Considering a sonex but still would like info on some specs.

[daleandee]

Can someone give some clarification please?


GraemeSmith stated:

AeroVee Turbo allows a factory approved gross weight of 1,200lb Up from 1,100 of the non-turbo.

MichaelFarley56 stated:

In most cases, a nicely equipped Sonex will end up weighing around 700 lbs which gives you a useful load of around 500 lbs.

Has the factory approved a gross weight change for Sonex aircraft? I cannot find a confirmation anywhere ...

Thanks,

Dale

[MichaelFarley56]

Can someone give some clarification please?


GraemeSmith stated:

AeroVee Turbo allows a factory approved gross weight of 1,200lb Up from 1,100 of the non-turbo.

MichaelFarley56 stated:

In most cases, a nicely equipped Sonex will end up weighing around 700 lbs which gives you a useful load of around 500 lbs.

Has the factory approved a gross weight change for Sonex aircraft? I cannot find a confirmation anywhere ...

Thanks,

Dale

Dale,

You are ABSOLUTELY correct!! My mistake on my numbers and thank you for catching it for me.

Unless things have recently changed, the maximum factory recommended takeoff weights are:

Standard AeroVee: 1100 lbs (non-turbo)

Turbo/Jabiru 3300: 1150 lbs

I honestly don’t know what the recommended numbers are for a UL or Rotax but I assume it’s the same 1150 lbs max takeoff weight.

That would make the “normal” useful load for a turbo equipped Sonex around 450 lbs.

Thanks again Dale!

[lakespookie]

A little background and i might be flamed for this but the weight limits on the airframe are due to the LSA rules, there is also a structural consideration in regards to the wing loading but honestly the biggest issues are going to be climb rate, I am building a Waiex-B and intend to Set my weight at 1250, But i am also planning on an aeromomentum AM15 rated at 147 but typically putting out 130 in a more reasonable RPM range, You will give up the ability to cert the aircraft LSA if you go higher than 1150, I would not suggest weights about 1150 with any engine choice in the 100 HP range, The 3300 is rated at 120 but you cannot operate it continuously at that power setting, where as my engine choice can be operated continuously at the 130 HP setting and has a similar longevity issue running at 147. (Personally i dont intend to operate it at 147 the RPM is pretty high for those power settings and really i just want the option for high density altitude airports, it just gives you more options and margin and the price diffrence is the same YMMV). Now that wing loading is out of the way the generator on the Aerovee i feel is significantly underpowered for the amount of modern glass most run in an IFR platform, and the neutral stability is a concern for extended and IFR Flight to minimums, i am in san diego so i have the same mission concerns regarding the marine layer and that is why i plan to equip IFR. Maybe my considerations change after i have been flying the plane for a while but currently my planned mission criteria for go/no go is no more than a 2000 foot layer, AP must be fully functional, and temps have to not be conductive to icing. As far as equipment goes i want to have at least 2 nav/coms but may go with a single nav and 2 comms and plan to equip with a GNX375, you basically get an IFR navigator for about 3k compared to any other setup when you take into consideration that a 45R is roughly 4k and thats the transponder capability you get with the GNX375. I would want at least 2 radios for any IFR work and the Nav gives you another option for shooting approaches.

Like most have said everyone makes their own choices as far as the amount of risk they are willing to take and thats why pilot training covers CRM and Risk Reduction in so much detail because at the end with very few exceptions the human is the biggest risk factor.

[pappas]

John must hate these discussions because he doesn't really want anything other than an altimeter, oil-pressure gauge, and an air-speed indicator in these things.

Don't get me wrong. I am not even remotely suggesting that any Sonex in the lineup is a good IFR platform. They are not. I would never decide to intentionally fly one as my primary aircraft if I needed to fly often in IMC.

I am only stating that it is nice to have modern, lightweight, glass panel equipment with very full-featured VFR capabilities. In the event that I found that I had planned so poorly, which I have not yet in 30 years of flying, that I was about to run out of fuel over Carlsbad and needed to get through a 300 ft layer of light overcast to break-out with a clear 900 feet left above the runway, I would rather have the set-up I have than not.

I suppose it is the same thought I have about carrying a weapon. I would rather have it and not need it, than need it and not have it.

If you want to have a lot of fun, inexpensive, (for aircraft), cost to acquire, run, and maintain, fly a Sonex!
If you want to do a lot of IMC.....don't use any Sonex.

[lakespookie]

John must hate these discussions because he doesn't really want anything other than an altimeter, oil-pressure gauge, and an air-speed indicator in these things.

Don't get me wrong. I am not even remotely suggesting that any Sonex in the lineup is a good IFR platform. They are not. I would never decide to intentionally fly one as my primary aircraft if I needed to fly often in IMC.

I am only stating that it is nice to have modern, lightweight, glass panel equipment with very full-featured VFR capabilities. In the event that I found that I had planned so poorly, which I have not yet in 30 years of flying, that I was about to run out of fuel over Carlsbad and needed to get through a 300 ft layer of light overcast to break-out with a clear 900 feet left above the runway, I would rather have the set-up I have than not.

Literally why I expected to get flamed lol

And I am with you on not planning to use it as an IFR platform, but that morning layer is so consistent that as of right now basically all my flying except IFR training is an afternoon flight lol and my mission is based on 2-3 day trips across the western half of the US with an occasional longer trip like Oshkosh or sun and fun etc.

[builderflyer]

It must be frustrating for an aircraft designer to design an aircraft with a particular mission in mind only to have it being utilized for missions that the designer had not anticipated, or even considered reasonable. VanGrunsven went through this dilemma years ago with the RV-6 and I have to wonder what John Monnett may be thinking if he's been reading any of these recent messages.

Regarding instrument flying competency. ........there is no instrument rating lite.........flying 2 or 3 instrument departures or approaches a year through a relatively thin marine layer does not begin to keep an keep an instrument pilot current, legally or otherwise. Not that it is impossible, but it takes a very dedicated private pilot to retain the level of instrument proficiency once achieved at the time of receiving the rating and must be maintained as the years go on. When no longer required as a condition of our employment, many of us have chosen to allow this rating to lapse simply because of the difficulty in maintaining currency.

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

[lakespookie]

It must be frustrating for an aircraft designer to design an aircraft with a particular mission in mind only to have it being utilized for missions that the designer had not anticipated, or even considered reasonable. VanGrunsven went through this dilemma years ago with the RV-6 and I have to wonder what John Monnett may be thinking if he's been reading any of these recent messages.

This reminds me of the Robinson helicopter it was never intended to be a trainer and is actually a really unforgiving helo with the low inertia rotor head

Regarding instrument flying competency. ........there is no instrument rating lite.........flying 2 or 3 instrument departures or approaches a year through a relatively thin marine layer does not begin to keep an keep an instrument pilot current, legally or otherwise. Not that it is impossible, but it takes a very dedicated private pilot to retain the level of instrument proficiency once achieved at the time of receiving the rating and must be maintained as the years go on. When no longer required as a condition of our employment, many of us have chosen to allow this rating to lapse simply because of the difficulty in maintaining currency.

Yeah I dont plan an using the waiex for currency i am a member of a pretty nice flying club with access to several sims in addition to over 75 aircraft that i intend to continue to make use of for diffrent mission sets.

[pappas]

With all of that said, It is a testament to the versatility of the Sonex design. John designed it to fulfill his vision. But he designed it so well that it is capable of more. There is no denying that these things have flown almost everywhere. Use it for a one hour fun machine twice a week if you like it that way. Fly it all across your region of the country if you like to travel alone and have places you want to see. 145 mph, less than 6 gph burn, no speeding tickets, beats the hell out of driving in my opinion.

[lakespookie]

With all of that said, It is a testament to the versatility of the Sonex design. John designed it to fulfill his vision. But he designed it so well that it is capable of more. There is no denying that these things have flown almost everywhere. Use it for a one hour fun machine twice a week if you like it that way. Fly it all across your region of the country if you like to travel alone and have places you want to see. 145 mph, less than 6 gph burn, no speeding tickets, beats the hell out of driving in my opinion.

Def Beats driving lol.

[AstroAussie]

My Waiex B has the Aerovee Turbo up front. I have all Dynon avionics including a Dynon 10 inch HDX, AutoPilot, A/P Expert panel, Baro/Alt/Hdg/Trk Knob Panel, Intercom, Comm Radio, Xponder, ADSB in and out. I run an IPad Mini on the right side of the panel. I don't think all of this stuff weighs 15 pounds, I could be wrong, but not by much.

The Scottsdale FSDO sent out 2 inspectors for my airworthiness inspection prior to the first flight. They took about 2 hours going over the plane. I showed him how all of the avionics worked and he said, "I'm going to sign this plane off for IFR flight". It didn't occur to me to ask him for that, he just announced he would. So......my Waiex is ready for a marine layer. Go Figure!

excuse the dumb and embarrassing question but, how do VOR's work in an EFIS system? I understand how VOR works in general but what i mean is equipment wise. Is there some antenna I connect to the dynon? Does your dynon even have VOR capabilities? that is something i have avoided asking for seeming dumb lol but if I'm ever gonna find out i gotta ask it.