Velocity V-Twin

[ChristianGodin]

Some of you must have read about that airplane. I'd like to have your comments.

[aviatoreb]

It is a very interesting airplane - if I were going to go experimental - maybe that would be the one.  Love the claim that there is no effective Vmc.

[omega708]

Long before I started working on my PPL, I was fascinated by the Velocity kit planes. The lack of a true VMC issue is a neat idea for a twin, but if the canard stalls before the main wing ( as they claim on all of their models ) it would prove tough to flare while landing. Unless ground effect is more pronounced on the canard, it seems you'd have to have a pretty flat landing attitude...

Fortunately, with the engine(s) in the back, you wouldn't have as much of an issue with prop strikes from porpoising, but it seems like it might try to wheelbarrow on you.

[carusoam]

Factory built, 310 HP is available in a single engine with 6 cyl, I'm staying where I am. Calling AAA in San Antonio for an Acclaim, if I win the lottery.

Two engines in close proximity to the center line is an improvement, not looking through the prop arc, and prop noise further away would be nice as well.

A pair of Continental IO520s would run very smoothly back there....wouldn't it?

Best regards,

-a-

[aviatoreb]

Factory built, 310 HP is available in a single engine with 6 cyl, I'm staying where I am. Calling AAA in San Antonio for an Acclaim, if I win the lottery.

Two engines in close proximity to the center line is an improvement, not looking through the prop arc, and prop noise further away would be nice as well.

A pair of Continental IO520s would run very smoothly back there....wouldn't it?

Best regards,

-a-

 

Well - it is experimental. You can put any engine you wish to put back there.  IO520, wankel, diesel, turbine, or even rubber bands if you wish.

 

I'm not budging either.  Experimental intrigues me, but I made my choice when I bought a Mooney (and a Diamond before this) to go certified and factory built.

[kris_adams]

I've always loved the velocity as well.  I had not seen the twin.  Very interesting indeed.  Maybe a retirement project!

[ChristianGodin]

I know, this is experimental. But I am flying a 201 high and far, over the see quite often. I will never built that kind of airplain for many reason. But what an airplain. 175 knots, no stall, twinn, big inside, 2 small engine, turbo possible, only de-ice not possible. This is future...

[carusoam]

Christian,

Why is a FIKI system not possible?

Or is it not available or untested to the proper extent?

Your type of flying is serious business... IFR, over the sea, in beyond cold atmosphere.

I ruled out twins for the engine out roll overs for low experience pilots.

I ruled out home builts for various similar reasons.

This twin gets as close as possible to resolving the two main issues... Small distance between engines and factory supplied kit.

The O3 performance is still comparable to the twin. Except the 2000fpm climb rate. I would want to go faster for all that effort and additional risk... Makes a single Continental io550(N) pretty desirable!

Best regards,

-a-

[KSMooniac]

I think it is a great concept and execution.  A wonderful and logical evolution of Rutan's legendary configuration...kinda marries the efficiency of the EZ with the "serious" personal transport concept of the Beech Starship (which was horribly executed).  On paper it compares favorably with the Twin Comanche, which I always admired as a nearly twin-Mooney in terms of philosophy and efficiency.  Performance wise, it looks to be similar to an IO-540 or IO-550 single Velocity, but some folks want/need the redundancy of a twin and this looks like a great option.  I'd want to slap a couple turbo-normalizer systems on there too and have a real cross-country time traveler... It could probably top 200 KTAS (or more!) at 18k and 12-13 GPH total.  My brother in CO has been lusting after a regular Velocity for CO-MS family trips for a while, but he doesn't have the time or budget to follow that dream currently.

[aviatoreb]

Why is a FIKI system not possible?

Or is it not available or untested to the proper extent?

 

Does the idea FIKI for regulation sake even exist for experimental?

 

Certainly there are de-ice systems for some experimentals available.  TKS is available for a few but it is a highly specialize system that has to be airplane specific designed since it is titanium strips.  It is not something you can home machine but must buy from them.  Some exotic system like evade electric or such I don't know - and wouldn't trust.  I suppose pneumatic boots would be the best and easiest bet to fit to your home built.  It would be good ice protection but I have no idea if it can be certified for fiki since the whole plane is not certified.

[1964-M20E]

As the builder you determine what is or is not acceptable on the aircraft and that is part of the attraction to experimentals.  However, you are also the test pilot.  So as the bulder if you install a de-ice system you do the engineering, and you are the test pilot and you fly it.  I'm not sure how many de ice systems were actually tested in real world icing conditions before being certified maybe they were tested in labs.

[ChristianGodin]

Most of the time, homebuilts are small VFR equiped aircrafts. Until recently I had never seen a homebuilt with de-ice. But I ran into a Lancair on a tarmarc TKS equiped. To me, a twin not equiped with somekind of de-ice is limited to formation. Some will spend near 1000k$ on a Turbine Lancair Evolution without de-ice system; non sens! If you can get a twin turbo de-ice equiped with state of the art glass cockpit for under 300k$, no stall, no bad habit on a single engine and keeping 12 000 feet on one engine; this is a dream! Only the investment would be questionable.

[carusoam]

I'll be staying in the Mooney camp for a while...

And that's OK with me!

Let me know when they install a pair of IO550s on that thing....or a turbine!

-a-