Anyone hear anything? Can’t find anything in the press about the fate of this project…
Apparently they had a serious accident due to loss of control in the landing phase.
I suspect the project is dead and will risk an obituary:
2 years ago I have made a bet with a friend who was a big fan of the plane because of its looks and the nationality of the genius behind it.
I bet that it would not even come close to the performance numbers claimed, would never be able to fly pressurized and would not make it to certification.
I did not bet that it would crash due to loss of control, but now that it has happened one can take a second look at the very very weird tail and conclude that you can’t mess with the rules of physics…
Some investors must be quite unhappy…
Flyingfish wrote:
Assuming it WILL be delivered and the FAA will give the experimental planes one-off CoAs despite them being built by the factory…
There’s a provision for that within the Experimental category, but as far as I know it’s limited to one-offs like this glorious beast, built by Kim Kimball (originally for a customer named John McCulloch). FAA would not allow serial factory production within Experimental Category.
I’ve heard they now have 80 orders. The web site says they fly under a “special airworthiness certificate”.
Is this a fancy way of calling an amateur built experimental? or are they using EASA slang?
And how can they get away with this – where is the 51% then?
Airworthiness Regime
Ready-to-fly aircraft with Special Airworthiness Certificate
They have diluted the claim to the fastest piston aircraft
“The Valkyrie is one of the fastest piston aircraft on the market”.
Which implies they are now projecting less than 242 knots instead of the previous 260.
I think there are a number of technical issues with this aircraft:
- small propeller ( for 350 HP) sitting behind a steep disruption of the fuselage’s lines and the pair of Tomcat-inspired vertical stabs. It really looks like the poor prop is unwelcome in this aircraft. I think this will be horribly noisy and also inefficient.
- extremely innovative, giant forward tilting “canopy”. How will such a solution behave under extreme temperature and pressure changes?
There is also another aspect that disturbs me: it is marketed as a “private” aircraft – as in “private jet” with focus on luxury, looks, etc.
There is a good chance that buyers will be more affluent newbies than seasoned pilots. Good luck with 350 turbocharged HP and a non-certified airframe.
Assuming it WILL be delivered and the FAA will give the experimental planes one-off CoAs despite them being built by the factory…
Rwy20 wrote:
The price: 700’000 $
It’s not new…it’s been going on for a decade…it’s a vapor plane. Only one made and it doesn’t fly.
Square sine wave noise on the Avanti’s make the noise distinct because the prop is chopping off the exhaust. But it’s actually not louder than a King Air. But certainly more noticeable. Some airfields that have banned them have done so based on how they sound, not how much. Noise racism, basically. 
On take off, the Avanti has been measured at 81.9 dBA, slightly lower than the Beechcraft King Air at 82.8 dBA. This is below FAA stage 3 noise limits which set a maximum of 89 EPNdB for take off. On some airports they use SENEL measuring and there it can bust the limits, probably because it’s not a great climber. But so do lots of other aircraft.
Airborne_Again wrote:
What’s the technical reason for that?
Disturbed air passing through the propeller disc.
Mooney_Driver wrote:
would be very cautious with a pusher configuration due to noise.What’s the technical reason for that?We do get one or two Avantis from time to time and I can hear them from miles out. Some folks have already protested massively against them, also elsewhere.
I would be very cautious with a pusher configuration due to noise.
We do get one or two Avantis from time to time and I can hear them from miles out. Some folks have already protested massively against them, also elsewhere.
If it is anything like that, it will be a non-starter in large parts of Europe.
Otherwise another interesting design, the viability of which I will believe once it is done. The canard looks awful, like it was an afterthought and not well thought through.
They have moved on from CGI to a mockup (no propeller visible, it seems)
