This company is really good in PR, much more than other aircraft manufacturers. And they know the investors market so they gathered a lot of money to design their plane, with a very small team (they have maybe 4 engineers, plus some freelancers).
I talked to one of the founders at AERO and he seemed super bright.
That said, it seems they didn’t invent much. They use the last technologies. APM uses the same one shot wing and fuselage since the end of the 90s.
At least a cirrus is made of plastic parts glued or bolted together in the traditional way, like metal planes, but with the “one shot” Elixir concept I would wish the insurance (fully comprehensive mandatory) deemed the plane totaled for every little scratch!
AdamFrisch wrote:
the whole wing
Which definitely is not a good thing when you want to transport the aircraft over land. Just “because you can” doesn’t necessarily mean it’s a good idea from a practical point of view. And what about repair? Inspection?
They have demonstrated a repair method when they tested for ultimate load.
Are there any details?
I would expect the wing can be removed, otherwise the whole thing would have to be broken up in most instances of an off-airport landing.
Carbon fibre repairs are in many ways much easier than on metal airplanes.
Metal repair is straight forward. Carbon is a lot more mess, and requires more skill. Enough to matter? probably not. But this “one shot” is something else. The only advantage is it is cheaper to produce large structures. As I understand there are no spars for instance, in the correct sense of the word. How is this to be inspected when the structure has been overloaded ever so slightly? And how to repair it when the integrity is based on the complete integrity of the entire structure? Somehow this sounds like a whole new ballpark.
I also see that part of the thing here is Elixir base, at least part of their production, on renting out aircraft. This sound like a very good idea, because for any damage, the customer gets a new one the next day, and the damaged aircraft is simply sent to the factory for a repair there by specialists with the correct tooling and jigs. The club will always have a new plane and a predictable cost for every hour flown. Could work just fine, depending on the actual cost.
Is this not the equivilent of car leasing today?
As I think I have mentioned before, if the mission is flight training/local flights, or a day out for 2, then this is an interesting option. If you actually want to go somewhere overnight, for a weekend, or longer, then it just another plastic-fantastic…
Regards, SD..
What does “one piece wing” mean? If it means 2 are attached to the fuselage, then no problem. Just like a Cessna or Piper.
If the fuselage sits on a one-piece wing, it’s still not a major problem after an off-airfield minor accident. After an emergency landing, our one-piece DR1050 wing was transported on a small car transporter.
The VFR version is now CS23-23 certified. See here.
I am interested whether this (very innovative) plane will actually be usable as a tourer, not so much as a trainer.
From first looks of it, the pros I see are:
cons:
I am also not sure I would be comfortable flying this thing in IMC. Being an IFR approved trainer (flown in VMC) is one thing, but really flying in the elements is another…
Is it known yet what a fully equipped IFR version might cost, in a few years?
