The company went bust in 2008.
Air Touring had a “dealership” for it, shortly before they did their “IPO” and predictably went bust shortly afterwards. I spoke to some people there at the time (not “top management” I should add) and their view was this was completely unworkable in Europe due to the amount of paperwork the pilot would have to collect. The only people who expressed interest were apparently “bankers” and none of them was going to get a JAR-FCL ATPL or something similar, and apparently the UK CAA said they would not allow it to be on the N-reg…
But that is Europe… was there ever a market in the USA? A turboJET needs a Type Rating and there is a number of people out there who fly bizjets themselves.
Peter wrote:
… this was completely unworkable in Europe due to the amount of paperwork the pilot would have to collect.
Why would that be? This is just another high-performance single-pilot aeroplane. No different -license wise – form a turbine Malibu or TBM or PC12. Plentry of those are flown by private pilots. Multiengine, so more like a King Air, but again, plenty of these are flown by PPL holders.
Over the years I have seen quite a few of similar aircraft concepts come and go. Not only the BD10 and Viperjet mentioned in that Wikipedia article. Can’t remember the names now, but every time one went to the Aerosalon in Paris or to the Farnborough show yet another new mockup would be on display. Why don’t they sell? My personal guess is that the combination of cost – they cost as much to buy and operate as a proper aircraft with 6 or 8 seats – and lack of practical use will attract very few buyers. No baggage space, difficult access (do they need someone on the ground who hauls a ladder so they can climb out of it just like from a real fighter jet?), two seats only and requires a long paved runway. Add to that a new manufacturer with unpredictable future, no network for maintenace (yet), no training infrastructure. Who will invest severl million currency units in such an aircraft?
Why would that be?
Apparently the CAA here got very upset by it. 500kt+ etc.
Around 2010 I went to a presentation at NATS (basically same thing as the CAA; they work closely together) where the presenter announced that any jet in European airspace will require an ATPL. There was a bunch of old CJ / King Air / etc guys there and their eyes rolled up but nobody said much because this was just totally outrageous.
A good point about the ladder 
In the US, I think almost all potential buyers for this aircraft would instead buy an L-39 for one tenth of the cost.
Peter wrote:
…announced that any jet in European airspace will require an ATPL…
This is simply not true. Nor was it ever true nor are there any such plans for the future (none that I have heard of). I know enough people who fly CitationJets (from Mustang to CJ4) and Phenoms single pilot all over Europe on PPLs. The training providers usually insist on the candidate holding an instrument rating but AFAIK there is not even a legal requirement for that. Mind you, a Mustang is a lot easier to fly than a Golden Eagle or similar complex old-fashioned (ergonomics and performance wise) piston twin. The lawmakers know that.
But these mini fighter lookalikes are really only toys for rich boys. For toys they are a little bit on the expensive side (I guess one can have as much fun in an Extra 300 at less than 1/10 of the cost) and rich boys with flying ambitions are not produced in sufficent quantity to make production viable. Add to the that all the surplus military jets on the market (we had that thread on the L29 and L39 recently) which can be bought for the value of the metal and which deliver exactly the same.
In the US, I think almost all potential buyers for this aircraft would instead buy an L-39 for one tenth of the cost.
Or this ‘wannabe L39’ for one hundredth of the cost.
https://www.flyer.co.uk/czechs-debut-microlight-fighter-at-aero/
Nice plane. Visibility must be awesome, even for the passenger.
I am tempted.. Hey, the world needs suckers like me to push new ideas forward! OK, you all give me reasons why not to be one of them. Not too many please, my wife may watch this space.
aart wrote:
OK, you all give me reasons why not to be one of them. Not too many please, my wife may watch this space.
If she reads this bit from the article: " …the aircraft’s heat ‘signature’ is almost zero making it hard to detect and shoot down. " she will definitely want you to buy one of them! Who likes to be shot down?
Sometimes she does..
The Javelin was not simply targeting private owners – it was a (planned) military trainer also (planning) to sell into the private market.
I am sure there would have been quite a few buyers, but the volume would have come from the military.
