Jump to content
scre80

Subsonex

Recommended Posts

Hey All,

 

Anyone know of the subsonex is legal in Australia? Would it be RA-Aus or CASA registered?

http://www.sonexaircraft.com/subsonex/index.html

 

Would be interested to know if anyone has purchased one to build here. A great concept but out of my price range.

 

Thanks

I don't think RAA allows turbines except "maybe" (don't rely on my law knowledge) in the 95:10 300kg MTOW section.

 

I think VH exp would be fine for it.

 

I think a turbine STOL machine that could run on farm diesel would be awesome:thumb up:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only RAA categoty with turbines is 95.10 and with 60ft^2 of wing yout MTOW under 95.10 is about 60kg LESS than the empty weight so its a non-starter as RAA ... experimental GA is the only way it would work.

  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only RAA categoty with turbines is 95.10 and with 60ft^2 of wing yout MTOW under 95.10 is about 60kg LESS than the empty weight so its a non-starter as RAA ... experimental GA is the only way it would work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not 100% sure but I think someone from Wedderburn had put a deposit on a sub sonex kit while they were at EAA.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't think RAA allows turbines except "maybe" (don't rely on my law knowledge) in the 95:10 300kg MTOW section.

 

I think VH exp would be fine for it.

 

I think a turbine STOL machine that could run on farm diesel would be awesome:thumb up:

 

Only RAA categoty with turbines is 95.10 and with 60ft^2 of wing yout MTOW under 95.10 is about 60kg LESS than the empty weight so its a non-starter as RAA ... experimental GA is the only way it would work.

 

Just to clarify for some folk - there's no restriction in RAA about running a turbine engine. 95.55 specifies that qualifying aircraft must have a single engine and a single propellor, so a turbine turboprop would be fine, but a turbine jet (like the Subsonex) wouldn't qualify due to the lack of an airscrew.

 

I agree with SDQDI, there'll be a big place for a STOL turboprop when a small powerplant becomes available ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sub-sonex stall speed in the landing configuration is 50KT, so it is out of contention for RAA regardless of engine type

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just to clarify for some folk - there's no restriction in RAA about running a turbine engine. 95.55 specifies that qualifying aircraft must have a single engine and a single propellor, so a turbine turboprop would be fine, but a turbine jet (like the Subsonex) wouldn't qualify due to the lack of an airscrew.

 

I agree with SDQDI, there'll be a big place for a STOL turboprop when a small powerplant becomes available ...

 

Well the guys building the turbojet used in the subsonex DO have a turbo prop using the core from the jet engine on the subsonex ... the jet is US$40k + controllers + filters and pump + delivery and OZ GST ... so no real change out of AU$80k before you get a propellor or an airframe ... and fuel burn is in excess of 25l/hour at 60% ... got to be keen for braging rights ahead of sanity for that to look good ;-)

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think if you have the $$ to but this, you will not be concerned about fuel cost. Braging rights, maybe but it would be fun to fly!! That would have to be the key. Who would not want to live their boy dream and fly a single seat jet!!!

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think if you have the $$ to but this, you will not be concerned about fuel cost. Braging rights, maybe but it would be fun to fly!! That would have to be the key. Who would not want to live their boy dream and fly a single seat jet!!!

I agree. What a cool aircraft to own! I am sure if you were committed enough a person could make it work. No aircraft is cheap to run and the purchase price is not too bad if you consider the cost of new ga aircraft these days..

 

Dream big!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The characteristics of a geared turbine would make a CS prop almost mandatory except in the most basic of designs. While it may have been done with FP, starting and management generally would be much simpler. A supercharged rotory engine would achieve good figures for power too. Nev

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh and the turbine from the sonex jet guys is not a toy - its 62kg of 240shp engine ... Id still go for the pure jet version in a 95.10 - the engine is only 20kg ... come to think of it thats the same weight as the 28hp engine in the sapphire sitting in the shed ... ;-)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They are very light for the power they make and usually much more reliable. Pure jets have very little thrust. Nev

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They are very light for the power they make and usually much more reliable. Pure jets have very little thrust. Nev

Ah but a 95.10 sapphire flies my fat old butt on 28hp so doesn't need heaps of thrust ... and who needs long legs if its cache youre after - it'd hold 1.5hrs of fuel within the 95.10 limits ;-)

 

But the heat blast on the composite tail might mean there are more mods required ... but the fun of it ... now where is my lotto ticket ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What ever happened to Bede? I dreamt of owning a 5J when I was a kid. I believe the engine was a generator turbine or some such so probably cheap-ish as surplus from an airline

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Young woman, Tory Mac, or something similar. imported one, I had the rego-number, but the HD it's on has the pins broken, so no pics off that HD.

spacesailor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What ever happened to Bede? I dreamt of owning a 5J when I was a kid. I believe the engine was a generator turbine or some such so probably cheap-ish as surplus from an airline
BD-5 kits come up every now and then, but you've gotta be keen.

 

If you want turbine time, you're better off trying to build a Cri Cri, and running two JetCat turboprops or AMT (or equivalent) model jet's on it. TWIN-turbine time! And you don't need a multi-engine endorsement to fly it. I'd love to be a fly on the wall in the Qantas interview..."So, Mr Planenut, I see you have 1,500 hours twin turbine, but you only have a CPL but no MECIR, can you explain that?". :oh yeah:

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"but you only have a CPL but no MECIR, can you explain that?"

Yes Sir.

Just bureaucracy !

 

spacesailor

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×