SonexBuilders.net

I have fallen into the trap of too much getting the Waiex ready for first flight and not enough getting myself ready....

I am looking at getting some tail wheel refresher, rust removal, whatever you like to call it training, and it seems like only a couple of choices in aircraft in my area, a Citabria or a Pitts. I will probably couple the training with some upset recovery type of training as well. Having never flown or even been a passenger in a Sonex, I am not sure if either one of these aircraft would be a close enough match to consider being acceptable for transitioning into the Waiex.

Any thoughts on which one of these aircraft would be better suited than the other for preparing myself for flying a Waiex?

Depending on how your camber and toe is setup as well as what the runway is like your sonex could be a handful. For example mine does not like wheel landings and our grass runway has a rather narrow spot in the middle. So it's 3 pointers and stick in lap on each landing.

If you can, I recommend starting with the Citabria to knock off the rust then get a few landings in the Pitts to make you zero in and focus. I understand the Pitts is a handful on the ground.

If you had a C140 available that would be a good choice. Springy gear, side by side seating. That is what I used to get the 9 years of rust off. I flew it for about 3 hours.

I only have a couple hours of Citabria/Decathlon time. I don't remember it being a particularly challenging airplane to fly. But then again, neither was the Waiex - just different.

I have about 10 hours in the Pitts. Good thing is if you do a good job in the Pitts you are at the top of your game. But it's a lot different in landing as compared to the Waiex, so I'd probably vote Citrabria first. The one good thing about the Pitts for prep is the controls are light and sensitive. I find the Waiex to be similar - fingertip control, definitely not like a Cessna.

The Sonex series seems to have some bad history of people transitioning from other types, especially people who buy the airplane and then fly it home. I found the airplane pretty forgiving. I may not be the normal pilot though. 1000 hours, probably 1/3 tailwheel, 1/3 glider, lots of towing, helicopters, many different types in my logbook, and acro. For me the hardest part is the sight picture. I'm getting much better at it.

Brock's point about wheel landings seems true to me. If I am light on the gear and off in yaw at all, I get the maingear shudder of death. The toe in changes as the gear gets loaded. So it seems fine on takeoff, but sometimes I get one gear leg going when I'm landing. If I plant the tailwheel first and stall it so both mains are down and planted, I don't get any shudder. I'm still figuring the airplane out.

I found the airplane to be pretty forgiving though. Does not seem too ground-loopy to me.

Good luck! First flight is exciting.

Murray:
I have about 600 hours total time, mostly tailwheel. Have owned and flown acro in baby lakes and Pitts, and have lots of acro time in citabria and decathlon, as well as normal flying 150 and 172 Cessnas. Now I have legacy sonex tailwheel with Aerovee, and we just installed a Rotec tbi on her. My advice is if you can learn to handle a Pitts you could handle anything. Plus they are a lot of fun. But, learning in a Pitts is overkill (no pun intended) for a sonex. The sonex is quick, and sensitive, but fairly gentle and predictable. You must remember to keep flying the rudder pedals till you stop, but it is fully controllable. The first time I sat in a sonex I flew it home with no introduction other than how to turn on the electronics, and my first landing was dead stick as the engine quit on downwind.
The only problem I have had is getting the landing speed and sight picture right to prevent bouncing.
Get some time in a citabria, then fly the Sonex. You will be fine.
Ron Jacob
Legacy Sonex
Aerovee with Rotec tbi

I received my tailwheel endorsement about eight months before I did my first flight in my 3.0 Corvair powered Sonex. My tailwheel training was done in an Aeronca Champ. The thing that helped me was that I had owned & flown a nose roller Sonex for nearly 200 hours and knew how the plane would handle and what the approach picture should look like. Still ... I bounced my first landing attempt. Not bad bounce, but it was the first flight so I powered up and went around.

I want to post here part of a conversation from another thread. I believe Scott was correct to point out that we need to be careful about how we say "the Sonex is easy to fly." I would encourage any prospective pilot to get as much familiarization and training as they can to feel comfortable before first flight. Here's a link for the comments from another thread:

viewtopic.php?p=52121#p52121

Here is what I wrote about my first flight in a Sonex. Bear in mind it was pretty well debugged as I had just bought it from the builder. When I picked her up I was a 2,000 hour pilot with time in 47 aircraft types including tail time AND including left turning engines! I had no formal transition training for the particular Sonex I had just purchased - but I had gone out and made sure I was current in a J3 Cub. But that has a right turning propeller.....

--

I preflighted slowly and then spent 30 mins taxiing around the ramp getting used to the sight picture and the lack of a turning circle. More than once I had to stop the engine, climb out, pick the tail up and turn the plane around and then carry on. I also spent some time thoroughly learning two of the screens of the Engima EFIS so I could monitor the engine and my airspeed and attitude. Actual navigation on the delivery would be by iPad.

I taxied down to the active only to have the wind swing 180 as I did. I couldn’t get round on the narrow taxiway and had to stop, get out, pick the tail up and taxi back the other way. Glad no one was about…..

And then the first take of. I didn’t let her fly of – I should have let her fly off – but no - I picked the tail up. Even with my Tiger Moth experience of a left turning engine – I over controlled the tail swing. Glad I was on a wide runway! I climbed out and elected to get some airwork in the practice area before some pattern work. I set up on a lake for a heading and flew some slow flight. Discovery - you really must abuse this plane to get her to drop a wing. She prefers to just burble the stalled wing at you and mush downhill. Lots of steep turns till I got it somewhat dialed in. They were steeper than 45 degrees and less than 60. In the end about 50 where I could – at least initially – get the plane to stay on speed and altitude and I started to hit my wake. I tried some power on stalls. Then some slips in landing configuration. I initially missing how slippy the plane was and how a slip doesn’t necessarily get the plane dirty enough to slow down as well as sink. Then I flew some ‘go arounds’ at 3,000ft AGL while I got the workflow down. I was sure I was going to need this one.

Back to the pattern and what might be best described as three full stop crunches with full taxi backs, seasoned with two go arounds. Funnily enough it was not the sight picture close to the ground that was bothering me – I just wasn’t getting slowed down enough and spent some time on my tailwheel with the stick in the pit of my stomach waiting for the mains to agree I was slow enough for them to drop to the surface. I had been misled by the builder's lack of flaps till the last minute – in his workflow because we were at maximum gross and sank and
slowed easily with the nose up. But only one up and putting in flaps late – I was diving fast for the runway and wasn’t slowing down. It wasn’t awful. Just used a lot of runway.

Back to the ramp, pack the plane, fuel her and go look at the weather for the delivery trip home.

--

And YES - do not be fooled by "the Sonex is easy to fly". Too many folks have ended up in the weeks thinking that. It is easy enough to fly - sort of. But if took me 50 hours to get it that some stuff was automatic and I started to fly it WELL.

GraemeSmith wrote:Here is what I wrote about my first flight in a Sonex. Bear in mind it was pretty well debugged as I had just bought it from the builder. When I picked her up I was a 2,000 hour pilot with time in 47 aircraft types including tail time AND including left turning engines!

And YES - do not be fooled by "the Sonex is easy to fly". Too many folks have ended up in the weeks thinking that. It is easy enough to fly - sort of. But if took me 50 hours to get it that some stuff was automatic and I started to fly it WELL.

Graeme, as I recall, and what you didn't mention here, was how the last part of your journey home was made in the dark of night. The hair still stands up on the back of my neck thinking about what an electrical failure (or engine failure for that matter) in a new to you experimental aircraft may have meant to the safe completion of the flight home. I'm glad that your first cross country trip in your purchased Sonex turned out well, but I think you would agree that others should not follow your example in this regard.

Art,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Sonex taildragger #95,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Jabiru 3300 #261

Thanks all for the advice.

I will probably use the Citabria because neither plane will give me the right sight picture. My Waiex is Rotax powered so the turning tendancy will be to the right, in fact being gear reduction the engine torque will be countered by the propeller torque so will be mostly P factor at play.

I only have 300 hours flying and only 18 hours in TW (Citabria mostly) but plan on doing a few hours getting profficient again or more if that is what it takes. I also still have to do a lot of ground testing of the engine, burn in the brakes, test ground handling, make sure I get full engine power (which I haven't been able to achieve yet, suspect insufficient air supply to the Rotec TBI) and get familiar with everything. With enough taxiing etc. I hope to have an idea of the landing attitude sight picture, all of this is part of getting to know the aircraft too.

I hadnt flown during the couple of years I was builing my sonex. I just did a BFR in a decathlon prior to flying my sonex's first flight. I did have 230hrs in a sonerai so I was ready for the senstive controls. The P factor with the 3300 jab was far more than anything I had ever experienced beforehand and caught me by surprise, I imagine P factor will also be significant on the rotax. While the sonex is generally easy to fly and a fairly benign taildragger, it is not a great flyer at lower speeds. Which is probably the reason for the high occurance of stall spin accidents with new pilots. Get slow at low power and it will sink like a brick. Know your best glide speed and dont go below it till you are on final and have the landing made.

Murray Parr wrote:(suspect insufficient air supply to the Rotec TBI)

Rotec TBI on a rotax?. Sounds like you are asking for trouble there. I hope you still have the bings.
Steve

I really like what Dan Gryder says about speeds in the pattern. He says don't go below DMMS until you are on final and on a stablized approach. At that point you should be at Vref. I am a 10,000 pilot and cfi and I had never heard of DMMS until I started watching Dan a couple of years ago. DMMS is 1.404 times the clean stall speed. Vref is 1.3 times the dirty stall speed. I think his approach will keep people from doing stall/spins in the traffic pattern.