Raptor Aircraft

The hinges are huge because he designed the elevator like a Fowler flap. Should’ve just bought a Velocity nose gear shimmy damper.

The amplitude of the nose wheel instability departures tells me a shimmy damper isn't going to fix it. There's a fundamental geometry problem. You can see the nosewheel occasionally squirming during slow speed taxi.
 
Skip to 11 minutes and watch this taxi test. He says he wants to see what the ailerons felt like without the spades installed, but I really don't know what he's trying to learn.

\
 
Skip to 11 minutes and watch this taxi test. He says he wants to see what the ailerons felt like without the spades installed, but I really don't know what he's trying to learn.
Words fail me.

Nauga,
and the replies he has deleted without posting
 
Just don’t get why he’s going with spades. None of the canards I know of use them. My Velocity is as light in roll as my Glasair. Just no need for spades.
 
Just don’t get why he’s going with spades. None of the canards I know of use them. My Velocity is as light in roll as my Glasair. Just no need for spades.

If you listen to the later part of the clip he explains his rationale.
 
Skip to 11 minutes and watch this taxi test. He says he wants to see what the ailerons felt like without the spades installed, but I really don't know what he's trying to learn.

\

Yeah that's gonna be a hard no from me.

I like the idea of what he's trying to do, but damn man, get some help from a professional.
 
Skip to 11 minutes and watch this taxi test. He says he wants to see what the ailerons felt like without the spades installed, but I really don't know what he's trying to learn.
At first I wondered why he was flopping the poor thing back and forth like that, to the point where any sane person would have pulled the throttle and applied brakes to stop that ferocious oscillation. Then I realized that he was just along for the ride, and apparently not bright enough to figure out he should pull the throttle and apply brakes to, oh, I don't know -- keep from breaking the main gear or something.

Just don’t get why he’s going with spades. None of the canards I know of use them. My Velocity is as light in roll as my Glasair. Just no need for spades.
I like the idea of what he's trying to do, but damn man, get some help from a professional.
You know why I don't design airplanes?

It's because, in that endeavor, I have no clue what I'm doing, and therefore should not design airplanes until such time as I do, indeed, learn what the hell I'm doing.
 
If you listen to the later part of the clip he explains his rationale.

Yeah I listened to it and obviously his choice of spade design isn’t working. First, he shouldn’t need spades to have light control forces. This isn’t an aerobatic aircraft and the speeds it’ll be cruise won’t require boosting the aileron effectiveness. Second, he could’ve followed the design of every other canard and just mass balanced the ailerons. Outside of a few reports of heavy roll forces on Velocity XLs, canards are generally light in roll and pitch.

Another thing. I’ve never seen such static aeroelasticity outside of a sailplane. That wing has a tremendous amount of flex in it. My Velocity has about the same wing span and exhibits hardly any flex.

I have no doubt now that if his initial test pilot would’ve flown it earlier this year, it definitely would’ve ended in disaster.
 
At first I wondered why he was flopping the poor thing back and forth like that, to the point where any sane person would have pulled the throttle and applied brakes to stop that ferocious oscillation. Then I realized that he was just along for the ride, and apparently not bright enough to figure out he should pull the throttle and apply brakes to, oh, I don't know -- keep from breaking the main gear or something.



You know why I don't design airplanes?

It's because, in that endeavor, I have no clue what I'm doing, and therefore should not design airplanes until such time as I do, indeed, learn what the hell I'm doing.

You can do like me then, and build paper planes to fly at the dog to annoy him.
 
Another thing. I’ve never seen such static aeroelasticity outside of a sailplane. That wing has a tremendous amount of flex in it. My Velocity has about the same wing span and exhibits hardly any flex.

I have no doubt now that if his initial test pilot would’ve flown it earlier this year, it definitely would’ve ended in disaster.

I'm glad you posted this, because I was going to ask you if the wings on your Velocity behaved in that manner.

I can't help but believe the day someone attempts to fly that thing, it's going to result in a LOC shunt.
 
I'm glad you posted this, because I was going to ask you if the wings on your Velocity behaved in that manner.

I can't help but believe the day someone attempts to fly that thing, it's going to result in a LOC shunt.

My canard doesn’t even flex that much and I’ve gotten into canard flutter before in turbulence. A problem on some 173s. Although I think mine was due to control rod sloop and not improper elevator balancing.

I can see this thing getting some twist involved where the wing meets the winglets as well. That won’t be pretty.
 
Last edited:
Just don’t get why he’s going with spades. None of the canards I know of use them. My Velocity is as light in roll as my Glasair. Just no need for spades.

I was assuming that he had to go with spades because it's the only way to balance the ailerons. I could go back and look at the older videos, but I've got to primer the jeep.

That said, the only planes I've seen spades on are aerobatic planes.
 
Spades will generally generate a lot of drag. Not going to help his claimed speeds. Flutter is also a function of true not indicated air speeds. At the altitudes and speeds he is quoting the aircraft will need a stiff structure and very well balanced controls.
 
Last edited:
Skip to 11 minutes and watch this taxi test. He says he wants to see what the ailerons felt like without the spades installed, but I really don't know what he's trying to learn.

\
Oh My God... the landing gear broke from that type of bouncing? And the wing! Wayyyy too flexy.

I like this guy's desire to build something new and different, but hire some professional help.
 
At first I wondered why he was flopping the poor thing back and forth like that
I couldn't figure out why he was letting his hand get whipped and forth.. were the forces too great that he couldn't hold against them?
 
Oh My God... the landing gear broke from that type of bouncing? And the wing! Wayyyy too flexy.

I like this guy's desire to build something new and different, but hire some professional help.

On another board, one of the professionals he hired to help made comments to the effect that Peter didn't listen very well to expert advice. He has a vision and little things like engineering and generally accepted practices were ignored if they were contradictory to the vision.
 
later part of the clip he explains his rationale
But he's mixing apples and oranges... he thinks it will help balance them (weight, he mentions CG) with zero regard for the aerodynamic loads. I've wiggled the wings on Cirrus (which has more flex then what you get in a Piper, etc.) and this make me appreciate a professional engineer vs this amateur.. zero aileron "float"

I know that Boeing uses a "looks about right" rule.. but honestly, you need more than that to build an airplane, especially one with the performance goals he is setting.
 
On another board, one of the professionals he hired to help made comments to the effect that Peter didn't listen very well to expert advice. He has a vision and little things like engineering and generally accepted practices were ignored if they were contradictory to the vision.
That's sad, and will result in (best case scenario) a plane that grossly under performs on its design goals or (worst case scenario) kills its occupant. Unless this plane gets radical redesign I see the first flight of this thing ending very tragically
 
That's sad, and will result in (best case scenario) a plane that grossly under performs on its design goals or (worst case scenario) kills its occupant. Unless this plane gets radical redesign I see the first flight of this thing ending very tragically

Grossly overweight, questionable floppy structure, control surface slop (flex/flutter/WTF?), and poorly designed auto conversion/reduction drive. All operating out of a 5,000' runway with poor runoffs and surrounded by a forest with no decent emergency landing sites anywhere nearby. What could possibly go wrong?
 
When he added 4.5 pounds to "balance" the ailerons, the main logic seemed to be that since he had a couple of 4.5 lb weights handy, they were the correct solution to the problem.

F'ing crazy.
 
He has a vision and little things like engineering and generally accepted practices were ignored if they were contradictory to the vision.
Hey, I'm all in favor of abandoning "generally accepted practices" when they get in the way of innovation, too... if and when a different sound, well-engineered way can be found around them. He hasn't found those, quite obviously
 
This can only end well.... Yikes, I hope no one gets hurt.
 
Hell, I'll fly it. Truck it somewhere with lots of fields, flat land and write me a fat check. :D

I could use a fat check.

Just need to finish that PPL thing. :cool:

Skip to 11 minutes and watch this taxi test. He says he wants to see what the ailerons felt like without the spades installed, but I really don't know what he's trying to learn.

\

I hereby renounce my previous statement that I would fly this thing for a fat check. I want to live.
 
This guy has a lot of parts flying off his plane throughout his extensive Taxi testings.
 
Comments on Homebuiltairplanes forum from Jeff Kerlo.

"I preached the importance of weight consciousness and adamantly voiced concern over all the unnecessary garbage being thrown into the airplane , not to mention one unnecessary oversized extremely heavy passenger side door amongst many other things. Mark did as well. We were both ignored and scoffed at by someone always thinking he knew better . Early on we threw our hands in the air and left it up to the Master Designer and project manager. We sincerely tried to keep it sane to no avail. Our recommendations were always second guessed. You have no idea the second guessing I went through during my efforts in correcting the aero problems discovered with the model.

The models creation was a direct result of my apprehension upon seeing the original design and incidence/decalage settings that made no sense. At this point I respond just as Schultz did in the old Hogans Heroes TV show, " I know nothing" when asked why this or why that. New Motto comes from a little cartoon penguin , "Smile and wave boys,smile and wave".Nuff said".

".. it (the model) exhibited horrendous spiral instability. Wings level to 50+ degree bank angle in three rapid cycles. This occurred when arresting descent and beginning "flare " to establish normal canard approach deck angle before touchdown. First occurrence was quite a surprise".


" The original vertical area concerned me from the onset and flight showed my belief they were inadequate. They were increased significantly in two steps and showed little improvement in stability. I was never a fan of BLENDED WINGLETS( there, I said it too) and suspected significant wrap around flow vertically up the winglet at high AOA , thereby compromising the flow over the winglet. That is when I figured a fence at the inboard point where the radius began should likely help . It arrested the dutch roll tendency, locking in the airplane when rolling into and out of banking. It also, not surprisingly, require adding significant amount of up elevator trim after their addition telling me the wing was now also producing more lift, again no surprise to me, and working harder. I then suggested we do stall testing and he scoffed at that and said everything is fine now , time to build the real one. So all bets are off as to how real articles stall behavior plays out. As I said , I have suggested many required test considerations, only to have them scoffed at. Don't like to throw hands up in the air but what else could/can I do. He thinks he knows it all".”
Peters ego is going to either kill him or make him fail.
 
Last edited:
Comments on Homebuiltairplanes forum from Jeff Kerlo.

"I preached the importance of weight consciousness and adamantly voiced concern over all the unnecessary garbage being thrown into the airplane , not to mention one unnecessary oversized extremely heavy passenger side door amongst many other things. Mark did as well. We were both ignored and scoffed at by someone always thinking he knew better . Early on we threw our hands in the air and left it up to the Master Designer and project manager. We sincerely tried to keep it sane to no avail. Our recommendations were always second guessed. You have no idea the second guessing I went through during my efforts in correcting the aero problems discovered with the model.

The models creation was a direct result of my apprehension upon seeing the original design and incidence/decalage settings that made no sense. At this point I respond just as Schultz did in the old Hogans Heroes TV show, " I know nothing" when asked why this or why that. New Motto comes from a little cartoon penguin , "Smile and wave boys,smile and wave".Nuff said".

".. it (the model) exhibited horrendous spiral instability. Wings level to 50+ degree bank angle in three rapid cycles. This occurred when arresting descent and beginning "flare " to establish normal canard approach deck angle before touchdown. First occurrence was quite a surprise".


" The original vertical area concerned me from the onset and flight showed my belief they were inadequate. They were increased significantly in two steps and showed little improvement in stability. I was never a fan of BLENDED WINGLETS( there, I said it too) and suspected significant wrap around flow vertically up the winglet at high AOA , thereby compromising the flow over the winglet. That is when I figured a fence at the inboard point where the radius began should likely help . It arrested the dutch roll tendency, locking in the airplane when rolling into and out of banking. It also, not surprisingly, require adding significant amount of up elevator trim after their addition telling me the wing was now also producing more lift, again no surprise to me, and working harder. I then suggested we do stall testing and he scoffed at that and said everything is fine now , time to build the real one. So all bets are off as to how real articles stall behavior plays out. As I said , I have suggested many required test considerations, only to have them scoffed at. Don't like to throw hands up in the air but what else could/can I do. He thinks he knows it all".”
Peters ego is going to either kill him or make him fail.

That statement reminds me of the time I met two former Blue Mountain Avionics employees. They expressed concerns and recommended changes only to be ignored by the CEO. He thought he knew better and because of that, their early generation EFIS displays had many reports of problems...including mine.
 
That statement reminds me of the time I met two former Blue Mountain Avionics employees. They expressed concerns and recommended changes only to be ignored by the CEO. He thought he knew better and because of that, their early generation EFIS displays had many reports of problems...including mine.
I’ll be shocked if he ever finds someone that will test fly it for him
 
The most recent video he has uploaded of the aileron pulley mounting locations flexing is absolutely horrendous. I can't believe his "fix" is mounting steel plates on the exterior of the fuselage. :confused:
 
It's getting better all the time. First there were 4½ lb weights on the aileron spades, now 5¼ lbs of lead from McMaster-Carr, the well-known aviation parts supplier, and the aileron pulley mounts need to be reinforced.

I was rather surprised when he said the rear pulleys were bonded to the 0.090 carbon fiber skin as their only source of rigid support. Really? Yeah, it's strong stuff, but the skin isn't substantial at those thicknesses, and flight air loads on the ailerons are likely sufficient to tear loose the small bonding area of the bracket from the skin.

He could have easily bonded a CF doubler to the area during construction. Why didn't he anticipate the loads the pulley would impart on the skin? Another question is why bother using 4130 for his "solution"? Mild steel would work just fine. I suppose the 4130 sounds more proper for an aircraft.

That's another on the list of myriad engineering issues, and a good example why the thing is never going to fly. Well, if it does, it's not going to do so for very long.

Throughout the airframe he has demonstrated he doesn't understand the properties of CF. The crazy flex that propagates from one wing to the other when cycles of movement are applied to one wing is a good example of that.

How many more issues exist like the violent nose wheel divergence at low speeds, the main landing gear torn loose from its mounting due to uncontrollable aileron reversals at taxi speeds, and inadequate reinforcement of structures supporting critical flight control components, revealed by loads well below those that will exist in flight?

One wonders what's next.
 
Last edited:
Well, I watched a lot of Peter's videos and also have bought one of his deposits. Not at all confident, to ever see the real thing performing as advertised or able to keep the costs at 130k$. But he did a better job than expected and has really built something. The whole project, afaik, should be a kind of open source without any secrets and with a lot of contributions from the outside world...
When reading all the posts in this forum, my feeling is, that Peter seems to ignore this part of his promising idea, to use the skills of the aviation community all around.
And now I'm afraid, that after all those years of restless work on the Raptor, Peter might be forced to fly it on his own, despite of detecting more or less urgent issues that should be taken care of before the maiden flight.
Isn't there somebody out there close to Atlanta to offer a helping hand or advice? Maybe Peter is now ready to take the advice...
 
Well, I watched a lot of Peter's videos and also have bought one of his deposits. Not at all confident, to ever see the real thing performing as advertised or able to keep the costs at 130k$. But he did a better job than expected and has really built something. The whole project, afaik, should be a kind of open source without any secrets and with a lot of contributions from the outside world...
When reading all the posts in this forum, my feeling is, that Peter seems to ignore this part of his promising idea, to use the skills of the aviation community all around.
And now I'm afraid, that after all those years of restless work on the Raptor, Peter might be forced to fly it on his own, despite of detecting more or less urgent issues that should be taken care of before the maiden flight.
Isn't there somebody out there close to Atlanta to offer a helping hand or advice? Maybe Peter is now ready to take the advice...
He built something, but I don't know that what he's built will actually fly for long. It sure doesn't look like it. In the last video I skimmed through, he was testing a nonsensical approach to solving an aileron problem, and succeeded in demonstrating that the thing can't even taxi without shaking apart. From what I gather, many people have offered advice and suggestions, which have been largely ignored. I sincerely hope he doesn't try to fly that thing before it's actually safe, if that ever happens.
 
DaleB, I agree. In the past, it was not easy to offer some help or advice to Peter. Me, myself, made some suggestions. But looking at his last videos with those helpless and well, lonely, actions to bring his dream close to its first flight, there should be more support from all of the community. All the severe remaining problems are no game stoppers. I agree, some professional help is required. The question is, if Peter is already enough out of money yet?
 
He built something, but I don't know that what he's built will actually fly for long. It sure doesn't look like it. In the last video I skimmed through, he was testing a nonsensical approach to solving an aileron problem, and succeeded in demonstrating that the thing can't even taxi without shaking apart. From what I gather, many people have offered advice and suggestions, which have been largely ignored. I sincerely hope he doesn't try to fly that thing before it's actually safe, if that ever happens.
I have nightmares of flutter de-winging the thing. That's even a possible cause of the JetEze crash. Flutter bad.
 
Back
Top