Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 24

Thread: What's up with Synergy

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Hillsboro, Oregon / USA
    Posts
    64

    What's up with Synergy

    Hi all,

    Did John McGinnis and/or Synergy make it to AirVenture this year? I didn't (obviously) and haven't seen or heard anything at all one way or the other. What's the latest?
    --
    Richard

  2. #2
    FSMP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Baltimore, MD. USA
    Posts
    35
    Did John give his presentation on the 27th ?
    Last edited by FSMP; 07-30-2011 at 03:12 PM. Reason: .

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Detroit
    Posts
    51
    Yes, he did. He also brought the scale model. But no numbers were stated and he estimated only 25% chance to be ready for GFC at end of Sept.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Detroit
    Posts
    51
    Here is the link to Synergy's Facebook page where there are now links to a series of YouTube videos that appear to cover the entire presentation.
    http://www.facebook.com/pages/Synerg...12353422181543

  5. #5
    hogheadv2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Booger finger of the mitten
    Posts
    30
    &*^%$#*() One of the main reasons I went to OshKosh and some how I missed the Johns presentation. Ahhhhgggg!

    If you feel like being part of the cause, Help them Make History http://www.synergyaircraft.com/ What I learned in the forums from him was worth the cost of a book.


    Maybe if if the price is right $$ he'll write your name in the dust on the shop wall ;D

    Tom

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Posts
    2

    Synergy aircraft

    I just watched the video and this is REALLY cool! The first time i saw anything with the boxed wing concept was a boxed wingtip treatment to a Gulfastream at Airventure 2010. I wonder why its taken this long for someone to introduce this concept (unless its really been done before and I just never saw it).

    Regarding this aircraft specifcally, any idea why the designer chose a 5 seat version instead of a 2 or 3 seat version for starters? Also, for the traveling family (like me and my wife in particular), why would he put the pilot "alone" up front?

    Really looking forward to the development on this. Could be a realtively simple kit build.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Hillsboro, Oregon / USA
    Posts
    64
    Quote Originally Posted by Cattflight View Post
    I wonder why its taken this long for someone to introduce this concept (unless its really been done before and I just never saw it).
    A vast gulf exists between genuine innovation and commercialism. The former is risky, costly, and time-consuming while the latter requires conservatism, austerity, and speed. The former requires dreamers and leaders while the latter requires steadfast workers and managers. So long as the primary motivation for "new" in aircraft remains money, exploration of synergistic design concepts will remain rare.

    Please check the discussion archives for the "Beyond Streamlining" thread for more than enough information to keep you interested. Also check the "part deux" thread in the Hangar Talk area, where we're restarting the technical and theoretical discussions.


    Quote Originally Posted by Cattflight View Post
    Regarding this aircraft specifcally, any idea why the designer chose a 5 seat version instead of a 2 or 3 seat version for starters? Also, for the traveling family (like me and my wife in particular), why would he put the pilot "alone" up front?
    Green Flight Challenge. The idea is get better than 200 seat-mpg at better than 100 mph. With five seats you need only 40 mpg actual. That's still a tall hill when you consider that your C-172 or Commanche probably gets about 12 mpg actual (48 seat-mpg) and a Velocity gets about 20 mpg actual. Additionally, John says a design goal is "comfort." Finally, it naturally falls out from the design. (see the archives for how that happens.) Certainly six seats, or four seats with meaningful cargo, helps marketability too.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cattflight View Post
    Really looking forward to the development on this. Could be a realtively simple kit build.
    I hope MC2 does not do either a kit or a finished plane. Yes, I want one if I can possibly afford one before I'm too old to fly. OTOH, John's highest and best use to the world and to us is as a designer, not a manufacturer. Tooling up to make and market a kit is costly and time consuming. The effort is likely to dilute the attention and efforts of one of the few genuine geniuses in the world. Far better if they/we can figure out how to license the design and/or key parts to some of the many outstanding kit makers already in the business. Glassair, Lancair, Velocity, and others already do a great job with composites and should in theory be happy to add another design to the stable. Then John would get the income streams from the kits (albeit less) and be able to focus his attentions on design.
    Richard Johnson, EAA #395588

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Detroit
    Posts
    51
    Quote Originally Posted by Cattflight View Post
    I just watched the video and this is REALLY cool! The first time i saw anything with the boxed wing concept was a boxed wingtip treatment to a Gulfastream at Airventure 2010. I wonder why its taken this long for someone to introduce this concept (unless its really been done before and I just never saw it).

    Regarding this aircraft specifcally, any idea why the designer chose a 5 seat version instead of a 2 or 3 seat version for starters? Also, for the traveling family (like me and my wife in particular), why would he put the pilot "alone" up front?

    Really looking forward to the development on this. Could be a realtively simple kit build.
    John said (I forget when or where) that it could be flown from the two side-by side seats and put the little guy up front. Just an option. BTW - it's not a boxed wing; the top part is tail. He's been VERY clear on that.

  9. #9
    Eric Witherspoon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Tucson, AZ
    Posts
    195
    Found this searching "box wing airplane" from 2005:
    http://tinypic.com/1ta9lv
    so there's probably other examples to indicate that it's been thought about for a long time. A big reason this wouldn't be too attractive for the type of airplane shown in this picture (an airliner with a diamond/joined wing/tail) is that it would probably be much more involved to add fuselage plugs to generate a long-fuselage version, or, use the same (or minimally modified) fuselage with an "improved" wing. For example, the more recent versions of the 737 and 747 probably re-used a LOT of the existing fuselage design and tooling while incorporating new wings. But for a single-point design like the Synergy where if it was a kit, it would be available in the "one size" for a couple hundred units, until the "next size" becomes available. If the performance advantages prove to be worth whatever the cost, building, and/or storage compromises might prove to be, then it probably would find some customers... At least give us something new to see at fly-ins... Though if I were going to design a first iteration to market, it would be the 2-seater. This, by far, seems to be the most popular seating capacity in homebuilt airplanes. More seats than this starts to get very expensive to build and power, and single seaters are always a very limited market (and not much less cost to build or power than a 2-seater).

  10. #10
    steveinindy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    1,449
    Help them Make History
    They might well replace the Shorts cargo series in my book as the ugliest aircraft I have ever seen fly.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •