Why Sonerai?

[Chucker]

We are building/Owning/Flying one of the best homebuilt Sport Aircraft designs of all time. Why doesn't everybody see it that way? I started this thread to explore this question and I hope it will be a very active and dynamic thread from now on. We all depend on the popularity of our community for a number of reasons. Obviously the resale cost of our creations is of some importance. Of greater importance is the availability of businesses like Fred's, Great Plains Aircraft Supplies, and others that provide Sonerai specific parts. Without them, our challenges in building and maintaining our dearly loved birds grows exponentially.

I use Smokey as a poster child. Smokey has built and owned multiple RV's and one Sonerai. By his own testimony, he got more joy out of the Sonerai than any of his previous aircraft. And yet, he no longer owns a Sonerai. Tim spent years building and improving his Sonerai. I know he loved it. But he sold it for an RV4. I want to explore that. On paper, the stretch version of the Sonerai has a cockpit roughly the size of the RV4 and not terribly smaller than the RV8. It can be built and operated for a fraction of the cost and the useful load is....well... USEFUL with a very reliable and inexpensive VW 2180cc engine. If you want to spend a little more, there are engine options up to 120hp that will give the Stretch excellent numbers when compared to anything Vans or Sonex have to offer.

When I bought my Sonerai project, I owned an unopened box of RV7 empennage components. I sold the RV kit in favor of something I could afford to own and operate to my heart's content. I have yet to question that decision.

Where is the rub? Can we modify the design to address the rub? Is it the welding? Would more people build if they did not have to weld? Is it the cockpit size? Is it the payload? Is it the cruise speed? Is it the lack of a factory to fall back on and blame when things don't go well? Is it just a matter of marketing? I'm very interested in your thoughts.

All the best,
Chucker

 

[dcstrng]

Good question – count me among those who put lots of enjoyable hours into a Sonerai project, sold it for about 1/3 the cost of what I’d accumulated (another way of saying I‘d pay three times what I sold it for to get it back), and then have spent lots of hours regretting my impulsiveness. I think one of the unappreciated features of these birds is you can make all sorts of modest tweaks that don’t ruin the aerodynamics, compromise the structure or transgress the spirt of what John M. was attempting to design – hard to do with a kit. Yep, and I still hang around here trying to get up the nerve to start over…

 

[dcstrng]

PS – you may be correct on the welding… maybe we need to become missionaries of welding… There is a perception (fairly widespread IMO) that the only way to go is with a gazillion-dollar production TIG machine and hundreds of hours of practice, then maybe you can rationalize procuring the basic 4130 need for the fuselage and get started – that’s an awfully steep threshold for an airframe that might have $800-900 of 4130 in the basic structure. Nothing wrong with TIG, but O/A is pretty basic, fairly inexpensive, has more than proven it does the job nicely, doesn't intimidate (much) and is just plain fun.
Other possible issues;
• I’m wondering if another issue might be the preferred engine. In the era when the Sonerai was designed nearly everyone had some experience with the VW (car), and it had almost a cult following and was understood (somewhat) by anyone who owned a screwdriver. Nowadays however, the air-cooled VW is often considered a relic and if the FWF doesn’t have a Jab or a Rotax (etc), many don’t know what they might be looking at – missing the fact that although many different power-plants have been shoehorned into the Sonerai, the VW remains the “go-to” power for this straightforward design…
• Then there is the issue of the tailwheel – Hmmm… the biplane guys wrestle with this as well… not sure how you combat that other than simply show that normal humans can indeed fly it safely and have fun as well…
• Is fabric an issue – maybe…
• Size – maybe, or at least the perception of size, given that the cockpit sizing is actually reasonably generous in the “L” models even by contemporary standards…
• Age – perceived to be an outmoded design… well, the Tailwind folks sometimes have to put up with this misconception as well, but many of the detractors only get to see the empennage of the TWs as they zip by (and HP for HP, Sonerai has to be in that category too…)

 

[Chucker]

Good points, Larry.

As to the VW and tailwheel, then how do we explain the popularity of Sonex? I think that should be our primary comparison...

Both use the VW. However, John obviously spent a great deal of effort with the model B so that he could offer other engine options. People are definitely less familiar with the inner working and hidden mechanisms of engines these days....fear of the unknown. Perhaps that drives them to proven engines that can be installed off the shelf and sent back to the factory for, well, everything.

Both Sonex and Vans are predominantly tailwheel designs. Just like Sonex and Vans, the Sonerai offers a tailwheel option. And the Sonerai, judging by Dave's bird, is the easiest to convert back and forth. If the tailwheel is that feared, why then do so few of our Sonerai friends (and Sonex builders as well) choose that option?

 

[Chucker]

What if.....

you could buy a Sonerai kit for the same price as a Sonex quick build kit. No welding. No metal bending. Just take it out of the crate and start bolting the pieces together, paint it, cover it, hang a proven FWF package on the nose and install the instruments and radios of your choice, then go flying!

...what if?

Steel is Real!

 

[smokyray]

Chucker,
I'm honored to be included in your thread, much less even a poster child, dude! Good discussion thoughts above and I will contribute my Dos Centavos.

All the above comments concerning the Sonerai are true.
Appeal: I loved 994SP for the very reason John designed it, alot of bang for the buck, maybe the most in any small airplane. Way back in 94' when I built my RV4 I was looking for what I later found in the S2, low cost usability but not quite the utility. Comparing the two, the RV4 cockpit is larger, the Lycoming generally more reliable and accepted in aviation circles and the overall RV design prolific with over 10,000 flying examples. There is a reason, they are a masterful design that build reasonably easy, look good and fly even better. More importantly they come in kit form making them accessible to the masses. That doesn't diminish the Sonerai's appeal by any way shape or form or change my opinion. With a bit of engineering and marketing savvy, it could be re-born as a kit with a Jabiru or Rotax 912 up front and have a slightly larger audience, possibly. Much of the Sonerai appeal is low cost for which sweat equity, scrounging and scratch-built by design, insure. As mentioned above, the times have changed as has the market and potential builder/buyer/pilots therein. Whether a early 70's plans-built design with a relic car engine could be sold en masse with some modern tech added is yet to be seen.

Utility. Having given rides in the S2 and my RV4, the front cockpit in the S2 with stock canopy is fine for kids, but very tight for even the most petite Esposa. The RV will do everything the Sonerai will do, and more but at a cost. Literally twice. However comma, I still needed the utility of a bigger, faster, more comfortable Sport Plane that literally does it all for which my former RV4 and current RV6X fit the bill. Compromise?
Absolutely.

That said, I still miss 994SP for the very reasons I mentioned above...
V/R
Smokey

http://www.sea-avio.com/
The new S2?

 

[Pttim]

Chucker,

Your bring up some valid comments, for me the Sonerai was never the dream it just became it. As a fledgling student pilot I like everyone else dreamed of owning my own airplane, I looked at Cessna 150/152's because that's what I was training in and that's all I knew, I shopped by price thinking cheaper is good, (still had much to learn). I stumbled across an advertisement for a Sonerai 2 in Utah for $8,000 with a brand new Great plains 2180. Having not ever seen or heard of a Sonerai2 I googgled it and landed here! After seeing pictures of the one in Utah and the condition plus the distance from PA I kept looking and found a Sonerai 2L fuselage, one wing, a 50HP Franklin engine, basically in my back yard. I bought it and figured I would be done with it in a year! LOL still didn't know Jack Sh-t! Many of the people on this website have become my friends, some I consider family, two have passed away, Scott and Tom Mitchell. I poured my heart and sole into the Sonerai, one wife, one girlfriend. I finished her in 2014 and enjoyed her for 4 years and 130 hours.

I was always aware of the Van's design however I just was not in the position to even think of it so I built the next best thing in my opinion. Flying alone is good, flying with someone is good, the option to fly with someone was really not an option for my S2L I would have been at 1150 lbs take off, plus as Smokey points out it is tight even for the most petite of Esposa's . The fact that I crammed my 6.0 foot frame into the front seat of Dave Wilcox's S2LS, Gaston's S2, and Ed Schroms S2S is a testament to my motivation. I was only 4 months from flying mine when Scott passed away, I was crushed, he was truly a friend I never met and am grateful for what he has done and who he was. Let me get back on track!

RV-4 is as Smokey says the same in many respects as the S2 just a bit larger, more refined machine, it does everything an S2 does with ease albeit at double the price. The benefit for me is I get to share my experiences with my girlfriend and friends. for rides. When I earned my A & P certificate in 2016 the door to the world of Experimental opened up even wider, now I could purchase an already flying aircraft and be able to maintain it! The timing was perfect, the Sonerai prepared me well for the RV-4 there were no big surprises. I have never for a moment regretted selling my S2L, I have tons of pictures on the wall, thousands of fond memories and look forward to the new owners first flight. But the aviation journey continues and I am happy with my decision to purchase the RV.

 

[Chucker]

Thanks, Tim... both for the time you took for this response and for the time and passion you have given this community.

Just for the record (and I hope the other Stretch owners will chime in) the distance from the front seat to the front pedals is only 5/8” less than the advertised dimension of the RV4,6, and 7. The RV8 actually has less legroom (on paper). Having said that, was the issue more about legroom once seated? Or, simply the process of getting your knees under the panel?

I am still in the process of replacing the front seat and will be able to try it out for myself. I agree that the original Sonerai II was not a reasonable 2-place option....part of the reason I removed the front seat on my original mid-wing. I remain hopeful that the Stretch version solved the space issue and would love to hear from those who have been flying theirs with pax.

Chucker

 

[Pttim]

The stretch was better than the S2, In the S2 I had to remove seat cushions and my shoes for the S2, but I drove from PA to Quebec, got detained by Canadian customs when they asked how long I would be here and what was I doing. I guess telling them I was going to fly an airplane and I will be returning the same day peaked their interest. After completely emptying my Jeep and going through all my stuff they let me pass! I was determined to get my ride!!!

 

[Chucker]

....I'm sorry. This is beginning to sound as though I am trying to draw lines and make this a competition. That would be divisive. I don't want that. I don't blame anyone for selling their Sonerai and moving to another machine that better fits their mission. I particularly appreciate the fact that those who have moved on still visit the forum and engage with friends. I am sorry if it feels as though I am asking anyone to justify anything....not my intention.

I am an inventor. I think we all have some of that in our blood if we are building experimental aircraft. The inventor in me believes that the Sonerai design is exceptional in terms of cost, weight, simplicity, durability, and performance. Something, however, is limiting its value on the open market. Perhaps that is simply a matter of marketing. But maybe there is more to it. Maybe there are a few tweaks that can be made that would make the Sonerai better fit the mission of a larger crowd of aviators. Flying is expensive and pilots are cheap....and we do our research. If there is a way to meet the mission and save some money, we will find it.

So back to my question, "Why Sonerai?" Maybe a more specific question would be, "The Sonerai would better meet my mission requirements if only it.....fill in the blank?"

I think you've already clearly stated that it does not have enough room for an adult passenger. Do you feel that way about the Stretch version as well?

Smokey also stated that the Sonerai was not fast enough for his mission. Any seconds on that? If so, what cruise speed meets your mission? Speed costs money....but there are ways to add power to the Sonerai without doubling the cost.

What other mission requirements do you have that the Sonerai does not fill? Please try to be specific. If cockpit size is an issue, then is it the width, the headroom, the legroom, getting in and out?

I don't know where I will go with this...but I have a wonderful test bed sitting in my shop. I would love to turn that airplane into a prototype for the 2-place Sonerai of the future. Tell me what bugs you....or what you think keeps others away from our community.

Thanks,
Chucker

 

[Pttim]

Chucker,

The larger crowd in the Aviation community simply wont fit in a Sonerai, ;D Hence the need for Cherokees and Cessna's , Speed was part of my decision as well. My Sonerai poked along at a pretty good pace 135-140 at 5gph. Not to shabby, the RV-4 will poke along at 180 mph @ 8gph. So the typical 550 mile jaunt. the RV-4 will do it 1 hour quicker with two people aboard at the cost of 8 gallons over the Sonerai which would only transport the one person in my case.

 

[Chucker]

Correction....the RV8 has 1/2" more legroom than the RV4-7.

Would anybody prefer that the Sonerai soloed from the front seat? Dave's stretch is so tail heavy without the Continental that I think it could be done. That would improve visibility and provide on heck of a baggage compartment for solo cross country flights.

 

[tntav8r]

I had a Sonerai II-LT that I built with a friend of mine. I bought him out and flew it for about 150 hours, and the only reason that I sold it was because I could not carry a passenger with me. Bang for the buck, for FUN flying it can't be beat, and it was a great single-seater with the 1835 VW. Range was a bit of an issue with only 10 gallons, but at the time I owned it I rarely flew very far - by choice. Most of my flying was within 100 NM to see friends or Pancake Breakfasts, so no problem at only 3.8 gal/hr. Baggage was also great, I could load up the front seat easily, and not worry about weight to stay within CG.

I have said many times that if it had been a Low-wing Stretch, I wouldn't have sold it.

Having said all that, every aircraft design has some form of compromise - there is no perfect plane that will meet ALL missions of ALL pilots.

As I see it, The Sonerai mission is simply Sport Flying - flying for the fun of it, and very reasonably at that. Due to limited baggage, cross country capability suffers with 2 aboard, which is why some gravitate to the RV's.

 

[tntav8r]

Front-seat solo would probably be preferred, more baggage, more fuel, faster... oh wait, now you have an RV...

I think fabric covering is a reason more aren't interested as well. Look at the Short Wing Piper Tri-Pacer compared to the Cessna 172. The Piper out performs the 172, and is cheaper to buy, yet is not as popular.

 

[Chucker]

Good point about the fabric. I'm going to cover my project with Oratex. I know the material costs more...but the process is so much quicker and easier, and the end product is lighter and relatively bulletproof. Sanding and painting my plane 12 times over is not my idea of a good time.

Perhaps this goes along with the issue of luxurious interiors and fancy panels. Maybe we need to look at the Sonerai as an extension of ultralight aircraft....one that keeps you out of the cold, goes faster, and can carry a second person and some baggage. Being a military pilot I see no point in anything that does not contribute to the mission. If its not needed, its not going!

 

[kennyw]

...So back to my question, "Why Sonerai?" Maybe a more specific question would be, "The Sonerai would better meet my mission requirements if only it.....fill in the blank?"

I think you've already clearly stated that it does not have enough room for an adult passenger. Do you feel that way about the Stretch version as well?

Smokey also stated that the Sonerai was not fast enough for his mission. Any seconds on that? If so, what cruise speed meets your mission? Speed costs money....but there are ways to add power to the Sonerai without doubling the cost.

What other mission requirements do you have that the Sonerai does not fill? Please try to be specific. If cockpit size is an issue, then is it the width, the headroom, the legroom, getting in and out?

I don't know where I will go with this...but I have a wonderful test bed sitting in my shop. I would love to turn that airplane into a prototype for the 2-place Sonerai of the future. Tell me what bugs you....or what you think keeps others away from our community.

Thanks,
Chucker

The Sonerai is a great little airplane. It meets a very limited set of mission requirements. That is to get airborne in something sportier than a Cessna 150, do limited aerobatics, and do it all as inexpensively as possible.

That fits the bill for me while I'm building. But long term, I need all of that and bit more. I need a solid 2 place sport aircraft with enough speed and enough useful load to make 2-up weekend cross country trips practical and reasonably comfortable. The RV-8 will do that. But, even solo local flight won't be nearly as economical as the Sonerai!

 

[dcstrng]

Good point about the fabric. I'm going to cover my project with Oratex... Perhaps this goes along with the issue of luxurious interiors and fancy panels. Maybe we need to look at the Sonerai as an extension of ultralight aircraft... If its not needed, its not going!

Yep -- Oratex has always intrigued me and I made up a few test panels for a previous project – limited weather exposure, but just banging around in the shop, they seem indestructible. I think the logical option for a fabric-averse Sonerai builder would be a Sonex. The RV family is renowned, but they seem to fit a different mission – particularly economically/visually… I know we go through all these value calculations to justify/disqualify things for ourselves, but this is sport aviation – Sonerai is largely unchallenged (to this day) at what it was designed to do (that’s assuming I know what was on John’s mind – which is highly speculative :-\).

 

[mhflyit]

I've posted before the reasons I chose the Sonerai. Having had more 'expensive' airplanes in terms of both acquisition and operating cost I wanted to prove that flying doesn't have to be that 'expensive' (Debonair - 14gph! and RV8). I wanted to restore or build a plane with RV like handling, no vises (per Bud Davisson's report), support of enthusiasts that actually fly the type (Fred, Ed and a NTSB investigator), can run 130-140 mph with a gas burn less than 5 gph, a climb rate close to 1000ft/min and a 2 hr duration that costs less than $20k all in. The Sonerai checked all of these boxes!
I did think that I could use it for passenger flying but soon realized (while building) that the S2 would be just a fantastic single seat little fighter!
Well I have about $18k all in (receipts kept), cruise without wheel pants at 135mph, climb somewhere north of 800ft/min on 4 gph. I have also learned a lot during my ownership.
Selling now as I too have a different mission with my first born starting college - two place with luggage!
I do think the Jabiru Sonerai in Australia(?) is possibly the Ultimate Sonerai II - a regular SII on steroids... but it wouldn't have met the less than $20k goal!
Who said all airplanes are a compromise???

 

[mhflyit]

Covering was the best part of the restoration - the Stewart system was great. Painting was horrible but the actual attachment of the fabric was hugely satisfying!

 

[Bil4381]

Several issues exist with homebuilts.
- you have to really like a scratch built project, to complete and fly it. It took me 7 years to complete mine. Every day I did something to make progress. It is wonderful to fly if you can.
- Now there are kit builds. Someone them will fly in less than a year. But they are also much more expensive. The simpler they are to build, the more they cost.
- A Sonerai is a Sport Plane. Entry level pilots who only flew trainers will not likely want to keep it after the first flight. Some Sonerais are hotter than others. Mine has a Jabiru 3300 engine rated at 127 hp at 3300 RPM. In level flight I actually get 3300 rpm. At 127 hp My airspeed shows 180 mph.
- I suspect that many of those who choose a different project, want something with a production aircraft engine not a VW conversion. Reliability is the issue here.
- I have seen 2 Sonerais built to fit pilots around 5'10" tall. I fam 6'5" and weigh 250. Even at 300 lbs I fit in 0072 comfortably. The canopy is 47" above the seat pan. My legs are 32" and there is leg room to spare. I added spacers on the rudder pedals to prevent brake application during takeoff.
Bill E