# Raptor Composite Aircraft

Discussion in 'Aircraft Design / Aerodynamics / New Technology' started by Dexacare, Mar 28, 2016.

### Help Support HomeBuiltAirplanes Forum by donating:

1. Aug 23, 2019

### rbarnes

#### Well-Known Member

Joined:
Aug 28, 2015
Messages:
45
9
Location:
Texas
That pricing is better than it looks at first glance.

$90k is actually for a turn key firewall forward installation by DeltaHawk into your experimental plane. Including prop, fuel system and electronics. True turn key install. When adding all that cost to the engine 90k is not that bad. They're offering this installed kit for the first dozen or so engines to get some engines flying in people's planes as quick as possible 2. Aug 23, 2019 ### TarDevil ### TarDevil #### Well-Known Member Joined: Jun 30, 2010 Messages: 259 Likes Received: 119 Location: Coastal North Carolina/USA Yeah, my thoughts. High, but not horrible considering they will get thrust for you at that price. The bigger issue with a Deltahawk engine is power. I don't think they have anything powerful enough to produce a climb in Raptor. rv6ejguy likes this. 3. Aug 23, 2019 ### BoKu ### BoKu #### Well-Known MemberHBA Supporter Joined: Aug 16, 2013 Messages: 2,246 Likes Received: 2,798 Location: Western US I really enjoyed No Short Days by Kimble D. McCutcheon. It's available as a series of .pdfs from the Aircraft Engine Historical Society: https://www.enginehistory.org/engines.shtml wsimpso1 likes this. 4. Aug 23, 2019 ### BJC ### BJC #### Well-Known Member Joined: Oct 7, 2013 Messages: 9,289 Likes Received: 6,059 Location: 97FL, Florida, USA Their engine (180 HP) is not enough HP for the Raptor. As quick as possible will be good: they have only been developing the engine for 22 years. BJC 5. Aug 23, 2019 ### FarmBoy ### FarmBoy #### Well-Known Member Joined: Mar 14, 2012 Messages: 103 Likes Received: 17 Location: Gainesville, VA A turbo itself, yes, selection, integration, and control of a set of turbos to provide both engine intake pressure normalization and bleed air for cabin pressurization over a defined range of temperatures and pressures customized for a specific engine not so much. My thought about this unit was that it would be relatively simple to add as a source for cabin and engine pressure normalization to a desired altitude (e.g. 8-10,000 ft), providing an ability to use as a turnkey option to add to a wide range of standard (sea level optimized) engines (turbo or non-turbo) with little regard to displacement or RPM. It this regard, this is a very clever, 'elegant' device (that is itself basically a CVT belt driven turbo) that could be programmed to only provide make-up pressure as demanded by ambient pressure and would otherwise cause little to no load on an engine at low altitude. 6. Aug 23, 2019 ### rv6ejguy ### rv6ejguy #### Well-Known Member Joined: Jun 26, 2012 Messages: 3,744 Likes Received: 2,765 Location: Calgary, Alberta, Canada The DeltaHawk is still unproven in my book as far as power, longevity and reliability goes. No way I'd be the first to drop$90K on their promises. They rate right up their with the Zoche diesel and the 6 cylinder Pmag promises. They all lost credibility years ago in my book.

Raptor needs at least 350 hp to be viable, perhaps 400 if the bloated weight can't be brought down a bunch. Maybe these folks could help: https://advanced-aero.com/product/g3-standard-turbo-lycoming-engine-tio-540-br-385hp/

7. Aug 23, 2019

### gtae07

#### Well-Known Member

Joined:
Dec 13, 2012
Messages:
1,769
1,049
Location:
Georgia
But we have computers now! Everything should be perfect the first time!

Besides, any fool would know that test failures, schedule slips, and budget exceedences would have all been prevented had proper risk reduction taken place and detailed program management been applied.

(we need a sarcasm tag here...)

akwrencher and BoKu like this.
8. Aug 23, 2019

### bmcj

#### Well-Known MemberHBA Supporter

Joined:
Apr 10, 2007
Messages:
12,689
4,697
Location:
Fresno, California
At this point, it seems like the best engine choice might be a turbine or turboprop. That could provide the necessary power, and more. Weight savings on the engine, but you’ll need to carry more fuel.

9. Aug 24, 2019

### Tiger Tim

#### Well-Known Member

Joined:
Apr 26, 2013
Messages:
2,842
1,582
Location:
Thunder Bay
I was thinking the same. Maybe a nearly run-out Walter?

10. Aug 24, 2019

### Kyle Boatright

#### Well-Known Member

Joined:
Nov 12, 2012
Messages:
737
371
Location:
Marietta, GA
Good idea. Ain't like the amazing projected range has any real utility. Lindbergh and Max Conrad are the only two people I know of who were dedicated enough to sit in an SEL seat for that long...

11. Aug 24, 2019

### FarmBoy

#### Well-Known Member

Joined:
Mar 14, 2012
Messages:
103
17
Location:
Gainesville, VA
A normally aspirated 540 has a dry weight of 438 lbs - might as well go with an LS3.

As noted previously, one of these - https://www.vividracing.com/ford-racing-23l-mustang-ecoboost-crate-engine-p-151854857.html - is 340lbs full up and with the right ECU programming and a good IC can easily produce 350+ FWHP at 4000 RPM from the stock crate engine (https://www.drivingline.com/articles/ecoboosted-adding-96-hp-to-ford-s-23l-ford-mustang). Add a Ballistic PSRU and for less than $15K (with an SDS EFI) you have a solid power plant. Add a Torotrak V-charge and you should be good to go with pressurization up to 25,000 ft. You ought to able to complete a firewall back package for with prop (including air conditioning) with this setup and save 2-300 lbs from his current configuration. 12. Aug 24, 2019 ### rv6ejguy ### rv6ejguy #### Well-Known Member Joined: Jun 26, 2012 Messages: 3,744 Likes Received: 2,765 Location: Calgary, Alberta, Canada Peter had originally listed PT6s as an engine choice but the engine was worth much more than he wanted to sell the whole airplane for so that was passed by. Might have been better to go after fewer turbine sales than the mass market but then he'd be competing directly against Lancair IVPs which already demonstrate superior performance over his projected numbers. For 4 cylinder engines, there is still the question of TV with the PSRU and I'd never try to get over 100hp/L out of an engine for aircraft use. Chances are that the long term durability wouldn't be there, especially at 150hp/L. Last edited: Aug 24, 2019 BoKu likes this. 13. Aug 24, 2019 ### TFF ### TFF #### Well-Known Member Joined: Apr 28, 2010 Messages: 11,408 Likes Received: 3,159 Location: Memphis, TN This project is the perfect real world example on how hard it is to be different. Nothing off the shelf means you’re not getting any relief in someone else’s knowledge covering part of the project spec. 100% responsible is hard to swallow when it is a real 100%. Develop an engine gearbox combo; do you have the time? Even putting off the shelf parts together takes time and testing. Once you add that up, is the value better. You might have squeezed the turnip to get the initial parts and never figure out how to mate them. 100% Fail. I have seen so many projects where the owner will not finish something because it needs$100 a piece bolts. Throw $20,000 away because of principle of 5 hundred dollar bolts, fail. Principal is misplaced. The bolts have no ego. A Titan 51 V8 FWF is about$45K with all the discounts. Close to $60k if no connection to their airplanes. Minimum you will spend the same$45K in time and parts to duplicate it to equal operating reliability. That is what it will cost to fly a $7000 engine. That is if you are 100% self sufficient know it all. Need help? Better have the right friends or pay. You can do it better? We are watching the we can do it better right now. If he has been smarter, he should have developed the airframe and engine separate. Not because he could have divided the development problems into separate areas. He could have had two viewerships and double if not triple the people watching. Whichever side of the project was a turnoff could be deferred to the other. Keep the train wrecks separate. 14. Aug 24, 2019 ### Tom Nalevanko ### Tom Nalevanko #### Well-Known Member Joined: Oct 10, 2007 Messages: 1,304 Likes Received: 122 Location: Camarillo, CA FB report — no leaks with latest design. Best, Tom BoKu likes this. 15. Aug 25, 2019 ### BBerson ### BBerson #### Well-Known MemberHBA Supporter Joined: Dec 16, 2007 Messages: 11,640 Likes Received: 2,181 Location: Port Townsend WA For over water flights to Hawaii, I think maybe a Lycoming dual pack twin engine, with both into one prop shaft might work. Using two turbocharged Lycoming engines with wide belt drives to the prop shaft, and with overrunning clutches if one engine fails. Like the 8" wide belt drive on a turbocharged Enstrom. These engines could be overhauled used engines instead of new. His Audi engine was used, I think. Overhauled Lycoming engines would not be worse than any new diesel even if any brand new diesel auto engine is available to buy. Since diesels tend to tear up the PSRU with the high compression shocks. The Rutan Voyager went around the world without using any Diesel engines. They had two engines and shut one down for extended range. Over water two is better but one can be shut down for reserve if needed. 16. Aug 25, 2019 ### TFF ### TFF #### Well-Known Member Joined: Apr 28, 2010 Messages: 11,408 Likes Received: 3,159 Location: Memphis, TN I just put a new belt on one of the company’s Enstrom last week so I know them well, but the obvious choice is two 540’s, Piaggio style. At least you could kill the butterfly with a hammer. Anyone buying into one of these projects is not really caring about cheap, they want to be different. I have a friend who built a Defiant. He sold it a couple of years ago because he was trying to update it and the project bogged down. Last year he bought a ready to fly Velocity. He had a V8 juice moment. He could not figure out new doors, and once he had the Velocity it became obvious copying the Velocity doors would have allowed him to fix the last update problem. By the way his Defiant had originally two auto conversions. He had lots of problems. It has Lycomings on it now. 17. Aug 25, 2019 ### rbarnes ### rbarnes #### Well-Known Member Joined: Aug 28, 2015 Messages: 45 Likes Received: 9 Location: Texas My comment was not based on using the DeltaHawk in the Raptor, just on your comment that "$90k was expensive". I think once it is offered in certified version the engine alone will price out similarly to a Cont TSIO 360 (which is admittedly a very expensive 200hp engine)
Before the Rudd Family came along with their half a billion in deep pockets I would have agreed with you. The DeltaHawk is legit now. (finally) It has the funding it always needed and a family with a passion for aviation and long proven history in running a successful industrial manufacturing business.

I've been following the Raptor since day one and was fascinated to watch the CNC mold building process. I commented on YT at the beginning that he was making a huge mistake with the initial engine choice and his reply was "if it doesn't work we can stick a Continental in there" .... which turned out to not be true with progressively narrower and narrower tunnel vision being displayed by Peter.

He almost lost me when he weighed the engine alone. He really started pushing me over the edge when he weighed the whole plane. I gave up on this thing ever working when I watched him stick 100lbs in the nose as "ballast".
Like watching a slow motion car wreck at this point. All you can do is cringe and wait for the crunch...

rv6ejguy and BoKu like this.
18. Aug 25, 2019

### rv6ejguy

#### Well-Known Member

Joined:
Jun 26, 2012
Messages:
3,744
2,765
Location:
The Deltahawk, no matter what how deep the pockets are behind it, is still unproven in my view. When they get 100 flying and they accumulate 2000 hours each, trouble free, they will have arrived. They must have spent many tens of millions on R&D in the last couple decades, that money needs to be earned back and I'm not convinced that will be any time soon even at that \$90K price which includes prop, engineering and labor. I don't believe the market is there in North America given the price of avgas and the fact that the BSFC is little better in cruise than a Lyconental running LOP with EIs. There will never be a net cost savings even over 2000 hours. We'll see on that one.

Military and foreign sales where avgas prices are much higher may boost the numbers of course. Now, DH has lots of competition from the Continental and Austro diesels which are well proven. Too late to the market to take a big share now.

19. Aug 25, 2019

### Bert

#### New Member

Joined:
Mar 17, 2016
Messages:
3
0
Location:
Stony Plain
If memory serves me, he put that ballast in to keep the nose from accidentally rising during high speed taxi tests. It is not intended to be there once flying begins.

20. Aug 25, 2019

Joined:
Jun 26, 2012
Messages:
3,744