3 ms·
You don't see a lot of pusher-configuration aircraft. I wonder if they plan on using the same design for a military UAV? Having a multi-fuel capable engine is
by donw 6y ago
You don't see a lot of pusher-configuration aircraft. I wonder if they plan on using the same design for a military UAV?
Having a multi-fuel capable engine is a pretty clever design choice, and I imagine the improved aerodynamics come from the combination of the pusher configuration and the lack of windows (the latter enables a lighter, stronger, and more streamlined fuselage).
Fuel consumption looks to be about double a Cessna 182 (18-25 gal/hour), but that's rather good for an aircraft of this type.
One question did spring to mind: why have they styled it after a vibrator?
- charliemil4 6y ago> One question did spring to mind: why have they styled it after a vibrator? “It’s all about the laminar flow”[0] [0] https://www.ottoaviation.com/technology https://www.ottoaviation.com/technology
- tyingq 6y agoI was reminded of those water pressure rocket toys: https://thumbs.worthpoint.com/zoom/images1/1/0812/07/parks-plastics-toy-water-rocket_1_accc416bea0904ba50b8b85cbc41acd3.jpg https://thumbs.worthpoint.com/zoom/images1/1/0812/07/parks-p...
- ceejayoz 6y ago> I wonder if they plan on using the same design for a military UAV? A mockup of a UAV version is shown in the article.
- metalliqaz 6y agoit is much faster than a C182. if it flew at Cessna speeds it might be about even