Cobalt Co50

Member for

8 years 6 months

Posts: 17

Hi Guys and Gals I found your forum via Pprune and the Ruprecht/aircraft ferrying debacle thread that has unfolded over there. This seems a decent forum with some knowledgable people contributing. Have any of you come across the Cobalt Co50 that was unveiled at Oshkosh last year? www.cobalt-aircraft.com I have a very slight vested interest in the aircraft (we may end up supplying some parts for it) but that is all. As it is a novel design, I was more interested in what the GA fixed wing communities impression of it is, good or bad. I am from a rotary wing background so my knowledge on the fixed wing side of the industry is not as good as it should be. Do you like/dislike its looks, performance, range, payload, cost? What about canards? Do any of you have any experience flying a canard aircraft? If so how do you find them? Can it be a serious competitor to the SR-22 and Corvalis? Any general comments are welcome and like I said, they can be good or bad. Balloo PS Please let Ruprecht contribute to your forum again. His threads and posts provided astonishment, disbelief, hilarity, shock and concern in one grammatically incorrect, incoherent sentence, or rather several combined sentences that stretched to a non punctuated paragraph.
Original post
Profile picture for user spitfireman

Member for

14 years 4 months

Posts: 2,766

I like the look of this aeroplane, sort of reminds me of Burt Rutan(?) Varieze. However, to me the weak point is the canard. One reasonable sized birdstrike on these will not make your day. Can this areoplane be controlled in pitch if they are rendered U/S? Baz

Member for

8 years 6 months

Posts: 17

spitfireman I don't know about the birdstrike capabilities of the canard, however I did hear a rumour that it would have a BRS, like the SR-22. Whether that would recover the aircraft in all scenarios of birdstrike and flight profile I also do not know. Balloo
Profile picture for user 27vet

Member for

9 years 11 months

Posts: 2,657

Welcome Balloo, Baz makes an interesting point, particularly since the cruise speed is high and the altitude is low (presumably non pressurized). They would have to build those canards pretty strong. Would a BRS be able to deploy at 245kts?

Member for

8 years 6 months

Posts: 17

Vpd for the SR-22s BRS is 133 kts. That's the max demonstrated safe deployment speed. Maybe it will deploy safely at faster speeds but I dont think they would risk it all the way up to 245 kts.
Profile picture for user Moggy C

Member for

19 years 9 months

Posts: 16,831

Radical designs never seem to fare as well as boring, conventional ones. I would guess that real world residuals on this would end up a lot lower than the Cirrus, an aircraft that has captured the attention of the market better than I think its qualities deserve. Moggy
Profile picture for user low'n'slow

Member for

13 years 1 month

Posts: 1,433

As Moggie has already said, the big challenge for an unconventional design such as this is the conservative nature of the market place. The Beechcraft Starship perhaps is a salutary tale in how buyers, nervous of tying their investment into something which may depreciate rapidly, preferred lower performance, older more conventional designs. Even Cirrus had to back away from more radical designs to well-honed conventionality. There is also the issue of noise. Anyone who has heard pusher prop designs from the Vari-Easy to the Piaggio Avanti, must admit they are a lot noisier than their more conventional equivalents. In these days of increased environmental awareness, that could be a defining issue.

Member for

8 years 6 months

Posts: 17

Thanks for the comments, some interesting points there. I will watch with interest with how the story unfolds over the next few years. Strangely enough it is going to be built in Saguenay, Canada, just north of Quebec City. Presumably it will be type certified with TCCA first.