Raptor Aircraft

Please, no. I'm inside the pattern.

PS. I've seen 3 first flights from Dobbins. The C-5, the F-22, and the C-130J. I was a little kid when the C-5 launched right over my head in June, 1968. I was in a parking lot at the end of the runway. Think about that.

Wow! You’ve been there for quite some time. I bet you’ve seen a lot of change in what’s been based there through the years as well. Navy A-7s, A-6s. Army Guard helos OV-1s. Marine helos. Air Force F-15s, C-130s. Navy F-18s. Much military history there. Not much traffic these days though. Old Army friend has a good gig there flying UC-35s in the Reserves.
 
It is annoying when you realize you've become (or are becoming) one of the old guys. I'm in that boat at work, where I'm in the "senior" generation of engineers now. How in the hell did that ever happen?
It’s better than the alternative.
 
Airport suitability should have been determined on the first trip.
Something tells me pretty much any test pilot or engineer's first exposure to the project would tell them there were much bigger fish to fry than the matter of the field suitability.

Four visits from test pilots and they didn’t bother to watch his engineering / assembly of the craft? Come on.
Four visits from pilots who thought a hands-on inspection and talking with the builder might give them more insight into the likelihood of success?

However, from what I read here and based on what Peter said in his latest video...
Do you think those two sources give you the full story? Seems to me there's an important input missing. No one but the pilots and the builder know for certain what feedback was provided, and if the pilots want to maintain their professional reputations they're not going to broadcast every squawk to the world without the builder's permission.

Where do I sign up for this test pilots' cabal, where they're not interested in flying something new, only in shattering an inspired builder's dreams?

Nauga,
surrounded by experts
 
Last edited:
...Navy A-7s, A-6s. Army Guard helos OV-1s. Marine helos. Air Force F-15s, C-130s. Navy F-18s. Much military history there. Not much traffic these days though.

I remember when they had C-124 Globemasters. I'd love to see/hear something like that fly today. Four R-4360's going around the sky in formation. That was a big 'ol airplane that appeared to move across the sky very slowly. At some point, there were F-100's and later, F-105's. Also, the Army had C-7 Caribous. Another slow flying recip.
 
Question 1: Do we know if he ever bothered to fly a model of this in X-Plane?

Question 2: Do we know if he ever bothered to build a scale version R/C to test fly?

Question 3: Do we know if there was any type of wind tunnel testing?

If none of the above 3 took place I would not ever let this thing fly more than what we saw in the recent Airborne! video.
Name 3 kitplanes either available or in development that have done all three of these.

Nauga
who flew airplanes before CAD and panel-method approximations were commonplace
 
Name 3 kitplanes either available or in development that have done all three of these.

Nauga

Can anyone come up with a single kitplane that was tested in the wind tunnel before flight?
 
Can anyone come up with a single kitplane that was tested in the wind tunnel before flight?
Yes, but I can't think of one that successfully made it to market. Plenty that were tested *after* first flight.
I suppose I could say I can think of one that meets all three 'criteria' but it didn't make it to market and used a bit higher fidelity CFD than the blade-element theory of Xplane. The full-scale did fly, at least.

Nauga,
and curved air
 
Name 3 kitplanes either available or in development that have done all three of these.

Nauga
who flew airplanes before CAD and panel-method approximations were commonplace
I just don't put this person in the same category as Lance Neibauer, Rutan, etc.

If Bode Miller gives me advice on how to plan a good ski program I'll trust him. Some random guy who bought his first pair of skis and went down the hill in his backyard, I'll need to see some "proof" that they know what their on about
 
Can anyone come up with a single kitplane that was tested in the wind tunnel before flight?
I just don't see other kitplane makers following this kind of haphazard approach..

If someone asked you to test pilot the Raptor wouldn't you also expect to see something beyond the "looks about right" rule?
 
Put another way, if Burt Rutan built an airplane based on nothing but gut feel I'd feel much different about it.. wind tunnel testing or not
 
I just don't put this person in the same category as Lance Neibauer, Rutan, etc.
Do you think everyone but Rutan and Neibauer need to meet your 3 criteria? Do you think Rutan or Neibauer did with their first designs?

Nauga,
who knows why the tail got bigger
 
To figure this out, both(!!) of these guys had to come all the way from California! Really!? The (lack of) acceleration has already become very obvious in his previous videos, they could have also asked him for the recordings out of his G3X. I can only guess how much they already charged him for their 'services'.


So you're saying that Justin should have bet his life on YouTube videos and data that was gathered by hopelessly inexact taxi runs made by someone without any test flying experience and without any regard to fixed parameters?

Are you unaware Elliot was there to pilot their PA-30 as a chase and photo airplane?

There's also something you and everyone else that's criticizing the actions of Justin and Elliot haven't considered. It's ridiculous to assert that the subject of runway length at Cherokee hadn't been discussed with Peter in earlier visits.

I believe Peter is to blame on this one. It's plausible he argued about the issue in earlier visits. He convinced them that when Justin and Elliot came out again, the aircraft would have already undergone high speed runs up to and past the point of liftoff, and that acceleration and control authority was nominal. He told them everything was as anticipated, and flight would be attainable on Cherokee's runway.

They showed up, Justin made some high speed runs, and discovered things that informed his decision. It's not a radical scenario. Peter is the one that told them it would work, and to come on out. He took responsibility for that decision, and agreed it would be billable hours.

You don't seem to have the slightest grasp on the seriousness of pushing in the throttle and leaving the runway in what by all appearances is a poorly designed and ineptly constructed aircraft.
 
Last edited:
Do you think everyone but Rutan and Neibauer need to meet your 3 criteria? Do you think Rutan or Neibauer did with their first designs?

Nauga,
who knows why the tail got bigger
No, I feel there's a continuum there, established experts, vs people like this guy

I admire the tenacity and the vision, and the less conventional design.. but the "I cut a whole here and glued that there and tightened this that much because I felt like it, oops it shook itself apart, hmm" approach just feels wrong. Peter Garrison's writing on Melmoth 1 and 2 showed a scientific approach.

Everything knew will have some trial and error. I don't think I'm alone in my skepticism of this builder's abilities though.. from reading what others posted on this thread about his treatment of prior expert help only strengthens my opinion on him
 
Can anyone come up with a single kitplane that was tested in the wind tunnel before flight?

They're still working on the prototype for the DarkAero, however I watched a video awhile back where they did some wind tunnel testing with a model. So assuming they have a successful flight and get it into production they may be the first?
 
Just stumbled across this. Web site is still up, and they still show the Audi engine. Is this thing still alive, or is it just that someone never turned off the web site?
 
I just don't put this person in the same category as Lance Neibauer, Rutan, etc.

If Bode Miller gives me advice on how to plan a good ski program I'll trust him. Some random guy who bought his first pair of skis and went down the hill in his backyard, I'll need to see some "proof" that they know what their on about

the interesting part of that is that lance is not an engineer. his training is in the graphic arts. the difference is he sought and listened to advice from people that knew what he didn't.
 
That might be to his advantage. Elon Musk is not a rocket scientist - but has the business building skill that has lead to a revolution in space flight. Jobs wasn’t the technical genius - but he built Apple.
 
the interesting part of that is that lance is not an engineer. his training is in the graphic arts. the difference is he sought and listened to advice from people that knew what he didn't.
Sometimes it took a while :cool:

Nauga,
neutrally
 
That might be to his advantage. Elon Musk is not a rocket scientist - but has the business building skill that has lead to a revolution in space flight. Jobs wasn’t the technical genius - but he built Apple.
no, but jobs had Woz
 
It doesn't take michelin-starred Chef to be able to realize when something tastes bad.

you also don't have to be professionally trained Chef in order to be able to cook something that tastes good

this guy is the equivalent of a 5 year old throwing everything into a pot in the kitchen because he wants to create the world's bestest cake
 
That might be to his advantage. Elon Musk is not a rocket scientist - but has the business building skill that has lead to a revolution in space flight. Jobs wasn’t the technical genius - but he built Apple.
And all these guys surround themselves with smart people and actively look for the best talent
 
No because all smart people post on POA. He should have come here for advice!
I wonder if he's ever been on here and checked out the forums...

would be interesting to know how many people who work for Textron, Cirrus, etc come on here
 
Can anyone come up with a single kitplane that was tested in the wind tunnel before flight?
IIRC (not assured), the Europa

Which of course was a raging success
 
Last edited:
Yes, but I can't think of one that successfully made it to market. Plenty that were tested *after* first flight.
I suppose I could say I can think of one that meets all three 'criteria' but it didn't make it to market and used a bit higher fidelity CFD than the blade-element theory of Xplane. The full-scale did fly, at least.

Nauga,
and curved air

Do tell. Which one?
 
no, but jobs had Woz
Exactly - he had smart people around him that could do things he couldn't. But as smart as Woz was, he didn't have the Job vision. Gates is a smart cookie as well, but not that smart that he didn't need others around him - what he brought was the vision and obsessive drive.

Approaching this from a non traditional, non classical "we've done it this way before" will maybe bring something beyond a 1950's technology engine, blind rivets, the third or fourth incarnation of Mooney, etc.

Maybe.... If I had to bet, I would say it's going to be hard / probably not going to become viable. If it ever happens, it will be past my years that I'll be able to fly.

Wish him all the best.
 
Last edited:
It is annoying when you realize you've become (or are becoming) one of the old guys. I'm in that boat at work, where I'm in the "senior" generation of engineers now. How in the hell did that ever happen?

Reasonably clean living and a little bit of luck?
 
this guy is the equivalent of a 5 year old throwing everything into a pot in the kitchen because he wants to create the world's bestest cake
There is also a crowd of the 5 year old's kindergarten classmates leaning over his shoulder loudly telling him what he and the professional chefs that tasted his work are doing wrong, having never read a cookbook or cooked anything, but they've seen a lot of pictures of food on the internet.

Nauga,
and his SeKriT RecIpE
 
I wonder if he's ever been on here and checked out the forums...

Based on the obsessive and almost instantaneous removal of negative comments on Peter's YouTube channel, it's probably safe to say he spends his evenings careening from aviation forums to YouTube to aviation forums to YouTube ad infinitum, until collapsing into bed in a perspiration soaked heap and nights filled with visions of an overweight aircraft trundling endlessly toward the oncoming end of a runway.

:D
 
I’ve had a few closeups around some aviation companies that insisted in making colossal mistakes due to ego, tradition, and greed. I’ve seen a couple of airplane companies being passed around from millionaire to billionaire hoping to bring it back only to make the same mistakes over and over again.

Cirrus has always been a little bit unique, marketing led followed by follow through on product and not without a few challenges along the way.

I never even heard of raptor and just read every post on this thread. Wow.

300knots for $130k? Sure. All day. Garmin included. Where do I sign?

Never going to happen. Not at all.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
300knots for $130k? Sure. All day. Garmin included. Where do I sign?

Never going to happen. Not at all.

Agreed. I think Peter started with good (but overly optimistic) intentions, but maybe the heavy investments he's made is taking its toll and he's guided toward making the Raptor work. For his sake, I hope it does. I think he would have been closer to completion if he just used a proven aircraft engine on the design first and perfected the design, then retrofitted whatever other engine he wanted to use. (I do think the Audi TDi engine was probably not the right choice.)

But look at Icon. The A5 is nowhere close to what was originally planned as a selling price. It was intended as a user friendly, automotive-familiar cockpit amphibious aircraft at a reasonable price. Still an interesting aircraft, but one that isn't quite so speedy for a lot of money that could acquire a lot of other more capable aircraft.

I think Peter is going to end-up with this one-off aircraft and not a lot of retirement savings left.
 
I laughed when you brought up Icon. I actually met with them once upon a time for a sales job.

So they originally had a purchase price for a Sport Pilot airplane...took a boatload of deposits....had issues delivering on those deposits...price started at $139k...and then raised the price to nearly $400k...not including the trailer...delivered 90 airplanes with a backlog of 1300...then there is the whole controversial purchase agreement that made the 2000 hour Robinson-type overhaul of the airframe a requirement...and a 6000 hour lifetime limit on the airplane...and "audio and video" recorders mandatory on the airplane...and then the Chinese money dried up after the tradewars resulting in a bunch of layoffs...and and and and and.

And they had a flying prototype in 2008; Raptor hasn't seen a flight pattern yet.
 
Icon seems like a glowing success compared to some of the others out there: Synergy, Raptor, Terrafugia, Elio Motors, etc.

If it sounds too good to be true...
 
I wonder if he's ever been on here and checked out the forums...

would be interesting to know how many people who work for Textron, Cirrus, etc come on here
The number is greater than or equal to 1
 
and "audio and video" recorders mandatory on the airplane

I wondered if this was a liability limiting device.

Grieving relative - "Now you must pay".
Airplane manufacturer - Well the training syllabus and Operating Manual say this (waves at completion certificates, books) and it was being operated like this (waves at video). Goodbye!
 
Back
Top