Half the performance is still decent local soaring, as long as you don't want to go much more than, say, 400 miles a day.I would settle for half the weight, half the cost and half the performance. Then add the motor and see if it could still launch from a level field or a hang glider launch.
Air brakes -From their Facebook:
1comet prototype nr2
There are no major aerodynamic changes as prototype nr 1 flies well. At first glance you may note that we modified the shape of the vertical stabilizer. Not for aerodynamic reasons, but in order to reduce torsion loads on the tail boom. The tailboom gets lighter and the CG of the glider moves further to the front.
The wing is now equipped with speed brakes deployable up to VNE. For practical reasons the spoilers mounted on the cabin of prototype nr 1 could not be built as big as calculated. So they lacked efficiency.
The Mitchell Wing like hang-stick of prototype Nr 1 was replaced by a more conventional Swift-like side stick mounted on the down tube. We invested 2 years in engineering and in hundreds of hours of FEM calculations. This allowed us to optimize the inside structure: lighter, safer and simpler to produce.
What remains unchanged: The nice laminar wing, the all-over sandwich glider like surface, the sleek cabin, the forgiving stall characteristics and the fast roll rate.
View attachment 109136
Pod iteration idea.... F1 CF crash cage covered in this plastic aero shell.