The Celera 500L aircraft may fly soon
A few things off the top of my head that look odd:<p>- Who is going to want to take the time to climb to 65,000 feet in this? People going transatlantic? They'll probably still take a Gulfstream.<p>- Does it still get reasonable range economy at lower altitudes and true airspeeds?<p>- Nobody will be able to see the runway over the nose on landing.<p>- That door doesn't look like it'll hold up to pressurization.<p>- The landing gear looks very light.<p>- The engine is going to have very tight thermal and mechanical constraints based on its position in the rear of the fuselage.<p>- I'm assuming it's a turbine engine in here? Trying to turbocharge something enough to get to 65,000 feet is going to be awful and very maintenance intensive.<p>- Update: Nope, at least one V-12 with multiple turbochargers. If there is more than one engine the complex gearbox to drive the propeller will be difficult to get approved. See the Learfan aircraft [0].<p>- The propeller is out on a long shaft, may cause issues.<p>- The propeller is a pusher configuration, which isn't inherently bad, but causes efficiency losses from turbulent air coming off the fuselage.<p>- Pusher configurations - especially pusher turboprops like the Piaggio Avanti are noisy.<p>- Update: It's a piston engine. May not be as noisy because it appears that the exhaust is farther upstream than usual. However, cooling everything will be difficult.<p>- High altitude flight introduces the possibility of coffin corners in the envelope and very little room between overspeed and stall.<p>- That big engine (for high altitude flight) will reduce room in the cabin considerably.<p>- Everybody and their mother will probably have a tail strike.<p>Source: pilot and an aerospace engineering degree.<p>[0]: <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LearAvia_Lear_Fan" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LearAvia_Lear_Fan</a>