10/23 Raptor Video

[PPLOnly]

This would be an ideal moment for the project to slip quietly into history. No-one was harmed (financial investors aside!), and no-one needs to be.

Got to know when to fold them so you can live on to build another day. The quiet of his channel makes me think he’s sat around and pondered the myriad of big issues he has that require large redesigns and why he’s flight testing now in full knowledge of those changes.

 

[TarDevil]

He's waiting for an engine

 

[Geraldc]

He's waiting for an engine

Supplier probably saw what happened to the last one.

 

[flywheel1935]

Maybe, just maybe, he shipped out lock ,stock and barrel to CA ????
Any HBA guys nearby ?

 

[rv6ejguy]

Peter doesn't give up easily and he's got too much of his life wrapped up in this project to quit now. He might not have great skills for aircraft and systems design but few people possess his tenacity in the face of repeated setbacks.

 

[Marc Zeitlin]

... few people possess his tenacity in the face of repeated setbacks.

This will be somewhat of a diversion from the actual aircraft discussion, but it vaguely applies.

Steven Levitt (he of "Freakonomics" fame) has stated numerous times that quitting can be substantially more beneficial than persisting in the face of failure. Obviously not all the time - witness how successful the cold fusion folks have been over the past 60 years by persisting (that's a joke, son). But sometimes, it's better to quit than to persist.

Now, with respect to tenacity, there was a guy who bought a heavily modified COZY (modified to be a twin, and have a custom fiberglass/carbon spar and wings) against all recommendations NOT to buy it. And then he spend the next few years, driving two hours each way from his apartment in Manhattan to the airport out on Long Island, to work on the plane, replacing the spar and wings, removing the twin engines and installing an O-540, and installing a forward hinged canopy. At every stage of his work, he was dissuaded from moving forward due to his lack of knowledge and skill, but everyone that talked to him (and I spent a LOT of time trading email with him, trying to keep him on a safe track) tried to help him be safe. He would listen, nod his head as if he understood all the good advice he was getting (and he did get good advice, not just from me) and then almost always do the opposite of what he was told.

Eventually, he got the plane flying, and although he was told (by me) not to do ANY stall testing until we figured out the CG questions the plane still had, and until he installed the leading edge vortilons that you see on most canard aircraft, in July, 2014, he managed to get the plane into a deep stall over the Long Island sound. That would have been OK - all other right side up deep stalls in canards have been survivable, but he was an aerobatic pilot, was wearing a parachute, and pulled the pull-pin on the canopy hinge ejection mechanism. The canopy came backwards and he died where he sat from blunt force trauma - not from the impact with the sound or from drowning.

In this case, his tenacity (and he was the most tenacious guy - and a NICE guy that I ever met), in the face of good advice to the contrary, killed him. It was very sad for the canard community.

Long story - maybe means something in context...

 

[rv6ejguy]

I know tenacious people who soldier on over 20+ year builds but most of that work involves slow but forward progress whereas Peter has had hundreds of setbacks and kept on going, I have to admire that gumption, misdirected or not. Of course, he doesn't know what he doesn't know (lots) and I also think he doesn't appreciate or take to heart the failures and the close calls he's had on this project and the risk to himself. I hope he ends up in one piece at the end of this.

Big ego and DK for sure here but he's as much as admitted now that this design won't come anywhere close to his initial projections so, if not the world beating design he's promulgated for 8 years, why continue? I suppose the end game for him is to see it in production as that was his big vision.

 

[BBerson]

Sorry, I don't see how tenacity caused the canopy accident. I watched a 9000 hour commercial pilot kill himself after getting his ailerons reversed. I don't know the cure for these unplanned events.
Finishing things is generally thought to be applauded. In the Raptor case he may now have learned by experience that sometimes it should not be finished.

 

[Malish]

He's waiting for an engine

It's will be good time to make all necessary changes to airframe for proper cooling. Also first install new power plant back on test stand and run it for 40 hrs. before putting it back on aircraft.

 

[berridos]

looking at the ducting of the upper radiator inlet scoop, it seems like it is ducted up to a small radiator (no plenum) and after the rad, just spills the air into the engine cowl, disregarding compleltly an outlet scoop and hoping the prop at the root creates suction in the whole engine compartment . Pretty casual setup. For sure no straight airflow to the outlet as the engine is in the way.
A suboptimal solution would be make a continous scoop separated from the engine compartment and ranging from the current inlet location straight to the back without merging into the engine compartment, following the spine of the beast. Maybe worth to try and could be aestetically pleasing..

 

[Rataplan]

I hope he will use this time to check the whole plane. Every cotter pin, bolt, nut, cable, lamination, balance weights etc etc. Not something related to the Raptor itself but something I should do with any from scratch design and first build.

 

[Rataplan]

Peter doesn't give up easily and he's got too much of his life wrapped up in this project to quit now. He might not have great skills for aircraft and systems design but few people possess his tenacity in the face of repeated setbacks.

Sure he possess tenacity but sometimes its like using a can of green paint to paint something red and trying over and over instead trowing the green paint away and buy red paint

 

[BBerson]

Returning to Raptor...
I have the latest FLYING with number 8000 Cirrus on the cover. For PM and his investors to compete with Cirrus they should probably be following the evolution of the Cirrus. This limited edition Cirrus weighs 2495 pounds and 3600 gross. Seats five or 92 gallons of fuel but not both, of course. Max operating altitude 25,000 feet (not pressurized).
Max cruise 213 ktas at FL 250. Price $1,197,400.
It does seem like there might be a kit built market in this category.

 

[flywheel1935]

" Just when you thought it was safe to get back in the water"
HEEEEEEEEEEE'S BACK

 

[Dana]

Moderator note: I just deleted a bunch of posts that were off topic and/or abusive, as well as some OK posts that referred to the abusive posts. Please keep it on topic and friendly, we don't want to have to shut down another thread.

 

[BBerson]

I didn't hear anything about installing the A/C pump in the video.
Comments said the engine has 45k miles.

 

[Voidhawk9]

You missed it, he did mount the A/C.

 

[Pilot Rick]

New video up! He is installing an engine with 45k miles on it. I was thinking.... if he intends to build thousands of raptor kit planes why is he using this engine? It's no longer in production so how will he obtain the engines for his plane?

 

[TarDevil]

I can't imagine installing an engine on an airplane without at least a partial teardown inspection. I know this point has been stated previously but blind faith has no place in aviation.

 

[wsimpso1]

Sorry, I don't see how tenacity caused the canopy accident. I watched a 9000 hour commercial pilot kill himself after getting his ailerons reversed. I don't know the cure for these unplanned events.
Finishing things is generally thought to be applauded. In the Raptor case he may now have learned by experience that sometimes it should not be finished.

Marc's post seems to be an object lesson in the following:

• Tenacity combined with good judgement and execution can give good results eventually;
• Tenacity with poor judgement and/or execution still give poor results.

Specifically, the subject Cozy was an immense amount of work when a Cozy could have been bought close to what he wanted, and flown safely. Instead, the new owner implemented a canopy and release combo that is generally known to be a fatal flaw and then test flew the airplane in a configuration known to be problematic. With the also known fix used in sailplanes, the canopy would have been restrained from sliding back through the occupants and most likely would have swung up and back, allowing egress.

In addition, a review of history of Cozy and other Canard aircraft flight and accident histories would have shown that there was no need to abandon the airplane. Using that insight, he would have been well served to have deep stall as a possible circumstance in any testing, and would have been followed on his test cards with procedure:

• Transmit a Mayday with location and expectation that the airplane would be floating right side up;
• Secure the engine and electrics;
• Tighten the belts and put helmet on headrest.

Then he and the airplane would have been recovered intact and reusable.

Tenacity with a poor plan is still a bad thing.