Have you ever read a flight test in “Pilot” (I have been subscribing to that magazine for more than 20 years, but not any more) or any other aviation magazine where the test subject was not described as good?
The test in this months issue of our Skybolt was a little mixed, and as I don’t disagree with your observation, it puts it into some perspective 
No printed mag can afford to run a bad review of a major-league product. There are too few advertising spenders in this game.
I stopped the US Flying mag because of that; after Mac McClellan left there was nothing “critical” written in there.
The only mag I have seen running negative reviews was the US Aviation Consumer mag, which is an online subscription. However the quality of their “research” sometimes left a great deal to be desired, on topics / products which I just happened to know something about.
Did Pilot mag do a flight test of the Panthera, and what performance figures did they report? We all know it looks good; it’s been very visible for 2-3 years now
OK, so for those who can’t get hold of a copy, the summary points of the test are:
High build quality
Wide, well lit cabin, good seats
26G crash protection cabin made of Kevlar
Originally were going to use a Rotax engine but Rotax abandoned it
Lyco promised FADEC on IO390 but abandoned that
Very good handling
177kt TAS at 75% power, FL075
195-200kt TAS expected with 260 HP IO540
Very stable, good for IFR
Top of instrument panel lines up with horizon at cruise
35kt gain by retracting gear & flaps
380kg payload on IO540 version, with full fuel
BRS chute weighs 28kg
€450k, certification expected 2017
Vne 220kt
I know I gave Pilot a hard time at the start of the thread, and notwithstanding the general comments from others about the lack of critical observation in GA mags, I thought the test wrote up was good. TBH it’s the occasional interesting articles like this that keep me subscribing. If you are interested in knowing more about the aircraft, I’d encourage you to pick up this months edition
I wonder what sort of reading pleasure a magazine that flogged each product would provide, eh?
I wonder what sort of reading pleasure a magazine that flogged each product would provide, eh?
I don’t read a flight test for pleasure, but for getting an honest opinion about a product, in this case an aeroplane. If I just find the figures of the sales brochure repeated in this “test” I don’t get anything from it. “High build quality” – well yes, it better be, it’s their demonstrator. I’m sure Citation demonstators also show high build quality, but ask our technicians who have to keep serial number 609 airworthy… And a statement like “35kt gain by retracting gear & flaps” shows only that the author of that “test” is obviously not a qualified test pilot. With an Airbus you can probably gain 250kt by retracting gear and flaps (if they have not already been torn away by letting them outide above their maximum speed…), but what does that figure tell us? And so on…
I have been reading the electronic version of “Pilot” (UK) for a couple of years now and I find it much better and more interesting than the comparable German stuff like
“Aerokurier” and “Fliegermagazin” which is much more ad-clients boots licking
… I find it much better and more interesting than the comparable German stuff …
Certainly! This is why I cancelled the subscription to the German magazines a decade before “Pilot”.
And a statement like “35kt gain by retracting gear & flaps” shows only that the author of that “test” is obviously not a qualified test pilot.
I think the guy who wrote the test is/was a Socata test pilot who is/was responsible for testing the TBM range of aircraft
I don’t read a flight test for pleasure, but for getting an honest opinion about a product, in this case an aeroplane
Oh, come on, give me a break. Honest opinion? You know the guy personally so that you can judge his honesty? Please, everything in print is biased, that is true for any of the old heros as well, Mac included. A judged opinion can only be made by yourself, and it will be biased in your favor.
You know the guy personally so that you can judge his honesty?
I have indeed read flight tests written by people I know personally. And then there are trained test pilots who have spent a lot of time and money to be able to objectively describe an aircraft’s flying characteristics. Flight test by test pilots are rare in GA magazines, but common in the more professional ones (like “Aviation Week and Space Technology” or “Flight”).
The next best is to read a flight test by someone who wrote about something before that you have sampled yourself. So you can see if his impressions match yours more or less. I once read a test about a Seneca somewhere where the author described it as “nice handling aeroplane”. I will certainly not read anything else written by this person 
