Who flys an EZ or Cozy in X-Plane?

[dpaton]

I've heard that there are a bunch of people who fly the models from Curt at Vigilance Aero. I was just curious how many are here. I'm pretty sure he's working on updates to the 8.x modeller, which promises to make them even cooler I think. Just looking for like-minded sim flyers I suppose.

 

-dave

[Jon Matcho]

I fly x-plane and have a number of hours "invested" in it. I don't have 8.0 yet, but would follow Curt's lead on that one. I fly on a single monitor system right now, with a crappy joystick. I'm convinced it's good for helping understand what's involved with flight and helpful in lieu of having a Cozy at your disposal.

 

Curt told me he solo'd in a helicopter in just a handful of hours because he flew hundreds in X-plane.

 

There's a simulators section here w/a number of X-plane threads: http://www.canardzone.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=145

 

Also, Curt frequents this forum now and again.

[Strider]

I'm working on the updated canards for X-Plane version 8.20 (latest) by improving the VariEze first, and then I'll transfer the required changes to the LongEZ, Cozy, Proteus, ARES, etc. This is proving to be more involved than I had hoped. The differences in the virtual-wind-tunnel physics between v7 and v8 are drastic.

 

Also, I don't receive feedback on these designs. Apparently there are very few pilots who fly both the real aircraft and the X-Plane replications. This is unfortunate for me, as I have not personally flown a LongEZ and have never even been for a ride in a Cozy. I hope that no one is offended, but I personally believe it is unfortunate for pilots as well. The military uses flight simulators, the airlines use flight simulators, medivac firms use flight simulators, corporate flight departments use simulators ... but homebuilders don't. And we have all seen what a terrible year 2005 has been for canard aviators involved in Class A mishaps. Our planes are low-cost: we build them ourselves using the lowest cost tools and materials. The X-Plane sim is a low-cost solution, and I am the only designer who has produced designs for X-Plane on an FAA-approved flight training system.

 

I now have over 75 hours in the 22 year old VariEze N111JK. Local EZ drivers all told me that my first attempt to land the plane would involve more than one go-around. They were wrong- my first approach and landing were more than satisfactory, because I had flown the plane and landed it more than 100 times in X-Plane. I practice in X-Plane regularly, particularly for long flights like Denver to Phoenix, Denver to Oshkosh, etc.

 

Currently the delay in my X-Plane work is due to my helping my wife Gail prepare for her first solo in our plane. She has flown our VariEze and a LongEZ from the back seats, she recently completed her BFR in a Cessna, and she has been practicing high-speed taxiing, flying the canard, takeoffs, and approaches in X-Plane. She will probably solo in our plane this Sunday (Saturday's forecast is windy). Our Advisor and I are convinced she's good to go. This has been a stressful time for me, and I'll continue to be freaked out until she lands after her solo.

 

So now you know why I haven't been around here lately.

[dpaton]

Curt: Thanks for stopping by

 

Jon: The money spent on a CH control system (stick, pedals, throttle?) is totally worth it. The CH stick blows my $30 Logitech abomination away so completely I haven't taken it out in months, and I don't plan to in the future. I've played with the pedlas and throttle elsewhere, and I hope I can make the additions soon.

 

Personally, I'm all for type-accurate flight sims. I don't think they can do anything but help us, as long as they're accurate.

Between the statements from other active pilots and things like Curt's and Austin's adevntures in helicopters, I'm convinced there's merit in using X-Plane as a training aid. Yes, there are issues with it, but the flight model is becoming more solid every release, and that's what we really want to practice isn't it?

And if there's one thing I'm sure I'll want, it's the ability to practice somewhat accurately while the weather in the midwest is being less cooperative, as it seems to do a whole lot.

 

My $0.02

 

-dave

[Len Evansic]

Best of luck to you and Gail for this weekend. Keep us updated.

 

When you say the changes in wind tunnel physics are drastic, I'm hoping that means greatly improved. Although this would definitely mean a lot more work to correct fudges for less-good physics.

 

I share your feelings about using sims for training. Here in upstate NY, it is really difficult to count on good weather, so X-plane has been a Godsend in keeping an edge between flights.

 

I'm still working on my PPL, and am a LONG way away from flying my own canard, so I can't offer feedback on the models, but I enjoy your 7.x models immensely.

 

-- Len

[Jon Matcho]

Jon: The money spent on a CH control system (stick, pedals, throttle?) is totally worth it.

Thanks -- I touched one at Oshkosh and at first thought they were selling a control stick for kitplanes. You know what's on my wishlist. I want the pedals and throttle too, but will hold until I get near to complete w/my build. Then again, who knows, I may have a good sim built by then...

 

Oh yeah, I moved this thread into the sims area of the forum.

[Strider]

I agree that CH Products equipment is very worthwhile. I have used their sticks, pedal units, and a yoke unit for many years. AFAIK, CH Products is the only company which produces control units for both computer uses and for real aircraft cockpits.

 

My statement about being the only designer "who has produced designs for X-Plane on an FAA-approved flight training system" is missing the word "canard." Fidelity Flight Sims of Pittsburgh obviously produces X-Plane designs which are FAA-approved. But not canards. They remain as bigoted against canards as they are about Apple Macintosh computers. Also, the info that I have is that canards in MS FlightSim use the look-up tables for the C-172. Enough said.

 

In gaining FAA Approval and certification, the FAA doesn't care about perfectly accurate dimensioning, totally correct polar curves for airfoils, nor the exact specs for engine and propeller equipment. All other flight training systems are "lookup-table" driven, so therefore it is ONLY the results that matter. This means that, yes, canard designs in X-Plane which provide accurate speeds, control rates, climb rates, glide ratios, etc. have been "fudged" in the interest of producing accurate results. Correct results are produced (in X-Plane) by testing, testing, testing ... and according to the criteria described in the FAA document AC 120-45A. As X-Plane becomes "more accurate", perhaps I will not have to invest so much time testing to FAA standards, but it isn't there yet. This is the perspective that I gained working on an FAA certified FTD Level 2 running X-Plane at Windsong Aviation, Jeffco Airport, Denver.

 

Beyond this, a very major issue is incorrect training in simulation. Training on an incorrect or inaccurate aircraft replication is WORSE than no training at all. This is also a factor in the delay of updates of my designs.

 

Mr. Al Wick describes his work in both risk reduction and warning system automation in homebuilt aircraft, and I believe he has produced major accomplishments. Unfortunately, and for whatever reasons such as added cost etc, his choices of additions to his aircraft have not been widely accepted by others. And he cannot and will not replace the human pilot, who has the ultimate responsibility to fly the airplane. I'm sure he recognizes that if we make the aircraft perfectly reliable at all times, we will still have difficulty improving the human. IMHO, the combination of winter time and X-Plane addresses this issue, at least in part.

[Radioflyer]

When I got my PPL, the simulator at the school was good practice for flying "under the hood" and dealing with equipment emergencies. Flying windy conditions and turbulence was harder in the simulator than in real life. It helped create a certain "awareness", I guess, but the fidelity to real flying mechanics wasn't that helpful. So, I guess I'm saying that probably any simulator time is good for some things, but not for actual aircraft dynamics. (Of course, a multimillion dollar, moving platform simulator is an entirely different thing)

 

Having said that, my understanding is that the differentiating point about X-Plane is its accurate and reconfigurable physics engine that can be applied to new airframes. I would not mind trying out a good LongEz simulator. Before I satrt Googling, can someone provide an overall orientation about setting up X-plane as a Long Ez simulator. Is X-plane only for Apple platforms? Is it share ware? Where can the Long Ez model be found?

[Jon Matcho]

...can someone provide an overall orientation about setting up X-plane as a Long Ez simulator.

You need a 'gaming quality' PC and a joystick. You can use your keyboard for all the controls, and even use a keyboard instead of a joystick. CH Products makes great joysticks as well as throttle quadrants. Go nuts and get a double or triple-headed monitor card and you'll be fully immersed.

 

Is X-plane only for Apple platforms?

Mac, Windows, and Linux.

 

Is it share ware?

No, but there's a demo version you can download.

 

Where can the Long Ez model be found?

Before I satrt Googling...

Sorry, but you're going to have to google for VariEze and 'Curt Boyll', or search this forum. Curt flies a VariEze AND happens to be an extraordinary X-Plane plane designer. I've seen a Long-EZ out there, but I'd bet Curt's VariEze is as accurate as you're going to get in X-Plane.

 

See www.x-plane.com as well.

[Radioflyer]

Ok, Jon, thanks. I think I'm going to look into this. For $39 bucks, on can't go wrong.

[Remi Khu]

I've played with Curt's Cozy IV model on my XPlane 8.17 the past three days. The model is fast, and extremely twitchy when I have it configured to full realism.

 

It's a lot of fun and challenging flying in the traffic pattern. Speed management is quite an eye opener for me, a C-172 and PA28-180 pilot. I'm not sure what the power settings are for the real Cozy, but I would appreciate some settings for landing the slippery cus. I've had to pull throttle to idle turning base and dump the landing brake just to get below 100kts.

 

Remi

[dpaton]

From what I've read, that's not all that uncommon. The canards we talk about here are excellent gliders.

 

-dave

[Jon Matcho]

For $39 bucks, on can't go wrong.

Not sure if you caught it, but someone pointed out that CH Products also makes real world aviation control sticks -- so you know you're in for the real feel there.

 

The model is fast, and extremely twitchy when I have it configured to full realism.

I've noticed some erratic behavior as well, such as a tendency to veer left when taxiing. I asked Curt about this and he mentioned that it's something like spiral propwash that's built into X-Plane (which pushers are not subject to). He's been asking to have it addressed for a couple versions now. Maybe it's fixed in 8.x (I haven't upgraded yet).

 

The canards we talk about here are excellent gliders.

Yes, they are fast airplanes. Still, I felt the Cozy was a bit too fast on approach as well, but have no valid basis to even offer that as an opinion. I certainly could have been mishandling the simulated airplane.

 

Curt happens to be building a Cozy Mark IV right now, and so I'm counting on a very good Cozy Mark IV X-Plane in the coming future. I'm sure things will only get better here.

[dpaton]

FYI, I've experienced some real live flakyness with some of the aircraft in 8.20, all of them are old 7.x designs. It manifests itself as an unrecoverable inverted deep stall. Twitchy is an understatement for when it's flying right. I don't think the propwash bug is fixed for canards yet.

 

Curt, send me a list of your squawks. I'll add them to my own in my next email to Austin.

 

I think righ tnow, if you want to fly the EZs or the Cozy, keep it at 8.17 maximum. 8.20 changed enough in the flight model that it medded things up.

 

As for the $39 comment, I think that was referring to the current discounted price of X-plane when purchased direct from Laminar Research. The CH sticks are a lot more money, and worth every penny.

 

-dave

[Strider]

Updated flight models are available for X-Plane, currently including new Cozy Mk IV's, a new O-200 powered VariEze with Dynon, and a Defiant. I'm working on a new Long-EZ, and Burt's Boomerang. Here is a link to the VariEze:

 

http://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?autocom=dlmanager&do=viewfile&fid=6897

 

X-Plane.ORG now requires a registered Login for downloads, due to spamming and bots causing trouble. Sorry for the inconvenience. The other planes are available there at the .ORG also, with a search.

 

These flight models demonstrate increased accuracy over earlier efforts, and I'm using the specs for development of a design of my own. It seems to me that there is continued, perhaps resurgent, interest in canard homebuilts. And there is interest in how to get more out of the Cozy MK IV ... more cabin space, more speed, etc. But the design is limited in how much it can be stretched.

 

This design is intended to address these issues, as it has a larger cabin at the start, is designed for higher indicated speeds, and can accommodate engines from the O-320 all the way up to TNIO-360's, or even TNIO-540's. The example powered by two O-320's provides performance slightly better than a standard Cozy, but with slightly higher fuel-flows (the price of the larger cabin). Cost to build a SuperTandem starts at about the same as a Cozy Mk IV. Offers handling at least as good as Rutan. Again, this is being developed using numbers in X-Plane which provide accurate results in the VariEze, Long-EZ, Cozy, Defiant, Boomerang, Proteus, White Knight, and SpaceShipOne.

 

http://www.vigilanceaero.com/SuperTandemConcept.jpg

 

This flight model for X-Plane will be made available soon.

[Jon Matcho]

I just got a new computer... I think it's time to upgrade my X-Plane and get 2 monitors going at home! Fun stuff, and useful at that.

 

[Strider]

The Boomerang for X-Plane 8.40 is available at www.x-plane.ORG. Sorry for the inconvenience of having to login there for downloads, but they've been having troubles with bots and so forth. Here is an image of the flight model:

 

http://www.vigilanceaero.com/Boomerang.jpg

 

A new Long-EZ is next.

 

Oh, regarding multiple monitors for X-Plane Jon, I've found that the 3-head Matrox Parhelia works great. A three-head is cool, 'cuz you can have the instrument panel in the middle, and side views to the left and right. For X-Plane v8.x, the larger Parhelia would be best ... more VRAM for the much more realistic terrain and objects. Another solution is multiple computers, and X-Plane itself allows managing the ethernet IP connections.

[Jon Matcho]

A three-head is cool, 'cuz you can have the instrument panel in the middle, and side views to the left and right.

I'll have to settle for 2 LCDs. I guess I'll span the views onto both.

 

I'm very much looking forward.

[Strider]

A new Long-EZ for X-Plane is now available. This flight model demonstrates all of the correct numbers according to the Owner's Manual: Speeds, RPM's, Fuel Flows, and correct glide ratio engine out prop windmilling. An image:

 

http://www.vigilanceaero.com/LEZ_poster.jpg

 

And the download:

 

http://www.vigilanceaero.com/Long-EZ_840.zip

 

Includes Dynon, GPS-196, Becker, Grand Rapids, TruTrac, and O2 system for VFR day and night. Per-plans empty weight of 775 lbs, and Lyc. O-235-L2C with instructions for converting to 150 HP O-320.

[Radioflyer]

I want to practice landing the LongEz in X-plane before I start to actively fly my real LongEz. Is anyone using Strider's (Vigileance Aero) 8.40 Long-Ez with X-plane 8.6x?

[Cozy Girrrl]

Strider... you ought to make the response time of the controls incrementally sluggish over time if the oxygen is not flowing above 12k ft, eventually leading to the screen incrementally getting greyer...maybe by then the pilot will get a clue =)

...Chrissi

[Zulu Yankee]

I see that X-Plane 9 is available now. Are the canard airplanes (spacifically Cozy and Long-EZ) available on X-Plane 9 yet or should I start out with version 8.6?

[Strider]

Actually, my canards are already designed like this in X-Plane. It's just not down as low as 12,000. Even my VariEze's for X-Plane have oxygen, and it's On by default. But it's set for about 17,000 feet, and it doesn't run out. So I've put it in mainly just to keep X-Plane canardians out of Class A.

 

But you can also turn it off. In which case, yessiree, right at about 12,000 X-Plane's screen will start going dark. This is a normal feature of X-Plane, and it requires that you have the blackout from g-force and hypoxia enabled in the Rendering dialog screen.

 

Strider... you ought to make the response time of the controls incrementally sluggish over time if the oxygen is not flowing above 12k ft, eventually leading to the screen incrementally getting greyer...maybe by then the pilot will get a clue =)

...Chrissi

[Strider]

I would recommend staying with X-Plane v8.64 for a while longer. The DVDs for version 9 are available, it's true, and you can download and run the updates from www.x-plane.com. BUT, this is still a BETA application. There are lots of bugs and problems still.

 

X-Plane version 9.x (b13, at this pt) is available for public use because Laminar Research is a VERY SMALL company, and they get a bunch of enthusiasts to do their Beta testing for them. It is still very early in the process. From my experience with X-Plane (10 years now) I would wait until at least version 9.20.

 

This is particularly true for people who think that flying a computer flight simulator has relevance to their flying what they believe is the very same plane in "Real Life"tmCircleR. (people like me.)

 

If you intend to use the computer for any sort of transition or proficiency or familiarization, you must wait until I've had a chance to run the flight models through the standard requirements that the FAA uses for Approvals of X-Plane in flight schools, and this isn't worth doing until the program is stable.

 

Improper or incorrect simulator training is worse than none at all, trust me.

 

However, I have just spent about three hours test flying and making adjustments to my canards for X-Plane in version 9b13. They are basically flyable, but I don't know yet if they're accurate. I'll get these uploaded to my Web site and post their availability. This includes VariEze, Long-EZ, and 3 different Cozy's (Well, two Cozy's and a CharlieGolf RG Full Retract with Blue Mountains, and ... etc).

 

X-Plane has proven very useful for my flying. I've been flying a VariEze that I did not build for more than three years now. Just this year alone, I have flown to Colorado Springs 3 times, to Sedona, AZ, Kremmling and Grand Junction, CO, Oshkosh, WI, Elizabethtown, KY and Las Vegas, NV. All of these flights in the real airplane were like a Deja Vu, because I had flown the flights in X-Plane.

 

Sorry for the delay, but you may notice that X-Plane is affordable and the only canard-type computer flight models worth using, are free.

 

I see that X-Plane 9 is available now. Are the canard airplanes (spacifically Cozy and Long-EZ) available on X-Plane 9 yet or should I start out with version 8.6?

[MikeD]

Srider,

 

I've been using the demo ver of 8.64 and have just purchased the full version but am waiting for the CD's before I can use it fully. I'm presently building a Long-EZ that will have a Lyco O-320 B3B.

 

The 'Long-EZ 840' file makes note of the fact that you can change the configuration from a O-235 to the O-320 engine, how do you do this, I cannot find any settings to change!

 

MikeD (U.K.)