Posted on 08/28/2020 9:49:51 AM PDT by Red Badger
The whispers started three years ago. A mysterious bullet-shaped plane was spotted at the Southern California Logistics Airport near Victorville in April 2017. Its unusual design prompted immediate speculation, with military website The War Zone being the first to report that the aircraft was the work of California-based Otto Aviation -- and that development was very much under wraps.
Someone looking for an ID of an unusual looking aircraft spotted at the Southern California Logistics Airport. https://t.co/83J7RqOpvy pic.twitter.com/eAPrXNwIEf — John Wiseman (@lemonodor) April 16, 2017
Now, in the late summer of the strangest year in aviation history, the Celera 500L has finally been revealed to the world, with the launch of a new website and a bunch of very cool new photos. What we're looking at is a six-person private craft that promises to fly at jet speeds, but with eight times lower fuel consumption, and a range that's twice that of a comparably sized craft. Bold claims indeed. Otto Aviation says on its website that 31 successful test flights have so far been performed, with aerodynamic efficiency proven in 2019, bolstering its declaration that "the Celera 500L is the most fuel-efficient, commercially viable aircraft in existence." The company, founded in 2008 and an offshoot of Bill Otto's Otto Laboratories, says that the Celera 500L runs at 18 to 25 miles-per-gallon fuel economy (compared to the 2-3 miles-per-gallon of a comparable jet aircraft). Then there are the modest $328 hourly operating costs, which are about six times lower, and the generous 4,500-nautical-mile range. Maximum cruise speed is projected to reach more than 460 miles per hour.
(Excerpt) Read more at edition.cnn.com ...
Do3sn’t use AvGas
It also runs on JetA. Got a problem with that?
Glide ratio of 22:1. Those “tiny” wings, seem to do pretty good work. If you’re getting a lot of the lift from the body; wouldn’t “ground effect” come into play at landing?
“When those prop tips go supersonic, it’s gonna be load ...”
Why do you think that?
I heard it was made of Upsidazium. ;0)
-1
We live on a small airport and have a couple of airplanes. One of them is a low wing, a cherokee. Ground effect does come into play even on a draggy low wing airplane, but this is not a good thing when it comes to landing in as short a space as possible. You end up floating down the runway until you finally slow up enough to get the wheels to stay on the ground. And the 22 to 1 gluide ratio demonstrates that the plane is not going to slow much in its standard flight configuration.
Our neighbor has a highly modified Mooney. It is a very slick airplane and even has air brakes in addition to the flaps that up pop out of the wings to help slow it down. I went flying with him... once. Even skimming the tree tops as we came in and him using both flaps and the air brakes we still didn't get the wheels on the pavement until more than half way down the runway. The stall speed of his Mooney is likely half the stall speed of the “bullet plane”.
All small airplanes are vulnerable to engine failure and off airport landings, especially single engine planes.
typo = loUd, not load.
Subsonic props (at the tips) are much quieter than supersonic ones. More efficient as well.
Ask the Russkies who fly/crew the Tu-95 Bear. While at cruise/loiter speeds the tips are/were subsonic, but when flying ‘at speed’ the US SOSUS network could track a Bear’s flight path. Yeah, they are/were that loud. Rumor (and The Hunt for Red October movie) had SONAR operators on the boats able to hear a Bear, but not confirmed, shall we say.
In those images, the prop looks to be relatively small diameter. (in contrast the TU-95 and the V-22 Osprey which have very large diameter props). SO to generate enough thrust at published cruising speeds, I am thinking that at take-off RPMs/pitch and high speed cruise, the prop will rotate fast enough to get the tips supersonic. Don’t have the data, just postulating.
;-) Hey if the long nose Mad Dog 88 can fly so well, irrespective of careful load and balance, maybe this thing can too. Dunno.
Someone suggested a front canard. I think a little front trim tab might be smart.
Except over water ...
What caliber is that?
15,000.............
It’s not a jet engine. Those are air intakes for the engine that drives the propeller.
It’s not a jet engine. Those are air intakes for the engine that drives the propeller.
They could mount a camera or two, as supplemental visibility.
“I’d know the Songbird’s engines anywhere”
have no idea
“SO to generate enough thrust at published cruising speeds, I am thinking that at take-off RPMs/pitch and high speed cruise, the prop will rotate fast enough to get the tips supersonic. Don’t have the data, just postulating.”
Engine spec is 2127 rpm for takeoff. Do the math.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.