If Justbecause is from Pipistrel, allow him some slack!
Asking about the route forward is going to get you better answers than accusing them of “bullshit marketing”.
Instead of telling that Diesel/Jetfuel is not possible, you should rather try to make it happen. Otherwise your project is 90% doomed to be an economic failure. Nobody needs another IO540 4 seater that isn’t even deiced when the market is full with nice TKS SR22 that beat your avgas Panthera in 9 out of 10 criteria.
In an ideal world, yes.
Firstly Cirrus didn’t do too badly with an avgas plane 
Secondly one has to ask the hard question: in the post-Thielert era, how many people would buy a brand new design, with a diesel up front? Certainly many would; mostly those who either have loads of spare money so they can take on the risk or those who absolutely need avtur. But many would not, and almost nobody in the USA, and I think it would be a mistake to being out a plane which is not going to sell in the USA.
Pipistrel would have to include some kind of guaranteed availability and they cannot bet the whole company on that. The only reason Diamond survived was by following certain “interesting customer service policies”.
TKS can always be introduced later.
Firstly Cirrus didn’t do too badly with an avgas plane
Yes, because they came at the right time and are now the monopolist. There is simply no room for an IO540 Panthera and it’s not only that it competes with new Cirrus planes, it also competes with the used market of Cirrus planes which have TKS, oxygen, BRS, branding, etc.
If you’re the new kid on the block, you have to distinguish yourself. The IO540 Panthera fails at that. Even Cessna has no chance against Cirrus and they are the strongest brand there is in GA.
A diesel Panthera would distinguish itself from the rather crude Diamond/Cessna designs which are not aerodynamically refined. Whether this would be enough to make it a success, I don’t know. The US market wouldn’t buy either version, they don’t even buy the Cessna 400.
I’m not sure I understand the shift to the IO540 over the IO390. People who buy a brand new plane like the Panthera are planning to do some serious touring and I doubt they’re going to fiddle around with Mogas to save a few quid. If you need speed on a budget, there are lots of other options. The Panthera is a serious piece of kit for serious pilots, who are likely also considering a brand new Cirrus. The USP of the Panthera is exactly performance through efficiency in stead of through brute power, which is why I really liked the idea of using the small 390 engine while keeping up with the Cirrus due to better aerodynamics, smaller cabin and folding the gear up (modern Mooney?)
If you’re the new kid on the block, you have to distinguish yourself.
I completely agree with Peter on the Avtur vs. Avgas discussion. If you put yourself on the list for a new Panthera, you’re betting on a brand new airframe from a company that has been around for a long time, but is making it’s first entry into this class. I would not want to be betting on an unproven engine at the same time. There is still plenty of Avgas available throughout Europe and the US, which is where you will sell 90pct of your planes the first 10 years. If there is demand after a diesel version, it should be easy to introduce such a version at a later stage when the airframe is proven.
On a seperate topic; there are different cultures represented on the board and I would maybe ask those of Germanic/Dutch/Nordic origin to be aware of that and for the Brits to be a little tough skinned, to avoid turning Euroga into Pprune. What an Englishman would phrase as “ambitious performance targets” would be phrased as “bull***** marketing” across the channel. Being a direct Dane living for a decade in England, I have learn these lessons the hard way.
Well said about the terminology
As I wrote before, I suspect there is more to the dropping of the IO390, and it is probably a lack of interest by Lyco in supporting it. Does any other plane use it? If the unusual TB21 (TIO-540-something) engine saga is anything to go by, an IO390 owner could be looking at 1.5x to 2x the engine fund of an IO540 owner.
Also, the SMA diesel is mounting point compatible with an IO540, so there is a way forward to avtur. I just would not bet the whole shop on it. Do it as a parallel development, and fly the prototype to AERO 201x, every year, until enough people are interested 
Anyway, an IO540 sounds better than any 4-cylinder, so that’s a done deal
…and I would maybe ask those of Germanic/Dutch/Nordic origin to be aware of that…
Would you care to explain?
…going to fiddle around with Mogas to save a few quid.
The reluctance to buy a new aeroplane that requires AVGAS is not really driven by the price. Before I started my current job, I flew a lot on piston twins doing cargo flights all over Europe and mainly at night. Getting AVGAS was our biggest concern, much more than weather and opening hours of airfields. I had some pretty scary moments in the middle of the night because of the fuel state… Personally, if my goal would be “serious touring” ( which for me would mean: all weather, all day and where I want/need to go and not where they sell the fuel my aircraft needs) as you call it, AVGAS would be a no-no.
In various above posts the suggestion is made that Diesels are unproven. The Thielert/Centurion/Technify (bought by Continental) engine has now been flying for 10 years, and surely had its problems, but the reliability seems to be quite good nowadays. Technify claims higher reliability than avgas engines, although in all honesty that may be a bit over the top because they are comparing engines from 0-10 years old to engines of 0-50 years old. As to maintenance costs, they are coming down. TBO’s/TBR’s are going up. Austro has been around for only a few years but obviously they have had the advantage of learning from Thielert’s mistakes. So, when are we going to say that Diesels are proven? in another 10 years? 25? 50? The next century?
I had a chat with a fellow here who flies a nice SR22 while he was fuelling. So at € 3/liter and 60 liter and hour fuel burn his fuel cost are € 180/hr. The cost of running my DA42 not only including fuel, but also maintenance, engine and prop reserve is not all that much higher. So the notion that Diesels “are for people with loads of money that can afford to take the risk” may need revision.
I think it’s fair to expect a new, groundbreaking aerodynamic design like the Panthera to also explore a “modern” powerplant in some shape or form.
If more aircraft manufacturers would trial the SMA or other diesels, perhaps the diesels would get a chance to evolve through operating experience + R&D into the solid platforms we perceive from our current avgas burners.
QuoteWould you care to explain?
It could lead to a long discussion on cultural differences and what is more right…saying what you mean and meaning what you say vs wrapping everything so nicely that noone gets the point. I was not singeling anyone out, but being Dane, married to a Dutch, lived in Germany and now living in the UK gives me some experience. The point is, re-read what you wrote before hitting send and don’t take immidiate offence if you read something put too directly
The Thielert/Centurion/Technify (bought by Continental) engine has now been flying for 10 years, and surely had its problems, but the reliability seems to be quite good nowadays
Yes, but not entirely without it’s issues, as you point out. It may be that there are no further issues with diesel and it is all blown out of proportions, but would you bet your business on proving to the world that they’re wrong? Diamond also threw in the towel and started offering AVGAS engines as an option.
