asked them for a pressurized version and they refused.

I think he then figured if he had to do the whole thing himself, no sense using their out of square molds and older techniques. Might as well improve on the design completely.

I've said it before - he does not need a plane at all. If he can make a viable aviation diesel out of that Audi engine, he will get rich selling them alone. If not, the project is dead either way.

Don't know about the Eclipse 500, but the Starship didn't meet its design objectives because the FAA made them overdesign it as the FAA didn't understand composites at the time.

230ktas on 7gph - the max projected speed at FL250 is 300ktas which will be a bigger feat.

The plan for doing this is to use a compound turbo (explained in some of the videos) to create enough boost to maintain HP at altitude. This seems like a reasonable approach but begs the question - why don't other manufacturers already do this?

That said, even if it only goes 250ktas, that would still be pretty sweet.

B-17’s never had them, but Constellations, DC-7’s and P2’s did. Actually pretty simple fluid coupling tied directly to the crankshaft, worked well. Those turbos were last in the combustion line, so anything coughed up by the motor ended taking them out.