News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The potentially revolutionary Celera 500L aircraft by jillesvangurp on Friday August 28, 2020 @04:28AM (#24302599)
If they reduce drag, which is exactly what they are claiming to have achieved, that would reduce the amount of horse power needed to overcome that drag. Less HP translates into better fuel economy.

Basically this plane has the engine mounted on the back, which means center of gravity and wing position are quite a bit different. The nose cone looks very streamlined and crucially the wings are in front of the vortex produced by the prop. I'm guessing that that adds up to a bit of reduction in drag. The reason many planes have the engines mounted on the other side probably have to do with things like cooling, engine size, and other practical concerns.

Re:The potentially revolutionary Celera 500L aircraft by VBprogrammer on Friday August 28, 2020 @05:29AM (#24302988)
They are claiming improvements across almost all areas. If it flew as fast and as far as the competition on 50% less fuel, that would be amazing. If it flew 60 knots faster in the same fuel and payload, awesome!

However, they are claiming improvements across the board. 3x the range, significantly faster, flies higher, uses less fuel. It doesn't pass a sniff test.

Compare it to the Grob Strato 2c. Notice how long the wings are by comparison? This is a feature of nearly all subsonic high altitude aircraft. Also notice the how long the props are on the Grob, another feature of high altitude aircraft conspicuously missing on this aircraft.

Pusher aircraft are not new. In fact they are as old as powered aviation itself. They generally aren't significantly more efficient.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grob_Strato_2C