The Flying Pill

It’s Potentially Revolutionary to show you WHAT NOT to do!! :D

Its ugly, but with a diesel and the low drag planform, I expect it to have good performance. I'd love to hear the details behind the takeoff distance mentioned in the article. I wonder if that's a balanced field distance, which would (sort of) make sense. Your everyday reporter isn't going to understand that issue well enough to write anything useful about it, so...
 
I think this thing is horrendously ugly and missing at least one engine. They state the takeoff distance is 3,300’ at Standard...o_O

fQivxq9.gif
 
Brings to mind a halibut with that window configuration. Got to imagine the forward visibility is pretty much nil. Sure has a great view of the sky, however.
 
The company's claim seems to be that it will be no more expensive for a small group to fly in an airliner than to charter a 500L. As an added benefit, you could fly into smaller airports closer to your true destination. It's probably too early to say if the company can live up to its promises, but if the operating cost and performance matches up with what they are saying, the limiting factor on a mass migration from flying on large jets to traveling in egg-taxis will be pilots, I think. Could this cause a greater demand for commercial pilots who don't necessarily have their ATP? I don't even think this requires a type rating.
 
I'll believe it when it gets certified. If it gets certified.

I figure well know in 3 to 5 years
 
Looks pretty slick. I hope they achieve their certification goals. More new airframes is always good.
 
I'd go fiftiethsies on this with some others.
 
New take on an old design.

Mixmaster
The Mixmaster had two engines driving contra rotating props. This has one engine. Kinda different, though one can certainly see the similarities. The Mixmaster had all kinds of problems, I think there's one left in pieces in the Museum of the USAF. I hope the newer entry fares better.
 
Back
Top