Has anyone already placed an order for a Panthera?

[Jean]

Some more translation...

"Panthera was primarily designed with a 6 cylinder Rotax in the 220-330 hp range in mind. This engine was promising a low weight and low mogas consumption. But Rotax abandonned that project.
Therefore, Pipistrel designers chose the Lycoming IO-390 which was to be certified as iE-2 (Electronic Fuel-Injected FADEC) allowing as well low mogas consumption. But Lycoming eventually abandonned that project too."

They seem very obsessed by mogas engines. Mogas is cheaper but not available on most airports in Europe.

"Slip/Slide warning: at 90 kt clean or 75 ldg cfg a two times ball deviation left or right generates a natural vibration in the stick indicating the non symetrical attitude".

"At 200 kt descent speed, turbulence is handled very comfortably".

"The aircraft is very stable in route , a good IFR machine"

"At level flight in t/o config power set for 100kt, Panthera accelerates to 135 kt without any power change when cleaning flaps and gears".

"Panthera is compared to same class aircrafts. The weight is considerably lower: 400 pounds lighter thant Bonanza P35, 340 pounds lighter than Mooney M20K and... 703 pounds lighter than Cirrus SR22"

"With only 210 hp Panthera is faster than Bonanza and Mooney by 15 kt and same speed as SR22 which has 100hp more"

"Roomy cabin, as big a Cirrus, 39' wide at shoulders and more at hips"

"Pipistrel is working on an electrical FIKI system"

[Antoine]

Thanks Jean. A small correction: cabin width of 125 cm actually works out to 50" I think.

Jeff agreed, I also think the numbers are good enough. The pics show a Go-Pro on the T tail and the steps are not retractable (yet). The former alone is worth 5 knots on a Lancair 360 (says someone who tried).
And in the article, they talk about excessive cooling and Pipistrel's intention of reducing cooling flow. So there still is some potential in aerodynamics alone.

The low Vfe and Vle are bad news and I agree with you that this will make for challenging flight planning with the possible need for speed brakes to tame it.

[CFIDave]

"Panthera was primarily designed with a 6 cylinder Rotax in the 220-330 hp range in mind. This engine was promising a low weight and low mogas consumption. But Rotax abandonned that project.
Therefore, Pipistrel designers chose the Lycoming IO-390 which was to be certified as iE-2 (Electronic Fuel-Injected FADEC) allowing as well low mogas consumption. But Lycoming eventually abandonned that project too."

That sounds remarkably similar to what Diamond said when they were developing the DA50 SuperStar back in 2007 and were dependent on new engine developments:
- 1st choice Rotax 6-cylinder engine project cancelled.
- 2nd choice Continental 6-cylinder FADEC engine project was also cancelled; existing non-FADEC Continental engines consumed too much fuel.

Performance with the 168hp AE300 diesel (the DA50 Magnum model) was inadequate. So the DA50 (if it ever comes back to life as a single instead of the DA52 twin) still awaits a suitable engine.

[Jean]

"Panthera was primarily designed with a 6 cylinder Rotax in the 220-330 hp range in mind. This engine was promising a low weight and low mogas consumption. But Rotax abandonned that project.
Therefore, Pipistrel designers chose the Lycoming IO-390 which was to be certified as iE-2 (Electronic Fuel-Injected FADEC) allowing as well low mogas consumption. But Lycoming eventually abandonned that project too."

That sounds remarkably similar to what Diamond said when they were developing the DA50 SuperStar back in 2007 and were dependent on new engine developments:
- 1st choice Rotax 6-cylinder engine project cancelled.
- 2nd choice Continental 6-cylinder FADEC engine project was also cancelled; existing non-FADEC Continental engines consumed too much fuel.

Performance with the 168hp AE300 diesel (the DA50 Magnum model) was inadequate. So the DA50 (if it ever comes back to life as a single instead of the DA52 twin) still awaits a suitable engine.

I agree but Panthera's protoptype already makes a very good job with a plain old IO-390. Not the case of the DA 50.

[CFIDave]

I agree but Panthera's protoptype already makes a very good job with a plain old IO-390. Not the case of the DA 50.

The point I was trying to make is that aircraft manufacturers including Pipistrel continue to be "victimized" by engine manufacturers who abandon or cancel plans to develop newer FADEC, mogas, diesel, or more fuel-efficient engines. This (as well as the Thielert bankruptcy) is what likely convinced Diamond to start Austro Engines -- so that Diamond might better control its own destiny with respect to engine suppliers.

The related issue is that it's difficult or impossible for piston aircraft engine manufacturers to invest in new engine technology when there are so few new airplanes being produced (fewer than 1000 certified GA piston airplanes were sold in 2013). Engine manufacturers can't make a profit on new engine designs when development has to be amortized over such a small number of potential units sold.

The result is that most new high-tech airplanes like the Panthera must unfortunately be designed around the use of antiquated engines developed long ago. As I used to tell people when we owned a Lycoming DA40: "We fly a George Jetson aircraft powered by a Fred Flintstone engine."

[Gasser]

My biggest gripe on the whole economy of private aircraft development is the fixation only on absolute speed, and or range when speed to fuel burn...efficiency should be most important. I'm all for going fast but going pretty fast while not burning much gas is more important than going F-ing fast but fuel be damn.

I think this thing only going 170 knots but burning just 11.xx gph would give Cirrus heart burn. If you want more speed then do a turbo option for the people that want or need to go high.
I love the concept of the mooney. Fast for the amount of fuel burn but in today's times and tech, no chute and crappy useful load will cause there new start up to flounder IMO. This aircraft with its good useful load( assuming it's real in the end) and the chute with very good speed and efficiency would sell like hot cakes. Having competition for Cirrus is good for GA. Keeps cost controlled and gets more people flying.

I hope they succeed and my fantasy of how this plane will eventually get certified is my dream plane. Basically a modern composite mooney type aircraft with great speed to efficiency and a ballistic parachute.

I wish Pipestrel all the luck.

[Antoine]

One way out of the deadlock with small volumes and high certification costs is to go experimental

Actually, Pipistrel will be doing exactly this: the first batches of planes will be flying prototypes, sold to customers. Very clever.
The only reason i did not go for that is you can't have them IFR-certified under EASA rules.
Otherwise I would probably soon be sitting on a heap of Pipistrel parts with a broom in my hand and making airplane noises!

[Gasser]

Hum, to be honest I have no idea if you can fly IFR in the US with an experimental aircraft. I'd consider that option if the price was right.

[Jean]

Hum, to be honest I have no idea if you can fly IFR in the US with an experimental aircraft. I'd consider that option if the price was right.

Ask Brock.
He's flying an experimental supercharged DA40.

[CFIDave]

Hum, to be honest I have no idea if you can fly IFR in the US with an experimental aircraft.

You absolutely can fly IFR in an Experimental Amateur-Built aircraft in the US, and even carry passengers so long as you're not charging money for the flight. I considered building a Lancair Evolution before buying a new DA42, since the entire carbon-fiber shell goes together in 2 weeks at the Lancair factory, and there are multiple builder-assist companies to help the owner complete and finish the aircraft while still meeting the FAA's "51 percent rule."

It will likely be years (if ever) before similar help is available to build a Panthera.