Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Twin EZ

Full Flying Canard

Recommended Posts

In the process of designing my "perfect" Long ez, I was considering building a full flying canard (vs fixed with elevator). Has anyone ever tried it? Are there specific reasons not to do it on a canard? On Convention AC, they work great. I had stabilators on both of my planes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has anyone ever tried it?

Not anyone who is still alive. Not a real successful mod.

T Mann - Loooong-EZ/20B Infinity R/G Chpts 18

Velocity/RG N951TM

Mann's Airplane Factory

We add rocket's to everything!

4, 5, 6, 7, 8. 9, 10, 14, 19, 20 Done

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not anyone who is still alive. Not a real successful mod.

But since, from your name, you appear to have a twin, there will at least be one of you left to try something else flyable, after your demise.:sad:

What are you building...Perhaps you can post pictures of your work soothers can learn?


Self confessed Wingnut.

Now think about it...wouldn't you rather LIVE your life, rather than watch someone else's, on Reality T.V.?

Get up off that couch!!! =)

 

Progress; Fuselage on all three, with outside and inside nearly complete. 8 inch extended nose. FHC done. Canard finished. ERacer wings done with blended winglets. IO540 starting rebuild. Mounting Spar. Starting strake ribs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the process of designing my "perfect" Long ez, I was considering building a full flying canard (vs fixed with elevator). Has anyone ever tried it?

There are anecdotal reports of a small number of people attempting it on Vari-Eze's, but I can find no documentation whatsoever. There are one or two extant canard aircraft designs that use "stabilator" like canards (as did the Wright Flyer).

 

Are there specific reasons not to do it on a canard?

Yes. It will substantially change the stability and control characteristics of the aircraft, and would require a LOT of analysis to determine appropriate airfoils, dimensions, and control system design to make it workable, stable, and controllable. It's a LOT more difficult on a canard than it is on a conventional aircraft - a canard is NOT just a backwards conventional design. You can easily create uncontrollable, unstable, and deep stall susceptible situations if you don't know what you're doing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps you can post pictures of your work soothers can learn?

You can always click the link to Mann's Airplane Factory

T Mann - Loooong-EZ/20B Infinity R/G Chpts 18

Velocity/RG N951TM

Mann's Airplane Factory

We add rocket's to everything!

4, 5, 6, 7, 8. 9, 10, 14, 19, 20 Done

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can always click the link to Mann's Airplane Factory

Reference question to what was HE building, and if perchance he works on his articulated canard, there might be photos so as to enlighten others with his hair-pulling exploits [mods].

I try not to post my own hair-pulling exploits anymore, but wanted others to benifit from HIS.

I know...I am a siccccck man. =)


Self confessed Wingnut.

Now think about it...wouldn't you rather LIVE your life, rather than watch someone else's, on Reality T.V.?

Get up off that couch!!! =)

 

Progress; Fuselage on all three, with outside and inside nearly complete. 8 inch extended nose. FHC done. Canard finished. ERacer wings done with blended winglets. IO540 starting rebuild. Mounting Spar. Starting strake ribs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I have a twin, but that is not what my name is about. I have be working on designing a twin LE. I know that it has been done before (once by Bowden), and I know that there has been a lot of skepticism about that around here, so I have not made any mention of it. Justt for the record, I have built over 75 aircraft from scratch, using everything from Rotax 277 - 912, subarus and 1 turbo charged honda civic engine. I am not an engineer (admitting that there is more that I don't know than I do know), but I have always loved a challenge. I think that a viable twin is possible with the right engines, and keeping the weight DOWN!!! My planned design has a finished weight of about 975# with 160 HP. Why is it that I feel I have just opened myself up for a bunch of bantering???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds interesting, I've got two questions though:

160 HP total or per engine?

What's the configuration? (Defiant style or other)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds interesting, I've got two questions though:

160 HP total or per engine?

What's the configuration? (Defiant style or other)

Two 80 hp for a total of 160. If someone were foolish enough to put 2 -160 hp engines on, it would be a disaster waiting to happen. Way too heavy, and if one engine went out, there would be FAR TOO much thrust on one side to keep the aircraft in control. If the power were pulled back to prevent spinning, the aircraft would be be so heavy, it wouldnt maintain altitude.

The engine configuration would have both engines in the rear. Not feasable to put one up front, and why ruin the beautiful looks of the LE and the visibility would be compromised.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Two 80 hp for a total of 160. If someone were foolish enough to put 2 -160 hp engines on, it would be a disaster waiting to happen. Way too heavy, and if one engine went out, there would be FAR TOO much thrust on one side to keep the aircraft in control. If the power were pulled back to prevent spinning, the aircraft would be be so heavy, it wouldnt maintain altitude.

The engine configuration would have both engines in the rear. Not feasable to put one up front, and why ruin the beautiful looks of the LE and the visibility would be compromised.

I really wanted to do this type of aircraft also after seeing the Shaw twin done in great britain. after much thought and engineering i found out the same thing shaw did. the aircraft is to small a platform the support two engines and two people. with an engine out and only 80 hp you will be in the low side of the power required to maintain altitude and if it happens during takeoff the extra engine will do you no good, in fact the extra drag will hurt you. you need a bigger platform as in 150% scale long ez then you can use an engine of a size to maintain flight if there is a engine out. the other problem is the much increased drag of the engines that you don't have in the single engine ez. an 80 hp engine uses a lot of its power just to offset that drag if the engine is increase to 160 hp there is plenty of extra hp to offset the increased drag of the only slightly bigger engine. now if you are thinking I am just another that wants to shoot down your design, well I have a set of drawing for a 125% long ez with three 100 hp engines.

Evolultion Eze RG -a two place side by side-200 Knots on 200 HP. A&P / pilot for over 30 years

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no doubt about it that there will always be a situation where the 2nd engine may not help out. I have gotten that same response several times, "what happnens if one quits on take off"? Well, I ask this, on a single engine LE, ....same question. Gues what? same answer: fly the plane as best you can and hope there aint a tree or house in your way. Ont he other hand, my calculations show that the LE can sustain altitude with 80-85% power on one engine. There are significant variable involved such as weight and how well the engines are cowled. I believe that properly done, the drag can be quite minimal. I think that one of the biggest problems that Mike Bowden had wat the design of the engine cowls. We cant just expect to cover an engine and call that good. A lot of time must go into minimizing the drag around the cowling and engine and maintain proper cooling. Putting all of the technical babble aside,lets face it...It would be SERIUOSLY COOL :D

I will continue to rifine my ideas, continually trying to fix any possible problems. I welcome any opinions that are given, but I am not easily diswayed. I think that if the drag stays low, the aircraft stays light, than this can work.

BTW, my fuel burn will be a total of 5GPH at cruise... not bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anybody remember why Lindberg decided on only one engine?


T Mann - Loooong-EZ/20B Infinity R/G Chpts 18

Velocity/RG N951TM

Mann's Airplane Factory

We add rocket's to everything!

4, 5, 6, 7, 8. 9, 10, 14, 19, 20 Done

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anybody remember why Lindberg decided on only one engine?

If I remember correctly, he couldnt afford the windshield, I would guess that the second engine reasoning was along the same guidelines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anybody remember why Lindberg decided on only one engine?

Two or Three engines multiplies the likelihood of problems/failure by the same amount.

T Mann - Loooong-EZ/20B Infinity R/G Chpts 18

Velocity/RG N951TM

Mann's Airplane Factory

We add rocket's to everything!

4, 5, 6, 7, 8. 9, 10, 14, 19, 20 Done

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eveyone has an opinion and knows what they are comfortable with. And thats ok. I am not here to "convince" anyone that a twin is better than a single engine aircraft. It is simpy my preference for my next plane. Lets face it, if everyone wanted the same plane, same paint, same engine, same guages, same interior.....BLAH..what would be the point. I am a firm believer in going from the "know" to the "un-known" slowly. Taking baby steps along the way to make it right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is some stiff competition here as far as the 'Most Extreme' title goes. I'm looking forward to pics!


T Mann - Loooong-EZ/20B Infinity R/G Chpts 18

Velocity/RG N951TM

Mann's Airplane Factory

We add rocket's to everything!

4, 5, 6, 7, 8. 9, 10, 14, 19, 20 Done

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wont be doing any work until I am satisfied with the design. And of course there are financials...I was forced to close down my business about 6 months ago..that hurt. But I will definately keep everyone up to date.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wishing you well, on all fronts. =)


Self confessed Wingnut.

Now think about it...wouldn't you rather LIVE your life, rather than watch someone else's, on Reality T.V.?

Get up off that couch!!! =)

 

Progress; Fuselage on all three, with outside and inside nearly complete. 8 inch extended nose. FHC done. Canard finished. ERacer wings done with blended winglets. IO540 starting rebuild. Mounting Spar. Starting strake ribs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eveyone has an opinion and knows what they are comfortable with. And thats ok. I am not here to "convince" anyone that a twin is better than a single engine aircraft. It is simpy my preference for my next plane. Lets face it, if everyone wanted the same plane, same paint, same engine, same guages, same interior.....BLAH..what would be the point. I am a firm believer in going from the "know" to the "un-known" slowly. Taking baby steps along the way to make it right.

The twin idea is a cool one. the advantage of a properly designed twin is that you have that second engine if one quits and to design that out of the design just does not make since to me. if you have two engines and you need both of them to keep you in the air then you are cutting your odds in half that you will make a successful flight. double the trouble. to build a twin just to have a twin is not a good reason to build a twin. the twin part needs to be there for better reasons.

Evolultion Eze RG -a two place side by side-200 Knots on 200 HP. A&P / pilot for over 30 years

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Make no mistake about it, my goals are to design it so that it will maintain on one engine at 80% power. My calculations show that running at 1300 lbs, it will maintain altitude on one engine, holding the speed at 100 knots. You may be refering to my take-off emergency senario. I wanted to simple point out that a twin is not a placebo. It can not be the savior in every situation. But 99% of the time, it can save your bacon. In the end, the proof will be when it is actually flying. I am confident that a Twin LE can be done, reliably with some amazing performace results.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Justt for the record, I have built over 75 aircraft from scratch, using everything from Rotax 277 - 912, subarus and 1 turbo charged honda civic engine.

That's very hard to believe. I'm not calling you a liar, but 75 a/c from SCRATCH! In one lifetime...? Sorry, but this is pegginig my B.S. meter.

 

Can you prove this statement?

 

I can't even fathom someone building 75 from kits, let alone 75 from scratch...:confused:

 

EDIT: Ah - I see you had a business - I'm assuming a business where you had a number of workers who built planes. That's a little different than saying that you personally built 75 planes from scratch, don't you think?


Phil Kriley

Cozy #1460

Chapter 13 - nose

Right wing done - working on right winglet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Twin you may want to look around on this site (or in the CSA newsletters)... I beleive there was a LE that was built with 2 80hp Jabiru engines. The owner decided to convert back to one because of the observation made previously (not enough power to maintain altitude on one engine)...

 

Here is the link:

 

http://www.canardzone.com/forum/showthread.php?t=10767&highlight=twin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's very hard to believe. I'm not calling you a liar, but 75 a/c from SCRATCH! In one lifetime...? Sorry, but this is pegginig my B.S. meter.

 

Can you prove this statement?

 

I can't even fathom someone building 75 from kits, let alone 75 from scratch...:confused:

 

Its not that hard, when that is what you did for a living for 8 years. So, yes I can prove it. Thanks for the attitude, gives me that warm and fuzzy feeling all over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Twin you may want to look around on this site (or in the CSA newsletters)... I beleive there was a LE that was built with 2 80hp Jabiru engines. The owner decided to convert back to one because of the observation made previously (not enough power to maintain altitude on one engine)...

 

If you were to have red this thread from the beginning, you would have noticed that I have commented on Bowden's LE a couple of times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Twin you may want to look around on this site (or in the CSA newsletters)... I beleive there was a LE that was built with 2 80hp Jabiru engines. The owner decided to convert back to one because of the observation made previously (not enough power to maintain altitude on one engine)...

 

If you were to have red this thread from the beginning, you would have noticed that I have commented on Bowden's LE a couple of times.

In CP 55 page 11 is a picture of Ivan shaw's Twin ez powered by two Norton rotary engines

http://www.cozybuilders.org/Canard_Pusher/1988-04_cp-55.pdf


Evolultion Eze RG -a two place side by side-200 Knots on 200 HP. A&P / pilot for over 30 years

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

The Canard Zone

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information