The Otto Aviation Celera 500L

Discussion in 'Flight Following' started by AggieMike88, Jun 9, 2019.

  1. Groundpounder

    Groundpounder Pattern Altitude

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2013
    Messages:
    1,669
    Location:
    New Hampshire
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Heywood Jablowme
    No one is going to trade their G550 for one of these, but if a company along the lines of Wheels Up buys a fleet of them, and markets them correctly, I could see them being very popular with the new to charter crowd. Assuming the performance they are predicting holds true.
     
    flyingcheesehead and Jim K like this.
  2. kyleb

    kyleb Final Approach

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2008
    Messages:
    5,284
    Location:
    Marietta, GA
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Drake the Outlaw
    The TBM 700 is a comparable airplane with a high cruise of 350 mph airplane on 700 hp. I struggle to understand how the Celera is gonna go 100 mph faster on 200 fewer HP. But, even at 350 MPH, it would be a pretty quick point to point airplane East of the Rockies or along the West coast.
     
  3. MountainDude

    MountainDude Pre-takeoff checklist

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2011
    Messages:
    264
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    MountainDude
    From what I understand, the speed (450 mph) will be achieved at 65,000 ft. Assuming the plane can climb at 2000 fpm all the way up (doubtful), it will take >30 min of climbing at a slower speed and higher fuel burn.
     
  4. kyleb

    kyleb Final Approach

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2008
    Messages:
    5,284
    Location:
    Marietta, GA
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Drake the Outlaw
    Where'd you find the 65K' reference? That's a ridiculously high number for umpteen reasons. The military won't go that high without pressure suits.

    And at some point you get into critical mach numbers and coffin corner. Where's @nauga when you need him?
     
  5. iamtheari

    iamtheari Pattern Altitude

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2016
    Messages:
    1,989
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Ari
    Probably test-flying the Otto Aviation Celera 500L.
     
    overdrive148 likes this.
  6. kyleb

    kyleb Final Approach

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2008
    Messages:
    5,284
    Location:
    Marietta, GA
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Drake the Outlaw
    Possibly true, but I think what he's working on today has more propellers than the Celera.
     
    overdrive148 likes this.
  7. FormerHangie

    FormerHangie En-Route

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2013
    Messages:
    3,193
    Location:
    Roswell, GA
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    FormerHangie
    The performance figures are all derived from the patent filing, I believe.

    I'd have more faith in their ability to come up with something marketable if their claims were more conservative. I don't believe that current designs are leaving that much on the table.

    Just looking at the engine, the Wikipedia entry for the RED A03 engine gives a specific fuel consumption value of 210/g/kWh, while a similar size Pratt and Whitney PT6 is around 380/g/kWh. That's a quite a bit less, but then on their web site they state it uses "up to 8 times less" fuel than jet aircraft. Maybe that's true when you compare it to an early Jetstar, but not when you look at a PC12, which is a more realistic comparison.
     
  8. deyoung

    deyoung Pre-takeoff checklist

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2014
    Messages:
    456
    Location:
    Tucson, AZ
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Chris
    Much much lower drag. At least that's the idea.
     
  9. Tantalum

    Tantalum Final Approach

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2017
    Messages:
    6,069
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    San_Diego_Pilot
    Yeah, Celera is banking heavily on that unorthodox shape for its claims.
     
  10. Piperonca

    Piperonca Pre-takeoff checklist PoA Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2015
    Messages:
    304
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Piperonca
    I still think it's a flying helium tank with an engine in back.
     
    Zeldman and TCABM like this.
  11. kyleb

    kyleb Final Approach

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2008
    Messages:
    5,284
    Location:
    Marietta, GA
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Drake the Outlaw
    Speed increases with the cube root of the of HP increase. So, to go 30% faster, you'd need twice the HP if the drag profile doesn't change.

    Think about that relative to the TBM700. The Celera plans to go 1/3 faster on 71% of the HP. It isn't like the TBM is a drag monster. It is a pretty clean aircraft in its own right.
     
    FormerHangie likes this.
  12. Sierra_Hotel

    Sierra_Hotel Pre-takeoff checklist

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2019
    Messages:
    335
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Sierra_Hotel
    *at twice the altitude.

    Also, from their website:


    No clue what conventional aircraft they're comparing it to
     
  13. kyleb

    kyleb Final Approach

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2008
    Messages:
    5,284
    Location:
    Marietta, GA
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Drake the Outlaw
    Yeah, I know. But twice the altitude isn't realistic or practical for a bunch of reasons.

    I'd love to see their projections for sub-RVSM altitudes. Not that they can't equip it for RVSM, but...
     
  14. Rocketman4992

    Rocketman4992 Filing Flight Plan

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2020
    Messages:
    5
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Rocketman4992
    Wow, quite an aggressive air frame in terms of changing things up. Looks like a great design to reduce flow separation as much as possible, which is probably why they believe they will get the speed, range, fuel economy. That back end has be wondering how they are going to deal with tail strikes. They are almost asking for it imo.
     
  15. GaryM

    GaryM Pre-takeoff checklist

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2020
    Messages:
    267
    Location:
    New Jersey (KMMU)
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Gary M
    Stearman
     
  16. Sierra_Hotel

    Sierra_Hotel Pre-takeoff checklist

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2019
    Messages:
    335
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Sierra_Hotel
    Anyone know where the 65,000ft came from? The engine website mentions up to 50,000ft capability.
     
  17. MountainDude

    MountainDude Pre-takeoff checklist

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2011
    Messages:
    264
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    MountainDude
  18. MountainDude

    MountainDude Pre-takeoff checklist

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2011
    Messages:
    264
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    MountainDude
  19. WillFly4Food

    WillFly4Food Pre-takeoff checklist

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2016
    Messages:
    127
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    WillFly4Food
    I’m wondering if that’s not deliberately built that way to protect the prop.
     
  20. Sierra_Hotel

    Sierra_Hotel Pre-takeoff checklist

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2019
    Messages:
    335
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Sierra_Hotel
  21. cujet

    cujet Filing Flight Plan

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2012
    Messages:
    29
    Location:
    Jupiter, Florida
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    cujet
    Yes! The problem with the "unorthodox shape" idea is that a modern tube fuselage has a Cd as low as 0.022 and is generally not the major contributor to total airframe drag. Creating lift is. Additionally, cooling drag is a major factor with certain engine designs (pistons, for example)

    It's interesting to compare the various airliner designs that eliminate the fuselage entirely and place passengers in the wing, reducing drag by about 20%. However, as always, the way the drag reduction happens may be intentionally unclear. It's by the downsizing of the airframe itself (for a given passenger load) , and not by it's shape.
     
    Tantalum likes this.
  22. Tantalum

    Tantalum Final Approach

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2017
    Messages:
    6,069
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    San_Diego_Pilot
    I think the Piaggio Avanti has a very efficient, and somewhat unorthodox shape.. IE, rather than try and make the "tube" more efficient they made is such that the tube contributes 20% of the lift and thus they have a smaller wing which creates less drag

    This is an underappreciated plane.. crazy fast, good performance, and sips gas, despite having two engines. This guy has probably the best, and most comprehensive, and least annoying CLICKBAIT SMASH THE LIKE button videos out there


    It says walk around but he spends a lot of time walking through the cockpit
     
  23. cujet

    cujet Filing Flight Plan

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2012
    Messages:
    29
    Location:
    Jupiter, Florida
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    cujet
    It's good to note that turbodiesel engines, such as used in the Celera, can be configured to make rated HP at any normal altitude we would use. The higher the plane goes, the faster it will go for a given HP (to a point of course) . This is unlike a PT-6, for example. Which may be flat rated to 10-12K ft or so, and after that is subject to normal lapse rate HP losses. It's just a matter of turbocharger/supercharger and intercooler workload. And of course, the associated increased cooling drag. There are some difficulties with high altitude compression ignition engine (diesel) use, including the inability to re-start above 14-16K feet. And the requirement to carry power on descent, to prevent flameout.
     
  24. WillFly4Food

    WillFly4Food Pre-takeoff checklist

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2016
    Messages:
    127
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    WillFly4Food
    As I understand the Piaggio Avanti, it’s the layout of the three wings, combined with the weight & balance, that greatly benefits efficiency because all three wings are lifting surfaces. Contrast that with the traditional layout where the main wing is pulling up, while the horizontal stab is pushing down, which results in greater drag compared to the Avanti.

    In any case, the Avanti is a cool plane.
     
  25. cujet

    cujet Filing Flight Plan

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2012
    Messages:
    29
    Location:
    Jupiter, Florida
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    cujet
    I'm based at PBI, and Piaggio was based in our hangar for many years. I absolutely love the "idea" of the Piaggio, love the look and I believe the idea should be refined to perfection.

    But again, it's good to let reality settle in for a bit. The Piaggio has 2ea. 1600HP engines on an airframe that is not all that much bigger than the Celera, engines that also produce significant jet thrust (unlike the Celera which has cooling drag) . The Piaggio climb/descent profile is nothing like a jet, but rather like any other turboprop. Piaggio's 400Kts cruise is possible in the low FL300's, but 350kts is the "efficient" speed. What you get is a 3 hour trip vs 2 hour trip in a jet, due to the above. The total fuel burn is lower per hour, but not that much lower per trip. And you have the substantial additional cost of regular prop overhauls. That alone purchases a lot of fuel!

    Those who design aircraft would do well to remember that many of these ideas have been tried in the past and the results are well understood. The trend towards jets is a good one for many reasons, including the performance in weather/icing conditions. Props are props and jets are jets.
     
    Tantalum likes this.
  26. nauga

    nauga Pattern Altitude PoA Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2013
    Messages:
    2,436
    Location:
    Rockwood Storage Facility
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Mantis Toboggan, MD
    A well-designed two-surface airplane requires minimal downforce in trimmed level flight, so the increased lift on the main wing should not be a big hit to efficiency. As for all surfaces lifting, drag is inversely proportional to aspect ratio, so letting a high aspect ratio wing do the majority of the lifting is going to be the most efficient. Same idea applies to a fuselage - better to spend time reducing drag than increasing lift on a fuselage, let the most efficient surface do the lifting.

    Nauga,
    and trim drag
     
  27. flyingcheesehead

    flyingcheesehead Touchdown! Greaser!

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Messages:
    23,698
    Location:
    UQACY, WI
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    iMooniac
    Even in the TBM at 14:1, generally in cruise (FL300-310) we have around 70 miles of glide available, and most of the time if I'm looking at the glide ring up there, it's a matter of "which airline airport is more likely to get my passengers home today?" more so than "is there somewhere I can land safely?" a 70nm circle anywhere east of the Missouri River gives you a TON of options.

    Eh, not really. Reliability is the name of the game. Less scheduled maintenance, less unscheduled maintenance! That keeps the planes flying and making money.

    But, for example, the PT6 requires a hot section inspection at 1800 hours, and an overhaul at 3600 hours. NOT optional the way it is with pistons. @Ted DuPuis can surely tell us what the low end is on a hot section, but an overhaul is certainly going to be well into six figures, or seven figures if it got abused.

    In addition, the fuel cost is quite a bit higher. We burn around 90gph at takeoff to get 850 shp, down to maybe 52 gph in cruise (at maybe 86% torque, so 730shp). Pure jets are worse.

    Altitude.

    However, I think that 450 is really a marketing number. We fly in the neighborhood of FL300, where about 70% of the atmosphere is already below us. at FL650, 95% of the atmosphere is below you.

    Ideally, you'd have enough engine power to get to where cruise is at L/dmax... But unless you have a REALLY long leg to fly, it wouldn't be worth it to go that high.

    I wish them luck, though. I like it when people at least try to break the mold a little.
     
  28. Tantalum

    Tantalum Final Approach

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2017
    Messages:
    6,069
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    San_Diego_Pilot
    Yes! That's why, even though our friend Peter has questionable practices and often gives us head scratchers, I appreciate that he's pushing the envelope on his own too
     
    Volzalum likes this.
  29. Tantalum

    Tantalum Final Approach

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2017
    Messages:
    6,069
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    San_Diego_Pilot
    We'll Celera comfortably won this one!
     
  30. Piperonca

    Piperonca Pre-takeoff checklist PoA Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2015
    Messages:
    304
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Piperonca
    How fast did it go?
     
  31. Sierra_Hotel

    Sierra_Hotel Pre-takeoff checklist

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2019
    Messages:
    335
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Sierra_Hotel
    We don’t know yet. Haven’t seen any performance figures get released.
     
  32. iamtheari

    iamtheari Pattern Altitude

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2016
    Messages:
    1,989
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Ari
    I can’t find any record of it actually flying. There is the claim that it has flown 31 times, repeated across a wide variety of blogs that just cite to each other. FlightAware has a position-only flight for N818WM but that was in 2015 near Houston. If it’s flying in Southern California in 2020, it is hard to imagine airspace where ADS-B isn’t mandatory. If it’s flying in or above Class A airspace, it should be on an IFR clearance. If it has flown, where is the proof?
     
  33. Salty

    Salty Final Approach PoA Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2016
    Messages:
    6,750
    Location:
    FL
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Salty
    You think this was fake?

     
    Tantalum likes this.
  34. Tantalum

    Tantalum Final Approach

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2017
    Messages:
    6,069
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    San_Diego_Pilot
    There's a video of it on YouTube and Vimeo
     
  35. iamtheari

    iamtheari Pattern Altitude

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2016
    Messages:
    1,989
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Ari
    Where did they fly it? The video looks legitimate but 31 flights without any ADS-B data seems odd. One would think that a plane designed to cruise above Class A airspace would have been up to 10,000 within the first 2 dozen test flights, even if it’s well outside other rule airspace.
     
  36. Tantalum

    Tantalum Final Approach

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2017
    Messages:
    6,069
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    San_Diego_Pilot
    For some reason they have been operating somewhat under a veil of secrecy. Early on in the development some were speculating if it had some kind of military application because they were so hush-hush about it
     
  37. Tantalum

    Tantalum Final Approach

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2017
    Messages:
    6,069
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    San_Diego_Pilot
    *I think they were flying it out of victorville, one of the articles in thedrive mentioned l California logistics port. Middle of nowhere
     
  38. Tantalum

    Tantalum Final Approach

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2017
    Messages:
    6,069
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    San_Diego_Pilot
    this article mentions the logistics port as where they've been playing with it: https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zo...volutionary-celera-500l-aircraft-may-fly-soon

    that would put it comfortably outside the mode C veil, and given that they probably, so far, have stayed under 10K might explain? they may have also gotten clever in trying to hide it from curious eyes

    in contract to Peter, these folks seem to be doing a lot of behind the scenes stuff and doing a very slow, methodic approach to their testing

    what I'm curious about most is:
    (A) how fast will it really go
    (B) how high can it really go
    (C) the fact that they're using a completely homegrown new type of engine is news in itself https://red-aircraft.com/?lang=en .. and posting the homepage image here because some people, including me, are lazy to click on links. But the claims of this engine are bonkers in themselves.. up to 600 hp, allegedly half the fuel burn compared to a TURBINE, and operating up to 50K.. that's bonkers.

    upload_2020-9-13_15-47-47.png
     
  39. Tarheelpilot

    Tarheelpilot En-Route

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2010
    Messages:
    4,093
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Tarheelpilot
    They are still optional it’s just rare to ever see anyone ignore them in practice.
     
  40. Sierra_Hotel

    Sierra_Hotel Pre-takeoff checklist

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2019
    Messages:
    335
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Sierra_Hotel
    Awful lot of assumptions in your conclusions.