Discussion in 'Sonex' started by fly_tornado, Feb 19, 2016.
"Momdel" & "Sones" FT? Did you get so excited that your fingers couldn't keep up with your brain?
More room in the cockpit looks good though. I wonder how much impact it will have. In their performance? The Sonex gives Great performance and great value for the money. They've impressed me for a long time and if/when I get the our jab sorted and flying I might have a late midlife crisis and build one.
If the Minister for War and finance agrees.....
on the phone, didn't check what i had written before clicking
it should go ok as long as you chose the right engine for your payload/conditions
What's surprised me is they actually admit people may want to put engines other than their two designated ones, Jabiru and Aerovee.
More Engine Choices: A new Universal Cowl is designed to fit many popular engine options. Builders can experience the same great firewall-forward support for AeroVee/AeroVee Turbo and Jabiru/CAMit 3300 engines, and in addition, B-Model engine mounts will be available for UL Power 350i, 350is, and Rotax 912-series engines.
How much of a rocket would one of these be with a Rotax 915 (yes 5) iS engine be?
Although the concept of 'Area Rule' is supposed to be aimed at high-sub, to trans-sonic speeds, many designers will still look at creating a situation where the largest cross sectional part of the fuselage occurs aft of the wing centre of pressure (usually spar), nearer to the trailing edge.
It will be interesting to see how this effects the speeds of the Sonex?
By widening ahead of the wing, this will be creating a greater 'whetted area' ahead of the wing than the original (drop in directional stability?) and thereby enhance the suddenness of the sectional area drop-off near the trailing edge.
Another point could be that the original, having an increasing sectional area from the nose to the seat-back bulkhead, is steadily increasing the air velocity towards the this sudden taper point, enhancing laminar flow down the rest of the fuse.
If the wider forward fuse stabilises the flow before the seat-back bulkhead, there may be the possibility of separation past this point, adding drag and/or possibly reducing directional stability...?
All the above points are personal conjecture, and only likely to have an effect of no more than say 2% on aerodynamic efficiency?
Hey John, can you build us a small sleek, high performing but low powered aircraft?
Oh and by the way, make if big and roomy with bigger engines for long distance will ya?
watching with great interest. I'm thinking either a jabiru 3300 or UL350i to drive it.
It is interesting how there is a general trend for aircraft to become bigger and bigger over time. With a bigger aircraft comes a bigger engine to maintain the same performance and so operating costs increase over time.
Many of the kit makers seem to be doing it. VANS RV6 >>RV7>>RV14, Jabiru and now Sonex.
It also seems to happen with cars. Look at how much bigger a current commodore is compared with an early one (VB eara) or the Honda civic which too has grown over time.
The market feedback always seems to be I like this but want a little bit more space and so manufacturers respond.
People are becoming bigger and bigger, all over too, not just guts. And we seem to have more stuff these days and want more stuff such as instruments, hence the larger instrument panel.
I am sure that that factor is the main driving force for bigger aircraft.
On a side note, for cars, do not forget mandatory government required safety features.
It used to be if you crashed you carked it with the steering wheel shart co-located with the aorta, now you have a crash and the public health system sews you back together and the welfare system pays you invalids benefits for the rest of your wracked and mangled life.
Separate names with a comma.