The revolutionary 460mph bullet-shaped
plane that costs $328 per hour to fly and
does 25 miles to the gallon as makers claim
it will make private air travel as
affordable as commercial
Daily Mail (UK),
by
Frances Mulraney
Original Article
Posted By: Imright,
8/29/2020 6:09:39 PM
The much-anticipated Celera 500L 'bullet' plane which is set to revolutionize private air travel has been revealed.Developed by California-based Otto Aviation, the Celera is a six-person craft they say boasts groundbreaking fuel efficiency with eight times less consumption. Yet, it can still fly at jet speeds with a maximum cruising speed of 460 miles per hour, while having a range of more than 4,500 miles, twice that of other aircraft the same size. Powered by a RED A03 engine, the aircraft is expected to be on commercial sale by 2025 but the cost is not yet known until main production begins. Scroll down for video
Reply 1 - Posted by:
bad-hair 8/29/2020 6:23:39 PM (No. 525249)
I suspect air travel and travel in general are in for some changes. BUT Does the six person aircraft include pilots so it's a 4 passenger ? How many of these does it take to compete (fuel or otherwise) with a 737 ? 200 passengers with 2 pilots v 4 passengers w 2 pilots ? Silly article really, go buy your flying car.
1 person likes this.
Reply 2 - Posted by:
Jesuslover54 8/29/2020 6:47:30 PM (No. 525256)
These things are always five years out and when the time rolls around the investors have lost all their money. Statistically speaking, of course, but you never know.
8 people like this.
Reply 3 - Posted by:
konocti95 8/29/2020 6:54:27 PM (No. 525263)
I got all excited about the Eclipse jet in 2000...and the Lit Motors C-1 self balancing motorcycle in 2012...and the Elio 86 mpg car in 2017...
Will Lucy hold the football for me for reals this time?
16 people like this.
Reply 4 - Posted by:
DVC 8/29/2020 7:04:43 PM (No. 525268)
We will see. The piston engine is a light weight, all aluminum diesel. Those attributes rarely have been commercially successful together before. Diesel engines generate exceptionally high internal stresses, and the successful ones have had thick cast iron structures, think big semi-trucks. The lightweight ones in automotive use have typically been not very durable.
The laminar flow fuselage shape is immediately recognizable as a NACA laminar flow wing profile, something about like a 66215 or 67215 or so, well known ways of making low drag airfoils. It will require
a very smooth manufacturing process to work, but composites can do that today, not insurmountable. This pilot thinks that cockpit visibility looks abysmal at best.
I have flown my own pusher, composite aircraft for over 1000 hours since I built it, so I know a little
bit about the topic. I have seen many new flash-in-the-pan "greatest idea ever" aircraft come to Oshkosh
and then never go anywhere beyond a prototype. The Eclipse 500 and two Cirrus models are the only new designs that I can think of at the moment which have been successful, although for the Eclipse, that may be an overstatement, there are complaints. The Cirrus jet is a single engine very small jet aircraft, sells for about $2 million. Their single engine piston aircraft sells for about $700K or so. Even fairly
basic aircraft today are eyewateringly expensive to purchase.
Interesting design....we'll see how far it goes. And how many people are actually up to flying their own
aircraft? It is not trivial from a skill standpoint, and the costs are much higher than most imagine.
Best wishes, but after seeing so many interesting prototypes go nowhere, I will watch and learn.
9 people like this.
Reply 5 - Posted by:
Ida Lou Pino 8/29/2020 7:09:01 PM (No. 525273)
The best feature - - it runs on algae!
3 people like this.
Reply 6 - Posted by:
Highlander 8/29/2020 7:20:53 PM (No. 525284)
One thing I’d never want to see while flying is that idiot light flashing red, telling me I have just thirty seconds to live before impact!
4 people like this.
Reply 7 - Posted by:
davew 8/29/2020 7:50:47 PM (No. 525303)
I tried to get some real performance specs on this but their website doesn't list even the basics about service ceiling or whether it is turbocharged or pressurized. Unless it can operate above 12,000 feet it is not going to be a reliable form of transportation because it can't get above a lot of weather conditions or operate in higher elevation airports like Denver. Also, a single engine aircraft is fine for private aviation pilots but I don't think commercial passengers are going to like flying over large bodies of water or coastal areas on one engine. Seems like they left off a lot of the details that matter in their press release.
5 people like this.
Reply 8 - Posted by:
Strike3 8/29/2020 7:53:52 PM (No. 525307)
Nice concept but will such a small plane allow you to set your scotch and soda on the tray and have it not spill all over you at every draft?
All kidding aside, the most important question is will the underprivileged be able to fly in it as often as the white privileged can?
6 people like this.
Reply 9 - Posted by:
bad-hair 8/29/2020 7:59:01 PM (No. 525313)
Yep Got it #7. Altitude 1500 feet Light up on the dash says "Maintenance Required". Just pull over to the side of the road.
I just don't want these idiots flying over my house.
2 people like this.
Reply 10 - Posted by:
Lawsy0 8/29/2020 8:38:03 PM (No. 525334)
I'll believe it when Limbaugh buys one! As if.
Guess what! If you didn't already know it, Daily Mail (UK), turns off YOUR ad blocker automatically the moment you open the site. Fancy footwork, ya'll.
2 people like this.
Reply 11 - Posted by:
coldoc 8/29/2020 9:30:12 PM (No. 525351)
Nice pitch for some sucker money, but if you're one of those born every minute, here's your sign!
0 people like this.
Reply 12 - Posted by:
kono 8/29/2020 9:40:58 PM (No. 525354)
Isn't "bullet shaped" kind of like "warhead shaped"? And traveling at 400 mph.... what does its radar profile look like? Will our defense systems have to be disabled to allow these things to fly around without worry about being shot down?
Sorry for #11... I stopped opening DM when it became clear that they were not going to let users read who use ad-blockers. So I'm not going to be in a position to let them disable it, themselves. But if a site disabled something on my machine without my permission, I might consider disabling their site in a way that would require a proctologist to restore it to service.
I don't blame them for needing ad revenue to stay financially viable. But I will not let their animated ads (especially the flashing ones) send me into seizure. And I'm not going to pay them ransom, I mean subscription fees, on hopes that it will spare me from the ads. (And on the same topic, I won't pay Lcom more than 50 bucks a year to get rid of their ads.)
0 people like this.
Reply 13 - Posted by:
DVC 8/29/2020 9:48:49 PM (No. 525361)
#8, this is not going to be a commercial passenger aircraft, I am sure. Private aircraft.
0 people like this.
Reply 14 - Posted by:
snowoutlaw 8/29/2020 10:00:14 PM (No. 525365)
Not needed, here in CA we have the electric bullet train that goes 200mph, only needs a trillion more and its done.
1 person likes this.
Reply 15 - Posted by:
DVC 8/29/2020 10:01:50 PM (No. 525366)
Don't be concerned, #13. First, do you imagine that the USA has an air defense system with missiles at the ready to shoot down 'bad guys'? We do NOT. We had Nike air defense missiles in place around big cities in the 1950s, all removed by the 60s and never replaced with anything. 100% of our air defense capability is manned aircraft at this point, and there were really none available on Sept. 11th, so some entirely unarmed F-16s were scrambled to try to intercept what they thought was going to be an attack on the White House or Congress. The pilots decided that they could ram and likely die, if needed, but had no gun ammo, no missiles and it takes a LONG time to arm them from scratch. We may well have a few armed interceptor aircraft now, perhaps, but certainly nothing that is automated and hair trigger, might accidentally shoot down a civil aircraft.
So, getting shot down is not something to worry about at all. And as to shape.....even a military radar doesn't have any idea what a target is shaped like. Just a blip. It can see bigger targets farther.
Aircraft today flying above very low altitudes are required to have electronic gear which sends data about who and what they are to air traffic centers and to nearby aircraft to make mid-air collisions less likely. And most civil (air traffic control) radars cannot even see most small aircraft at all by just the radar return, they can only see them with these radar transponders which project a big signal, not by reflected radar, because they are not military search radars.
I have been flying in an aluminum Cessna and had them not be able to see me at all at 50 miles. My composite aircraft, it turns out, is pretty stealthy, by accident - which is why we have transponders to make us very visible to radar.
2 people like this.
Reply 16 - Posted by:
RuckusTom 8/29/2020 10:35:35 PM (No. 525382)
It'll do your dishes and mow your lawn too.
0 people like this.
Reply 17 - Posted by:
Trashcann 8/30/2020 12:06:18 AM (No. 525417)
The engine this plane uses puts out 500 hp max. I don't see how they are going to get 460 mph out of that. I am glad people are working to expand efficiency in air travel but I will not hold my breath for this aircraft.
1 person likes this.
Reply 18 - Posted by:
mc squared 8/30/2020 12:07:12 AM (No. 525418)
GM sold 'lightweight' diesels in Buicks, Pontiacs and Caddies in the early 80s. A retired car salesman told me they wouldn't take those cars in trade. I know it's 40 years on but diesels have very high cylinder pressures and don't lend themselves to light weight.
2 people like this.
Below, you will find ...
Most Recent Articles posted by "Imright"
and
Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)