Jetfuel is their only realistic chance to become succesful.
If i had to choose then SMA would be my bet.
Thus far SMA has not flown in any numbers
Haven’t that christian missionary fellowship people got about 50 182 that have been converted to SMA power?
Here is the Avweb coverage.
I continue to be amazed by the BS marketing stuff these keep saying into the wind just to maintain “a good vibe” in the public. And the media continues to drink all that kool-aid…
First, they said the engine switch was due to mogas; then they say it is because of performance…
And 58 gallon tanks are just too small for an IO-540 equipped aircraft in today’s world, no matter if you throttle back to 10.5 GPH in cruise. Hey, this engine drinks 24 GPH or so in initial climb!
Interesting also that they talk about 93 octane… 
And: what they obviously fail to mention is that with the higher MTOW, ELA1 compliance, which was supposed to be a big cost-saver for european operators, has also gone down the drain…
There is nothing innovative left in the Panthera with this move. And with just about everybody going to smaller turbocharged engines, this “NA for customers in Africa for simplicity” BS is just ridiculous. Too bad this once interesting project has gone south.
Yeah, who would ever operate such a filigree aircraft in Africa?? The reality is 50-year old 206s…
Reality has caught up with them I suppose. And rather than getting the problem sorted out by sticking to that engine and admitting their marketing fauxpas re speed and range, they do what killed other companies: abandon economy for brute power. Bad decision. There is no innovation left really. There are plenty of planes who fly with those big bore engines at more than 200 kts. One just restarted production at Kerrville, Tx, which is a proven design rather than a vapourware sci-fi project.
Pity, I really thought this would make a new airplane worth looking at. But if it sounds too good to be true, then it mostly isn’t.
And this statement about the IO540 giving the same consumption and range as the IO390 is also complete BS. The friction losses are significantly higher and the extra weight is considerable.
Customers who want efficiency with a small cabin will go to Mooney, customers who want a fast new plane will go to Cirrus. There is no room for Pipistrel unless there is something truly innovative about it — like a diesel engine.
58 gallons is way too low for IO-540
I see no market for it either. And i am pretty sure that this move will the project.
I’ll visit them at Aero (I guess they’ll exibit) – we have some common friends – and hear first hand where they are heading to. IMHO this is dead end.
