Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

Pipistrel Panthera (combined thread)

Factory built gliders have been are exempt ‘forever’ as have factory built aerobatic aircraft, warbirds and some other defined sub-categories of FAA Experimental Exhibition. All those operate relatively freely, nowadays without even geographic limits on proficiency area. Basically for special interest aircraft that aren’t jets its wide open except for the requirement for filing an annual non-binding exhibition ‘Program Letter’. You can even move a certified aerobatic aircraft into Experimental Exhibition, to allow the owner to make design changes without restriction. Typical changes are things like spade design etc. that make the plane more competitive in the view of the owner. It eliminates the potential to use the aircraft for training, but for a single place plane that is not a factor and you find a lot of aerobatic owner/pilots doing this to make their life easier. Similar situation to that with moving FAA LSAs into Experimental Light Sport, also allowed.

Other Experimental Exhibition sub-categories for factory built aircraft however now have more than previous restrictions, for example that into which the AN2 was inserted in roughly the 1990s. My understanding is that some of those planes have FAA DAR operating limitations that require e.g. special permission for any flight that doesn’t start and end at the same airport. The issue with the AN2 is that its a utility plane, not a special interest display plane, and FAA wants to prevent manufacturers and importers of everyday utility planes from skirting certification… which is exactly what the Pantera importer is doing, increasingly so once he’s sold the three ordered as planned per his interview, versus just one.

A factory built aircraft that is in the certification process is typically operated in Experimental R&D, not Experimental Exhibition, a category that for obvious reasons would not include selling aircraft to commercial customers.

Last Edited by Silvaire at 21 Apr 19:16

This picture was taken in cockpit or Panthera recently delivered to USA. The numbers owner shared on another forum are pretty amazing.

What I can see on this picture totally dwarfs any similar SEP: 189 KTAS (172 KIAS) at 7.000 feet, consuming only 10.9 GPH of 100LL.

Last Edited by Emir at 31 Jan 13:32
LDZA LDVA, Croatia

A similar SEP would have been the Mooney Eagle – 244HP, it would post similar numbers as above, in the end small aircraft aerodynamics with tractor props there is not much new in the world.
What is new and vastly improved is the material design – the panthera comes in at 1800lbs empty weight which is about the same as a early M20J vs 2200 lbs for the Mooney eagle thats a massive difference – of course what weight will the panthera be when it is certified is an open question.
If only they could have put the lycoming del-120 into this – lower HP of course but once off the runway it would have been an excellent performer, possibly even better performance at 10k feet because of the turbo and amazing range.,

aidanf123 wrote:

A similar SEP would have been the Mooney Eagle – 244HP, it would post similar numbers as above, in the end small aircraft aerodynamics with tractor props there is not much new in the world.

Maybe similar numbers but Pipistrel cabin is bigger comparing to Mooney – only 5 inches wider but it looks much roomier, especially rear seats.

LDZA LDVA, Croatia

Pipistrel cabin is bigger comparing to Mooney – only 5 inches wider but it looks much roomier, especially rear seats.

I have to disagree with you on this one. Headroom and legroom (fixed seats if I recall correctly) were worse in the Pantera than in any Mooney.
I sat in a P at Friedrichshafen.

Forward visibility wasn’t great either. But yes, the cockpit of a Panthera definitely says “21st century”.

EBST, Belgium

Emir wrote:

What I can see on this picture totally dwarfs any similar SEP: 189 KTAS (172 KIAS) at 7.000 feet, consuming only 10.9 GPH of 100LL.

In terms of efficiency this is remarkable indeed. Similar values out of books:

The Mooney M20R (Ovation 1, 280hp): At 8000 ft, 185kt @ 15.3 GPH, 75%: 180 kt @ 13.7 GPH, 65%: 170 kt @ 11.9 GPH.
The Eagle has the same engine but restricted to 244 hp, still it reaches 180 kt @13.5 GPH @8000 ft.
The M20J 201 would be able to run 168 kt @ 11.8 GPH or 160 kt @ 10.2 GPH @ 8000 ft.
The PA24 Comanche 260 will do about 160 kt @14 GPH @ 8000 ft.

The Mooney Acclaim M20V: 8000 ft, 199 KTAS @ 17 GPH, or at 11 GPH around 160 KTAS.
(Obviously this is not where an Acclaim should be flown, it’s best economy is up high such as at 18000 ft, where it can reach 200 kt @ 14 GPH or 220 kt @ 17.5 GPH.

So this is quite impressive indeed, it would be very interesting however how this picture was taken. Personally I’d rather have a look at the POH as a whole to see what it really can do. Also it would be interesting to compare range figures at this kind of speeds.

At the same, we should not forget that this still is an uncertified airplane on a special permit. In that case, we maybe should compare it rather to airplanes like the Lancair 4 or so.

Last Edited by Mooney_Driver at 01 Feb 15:01
LSZH(work) LSZF (GA base), Switzerland

I very much doubt this has the dodgy low speed handling of a Lancair… otherwise to get it certified they would need to do a substantial redesign.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

@aidanf123, the Lycoming DEL-120 isn’t a developed or practical product. Despite what you might read on the web, it has no current airframe application.

Last Edited by Silvaire at 01 Feb 15:49

Peter wrote:

I very much doubt this has the dodgy low speed handling of a Lancair… otherwise to get it certified they would need to do a substantial redesign.

I am sure it does not, it’s not a edge of sanity design like the Lancair 4, nevertheless it is so far an “experimental” for all practical purposes, so the comparison to the performance of this kind of planes would still be appropriate.

But for what it’s worth, to add to the above comparison: Here’s the Columbia 350.

At 8000 ft it will fly 182 kts @ 15.7 GPH or 160 kts at 11 GPH.

The Corvalis 400 will do roughly 200 kts give or take a few @ 8000 ft but will take around 22 GPH to do that.

So whichever way you turn it, if the above are real life values, the Panthera is writing a new chapter in efficiency.

Last Edited by Mooney_Driver at 01 Feb 15:54
LSZH(work) LSZF (GA base), Switzerland

Mooney_Driver wrote:

The PA24 Comanche 260 will do about 160 kt @14 GPH @ 8000 ft.

In FL100 I’ve done 175 true at 14 GPH. But that is rich of peak. Should be ~172 at 8000ft.

I think a Comanche 260 should be able to provide ~170 true on 11 GPH LOP, if engine cooling is redone to factory new. I typically cruise on 150 true on 9 GPH and keep the temperatures low.

I assume the Panthera is kept LOP, because you won’t get 11 GPH on the 6 cylinder engine when ROP. So it’s faster, but not “outclassing”.

Germany
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top