Defend Raptor

Homebuilt Aircraft & Kit Plane Forum

Help Support Homebuilt Aircraft & Kit Plane Forum:

Victor Bravo

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2014
Messages
10,066
Location
KWHP, Los Angeles CA, USA
I read a story many years ago about a guy who received a $100 speeding ticket in the mail, along with a photo of his car and the radar speed readout.
The Mr Wiseacre mailed back a photo of $100.
The court replied, mailing him a photo of a set of handcuffs.
Mr Wiseacre got the message.
Funny part is that the photo tickets were (correctly) ruled unconstitutional, and un-enforceable. So you have a legal right to not even respond when you get a letter demanding money, and they can't legally charge you with "failure to appear" because you never signed any promise to appear. A rare and very delicious treat in the world of dealing with the traffic courts.
 

speedracer

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2020
Messages
252
Funny part is that the photo tickets were (correctly) ruled unconstitutional, and un-enforceable. So you have a legal right to not even respond when you get a letter demanding money, and they can't legally charge you with "failure to appear" because you never signed any promise to appear. A rare and very delicious treat in the world of dealing with the traffic courts.
Sorry VB, camera tickets are still legal in several states. They include WA, and OR where I do 99% of my driving. At least in WA. they don't go on your driving record. A quick Google search shows 16 states where they're legal.
 

Vigilant1

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2011
Messages
7,156
Location
US
Funny part is that the photo tickets were (correctly) ruled unconstitutional, and un-enforceable.
A cautionary tale: German traffic enforcement officials snapped a picture of my rental car slightly exceeding the posted speed limit in some tiny berg. Avis charged the fine plus a hefty service charge of their own, to the credit card I used to rent the vehicle. I was notified about 2 months after the alleged offense. No effective way to dispute any of it, a done deal.
And don't get me started on the after-hours rental car return at Stuttgart. Avoid if possible, write up every blemish on the car when you pick it up, photograph every piece of glass and body panel when you drop it off, and pray. I'll bet 20 customers have been billed for the same door ding.
 

DaveK

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2007
Messages
382
Location
Northern California
It looks vaguely like an ultralight I toyed with when I was about 20. Except the box wing attached at the bottom and top of the fuselage, had more span, and the engine was mounted between the wings driving a prop.
I can’t see how he can say the wing will be stiffer, the upper wing isn’t attached to the fuselage or braced back to the lower wing. Other than having shorter span I just don’t think that statement is correct.
Also, how about that boundary layer ingestion at his ducted fans!? That alone will make this thing go really fast (sarcasm).
 
Last edited:

proppastie

Well-Known Member
Log Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2012
Messages
5,454
Location
NJ
Someone hacked his computer and switched the original engineering with what got built?
 

HomeBuilt101

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2015
Messages
364
Location
Aguila AZ
The electric fan nacelles are going to create a bunch of drag because the air will be flowing between the fuselage and the nacelle. If he would move both fan nacelles inboard and fair them into the sidewall of the fuselage that that drag interference point would be reduced and the asymmetric thrust issue produced when one engine has failed will be mitigated. The downside is that any FOD/ice/birds sliding along the side of the fuselage will find its way into the fan.

What is the purpose of the lower (downward) winglets? Just seems like an unnecessary source of drag. What would they do that the winglet "box" will not do?
 
Top