Bell 609 program in trouble?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: US
Posts: 604
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bell 609 program in trouble?
Hailed as the ideal combination of speed and convenience for the business traveler, the BA609 tilt rotor aircraft, which has been prominently displayed at most major aviation trade shows in the past year, may be an aircraft whose time hasn't quite come yet, according to Bell. The Fort Worth Star Telegram reported this week that Bell is shifting most of the development work on the intriguing aircraft to its partner AgustaWestland, largely because it will be too pricey to find a market in the U.S.. "We designed the 609 for a new U.S. market and unfortunately we are not seeing that materialize, so we are looking at all options that make sense for the future of this program," Bell Helicopters CEO Dick Millman said in statement issued to the newspaper.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,578
Received 435 Likes
on
229 Posts
Some of us have been concerned for years that this aircraft is actually just too specialised and expensive for its own good. 
Engineering achievement, ten out of ten. Practicality and economic viabilities, far lower down the scale.
I'm afraid that in UK in particular, it could only ever be a niche model, or to put it more bluntly, a novelty status symbol. In a declining economic climate that niche possibly doesn't exist.
I wish it were different, hope I'm wrong.
Engineering achievement, ten out of ten. Practicality and economic viabilities, far lower down the scale.
I'm afraid that in UK in particular, it could only ever be a niche model, or to put it more bluntly, a novelty status symbol. In a declining economic climate that niche possibly doesn't exist.
I wish it were different, hope I'm wrong.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Philadelphia PA
Age: 73
Posts: 1,835
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
It's often been seen as a solution looking for a problem.
There are some places where it's unique characteristics will carve a niche. Longer distance trips (for helicopters) where speed is of the essence appears to be it's strong point.
Aside from a few VIPs who might be worth the cost, search and rescue offshore comes to mind - as long as you don't need to pick up too many people. Oil rig support for deep-water wells is another possibility - especially for parts that put a rig down for production. At a price of lost production goes up with the price of oil, the tilt rotor will be very attractive.
And then there are the few relatively remote,but not too distant locations that can't be serviced by fixed wing and are too far away for current helicopter support. Expensive, but may be necessary for medical purposes, for example.
I'm sure there are others, but essentially it's going to fit between a helicopter and a fixed wing, and needs to find it's own market.
And there is always the possibility that it will create another market.
I have faith that Agusta will have the political will to make this happen.
There are some places where it's unique characteristics will carve a niche. Longer distance trips (for helicopters) where speed is of the essence appears to be it's strong point.
Aside from a few VIPs who might be worth the cost, search and rescue offshore comes to mind - as long as you don't need to pick up too many people. Oil rig support for deep-water wells is another possibility - especially for parts that put a rig down for production. At a price of lost production goes up with the price of oil, the tilt rotor will be very attractive.
And then there are the few relatively remote,but not too distant locations that can't be serviced by fixed wing and are too far away for current helicopter support. Expensive, but may be necessary for medical purposes, for example.
I'm sure there are others, but essentially it's going to fit between a helicopter and a fixed wing, and needs to find it's own market.
And there is always the possibility that it will create another market.
I have faith that Agusta will have the political will to make this happen.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Center of the Universe
Posts: 645
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can accept the notion that the 609 (and tilt rotors in general) are a magnificent technical achievement. So far, however, these seem to be a huge bundle of compromises. One could purchase a new S76 and King Air B200 and have enough left over to operate both for several years without spending what a new 609 is projected to cost. Both of these aircraft will do a better job re their part of the mission too! One has to want or need the combined capability a very badly to go with the 609. Some will say that this is the entire point, but these will be few in number, and as other have suggested, this points to a small market.
EN48
EN48
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sale, Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 3,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Who do you believe? From Aviation International News today.
Bell Helicopter Still Committed to Civil Tiltrotor
A Bell Helicopter spokesman denied speculation that the company plans to pull the plug on the Bell/Agusta BA609 civil tiltrotor or sell its entire stake in the program to Italian development partner AgustaWestland. Speculation about Bell’s future in the program escalated earlier this week after Bell CEO Richard Millman told the Fort Worth Star-Telegram, “We designed the 609 for a new U.S. market and unfortunately we are not seeing that materialize, so we are looking at all options that make sense for the future of this program.” Orders for the 609 have remained nearly static, at approximately 80, since 1996. The spokesman said the company is looking at ways to get “[the] cost out of the product” and looking at “refreshing” its technologies, primarily the avionics. “Bell invented this technology and continues to believe in this technology,” he said. “However, it is no secret that the Italians want to speed up the program,” which is now scheduled to deliver certified aircraft by 2012. Two BA609s are currently in flight test–one in Italy and one in Fort Worth. Two more aircraft scheduled to join the test program earlier this year have yet to be added.
Bell Helicopter Still Committed to Civil Tiltrotor
A Bell Helicopter spokesman denied speculation that the company plans to pull the plug on the Bell/Agusta BA609 civil tiltrotor or sell its entire stake in the program to Italian development partner AgustaWestland. Speculation about Bell’s future in the program escalated earlier this week after Bell CEO Richard Millman told the Fort Worth Star-Telegram, “We designed the 609 for a new U.S. market and unfortunately we are not seeing that materialize, so we are looking at all options that make sense for the future of this program.” Orders for the 609 have remained nearly static, at approximately 80, since 1996. The spokesman said the company is looking at ways to get “[the] cost out of the product” and looking at “refreshing” its technologies, primarily the avionics. “Bell invented this technology and continues to believe in this technology,” he said. “However, it is no secret that the Italians want to speed up the program,” which is now scheduled to deliver certified aircraft by 2012. Two BA609s are currently in flight test–one in Italy and one in Fort Worth. Two more aircraft scheduled to join the test program earlier this year have yet to be added.
Niche market... Ten years or so ago one of my last Chinook tasks was the recovery of a Bristows S61 from N of Ullapool to Aberdeen. That night Bristows kindly accommodated us in what used to be the Skean Dhub (sp?), and while we were there the Chief Pilot came in and had a chat. When the conversation came around to where the commercial world was heading, his opinion was that a niche worth watching was the provision of support to the largely-automated, remote north-west oil installations then being mooted off Scotland. His view was that a fast, small-footprint VTOL system would be ideal for the job, and reckoned that the 609 would be one to keep an eye on. Perhaps with the rising price of oil, such an idea will be affordable soon?
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sale, Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 3,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From Aviation International News today.
More delays announced for BA609
By Thierry Dubois
July 15, 2008
Bell Helicopter (Chalet L3-7) here in a press conference yesterday strongly hinted the company is about to transfer more work to partner AgustaWestland in the protracted BA609 Tiltrotor program. “We are looking for the most efficient way to get the aircraft certified and we’ll possibly find some efficiencies in Italy,” Mike Blake, executive v-p for customer solutions, said. While one test aircraft resides in Texas and another in Italy, Bell has earmarked the next two for Europe. Bell’s and AgustaWestland’s respective shares in the program are believed to be 60/40, despite conflicting numbers given by the two companies.
It seems Bell/Agusta Aerospace delays the BA609 program by one year every year. This year, it has postponed its certification target from “2010/2011,” as announced in June 2007, to “2011/early 2012,” according to a new development schedule released by AgustaWestland. Blake only referred to 2011, an “unchanged” schedule. Last year at the Paris Airshow, CEO Giuseppe Orsi had even pledged to exhibit a customer-delivered aircraft at the 2011 event. A BA609 is performing daily flying displays here in Farnborough.
The number of flight hours performed in the flight-test program has remained practically static for five months, at about 300 hours. One BA609 flies from Bell’s test facilities in Arlington, Texas, while a second test aircraft flies from Cameri, an Italian air force base near Milan. Test pilots have explored the flight envelope to 25,000 feet and 310 knots.
In February this year, at the Singapore air show, a Bell/Agusta executive issued AIN a bullish update on the program, saying it would add some 100 flight test hours this year. He also claimed a combined 220 engineers work in the program in Italy and the U.S. In 2007, the FAA froze the airworthiness certification basis of the 12-passenger aircraft. The BA609’s first flight occurred in 2003.
Despite the delay, Bell/Agusta is here to confirm plans for a search-and-rescue variant of the BA609. Thanks to its 275-knot speed, the BA609 would reduce typical helicopter mission time by 44 percent. At more than 300 nautical miles from the coast, a BA609 could recover up to six people with its hoist.
More delays announced for BA609
By Thierry Dubois
July 15, 2008
Bell Helicopter (Chalet L3-7) here in a press conference yesterday strongly hinted the company is about to transfer more work to partner AgustaWestland in the protracted BA609 Tiltrotor program. “We are looking for the most efficient way to get the aircraft certified and we’ll possibly find some efficiencies in Italy,” Mike Blake, executive v-p for customer solutions, said. While one test aircraft resides in Texas and another in Italy, Bell has earmarked the next two for Europe. Bell’s and AgustaWestland’s respective shares in the program are believed to be 60/40, despite conflicting numbers given by the two companies.
It seems Bell/Agusta Aerospace delays the BA609 program by one year every year. This year, it has postponed its certification target from “2010/2011,” as announced in June 2007, to “2011/early 2012,” according to a new development schedule released by AgustaWestland. Blake only referred to 2011, an “unchanged” schedule. Last year at the Paris Airshow, CEO Giuseppe Orsi had even pledged to exhibit a customer-delivered aircraft at the 2011 event. A BA609 is performing daily flying displays here in Farnborough.
The number of flight hours performed in the flight-test program has remained practically static for five months, at about 300 hours. One BA609 flies from Bell’s test facilities in Arlington, Texas, while a second test aircraft flies from Cameri, an Italian air force base near Milan. Test pilots have explored the flight envelope to 25,000 feet and 310 knots.
In February this year, at the Singapore air show, a Bell/Agusta executive issued AIN a bullish update on the program, saying it would add some 100 flight test hours this year. He also claimed a combined 220 engineers work in the program in Italy and the U.S. In 2007, the FAA froze the airworthiness certification basis of the 12-passenger aircraft. The BA609’s first flight occurred in 2003.
Despite the delay, Bell/Agusta is here to confirm plans for a search-and-rescue variant of the BA609. Thanks to its 275-knot speed, the BA609 would reduce typical helicopter mission time by 44 percent. At more than 300 nautical miles from the coast, a BA609 could recover up to six people with its hoist.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cambridgeshire, UK
Posts: 1,334
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Out of interest...
Bell/Agusta BA609 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
General characteristics
Crew: 1 or 2
Capacity: 6 to 9 passengers/5,500 lb (2,500 kg) payload
Length: 44 ft (13.3 m)
Wingspan: 60 ft (18.3 m)
Height: 15 ft (4.5 m)
Wing area: ? ft² (m²)
Empty weight: 10,483 lb (4,765 kg)
Loaded weight: ? lb (kg)
Useful load: 5,500 lb (2,495 kg)
Max takeoff weight: 16,800 lb (7,258 kg)
Powerplant: 2× Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6C-67A turboshaft, 1,940 hp (1,447 kW) each
Performance
Never exceed speed: ? knots (mph, km/h)
Maximum speed: 275 knots (315 mph, 510 km/h)
Cruise speed: 260 knots (299 mph, 465 km/h)
Stall speed: ? knots (mph, km/h)
Range: 750 nm (852 mi, 1390 km)
Service ceiling 25,000 ft (7,620 m)
Rate of climb: 1,500 ft/min (7.6 m/s)
Wing loading: ? lb/ft² (kg/m²)
Power/mass: ? hp/lb (W/kg)
General characteristics
Crew: 1 or 2
Capacity: 6 to 9 passengers/5,500 lb (2,500 kg) payload
Length: 44 ft (13.3 m)
Wingspan: 60 ft (18.3 m)
Height: 15 ft (4.5 m)
Wing area: ? ft² (m²)
Empty weight: 10,483 lb (4,765 kg)
Loaded weight: ? lb (kg)
Useful load: 5,500 lb (2,495 kg)
Max takeoff weight: 16,800 lb (7,258 kg)
Powerplant: 2× Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6C-67A turboshaft, 1,940 hp (1,447 kW) each
Performance
Never exceed speed: ? knots (mph, km/h)
Maximum speed: 275 knots (315 mph, 510 km/h)
Cruise speed: 260 knots (299 mph, 465 km/h)
Stall speed: ? knots (mph, km/h)
Range: 750 nm (852 mi, 1390 km)
Service ceiling 25,000 ft (7,620 m)
Rate of climb: 1,500 ft/min (7.6 m/s)
Wing loading: ? lb/ft² (kg/m²)
Power/mass: ? hp/lb (W/kg)
There are a lot more businessmen out there, even in the current climate, than is suggested here who value the time savings this machine can offer over everything else.
The only downside is the 'new technology' tag and the fact that we have still to be told if it can operate into London Westland.
If it can, S76D/jet combo does not compare - if it can't, then faff faff faff faff!
The only downside is the 'new technology' tag and the fact that we have still to be told if it can operate into London Westland.
If it can, S76D/jet combo does not compare - if it can't, then faff faff faff faff!
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Los Angeles, USA
Age: 52
Posts: 1,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wouldn't count it out just yet.
As a turboprop in normal flight mode she has the potential of being very fuel efficient with those small wings (less drag) and huge props (huge props = less power needed to maintain speed). And since the props are coupled, perhaps one could even turn one engine off in cruise?
Obviously she's going to suffer from only being able to take off with a certain amount of fuel vertically which will limit range, but maybe they can fill her up more if she does the rolling take-off with the nacelles in the 45 degree position?
I find this aircraft terribly exciting. It might just be the answer to everything.
As a turboprop in normal flight mode she has the potential of being very fuel efficient with those small wings (less drag) and huge props (huge props = less power needed to maintain speed). And since the props are coupled, perhaps one could even turn one engine off in cruise?
Obviously she's going to suffer from only being able to take off with a certain amount of fuel vertically which will limit range, but maybe they can fill her up more if she does the rolling take-off with the nacelles in the 45 degree position?
I find this aircraft terribly exciting. It might just be the answer to everything.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Jankara
Age: 64
Posts: 377
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Never Mind the Quality, Feel the Width!
Time savings... blah, blah
New technology..... blah, blah
What nobody seems to have made serious mention of is what the price and operating costs will be for this modest 6-9 seater (about that of a Bell 407)
New technology..... blah, blah
What nobody seems to have made serious mention of is what the price and operating costs will be for this modest 6-9 seater (about that of a Bell 407)
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,578
Received 435 Likes
on
229 Posts
It might just be the answer to everything
Battersea heliport apart, there are a whole load of helipads in UK where an S-76 or an A-109S will fit but this machine unfortunately will not. I'm certain it will find only a relatively small number of customers, at least in UK. If it needs to operate from an airfield at both ends of the journey, it has no practical advantage over a small bizjet.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Philadelphia PA
Age: 73
Posts: 1,835
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Several things are still not quite clear about this marvelous piece of technology.
a) performance is going to be pretty severely restricted by the ability to make use of the flexibility. We have enough trouble with Category A now for the different types of landing areas (elevated helipad, ground level helipad, short runway and long runway). Now we add the added dimension of an adjustable angle nacelle. I think we'll see only one or two nacelle angles available so there is a limit to the size of the performance charts, if for no other reason.
b) size constraints for operations. Again, alluding to Category A, there are going to be some pretty tight constraints on the size of the areas the 609 can operate from. A lot of oil rigs will probably be out of the question, and other helipads will be under scrutiny. I hope that Agusta/Bell have been doing their homework on this ahead of time.
c) the interface with Air Traffic Control is going to take on a whole new dimension - you can take off from a heliport that probably isn't featured in the normal IFR system and have to feed into the upper airways structure. There are a lot of delays between filing and getting airborne for this type of operation when operating from an airport - how is the 609 going to handle this from an off-airport site? (The V-22 can suffer the same sort of problem - they may have sorted this already.)
d) approach is going to be similarly constrained as takeoff is for performance. The inherent flexibility that the tilting nacelle offers also means that a consistent approach profile is going to be dictated by the manufacturer, and I would suggest that only one or two profiles will be given performance information or even allowed.
We have a long way to do until we unlock the complete potential of the tilt rotor - and I hope we can overcome those obstacles quickly.
a) performance is going to be pretty severely restricted by the ability to make use of the flexibility. We have enough trouble with Category A now for the different types of landing areas (elevated helipad, ground level helipad, short runway and long runway). Now we add the added dimension of an adjustable angle nacelle. I think we'll see only one or two nacelle angles available so there is a limit to the size of the performance charts, if for no other reason.
b) size constraints for operations. Again, alluding to Category A, there are going to be some pretty tight constraints on the size of the areas the 609 can operate from. A lot of oil rigs will probably be out of the question, and other helipads will be under scrutiny. I hope that Agusta/Bell have been doing their homework on this ahead of time.
c) the interface with Air Traffic Control is going to take on a whole new dimension - you can take off from a heliport that probably isn't featured in the normal IFR system and have to feed into the upper airways structure. There are a lot of delays between filing and getting airborne for this type of operation when operating from an airport - how is the 609 going to handle this from an off-airport site? (The V-22 can suffer the same sort of problem - they may have sorted this already.)
d) approach is going to be similarly constrained as takeoff is for performance. The inherent flexibility that the tilting nacelle offers also means that a consistent approach profile is going to be dictated by the manufacturer, and I would suggest that only one or two profiles will be given performance information or even allowed.
We have a long way to do until we unlock the complete potential of the tilt rotor - and I hope we can overcome those obstacles quickly.
Thirty years ago? Heck, Shy, I was excited about the tilt-rotor forty years ago! And by that time, Bell had already been working on the concept for fifteen years (since 1953). The fact that they're divesting it to the Italians is telling. I can imagine Bell CEO Richard Millman asking his people, HOW long has this company been working on this?? And it's STILL not certified? And won't be until 2012?? MAYBE?? Oh, fer cryin' out...Look, just dump it. Dump it NOW!
Shy and Shawn are right: A whole new infrastructure will have to be built to accomodate the 609. Can anyone imagine a 609 landing at a Manhattan heliport? Is there even one that could accommodate a tiltrotor right now? If not, scratch the New York market. Remember the much-touted IFR-MLS approaches to Wall Street that never happened?
At PHI, whenever a "big ship" (anything the size of a 412 or larger) was coming in to land on a platform where there was already a small ship (e.g. 206) parked, the small ship had to be lashed to the deck with airframe tiedowns and *both* blades had to be secured. What will happen when a 609 comes in to land at a heliport where other "normal" helicopters are parked? There'll be 206's and Astars laying over on their sides like toys, that's what.
And Shy is quite right, if the 609 is used where you have to go airport-to-airport at both ends then you might as well use a real King Air. I'd go further and say that the 609 might not even justify itself if there's a heliport at only one end.
I'm no clairvoyant, but I just can't see big cities approving and building big "vertiports" for the tilt-rotor. And oh yesh, they will have to be big. Let's see, where's that one in Washington D.C. gonna go? Wait, they already have one! It's called Washington National Airport. And 609's landing at the corporate headquarters? Man, I'd love to have the auto windshield repair business in that town!
Bell knows this, obviously. They know that the corporate market in the U.S. is just out...a non-starter. That leaves the rest of the world. Okay, maybe not Britain but parts of Europe, Russia, Africa...China? India?
Plus, I'm sure the CEO Millman had a sit-down, "Come to Jesus" talk with the engineers. He probably asked: What is this thing REALLY gonna carry? How fast is it REALLY gonna go...you know, with a load? And how far? Are we talking nine pax at 260 knots for 750 miles? From a vertical takeoff?
And the engineers probably said, "Umm, no Chief. Not even close. But you know, a JetRanger can't even hit all of its performance high points at the same time either."
At which point Millman probably said, What, are we f~</<ing married to this thing?! I want a divorce!! Get me Agusta on the phone, STAT!
Or maybe not. Who knows.
One one hand, I'm with Shawn Coyle. It'd be interesting to build it and see what market develops for it. Because you know one (or more) will.
On the other hand, I fear that the 609 will be Bell's equivalent of the Beechcraft Starship. A small number will get built, but not nearly enough to pay for the 60+ years of development, much less the tooling. They'll be virtually uninsurable and uncrewable and impractical. Then, one 609 will get into a fatal A-VRS accident (because civilian operators won't be hamstrung in their operating parameters like NATOPS does for the V-22). The 609 fleet will get grounded and eventually all will get recalled and scrapped.
Shawn talks about unlocking the potential of the tiltrotor. Personally, I think if the design had any merit, the potential would have been realized and exploited years...wait, decades(?) ago.
Shy and Shawn are right: A whole new infrastructure will have to be built to accomodate the 609. Can anyone imagine a 609 landing at a Manhattan heliport? Is there even one that could accommodate a tiltrotor right now? If not, scratch the New York market. Remember the much-touted IFR-MLS approaches to Wall Street that never happened?
At PHI, whenever a "big ship" (anything the size of a 412 or larger) was coming in to land on a platform where there was already a small ship (e.g. 206) parked, the small ship had to be lashed to the deck with airframe tiedowns and *both* blades had to be secured. What will happen when a 609 comes in to land at a heliport where other "normal" helicopters are parked? There'll be 206's and Astars laying over on their sides like toys, that's what.
And Shy is quite right, if the 609 is used where you have to go airport-to-airport at both ends then you might as well use a real King Air. I'd go further and say that the 609 might not even justify itself if there's a heliport at only one end.
I'm no clairvoyant, but I just can't see big cities approving and building big "vertiports" for the tilt-rotor. And oh yesh, they will have to be big. Let's see, where's that one in Washington D.C. gonna go? Wait, they already have one! It's called Washington National Airport. And 609's landing at the corporate headquarters? Man, I'd love to have the auto windshield repair business in that town!
Bell knows this, obviously. They know that the corporate market in the U.S. is just out...a non-starter. That leaves the rest of the world. Okay, maybe not Britain but parts of Europe, Russia, Africa...China? India?
Plus, I'm sure the CEO Millman had a sit-down, "Come to Jesus" talk with the engineers. He probably asked: What is this thing REALLY gonna carry? How fast is it REALLY gonna go...you know, with a load? And how far? Are we talking nine pax at 260 knots for 750 miles? From a vertical takeoff?
And the engineers probably said, "Umm, no Chief. Not even close. But you know, a JetRanger can't even hit all of its performance high points at the same time either."
At which point Millman probably said, What, are we f~</<ing married to this thing?! I want a divorce!! Get me Agusta on the phone, STAT!
Or maybe not. Who knows.
One one hand, I'm with Shawn Coyle. It'd be interesting to build it and see what market develops for it. Because you know one (or more) will.
On the other hand, I fear that the 609 will be Bell's equivalent of the Beechcraft Starship. A small number will get built, but not nearly enough to pay for the 60+ years of development, much less the tooling. They'll be virtually uninsurable and uncrewable and impractical. Then, one 609 will get into a fatal A-VRS accident (because civilian operators won't be hamstrung in their operating parameters like NATOPS does for the V-22). The 609 fleet will get grounded and eventually all will get recalled and scrapped.
Shawn talks about unlocking the potential of the tiltrotor. Personally, I think if the design had any merit, the potential would have been realized and exploited years...wait, decades(?) ago.
I wonder if Nick Lappos has taken the 609 for a spin yet?
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Variable
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FH1100
All your points are valid and I do not see much of a market either but I hope I am wrong, would be great to have new stuff around.
It has been in development a very long time but could this not be the time when it all comes together? We finally have the materials that are light and strong enough to build it and engines are available with the OEI power that the thing needs to be certified. Time will tell.
All your points are valid and I do not see much of a market either but I hope I am wrong, would be great to have new stuff around.
It has been in development a very long time but could this not be the time when it all comes together? We finally have the materials that are light and strong enough to build it and engines are available with the OEI power that the thing needs to be certified. Time will tell.