Disembodied spirit

20 posts in this topic

Posted

I once tried to go to the restroom in Mexico.  The label above the door read "Caballeros".  It was at that moment I realized I did not own a caballo, a horse.  I decided to push the rules, instead of watering the bushes behind the building.  So now I am in much the same boat, or- plane,  so-to-speak.  I am no longer the proud owner of an Avid.  I look down, and don't see a shadow anymore.  Nick commented that he knew what he wanted, but that perhaps I didn't.   It was becoming clear that what I really wanted was something faster, longer-legged, and yes, powered by a well-proven 4-stroke.  So aside from it being stuck in SoCal, with me up in WA, with winter running at full steam, I am again an avionero.  This time it's a terrain-gobbling Corvair-powered Sonex.  Here's a pic:N509SX.thumb.JPG.feac7ca7ac6b168fd000964

So what does this portend for my presence on this site?  Probably a rather quick fadeout.  But guys, it's been great!  I wish I could have met more of you in person.  Y'all are the best!  Blues skies and tailwinds, all!     - Turbo  (oh, and yes, it's normally aspirated!)

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted


Real nice Sonex. Enjoy it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Beautiful bird! Enjoy, have a blast, and fly safe!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Congrats on the new bird!  That doesn't mean you have to be a stranger around here, swing by from time to time and kick the hornets nest mr!

 

:BC:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Roger, wilco!   -T

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Everybody talks about how short coupled and squirrely the Avid/Fox is with the standard gear and the Sonex seems even shorter. Let us know how it handles compared to the Avid/Fox.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

From everything I've heard, the Sonex is easier to land than many other taildraggers, in part due to the direct connection between the rudder and tailwheel.  It took me a surprisingly long time to be comfortable landing the Avid, even at those comparatively low speeds.  I conjecture that the aft-swept landing-gear legs of the Sonex contribute to this.  We'll see!

We steer boats from the rear, and pitch airplanes from the rear (although not on tandems and canards).  Yet we steer our cars, bikes, and other traction vehicles from the front.  Why?  I used to back my sailboat using the rudder like a canard.  But the keel was huge.  In a traction vehicle the rear follows the front absolutely.  But try putting the outboard on the front end of a canoe.  I think it relates to lateral stiffness of the un-steered end; its ability or lack thereof, to follow.   On the Sonex, I suspect that the aft-swept titanium-rod gear legs contribute to a slight amount of lateral smooshiness (scientifically speaking), making tailwheel steering more manageable, as it's stable to small lateral disturbances.  John Monett's brilliance!  Just my 2 cent theory on this.  On pitch, I was forever overcorrecting until I discovered that flaring per se was unnecessary; the airplane does it all on its own!  With the go-cart stance of the Sonex, I gotta think it too will flare itself.  Talk about ground effect!

Edited by Turbo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Congrats on the Sonex.  I have no doubt that you will enjoy it and it sounds like it fits your mission profile better.

In regard to the ground handling, nothing against John Monnett, I have a Sonerai IIL which is a great John Monnett design, but to be clear, the aft swept spring rod gear is not a John Monnett creation. It was pioneered by Steve Wittman in the 1930's, and used on the Tailwind and Buttecup airplanes. Also, the tapered rod direct linkage tailspring was also used by Wittman at least as early as his Buttercup built in 1938.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Every tail dragger kit I ever looked at said " easiest tail dragger to land" ever. Some probably were, some probably weren't. Let us know your impressions after you fly it. I'd take your word over a kit manufacturer any day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Congrats on the Sonex.  I have no doubt that you will enjoy it and it sounds like it fits your mission profile better.

In regard to the ground handling, nothing against John Monnett, I have a Sonerai IIL which is a great John Monnett design, but to be clear, the aft swept spring rod gear is not a John Monnett creation. It was pioneered by Steve Wittman in the 1930's, and used on the Tailwind and Buttecup airplanes. Also, the tapered rod direct linkage tailspring was also used by Wittman at least as early as his Buttercup built in 1938.

Thanks for the correction.  Great ideas in both cases, I think.  I never liked the tailwheel springs on my Avid, despite swapping the stiffer one to the port side, where the thrust center is while taxiing, due to the prop-shaft AoA, and left-turning prop.  That helped, but still left the back end laterally smooshy (There I go ranting technical again!).  Of course, tightening up the springs helped too.

Every tail dragger kit I ever looked at said " easiest tail dragger to land" ever. Some probably were, some probably weren't. Let us know your impressions after you fly it. I'd take your word over a kit manufacturer any day.

Will do.  I have heard of some Avid copycats that were almost impossible to keep straight.  With the higher landing speeds, the Sonex had better be easier to control!  Months ago I got seriously panned for suggesting fast taxiing as a way to increase comfort level with taildraggers, but I am convinced it was helpful to me.  The key was to keep it on the ground.  But that moment when the rubber first meets the tarmac on landing was, for me, for many landings, one of near-panic.

Edited by Turbo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I agree with the fast taxi practice. Many don't for various reasons. My opinion is if one cannot control it there. they shouldn't go airborne  Fast taxi and crow hops would be the most squrriely time so if you get that down, you got it. This isn't a self teaching maneuver replacing good tail wheel instruction, just feeling out a different type of tail dragger and its quirks. But then I do things my way and do not suggest any new person who is new to tail wheel aircraft try it. It is not for the beginning T W student. A good check out from an experienced (in type) pilot is always the best no matter how good one thinks they are. A lot cheaper than rebuilding a airplane.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I totally agree.  There's a local guy, a CFI with experience in type, who is going to go around the patch with me a few times before I start the long trek back home to the frozen north.  And oh, forgot to mention that various pilots who have flown the Sonex corroborate the factory's claim that the airplane is easy to land.  Nice to hear!

Edited by Turbo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Turbo,

It is great to have your aerodynamic expertise on this site - drop back from time to time and share, OK?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Turbo, having flown a Sonex I can tell you I found it fairly easy to land as long as you really get your site picture for straight, just like any other conventional gear aircraft. Nimble and responsive but not overly so at all. Very true airplane that does what you tell it to, even if you didn’t realize you told it already. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Nice to hear, Lostman!  I am so looking forward to getting the "bird in hand" and enjoying the many adventures that await.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Turbo,

It is great to have your aerodynamic expertise on this site - drop back from time to time and share, OK?

Yeah, you guys are so much fun and inpiration, I may have to haunt the site from time to time!  & merci, nlappos, pour les bon mots!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Lostman, you nailed it!  The sight picture is close to that out of a go-cart.  The airplane, for being a taildragger, is quite controllable at landing speeds.  Not really directionally stable like a tri-geared bird, but controllable, with no tendency to lumber from side to side as you pump the rudder pedals.  Landing the airplane seems to have two distinct rules: 1. Let God flare the airplane, and 2. Land IN the runway, not ON it!  You must, with jet-jock steely nerves, resist flaring the airplane, as ground effect handles that very adequately.  If you chicken out at the last second, you will get into a PIO that can be hard on your landing gear and/or prop.  Please don't ask how I know this.  The bird and I will come to an "understanding" very soon.

If you want a wheels landing, omit the "hold it off, hold it off" part.  Playing that game too long can get you a tailhook-style carrier landing, where the solid tailwheel touches first.  The tailwheel is very noisy, like it's a skid or something, as the nearly megaphone-shaped aft fuselage magnifies its interaction with the tarmac like a Grammaphone bell. 

Still, all-in-all, it's a delight to fly, and it rocks.  I am using 200 nm for a practical range.  The fact that the wing structure sandbag tested to failure at 10.5 Gs is to me very comforting.  Pilot only it's aerobatic.  However mine, with the Corvair engine and its odd and likely heavy motor mount, would be nose heavy were it not for three little 5-lb bags of lead shot in the tail.  Don't want that stuff banging around, so I tend to keep it right-side up and pointed in the direction it's going.   Still, at times I look out at those stubby little wings and marvel at how they manage to hold me up!  It's all in the journey, and I'm diggin' it! - Turbo

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Good to hear from you!  I'm glad you are enjoying the Sonex.  Every once in a while I check out Barnstormers to see what's out there.  I need to finish building my Kitfox before venturing out to other projects.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Well, with more than 40 landings under my belt (not all good, BTW), the little beast and I have fought to a truce.  It's not so bad, but unforgiving of overcontrolling in pitch on landing, which is surprisingly easy to do at first.  My bird has 10, 20, & 30 degree flap positions, and I find that 10 is great for takeoffs and 30 is more forgiving than 20 for landings.  30 degs tends to slow you down and damp out any bouncing faster than 20.   The best landings are 3-point, for which it's better to touch the tailwheel first, the so-called "tailhook" landing.  How do you know the tailwheel is down?  It's noisy, like a gramophone needle on the runway!  The 10 degree position for takeoffs is good because the airplane sits with the wing at an AoA substantially below stall, so that little bit more lift helps you get off earlier.  Still, the bird first gets off in ground effect and there's often a few seconds of skimming the runway that you've got to wait out, steering with rudder, before you can really leave the runway.  Stick-back takeoffs make for a snappy un-stick departure, though, and are necessary in strong crosswinds, as the skimming along in ground effect is not something you want to do crabbed!

Next I'm intent on trying to use VGs to tame the body side corner flow on the wing aft upper surface.  That area is separated almost all the time.  Maybe there's a weenie bit of speed potential hiding there!  First challenge - how to keep camera from departing the airframe!

Take care all, and Merry Christmas!  --Turbo

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Turbo, great to hear your report.  I've often thought the Sonex would be a perfect compliment to the Avid/KF as a second airplane if you could afford to have both. With one airplane you have to figure out what your primary mission is, but you can always dream of both. 

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