Subsonex Jet - Cost to Own 

There's some truth to that

@@CompleteWalkaround So your palette likes weird, eyeball-pulling, slick, faster than you might think experimentals even to the point of having a Soviet Bloc jet engine that lasts slightly longer than a gallon of milk.

Such good fuel burn, he could afford to post it twice.

​@@wormyboot lmaooo

"It has enough fuel to run the engine for about two hours... It is recommended that you land before that time is up" - 😂😂😂

The main thing holding you back would be a chunky electric motor to pull them up. Sonex already makes the Onex wing. Leverage from pushing up on the wing tip is minimal, but wrenching it up from the hinge would take some more serious force. I'll say definitely not impossible. Thanks for the second watch 👍

How did you manage to watch a 3 minute video in 18 seconds😮

@@KCJbomberFTW I used one of my contacts to borrow a certain machine for a little bit. Shhh! Don’t tell them; I don’t think they noticed. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-ycoCwoplU6Y.html

I will get there. You're in EU by chance?

@@CompleteWalkaround That would be great! I will be waiting patiently for it then ;). And yeah, i'm from the Netherlands!

It's a good point. Imo, the issue is the thrust of the engine at just less that 300 lbf. I think they were really gunning for the 200 knot mark and so size/weight had to come down until that could be met. Just my opinion.

You only cross country in a Sonex if you hate yourself. These are toys, meant to go up, sight see a little and RTB.

I don't think you understand jet math. It is not possible to include more fuel and retain the same or even similar performance. A jet engine develops X amount of thrust. A takeoff acceleration rate requires X amount of thrust to weight ratio. Climb rate and gradient requires X amount of thrust to drag ratio. Better compared at lift/drag ratio and thrust/weight. A jet engine and the aircraft weight and the wing area, the takeoff distance, rotation speed, and the landing speed. Most importantly the climb rate, and gradient are all inextricably linked. And a Jet engine burns a certain specific fuel consumption per pound of thrust per hour. - These little jets burn something like 1.25lbs/hr/lbf thrust in cruise. That is, if it develops 200lbs of thrust it burns 250lbs/hr of fuel which is 37.5gal/hr. If you take it up from that lower altitude cruse up to 18,000msl it drops the thrust, drag, and fuel burn a lot. Because less pressure means less density means less oxygen and less fuel. This is the secret to jet transport: 36,000' MSL std conditions. No higher, and no lower. And there are many reasons for this. A certain fraction of the gross weight is empty weight. A certain fraction is pilot/payload. Another fraction is fuel. They all add up to 1.0 and no more. And thrust has to be a certain fraction of that weight. The only way to bring more fuel with the same weight and performance is to ditch the pilot. Or make a lighter airplane. (How? Less strong?) Otherwise accept abysmal performance from increased weight, increased wing area. Lower speed, longer takeoffs, lethargic climb rate, Etc. Then what is the point of having a jet? If it's slow and lethargic? This thing has enough fuel for 50 minutes at full power, at sea level, with the 1250N jet engine. That becomes 2:45:00 at 36,000'. Or 2hrs cruise with 30min reserve, after takeoff and climb.

www.sonexaerospace.com/subsonex-uas.html

if you did that it would probably go the same speed as an A10 warthog.

@@CompleteWalkaround ah, I see. Very cool. Still think a T-tail configuration would be better looking.

Thanks 🤓

Impossibly low. Fuel burn in cruise alone would have cost more than the stated hourly cost

I know.. no surprise these some cutting and pasting going on in these videos creation. Those were numbers from a previous episode. I should make a prepost checklist 🙂

205 (nautical) miles per hour :3

If you want to do 220 mph and go slower, at 191 Knots, that's fine.

@@Karuiko That's LENGTH, not speed

@@peterk2455 So are statute miles.

Ya, I know. Very disappointing cut and paste error

@@CompleteWalkaround My comment was tongue in cheek. Sorry if that didn't completely come through with the smiley. Your stuff is truly amazing and has helped understanding the costs involved in owning however.

@@tds456 Ya I gotcha. Still sad it's not super cheap

I did.

I'm pretty sure they use the TJ-100 in certain cruise missles.

Just building hype for the glider video 😉

@@CompleteWalkaround Xenos Motorglider?

I know. Sorry 😟

Fixed are per year, variable per hour

@@CompleteWalkaround so this thing really isn't too terribly expensive. At least not compared to other aircraft and even quite a few ground vehicles.

I can yup

@@CompleteWalkaround Thanks, would you, please? :)

Exactly! Preposterous!!

Thanks

Sold it 🫤

$74,000

Nice try. Do you know what a lisp is