Honda jet??

[ccnavyman]

I didn't realize that Honda was in the aviation business.

http://picasaweb.google.com/erik.myrom/HondaJet72309KLAF#5362461920499679618

 

[C420sailor]

Yup, they've had that one around for a while.

 

[Vas Deferens]

Yeah the Hondajet has been out for a while, I first saw it on the cover of the 08 NC Aero Charts and Airport Directory. I think they have a manufacturing site in Greensboro.

 

[bbf7b2]

As far as I know the HondaJet has just served as a technology demonstrator. I don't know of any of them in private use. From what I've seen the wing mounted engines have substantial efficiency advantages over empennage mounted engines, but the whole "people don't want to ride in a plane that doesn't look like a plane" problem has come in to effect.

 

[Pepe]

Putting the engine on the wing doesn't increase the efficiency by a substantial amount, if at all. It's designed to look cool.

 

[jfulginiti]

I recall reading that the cabin noise/vibration is reduced by mounting the engines on the wings instead of the fuselage.

 

[xj220]

The big deal with the HondaJet was the fact that you could go to smaller airports than traditional jets. Runways of 3000 ft or less wouldn't be off limits to jet traffic anymore.

 

[desertoasis]

Runways of 3000 ft or less wouldn't be off limits to jet traffic anymore.

What about Cirrus's jet? Have they released any specs on its T/O or Landing distance?

I know the Citation Mustang still needs 3100 feet to take off and I think 2500 or something to land, but I figured the Cirrus jet can't be too far off the Honda.

 

[xj220]

It's been awhile since I've really read about it and looked into it, but I believe the HondaJet was one of the front runners in the "microjet" category.

 

[BENDER]

Piper stopped by the local FBO with there single engine VLJ, pretty slick. The single engine is a great for the economical solution in my opinion, but the idea of a single engine jet seems a little perilous.

 

[Beans]

Putting the engine on the wing doesn't increase the efficiency by a substantial amount, if at all. It's designed to look cool.

Most "cool" aerodynamic designs are only cool looking because they had to be that way.

According to the in-house research done and published by Honda Aviation, it is substantial enough to warrant the new design. Plus it frees up some cabin space, and it might be a bit easier to get around the engine for mx work. Oh, yeah, and it looks cool.

 

[scoolbubba]

Piper stopped by the local FBO with there single engine VLJ, pretty slick. The single engine is a great for the economical solution in my opinion, but the idea of a single engine jet seems a little perilous.

No worse than a single engine piston... They're both capable of gliding, only the jet gets to start higher.

 

[Gatordev]

No worse than a single engine piston... They're both capable of gliding, only the jet gets to start higher.

And a turbine is much more reliable than a piston...at least certain turbines.

 

[mtsupilot09]

And a turbine is much more reliable than a piston...at least certain turbines.

Absolutely. Pilatus has built an empire based on single engine turboprops (PT6As) one of which being the Texan II. It's a PC-7.

 

[beaverslayer]

Most "cool" aerodynamic designs are only cool looking because they had to be that way.

According to the in-house research done and published by Honda Aviation, it is substantial enough to warrant the new design. Plus it frees up some cabin space, and it might be a bit easier to get around the engine for mx work. Oh, yeah, and it looks cool.

Whether it was designed to or not, it definitely ended up looking pretty cool.