Not weird, but prescient. Then as now, diesels offered better efficiency, hence greater range, and the picture shows an airplane clearly intended to be capable of vertical takeoff and landing. The opposed piston arrangement is more efficient in its use of materials, which is why Junkers made its diesel aero-engines that way, years later.

The opposed cylinders also make a flat engine, which could fit inside the wing, or otherwise be more aerodynamic.

I think this Corvair of the air has serious conceptual problems.

The opposed piston design has been around for a long time,and was used in large ships.

They were very efficient.

Very simple construction compared to Otto engines.

On a two cycle scavenger type diesel,no valves,cams,lifters,etc.

No head gaskets to blow.

My question is,why are they not used today in cars?

One reason would be air pollution.

I found this article..actually the emissions are lower.

The old technology may be about to be making a comeback.

Check it out:

https://www.motortrend.com/news/at-least-one-automaker-plans-to-produce-an-opposed-piston-engine/

And:

https://www.caranddriver.com/features/columns/a25224238/achates-opposed-piston-engine/

With this additional information, the idea becomes more intriguing. Thanks.

As to the only drawing so far, I saw six (not 10) propellers. The overlapping forward propellers look like a vibration nuisance from asymmetrical airflow. Also, small-diameter high-rpm props don't seem efficient for lift generation.