10/23 Raptor Video

Homebuilt Aircraft & Kit Plane Forum

Help Support Homebuilt Aircraft & Kit Plane Forum:

Status
Not open for further replies.

Deuelly

Well-Known Member
Log Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2012
Messages
315
Location
Marshall, MN
He’s pretending he’s a manufacturer, that’s like saying the G650 crash hurt our community. If he was E-AB I’d agree.
Why do people keep thinking Peter's choices can't effect us. I seem to remember one guy, in one P-40, disobeying one line of his operating limitations recently. It changed how all training, in all experimentals, is handled. The Raptor project is very public. Peter's actions could easily effect any of us.

Brandon
 

BoKu

Pundit
HBA Supporter
Joined
Aug 15, 2013
Messages
2,960
Location
Western US
There is barely enough market for Velocity (full kit and owner assistence), AeroCanard (partial kit), and Cozy MkIV (plans), then new Raptor would try to take some of each...
True enough. But let's not forget that Peter was aiming at a whole 'nother pie altogether. If he had actually produced a pressurized canard capable of getting well into the flight levels and staying there for any reasonable duration, the TAS/IAS ratio would have been a substantial competitive advantage. With that fat cabin it wouldn't have gotten all that close to the claimed 300 kts, but it would still be a rockin' XC machine.

Unfortunately, Peter appears to have underestimated by about an order of magnitude how hard it would be to produce enough power dependably enough to get to 25k ft. He also seems to have underestimated by a similar margin how hard it would be to develop the requisite airframe. But if he had gone with proven powerplant and turbo systems, and concentrated on the airframe problems, he might actually have gotten up there in the time his budget allowed.

Of course, the Lancair IVP and later Evolution pretty much paved that road, with a configuration that allows higher Cl and commensurately lower takeoff and landing speeds besides. But the canard layout offers compelling packaging advantages when it comes to entry and egress, and at expos and air shows that counts for more than you might imagine. Especially among non-pilots and those old enough to have earned the requisite wealth to be in the fast airplane market.
 

rv6ejguy

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Jun 26, 2012
Messages
4,566
Location
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
The reality though is that the price of admission for 300 knots in pressurized comfort (Lancair IV-P) makes this market pretty small. New Raptor kits with real airplane engines are not going to come in at half the price of a used IV-P.

When it comes down to the crunch, few YouTube fanboys will actually be writing $250-$300K checks for Raptor kits. Well heeled pilots with IFR ratings would be the actual customers if Raptor could match IV-P performance- which it never will.

You don't need a pressurized plane to bump along at 160-180 knots at 8-12,000 feet.

I see a very limited market for what Raptor is likely to deliver even after a good re-design.
 

Topaz

Super Moderator
Staff member
Log Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2005
Messages
14,752
Location
Orange County, California
The reality though is that the price of admission for 300 knots in pressurized comfort (Lancair IV-P) makes this market pretty small. New Raptor kits with real airplane engines are not going to come in at half the price of a used IV-P.

When it comes down to the crunch, few YouTube fanboys will actually be writing $250-$300K checks for Raptor kits. Well heeled pilots with IFR ratings would be the actual customers if Raptor could match IV-P performance- which it never will.

You don't need a pressurized plane to bump along at 160-180 knots at 8-12,000 feet.

I see a very limited market for what Raptor is likely to deliver even after a good re-design.
He'd have been better to go after a certified market, since he was going after investment capital, where there's at least a chance of broader acceptance. There's a market out there, just not a very big one for an airplane in that class with "EXPERIMENTAL" plastered on the door frame and a couple thousand hours of labor involved before you get the gratification of ownership.

But then, given the result, it's probably better he went the way he did.
 

Victor Bravo

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Jul 30, 2014
Messages
9,704
Location
KWHP, Los Angeles CA, USA
I believe that Dave R. and the Berkut group pivoted towards a UAV sub-contract or something as an unmanned sensor platform. If the Raptor gets "fixed" and can actually operate on Diesel fuel, then there may be some DOD or intelligence gathering niche market for it to haul around a sensor package that is too bulky for the other EZ derivatives. No idea whatsoever if this is even remotely feasible, but given that the cabin volume is higher than other EZ's... it's a potential move to try and demonstrate some "feature differentiator" for an investor to get behind.
 

rv6ejguy

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Jun 26, 2012
Messages
4,566
Location
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
I believe that Dave R. and the Berkut group pivoted towards a UAV sub-contract or something as an unmanned sensor platform. If the Raptor gets "fixed" and can actually operate on Diesel fuel, then there may be some DOD or intelligence gathering niche market for it to haul around a sensor package that is too bulky for the other EZ derivatives. No idea whatsoever if this is even remotely feasible, but given that the cabin volume is higher than other EZ's... it's a potential move to try and demonstrate some "feature differentiator" for an investor to get behind.
Possible with a CD-300 but not with the Audi setup.
 

Rataplan

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2021
Messages
202
I believe that Dave R. and the Berkut group pivoted towards a UAV sub-contract or something as an unmanned sensor platform. If the Raptor gets "fixed" and can actually operate on Diesel fuel, then there may be some DOD or intelligence gathering niche market for it to haul around a sensor package that is too bulky for the other EZ derivatives. No idea whatsoever if this is even remotely feasible, but given that the cabin volume is higher than other EZ's... it's a potential move to try and demonstrate some "feature differentiator" for an investor to get behind.
its to heavy and not aerodynamic enough for high payload equipment weapons etc etc .
 

MaydayMayday

Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2020
Messages
18
>I don't knock Peter for his attempt at accomplishments. He might not be the best at anything but he has managed to accomplish far more than 99% of the people on here ever claimed he would.

Not trying to sound snarky...but here is a good question...

How many people on this forum have taken a clean sheet of paper and got it flying...without any previous experience in the industry?

It was indeed a clean sheet. The Raptor is certainly NOT a copy of the Velocity. Well it is as much as the Boeing 707 is a copy of the DC-8. They look similar but they are indeed completely different.

Did PM hire people to do a great deal of the labor? Yes for sure.

Did PM have experts help him in the design and construction? Yes for sure.

Did PM NOT listen to the experts? Yes for sure. At least he did not listen to a lot of them.

I have some experience with the man and I can say that I am not a fan. I am not surprised that there were no corks popping from the adoring crowd.

I am however amazed that a computer guy BUILT AN AIRPLANE...FROM SCRATCH...and HE FLEW IT...and we all got to watch it fly.

I also really do wish the investors will hire a bunch of experts...ones who work together as a professionally focused team...and fix it and then we could see a new unpressurized, reasonable weight, diesel direct drive horizontally opposed air cooled airplane kit be made in the USA and it have a fast builder assist program and get some new airplane choices out there.

Ok...start pounding on me...but the truth is...he did something that I...and 99.5 percent of the people who are pounding on him could NOT do...he BUILT AN AIRPLANE...FROM SCRATCH...and HE FLEW IT
 

Deuelly

Well-Known Member
Log Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2012
Messages
315
Location
Marshall, MN
>I don't knock Peter for his attempt at accomplishments. He might not be the best at anything but he has managed to accomplish far more than 99% of the people on here ever claimed he would.

Not trying to sound snarky...but here is a good question...

How many people on this forum have taken a clean sheet of paper and got it flying...without any previous experience in the industry?

It was indeed a clean sheet. The Raptor is certainly NOT a copy of the Velocity. Well it is as much as the Boeing 707 is a copy of the DC-8. They look similar but they are indeed completely different.

Did PM hire people to do a great deal of the labor? Yes for sure.

Did PM have experts help him in the design and construction? Yes for sure.

Did PM NOT listen to the experts? Yes for sure. At least he did not listen to a lot of them.

I have some experience with the man and I can say that I am not a fan. I am not surprised that there were no corks popping from the adoring crowd.

I am however amazed that a computer guy BUILT AN AIRPLANE...FROM SCRATCH...and HE FLEW IT...and we all got to watch it fly.

I also really do wish the investors will hire a bunch of experts...ones who work together as a professionally focused team...and fix it and then we could see a new unpressurized, reasonable weight, diesel direct drive horizontally opposed air cooled airplane kit be made in the USA and it have a fast builder assist program and get some new airplane choices out there.

Ok...start pounding on me...but the truth is...he did something that I...and 99.5 percent of the people who are pounding on him could NOT do...he BUILT AN AIRPLANE...FROM SCRATCH...and HE FLEW IT
My day job is building airplanes. I get paid to do it. That makes it very easy. Most people on this forum don't build planes they've designed because providing and surviving is priority one. If they were willing to take other peoples money and risk it on foolish endeavors then more of their planes would be built. Most my plane designs are pretty foolish but they're fun. Any 15 year old with a rough drawing of a plane on toilet paper could could build a plane using other people's money. Peter used other people's money to make a plane barely fly. That shows amazing......use of other people's money?

Brandon
 
Last edited:

Kyle Boatright

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Nov 11, 2012
Messages
1,268
Location
Marietta, GA
>I don't knock Peter for his attempt at accomplishments. He might not be the best at anything but he has managed to accomplish far more than 99% of the people on here ever claimed he would.

Not trying to sound snarky...but here is a good question...

How many people on this forum have taken a clean sheet of paper and got it flying
You forgot to mention that he spent millions in Other People's Money (OPM) in this endeavor. If he'd done it on his own nickel, I'd have a LOT more (patience, understanding, compassion, empathy, etc) for Peter and his project.
 

rv6ejguy

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Jun 26, 2012
Messages
4,566
Location
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Ok...start pounding on me...but the truth is...he did something that I...and 99.5 percent of the people who are pounding on him could NOT do...he BUILT AN AIRPLANE...FROM SCRATCH...and HE FLEW IT
We applauded Peter's impressive perseverance in designing, building and flying Raptor but that's where the admiration ends. He took millions of dollars setting out to build a best in class, turbocharged, pressurized, 4-5 place kit airplane for production and delivered a turd prototype which meets ZERO of his ridiculous performance predictions and fails to perform anywhere close to a 1970 Piper Arrow in fact. Not an impressive result for a couple mil spent...

If it's ever sorted, it will perform no better than a Velocity XLT, which has been available for years now and it will likely cost more too once all the extra development costs are added to the kit price and the certified engine to power it.
 

Kiwi303

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2015
Messages
418
Location
En Zed. Aka The Shire.
Give 99.5% of the people pounding on him $2 mil and we'll see what they can do.
I wouldn't say I've been pounding on him, but I'll step up and take that money and that challenge. More, I'd give 2 years to first flight.

It won't be an uniobtanium E-Engine with Dilithium crystal storage and 40 vertical fans with 90* rotation giving supersonic cruise like the latest CGI vaporware however.

Just another boring tractor layout like the majority of things out there.
 

AdrianS

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2014
Messages
736
Location
Australia
Assuming 2 wings, tailplane, undercarriage, fuse, cockpit, engine, and electrics - that's 8 major systems.

So 8 HBA members get picked out of a hat, and each gets 1/4 million to design their bit - which is also randomly chosen.

What could possibly go wrong?
 

TarDevil

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2010
Messages
1,015
Location
Coastal North Carolina/USA
Wow...very predictable response
You're vomiting out tired, worn out fan-boy cliches to a population of highly experienced and quite accomplished aircraft homebuilders. So, **** right the responses were predictable.

Has anyone else here built an airplane that meets the criteria and performance specs Peter detailed for Raptor?

No.

It's a waste of time and two million dollars.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top