Altitude and Speed in COZY aircraft

[Lynn Erickson]

the infinity 1 is claimed for a Vne of 460 mph: do they use a different canard?

the key word here is claimed. thats not the same a tested and proven. to do that they would have to actually build and fly a real aircraft. the aircraft might hit the VNE of 460 MPH but I doubt that the wings will still be attached to the fuselage. but I think that the stick grip will hold up to the pilot inputs, as it will be mostly just squeezing above 300 mph.

[Rydogg]

the infinity 1 is claimed for a Vne of 460 mph: do they use a different canard?

Ha!!! JD's "Infinity One" has been on the build phase for the past 10+ years. Don't hold your breath on him actually making this thing. I spoke with him at OSH a few years ago and when I asked about the plane and it's status (when will he start selling these things), he very blatently (& rudely) told me that it's still being developed and I needed to give him a deposit...RIGHT THEN. I just laughed, shook my head and walked away. I don't think that he will ever be making any of these planes for sale. Too bad though:( , his 'claimed' performance specs are sweet!

[airnico]

the key word here is claimed. thats not the same a tested and proven. to do that they would have to actually build and fly a real aircraft. the aircraft might hit the VNE of 460 MPH but I doubt that the wings will still be attached to the fuselage. but I think that the stick grip will hold up to the pilot inputs, as it will be mostly just squeezing above 300 mph.

it has been said that the Roncz canard could have a critical mach # of 380 mph so I was wondering what kind of canard JD is using to fly so fast.

you're right Lynn, claimed means something different than proven, but if JD claims for 460mph he has probably some reasons to do it, or is he simply not afraid of being claimed for a dreamer?

Rydogg check the infinity 1 page and you'll find that if you want to have it you have to send 1000$ deposit and when the missing 500K$ will be collected they'll start building your plane.

I actually am not going to do it, but would like to realize how they can(or want or hope....) build a so fast canard aircraft: is it possible to find an airfoil able to fly so fast and also to land at a realistic speed?

if the answer is yes, why do we continue building roncz??

[Waiter]

Sounds like an excellent question for JD.

 

Waiter

[Rydogg]

Rydogg check the infinity 1 page and you'll find that if you want to have it you have to send 1000$ deposit and when the missing 500K$ will be collected they'll start building your plane.

Yeah, he's been stuck at "needing only $500k more" for at least 5 years...

[Vortal]

what about the starship's airfoil (Roncz 1085) it goes @ 335kts (385mph) (source http://www.bobscherer.com/Files/Starship/Starship%20Performance%20and%20Specifications.pdf)

by the way when your talking mph is it nautical miles (kts) or statute miles per hour (just to confirm, i get mixed up)

[Lynn Erickson]

you're right Lynn, claimed means something different than proven, but if JD claims for 460mph he has probably some reasons to do it,

 

he does, it is because either he knows more about this then any other engineer or he thinks he knows more about this then any other engineer.

[airnico]

what about the starship's airfoil (Roncz 1085) it goes @ 335kts (385mph) (source http://www.bobscherer.com/Files/Starship/Starship%20Performance%20and%20Specifications.pdf)

by the way when your talking mph is it nautical miles (kts) or statute miles per hour (just to confirm, i get mixed up)

 

if you refer to the 460 mph you can translate it to 400 kts but I have no idea about the use of the starship's airfoil.

[Monty Roberts]

So what would be the better solution to the mach tuck issue?

 

1.) Straight canard with a new airfoil with a thinner section (probably would have a lower CL so would need more area to keep stall speed the same)

 

2.) sweep the canard with the existing airfoil.

 

 

I guess it would depend on how fast you wanted to go in the end.

 

Monty

[ZUCZZ]

Ok, I'm a little puzzled here ... how fast do you peole plan to make your plane?

[Monty Roberts]

I don't plan to make mine that fast. I can't afford the fuel burn:sad: .....but was thinking more of people doing things like straping jets and rockets on these aircraft.

 

Monty

[Vortal]

So what would be the better solution to the mach tuck issue?

 

1.) Straight canard with a new airfoil with a thinner section (probably would have a lower CL so would need more area to keep stall speed the same)

 

2.) sweep the canard with the existing airfoil.

 

 

I guess it would depend on how fast you wanted to go in the end.

 

Monty

both!

start by #2 first but you'll still need to go with #1 at some point (supercritical airfoil at worst) that's why many if not all M=.7+ aircraft have swept wings... and M=.82+ have supercritical aircraft (lot of them)

[airnico]

here a quote from a previous discussion:

 

A swept canard would be significantly more complex to build. It could be done, and it might look snarky, but it wouldn't be faster.

 

You'd have to do a different canard attach system, since it would put torque on the current lift tab system. Since the elevators would no longer be in line you'd have a more complex way of activating them. Since span would be reduced you'd be creating more induced drag for the same lift.

and of course someone is doing something in that direction, check this:

 

http://www.reaa.ru/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.pl?num=1158383728

 

but if you look at the infinity 1 you'll find a straight canard just like ours.

 

So what would be the better solution to the mach tuck issue?

1.) Straight canard with a new airfoil with a thinner section (probably would have a lower CL so would need more area to keep stall speed the same)

2.) sweep the canard with the existing airfoil.

I guess it would depend on how fast you wanted to go in the end.

a new and faster airfoil would be a possible way(it has already been done once) but it would be a looong way to go through and who can do it?

 

how effective would be a swept canard in your opinion?

[Vortal]

for the swept wing check this

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swept_wing

 

for that cute canard, it does look cool but a forward swept canard.... this guy like to make things complicated, you need to know what you are doing, this is way above the competency of the majority of us (unless you have worked on the X29 program at the nasa) you'll need FBW and lots of plies of carbon fiber to control structural divergence and instability...

 

Marcel Dassault (the guy behind Dassault aviation, the falcon family and the rafale) said one day that a good looking aircraft is a good aircraft, but as we see here, there is some limits....

[Marc Zeitlin]

While reviewing this thread I found this quote:

 

Mark: not to put your shorts in a knot. But Jims Long had a 0-290 Lycoming. 135 HP;)

A quick check of the FAI's website shows:

 

http://records.fai.org/pilot.asp?from=ga&id=242

 

That N57JP, the altitude record holding Long-EZ, had a 160 HP O-320 in it for the record flights, as stated.

[emteeoh]

Does that mean your pants are in a knot, or chucks?

[ZUCZZ]

That may be so, but that plane is in a T/O weight class lighter than the Cozy.

 

Cozy falls in same weight class as the Bruce Bohannon records, 45K+. He picked up 5 records in one shot on that run. (IIRC)

 

Anyway, Cozy holds the South Africa record, still processing the paperwork