• Welcome aboard HomebuiltAirplanes.com, your destination for connecting with a thriving community of more than 10,000 active members, all passionate about home-built aviation. Dive into our comprehensive repository of knowledge, exchange technical insights, arrange get-togethers, and trade aircrafts/parts with like-minded enthusiasts. Unearth a wide-ranging collection of general and kit plane aviation subjects, enriched with engaging imagery, in-depth technical manuals, and rare archives.

    For a nominal fee of $99.99/year or $12.99/month, you can immerse yourself in this dynamic community and unparalleled treasure-trove of aviation knowledge.

    Embark on your journey now!

    Click Here to Become a Premium Member and Experience Homebuilt Airplanes to the Fullest!

Search results

Advertise with us
Find deals on amazon
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
  1. F

    Here we go...Synergy still NO FLY and lighter...

    It is not just BLC. Very incompletely, from what I do know, it is a very specifically span efficiency optimized wing configuration, wing and fuselage BLC, drag optimized fuselage, an optimized prop (not currently mounted or meant to be public at the moment), and more.
  2. F

    Here we go...Synergy still NO FLY and lighter...

    Lancair is definitely a better metric in many respects. And Otto was off to a good start though threw away great advantage with those huge aft intakes. As noted, data would be nice though. Those who continue to take offense at prior claims, many of which are well deserved though are mostly...
  3. F

    Here we go...Synergy still NO FLY and lighter...

    I have been told that information John has shared, beyond pics NOT taken at an airport, are in breach of multiple legal agreements formerly made by the founder. If the allegations are true, additional potential breaches of fiduciary responsibility prior to his ouster would be left to state and...
  4. F

    Here we go...Synergy still NO FLY and lighter...

    1000% agreement. While not a startup, I have a buddy at Aurora and he has shared about dozens of concepts that have been fully built and tested, some at large scale, in the same time-frame. But yes, they too have deeper pockets - especially now with their new owner. I again, place the prior...
  5. F

    Here we go...Synergy still NO FLY and lighter...

    Appreciate the sentiment, but I have a day job and it isn't for DBT. While I support the project and hope that it succeeds, the best I can do is try to convey what facts or insights I have with the time I have available. Whether trying to do that on this forum is a good idea, who knows.
  6. F

    Here we go...Synergy still NO FLY and lighter...

    And finally, some very insightful observations. Full computer-controlled FBW is already in the works so you are spot on there.
  7. F

    Here we go...Synergy still NO FLY and lighter...

    Though I don't feel comfortable sharing what I'm not sure may be proprietary, I'm not trying to be coy. I believe the design employs fairly straightforward BL suction but I don't know all of the details. I have seen portions in the prototype and from what I understand others will likely be...
  8. F

    Here we go...Synergy still NO FLY and lighter...

    Already been tested for potential turbulence at all interfaces and is smooth as silk. Not enough time to spend responding to everyone. Happy to share news when when flight test results are released.
  9. F

    Here we go...Synergy still NO FLY and lighter...

    All valid points. Resulting L/D is where the 'magic' happens. And BLC is absolutely required to achieve it. It will just be a slightly more slippery than average plane without it. You would be surprised how simple the BLC solution is though. The system design for it is the easy part, the...
  10. F

    Here we go...Synergy still NO FLY and lighter...

    The current engine is 100% the responsibility of the Founder who, while having made other fantastic contributions is, fortunately for the success of the company, no longer with them. If time and money weren't an issue, it would likely have a UL520 series engine in it right now for test purposes.
  11. F

    Here we go...Synergy still NO FLY and lighter...

    Agreed, for THIS size/class. They are doing the design work for the aircraft to scale for multiple applications. And I think that is primarily for the engine design so that it has applications to a broader set of aircraft/missions.
  12. F

    Here we go...Synergy still NO FLY and lighter...

    I made a visit about a year ago and from what I have seen the current prototype only partially takes advantage of rear fuselage boundary layer flow. It should be enough to prove necessary concepts though I think we'll have to wait for another rev provided enough success with the current flight...
  13. F

    Here we go...Synergy still NO FLY and lighter...

    I believe 35,000 is the minimum design target, with much higher being a goal. And the speed should be higher and fuel burn much lower so it should be just a wee bit better than what a Lancair IV achieved 25 years ago. I do agree that it's been way too long to see real progress in aircraft...
  14. F

    Here we go...Synergy still NO FLY and lighter...

    Good points - if the design flies as modeled in CFD/SIM and tested at up to 1/3 scale, the safety record should eventually speak for itself. I'm told they are also integrating multiple things, some old, some new, and some novel, that add significant dispatch reliability beyond traditional...
  15. F

    Here we go...Synergy still NO FLY and lighter...

    Drag improvement is more than 'just a bit'. Reduction in tip vortices alone is an order of magnitude higher than what the best double winglets will provide. And active BLC does the rest.
  16. F

    Here we go...Synergy still NO FLY and lighter...

    Apologies for the trail of posts - just catching up with the thread. Very perceptive. I've spoken directly with the current VP of ops, former military with multiple aviation certifications, and John's comments are total malarky (I'd like to use different words). And they are definitely NOT...
  17. F

    Here we go...Synergy still NO FLY and lighter...

    Not remotely similar aerodynamically.
  18. F

    Here we go...Synergy still NO FLY and lighter...

    My interaction with the new DBT team appear to reflect that they are indeed committed to making the technology work. Perhaps now that John is no longer involved it may actually happen.
  19. F

    Here we go...Synergy still NO FLY and lighter...

    I flew the sim he had at Oshkosh and the yaw and pitch stability were actually quite good. Hopefully they will show some flight testing results (and hopefully the testing will go better than Raptor, Joby, and Vertical).
  20. F

    Here we go...Synergy still NO FLY and lighter...

    Wasn't John still CEO/CTO then? Huh!
Back
Top