I have had a couple of inquiries into my demo flight of the Velocity V-Twin. So I figured I would post a slightly edited version here. Notes in brackets [] are from John Abraham of Velocity.

-- Plane feels flimsy (like a speed boat), the canard bounces a lot in turbulence - looks odd - John said helps with a smoother ride. [This is the nature of composites look at the tip of an airliner after takeoff when going through turbulence. They move quite a bit at the tips] If it bends it wont break.
-- Controls are very heavy and mushy, no way can I finger control. This requires real muscle to fly. Sure, you trim the plane hands off very well, but I would not want to spend a lot of time hand flying around DC to NY because of vectors and other changes. Note: The demo plane was configured this way. [can be lightened up to pilots likings]
-- Cannot identify if mushiness is endemic to plane or just the heavy controls combined with the cables [Cables are being eliminated in future models to direct push rods]
-- Lots of slack in controls, likely caused by cables. Push pull tubes would eliminate a lot of this play. Part of heaviness is springs used. If push pull tubes, is there a need for any springs?
-- Fit and finish feels like a Dodge Neon. Expected to at least be a Chevy; prefer to have BMW or MB. This is something determined by the builder and the builders budget
-- Somehow plane looks rough, cannot pin point why [since the plane was built as a prototype and a straight out of pocket R&D; less detail was given to fit and finish of the plane where a new one wouldn’t be that way. Velocity chooses not to operate in debt]
-- Stall speed high and very odd feeling, especially power on stall. Requires massive nose up. Would require more retraining than I expected. [That’s because the plane will climb out of a power on stall]
-- Odd vibration, John said cause was four banger engine. The light prop used with the io-320 makes the vibration worse. The heavier prop required for the 180-225 hp engines will be smoother
-- Another possible options is to get CR props and reverse the sides this will reduce the prop wave against the tail of the plane.
-- Very odd whipsaw on engine restart. Note, when one is shutdown and windmilling plane flies odd and I had trouble maintaining altitude and heading. Due to a lack of yaw, I kept over correcting. Also a lack of rudder trim readout makes it hard to know how much rudder correction you have put in. Last item, the unstable GRD attitude indicator makes it harder. Speed dropped from 155kias to 115kias. Once prop feathered speed picked up to a more stable ~130 KIAS with right engine at full power. [This is just a difference in airplanes. Since you can feel the rudder trim move the pedals (no trim tabs used) you don’t have to have a trim indicator, however the actuators do allow for a indicator readout if builder wants one. The yaw is something to learn to anticipate, different engines will have different restart procedures. However the new engine control switches will be located down at the throttle quadrant to make things more ergonomic.]
-- Much louder than I expected. john said air pressure seals on the doors make it a lot quieter [Also, turbo charged engines are quieter from exhaust noise. Or Exhaust could also be routed outboard on both engines.]
-- Velocity working on a 25in longer v-twin. Idea is six passenger plane, likely cost is another twenty thousand, would use larger io-540 260hp engines. [Target engine would be the Continental TSIO-360) The IO-540 may be a cheaper option due to a set of OH engines costing what one new Turbo 360 would be.]
-- Gear speed is 125kias this is slower then feels comfortable, not sure if lack of comfort is because how the Velocity feels or this is just over blue line in the Aerostar that I have spent the past ~300 hours staying above until short final [difference in aircraft that you get used to. The Aerostar is twice as heavy. We can increase gear speed if we increase gear tab strength.]
-- I missed speed brakes
-- feels like an even larger runway hog then the Aerostar
-- no shocks on gear, feel every bump, even while taxing
-- gear takes 12 seconds for up or down which seems like forever [can be changed with different hydraulic pump but most aircraft take a long time to retract depending on the pumps]

Tim

Tim,

This reads a little differently than your PM without the caveat.

Either way, I appreciate the info.

Best,

Jesse,

You are right, I just copy pasted from the email from John.

I probably should add the note here, I mentally always favor the positives so my notes tend to focus on the negatives.
The plane is really a great XC travel machine. It is definitely will be on the short list when I get a new plane.

Tim

Tim,

Thank you. Really great. I am very curious about the plane.

How about deice?

No one has done it, but I would. Note: all ice protection would be "theoretical", as in no FAA testing with ice shapes and blah, blah, blah (usual experimental space stuff)

Two options have been discussed with third party vendors. Thermawing and TKS.
Thermawing would be cheaper; the biggest technical issue with Thermawing is the brain box which has the potential to get very hot, which could cause problems if not managed.
For TKS, you really need to get a few potential kit buyers together. I forget the number, but you need a multi plane order before CAV Aerospace will consider designing the panels.

Tim

Here are a couple of photos from our V-Twin demo flight last week.

I was very impressed with the people, factory, pilot, airplane fit finish, build. It was gorgeous.

Visibility is excellent. She is smooth in the air and extremely predictable. Not light on the controls. I expected that and don't like it. She basically will not stall no matter what u do.

Why can't they make it handle like a B55?

Tim, why are you getting another airplane? You already put a lot of money in yours that will be hard to get back selling it. Might as well get the use out of it and keep it. Anything you buy unless new is likely to need catch up work, you already put that work into your Aerostar.

The v-twin looks like an interesting design. Does it have any advantage over a more conventional airplane?

A b55 colemill president II is hard to beat but costs a premium. I had one before the Aerostar and it was a great airplane. 185 kts on 23 gal an hour. About half what the Aerostar burns. No turbos, wastegates, weird Aerostar systems or other crap to deal with. It is a solid proven design.

Yup....and if what yer after is fuel savings....pull it back to Bonanza speeds.

I bet you could get well under 30 gph and around 190 kts.....and still have war power if needed.

Tim, I'm still perplexed as to how this so high in your list of contenders. Have you now changed your mind? Where does the Diamond come in to play here for you? In my recent consideration of economical piston twins, I spent a fair amount of time looking at Twin Comanches. Have you considered them as well?? One heck of an efficient twin and other than the Diamond, I'm not sure of another that matches its per mile efficiency, plus it's certified, still able to get parts, good owners community and very nice flying airplane. The later models had options for turbo and counter rotating props. They can be had on the used market for 50-110 AMUs.

Not too familiar with twin Comanche but unless you find a perfect specimen to buy I would expect a lot of catch up maintainence.

Eric,

Here is the whole thread on why.
viewtopic.php?f=7&t=88153

A canard has the advantage that when setup correctly it is basically impossible to stall/spin the airplane. A second effect of the design is that it is very efficient, all surfaces are lifting surfaces. But you can crash it, overs peed it and break it apart; but never stall it in the traditional sense.

As for the B55, I would rather keep the Aerostar. I can pull the power back and get the same fuel flows and speed. Plus, the Baron handles like a truck, the Aerostar is a sports car. What is more fun to drive?

Tim

Actually, I call it Baron speeds And it is closer to 26-28GPH depending on conditions and altitude.

Tim

Don,

I will answer in the other thread.

Tim

I forgot to add. I recently went up in a Velocity XL. The owner likes light controls, the plane was very nice, responsive and the control feel was excellent. Based on comments from a few pilots who have flown the Velocity Twin and the Velocity XL the differences between the two are in rudder and how the plane has been setup.

Tim

There was enough in your report for me to say no. If the plane were perfect, and you were someone else, I could see buying one and keeping it forever. You, being you, would take a bath...