Raptor Composite Aircraft

Homebuilt Aircraft & Kit Plane Forum

Help Support Homebuilt Aircraft & Kit Plane Forum:

Not open for further replies.


Well-Known Member
Jul 15, 2014
North Carolina
We almost never know the exact power on conversions, but roll rate, stall speed and best glide speed, sink rate in a turn and more can be looked at. If the prop diameter and pitch are entered X-Plane will estimate power.
We don't know the pitch either. Peter tweaks it often to maximise acceleration.
I estimated hp from the acceleration some months back. It was a lot lower than Peter estimates.


Well-Known Member
Jul 7, 2009
Rotterdam, Netherlands
Kind of reminds me of the Extra EA-400 which was built by Walter Extra. Extra EA-400 - Wikipedia

It also was a carbon fiber 'miracle' plane that went way overweight and ended up being 3350# empty with only a 350HP TSIO550L to push it along. A similar spec Cessna P210N (I have one) is around 1000# lighter. Walter put in a water cooled engine in order to try and gain some hp to push the tank along however this engine was finicky and caused many issues. He gave up and redeveloped the airframe for a turboprop (EA-500). However by then he was out of money and Extra went bankrupt.
Carbon can certainly be a lot lighter than a conventional alu airframe if done right. The Raptor has thicker laminates than I've ever seen in the biggest turboprops.

Two things massively hindered the EA400; an engine system that's a few hundred pounds heavier than yours and very conservative KD factors for composites, especially in that era. While your airframe is certified to fail above 150% limit load (say 6G's @ 4G limit load), many composite airframes have to demonstrate no failure until up to 3 times limit load. LBA allowable for certified UD CFRP for example is 600 MPa with 350 MPa at limit load. Seen enough test articles fail at close to or over 1000 MPa...

In light aircraft the differences are bigger since much of the structure is driven by buckling. A carbon panel will certainly be less than half the weight than an alu one.

Victor Bravo

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Jul 30, 2014
KWHP, Los Angeles CA, USA
I've had the privilege to meet and even fly with several people who have graduated USAF or USN TPS, and have also had the privilege to know people who were qualified as civilian test pilots but didn't graduate a military TPS.

One of the non-graduate guys I have flown with is just about the most highly experienced and respected test guy for small civilian airplanes, the ones that are essentially irrelevant to the military but far more relevant to GA.

Is a graduate of the National Test Pilots School in Mojave not qualified to test a light GA airplane, because the school is civilian?

Another acquaintance of mine is an AF FTE, but not a TPS graduate. He teaches the spins and spin testing to the EDW TPS students in gliders.

How many light general aviation airplanes are relevant to the USAF and US Navy, to the point that they do flight test on them?

Also... what specifically would the exact, correct, 100% relevant education and experience be, to perform flight test a light GA canard aircraft with a screwy piston engine and powertrain...

- AF TPS graduate who was in the first two-ship F-4 Wild Weasel mission over Baghdad, on the very first night in 1991? (I know him personally, really nice guy)
- AF TPS graduate who did the first flight on Have Blue? (no idea who that was)
- Non-TPS civilian with most of his experience in <3000 pound GA

I don't know Elliot personally very well, met him once to give him a propeller in a coffee shop. Before anyone calls him or anyone else a wanna-be, I think that his qualifications should be compared side by side with other civilian test pilots, and then cross-reference against the aircraft being tested. If Elliot starts loudly boasting about his skills and qualifications to flight test the F-22, then all the TPS graduates can stand up and call him a wannabe.

But 90% of the handful of test pilots I've met personally would be the very last ones to bad-mouth anyone, look down their nose at anyone, etc. In my personal experience speaking with them, the bigger and more spectacular their resume is, the smaller their ego.


Well-Known Member
Aug 28, 2015
I'm going to love to see how he is going to haul this 12' wide vehicle without removing that 1,000 lbs engine

Jay Kempf

Curmudgeon in Training (CIT)
Lifetime Supporter
Apr 13, 2009
Warren, VT USA
What's the point of this?
Huge runway on flat land with ocean all around. They built and tested some NASA stuff here and the F-14 and others. Flat bed about $1500 from Georgia.

There is also a huge runway in Arkansas City, KS. GE owns or leases it. Flat as a pancake in all directions. No civilization anywhere around. Ex SAC base.

Why trifle with a little more runway with shopping malls all around.

Splitting hairs or solve the problem. Mohave is good too. Once the thing passes muster he can get a ferry permit to fly it back after so many hours of flight time.


Well-Known Member
Nov 12, 2011
Ok so I have landed on post 5000.
From the previous 5000 odd posts what I have learnt is that there are some benefits from what Peter has done.
My choice would be a Velocity xl with the Audi motor Peter is using BUT with a proper redrive
like they are sucessfully putting on Chev LS motors and a properly set up Turbo.
Where I live Diesel is a third the price of 100ll so the Audi would be cheap(ish ) to run.
Last edited:
Not open for further replies.