[ CASE STUDY ]
SOLO: The Hypercar of the Skies
Step into a world where aerospace engineering meets automotive luxury with the eXalt SOLO. This high-performance personal aircraft redefines the flying experience, focusing on pilot ergonomics, intuitive controls, and a breathtaking aesthetic that looks fast even when standing still.
Industry
Industrial Design
Year
2017 to 2018
Areas of Expertise
Industrial Design•Branding•Mechanical Engineering•Aerospace
[ THE PRODUCT ]
A single-seat light sport aircraft sold as a kit, aimed at private pilots who want the cockpit of a performance car and the build time of a weekend project rather than a second career.
F1-inspired cockpit ergonomics over a chromoly steel spaceframe, with an aluminium wing box and carbon fibre skins.
[ HOW IT WORKS ]
Most kit aircraft are a fabrication project disguised as a purchase. SOLO was architected the other way round: every major assembly arrives finished, and the builder's job is to join them, in sequence, with ordinary tools.
Crate opens
Designed to assemble in under 40 hours
[ PERFORMANCE ]
In 2017 the SOLO was a set of equations before it was a shape: one seat, 800 lb at take-off, 73 sq ft of wing and a Rotax 582. The sizing then set the power the airframe needs at each speed against the power the engine and propeller give back. Drag along the chart, or the slider under it, to read it.
At 64 knots
At 64 knots
At 64 knots
Concept sizing, 2017. Redrawn from the performance table of the conceptual design milestone, built on the Perkins and Hage method with a 4 sq ft equivalent frontal area. Thrust horsepower is the power that reaches the air through the propeller.
| Knots | Power available, hp | Power required, hp | Rate of climb, ft/min | Range, NM |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 30 | 24 | 17 | 281 | 126 |
| 40 | 30 | 14 | 656 | 242 |
| 50 | 36 | 14 | 873 | 346 |
| 60 | 40 | 17 | 967 | 402 |
| 70 | 44 | 21 | 950 | 405 |
| 80 | 46 | 27 | 819 | 379 |
| 90 | 49 | 35 | 581 | 341 |
| 100 | 51 | 45 | 230 | 300 |
| 110 | 52 | 58 | 0 | 265 |
| 120 | 54 | 74 | 0 | 234 |
| 130 | 56 | 92 | 0 | 208 |
| 140 | 57 | 114 | 0 | 187 |
| 150 | 59 | 140 | 0 | 170 |
[ IN 3D ]
The conceptual design as it stands in CATIA: the spine over the open chromoly truss, the tricycle gear, the three-blade propeller. Lightened for the browser, not redrawn, and given colors for this view rather than a livery.
Loading the model
Swipe sideways to turn it, pinch to come closer.
Conceptual design . CATIA digital mock-up . lightened to 142,000 triangles
Conceptual design . CATIA digital mock-up . lightened to 142,000 triangles
[ INSIDE ]
A spaceframe wants to be welded and left alone. A modular kit wants everything to come apart. Reconciling the two is the whole engineering problem, and it is decided at the joint, not at the surface.
Structure
Cockpit
[ WHAT ONMOTIO DID ]
eXalt needed more than a beautiful aircraft. They needed a document a government funding body would act on, and a design that could survive the scrutiny that comes with it.
We delivered the full industrial design, the Class A surfacing, the cockpit ergonomics and the structural architecture, then wrote the 100-plus page strategic plan that carried the funding case.
2017
Sized before any surface was drawn: NACA 63-418, 73 sq ft of wing for 800 lb, 17.5 and 8.4 sq ft of tail.
2017
Posture, reach and view set around the pilot first, then tried in virtual reality inside the chromoly spaceframe.
2017
The outer surfaces built in 3D as Class A masterlines: 7.8 m span, 5.58 m long, 2.4 m high.
2018
Color, material and finish: livery boards on the side view, and a cockpit interior taken to its final model.
2018
Every assembly numbered in a single CATIA V5 product tree, from the fuselage to the mirrored wing half.
2018
Version 3.0, March 2018: the 103-page document that carried the funding case, from the product to its growth strategy.
We started from the design requirements: one occupant, a 200 lb pilot, a Rotax 582, a rectangular wing of aspect ratio 7. Wing loading set the take-off weight and the wing area, the wing area set the span and the 3.2 ft chord, then came the tail surfaces. A performance table on the Perkins and Hage method gave lift-off at 47 knots and runs of 361 and 405 ft. These figures framed the style work.
We delivered the full industrial design, the Class A surfacing, the cockpit ergonomics and the structural architecture, then wrote the 100-plus page strategic plan that carried the funding case.
Three calls that shaped it
Assembly
Modules that bolt together with ordinary tools
instead ofA traditional kit built from parts by the owner
It moves the difficult work back to the factory, which raises unit cost and shrinks the customer's build from a multi-year commitment to a weekend.
Cockpit
A car-derived seating position and control layout
instead ofConventional light aircraft ergonomics
It sets the fuselage cross-section, which sets the frontal area, which the aerodynamics then have to pay for. The shape of the aircraft follows from where the pilot sits.
Materials
Steel frame, aluminium box, carbon skins
instead ofA single-material composite airframe
Three materials means three processes and three sets of tolerances meeting at the same joints. It buys repairability and a builder who does not need an autoclave.
[ THE WORK ]
[ WHERE IT WENT ]
The programme raised CAD 1.5M (about US$1.2M) in government funding and the design has been recognised in the industry. The assembly claim is the one that matters commercially: forty hours, without specialised tooling, against kits that traditionally take a builder years.
[ THE SAME TEAM ]
This project needed several disciplines that usually sit at several different suppliers. Doing them under one roof is what stops a good concept from arriving at a factory that cannot quote it.
Start a project
