Our Bird Spreads its Wings - Building the Raptor Prototype 

So subscribe and hit the bell.

And a big acknowledgment. 👍

I wonder if there is still a question about a dark colour on fibreglass?

Brian Garrett unfortunately a swept wing produces much less lift than a straight wing so you have to make it oversize to compensate. One of the negatives of a canard design.

About 180 square feet wing and fore plane combined.

there wont be a production line afaik this will only be available as a kit and if they decide to produce it it wont get FAA certification before 2030 or so it takes forever to get an aircraft certified

@@Crushonius Crushonious you sure do speak with 100% authority about something you clearly know very little about.

@@Crushonius The plan for production of this aircraft is one of the most compelling innovations for this project. Having the courage to put 'real transparency' in place by building the whole thing on youtube (and opening your every business decision up to know nothing trolls) is another. But I guess the latter does have its downsides.

It's just going on the roof panels. They are fairly flat.

you're not........it will cost 500

@@101xaplax101 to hell with that. I'd go with the velocity at that kind of insane prices for a kit lol Edited to add: another reason I'd go for the velocity is when people raised legitimate concerns about the position of retract switches and indicators the response from raptor was less than satisfactory given the intended price tag. Its nice they're building a nice aircraft but if its for general sale you need to listen to warnings about people being busy on ifr approaches and easily losing orientation

@@Th3_Gael - all the negative Nancy's need to look up the word prototype.

Don't mind the trolls, They clearly do not know how prototyping works. Now once it into production the prices will go drastically down. They are designing a plane that the idea is if you can buy a new car why not buy a small plane. Which i applaud. So the first models will start at 130k maybe a little more but eventually i think Peter said once "that it should be around 80k per plane" which is fantastic. The idea of a Prototype is to give a person a taste and feel of what they want and then figure out how to make it amass which will take your 130k price even lower. Peter can correct me in parts i get wrong it his project. I just happen to fully see the project and the vision behind it.

If it comes out at $500K (and if it flies even half as well as it looks), that will still be bargain. I'll pay it in a heartbeat.

I've shown that view before when we had the rear seats test fitted. It's great out the sides and front.

Ah yes, just found the videos on the website. It looks much better than I would have imagined, good to see. It almost looks like there is enough room in the back that you could leave out the seats and put a bed in there - this could be a flying motor home! :-)

They're coming. Just need to be installed.

@@RaptorAircraft Awesome! Wishing you all the best :)

Possibly.

It goes down and slightly up but it also extends out and tucks in thereby reducing area and subsequent lift.

Raptor Aircraft Did the flight test model use the same details then?

Yes, I blow them out before final fitment.

Bluuplanet see my below comment reply to Rick Hearn.

scsirob prototypes are always heavier than production aircraft. Once they go into production you should see a reduction in total weight, particularly with regard to the doors I think.

It's a prototype!

@@RaptorAircraft That's fine. But even a prototype will need to prove itself and should be representative for the final product. If it climbs like a dog and needs 2 miles of runway because you never considered weight then that's not good. I'm not criticizing your project, just trying to understand why you do what you do.

Most likely not certified. Read the website for details.

here www.raptor-aircraft.com/

Put a small screwdriver in there and twisted it around several times and removed it and cleaned it off and then repeated the process till no more dust was on the screwdriver. Then I blew it out with high pressure air.

Danny Georgeson was thinking the same damn thing????

@@micjbaron Every week there are just a couple of them. Not sure what the problem is or why they continue to watch.

Must be the jealous competitors. Screw them. :)

Just no worries : those are from Bulgaria - means quite opposite gesture : You should be careful when nodding to mean "yes" and shaking your head when you mean "no" in Bulgaria, as this is one of the places where the meanings of these gestures are the opposite. ;-)

@@anvegger Hi Andrey, I'm left wondering now if I should give you a 👍or a 👎 for your comment. It makes sense, I just hope that it was a Bulgarian making a positive reply who left it. - Danny

DA40's are over 40 feet.

Try Google.

The canard stalls before the wings, making the stall a no brainer, plus they just look cool. The wright brothers knew what they were doing.

@@russelllowry1061 Ok, thank you.

The anti-stall part, as @Russel Lowry said is one of the main benefits. The downside is that you can't have flaps without balancing flaps on both lifting surfaces (see overweight Beechcraft Starship), which means you need a lot of runway (higher speeds) for both takeoff and landing. Canards are more efficient fliers. In a conventional plane the horizontal stabilizer pushes down to balance out the aircraft. This downward force needs to be counter-acted by lift on the wings. This means extra drag as the wings are being asked to carry more weight than the mass of the aircraft in cruise. Canards lift from both the canard and main wing, so the amount of lift being created is equivalent to the mass of the aircraft in cruise. The downside to that is balance. Cargo and passengers need to be carefully (weighed &) balanced to ensure the canard always stalls before the main wing (back to that anti-stall thing). Letting the main wing stall in flight would mean entering a deep stall, which means a long slow (yet not safe) descent to the ground unless your plane is equipped with a surplus of power (to overcome the drag of a high angle of attack and accelerate enough to get the main wing flying again). Load up the nose too heavily and you may find it very difficult to take off (and maintain trim at higher speeds). Many canard pilots fly with a ballast in the nose to keep the plane balanced during solo flights. In a conventional aircraft, you can still screw up the weight & balance, but the effects won't be quite as pronounced. _Usually_ the rear seat area (and fuel tanks) on these composite canards is the CoG for flight, so you can basically fill up the back seats (or fuel tanks) without worrying, as long as your front seats weights are calculated, and the great efficiency means these planes can haul a lot of cargo and/or fuel.

@@EUC-lid Thank you.

Rick Hearn If you do that then you lose the main advantage of a canard, which is a stall proof main wing. The canard has to stall first and if it is a stabilator then there is the possibility that it’s angle of attack is sometimes less than the main wing and therefore the main wing stalls first and you have a dangerous pitching up moment, then deep stall. All of which would be deadly at low altitude.

Andy McKee thanks for the reply. What you say makes great sense. Here’s my follow up question: When I’ve pushed the stick way forward to lower the nose sharply how can the main wing’s angle of attack increase to reach it’s stall point? No disrespect, I just can’t get my head wrapped around the scenario you describe.