With all the fuss about decarbonisation Pipistrel looks like a great company to own. The certified electric trainer is unique, Think an icon of CSR for the whole Textron.
While I struggle to understand why Textron spent a small fortune to buy Pipistrel, why would they do so to kill them? They are nothing like a threat to their core business. If the motive is to protect Cessna, they would have to buy up a lot more companies 
Back to the Panthera (which is really bringing something new in GA, a more efficient design than moneys with a look), it looks like Textron bought Pipistrel to kill them, more than develop it. I think they never really wanted to benefit from Pipistrel experience and models, which could have been good in Europe. It’s efficient design with cheap but good and light carbon fiber cells, very nice for schools and light stuff. These 2 places planes are developping in Europe (look at Elixir, bristell, CSA, …)
The Panthera is just a symbol, but the cherry on the cake is to continue selling expensive parts of models designed in the 50’s running leaded gasoline.
Snoopy wrote:
Would be, yes.
Robin is gone. The plane shown during Aero23 with the turbine was a mock up.
The next marketing stunt is the turbine VL3.
Pipistrel made a great exit to Textron. If you ask me, it was for their efficient line of two seaters and to prepare for electrification, not for bolting a turbine to an experimental.
Why marketing stunt? The manufacturer of my aircraft, GoGetAir, is completing the build of an aircraft which will be turbine powered – I was at the factory yesterday and saw it. Today they have the Slovenian FAA visiting to accompany testing of the motor mounts, the project is at a very advanced stage. This aircraft was ordered and has been designed for work in Africa where the availability of Avgas or Super is limited but Diesel or Jet A1 is readily available. He hopes to exhibit the completed aircraft at Aero before handing it over to it’s new owners. It’s not a marketing gag, but instead a serious piece of equipment to fulfil a need in the market. They are also running trials to see if the turbine can eventually be powered by (eg) Hydrogen such that if fossil fuels do become banned, then this is also an alternative
There is a french turbine manufacturer that is now equiping the Robin with a 160 HO turboprop. I read somewhere that they are developing a 250HP turboprop engine. With the pantera would be fantastic.
Would be, yes.
Robin is gone. The plane shown during Aero23 with the turbine was a mock up.
The next marketing stunt is the turbine VL3.
Pipistrel made a great exit to Textron. If you ask me, it was for their efficient line of two seaters and to prepare for electrification, not for bolting a turbine to an experimental.
Peter wrote:
The non-certified product for 400k or whatever is too expensive in Europe where the operation and long term parking is too limited. In the US these issues do not exist
You cannot manufacture and sell a new, non-certified factory built aircraft to the public in the US, unless it is LSA eligible. The only exception is Experimental Exhibition and even with foreign manufacture I think once the number of units shipped rises above approximately one, or maybe two 
the game is up, it’s no longer eligible. The foremost issue with the plane must therefore be that Textron (which owns Pipistrel) does not see a sufficient worldwide market to complete certification, which likely would also involve some design updates.
The very limited forward visibility strikes me personally as unacceptable, but maybe the market would differ.
There is a french turbine manufacturer that is now equiping the Robin with a 160 HO turboprop. I read somewhere that they are developing a 250HP turboprop engine. With the pantera would be fantastic.
Peter wrote:
I observe, with sadness, that not much money is being directed at this project, but they have obviously decided to not kill it off (yet).
There was no need to kill it, it’s been dead since the IO390 and 200 kt bubble burst. While the idea was brilliant, it collided with reality. Like so many great designs with came to nothing commercially, such as the Mooney Mustang, Beech Starship, Cessna 162, Prescott Pusher, Piper Jet and many more.
I hope that maybe Pipistrel will use the lessons learnt from the Panthera and turn that failure into a viable project called differently but based on the few things that worked on this one. Maybe take a book out of Dassault and sell the project to someone who will turn their Mercure into a world best seller. But as it’s GA we are talking about my hope is about zero that there are any takers who might do better.
The service options can’t be that terrible since the company has sold a lot of their other stuff, to business customers.
I observe, with sadness, that not much money is being directed at this project, but they have obviously decided to not kill it off (yet). They know their markets and they play where the return is faster.
The non-certified product for 400k or whatever is too expensive in Europe where the operation and long term parking is too limited. In the US these issues do not exist and I am sure Pipistrel know that the US is the market they need to penetrate. But that’s not easy – as e.g. Socata found out.
As for beauty, that is, as the saying goes, in the eye of the beholder Cirrus went for a very conservative shape, for the US market, with fixed gear being all a part of the whole concept. And with 300HP+ they don’t need a lot of efficiency. Non US designs have gone for a different shape for more efficiency.
boscomantico wrote:
They look super-ugly
Well, there are some other popular airplanes we talk about here which I find even more super-ugly. Which ones I sure will not mention, no intention of hurting the beholder(s)
