![]() 10/01/2018 at 14:47 • Filed to: planelopnik, cota | ![]() | ![]() |
Planelopnik will have to fill in for me, but I believe it was a Piaggio of some type? Flying out of KAUS on Sunday afternoon. Nifty looking, anyway.
![]() 10/01/2018 at 14:52 |
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piaggio_P.180_Avanti
Avanti!
![]() 10/01/2018 at 15:09 |
|
I can hear it all the way in Austin.
![]() 10/01/2018 at 15:18 |
|
Wow, I remember when these came out (along with the Beech Starship around the same time), but I had no idea production continued sporadically well into the current era. Pretty impressive to see the unusual design holding on.
![]() 10/01/2018 at 15:31 |
|
I saw a Starship that was en route to an airshow when I was in the Vero Beach area a few years back; I could not believe the racket that thing made.
![]() 10/01/2018 at 15:57 |
|
I think it has something to do with the props turning through the disrupted air behind the wing. I have no idea if that arrangement has any benefits beyond making a lot more noise.
![]() 10/01/2018 at 17:51 |
|
It’s the propellers cutting through the exhaust. It makes a square-wave sound which is pretty annoying. Inside the airplane, having the props at the back make it very quiet. It also makes for undisturbed airflow over the wings. The wings on the Piaggio are like 70% laminar flow. This makes for a very slippery airplane, props out front might impart more drag.
Interesting fact, the fuselage creates ~ 30% of the airplane’s lift.
![]() 10/01/2018 at 18:12 |
|
Interesting fact, the fuselage creates ~30% of the airplane’s lift.
That is interesting. I see them here in AUS from time to time. I was out at the airport last Friday for some planespotting and one took off. I missed it because I was on my phone, and when I heard it throttle up it was too late to get into shooting position. I’m kind of bummed I missed it. I haven’t got an Avanti in my photo collection yet.
![]() 10/01/2018 at 20:36 |
|
The wing airflow actually disrupts air delivery to the props as well. To mitigate it the prop needs to be something like half the chord of the wing before in distance behind said wing. NACA wind tunnel stuff. So the exhaust is cut up but the noise from previously disrupted flow is huge. Any long-ez has serious noise too.
![]() 10/01/2018 at 20:37 |
|
400knots is hard to beat too. Near citation speed.
![]() 10/02/2018 at 09:58 |
|
The prop is further aft than half the main wing chord. The main wing is pretty tiny on it. Less area than a 172 if I recall.
You can also see a study commissioned by Piaggio here https://arc.aiaa.org/doi/10.2514/1.45315
![]() 10/03/2018 at 01:03 |
|
Indeed it is, meaning that it’s quite efficient. Exhaust is still chopped and noisy but compared to other planes, it’s a better solution.
Absolute effect brought to light in this design of the Vmax Probe, where you see the full chord distance of the stabilizers before the prop. Totally pure clean thrust. It was still noisy though even with the exhaust nowhere near the prop....because the 100hp 2-stroke had no muffler...
Used to be on of the origional 6 Avanti’s in the US based at the field where I taught. Very unique.
![]() 10/03/2018 at 07:54 |
|
I’ve got about 1200 hours in them. A lot of fun when they worked, but I had more emergencies in the first 6 months of flying them than I did in 5 years of flying night freight combined.
![]() 10/03/2018 at 12:02 |
|
Jeez, had no idea the reliability went that direction. I know the one on my field at the time was an early example and therefore did not have usual and popular brke systems....so when it needed a brake job, it was down for 6-
8 months waiting for proprietary pads and discs. I’m sure it now has a
Goodyear brake
STC.