Page 31 of 35 FirstFirst ... 21 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 LastLast
Results 451 to 465 of 521

Thread: Raptor Composite Aircraft

  1. #451
    Moderator Topaz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Orange County, California
    Posts
    14,134
    Likes (Given)
    9102
    Likes (Received)
    5226

    Re: Raptor Composite Aircraft

    Quote Originally Posted by rv6ejguy View Post
    Well they weighed the Raptor today and it's over 600 pounds heavier than the projected weight on the website. This doesn't include paint and all the interior bits....
    Quote Originally Posted by BoKu View Post
    When I looked, it indeed said that the expected empty weight was 2300 lbs.
    Ummm, so it's 126% of the design empty weight? It's not exceptionally uncommon for even professional designs to be as much as 10% over the design weight. But 26%, and they're still without paint and interior? Eeesh.

    Something's gotta give. Methinks the program is in for a radical weight-reduction effort, of the "major redesign" kind.
    "If you have built castles in the air, your work need not be lost; that is where they should be. Now put the foundations under them." - Henry David Thoreau

    Design Project: Conceptual Design of an "Inexpensive" Single-Seat Motorglider
    Discussion Thread for the Project: Discussion: Conceptual Design of an "Inexpensive" Single-Seat Motorglider

  2. Likes BoKu, Voidhawk9, rv6ejguy liked this post
  3. #452
    Registered User Scheny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    Vienna, Austria
    Posts
    14
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    2

    Re: Raptor Composite Aircraft

    I have been developing these Diesel engines (BMW, Audi, VW, Porsche, Renault) for a few years and their increased weight is no shortcoming if the complete package is thoroughly planned.

    There is a project where they fitted a Eurocopter 120 (now Airbus H120) with a heavy Diesel V8 (AE440). Some of the engine developers are even former colleagues of mine. In terms of weight there was no benefit at all, as the additional weight is taken off from the available fuel while MTOW is constant. But while range, weight and performance is the same due to reduced fuel consumption, you still have the benefit of a reduced fuel bill (and less maintanence costs compared to a turboshaft engine).


    I am a big fan of the Raptor project, not because I think they did something completely new or innovative, but because they do their thing and show the whole world to see (even when they fail). This is something I admire! Even if the project would fail this is a much nicer alternative to what reality TV has to offer ;-)

    Jeff, good work you do and HUGE effort you are spending even though when you know something is not d'accord to you expertise :-)

    In case you are interested what differences have been required in converting the Mercedes blocks into aero-engines you can contact me if you want.

  4. #453
    Registered User rv6ejguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    3,325
    Likes (Given)
    2375
    Likes (Received)
    2351

    Re: Raptor Composite Aircraft

    Quote Originally Posted by Scheny View Post
    I have been developing these Diesel engines (BMW, Audi, VW, Porsche, Renault) for a few years and their increased weight is no shortcoming if the complete package is thoroughly planned.

    There is a project where they fitted a Eurocopter 120 (now Airbus H120) with a heavy Diesel V8 (AE440). Some of the engine developers are even former colleagues of mine. In terms of weight there was no benefit at all, as the additional weight is taken off from the available fuel while MTOW is constant. But while range, weight and performance is the same due to reduced fuel consumption, you still have the benefit of a reduced fuel bill (and less maintanence costs compared to a turboshaft engine).


    I am a big fan of the Raptor project, not because I think they did something completely new or innovative, but because they do their thing and show the whole world to see (even when they fail). This is something I admire! Even if the project would fail this is a much nicer alternative to what reality TV has to offer ;-)

    Jeff, good work you do and HUGE effort you are spending even though when you know something is not d'accord to you expertise :-)

    In case you are interested what differences have been required in converting the Mercedes blocks into aero-engines you can contact me if you want.
    Diesel vs. turboshaft is one case where reduced fuel load offsets engine weight increase however that's rarely the case on SI vs CI engines on fixed wing aircraft. When the SI engine is operated LOP in cruise, even with traditional air cooled engines, the BSFC is within a few percent of the CI engine. The fuel load reduction doesn't make up for the increased engine weight. In North America, gasoline is still inexpensive, the diesel doesn't show any overall cost reduction over 2000 hours of operation compared to SI engines, given their much higher initial cost.

    I'd also say that few helicopter pilots want to trade super reliable, smooth and easy-to-start in cold weather turbines for diesels. You won't see King Airs powered by diesels either. I highly doubt maintenance costs are reduced when using diesels over modern turbines- some of which go 5000-8000 hours on wing. The original Thielerts and WAMs were a disaster, same with the SMA- high cost, low durability. The Austro has been much better.

    The Audi conversion on the Raptor has many shortcomings I can see besides the weight. The staged turbo setup uses mismatched turbos from what I can gather after he relied on spread sheets developed for SI engines (vastly different beasts in many aspects) and a complicated intercooler system with no proper ducting for them, the oil cooler or the radiator. The engine tests showed fuel consumption was much higher than anticipated, the TIT was dangerously high (1800F), the redrive has undergone several re-designs. All of it is unproven in flight. I predict cooling issues, engine durability issues, more redrive problems, turbocharger surge issues at altitude and a really hot cabin up high with no cabin heat exchanger between the turbos and the occupants. Peter clearly doesn't understand turbos or engines from his comments on his videos. He has no appreciation for compressor discharge temperatures at 25,000 feet running pressure ratios of around 7 to 1. Other learned people have cautioned him on these various aspects and he ignored their concerns. The Audi diesel won't be the engine powering production Raptors if it ever gets into kit production, maybe a RR turbine.

    The comments in the latest video show only one guy who was concerned about the weight, ever Peter didn't seem so concerned saying it was a prototype. Seems nobody has much appreciation as to the importance of light weight in aircraft. It's huge. 600 lbs. won't be easy to lose with the present engine and all the options. This project just got extended years more with the weight problem alone. Peter's comments about it being in the Utility Category make little sense. This won't be used on rough fields being both a canard and a pusher. There is no Utility Category in Experimentals. The aircraft is just plain porky. No sense in sugar coating reality.

    I too, admire the fortitude of the team in getting the Raptor built as I've stated numerous times in this thread but the reality is starting to set in now. An untried engine and new airframe almost always invites failure and especially so when the guy in charge has no background in either discipline and doesn't use the knowledge of folks who do. Lance Neibauer of Lancair fame wasn't an engineer or aero guy but he used the additional knowledge of structural engineers and aero guys to bring his ideas and designs to life and into production. THESE were ground breaking designs in performance.
    Last edited by rv6ejguy; March 6th, 2019 at 03:30 PM.
    Ross Farnham
    Racetech Inc.
    16 years and 428.6 hours on Subaru Turbo powered RV6A
    "The world is changed by your example, not by your opinion" Paulo Coelho
    http://www.sdsefi.com/aircraft.html




  5. Likes BJC, canardlover, Voidhawk9 liked this post
  6. #454
    Registered User rv6ejguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    3,325
    Likes (Given)
    2375
    Likes (Received)
    2351

    Re: Raptor Composite Aircraft

    Quote Originally Posted by BoKu View Post
    I had to hunt up the website: http://www.raptor-aircraft.com/specs.html

    When I looked, it indeed said that the expected empty weight was 2300 lbs.

    As Ross points out, that specs page is heavily oriented towards a favorable comparison with the Cirrus SR22. Setting the mass disparity aside, it seems pretty ambitious to expect their 62" wide cabin to pass through the air almost as efficiently as the Cirrus's 49" wide cabin. That would take quite the reduction in Cd.
    Oh no Bob, you forgot about the "Area Ruling" Raptor has...
    Ross Farnham
    Racetech Inc.
    16 years and 428.6 hours on Subaru Turbo powered RV6A
    "The world is changed by your example, not by your opinion" Paulo Coelho
    http://www.sdsefi.com/aircraft.html




  7. Likes BoKu, flyboy2160 liked this post
  8. #455
    Registered User Toobuilder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Mojave, Ca
    Posts
    4,160
    Likes (Given)
    416
    Likes (Received)
    2894

    Re: Raptor Composite Aircraft

    Sorry, this is a " hard fail". There's no sugar coating it. If a design team in my company misses the target weight by this much we are all looking for new jobs the next day.

    As for admiring the Raptor team for "going for it" - not sure I agree. It's a bit like telling a kid that jumping off the roof with an umbrella won't work, and after explaining the technical reasons why, he tries it anyway. That stubborn trait is sometimes admired in a child, but adults are supposed to know better.

    Best thing at this point is to relegate the structure to ground based destructive testing only. Maybe they will learn about other surprises in the process. After that, start over on the new design.

    I suspect though, that this overweight condition is not viewed as a big deal and they will try fly it anyway. I hope the pilot survives.

  9. Likes flyboy2160, Marc Zeitlin, Topaz, wsimpso1 liked this post
  10. #456
    Registered User BoKu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Douglas Flat, CA
    Posts
    2,113
    Likes (Given)
    5081
    Likes (Received)
    2563

    Re: Raptor Composite Aircraft

    Quote Originally Posted by Toobuilder View Post
    ...Best thing at this point is to relegate the structure to ground based destructive testing only. Maybe they will learn about other surprises in the process. After that, start over on the new design...
    I think that this is a golden opportunity to slap on an IO-550 or whatever is on the SR22 and prove out the structure and aerodynamics with the same installed power as its nemesis. They'd get into the air, get a bunch of impressive vid for their YT followers, collect a bunch of useful data, and give the powerplant team a chance to catch up in a test cell. Everybody wins!
    Bob Kuykendall
    HP-24 Kit Sailplane
    HP-24 Kit Sailplane Facebook Page
    http://www.hpaircraft.com/hp-24
    EAA Technical Counselor
    "Homebuilt aviation is not for folks
    who won't try stuff at home."

  11. Likes BJC, Topaz, canardlover liked this post
  12. #457
    Registered User rv6ejguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    3,325
    Likes (Given)
    2375
    Likes (Received)
    2351

    Re: Raptor Composite Aircraft

    Quote Originally Posted by Toobuilder View Post
    Sorry, this is a " hard fail". There's no sugar coating it. If a design team in my company misses the target weight by this much we are all looking for new jobs the next day.

    As for admiring the Raptor team for "going for it" - not sure I agree. It's a bit like telling a kid that jumping off the roof with an umbrella won't work, and after explaining the technical reasons why, he tries it anyway. That stubborn trait is sometimes admired in a child, but adults are supposed to know better.

    Best thing at this point is to relegate the structure to ground based destructive testing only. Maybe they will learn about other surprises in the process. After that, start over on the new design.

    I suspect though, that this overweight condition is not viewed as a big deal and they will try fly it anyway. I hope the pilot survives.
    I think the team efforts still deserve recognition given that there are so many paper (or should I say CAD) airplanes these days with promises of superiority yet will never even get built, let alone fly.

    What has been built here, despite being grossly overweight is an accomplishment to me at least. Thousands of hours went into it so far. I respect those who put all those hours into getting it built to this stage and it's been fascinating to watch it take shape over the years. No, Raptor won't change the face of aviation any time soon with 230 KTAS cruise speeds on 7GPH, 300 knot top speeds or $130,000 price tags but lots was learned in building it so I suspect not all wasted. For want of some professional aero, structural and propulsion consultancy, it could have been a little closer to the targets at least with far less time spent.
    Ross Farnham
    Racetech Inc.
    16 years and 428.6 hours on Subaru Turbo powered RV6A
    "The world is changed by your example, not by your opinion" Paulo Coelho
    http://www.sdsefi.com/aircraft.html




  13. Likes BoKu, canardlover liked this post
  14. #458
    Moderator Topaz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Orange County, California
    Posts
    14,134
    Likes (Given)
    9102
    Likes (Received)
    5226

    Re: Raptor Composite Aircraft

    Quote Originally Posted by BoKu View Post
    I think that this is a golden opportunity to slap on an IO-550 or whatever is on the SR22 and prove out the structure and aerodynamics with the same installed power as its nemesis. They'd get into the air, get a bunch of impressive vid for their YT followers, collect a bunch of useful data, and give the powerplant team a chance to catch up in a test cell. Everybody wins!
    +1 on this. Provided there aren't CG problems associated with the grossly-overweight structure, the prototype can at least provide flight-test experience on the rest of the design. Useful load will be radically reduced, but the air counts no difference between a lightly loaded overweight airplane or a fully-loaded airplane that came in at the design weight: flight weight is flight weight. A prototype just has to be able to carry a test pilot and enough fuel to complete a reasonable test card. Since there are definite questions on the flight controls and performance, it would be a shame to throw away the opportunity to get some of those questions answered. Even crow-hops ought to begin to show the adequacy and function of the flight controls and, given the rest of the issues here, crow-hops are all I'd be doing for the first dozen flight attempts or so.

    I'm not sure what I'd do about the engine. Adding more power to the airframe demonstrates nothing, so I guess I'd be looking for a certified engine in the same power class as the diesel, and use that. Then bench-test the heck out of the diesel itself. I don't think putting them together from the beginning, in a project with as many question marks as this one, is really a terribly wise idea.

    Quote Originally Posted by Toobuilder View Post
    ... Best thing at this point is to relegate the structure to ground based destructive testing only....
    Given the level of structural redesign they're facing to get 26% of the weight out of this airframe, would testing this structure really inform much of anything? Seems to me that their "next" airframe is going to have to be "different enough" to render any testing with this structure relatively moot.
    "If you have built castles in the air, your work need not be lost; that is where they should be. Now put the foundations under them." - Henry David Thoreau

    Design Project: Conceptual Design of an "Inexpensive" Single-Seat Motorglider
    Discussion Thread for the Project: Discussion: Conceptual Design of an "Inexpensive" Single-Seat Motorglider

  15. Likes BoKu, canardlover, rv6ejguy liked this post
  16. #459
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Location
    Tehachapi, CA
    Posts
    346
    Likes (Given)
    54
    Likes (Received)
    456

    Re: Raptor Composite Aircraft

    Quote Originally Posted by Toobuilder View Post
    Sorry, this is a " hard fail"... If a design team in my company misses the target weight by this much we are all looking for new jobs the next day.
    A design team in your company could never miss the target by that much, because they would have known after 25% of the parts were built what the weight trend was and after 50% of the parts were built and the assembly was started, whether that trend was continuing. And a weight rollup in CAD would have also shown the trends. At that point, a plan would have been put together to deal with the projected weight issues. If, magically, an airplane was built with no-one having any clue what the weight was going to be, the whole management team would be walked out the door at the same time as the design team. This CAN'T happen at a real aircraft company.

    Quote Originally Posted by Toobuilder View Post
    As for admiring the Raptor team for "going for it" - not sure I agree. It's a bit like telling a kid that jumping off the roof with an umbrella won't work, and after explaining the technical reasons why, he tries it anyway. That stubborn trait is sometimes admired in a child, but adults are supposed to know better.
    Oh my Cthulhu, THIS.

    Quote Originally Posted by Toobuilder View Post
    I suspect though, that this overweight condition is not viewed as a big deal and they will try fly it anyway. I hope the pilot survives.
    I was amazed at the sanguinity Peter exhibited after missing the weight target by over 600 lb. (although in the video, he indicated it was only a 200 lb. miss, at least showing that he had SOME idea of the extra weight the thing has amassed). But there will be another 100 lb. of primer, paint, misc. crap on the plane before it's done. So there won't even be room for the pilot with full fuel.

    Ignoring the comments on the videos from people who obviously have no clue how an airplane is actually designed and built, if you wanted to do everything wrong about designing and building an airplane, you couldn't find a better example. Yeah, it's easy to pile on now, but I've been saying this since the website was revealed years ago. Sadly, examples of this are widespread - you only have to look at Cobalt, Synergy, Raptor, etc., etc. for folks that are going to revolutionize flight, but don't actually know what they're doing.

  17. Likes Topaz, canardlover, rv6ejguy, flyboy2160 liked this post
  18. #460
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Location
    Tehachapi, CA
    Posts
    346
    Likes (Given)
    54
    Likes (Received)
    456

    Re: Raptor Composite Aircraft

    Quote Originally Posted by rv6ejguy View Post
    I think the team efforts still deserve recognition ...
    There is no doubt that the build crew deserves a ton of credit for their hard work and determination. Even when you're getting paid, working hard and accomplishing the work goals is meaningful. BUT...

    Quote Originally Posted by rv6ejguy View Post
    ... lots was learned in building it so I suspect not all wasted...
    While Peter may (or may not, give the evidence) have actually learned something from this process (and his investors may or may not actually learn a tough lesson here as well - strangely, they rarely seem to do so, in general), I surmise that you're implying that the greater aerospace community has learned "lots" through this process. I'd be very interested in hearing what it is, exactly, you think was learned that was not already known by people who do this stuff for a living (as opposed to dilettantes).

  19. Likes flyboy2160 liked this post
  20. #461
    Registered User BoKu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Douglas Flat, CA
    Posts
    2,113
    Likes (Given)
    5081
    Likes (Received)
    2563

    Re: Raptor Composite Aircraft

    Quote Originally Posted by Topaz View Post
    ...I'm not sure what I'd do about the engine. Adding more power to the airframe demonstrates nothing, so I guess I'd be looking for a certified engine in the same power class as the diesel, and use that. Then bench-test the heck out of the diesel itself. I don't think putting them together from the beginning, in a project with as many question marks as this one, is really a terribly wise idea...
    To abuse the famous Pride and Prejudice quote, "It is a truth universally acknowledged, that an airframe in possession of little service history, must be in want of a proven powerplant."

    Also, I amend my earlier suggestion: I think they should flip the airframe over and sandbag the wings and foreplanes to 4g or so to validate the deflection estimates from their SolidWorks models. Then they should slap on an IO-550 and try it out.

    --Bob K.
    Bob Kuykendall
    HP-24 Kit Sailplane
    HP-24 Kit Sailplane Facebook Page
    http://www.hpaircraft.com/hp-24
    EAA Technical Counselor
    "Homebuilt aviation is not for folks
    who won't try stuff at home."

  21. Likes canardlover, Topaz, rv6ejguy liked this post
  22. #462
    Registered User Toobuilder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Mojave, Ca
    Posts
    4,160
    Likes (Given)
    416
    Likes (Received)
    2894

    Re: Raptor Composite Aircraft

    Random responses to several from above:

    Testing the existing structure to destruction will not validate the "next" design in any meaningful way, but it might just scare the design team into doing a bit more homework next time.

    I firmly believe "crow hops" are killers. The ground is what hurts you- get away from it as fast as possible. Remember the last flying car "high speed taxi" video? 'nuf said.

    Flight testing this structure with it's unique distribution of mass is not going to be representative of a "production" vehicle loaded up with sand bags to the same weight. Not sure the risk/reward benefit is even close on this one. If they missed the weight by this much, what else is wrong? Sorry, this is an expensive ground test article now.

  23. #463
    Moderator Topaz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Orange County, California
    Posts
    14,134
    Likes (Given)
    9102
    Likes (Received)
    5226

    Re: Raptor Composite Aircraft

    Quote Originally Posted by Toobuilder View Post
    Random responses to several from above:

    Testing the existing structure to destruction will not validate the "next" design in any meaningful way, but it might just scare the design team into doing a bit more homework next time.

    I firmly believe "crow hops" are killers. The ground is what hurts you- get away from it as fast as possible. Remember the last flying car "high speed taxi" video? 'nuf said.

    Flight testing this structure with it's unique distribution of mass is not going to be representative of a "production" vehicle loaded up with sand bags to the same weight. Not sure the risk/reward benefit is even close on this one. If they missed the weight by this much, what else is wrong? Sorry, this is an expensive ground test article now.
    Fair enough. You definitely have more experience at this than I do.
    "If you have built castles in the air, your work need not be lost; that is where they should be. Now put the foundations under them." - Henry David Thoreau

    Design Project: Conceptual Design of an "Inexpensive" Single-Seat Motorglider
    Discussion Thread for the Project: Discussion: Conceptual Design of an "Inexpensive" Single-Seat Motorglider

  24. #464
    Registered User BoKu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Douglas Flat, CA
    Posts
    2,113
    Likes (Given)
    5081
    Likes (Received)
    2563

    Re: Raptor Composite Aircraft

    Quote Originally Posted by Toobuilder View Post
    ...Flight testing this structure with it's unique distribution of mass is not going to be representative of a "production" vehicle loaded up with sand bags to the same weight...
    I'd want to see an authoritative citation for that one. I'm pretty sure that if the mass is about right and the CG is right, it will return valuable data.

    Quote Originally Posted by Toobuilder View Post
    ...Not sure the risk/reward benefit is even close on this one. If they missed the weight by this much, what else is wrong?...
    The risk/reward thing is an open question. Most risks can be mitigated with a sensible approach. As for the mass, it's a good bet that most of it is in the engine installation, and a lot of the rest results in greater stiffness and strength than intended, not less. Hence my suggestion that they do a static test to evaluate strength and stiffness to limit load.

    Quote Originally Posted by Toobuilder View Post
    ...Sorry, this is an expensive ground test article now.
    I respect your right to an opinion, but I disagree. I think that a lot of their airframe could be salvaged and could return a lot of valuable data with only a modest investment in reconfiguration.

    --Bob K.
    Bob Kuykendall
    HP-24 Kit Sailplane
    HP-24 Kit Sailplane Facebook Page
    http://www.hpaircraft.com/hp-24
    EAA Technical Counselor
    "Homebuilt aviation is not for folks
    who won't try stuff at home."

  25. Likes rv6ejguy, Topaz, canardlover liked this post
  26. #465
    Registered User rv6ejguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    3,325
    Likes (Given)
    2375
    Likes (Received)
    2351

    Re: Raptor Composite Aircraft

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc Zeitlin View Post
    There is no doubt that the build crew deserves a ton of credit for their hard work and determination. Even when you're getting paid, working hard and accomplishing the work goals is meaningful. BUT...

    While Peter may (or may not, give the evidence) have actually learned something from this process (and his investors may or may not actually learn a tough lesson here as well - strangely, they rarely seem to do so, in general), I surmise that you're implying that the greater aerospace community has learned "lots" through this process. I'd be very interested in hearing what it is, exactly, you think was learned that was not already known by people who do this stuff for a living (as opposed to dilettantes).
    No, I was mainly thinking of young Devon (SP?) who has thousands of hours working on Raptor. He's learned a ton which will be useful on the next project he's involved with. Jeff probably added some more to his already very extensive composite knowledge. Peter will forge on for a while I believe until he faces the cold, hard facts that he was in way over his head on this in many aspects. He learned the hard way and will now be facing the music from the ones who "told him so". He may have more respect now for the MEs and AEs he was so quick to dismiss as being uninspired before he started on Raptor.

    Once again, we see it's better to be quiet and humble, build out of public view and make no performance claims before flying a new design. There is nothing to live up to and nothing to apologize for if if doesn't turn out as planned. I don't understand why so many newb designers enjoy eating crow.
    Last edited by rv6ejguy; March 6th, 2019 at 06:23 PM.
    Ross Farnham
    Racetech Inc.
    16 years and 428.6 hours on Subaru Turbo powered RV6A
    "The world is changed by your example, not by your opinion" Paulo Coelho
    http://www.sdsefi.com/aircraft.html




  27. Likes BoKu, canardlover liked this post

Similar Threads

  1. Composite Aircraft Technology Glascat
    By tvly in forum General Experimental Aviation Questions
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: December 1st, 2015, 07:50 PM
  2. Raptor F-15 Replica
    By Starman in forum Warbirds / Warbird Replicas
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: April 16th, 2012, 07:07 PM
  3. F-22 Raptor: Up Close and Personal
    By Voyeurger in forum Hangar Flying
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: January 31st, 2011, 02:09 PM
  4. Painting Composite Aircraft
    By Joe Spirit Walker in forum Composites
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: December 21st, 2010, 03:01 PM
  5. Radial Rocket Composite Aircraft
    By Dudewanarace in forum For Sale / Wanted
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: September 24th, 2010, 11:18 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •