My dream plane.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
but has a range of circa 700nm?
Whether you fly much more than say 800-900nm in Europe is another matter, because you probably need Customs, etc. and there aren't that many airports.
The Kestrel looks very good, and I have a pic right here above my desk
No, you can't buy one and won't be able to for quite a while. My concern would be that the TBM is too well established. I wonder if the new Honeywell engine will retain the performance edge it had over the TBM, with the original PT6? Don't ask me what I think of Honeywell as a company...
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A lot more - see the
But as you said the aircraft is not in production to confirm those figures.
Diamond claimed amazing fuel consumption and speed figures pre production from certain test aircraft.
The production aircraft never came anywhere near.
I am sure it will be a lovely looking aircraft but I doubt there will be much in it between the TBM850 and Kestril.
TBM will win hands down on residual values and as a tried and tested product.
Addendum sorry wrong plane
My concern with any Bast+rd aircraft or modified ones like the Citation (Eagles) is that they are not approved by manufacturers and take a huge hit on residuals
Pace
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A prototype of the Kestrel has been flying for a few years, with a PT6, so to that extent its performance was known. I am happy that in its PT6 version it would have outperformed a TBM substantially.
Also, Epic Aircraft, who had a bust-up with Kestrel and went off doing their own thing with an apparently identical design, then went bust, but their website is still live, made a quantity of these, which are being flown by owners who got them under a "50% homebuilt" scheme.
The TBM850 is indeed well established and people in this business are very conservative. Being #2 is never easy, but there are ways to break down such barriers. The TBM has set a very high bar with its superb build quality, and Kestrel cannot go in below that, not in that price bracket ($3M+).
Whereas a Jetprop is much cheaper that any of these. The purchase price and the operating cost are about 50% down, but performance is similar (practically speaking). But the JP is still a "Piper".
It didn't suprise me that Diamond came nowhere even close on the DA42. Their business integrity is fully in line with GA practices - as most of their customers will tell you
Also, Epic Aircraft, who had a bust-up with Kestrel and went off doing their own thing with an apparently identical design, then went bust, but their website is still live, made a quantity of these, which are being flown by owners who got them under a "50% homebuilt" scheme.
The TBM850 is indeed well established and people in this business are very conservative. Being #2 is never easy, but there are ways to break down such barriers. The TBM has set a very high bar with its superb build quality, and Kestrel cannot go in below that, not in that price bracket ($3M+).
Whereas a Jetprop is much cheaper that any of these. The purchase price and the operating cost are about 50% down, but performance is similar (practically speaking). But the JP is still a "Piper".
It didn't suprise me that Diamond came nowhere even close on the DA42. Their business integrity is fully in line with GA practices - as most of their customers will tell you
How much difference in terms of speed would you achieve in the Robin design if the fuselage was made narrow by having tandem seats?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Los Angeles, USA
Age: 52
Posts: 1,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, the Tecnam does 140kts but thats for a 4-place aircraft and a bulky airframe and flying low. If you design it for 2, keep it really slim, and able to fly high, i.e. pressurised (the key to high speeds), I can't see it being impossible. If the Aerostar can do it with 700hp and 6 seats (115hp per person), then a 200hp 2 seater should be able to get pretty close. The key to the Aerostar being so fast was that the frontal area of it was small - it was cramped.
The whole gas turbine thing is a dead end if you want low cost. As much as I'd like to, until someone starts selling a certified turboprop engine for about the same as a Rotax, it's just not feasible. And even so, with the fuel flow, it's a hard sell. King Air 200's? Yeah, nice, if you want to pay $10.000 for a one way ticket.
And IO, if money was no object, this is what I want. I can't believe you keep a spot for a Jetprop in your heart, when this beauty is around for the same cost! 1600nm range!
The whole gas turbine thing is a dead end if you want low cost. As much as I'd like to, until someone starts selling a certified turboprop engine for about the same as a Rotax, it's just not feasible. And even so, with the fuel flow, it's a hard sell. King Air 200's? Yeah, nice, if you want to pay $10.000 for a one way ticket.
And IO, if money was no object, this is what I want. I can't believe you keep a spot for a Jetprop in your heart, when this beauty is around for the same cost! 1600nm range!
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AdamFrisch - The Extra 500 is very new. I think only 1 or 2 are flying. One sees them around shows, and occassionally out somewhere; I spotted one at Losinj LDLO last year. It looks like a very good plane, with a great range and importantly with a wide tradeoff between payload and range which is always a good thing to have.
But much depends on what you think of the company's financial condition. They have gone bust once or twice recently. With the E500 it is not like Piper going bust or Cessna going bust, or even Socata going bust. This plane is just too different from others that if you lost parts support you would have problems keeping it on the road legitimately.
I do wish them the best; it looks a great product. Their very intelligent chief pilot / salesman always tries to sell me one, which is 100% more than I can say for the arrogant tw*ts staffing the Cirrus and Diamond stands
The basic issue with turbines is that their MPG falls about 30% short of piston engines. Only the massive jet engines on things like the 787 deliver a specific fuel consumption which matches that of an IO540. Amusingly, the fuel burn per passenger kilometre of a 787 is about the same as that of a TB20 with 4 people And I can have one very attractive hostess which is a whole lot more than you will get on a 787 these days, unless it is a Thai operated one
If you do a straight turboprop conversion of a SEP, and keep the same size fuel tanks, you tend to lose some 30% on the range. Some of this can be clawed back via an improved TAS gain by flying higher than before, like you can do on the Jetprop PA46 conversion, but even a JP will not quite reach the absolute best economy range of the original Malibu which is probably about 1600nm to zero fuel. I think a JP can do about 1400nm to ZF.
Range is really important for serious flying. The TB20 is about 1350nm to ZF (FL100-140) and you can do vastly more with that than if you had e.g. 900nm to ZF, because due to the lack of airports in Europe one has to make such a generous provision for diversions etc that the usable range is way less than the ZF range, never mind legal IFR reserves which are much too tight anyway. The longest flight I would do is about 950nm.
Rod - why is that company's brochure all computer generated graphics, and poor quality ones too? Are they expecting somebody to put up some cash?
But much depends on what you think of the company's financial condition. They have gone bust once or twice recently. With the E500 it is not like Piper going bust or Cessna going bust, or even Socata going bust. This plane is just too different from others that if you lost parts support you would have problems keeping it on the road legitimately.
I do wish them the best; it looks a great product. Their very intelligent chief pilot / salesman always tries to sell me one, which is 100% more than I can say for the arrogant tw*ts staffing the Cirrus and Diamond stands
The basic issue with turbines is that their MPG falls about 30% short of piston engines. Only the massive jet engines on things like the 787 deliver a specific fuel consumption which matches that of an IO540. Amusingly, the fuel burn per passenger kilometre of a 787 is about the same as that of a TB20 with 4 people
And I can have one very attractive hostess which is a whole lot more than you will get on a 787 these days, unless it is a Thai operated one If you do a straight turboprop conversion of a SEP, and keep the same size fuel tanks, you tend to lose some 30% on the range. Some of this can be clawed back via an improved TAS gain by flying higher than before, like you can do on the Jetprop PA46 conversion, but even a JP will not quite reach the absolute best economy range of the original Malibu which is probably about 1600nm to zero fuel. I think a JP can do about 1400nm to ZF.
Range is really important for serious flying. The TB20 is about 1350nm to ZF (FL100-140) and you can do vastly more with that than if you had e.g. 900nm to ZF, because due to the lack of airports in Europe one has to make such a generous provision for diversions etc that the usable range is way less than the ZF range, never mind legal IFR reserves which are much too tight anyway. The longest flight I would do is about 950nm.
Rod - why is that company's brochure all computer generated graphics, and poor quality ones too? Are they expecting somebody to put up some cash?
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Glasgow
Age: 61
Posts: 909
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Beagle Basset
I had thought that the Beagle Basset might do. Unfortunately the Basset doesn't have the range (1,409 NM). I am also not sure whether there were any pressurised version. The civilian version is the Beagle B.206 Series 2.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: UK
Age: 51
Posts: 768
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What about a velocity aircraft might be even faster if it was a twin pusher ?
maybe a couple of big rotax's ?
They look great and quite sleak
Velocity Aircraft
maybe a couple of big rotax's ?
They look great and quite sleak
Velocity Aircraft
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Los Angeles, USA
Age: 52
Posts: 1,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah, Velocity has a demo TIO-550 powered rocket with the short wing and it does 290kts at FL250. That's turboprop speeds. But, it's a single and I would not feel comfortable flying long range over water with just one engine.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Midlands
Posts: 2,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IO – Just got the cash, web site is completely new and ½ finished. This is intended to be a C of A machine so certification will be expensive even if operating costs are not. The kit version is only a 1st step but the test flying is going very well. For the UK, with its potential for quite long water crossings, a twin which can match or out perform a Cirrus will sell. The aircraft is heavily based on their very successful 4 seater.
See below for flight test and comparison chart;
Twin-R
http://www.pprune.org/private-flying...st-flight.html
Not bad for an aircraft which does not exist
Rod1
See below for flight test and comparison chart;
Twin-R
http://www.pprune.org/private-flying...st-flight.html
Not bad for an aircraft which does not exist
Rod1
Last edited by Rod1; 11th Aug 2011 at 08:22.
Fly Conventional Gear
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Winchester
Posts: 1,600
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is intended to be a C of A machine so certification will be expensive even if operating costs are not.
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: on short final
Age: 48
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On the topic of high promises, I am surprised no-one has mentioned the latest talk of town
Pipistrel Aircraft Panthera | Pipistrel
I know it doesn't fit the wishes of Adam, but it is a very interesting project if they can deliver the numbers on fuel-burn and speed (200kts and 10 GPH). I am sceptical, but must admit that their current Virus SW model seems pretty efficient.
(I am however sure Adam will appreciate their plans for a hybrid version)
Pipistrel Aircraft Panthera | Pipistrel
I know it doesn't fit the wishes of Adam, but it is a very interesting project if they can deliver the numbers on fuel-burn and speed (200kts and 10 GPH). I am sceptical, but must admit that their current Virus SW model seems pretty efficient.
(I am however sure Adam will appreciate their plans for a hybrid version)
