Jump to content

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Yesterday
  2. Power to weight for marine engines tends to be not great, and since waverunners tend to use the water they're immersed in as coolant they're not really a viable option. Snowmobile engines are better, but quite a few Aussies have been trying to get some sort of marine engine to work since they have a lot more of those, and not so much with the snowmobiles. To my knowledge none have been successful. There's a fairly sizable community for Yamaha snowmobile engine conversions for aviation on Facebook. Most of the ones flying are in Gyrocopters and STOL type aircraft. There are actually a couple of groups, but there's a fair bit of overlap. There was some community split around a guy named Greg Taylor Mills, who runs a company called Mohawk. He's a bit of an outspoken "salesman" type personality and it caused some drama, but he and his group are still a pretty good source for information. Want to see something truly amazing? Look up Edge Performance and their EPeX 300Ti. It's a converted Yamaha Apex engine with Teal Jenkins' "SkyTrax" gearbox. 300 HP, and I think they're already pushing it up into the 400s. Pretty sure it's what Steve Henry is flying in his "YeeHaw" Highlander for STOL competitions. Not sure what the installed weight is, but a few guys are reporting their Apex installations at ~140lbs ish. I'd bet with the turbo, custom intake/exhaust, coolant system and whatnot this thing is probably closer to 200. Andrew: To answer your question they're 4 strokes, and then reduced at the gearbox for propellers. Peak power is something like 9500-10500 engine RPM, but reduced at 3.83:1 in the case of the Apex. Some of the older/smaller engines (RX1, Phazer) the gyro guys have been using converted Rotax C gearboxes for a while now with a fair bit of success.
  3. I live in Allentown so a 3 hour Hop in my Arrow  430 NM. how long would it take in your plane?

    it would be my pleasure to fly out 

    Ill text you this morning 




  4. They 2 stroke? Props can only spin at 3000 rpm max..... what is the hp at 2800 to 3000 rpm?
  5. macleodm3


    What do you propose to give the skins their shape? The Rutan methods are very easy to build..... the only sanding needed is final contouring before paint (same type work needed when restoring a classic car).
  6. Countach74


    Check out the Personal Cruiser fold a plane technique.
  7. Last week
  8. Yamaha makes some amazing boat engines. Seems the Waverunner engines would be an even better airplane engine. It just insane what HP numbers they can get out of a 3 cyclinder 1000cc engine. 160 lbs and 130 hp I think these would be crazy fuel efficient since you wouldn't need 130 hp to cruise. https://www.boats.com/reviews/new-yamaha-waverunner-tr-1-ho-engine-ushers-in-era-of-compact-performance/
  9. That plane looks like it would fit me perfect. 5'8" 120 lbs
  10. Royal


    Kent While I very much do respect you and your opinion, I really do because I have always asked and listened to the older guys when figuring out how to do something, I do know there are other ways to do things. I did come up with a way to make a fast, cheap and perfect mold. Found it by accident actually when we got a kitten 3 weeks ago. And with the CNC machines and 3d printers becoming extremely cheap I think its all doable. I already 3d printed a CNC machine from my $200 printer. The automotive collision industry already has different kinds of foams that are low pressure and structural. Most of the companies are always willing to email you back. From what I have been reading and experience in building things its better to improve the process than to change what its made off. Keep the foam, fiberglass and all aspects about the plane. Just make it easier to build. Very little sanding. I believe it can be done.
  11. Saw this plaintive post on FB (pic). Been there, sort of. I bought a Cozy III when I was about 210 (and 5'-10.5") and flew it a number of years. Eventually I flew it without seat cushions to get a little more hip room. It was fun but the C-III is not an airplane for big people. With two persons, it's like flying an EZ with two people in the front seat. Contemplate that! 🙂 Just look at the thickness of those seat cushions! They look like booster seats for a child. Whoever owned it last was Puffer-sized, for sure. That, my friends, is an original C-III panel. Lowrance hasn't made avionics for a decade. At 240, he is probably a bit large even for a C-IV. I always point those folks towards a Bearhawk or Murphy Moose.
  12. Kent Ashton


    When Rutan debuted "Moldless Composite Construction" in the 70s, it was a revelation how easy (EZ) it became to build near-perfect airfoils and aero shapes. And it does not take 1000 hours of sanding--maybe a week or two of normal work after the structure is built. I respectfully suggest you're going backward from that. First you have to come up with perfect, finished airfoil skins built around wing spars, control linkages, attach points for ailerons, and attach points for the wings themselves. There's 1000 hours of work right there. Then the skins, spars and the rest must be jigged and held in the correct shape while you inject (expanding?) foam in the voids with some sort of machine you have yet to develop and do it evenly without distorting the structure. A "better way" to make wings is to pull them from molds or used matched-hole metal construction but that ignores the 10,000 hours it takes to make the molds or the $10,000 it takes to buy the hole-punching computer and equipment. There is no free lunch.
  13. Countach74


    How are you going to get the fiberglass skin contour?
  14. Royal


    I have been trying to find a company that can blow foam straight into a fiberglass shell without adding pressure to the skins. I think the ends would have to be open. Only reason doing it this way would be to save the 1000 hours of sanding it takes to make them straight. I don't know why someone hasn't come up with a better way to make the wings yet.
  15. To 172 pilot: Be VERY careful buying a canard. Some are great, some not so great. The Varieze MAY have a problem with the wing attachment. Please ask some owners (I am NOT one of those). The attachment may be (1) fine (2) reparable but nobody TMK has published a repair method (3) not reparable. Kent sent you methods to find Varieze owners; FIND THEM. I know a guy that retired and found that his Vartieze is type 3. Bruce Hughes
  16. Kent any chance you could give me a ride in your id fly down no problem the plane im looking at is in mo. 

    1. Kent Ashton

      Kent Ashton

      Sure.   Where are you coming from?    Text me at 704-796-0919 to set something up

    2. Evan



      Im from Allentown PA roughly 3 hours in a Piper Arrow Ill text today thanks



  17. Thanks Kent. The process you describe here seems to break down if the current owner is not the manufacturer. Name search only returns current owners and N-numbers for me. Model search only returns manufacturers with no other useful info.
  18. The stupid FAA does not make it easy. This site appears to let you search for all the registrations in a state https://www.aircraftone.com/searchindex.asp You can download the entire FAA database here and search within it with a word processor program. https://www.faa.gov/licenses_certificates/aircraft_certification/aircraft_registry/releasable_aircraft_download/ You could do a "Name" search (sorted by N-number) here for "Dragonfly" https://registry.faa.gov/aircraftinquiry/Aircraft_Inquiry.aspx That will return 32 N-numbered Dragonflys. Then you can do an N-number search for each N-number and see the owner information. Or do a Make/Model search for Model "Dragonfly" which will return 323 Dragonfly entries with Manufacturer names, see pic below. If the "Manufacturer" in the 3rd colum is an individual [builder/owner] like Bailey Robert E do an individual Name Inquiry for his name (use the same name format). That will return the N-number for that owner which you can search for all the info. If the 2nd column has highlighted info like NORTH CAROLINA - 1, click on that and it will show you N-number info. If the Manufacturer is a commercial name like AVRO none of this works. Yeah, easy right 😞 Sometimes I see an airplane on craigslist. I do a Wiki search for the Craigslist town and find out what county it in, then I do a State/County search in the registry and see all the aircraft in the county. I can usually find the airplane and the N-number Or you might get lucky with a Google Verbatim search https://www.google.com/webhp?tbs=li:1
  19. When I do a Model search on FAA Registry, all it gives me is the manufacturer and nothing else that seems useful. Does anyone know the secret easy way to cross reference this with N-number, and/or current owner, and/or current address? I'm looking for Q2 or Dragonfly in New England. Thank you,
  20. Here's another one that makes you just shake your head. Tri-pacer had not flown since 1996. The AI that signed off the the annual did not supervise the owner's inspection. The 68 year old pilot and his passenger on their way to get a Wt & Bal at another airport landed in a cornfield when the engine failed. Inspection found an ancient, leaking fuel line, fuel valve that only opened 25%, debris in the gascolator, and a large insect nest in the engine compartment. Maybe the owner didn't want to disturb the wasps. 🙂 http://www.kathrynsreport.com/2020/07/piper-pa-22-150-tri-pacer-n7208d.html
  21. Here is a sticky on how to find canard owners. Good luck. https://www.canardzone.com/forums/topic/33309-varieze-builderpilot-wanted/?do=findComment&comment=63092
  22. Hi everyone I’m new to the site and am looking at a partially built aero canard fg yo purchase I live in Allentown pa and own and fly a piper arrow I am looking for someone to give me a ride in a front canard of any type but a cozy mark iv would be best. Would fly to your home field it would really help me in my decision I always loved the look and I’m looking fir a faster airplane (aren’t we all) just want to see how it feels and flys You can email me at wintec@aol.com
  23. Earlier
  24. I always make a habit of checking the compass once I line up. Obviously it should be close to the runway number, or something is amiss, in which case it is time to abort or delay the take-off until whatever is resolved.
  25. Hopefully, the pilot still has a head, though, and the back seater can't see through that. The lack of headrest will help forward visibility a bit for the rear seater, but in tandem planes, rear seat visibility forward isn't great. Every other direction is great, though. Yeah, I can see the pants on the plane, but they're the old football style - Tim's goal was to put the newer pressure recovery style wheel pants on the plane and pick up a few kts. I've got them sitting in my hangar... Either convince Tim to bring the plane to KTSP for a Pre-Buy, or pay for me (or someone else competent) to go to Phoenix to spend a day examining the plane. See my website (in the signature) for my services. There are a couple of other folks I can recommend for PB's as well.
  26. Thanks, Marc, that’s all very helpful. I worded “forward visibility” poorly. I know the back-seater still won’t see directly in front, but they won’t be staring at that bulkhead/headrest, and I think that’s an improvement. You’re confirming what I suspected regarding the engine. I do have a working knowledge of engines, in general, and on my less-run vehicles, I still run them every week or two, and all the way to fully warm. IF there was a case where the sit could be acceptable, this does seem like a likely candidate (which only means it’s probably worth the cost of checking). it does come with another set of wheel pants. The ones installed looked sound, though. So the rub is, how do I get fresh eyes on it in situ?
  27. Just reading this Mooney crash right after takeoff. Foggy day, 600 and 3/4 mile viz, older pilot (75). The day before he asked another pilot about instrument departures from RW 29. Next day, he told ATC he would take off from RW 29. He announced taxi to RW 29 and that he was taking-off from RW29, however, he was actually using RW 11. A helpful observer told him "Runway 11" on the freq as he made his initial call to ATC. Pilot said "Thanks for the help" but never contacted ATC and flew into the ground after about 180 degrees of turn. http://www.kathrynsreport.com/2020/07/loss-of-control-in-flight-mooney-m20j.html https://goo.gl/maps/BWCzC58DCtk6WjVq8 I feel for the guy. Been there myself in cases where your mind is quite certain of your present situation but the actual situation is much different. There is a second for the mind to grasp the new understanding and reorient. The flight path indicates he knew he needed to turn around. I imagine he was shuffling papers or fingering instrument departure pages and just did not keep track of the airplane. I has been my habit at strange fields to know the first heading after takeoff and visualize which direction it will take me. Maybe if this pilot had looked out the window and thought "My first heading is 290 and 290 is . . . wait!? Behind me?" BTW, I recommend this guy who does a great job of discussing recent accidents like the Pakistani airliner that did a gear-up touch-and-go recently (then crashed)
  28. Ok, Got it. Thanks everyone. Regarding my second question in the original post, I asked that because I'm also interested in installing a 4 cyl. D-motor in a Dragonfly. That question has been answered here.
  1. Load more activity

The Canard Zone

  • Create New...

Important Information