|
Post by bobthebuilder on Jan 18, 2012 0:52:49 GMT -5
Hi folks!
This is my first post. I'm looking to build an airplane and i'm interested in the Sonerai 1. Before I part with any hard earned loot, I would like to get some advice and opinions from you people with all of the experience. I have plenty of questions, some of which may have been asked frequently on this site before, so please bear with me.
I am just about finished with an LSA license. Maybe LSA wasn't the correct route to take for what I want to achieve, but it's a start. I would like to build and fly a sporty, single seat, semi aerobatic airplane. I am not looking to race it, or tour with it. I'm good with the hands, and would like to have something fun to play with on a Saturday morning. Have have flown microlights for the past four years, and have taken less than a handfull of passengers in that time. Flying is my time, and i'm selfish with it.
What are the flight characterists of the Sonerai 1? Is it fairly stable and forgiving, or a bit of a handful like a pitts? Is it maybe a little too hot as a first airplane?
does it have a good safetly record?
Best regards, Byron
|
|
|
Post by soneraifred on Jan 18, 2012 13:29:14 GMT -5
Byron: The Sonerai I is a great little airplane, but it doesn't meet the LSA requirements. Primarily, there is no way that it will meet the 45 knot (51 mph) stall speed. Take a look at the commentary by Ed Fisher in the Sonerai IILTS section of this site in the thread about LSA. Remember too, that the airplane was designed to race in the Formula V class, so at best, it is neutrally stable. I'll let Ed, Juergen, and Jeff (Schmleff) comment on the flying characteristics.
|
|
|
Post by raceair on Jan 18, 2012 19:40:53 GMT -5
Hi Byron, and thanks Fred, for the info you gave him....Fred's comments are right on. I love the way a Sonerai 1 flies. Yes, the Sonerai 1 is neutrally stable...If you roll into a turn, and let go of the stick, it will stay banked, for a period of time, and possibly bank some more. It is not a problem, it is just part of the 1's personality. Jeff Lange's Hoerner wingtip mod will help the roll stability. It is a bit more of a challenge on the ground than the Sonerai 2, but tracks a bit easier than a Pitts. I recommend to Sonerai 1 builders that they put the landing gear on backwards, as this moves the axle centerline aft, and lightens the tailwheel load, which allows it to track straighter. On takeoffs, the elevator power is immediate, but you don't raise the tail till you are going at least 40-45 mph, as the little rudder is still asleep, and you will make an immediate turn off the runway, with full opposite rudder. Sonerai 2's tend to be noseheavy, while the 1 , if loaded down with paint, tends to head toward the rear of the c.g. limit, with a 200 pound pilot. A Sonerai 1 is definately not able to be flown under L.S.A. guidelines....If you intend to go on to get the Private Pilot License, the Sonerai 1 can provide you with lots of low cost fun. I would not tell you that you shouldn't build one....It is a lot of fun.....Ed F.
|
|
|
Post by raceair on Jan 18, 2012 19:51:32 GMT -5
I forgot to add.....The safety record is average for an airplane of this nature. Small wings, small engine, small tires, make an off airport landing a bit more risky, because of the touch down speed, and the tires don't do well in a plowed field. Air racing related accidents have happened. It's not the fault of the airplane's present design. The Sonerai 1's that were used for FV racing had a mandatory stiffner mod added to the spar after a structural failure in a race. The 's' mod addition adds several pounds to the airplane, but I think it should be built in, weather racing or not. I said in another post, don't expect to get close to the original design's specs which list an empty weight of 440 pounds. Most people are lucky to get it built at 500 pounds empty. Jeff Lange, and Juergen, are presently current in the 1, and can give you some very impressive numbers with the bigger engines they are running.....Ed F.
|
|
|
Post by bobthebuilder on Jan 19, 2012 8:07:15 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by wbpace on Jan 19, 2012 12:30:23 GMT -5
What you will quickly discover as you get deeper into the homebuilder movement and make new friends (like us), the only manufacturer's numbers you can really depend on are those from Vans for the RV series. Almost everyone else doesn't seem to, um, let's say apply as much rigor to their weight and airspeed analysis. Not that anyone is being outright dishonest, because most numbers are true when the aircraft is built exactly to plans. But that almost never happens (everyone wants to "improve" their airplane in one way or another, or the skill level of the builder doesn't match that of the plans/kit manufacturer's). So the published numbers in the marketing materials must be taken with a grain of salt.
I realize the above is a bit of an over-generalization, but I think everyone would agree only a bit. (Maybe there is someone other than Van's that deserves his reputation).
Your best bet is to always talk to the builder community (like this one for Sonerai) for the real deal.
Bill
|
|
|
Post by bobthebuilder on Jan 19, 2012 13:17:29 GMT -5
Thanks for clearing that up Bill. I had no idea that these figures were inflated.
|
|
|
Post by wbpace on Jan 19, 2012 13:46:43 GMT -5
Not inflated, not really. That would be outright dishonest, and there is little of that. But they do represent the standard for an idealized, almost perfect airplane (per plans) that the average builder would find very hard to meet. What groups like ours will give you is practical, real-world numbers based upon how the average aircraft does when built by the average person.
|
|
|
Post by bobthebuilder on Jan 19, 2012 15:04:23 GMT -5
I think that the kit manufacturers such as Vans, are probably less prone to this due to facilities like pre punched panels and matched hole technology. It's easier to keep within weight and size tolerances when you assemble a "mecano set." Every aircraft is the same.
|
|
4trade
Junior Member
Posts: 51
|
Post by 4trade on Jan 19, 2012 16:57:35 GMT -5
I agree, not inflated...just dishonest! I start to sound broken record, but your really need to use that calculator and make your own opinion based on math more than believe.... Idealized, perfect airplane must weight maximum of 485 lbs to achieve 45 mph stall at 75 sq/ feet wing area and NACA64A212 airfoil...and designer know that perfectly well. Sonerai 1 weight empty approx 550 lbs.....So, even empty plane cannot achieve that advertise stall speed. Those numbers is just ad´s bull..... That plane should stall 54 mph minimum at 700 lbs gross, if build perfectly....otherwise stall is higher.... Math don´t lie.....here again: www.ajdesigner.com/phpwinglift/wing_lift_equation_force.phpVan´s is very rare company that advertise real and accurate numbers. Every plane achieve or exceed those numbers if build by plans. Shame that hard competition on small homebuild market have twisted somehow almost every published numbers. You really can´t trust most of them.
|
|
|
Post by juergen on Jan 23, 2012 4:27:04 GMT -5
Hi Byron, I can only say some numbers of my S1: stall speed is about 55mph empty weight: about 500lbs engine: 2180cc >100hp startroll (shortest): about 600ft landroll (shortest): about 600ft initial climb: about 1700ft/min at 130mph cruise speed: >180mph flying characteristic: not stable and great fun
with best regards Juergen
|
|
|
Post by mayday on Jan 23, 2012 4:37:09 GMT -5
Hi Byron, I can only say some numbers of my S1: stall speed is about 55mph empty weight: about 500lbs engine: 2180cc >100hp startroll (shortest): about 600ft landroll (shortest): about 600ft initial climb: about 1700ft/min at 130mph cruise speed: >180mph flying characteristic: not stable and great fun with best regards Juergen How are you getting 100hp out of your 2180? curious, those look like very good numbers!
|
|
|
Post by bobthebuilder on Jan 23, 2012 5:39:42 GMT -5
That climb rate looks nice!
|
|
|
Post by racegunz on Jan 23, 2012 10:00:19 GMT -5
I saw somewhere that Monett's Sonerai 1 was just over 400 lbs like 409 or something close and stall speeds that are advertised are at sea level and gross weight, and indicated. Dishonest? well ask Monett. I'm into my second experimental (not Sonerai's) and cannot fathom how either could be as light as the published empty numbers. Chuck's Mouser is a IIL and if I remember right he said when he built it it was under 500 lbs. so a I should be well under that.
|
|
|
Post by Schmleff on Jan 23, 2012 21:49:43 GMT -5
Take a look at GPAS's specs for a 2180 with a re-drive. 100+ at 4200. A basic 2180 will make that at 4200rpms not to mention the hot engine he has. Probably the hottest vw in a currently flying sonerai.
John's had to be that light because Bigfoot was the pilot. It was designed for recon missions over Loch Ness for food drops to The Monster ; )
|
|