Raptor Aircraft

TFulwider said:
Click to expand...

Interesting. So, he went from pulleys to cables running inside of a conduit and then back to pulleys, but with reinforced brackets!?
I know that he didn't want push rods but am wondering if this might in the end be the best solution.
 
German guy said:
Interesting. So, he went from pulleys to cables running inside of a conduit and then back to pulleys, but with reinforced brackets!?
I know that he didn't want push rods but am wondering if this might in the end be the best solution.
Click to expand...
I thought from the Raptor website that the original plan was pushrods. Does anyone know when or why the change to cables took place?
 
iamtheari said:
I thought from the Raptor website that the original plan was pushrods. Does anyone know when or why the change to cables took place?
Click to expand...
I'm sure it's in one his videos. His method though is haphazard and accidental.. so don't expect a detailed or scientific reasoning behind what is likely a series of dubious experiments

From what I last recall (I could be totally wrong) I thought he was using a system similar to what they use for steering on outboard motors.. is he abandoning that? I would have thought that system would work, they are, after all, designed to operate reliable in an environment far more severe than aviation (wet, salty).
 
I'm 70/30 the full scale one will eventually fly, honestly my biggest actual concern at this point was that massive flutter issue discovered in one of the taxi tests

We'll see. hopefully for aviation's sake this guy proves all the naysayers wrong
 
German guy said:
I'm probably alone with this opinion, but if the Raptor would be available with a traditional aircraft engine and flight testing would check out ok, I would consider it as our next project.
While I am thinking that his performance claims and cost estimates are outlandish, I still believe that he would have a winner if he could come up with something like a super-fast to build, pressurized, turbocharged, 200kts cruise Velocity in the $200k - $300k range.
Click to expand...

For $300k - parts only - at 260 knots, the market is close is to zero. The VelocityXL w/TSIO-550 turbocharged does all that but Velocity sells just a handful of kits per year.

Someone gets to spend thousands of hours building. There is no automated assembly process coming to save carbon/fiberglass builders. The closest you will get is professional build assist at standard shop rates adding tens of thousands to the butcher's bill.
 
Datadriver said:
For $300k - parts only - at 260 knots, the market is close is to zero. The VelocityXL w/TSIO-550 turbocharged does all that but Velocity sells just a handful of kits per year.

Someone gets to spend thousands of hours building. There is no automated assembly process coming to save carbon/fiberglass builders. The closest you will get is professional build assist at standard shop rates adding tens of thousands to the butcher's bill.
Click to expand...

That's why I said super-fast to build. Maybe somewhere in the 1,000 - 2,000 hr. range. The Velocities take forever to build, I actually know a guy who has already been working on a XL for many, many years, even though he's working on it pretty much every day.

By the time you're done with a Van's RV10, you'll be somewhere in the range of $160 - $190k and they sell really well even though they realistically take still around 3,000 hours to finish (I know because we started building one). Still, it cruises 'only' at around 165 kts. With builder's assist you'll end up well in the $200k range. Since there a several builder's assist providers, I would guess that there is quite a bit of demand to this option, even at this price level.

The other example would be the Glasair Sportsman. Their Two Weeks To Taxi program starts at $244k, without any options: https://glasairaviation.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Sportsman-TWTT-Order-Form-2­_21_2020.pdf
I understand that they are so busy that the wait is over a year to get a slot in the builder's assist program.

If you look at the Sling TSI as a kit or their builder's assist program, you'll find that the price levels are quite similar, yet they still seem to sell very well.

Long story short, I'm pretty sure that there would be quite a bit of interest in a +200kts aircraft, even if it would a bit more expensive than the examples above.

I would be VERY interested in a Velocity if the build times wouldn't be so crazy. Since Peter is set on the Audi engine, this part of the discussion appears to be moot, though.
 
German guy said:
I would be VERY interested in a Velocity if the build times wouldn't be so crazy.
Click to expand...

This is where standardization could help. Build times explode due to unique builder choices - different engines, props, accessories, avionics, interior appointments, etc. Create a standard package (Ala RV-12), kit the components, and provide detailed instructions. You could shave a huge amount of build time. Fit and finish is another time sucker. Either create better kits where things fit out of the box or have the builder get the beast flying, then take it to a fit and finish center/paint shop. Let them use their expertise to take 500 hours of builder time and turn it into 2 week/100 hours of professional fit/finish.

The reality is the builder only needs to create a flyable airplane. You can easily and legally hire out avionics, paint, etc.
 
Tantalum said:
I'm 70/30 the full scale one will eventually fly, honestly my biggest actual concern at this point was that massive flutter issue discovered in one of the taxi tests

We'll see. hopefully for aviation's sake this guy proves all the naysayers wrong
Click to expand...

The more I watch his video's, the greater the pessimism. In this structural construction video, it's difficult to make sense of the fuel system. One of the fuel lines has a twisted kink in it as well. This plane looks brutal to build.

Pretend for a minute the test flight goes like a champ! Just pretend.

The fitment and hand finessing makes the point about how far away he is from a delivery of realistic kits. The kit components all need to be produced in a consistent and repeatable fashion. Van's for example took YEARs to make a full reproducible kit. Early kits were required more of the home builder then today’s versions.

Assuming all goes well, the Raptor team still has to cross the engineering chasm of replicating kits.

 
Last edited:
Watched the latest video from Wasabi. If I had to bet, I'd say this will peter out (no pun intended) and fade into the sunset.

Now, you can be a visionary and a rascal - but even Elon Musk let the engineers figure out how to get things done. Edison had a lot of engineers at his invention lab. They were more of an arse when things weren't working - and the solution was to make people figure things out.

I see Peter as micro micromanaging and fighting every nut and bolt suggestion. That's not going to work.
 
Datadriver said:
For $300k - parts only - at 260 knots, the market is close is to zero. The VelocityXL w/TSIO-550 turbocharged does all that but Velocity sells just a handful of kits per year.

Someone gets to spend thousands of hours building. There is no automated assembly process coming to save carbon/fiberglass builders. The closest you will get is professional build assist at standard shop rates adding tens of thousands to the butcher's bill.
Click to expand...
If the actual cruise speed tops 250 KIAS and it burns cheap diesel/JetA, they would sell.
 
German guy said:
The Velocities take forever to build, I actually know a guy who has already been working on a XL for many, many years, even though he's working on it pretty much every day.
Click to expand...

I see a statement like that and it tells me that the person who made it bases their view on a SINGLE datapoint. Which means the safe approach is to disregard everything they say because they admit they're lacking on facts.

I worked on building my plane for many, many years. Why? Because I made it take that long. During my build, I made numerous modifications and fabricated components that I could have bought off the shelf. Do they all take that long? Of course not.

I actually know four people who built theirs in less than one year. And two of those were V-Twins.

But then again, maybe "forever" for you is six months.
 
German guy said:
The Velocities take forever to build, I actually know a guy who has already been working on a XL for many, many years, even though he's working on it pretty much every day.
Click to expand...

This is the downside of all composite aviation kits presently. The process to make structural composite parts is fantastically expensive to tool. Only mass business like the auto industry can accomplish this. Forget about GA business selling a few hundred planes. The amortized tooling costs would drive kit prices to new Cirrus levels. Diamond & Cirrus have developed repeatable hand an CNC based processes.

Peter's Raptor is essentially a wide body Velocity XL. Very complicated to make.

German guy said:
The other example would be the Glasair Sportsman. Their Two Weeks To Taxi program starts at $244k, without any options...
I understand that they are so busy that the wait is over a year to get a slot in the builder's assist program.

If you look at the Sling TSI as a kit or their builder's assist program, you'll find that the price levels are quite similar, yet they still seem to sell very well.
Click to expand...

Good examples of companies that built successful planes, and then surmounted the challenge of turning a hand-built prototype into a repeatable kit. Anyone here with a manufacturing background knows the tremendous challenge Tooling up, making manufacturing samples, adjusting, then manufacture.
 
Last edited:
donjohnston said:
I see a statement like that and it tells me that the person who made it bases their view on a SINGLE datapoint. Which means the safe approach is to disregard everything they say because they admit they're lacking on facts. [...]
Click to expand...

What is your estimate of how long it take to assemble a.) the standard and b.) the quick build kit? Velocity assumes 2,000 and 1,000 hrs. Do you believe this is reasonable? Including engine, avionics and interior?

Granted, I have only a SINGLE data point of somebody I know in person. But, like I said, we were interested in building a XL RG and from looking at builders logs online it appeared that pretty much everybody I found had been working for at least 10 years on the project until it was done. RV10s appeared to be completed much faster, typically in around 6 years.
Yes, life gets in the way and builders might not be working on the project every day, but so does it for RV10 builders and I know for a fact that one would already have to assume a minimum of 2,500, more realistically 3,000 hrs to put a decent RV10 from a standard kit together. I was therefore under the impression that one should assume at least 4,000 hrs to complete a Velocity XL RG from standard kit. To me, this qualifies as 'forever'. Of course, I can be entirely mistaken and they can be completed much faster.
 
Last edited:
NordicDave said:
[...] Anyone here with a manufacturing background knows the tremendous challenge Tooling up, making manufacturing samples, adjusting, then manufacture.
Click to expand...

Yes, and I would agree that the Raptor appears to be a nightmare to turn into a highly prefabricated kit. That's another reason why I wish that he would have started with a conventional engine and without stuff like a pressurized cabin and a/c. Even without that, it would still be a quite complex kit to produce.
 
German guy said:
What is your estimate of how long it take to assemble a.) the standard and b.) the quick build kit? Velocity assumes 2,000 and 1,000 hrs. Do you believe this is reasonable? Including engine, avionics and interior?

Granted, I have only a SINGLE data point of somebody I know in person. But, like I said, we were interested in building a XL RG and from looking at builders logs online it appeared that pretty much everybody I found had been working for at least 10 years on the project until it was done. RV10s appeared to be completed much faster, typically in around 6 years.
Yes, life gets in the way and builders might not be working on the project every day, but so does it for RV10 builders and I know for a fact that one would already have to assume a minimum of 2,500, more realistically 3,000 hrs to put a decent RV10 from a standard kit together. I was therefore under the impression that one should assume at least 4,000 hrs to complete a Velocity XL RG from standard kit. To me, this qualifies as 'forever'. Of course, I can be entirely mistaken and they can be completed much faster.
Click to expand...
1,000 hours for a fast build is totally possible. If you've built one before or have access to someone who has, then 800 hours is possible. I can't speak to slow build as I haven't done one. The single biggest factor in a build taking longer is modifications. If someone has put 4,000 hours in their build and they're not finished, then that would be extraordinary. Maybe a slow build kit where the builder is attempting to achieve perfection in every part and making lots of mods. Maybe.

I don't think I've seen anyone that spent 10 years on the build that was actively building. Kits where the builder started and then stopped and then started, etc. are not uncommon. I saw one recently that was over 20 years old. But there's no way someone isn't done after 10 years is they're actively building.

That's why the rule of "do something every day" is a good idea.

I worked on the road the whole time I was building and finished in 8 years. Could have done it in 4 but like I said, I made modifications... And tried to get things perfect early in the build.
 
donjohnston said:
1,000 hours for a fast build is totally possible. If you've built one before or have access to someone who has, then 800 hours is possible. I can't speak to slow build as I haven't done one. The single biggest factor in a build taking longer is modifications. If someone has put 4,000 hours in their build and they're not finished, then that would be extraordinary. Maybe a slow build kit where the builder is attempting to achieve perfection in every part and making lots of mods. Maybe.

I don't think I've seen anyone that spent 10 years on the build that was actively building. Kits where the builder started and then stopped and then started, etc. are not uncommon. I saw one recently that was over 20 years old. But there's no way someone isn't done after 10 years is they're actively building.

That's why the rule of "do something every day" is a good idea.

I worked on the road the whole time I was building and finished in 8 years. Could have done it in 4 but like I said, I made modifications... And tried to get things perfect early in the build.
Click to expand...

Another thought with regard to build time:

Vans are quite common with an active support base and the barrier to starting work is pretty low. I'd bet 70% of EAA chapters have at least one RV in the ranks. Velocity(ie?)s are less common and not everyone wants to put on a mask , goggles, and gloves to lay up fiber glass, sand, and do otherwise less pleasant things than popping a rivet.

So I wonder if the number of experienced hands to lend an hour and also the number of people interested in lending an hour is significantly different.
 
Having not entirely followed this thread, or the history on the Raptor, I really think its biggest downfall was not being realistic about the developer's or the aircraft's capabilities. A 5 place pressurized airplane that cruises at 230 knots on 7 gph that costs $130k? Lets be real here, there is nothing THAT groundbreaking about what he is doing that will break the efficiency or cost thresholds of current designs. I honestly can't believe anyone invested in this to begin with, and I even know one person that did.
 
donjohnston said:
1,000 hours for a fast build is totally possible.[...]
Click to expand...

All the way to getting it ready for it's first flight? This would be awesome! The few that are tracking their status on kitlog pro all have significantly more hours in their builds, even though it appears was whether at least some of them started with fast build kits.
Admittedly, though, I don't know if and what modification they made.
 
"the flight control systems were never really designed..." - "a resistance to do the work required to make this plane flyable"
damn. The Wasabi team is a class act in describing this guy's idiotic methods.
 
Last edited:
Tantalum said:
"the flight control systems were never really designed..." - "a resistance to do the work required to make this plane flyable"
damn. The Wasabi team is a class act in describing this guy's idiotic methods.
Click to expand...
That's a good watch. There's some appalling things that Elliot said. "The bolts were bent when I bought them, they just can't make bolts that long straight" - definitely false. "I rotated the bolt the other way so it would take up the slop" WTF.
 
Mtns2Skies said:
That's a good watch. There's some appalling things that Elliot said. "The bolts were bent when I bought them, they just can't make bolts that long straight" - definitely false. "I rotated the bolt the other way so it would take up the slop" WTF.
Click to expand...

That was shocking. I think this should be called the Harbor Freight Special.
 
Peter just seems to be annoyed by all the questions during that video. I get the impression as if he’s frustrated in having to explain or needing to justify his design choices. Taking constructive criticism doesn’t appear to be his strong suit.
 
Velocity173 said:
Peter just seems to be annoyed by all the questions during that video. I get the impression as if he’s frustrated in having to explain or needing to justify his design choices. Taking constructive criticism doesn’t appear to be his strong suit.
Click to expand...
And these Wasabi guys approached the issues in a very gentle and collaborative manner.. I'd be happy and honored to have these guys be the first people to ever fly something I built and designed

the bit at the end with them saying he was threatening to just flight on his own was shocking

kind of nice to see the inner workings of this plane through another perspective though.. and from people that are actually experts in this field

I give them credit for giving an honest shot in trying to use that airport for a test flight.. 5000 foot runway near inhospitable terrain is a tough sell for a clean sheet never before flown aircraft.. I would think you'd want a runway that is long enough for you to take off, potentially fly in ground effect a little bit etc. Or at least do a long extended take off run with a very slow rotation
 
Tantalum said:
I would think you'd want a runway that is long enough for you to take off, potentially fly in ground effect a little bit etc. Or at least do a long extended take off run with a very slow rotation
Click to expand...

Ideally, they would like enough runway to sneak up on rotation/lift-off speed over several trials to determine control authority, while leaving room for a non-panic stop. When they decide to fly, with this airplane, they will probably want to lift off, fly in ground effect, then set it back down, again checking control response. When it is time to really fly, I suspect they want to launch and get to 1,000' ASAP.

IMO, the real dangers of this aircraft are twofold: One - controllability. Two - the engine/redrive/prop.
 
OK, now I'm getting confused / concerned.
He uploaded a new video in which a states towards the end that he has to 'sort out' airworthiness issues before the Raptor can legally be flown. No further explanation. This is weird, I understand that the airworthiness certificate had been granted a while ago, Wasabi also didn't mention any issues with it.

He also said that his next step is to fly it in 'ground effect' himself.
Somebody asked in the comments "So ... between this update and Wasabi update, I'm left a little confused. Are you still planning on using them for the first flight, or are you going to try that out step by step yourself?" He mysteriously answered "Now that I have some breathing room I'm going to do what I can do while I'm comfortable with proceeding."

It almost sounds as whether Wasabi is out. If this is indeed the case, I think it would be a very bad idea if he would try to fly it himself.

 
Oh man :( :

Q: "Will the Wasabi guys being doing the test program still?"
A: "My plan is to see if I can comfortably take it into ground effect. After that is determined I'll figure out the next step. However, I can't do anything until I have the updated airworthiness certificate."

Others and myself urged him in the comments to not attempt flying it himself. I however doubt that he will be listening. :(

Thinking about it, I guess the issue with the airworthiness certificate is that flights are limited to the vicinity of the home airport.
 
midwestpa24 said:
Having not entirely followed this thread, or the history on the Raptor, I really think its biggest downfall was not being realistic about the developer's or the aircraft's capabilities. A 5 place pressurized airplane that cruises at 230 knots on 7 gph that costs $130k? Lets be real here, there is nothing THAT groundbreaking about what he is doing that will break the efficiency or cost thresholds of current designs. I honestly can't believe anyone invested in this to begin with, and I even know one person that did.
Click to expand...
Hammer, meet nail. I know someone that bought a slot as well. When he told me the projected performance numbers and cost I asked him for 8k(or whatever the slot was... can’t remember for sure.) I figured I might as well ask if he was in the mood to give away money.
 
German guy said:
OK, now I'm getting confused / concerned.
He uploaded a new video in which a states towards the end that he has to 'sort out' airworthiness issues before the Raptor can legally be flown. No further explanation. This is weird, I understand that the airworthiness certificate had been granted a while ago, Wasabi also didn't mention any issues with it.

He also said that his next step is to fly it in 'ground effect' himself.
Somebody asked in the comments "So ... between this update and Wasabi update, I'm left a little confused. Are you still planning on using them for the first flight, or are you going to try that out step by step yourself?" He mysteriously answered "Now that I have some breathing room I'm going to do what I can do while I'm comfortable with proceeding."

It almost sounds as whether Wasabi is out. If this is indeed the case, I think it would be a very bad idea if he would try to fly it himself.

Click to expand...
Oh dear....
 
He treats flying it in ground effect as something trivial. I've only done it back when I was a student pilot but it was one of the most challenging tasks my instructor had me do. At first it involves constant aileron elevator rudder and power changes. To do it in this....thing... with all its issues with balance, vibration, control deflection, multi-axis binding, "fixes" and with the owner as the "test pilot" ... I don't have a good feeling about this. Peter if you're reading this...leave the flying to the test pilot pros please. For your own good.
 
Last edited:
Elliot is the test pilot, Peter is the owner.
 
Well.... on the bright side, an accident in ground effect would likely not be fatal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top