speed: 2 vs 2L

[KWK]

Given my height, I would have to go L, so this question is only out of curiosity, but is a 2 faster than an otherwise similar 2L?

Of the 3 wing locations (low, mid, and high), I've read mid is the most efficient, but I've not read if it matters much. Given the speed of the faster 2L's, I have to believe it's better to tackle other forms of drag on the airframe.

 

[soneraifred]

Hypothetically, if the two airplanes (a mid-wing and a low-wing) were otherwise identical, you could expect the mid-wing to be slightly faster than the low-wing due to decreased intersection drag. But, given the variabilities in construction of different airplanes, it would be difficult to detect. If you have an inseam length of more than 28” you won’t fit in a mid-wing Sonerai II, and if you can’t get in, the airplane is useless.

 

[KWK]

"... it would be difficult to detect."

As I guessed, and you and Monnett should have the most empirical knowledge about this.

"... inseam length of more than 28” you won’t fit in a mid-wing Sonerai II..."

For those with a longer inseam wanting a mid-wing single, switching to a turbulent airfoil in the Sonerai II would let one have the same main spar thickness 5-1/2 inches further forward. There'd be no room for a passenger, of course. The NACA 2412 has about the same pitching moment as the 64A212, and the 1412 would off load the tail a bit, as would Riblett's 30-212.

 

[Aerowerx]

Student in back row timidly raises hand.....

"What is it Johnny?"

"Uh, teacher. What does 2 and 2L mean?"

 

[soneraifred]

For the Sonerai uninitiated:
1. There is the single-place Sonerai I (or 1), which is a mid-wing.
2. There is the original Sonerai II (or 2), which is the two-place mid-wing. Then, there is the IIL (or 2L), which is the low-wing version. And then, there is the IILT (or 2LT), which is the low-wing tricycle gear.
3. And there is the stretched Sonerai IILTS (or 2LTS), which has an 18” longer fuselage than the original II. Obviously, the LTS designation means low-wing, tricycle gear, stretched. It can be built as an LS if so desired.

 

[Aerowerx]

For the Sonerai uninitiated:
1. There is the single-place Sonerai I (or 1), which is a mid-wing.
2. There is the original Sonerai II (or 2), which is the two-place mid-wing. Then, there is the IIL (or 2L), which is the low-wing version. And then, there is the IILT (or 2LT), which is the low-wing tricycle gear.
3. And there is the stretched Sonerai IILTS (or 2LTS), which has an 18” longer fuselage than the original II. Obviously, the LTS designation means low-wing, tricycle gear, stretched. It can be built as an LS if so desired.

It would have been more clear if the thread title said "speed: Sonerai 2 or 2L".

 

[BJC]

It would have been more clear if the thread title said "speed: Sonerai 2 or 2L".

I don’t disagree, but since there isn’t a Sonex 2 or 2L, so that left the only option the Sonerai.


BJC

 

[KWK]

"... inseam length of more than 28” you won’t fit in a mid-wing Sonerai II..."

For those with a longer inseam wanting a mid-wing single, switching to a turbulent airfoil in the Sonerai II would let one have the same main spar thickness 5-1/2 inches further forward. There'd be no room for a passenger, of course. The NACA 2412 has about the same pitching moment as the 64A212, and the 1412 would off load the tail a bit, as would Riblett's 30-212.

Looking at the plans again, I see I need to correct that assertion. The spar in the Sonerai is not at the thickest point of a 64A212 airfoil. For the same spar depth, it looks as if you might move the spar forward maybe 3-3/4" in one of the turbulent airfoils.