This Genius Airplane consumes Less Fuel than SUV 

"Calculated" performance figures, but no actual test data. It's all vaporware, but the vaguely British accent of the narrator is convincing.

The company I worked for had a Beech Starship. We flew it around as a commercial commuter aircraft with commercial pilots. It look good, sounded great and had lots of space inside compared to others. But we seemed to need new props about every sixth landing. We learned why almost all aircraft have the prop in the front. Upon landing, and rocks, or dirt would damage the props. New we would be far from home and ordering one or two props. They would have to fly them out with a team from the factory to replace them. It was on us to pay for it and it was $$. After the third prop replacement, we returned it to Beech. Special pilots, not as fast as a commuter jet, always waiting on parts, etc. It looked killer in the giant hangar, but it was a bad design. Never again design a prop plane with the prop in the back. They get destroyed on landing.

It’s great to see so much effort put into this endeavor. The shorter runway take off is ideal for avoiding the big hubs, big traffic issues out of and into conventional International airports. That practical level of service coupled with the reduction in emissions makes this venture so worth while.

Very impressive performance numbers. Here's hoping that this one sees full production and finds acceptance in the market if it's as good as advertised.

So many videos like this. Still waiting for the travel revolution.

I hope all goes well for this company. It appears to be a wonderful addition to business travel.

This airplane definitely appears to have a lot of potential, very cool engineering !

This feels so much like the hype for the Beech Starship, which was supposed to be super-light, clean and efficient, carbon fibre, laminar flow. Wound up grossly overweight and too expensive. They took two seats out before it was even certified just to try to make it work.

I have been following this design for several years now and it continues to make it milestones. Small aviation is a very important sector. Many of us would use aviation from smaller cities in an inexpensive, comfortable and quick airplane. This taps into a largely unseen market. Handling and durability will likely be the final arbiters of commercial success. Thank you

I think the key to success of this project is the high quality of the 3D video...particularly, the hangar shots.

Interesting analysis of the claims, from the Wikipedia article: With a 35 ft (11 m) long fuselage and a 55 ft (17 m) wingspan, the claimed 22-to-1 glide ratio should yield a 3.5 sq ft (0.33 m2) equivalent flat-plate area drag.[9] With 500 hp (370 kW), this would allow a top speed of 300 kn (560 km/h) at 30,000 ft (9,100 m), and 430 kn (800 km/h) true airspeed at 65,000 ft (20,000 m), but the RED A03 critical altitude is 25,000 ft (7,600 m).[9] The propeller tips would have transonic wave drag and would operate in a disturbed wake, limiting propeller efficiency, and laminar flow would be difficult to maintain for a large part of the fuselage with windows and panel seams.[9] The configuration is similar to the 1948 Planet Satellite, or the 2011 EADS Voltaire electric aircraft concept.[7] The claimed 59% drag reduction "would be quite a hard task to achieve", according to the Royal Aeronautical Society, while lift-induced drag would not be reduced by laminar flow.[7] A 1:22 glide ratio like current airliners can be reached with its high wing aspect ratio, without a sensational drag reduction: better than other general aviation designs, but lower than most gliders.[7] The 460 mph (400 kn; 740 km/h) max speed is achievable, but the cruise speed has to be lower to reach the 4,500 nmi (8,300 km) range.[7] The fuel efficiency is difficult to compare with no specified payload, cruise speed and altitude.[7] Pushing the laminar flow to the limit could hinder handling qualities or structural efficiency, and laminar flow tends to be unreliable in service, as it is highly susceptible to degradation from surface irregularities.[7]

That's gonna seriously increase the amount of UFO sightings.

Following this aircraft through its development has sparked enthusiasm for the future of transportation by air and, due to the parallel efforts in the enhancement all azimuts of hydrogen fuel cells, of sustainable mass transit in general. But, the Celera has tickled the fancy of aircraft enthusiasts for years now, anticipating every step forward toward making this dream project an accessible reality. Hopefully, no insurmontable hurdles shall impede its accreditation/realization!

This is actually worth more to the industry. I can see many companies that have private airlines picking this up also many islands for short and long distance runs Definitely a golden award . Fantastic aircraft ❤

I’d get one if I was a multimillionaire. Price is $4.5M - $5M with a top speed of 460 mph. Also since planes can fly directly to your destination without the twists and bends of the road, it’s probably even more fuel efficient than a car if you wanted to get across the country.

That "Fuel" part, Thats what i've been waiting for in a plane for its market.

This combination of design elements was first achieved and flown by Eau Gallie High School Aeronautics Department in the 1980's. It was called the EG-1 experimental aircraft.

This thing is amazimg! I really do hope it goes into production and does well. There are a lot of unnecessary flights but used wisely and efficiently, this could really go along way to cutting emissions.

Will definitely look forward to the progress on this one!

Fifty years from now this will be old school, but in the present, it's eye opening innovation. This aircraft is rather intriguing and my hat's off to its creators!

This plane is the one that really should be using the new CATL 500 Wh/kg Batteries.

Yes, I think at this point this can private and point-2-point aviation. I am excited and looking forward to more updates!

All the luck to them. More clean aircraft are better for all of us !

Okay, it gets better fuel mileage than that SUV and pickup but how does it compare in trailer towing capacity?

This is an incredible piece of work, well done!

Exciting times! I just love the current wave of future aircraft concepts with better powertrains than just burning gas. Many/most will likely fail for one reason or another, but some will indeed make it to the market and hopefully be successful!

easily the coolest thing I've seen today....I hope they are successful & push thru all the way to the H2 fuel cells...very very COOL!

I love the push for efficiency. I'm excited to see what CATL's newly-announced aviation-grade batteries can do with an efficient design like this.

Looks sleek, well done! One thing I'd like to see is the Weight & Balance envellope. Just looking at the placement of the wing surfaces, having between zero and 19 people in the cabin, compounded with difference between full and near-empty fuel tanks would appear to be a major balancing challenge.

This is so much more makes sense than any hyper car , this is should be given more attention to the public so the industry can grow, and common people can fly

Has anyone thought about using the Omega 1 aviation engine in such a aircraft? The engine is extremely light for the power it creates and you can add each unit to another to increase the power. I would think it could be used with a hydrogen fuel. I'd be fascinated to see this engine, once the engine gets to the commercial stage, be used in such an advanced airplane.

I was flying with a friend one day and decided to calculate MPG based on fuel flow and ground speed. It was a twin engine Piper Aztec with 6 cylinder air cooled engines, and two bladed propellers. My calculated MPG was 20 and the plane was averaging about 200mph ground.

It just doesn't look like it should fly with such little (and aft) wing area! The test results/specs though--very impressive. I wish them all the luck in the world. I've love to be able to commute from my local FBO on one of these.

This is Amazing! Gets better mileage than most cars! And,it's a plane!

This has the potential to make running a charter business considerably more profitable. I can believe these haven't already flooded the charter market.

I would be more interested in MPG per pound of load beyond vehicle weight, or dollar per mile per pound load including capital and maintenance cost.

The concept is quite beautiful and stunning. This might be the revolution we've been waiting for!

They deserve every success!

As a Airline Transport Pilot, with close to 20,000 hours of flight time, I wonder how that thing will hold up flying the ILS into Denver during a severe icing storm and winds gusting to 55......visibility out those windows don't look that great for the pilots. Unless they're intending to get rid of us?

Turbulent flow is required to reduce wing stall speeds particularly at high angles of attack, so there may be some safety issues.

We oughta tell them about the toroidal propellers too

This is a great design. I hope it inspires designers to scale it up to larger sizes. Efficiency is beautiful!

The nose reminded me of the Bell X-1. A very cool fuel economy bird.

I would like to see the prop noise data for this aircraft. As long-time RC pilot pusher prop systems such as these are notoriously loud, I noticed the video was very careful to avoid any mention of noise. It looks like a good concept, but I will look for videos of the plane's takeoff with sound.

Wow. I bet it can also heal bad karma and it poops butterflies! I came here for an example of investor-fleecing lingo for my students and I was NOT disappointed 🤣

Innovation is one of the most appealing characteristic of human nature! The future is looking great!

That's substantially better than most boats. Amazing

Fascinating really. When will they be flying, and at what cost?

Wonder if they could also use a toroidal propeller to increase efficiency

That is HOT - it hits the SPOT.

keep going on this aviation development for the bigger ,faster ,cheaper and safer .

You can fly from la to Seattle without making any emissions. I get the distinct feeling that was a direct translation, or so is my instinct.

This aircraft is truly an incredible advancement in future of modern aviation. It's technology's will be integrated by other aircraft manufacturers in years to come. This aircraft is just amazing !!

If this thing achieves any of those performances stated, I'll eat my hat!

The video shows landings and takeoffs without so much as flaps, let alone any serious high lift devices. How do you get a slippery aircraft onto the ground.even on jet runways without them? How do you get it slowed down to pattern speeds and altitudes?

I am impressed by it as a technology demonstrator. Not so much as a viable commercial product. People with millions to spend want a proven safety track record, redundancy and turbine reliability.

✈🌍 Impressive! The advancements in small aviation are truly remarkable. It's fascinating to see how this design is catering to the needs of travelers in smaller cities, providing them with affordable, comfortable, and efficient air transportation. I wonder, what other innovations or features would you like to see in small aviation to further enhance its commercial success? Keep up the great work! 👍🚀

And the pusher prop helps auite a bit as pusher props are significantly more efficient than conventional forward facing ones.

Peter should take a drive up Guanella Pass in Colorado and look how Xcel stores energy at the Lower Creek Hydro Electric Reservoir.

Very efficient design, well done.

I’d love to see the this aircraft perform in icing conditions. It’s performance in crosswinds will be interesting as well. No, I don’t think this will be the biggest thing in aviation.

This company seems INSANE! Super excited.

Passanger : What happens when we run out of fuel or there's engine failure? Pilot : We glide and landing with engine off.

It is refreshing to hear about Laminar Flow again! (The more it is referred to in aviation research reports, I think, the better it is for the world.) When the aircraft body is made aerodynamically OK, it can be time to also take care of the propulsion system. By replacing traditional pitch control with BLADE TWIST CONTROL of the propellers, some amazing results can be achieved. E.g. the current top speed of Mach 0.6 can be increased to Mach 0.8 ! And still keep the regime of SILENT OPERATION in place.

Is it really more efficient than a traditional aircraft if it can carry less people? What would be the fuel consumption/payload weight metric for this aircraft and how does it compare to what we have now?

Heard of this before. Amazing design. Amazing aircraft

This must be a wake up call to the big aircraft manufacturers... everyone is worried about the future and this looks like it has some important answers.

Wow. I wish them the best of luck, seems like a wonderful idea. The fact that the laminar flow benefits do not scale up reminds me of an old classic book _The Forty Knot Sailboat._ The author made models of his hydrofoil and airfoil boat, also optimized for laminar flow, and they scooted across the water at great speed. But he never got a full sized one to work, and I'm guessing it was because laminar flow does not scale up.

About 25 yrs ago there was another plane like this called the VK-30 which got side stepped by the Cirrus line.

Eco friendly aviation time has come with this design . Simply fabulous. The egg shape fuselage for laminar flow is a breakthrough . This can be applied for SUV also

Yes! Seems like a giant leap forward for air travel!

Taxis going five hundred miles.

If it really does have totally laminar flow over the wings, wouldn't it have terribly sudden/scary stall characteristics?

Over-the-nose visibility doesn't look too great. On short final, with high pitch attitude, will pilot be able to see the runway? I had a plane with similar issue and eventually just did a final turn with roll out pretty much on the runway. I couldn't see the runway if I flew traditional final approach. Take off had similar issue: I'd look out the side to judge my position on the runway.

Oh my goodness I would love to be able to ride on that. I hope the best for this country because this looks so promising

My only concern is that a fully laminar wing will stall everywhere at the same time = super dangerous!

I'd love to see the numbers of this graceful bird if it was fitted with the new torodial propellers.

Great stuff. But, although I'm a glider pilot and love my planes, I have a feeling that the way forward to reduce CO2 emissions from aviation may ultimately be to do a lot less of it, especially in relation to 'non essential' travel. Also, we're fixed on the idea of being able to get from A to B fast. But is that really so important, in an age of ultra fast and powerful communications. I think the shape of the future has yet to truly emerge from the fog. But, this is a great little plane from what I can see and hopefully will do well in the niche executive transport sector.

Back in 1999 when the Ford Excursion was introduced, their advertisement said that the engine was very good that it was actually putting clean air back into the atmosphere. It was rated at 12 mpg on the highway, possibly not more than 8-10 mpg in the city. Helicopters can be flown with 100 HP engine or even less, but cars are built with > 250 HP engines as though they are all going to fly to space. The auto industry needs to learn from such airplane designs and need to push the performance to 100 mpg or else perish because they are just screwing up the environment with the CO2 emissions.

The design of the plane is giving me airship vibes. I wonder if the shape could be applied to a zeppelin, scaled up and given toroidal propellers. With the same engine, again, scaled up, it might be what the industry needs as a transport that straddles the area between fast, but expensive (not to mention, carbon intensive) heavy lift transport aircraft and the slow, but considerably cheaper, cargo ships sailing the oceans.

It doesn't look to me like the aspect ratio of the wings is much higher than that of other wings. Also, I wonder how much the hydrogen fueled drivetrain including storage cylinders is going to weigh. In the end it is all about fuel consumption per passenger kilometer/mile and it would surprise me a lot if this company manages to improve significantly upon what modern airliners achieve.

This is gorgeous! I want to get type certified immediately!

Yes, this is the future. I think it would be better though with contra rotation ducted fan props and canard configuration to reduce turbulence in front of the fan. It's good, but could be better.

this company should contact Taylor Swift & Elon

I think this would work well as a high value, time sensitive cargo or parts carrier. Housed at GA airports it would be more efficient than high traffic major hubs.

I have drawings from when I was about 8 years old of an aircraft I designed that looks like this one. Only that mine was propelled by 5 rocket engines at the back and had a Delta Wing.

Methanol is the most efficient way of storing hydrogen. And its much easier and cheaper to store than liquid hydrogen. Reformed methanol fuel cell/battery power would increase the range of this aircraft by more than 50%.

Would a toroidal propeller be applicable?

I get that it’s not truly a production model, but if we’re talking about passenger aircraft, they need to be able to hold large amounts of luggage and an excess of fuel in the event of an emergency. This design doesn’t seem to be effective for carrying passengers, fuel, and luggage, but we’ll see.

Has anyone built a radio controlled model of this aircraft? It would be a great subject for 'scale' modeling.

I see this as an interesting experiment. I don’t, but if I were willing to accept the pretty numbers they quote then I have follow up questions. 1.) How do they maintain the laminar flow with an airplane in service. It seems to me that dirt, bugs, rain and de-icing systems and actual ice will make maintaining laminar flow problematic. 2.) How do they handle emergency descent from FL500 due to pressurization loss? That’s a lot of altitude to get rid of. 3.) When they just “switch off the engine” as they put it for an efficient glide how are they maintaining pressurization? Something has to be running to keep it pressurized. Additionally as an instructor I have shut down a number of engines in multi-engine training and it’s not uncommon for an engine to be reluctant to start back after it has cooled down. I would be unhappy to shut down an engine at the temperatures you find at FL500. 4.) If they somehow do make it run on hydrogen how are they going to handle its availability? I am thinking this will sharply decrease the amount of usable airports. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. I look forward to their progress.

I wonder if there are ways this can be scaled up past its current limits by ingesting boundary layer flow and using it to power the engine.

I give them points for doing something outside the norm with a considerable potential efficiency benefit. If investors want to put money into it good for them, the potential reward is there. It is very hard to get a new design all the way through certification and then on to commercial viability so the risk is there too. If you don't see it, don't invest.

I ain't flying on anything with huge hydrogen cylinder tanks.. The Zeppelin tried that. But i am hugely impressed by the diesel motor (noisy?) and the general concept. Best wishes!!

WOW , DEE WOW-WOW-WOW !!! HOLY MACKEREL-GREAT BALLS OF FIRE , BRING IT ON . THANK YOU , WELL DONE FOLKS .

Assuming a weight of 3 tonnes, it would take 150 kW just to keep it airborn. Assuming a cruising speed of 300 mph, that works out at 7 mpg (not 18-25 mpg as stated), and that isn't even taking into account the horrendous ICE engine inefficiency or drag. I'm calling BS :(((

When you start your video with a bogus hype premise, it diminishes the credibility of the rest of the video. Also, "25 mpg" is actually a deceptive stat in the aviation world.

I don't think it is the biggest thing to happen in The industry, but it is a big step in the right direction.

We've had Jet engine powered aircraft for over 70 years years now and they have improved them many times over, BUT, it's time for the next quantum leap over jet engines. Just like going from reciprocating piston engines to jet engines, it's time for the next completely different aircraft engine. Probably one that can both push the aircraft to space and still be used for earth landing.

Looks great and all that, perfect for an experimental class where maybe one or two design elements can actually be put in use. This comes across as a marketing pitch more than anything. This "bullet body" isn't new, Zeppelins had it. And yet, a lot of modern air bodies have evolved to having air disrupters and microvanes plastered all over the airframe to improve control and even REDUCE drag. The feature of keeping fuel out of the wings threw me a bit. That was a huge design improvement at the time and was pushed as "free weight". EX: Every 100lb of fuel in the fuselage was 100lb of cargo weight. Every 100lb of fuel in the wing was within the lifting body and considered "free weight". Along with the extra fuselage space, which has to made bigger to hold the fuel because its not in the wings. Hydrogen: That is quickly becoming the new Green New Deal grift. Scientists have been poking at that for decades. At lab levels and small projects, it's fantastic. Large scale becomes a problem. Naturally occurring hydrogen is limited and takes time to form. But it can be made commercially for large scale. It's ingredients, wait for it,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Natural gas, coal and oil. Fossil fuels baby. Hydrogen is taking the same path as the ethanol grift. When people started looking behind the curtain, they found that more fossil fuels energy was being used to produce ethanol then what was produced by the ethanol. But by then the grants and tax funded programs were on a roll. But slap a Green sticker on the side of the engine and its the best thing ever. Batteries are another planet saver that really aren't. Lithium is a limited resource and planet destroying mines are going full blast to dig it up, using fossil fueled equipment and,,, save the planet? And of course batteries are charged by electricity which is made predominately by fossil fuels, something the greens seem oblivious to (or pretend they are).