Yes…there are no free lunches in aerodynamics.
I like that they’re offering something different from Cirrus. Not because there is anything wrong with Cirrus, but Cirrus made a number of decisions on welded gear and rommy cabin that may not suit everone in the market. Offering a Cirrus copy that’s just a little different is uninspiring (think Cessna 400), but I like the fact that Pipistrel has taken a very different approach and target pilots looking for something more efficiency/speed focussed.
Good point about the thin wing. For a serious tourer, I would expect it to become an option at some point.
Hi Phillipp,
The current issue of a german pilot has a flight report of the IO-390 powered Panthera.
Which one?
Sorry for the delay. Been flying some…
Sorry also for the missing word “magazine” in my last post. 
It’s in fliegermagazin however.
Had a talk today with one of the test pilots of the Panthera.
The reason for the swap of engines was explained to me as follows:
- Due to lack of interest (?) Lycoming has apparently abandoned Mogas certification for the IO390.
- The IO540 they now want to use is however fully certified for the use with Mogas (which surprises me but ok, he said so).
- He said further that while the standard airplane will be delivered with 50 USG tanks (to which he comments that with equal fuel flow both engines deliver the same speed, therefore the range is still valid), but they are considering offering LR tanks as an option.
They saw 177 KTAS at 75% at 7500 feet, using 11.2 GPH.
75% would be 158 hp, 0.425 lbs / (hp x hr), so the fuel flow is plausible.
They originally wanted 200kt at 10 GPH, so they only get 75% of the speed per gallon fuel flow they claimed…
A Columbia 400 needs 195 hp with approx. 14GPH (lean of peak) and almost the same SFC, so needs 25% more fuel.
The Cirrus SR22 will also make that speed, but needs more power and almost 17 GPH.
Clearly the Panthera is a more efficient airframe; given the Columbia is not retractable and quite a bit heavier, it is clear where that difference comes from.
To be honest, speed is not everything. 10kts more or less is not significant.
That is 30 miles closer in 3hrs. If you fly 3+ leg you want a bit more comfort.
To be honest, speed is not everything
But it sure helps….
Those actual performance figures are still very very impressive.
It’s like 100LL dropping in price by 25% or so.
200kt TAS is always paid for heavily in fuel. Turboprop owners achieve it, at high altitudes, but they pay for it heavily.
The Cirrus SR22 will also make that speed, but needs more power and almost 17 GPH
The non-turbo does 177 knots at just over 14 GPH (at the right altitudes).
200kt TAS is always paid for heavily in fuel. Turboprop owners achieve it, at high altitudes, but they pay for it heavily.
But not necessarily in fuel. An old, draggy Silver Eagle will do 200 knots at 22GPH. And on european average, 22GPH of jet cost wasless than 15 GPH of 100LL.
He said further that while the standard airplane will be delivered with 50 USG tanks (to which he comments that with equal fuel flow both engines deliver the same speed, therefore the range is still valid), but they are considering offering LR tanks as an option.
It seems like the Pipistrel people have learned nothing in the meantime…
It seems like the Pipistrel people have learned nothing in the meantime…
Well, at least and if that information is correct, there is one viable explanation why they discarded the IO390. If Lycoming indeed has suspended or dropped it’s Mogas certification, then the IO390 won’t get much attention in Europe.
Whereas the fuel capacity is concerned, at least they are now “thinking” of LR tanks whereas before they cathegorically denied them.
But you have a point, I won’t buy one either :)
