Jump to content

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Today
  2. This EZ today on B-stormers N4884Y https://registry.faa.gov/AircraftInquiry/NNum_results.aspx?NNumbertxt=4884Y Resonably priced for the nice panel, I would say (unless the engine is run-out) LONGEZ • $33,500 • FOR SALE • Nice IFR equipped LongEZ. See inventory. 145 knots on less than 6 gph. Only selling because of another aircraft purchase. Will deliver with new annual condition inspection. Prefer initial contact via text to #703. • Contact Fred Wimberly, Owner - located Callao, VA United States • Telephone: 703-409-5330 • 804-529-5753 • Posted July 19, 2019
  3. Yesterday
  4. If you know of a canard aircraft that will be for sale at Oshkosh or see one for sale there then please post the details here - I'm shopping!
  5. Last week
  6. Agreed. There's just so much time in the day and the pros/cons of foam/fiberglass vs. ribs/carbon are beyond RSD's original question: You and I both answered the question the best we could (original Berkuts had foam-core wings, and later used a rib structure). However, your link to Wikipedia is still just text without a citation; essentially hearsay anyway. So... there's more work to do in order to back up our claims, but at this point that's all I've got. 🙂
  7. TMann

    Berkut Wing construction

    As someone who has actually built the Berkut wings vs. I love working with carbon, especially carbon uni. I have a little bit of documentation here.
  8. Ya know, we are both guilty of saying "I recall XXX" or "I remember saying someone said XXX". This is lazy. We should strive to document what we're saying. Here is a comment about the ride from http://www.airbum.com/pireps/PirepBerkut.html and about the construction of the wings from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berkut_360 This kit was sold with "molded wings (including flat stock for ribs and spars)" so I you seem to be correct about the wing with ribs. https://www.canardzone.com/forums/topic/17030-berkut-project-for-sale/ I don't know if Berkuts were ever built with Long-ez spec wings but there is plenty of discussion about Berkuts found with a google search.
  9. I recall reading that the first Berkut wings were carbon skins on foam cores, and then they later replaced the foam cores with carbon ribs. I recall reading the same thing somewhere on the 'net, and recall discussing while flying in Marc Zeitlin's Cozy IV. Marc pointed out the flex of the wing, and that we were not feeling it much in flight. If it were carbon, we'd be feeling it.
  10. This Q2 from Barnstormers. Pics of unopened boxes in the ad. Here's something fun to contemplate: $9928 invested at 5%/year in 1982 would be $60,376 today. Nevertheless that's water-under-the-bridge. I imagine a Q2 kit today with engine would run at least $25,000. QUICKIE Q2 KIT • $5,000 • AVAILABLE FOR SALE • Am selling a Quickie Q2 kit along with an engine. The kit was purchased in 1982 and it is still in its original boxes. It was purchased by my father who is currently 95. He kept the kit and the engine (modified VW) in storage without doing a lick of work on it. The engine is unopened in its original box. The kit is $5000 and the engine is $2500. • Contact Dan Young, Owner - located Madison, WI United States • Telephone: 715-305-7057 • Posted July 17, 2019
  11. https://www.berkut13.com/berkut6.htm carbon, apparently, but I read that the wings were very stiff and gave a rough ride in turbulence. Other than weight saving, I don't seen any reason why fiberglass wouldn't be better--and cheaper.
  12. How were the Berkut's wings constructed - fibreglass over foam like a long-EZ or another method?
  13. If I had a shop that nice I'd probably never go home.
  14. Several weeks ago I was invited to an "Open Shop" event nearby. I was amazed at the shop when I got there, which could fit several more planes than the 2 that were in it. The builder is working on an RV and was seeking feedback from everyone. What's interesting about this shop is that it's on residential property, but the door opens to extended grass end of an airport runway. I'll have to find out more about this arrangement, but here are some pictures in the meantime... These doors open towards the runway just a short taxi away... I'm spent more time looking at the shop than I did the plane... I noticed these EAA Chapter 1000 worktables, which mine are based as well. I thought I used too many screws, but these tables beat mine by a few more screws per lineal foot (if I were ever to build new tables, I'd seek the same strength but half the wood).
  15. There were a few Dragonfly flyers here sometime ago and they may be lurking. I'm working on a Quickie TriQ-200 and there are some other Quickie flyers here.
  16. After a few trials and tribulations Corbin has soloed in his new Q200. Congratulations Corbin!
  17. I set out to finish just two walls so I could hang a pegboard so I could free some of my horizontal surface areas. As I got into it I find that, in order to do it "right", the add-on work just keeps coming. I had to include a third wall so I could deal with the one "outside" corner in the room. I worked around the existing electrical box, and not too gracefully at that, but it's good enough for what I need. Here are the first three walls... This looks crowded but most everything is on wheels and can easily be moved... Here's the rest of the shop... I'd like to keep these updates coming more quickly, but looking back at the first few before this I bored myself! I'll try to keep to the more significant updates. In the meantime I'd appreciate any feedback!
  18. There is a lot of talk about the FAA's recent requirement to log an ADSB Service Availability Prediction Tool (SAPT) preflight check or be accused of not exercising "due [preflight] dilligence". The regulation is obtuse but but what I get out of it is that if you have an ADSB employing a WAAS GPS source, you merely have to check the usual NOTAMS. The clearest thing I could find on this is the ICAO instruction See https://www.icao.int/SAM/Documents/2017-ADSB/08%20FAA%20Briefing%20ADS_B%20Rules%20and%20Airspace%20(2).pdf Selective Availablity is the jitter built into the GPS system by the military which has since been turned off but apparently there are older GPS receivers designed to deal with it. Note also that WAAS is an SBAS. ICAO also says
  19. Hello, Are these still available? Having trouble sourcing these for my EZ Thanks
  20. Through the years, we have watched good friends here on our forums build excellent airframes and then install non-aviation engines. We have learned that adapting any modern non-aviation engine to an airplane has many more unknown problems than any reasonable person should expect.... there are so many differences between an engine in a car and an airplane. So many failure modes... its actually very surprising. I would have thought we could bolt on a Subaru or Mazda or Chevy and just go fly (using safe hardware and wiring practices of course). It just isn't so....
  21. I found there's actually some discussion on the latest video update, which is startling in how Peter discounts some of the advice he's receiving for even basic things, such as safety-wiring engine parts, especially the spinning bolts. Here's one exchange that's particularly interesting, with Peter answering a seemingly harmless question with a telling response. Here's the question: ...and Peter's response: Wow! Here are my takeaways from this response: Peter recognizes that he'd have been better off if he had went with the aircraft engine approach. That would have eliminated a HUGE variable in his current equation. Peter is at the end of his runway, in terms of energy, and I assume time and budget. Peter is not going to test-fly his own creation. Peter is not blindly vested in the Raptor project, and Raptor Aircraft may soon cease to exist if a test pilot cannot be found. Kudos to Peter for having such self-awareness, and sharing this. This is far more positive than the other possibility, where Peter or a test pilot would be killed. It would be fantastic if the aircraft were to be successfully flown and improved -- perhaps all of those CAD and computational models are spot-on accurate -- but I remain skeptical and concerned about the next major milestone, which is for a test pilot to jump in and depart the runway. Stay safe everyone!
  22. Earlier
  23. Peter has posted a video update, with him taxi testing a new linkage assembly in his PSRU. The engine sounds great and the optimism is palpable with high-speed taxi tests coming up as a next milestone. I truly hope that Peter moves forward with healthy design-build-test-review cycles, learning from mistakes and improving the design, and being smart enough to know whether parts of the design may need to go back to the drawing board. The thing I realized when watching these videos is that there's no discussion at all from Peter on the constructive criticisms he's receiving in the comments and other places.
  24. Welcome to the forum Randall. I suspect this one may no longer be available, since it's from 2009. When items get sold the title is changed to indicate "SOLD", so there's a chance this is still available. I'm looking to implement a proper classifieds system to avoid this confusion in the future.
  25. I can see how writing about adding a pegboard might seem a bit ridiculous or trivial to some, but this was a big deal for me. I haven't had a fully working shop in about 10 years, and this pegboard marks a major milestone for me. I am getting back in business. Note the lone hammer, which I feel I have to explain it is tongue-in-cheek since I once caught some flak for posting a similar first pegboard pick from my old shop. Tell me that's not funny! 😉 You can see the put-wheels-on-everything mantra is working for me as well. I need to insulate and cover the left-side wall in insulation and plywood, and I'm going to extend the right-side section to use the same pegboard+plywood combination. I'm going to spray foam the ceiling joists and then do the remainder of the walls by October at the latest. I need to make room for my incoming Quickie TriQ-200 project, and this is all part of that plan. Yikes I have sh'tuff to do!
  26. I forgot about that. Even without the failures, or imagining that it survived even 100 hours would not be enough for me to trust Version 1.0 of the thing. The amount of engineering needed just to produce a viable PSRU is substantial, and then to prove its durability you'd have to torture-test several with adjustments to the design after each to gain my trust. The latest video released just 2 days ago shows Peter enthusiastically pressing on, expecting a first flight next month. He'll need every bit of that 5,000-foot runway I expect. Check out this documentary on another man's dream to create an aircraft which was just a bit too much.
  1. Load more activity


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information