Jump to content
TParker

TParker Long-EZ Rebuild

Recommended Posts

Hi,

I bought a Long-EZ project, hopefully didn't err too grievously with my selection. It was previously flying, first flight in 1988. Originally equipped with an O-235-L2C, it later had an O-360-A4A installed. In 1992, the 360 was removed with the stated intent of reinstalling the 235 and it hasn't flown since; it's accumulated some hangar rash, along with various things being stripped for use in other projects or with the intent of upgrading. This is very much a rebuild project, not a reassembly project; I thought it would a good tool to learn a lot about homebuilding aircraft relatively quickly.

1324456706_image1(10).thumb.jpeg.7bd9efc03be6c3ffc3329f7dd1d20a8d.jpeg

So far I've mostly been figuring out what exactly I bought, looking closely at everything, and doing background research on the MAN-GRD CP plans changes.

I'm sure I'll have lots of questions and can hopefully get suggestions/feedback on how to do this properly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks Good from here!!!  Will it need to be painted... or do you think you'll fly it first?

I would get everything safe, then do some flying before making it all look new.... do you have any local EZ experienced people to help?


Andrew Anunson

I work underground and I play in the sky... no problem

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I fix/modify things it will end up with patches, then once I'm reasonably happy with how it flies I'll think about repainting it. Do most people use rattle can primer for small areas? Cosmetics are the least of my concerns at the moment because it needs powerplant, avionics, and general rehab/updating.

 

Don't know any local EZ people but I have a buddy building a Velocity and a coworker who built a Quickie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I place a lot of importance on aircraft weight and balance, so I went a little nuts weighing everything. The empty weight of this EZ was, according to the builder, 890 lbs when equipped with the 235 and 1013 lbs when equipped with the 360. Both weights included lead ballast required in the nose to balance.

My findings:

  • Fuselage as it currently sits, no interior: 315 lbf
  • Right wing: 79 lbf
  • Left wing: 83 lbf
  • Canard, with elevators: 29 lbf
    • Left elevator: 3.4 lbf, less than the 3.6 lbf required by CPs 21, 57, 106
    • Right elevator: 3.7 lbf, less than the 3.9 lbf required by CPs 21, 57, 106
      • Close though, CPs mention that a well built example should be "well" below these weights but provides no variance data
  • O-235-L2C, with starter, alternator, mags, 6" prop extension, carb, no oil: 257.8 lbf
  • engine mount: 7.4 lbf
  • Top Cowl: 8 lbf
  • Bottom Cowl: 10 lbf
  • Stainless exhaust: 5 lbf
  • Wood fixed pitch prop (B&T 62x66): 8 lbf
  • Aluminum spinner: 3 lbf
  • What's left of the instrument panel, including engine gauges, vacuum Attitude & DG, and Terra transponder: 11 lbf

Which brings the current total to 817 lbs. Notable missing items are battery, radio(s), oil cooler, several control rods, much of an interior, wiring

I also spent some time trying to figure out if there was something I was missing regarding the brakes/rudders. This is how it's currently set up:IMG_20190916_215610447.thumb.jpg.fc377ef7c4b1062874344d0ba452e6c9.jpg

This appears to activate the brake as soon as the rudder is applied. Not sure I like this, if you land with a crosswind correction you'd be landing with the wheel already braked.

Two questions regarding interior finishing

  • What's this black anti-skid-ish coating called?
    • IMG_20190915_182650595.thumb.jpg.34c37c436478571d2d6330b40fadc6d0.jpg
  • Is there a good way to remove it other than sandpaper and elbow grease?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You could add a swingarm mechanism to the existing pedal assembly, or if your ambitious fab some new delux ones.


FZ

Long eze ,  Bottom of Chapter 9

Cozy Mark 4 # 1777  Chapter 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I strung up the elevators to see if they met the balance requirements of CPs 21, 57, 106 and found that they didn't. Both were about 6°. The CPs are a bit inconsistent, with 21 calling for 10°-20° in the text then 10°-25° in the sketch while 57 and 106 call for 12°-20°. Either way, my elevators a long way from meeting this. 

IMG_20190922_160650522.thumb.jpg.aae0992976c0f2177df6c0c41ff35da1.jpg

I haven't checked the orientation of the two balance weights yet to see if they are positioned per the plans. I did notice that the inboard balance weight on both elevators has the elevator hinge hole out of alignment with the rest of the outboard fittings; fixing this would rotate the balance weight such that it's CG would be further ahead of the tube which would be advantageous for the overall balance. However, this adjustment would be minor and I think unlikely to bring the elevator into balance.

Edited by TParker
typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Both were about.

That is pretty far off. Do you see the reason for such a small total?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Barry said:

"Both were about.

That is pretty far off. Do you see the reason for such a small total?

Nope, not yet. If you do, please share.

The weights of the surfaces are close to the maximums listed for balanced and painted surfaces. So if they're not balancing that's because the weight is in the wrong spot. I can think of the following possibilities:

  • I've misunderstood how this was supposed to be measured
  • Balance weights are in the wrong position
    • Maybe I can move them if this is the case
  • Balance weights are too small
    • Can't do much with this, as the surfaces are already very close to the allowable weights
  • Elevator brackets have the pivot in the wrong position
  • Elevator has too much paint on trail edge
  • Elevator was built poorly
    • Needs to be replaced

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whilst I haven't been as productive as hoped for due primarily to work obligations, I've managed to get some things done.

Before I got too carried away on the elevators, I tried taping some weight onto them to see how much it would take to bring them into spec. It looks like I can get the elevators to be within spec for weight and angle by adding ~0.1 lbf to the outboard balance on each. So I'll sand the paint off the balance and glass on a bit more lead.

The cylinders on the O-235 are significantly corroded above the rings, which while disappointing isn't surprising:

IMG_20190918_204744000_HDR.thumb.jpg.8f734ac4ced16c9781e6ba451bb60930.jpg

The bottom end, however, looks to be in surprisingly good shape. I had a couple of A&Ps look it over, who commented that they've seen much worse in active, flying aircraft. Unfortunately, the case was assembled with some sort of silicone sealant rather than any of the Lycoming approved methods and that sealant has deteriorated, so it needs to be, at a minimum, tore down, resealed, and reassembled. I'm holding off on further engine work while I decide whether to rebuild this one or pursue a 320 of some sort.

Built a rolling wing rack to hold the main wings and the canard while they're not on the airplane.

I figured out how the brakes are supposed to work, looks like it will be a usable system. It was jammed up, thus the initial confusion, but the attachment between the master and the pedal has a slot in it to allow for rudder deflection prior to brake engagement. I measured the various linkages in the rudder/brake system to see if there was enough adjustment available to allow for max rudder prior to engaging the brakes and it does. This system seems to have a rather significant motion ratio advantage in that ~5 deg of rudder pedal is ~25 deg of rudder surface deflection; but the linkage geometry looks like it matches the plans, so no reason to build something different until I try it.

Rebuilt the brake masters and calipers, installed new brake pads, cleaned up the main wheels, inspected and repacked the bearings, and replaced the tires.

Pulled the nose gear and retract mechanism out of the aircraft. This was a bit tricky, the pivot bolt was stuck in the bushing (NG7) and wouldn't come out. Friend of mine saved the day with a rivet gun. Unfortunately I did some minor damage to the side of the fuselage trying to pry it out that I'll have to repair.

20200112_170705.thumb.jpg.bd945aa2ddadaaad921c25b727955467.jpg

The retract mechanism was pretty gummed up with old grease and gunk:

20191230_160611.thumb.jpg.461f9141b636a45742d51bed520849df.jpg

But it cleaned up nicely:

20200104_154754.thumb.jpg.983d71779b8fe4b0e65e6e8db074948b.jpg

Similarly, the nose strut hardware:

20200111_141526.thumb.jpg.2ba020ba7109e29c4212e080b1062ce9.jpg

Cleaned:

20200111_154511.thumb.jpg.638cea8f451a016ef767d1824cd3e271.jpg

The nose strut compression spring (from CP25) and the nose wheel itself got the same treatment. 

So at this point, I need to reassemble all this stuff at the front of the airplane that I've taken apart. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, TParker said:

The cylinders on the O-235 are significantly corroded above the rings, which while disappointing isn't surprising:

One time, I self-honed some cylinders and re-ringed them but they were not that corroded--mostly just polished.  I think I would clean up the rust with some emery cloth and kerosene and see how they look.  If the rust can be removed, re-honing does not take off very much more material.   Shame people let cylinders get like that but I know several airplanes that have been sitting for years.

http://forum.canardaviation.com/showpost.php?p=69231&postcount=40

http://forum.canardaviation.com/showpost.php?p=69232&postcount=41


-Kent
Cozy IV N13AM-750 hrs, Long-EZ-85 hrs and sold

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Kent Ashton said:

One time, I self-honed some cylinders and re-ringed them but they were not that corroded--mostly just polished.  I think I would clean up the rust with some emery cloth and kerosene and see how they look.  If the rust can be removed, re-honing does not take off very much more material.   Shame people let cylinders get like that but I know several airplanes that have been sitting for years.

http://forum.canardaviation.com/showpost.php?p=69231&postcount=40

http://forum.canardaviation.com/showpost.php?p=69232&postcount=41

Thanks for the info! That's pretty interesting. Do you remember what grit you ordered?

According to the logs, these cylinders are already bored 0.010" over. So, unfortunately, it's unlikely that they'd remain within Lycoming's minimums. The reference I have (SSP-1176-4) indicates that 0.010" over would be, in itself, out of spec; I'm assuming that the nominal dimension, which isn't listed, is the 4.375" of the cylinder bore in the basic engine specs. The Lycoming parts manual doesn't list oversized pistons or cylinders as acceptable parts, but does have oversized rings. Superior makes oversized versions of pistons, rings, and cylinders. Probably worth trying though and then measuring against the limits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've made some small progress:

The nose gear retract worm drive had a significant bind in it. This was noticeable through the hand crank when I originally acquired it, but was more evident after it had been cleaned up and turning just the gear. Seemed to be caused by the worm gear shaft not being perfectly straight; the worm gear also had a small chip in it, so maybe it had a (hard?) landing without the gear fully extended. Ended up flipping one of the worm gear bushing blocks around and shimming it with a couple layers of UHMW tape; spins pretty freely now.

The nose gear fork faces where they interface with the wheel spacers were as cast and nowhere close to square, so the fork was making very little contact with the spacers. The axle bolt had some signs that the spacers were moving relative to the bolt. So I filed the faces; they're not perfect but they're a lot closer. Didn't have any blue, but a sharpie worked pretty well.

Before:

Nose gear fork, before

After:

Nose gear fork, after

Most of my effort has been expended on trying to figure out what to do about my engine mount extrusion (EM12) situation. What I've got is non-standard in a couple of ways.

Firstly, it has this aluminum bar on the bottom, going from left to right and an extra bolt to mount it. I presume, but don't know for sure, that this is one of the mods that was done when the 360 was installed. In my opinion, it does nothing except add weight, so I removed it. But in doing so, I noticed the biggest issue so far.

EM12 installation

There is supposed to be, per plans, another horizontal bolt holding the EM12 in, which is part of why I was asking this. This bolt is missing on both left and right sides on the bottom, but is present on the upper pair. Normally, I would just install said bolts, but given that installing them would require drilling into the fuel tanks, I've been trying to avoid that. I've done some analysis, and so far haven't come up with a load case that stresses that missing bolt in a meaningful way.  However it's a pretty complicated joint with a variety of materials; and the fact that I don't quite get the way it's intended to function means I may be missing something. On the other hand, my conclusion is supported by the fact that the epoxy and flox surrounding the EM12s shows no signs of cracking; though, with the limited hours in service, it's not a guarantee of future success. The other potential mitigating factor is that, as another mod to support the big engine, the engine mount has had two extra legs welded on to it which bolt onto the main gear carry through bolts; mount shown below. These extra legs add weight and require extra holes in the firewall; I'm not a big fan of either of those things but I like the extra load path and not having to puncture the fuel tanks. If others have reasoned opinions on the best course of action, I'd appreciate hearing them.

Engine mount

In the course of all this, I also discovered that three of the 10 vertical bolt holes that are used to mount the EM12s miss the spruce blocks embedded in the spars. So I've got to fix or mitigate that somehow; probably cut the hole open from inside the spar and bond in an additional spruce block.

I wasn't the biggest fan of the aluminum firewall because it was pretty beat up. Removing it became necessary anyway in order to do something about the spinning studs that held the angled rudder pulleys; the pulley brackets have to be replaced with steel ones per CP49. What's interesting is that the plans mentions that they may spin and to slot the ends to hold with a screw driver; so this is a known problem and, in my opinion, not a great solution. Four of the six were already slotted, and I had to add another. The combination of the slots and locking nuts resulted in two of the studs being damaged during the removal. The rudder bellcrank brackets also require replacement with steel and their bolts also spun which required making holes in the fuselage. Not a fan of all these buried fasteners with no anti-torque mechanism other than flox and hope (in vain). I'm going to figure out something better so this doesn't happen again. Given that I am missing one of the bellcranks, need new brackets, and that I don't have rear mounted brake master cylinders, I'm looking for other solutions to rudder actuation. The most straightforward is, I think, to use pulleys instead of bellcranks like the Cozy does; if anyone knows of something better please chime in.

20200530_171221.thumb.jpg.b08b982469297710ebfb018ff5cb649a.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Engine Mounts:  I couldn't say whether those EMs angles are sufficient and how to repair them but look at it this way:  These airplanes are very repairable and if you have to cut into the fuselage or tank to remove/repair them, yeah, it's a big job but likely very doable and you have the reassurance that the mounts are right.  Just cut stuff away until you get all the bad stuff out and expose the problem and start rebuilding. 

Extra engine mount tubes:  Never seen that.  Usually the plans firewall mounts can be upgraded with steel or larger aluminum and made stout enough for heavier engines.  If you are repair that area, it's a good time to reinforce the fuselage for stouter mount angles.

Main gear Mounts:  You also have a hole drilled in the main gear mount angle for a rudder cable (bottom of your 3rd picture) that is a known crack point so it would be a good time to replace those angles.  Marc has a photo in his gallery at Burnside Aerospace.  This is a fairly common repair. 

Damaged screws:  I am thinking you could cut out a square of the firewall with an abrasive disk--maybe 4" x 4" or more--and replace the screws on new wood and flox it back in.  I brazed little wires on the heads to give more resistant to turning.  Or maybe embed nutplates in the firewall that will accept screws.  Nutplates riveted on pieces of phenolic are pretty stout and could be floxed into the firewall.  First I melt candle wax into the threads to keep the flox out.   Then maybe a layer of BID over the repair.    Just some ideas.  🙂

Nose Gear spacers:  Aluminum bearing spacers do not work for me because the bearings wear down the aluminum and bearings get loose.  I remake them from steel


-Kent
Cozy IV N13AM-750 hrs, Long-EZ-85 hrs and sold

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Kent.

On 5/31/2020 at 1:43 PM, Kent Ashton said:

If you are repair that area, it's a good time to reinforce the fuselage for stouter mount angles.

Are there other mods to the fuselage besides increasing the size of the angles?

On 5/31/2020 at 1:43 PM, Kent Ashton said:

Marc has a photo in his gallery at Burnside Aerospace.  This is a fairly common repair. 

Can't seem to find it in his gallery. I am familiar with this one. I'll have to evaluate mine.

On 5/31/2020 at 1:43 PM, Kent Ashton said:

Or maybe embed nutplates in the firewall that will accept screws.  Nutplates riveted on pieces of phenolic are pretty stout and could be floxed into the firewall.  First I melt candle wax into the threads to keep the flox out. 

Good idea, and good tip. Thanks!

On 5/31/2020 at 1:43 PM, Kent Ashton said:

Nose Gear spacers

I'll check mine for play.  I don't think there's any obvious scoring that would imply relative motion between the spacer and the bearing race but I'll double check.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A loose-main-gear-repair pic is here, picture #12, showing a kind of rectangular alum plate   https://www.burnsideaerospace.com/gallery-of-work

Mods:  I don't have a list but a few I can thiink of are:    Cozy-style control stick (the EZ version can get loose), fiberglass pitch trim spring, Roncz canard, improved fuel valve, bigger brakes.

It would probably be interesting for you to join  https://canardowners.com/       I think(?) they have scanned copies of past Central States Association newsletters in the site.  That was/is  a great newsletter.  When the world was building EZs and Van was just a little kid in knickers, people contributed a lot of ideas to the newsletters.  Very interesting reading.


-Kent
Cozy IV N13AM-750 hrs, Long-EZ-85 hrs and sold

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kent and all

I bought a project many years ago and now have a FAA recognized airplane.

The most obvious fault of Burt's original design is that the Longeze is not wide enough.  You cannot fix that.  

The 2nd most obvious fault is the need to get a reasonable Cg without several pounds of lead in the front.    For MY Longeze I got rid of the huge alternator, nuts, washers, bolt, bracket and fanbelt by replacing it with a smaller alternator which fits on the point where  one magneto previously attached to the case.      My Longeze uses a little power for the Plasma II E., the radio and little else so a smaller alternator is fine. Unfortunately, after I bought it, I found that there is not enough space between the engine and the firewall.   So i had to cut out much of the firewall and replace it with a stainless steel and plywood structure which is as strong as before and safer due to the SS.   That takes a lot of work time but is a very big help in the Cg.

The Cg also will be better by making the nose longer and putting the battery as far forward as possible. 

I also put in an electric nose gear system by Wilhelmson which helps the Cg and means that I will never (again) have a landing with the nose gear up; at least I don't see any way it could happen.

The 3rd most obvious fault is the absolutely dreadful passenger seating space.    I have suffered through several rides in that space.   I put a small 2-part structure with small hinges that you might call a seat on the bottom surface of the space.  It makes a fairly comfortable seat by supporting the upper legs and the back.  An excellent cushion sits on the leg, butt, and back support.  I had no plans, I just did it.   Very light weight.   Took many tries to get it right.     A little storage space is under the upper legs.    I cut 2 small holes in the lower part of the bulkhead behind the pilot and put him on another "seat" so my feet have a little room.   I used the words "him" and me because I tried the system with my test pilot with me as passenger.    The FAA does not allow passengers during flight testing so I am not saying just when I sat in that seat.   But I have about 40 hours as a passenger.

The 4th obvious fault is that the passenger cannot get into the aircraft unless the nose is pretty far off the ground.    Once I had the Wilhelmson nose gear working (it took close to forever to get it to work and he saved my butt on that).    Anyway the nose is raised "enough" and the passenger climbs in.   Then the pilot climbs in, the nose is run up and the engine is started; no problem.   You CANNOT do that with the RAF nose gear system; my test pilot liked the Longeze so much that he bought his own.    He tried the same "nose off the ground" procedure and stripped several teeth off the RAF designated part.    The Cozy Girrrls carry a stronger replacement part but it is expensive. 

The 5th obvious fault is the need, now, to have a ADS-B installed.    That was not Burt's fault.   I put mine in and it works.   Part is under the nose and sticks out 5/8" in the air.   Part is on top of the "roll-over" structure.   Part is on the wall (right, forward of the stick).  Neat.

Read the Central States newsletter including older copies; there is a lot in information in there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A Bruce-

Interested in the work you did on both the front and rear seats for comfort/usability as described.  Have any photos you can post and more details?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bruce, i pretty much agree with you.   I am 225+.   I have flown in the back seat and it was not something i’d want to do for four hours.  In the  FCP  I hogged out the inside fuselage  foam  where the forearms rub, giving me another 1 and 3/4” of cockpit width which helped a lot.    My wife flew with me once and as you describe,  i had to boost her tush up to the back seat.  She was used to flying in the Cozy and did not like the EZ but she is old and cranky.   Younger, , attractive, more agile women do not seem to object. :-)


-Kent
Cozy IV N13AM-750 hrs, Long-EZ-85 hrs and sold

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Kent Ashton said:

A loose-main-gear-repair pic is here, picture #12, showing a kind of rectangular alum plate   https://www.burnsideaerospace.com/gallery-of-work

Ah, thanks. I saw it labeled as VariEze and didn't quite understand what I was looking at; should have looked closer.

 

10 hours ago, Kent Ashton said:

Mods

Thanks. I should have been more specific; the way your initial reply was worded made me think that there were fuselage mods that went along with the increased sizing of the EM12 extrusions. The mention of the control stick is interesting, I'll have to look into that.

For my purposes, this is pretty much a single seat airplane. I may give someone a ride if they're interested but otherwise the backseat is cargo volume. The electric gear is neat and would be nice to have but my goal is to get the thing flying and the manual system is serviceable. Same thing goes with other mods; I'll do them if they're necessary, make sense, or make the aircraft safer but otherwise they're extra work and I've got plenty ahead of me without looking for more.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeff, I knew someone would ask that.    I don't have pictures and have not seen it since November.

I am on Maui (IN MY house) and the aircraft is at OLM closer to my wife's house.    We have NO new cases of coronavirus and I am elderly so I am not going back to OLM for a while.   I may just confuse you.

1st:   3 pilots have flown it; each is a little different in height.   My 1st test pilot is too tall for a seat but I have to get my feet somewhere behind him; so there is a small fiberglass shield on each side to keep me from pushing on the cushion.   Then there is a flat fiberglass surface from the floor to the top of the back cushion.   I am shorter;  if I fly it, that surface has to be held in place on each side by an aluminum bar.  The other buddy also uses the bar.

See how confusing that is?    You have to design and do your own or wait until I am back at OLM.

I am the only passenger that has used the back but it is too complicated.

I rode in the 1st test pilot's Longeze from Tennessee to Washington with a makeshift plywood back and rather flimsy cushion.   I don't want to do that again.

Bruce


 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kent, when my wife first sat in the Longeze, her shoulders would NOT allow her to sit in the back seat.   That shoulder problem was not fat but bone, muscle, and joints.  She sat in the front and said "I will never fly this airplane", although she is a pilot.   My shoulder just fit in the back if I turn a little or sit lower.   It is not ideal for me.   Now we are much older.   I have gained maybe 4 pounds to 166 so maybe neither of us will fly it.

I would prefer having a passenger that can see out well enough to land it, just in case.   It will not be my wife.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK Jeff  I remembered a bit more on the back seat.

I did the work many years ago so I hope I get this right.   The passenger's floor is curved in all directions so get a rough idea by cutting a few pieces of cardboard.   Later you make some fiberglass.   I did not want everything attached permanently so I put down some grey duct tape in a U shape (which I removed later).

I made clickbonds from Cozy Girrrl's metal but I modify them so the base is not round.   If the base is round, they can come loose; I told them that but they did not listen.   The base also has to be roughed up.

When finished, I had a support structure attached to the bottom of the passenger's space and an actual seat in 2 parts hinged in the back.    That way, I have a little storage space below the seat and can get to the "hell hole" in the back.    Be very careful what you make permanent in a Longeze; you will later have to get behind or under a lot of parts.

 

1st  The front piece will be a rectangular foam piece about 6" high, 1/2" or 3/4" thick and as wide as needed.   It is styrofoam glassed on each side with 2 layers of BID (peelply anywhere that pieces will later be attached to each other,  to allow the next 2 pieces to attach ).     The two side pieces are roughly triangular but curved on the two sides that will touch the bottom of the passenger's space.   The top of the side pieces will be curved as well, because the actual seat will be curved to fit your butt.  

2nd: Put down 3 pieces of wet BID in a U shape on top of the grey tape and peelply them.   Let set.

3rd: Remove the peelply.   Put the 3 pieces of foam ( wet with epoxy) down on the pieces done above and support the 3 to give a U shaped structure (the actual seat will sit on tope of those 3 pieces later  Let set.

4th:   You probably will have to fill some spots with wet micro, then put BID wet with epoxy on both corners, AND between the bottom 3 fiberglass strips and the 3 glassed foam pieces.  Due to gravity, you may have to push those BID pieces into place with small pieces of wood which are covered with duct tape.  Let set.   This may have to be done, one corner at a time so 2 or more days is required.   You need BID both inside and outside of each corner.

5th   I pulled everything loose from the grey tape. drilled 4 holes for 3/8" holes, put clickbonds on the 4 holes and put everything back in place.   When the clickbonds are set, you can take everything out by removing 4 nuts, washers, and lock washers, if needed.

6th Make a flat fiberglass seat and a flat fiberglass back for the supports.    Those pieces need a slight curve both side to side and front to back.  I made mine by putting a plastic sheet and tape on some cardboard which is curved by putting supports underneath.    I think I used 3 layers of 8 oz BID.   The seat and the back have to be wider that the support structure, of course.

OK, you have a support for the actual seat.   I made 2 pieces of fiberglass that have hinges on the back.   The hinges are attached to the bottom of the passenger's space in the back with click bonds.   The most difficult part is getting the hinges in the right place and putting nuts on them.   I cannot describe how; you just have to look and work them into position before the click bonds are set.

Bruce

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.


The Canard Zone

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information