I have to be honest – if I see one more composite baked slick 2-seater with a Rotax 912s and a stick instead of a yoke, I’m going to puke.
You better not come to Aero Friedrichshafen then 
They have halls full of these and yes they all look similar. I thought this first one was pretty
The Blackwing, I believe
I still remember the fantastic performance of the MCR01 advertised by Dyn Aero
I still remember the fantastic performance of the DA42 210kt and 2000nm range.
OTOH there might be a reason for this
Presumably it is a formula which is relatively easy to design with some CAD package, and the less restrictive rules mean the barrier to entry is way lower than with certified planes. So it doesn’t cost millions to knock something up and exhibit it and see if it generates interest.
These miniscule planes will be very fast however – cockpit volume is Job #1 if you want speed and MPG.
LeSving wrote:
What engine would you put into an RV8 to fly MoGas?
Any carbureted 0-360 like the 360-A1P with a govenor. You can run them on cargas oversquare at 2000RPM/ 24 MP at 26l/h. Make sure you add a good gascolator like the one from ANDAIR. Been running MOGAS or Italian green since 1500 hrs in our Husky. No vapor lock in the summer and no pronblems till 18.000 ft
why not an injected IO360 (the low compression version, like the M1B) ? Why I often hear the association of MOGAS with Carbureted Engines? It’s a genuine question , I’m not an expert, but I don’t see why a low compression injected engine should not work with low octane gasoline, if the equivalent low compression carbureted version can.
Why I often hear the association of MOGAS with Carbureted Engines?
Peterson found some injection systems troublesome with MoGas. They at some point stopped testing, I guess. But there are many OWT out there…
Peter wrote:
Presumably it is a formula which is relatively easy to design with some CAD package,
I think it is rather the “only” answer to the parameters: 2 seater, Rotax 912, MTOW 450 kg, max stall speed 65 km/h, composite materials, and fly as fast as possible. But then again, Pipistrel proves the opposite so maybe the CAD theory isn’t all that bad.
Peter wrote:
Presumably it is a formula which is relatively easy to design with some CAD package
Presumably supplemented with a photo from a 1985 magazine article on the Lancair 235…. The answer is that Lance Neibauer was an artist before he was a plane designer, and people still like the looks of what he created. The first prototype pictured below has been in the EAA museum since 1986, coming up on 30 years.
Some of the new ones are almost indistuishable from the original Lancair
Silvaire wrote:
Presumably supplemented with a photo from a 1985 magazine article on the Lancair 235
Or maybe 30 years before that by Stelio Frati
I’m a great admirer of Stelio Frati’s designs but the genesis of the Lancair and its current derivatives is different. Lance Neibauer’s uncle was long before (early 50s, same time as the Falco) involved with development of the the Meyers 200, which is a fast plane. I think you can see the similarities, in particular the aft fuselage and tailcone shape .
PS Here’s your Frati (Falco etc) dervative, in wood as per the ‘original’
Alpi Pioneer
AdamFrisch wrote:
and a stick instead of a yoke
What is wrong with a stick?
