https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xLlN3HjsvC0

I think this could actually happen.

The project is based on having an extremely clean wing and airframe at very high altitudes, which is a practical impossibility. Bird crap, rain, ice, dings, bugs, and plain old dirt would dramatically reduce the performance. The only aircraft I know of that do this today are gliders that have wipers that run down the length of the wing to remove bugs and other containments in flight. I'm not sure how well they work, but they operate at far lower speeds and altitudes. Even then the whole airframe is not laminar flow, and this is a glider.

I also question if it is possible to design a turbine engine that exceeds piston efficiency levels at sub and supersonic speeds, at any altitude.

Regardless I don't think anyone with a billion dollars is going to give it to this program.

What happened to the 500? As I recall it was a single engine piston, got to the point of flight testing.

I think they flew the 500 for three years to prove the point. I also think the guy is using his own money.

Did it prove the point? I don't recall hearing anything about how it performed, whether it lived up to its claims.

I think this will be forever using up development money with occasional hardware flights to keep investment interest. Moller Skycar...

Forget the diesel and put a proven common engine on the 500 airframe to still have an efficient airplane with stand up cabin. Let the airframe technology prove it's worth with a baseline from a standard engine.

Once the airplane is proven continue with the advanced high altitude diesel to have the full package later. Small steps not all at once with a manufacturing startup.

Did it prove the point? I don't recall hearing anything about how it performed, whether it lived up to its claims.

That's a very weird, *machine-narrated* video. It would be a long, long way off even if.

Supersonic laminar flow? Nope... not by a long shot. Nice marketing video though.

Laminar flow isn’t the controlling issue while flying at high sonic/supersonic speeds.

It’s the drag bulge at the wing fuselage intersection (solvable by area ruling). The airplane shown in the video is going to run into the same wall every other design in the last 50 years has.

Even the Concorde couldn’t overcome the issue, so they used brute force (I.e., 4 turbojet engines) to fly supersonic.

It needs a really long nose.

These guys are using the laminar flow magic and should be using area rule and the raptor was claiming area rule and should have been using the laminar flow magic. Maybe they should get together and swap marketing.

Interesting point. It ran on a new-design diesel engine, I wonder how it would have performed with a PT-6 on the back? Single-engine Avanti that can fill the niche left by the demise of Piaggio?

yes exactly that. I think most of their airframe technology appears to be the top surface of a laminar flow airfoil lofted in a circle to make the fuselage shape. But if it works it gives a good volume to work with. With the engine they used and lack of rear world numbers it's hard to tell if the airplane is efficient or not. I wonder what other airplanes if any flew with that engine and the results?