Wait, you wanted to hear all objections against it right? If it's too many, simply stop reading after you've found enough.Wow - and that is for me to roll over 80 messages. Any one in particular - the killer one? If you send me to a hangar flying thread from here, I really in doubt of finding something valuable out of those posts. two years of discussion ... really?...
Any single one of those is between bloody optimistic to downright ridiculous (grass strip, 15C, sea level, no wind). I would be surprised if any of those meet them, even on a perfect level flat, concrete strip.As I stated before I am maintaining all the available existing stats from all the sources related to Canard Type Aircraft
Take off distance over 50':
1. Cobalt Co50 = "Short to Medium"
2. Raptor = 335 m
3. Phoenix = 488 m
4. Velocity XL = 396 m
5. Velocity SE = 427 m
6. Cozy MK IV = ?
7. Cozy III = ?
8. Long-EZ = 253 m
9. VariEze = 262 m
10. Jetcruzer = 530 m
The Velocity figure, according to their web site, is takeoff distance, not distance to clear 50'. Even then, I suspect that it is optimistic.Wait, you wanted to hear all objections against it right? If it's too many, simply stop reading after you've found enough.
Any single one of those is between bloody optimistic to downright ridiculous (grass strip, 15C, sea level, no wind). I would be surprised if any of those meet them, even on a perfect level flat, concrete strip.
Sorry...but were we in court I think that it has been entered into evidence and therefore is a fit topic here. I really only wanted the short version, and so far all I have seen is they are not making deliveries.This thread is about the Raptor.
I really don't care - I operate with the data - and the source of that data is authorized - if you want me to share my research with you feel free to ask. Definitely all numbers could be wrong - but we relay on the source of the data.Any single one of those is between bloody optimistic to downright ridiculous (grass strip, 15C, sea level, no wind). I would be surprised if any of those meet them, even on a perfect level flat, concrete strip.
If you apply that attitude to aviation you will be dead within a few years.I really don't care - I operate with the data - and the source of that data is authorized, if you want me to share my research with you feel free to ask.Definitely all numbers could be wrong - but we relay on the source of the data.
There is only one authorisation to that data, your own verification, eg; Get yourself down to an airstrip on windy days and compare for yourself.I really don't care - I operate with the data - and the source of that data is authorized - .
Relative to the task there is the difficulty of utilising flaps on a canard based craft which offer greater advantages to 'normal' wing set up.Canards per se do not have anything to do with not being able to start or stop within 500 m.
Using a canard is no technical limitation if designed right.
I think he's also ignoring a lot of changes in the financial landscape for people in the demographic that could produce private aurcraft owners. One is that the new middle managers come to their jobs with student loan payments that are the size of NYC rents; if you're coughing up $1500/month to the student loan sharks, on $5000/month before-tax dollars, when unemployment is a fickle CEO's bonus downsizing away, and you need a car and a rent without hot-and-cold running rats, pilot license is really low on the priorities.
The only possible chance in my honest opinion would be given if many and more followers would be able to work on that target. I agree the data is very very limited. But was that available at all for the frontrunners like Otto Lilienthal or Write Brothers? The aviation is all about pioneering. Someone is creating a ludicrous flying car, another one is using his musculus to fly from the skyscraper , the third one is adding a propeller to a parachute ... many many examples of foolish ideas at the time became the reality today. Where is the end of this story? There is non. We all doing the same foolish (at a glance) things. Even a "proven design" if presented to a public domain most likely would be rejected : "we have seen that one already, go do your research and bring something better new and unknown"I hope they succeed, but cannot see how they will meet all their planned objectives in therir planned timeframe.
That is another good point. And most likely you are correct. The key combination here is: I WILL BE DEAD. And the only uncertain is the time for that to happen Many people in Aviation are killed "in line of duties" Experienced and newbies, Engineers and Pilots, Researches and Testers... many many just passengers around the globe. That is the nature of that lifestyle. Is anyone from those who just walks on the street or drives their car secured from the death? Nope... I am sure you know that.If you apply that attitude to aviation you will be dead within a few years.
At the golden age of Aviation we all know how many companies went out of business using a "proven" design. And as of today - same thing: many homebuilders who tried to succeed in a specific market niche : would it be warbirds, nostalgic planes (like sportster for example), Light Sport etc ... have failed. Look at the SAM Aircraft as a perfect example. Thierry Zibi has created an airplane that:Thirty and forty years ago, the financial conditions were better for many people. So was the fact that before cell phones and email companies did not expect 24/7 availability from white collar staff.
Peter has responded to my note about participating - and I understand his point too - they are busy working on proving the Raptor's success:Taking a moment or two a week to address questions or misconceptions is part of the business.
I have been thru that a lot myself. Sometimes it is frustrating. Sometimes it is just silly. I would be here not advocating him but simply paying respect for his hard work. And do my best to contribute everything in my power to see the success, the failure people see better. That is normal reaction of the fear. Viam supervadet vadens = with its feet cuts through the path it follows. Something like that.Peter Muller said:Andrey, Obviously I am aware of all the naysaying out there. Just give us some time to prove all of them wrong. I don’t feel like I have to answer to any of them. Keep in mind that every day we are working hard to make the Raptor a reality whereas they are just sitting at their computers doing nothing but spew negativity.
This ^^^... While I certainly have been here long enough to know better about getting overly enthusiastic about any new plane announced, constant armchair engineering and bickering does nothing. As for "..taking a moment or two a week to address questions or misconceptions is part of the business..", I disagree.. Nobody is required to answer or refute anything. They are not beholden to anyone but themselves and any investors. If it fly's, that's proof enough. If it doesn't, so what? You get to say 'I told you so', sip your coffee and act smug, but that doesn't actually accomplish anything so in the end was worthless.I think we should respect the hard work and hours that have gone into this design. They are actually making molds and parts which is a lot more than many folks are doing here.
The hurdles are many. I wish them luck and wait for them to complete the prototype, fly it and post actual performance numbers.