SonexBuilders.net

Anybody else followed Jan's latest thread started on sonextalk?
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sonextalk/message/71223)

He just does not get it, how can he possibly think that it is a good idea to go on a forum where a large amount of people are proud Sonex/Waiex AeroVee owners, telling them they chose to build an "underpowered" aircraft/engine combination, and on top of that mocking the Sonex designers?!

Whether he is a good engineer or not, it does not matter, he is the world's worst businessman and if he keeps doing stupidities like these, his company is doomed to go down very quickly (again)...

I'm all for alternative engines and encourage their development for the Sonex, but Jan just can't be trusted. He has track record is clearly documented and he has done nothing with the Viking development to show that he has learned from his past. He is still pushing untested products into the market (one Sonex installation w/ limited flight hours is not a proven design in my opinion) and is basically soliciting customers to do R&D for him. Compare that to the Aerovee Turbo which is being tested on Sonex factory planes by the Sonex team...not their customers...

I hope the Viking is successful for the Sonex as I really feel the airframe needs more options...I just think unless Jan changes his whole approach, he'll never make this a viable option.

For me, I'm going to be a simple "underpowered" VW guy...but I look at all the new options with interest

I've been reading and occasionally responding to those posts Jan has been making on the forums. Like someone else said, I find it funny (pathetic) that his story goes from cutting on Sonex because they're not embracing the Viking for the Onex, to how great the Viking is for the Waiex, to how he wants the Sonex company to embrace his engine as the primary engine to sell. I'm not sure what world he's living on but insulting a proven company then hoping they embrace his product doesn't seem like a viable business plan.

I can tell you one thing...never in a million years would I give that company money. They could have the best product in the world (and I highly doubt that's the case) but with someone like that running the show, any money you give you better be ready to write it off.

I am one foolish enough to give him an initial deposit at AirVenture last year. I take solace in knowing I've only lost $1000 and not $13000. Expensive lesson, but a valuable one.
I would probably buy a Viking if a reputable company bought the design and supported it. I think its a pretty neat engine. Right engine, wrong company.
I find it amusing that he takes offense that Sonex doesn't recommend his motor. I suppose Rotax, Corvair and Continental should also take offense and post on the Sonex board their displeasure.
I predict he will no longer be in the Viking business by this time next year with a large number of angry and frustrated customers.

It seems the Viking flyers have had their first accident,
Very sadly the pilot, Gerald Chamberlain, did not survive the crash:
http://www.ntsb.gov/aviationquery/brief ... 5005&key=1
http://www.wsaz.com/news/headlines/BREA ... 03696.html
My sincere condolences to Gerald

I had met Jerry last year at AirVenture. Very nice guy.
Looks like its not a Viking issue, but fuel starvation. The final NTSB report will tell us.

Has anybody noticed this post by Sonex Aircraft on the Viking forum:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Vikingair ... ssage/2636

Pretty disappointing, I did not expect Sonex to lower themselves to Jan

I think I'll withhold judgement until I see if additional posts are made on the subject. I don't think it's "below the belt" to post on other forum boards but facts need to be stated, not opinions. If I was the Sonex factory I too would be closely monitoring the forums, since it appears a number of people are considering the Viking for their Sonex and that means a certain amount of new company liability on the part of Sonex. I hope it never happens but if a few Sonex & Viking engines have difficulty and go down, that could be very bad for Sonex. I don't blame them for wanting to keep their products a known quantity/quality.

One thing I will add, however, is that I don't see Sonex bashing the Viking on this post. They simply say the Jab 3300 is a good, well proven engine, and they prefer it.

That is true, they are not criticizing Jan's product on his forum as Jan did on the Sonex forum.
They are just questioning the numbers Jan publishes based on years of experience flying the Sonex with a J3300 which is still supposed to have more power than the Viking.
From that perspective indeed they have a right to do that, personally I wouldn't though, if he's really publishing numbers which are BS, that will very quickly turn against him like it did in his previous project.

Jan is posting performance results from a single implementation of Viking engine on a Sonex airframe. And he's promoting those results as what you should expect if you install his Viking on your Sonex. I don't begrudge his success with the Sonex, but he needs at least a few more installations before he can claim success.

There are so many other factors that Viking has posted regarding their installation. Have they done compete flight testing? Have they spin tested their installation? Did counter balancing the engine with a tail mounted battery change the spin recovery? Has moving the engine so far forward impacted the factory handling characteristics? Stall speed? Accelerated stalls? Is a Viking/Sonex expected to fly like a Jabiru/Sonex? Should Sonex be responsible for such alterations? Or the builder? If someone gets in trouble with a Sonex/Viking, who gets the bad press?

Jan has taken an adversarial position with Sonex, yet is trying to market his engine as the best solution to a Sonex. Not a good partnership if you ask me. Much like he did with the RV12.