Jump to content


The search index is currently processing. Leaderboard results may not be complete.

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 09/30/2020 in all areas

  1. 2 points
    I have modelled the main gear bow with 0.3 degrees toe-in. I will not finish the lugs that attach in the fuselage until I can find more dimensional information of the bow. My fuselage assembly still includes the F22, F28, and firewall from some imported data I had. I will remodel these. The main gear wheel and axle I have modelled are rough models of a European brand. The engine cowl lofts are suited to the UL390i I think I added a rough main spar in the STP file. It shows through my wing skins in places. This is partly because the spar dimensions are a bit simplified in the plans, but also my wing surfaces are possibly the foam surface. When I get on with the wing modelling I will check this. I need to finish the cockpit floor foam model, and will probably model the controls on the right side soon.
  2. 2 points
    Hello EZ People, I have been going through some CAD data I imported from somewhere else, checking, and correcting where needed. Now I am busy capturing what I can of the main gear, but I have been working in the fuselage tub too. There has been discussion about digitising the EZ PDF drawings. I think this adds no accuracy, and you can work just as well with the existing PDF data. Modelling in 3D creates parts that fit together correctly. 2D drawings can be generated from these 3D parts, and that is my aim to help with Open EZ. The original Rutan build instructions were quite clever, because the build became self jigging, and got round the inaccuracies in the drawings. I think it can be better today. Here are a few screenshots from recent work. Cheers, Justin MainGearAssy.zip
  3. 2 points
    Today's B-stormers. A good test of the "you guys sell these airplanes too cheap[ly[" theory. N70HA, O-235, very tidy. The refurbisher put a lot of effort into it. https://registry.faa.gov/aircraftinquiry/NNum_Results.aspx?nNumberTxt=70HA SUPER NICE LONGEZE • $75,000 • AVAILABLE FOR SALE • This aircraft is beautiful. I bought the aircraft from the original builder and proceeded to to do a ten year top to bottom nut and bolt refurbishment on it to create a truly modern up to date beautiful machine. By the time it was finished I was not able to get my medical...verys ad but I truly enjoyed working on it. You can now benefit from the hundreds of hours and many thousands of dollars in new equipment. This is a turn key airplane...everything is done to ensure a truly modern amazing flight experience...please look at the photos with the equipment list and descriptions! • Contact Craig Roberts , Owner - located Aurora, OR United States • Telephone: 503 318 3351 • Posted October 12, 2020
  4. 1 point
    I might be repeating myself but I had a thread on CanardAviation about modifying a prop and CA has disappeared so I will recreate it here: I had a 3-blade Performance Prop (a 61.25" x 76", 26.7 deg chord) that would not give me enough RPM. I had been reading Paul Lipps about the importance of thin prop tips and after a fastener took a chunk out of it, I decided to cut the tips down. I drew a line on the outboard 10" of the blades and cut the front part off evenly (pic 1, 2). Rasped, filed and shaped the wood to a pleasing profile, checking the balance along the way. In pic 3 I put used some lead shot to make that blade heavier. I glassed it but that was mostly an anti-fod measure and to give me a warm fuzzy it would hang together. Pic 3 is with glass on the other side and getting ready to glass the side showing. The trailing edge wood has been removed to make a flox corner. I also used JB Weld along the outboard leading edge and filed it to shape as leading edge protection. The mod gave me about 125 more RPM in cruise and the only real change was making the tips narrower and a touch thinner. It has held up well. Interestingly, it is still a 61.25 x 76 prop. For more details on glassing a prop, see my prop thread. I did the glassing a little differently later. Fun!
  5. 1 point
    Alan, I withheld my feedback out of consideration for your business, but you seem to be picking a fight so here’s my side of the story. The construction is good, but the plane is not in very good condition and miles from being called a finished airframe, which is what it was described as. I don't know Doug Koster, but invoking details about what he paid and why is irrelevant and probably not something Mr. Koster wants everyone to know. The airframe has clearly sat around a long time and is simply more work to finish than expected. Many of the metal parts show corrosion. One of the biggest issues is it is painted in a white primer or paint (you weren't able to say which when I asked) yet none of the contouring was done. Why? You didn’t have an answer. All that needs to be removed before contouring can begin and so the underlying work can be inspected. That alone looks to me like 600+ hours of work to straighten that problem out. The paint would hide UV damage to the epoxy if it were parked next to a window for a long time. And it might be incompatible with other materials used in finishing. Lots of mystery there, too much and it regrettably reduces the likelihood this would ever be finished. And as you stated, it is not an aerocanard, more aerocanardish. That means a longer build time as the new owner has to figure things out. Not the project Evan asked for. He expected a complete airframe. Since the contouring was not done, it could not be called a complete airframe by my definition. Another major concern is you failed to produce any builders log or the original plans in spite of numerous repeated requests by Evan in advance of the visit. Frankly you provided no documentation at all! You were evasive or at least uninformed during the presale process and and failed to disclose or share key information. Thats on you, no one else. And don’t smoke cigarettes around airplanes or in hangers or non-smokers like me. It’s foolish and potentially dangerous. I was there and thats what i saw. Izzy (603)410-7277
  6. 1 point
    I have not uploaded the Dynon Skyview 10". You can get that from the Dynon website. The large display needs a rectangular aperture in the IP frame at FS40. This aperture could be handy for working access to harness. My engine cowl lofting is suited to the UL390i with the 110mm propeller drive extension. The engine STP file can be downloaded from the UL Power website.
  7. 1 point
    This is the last CAD file.... just the nosegear with most of the actuator. My gear and worm drive is not accurate in the teeth geometry, but the pitches are correct. 'Just a few pictures to come Nosegear.zip
  8. 1 point
    'Main Gear assy is the gear bow, as closely as I can figure out. I would like to measure a real one and adjust this model. I think I know how it is made, and it would be easy to tool up for it. Sleek canopy. zip it a slightly smoother canopy shape I made, and the fuselage surface use in its frame is from my more accurate lofting. The modelling of the inside surfaces of the canopy frame is not at all accurate. Standard fus loft is as near as I can get to what the standard fuselage skin looks like. I think there is evidence that the standard nose makes a downforce just ahead of the canard. More to come. MainGearAssy.zip SleekCanopy.zip standard-fus-loft.zip
  9. 1 point
    As Jeff suggested, I will upload everything I have done so far. Here goes. The standard canopy is as close as I can get to the acrylic shape shown in the sketches. The frame part was from an earlier fuselage loft, and at a detail level is not at all accurate. Controls.zip is about where I stopped. I need to get on with something else. This is nowhere near complete. Datums.zip is just that.... some 2D capture of the aircraft datums. Fuselage Assembly.zip. Well this is starting to get accurate. The skin is offset from the foam surfaces by an average of 2 to 3 layers of UD glass. I think the foam is quite accurate. Long-EZ-Mist is mainly the wing and canard surfaces. I think it may be on the foam surface, rather than the outside of the skins, but it is a while since I made these, and I don't remember. More to come. Canopy-standard.zip Controls.zip Datums.zip FuselageAssembly.zip Long-EZ-Misc.zip
  10. 1 point
    I am dropping out of Open EZ, at least for now. I have another project that is closer to realisation, and am dedicating more time to that. I am hoping Open EZ can gain some more interest and momentum.
  11. 1 point
    Joe D. gave you some useful reference points. I'd point you to pages 52 through 61 of the POH, which shows performance for an O-235 LE. That's at an MGW of 1000 - 1400 lb, so at 1500 lb., figure a bit worse than the 1400 lb. curves. CG actually has at least as large an effect on top speed as MGW, so flying at the rearmost CG position (103") will get you the best performance.
  12. 1 point
    Short answer: not good but acceptable at lower density altitudes. For years I flew an O-235 Long-EZ that weighed 979# empty. My GF and I weigh 85# less than you and your wife. My engine (-L2C) had the 9.75:1 compression pistons (125HP at sea level theoretically) and a sweet Hertzler prop that was an excellent match for my airframe/engine. In wintertime temperatures (~35F) here at sea level, solo, with half fuel or less I would see 1500 FPM rate of climb for a brief time. Summertime , dual, and climbing through about 3000 MSL I would be pleased to see as much as 1000 FPM. But amazingly, I could nudge it up to 15,500 MSL and occasionally 17,500 at 100 - 300 FPM. At high density altitudes carrying a passenger would be eye-watering (in a scary way). I learned to leave fuel behind and also to lean for max. power before takeoff. And of course, try to avoid the hot part of the day and unfavorable winds (e.g. absolutely no tailwind). The lack of HP was my biggest dissatisfier with that airplane because I fly in the West and often dual but YMMV. But the O-320 engine really hits the sweet spot for the Long-EZ.
  13. 1 point
    The short answer to the title of this thread is "kind of" - a 970 lb. LE with an O-235 that you expect to fly regularly is on the heavy side. The performance will still be better than a C-172, but a plane 50 - 100 lb. lighter would be better. At 970 lb., the implication is that if you ever upgraded to an O-320, you'd be well over 1000 lb. - that's a heavy Long-EZ, even if one sets one's MGW to 1500 - 1680 lb. Competent? Flyable? Safe? Sure. There are many LE's in this weight range. Now, it may not be easy to find a lighter LE - most are a lot heavier than they should have been. And given the relative performance of this plane against spam-cans, it'll still be better (probably substantially so). So I'm not saying don't get it - just make sure you know what you're getting, and for Cthulhu's sake, get a Pre-Buy examination from someone like me or FreeFlight Composites who knows what they're looking at and can advise you clearly of what you're getting into.
  14. 1 point
    Strake is reinforced on left in board side and is intended for rear seat ingress and egress.
  15. 1 point
    Hello EZ People, I have been going through some CAD data I imported from somewhere else, checking, and correcting where needed. Now I am busy capturing what I can of the main gear, but I have been working in the fuselage tub too. There has been discussion about digitising the EZ PDF drawings. I think this adds no accuracy, and you can work just as well with the existing PDF data. Modelling in 3D creates parts that fit together correctly. 2D drawings can be generated from these 3D parts, and that is my aim to help with Open EZ. The original Rutan build instructions were quite clever, because the build became self jigging, and got round the inaccuracies in the drawings. I think it can be better today. Here are a few screenshots from recent work. Cheers, Justin MainGearAssy.zip
  16. 1 point
    Jon, I sent a PM to you regarding your Q2 kit.
  17. 1 point
    My Trip to Covington, TN (Jet Guys & RAFE) This will be a little long, but I think the detail will be good for new Ez owners who may want some insight on the resources available before/after you make your purchase. Jet Guys I connected with Robert Harris at Jet Guys last November when I had narrowed my research down to 2 VariEze's for sale. In the first conversation, I knew that I was talking with someone VERY familiar with canard aircraft. He gave me good advice on what to look for and offered feedback on the flying qualities of all the various canard models. I purchased the Lynn Coltharp VariEze (N40LC) in December of 2019. My plan was to complete all changes I desired in the remaining winter months and then get it down to Robert and his crew for a full inspection and condition inspection in the Spring. COVID-19 altered the plans for the spring and the summer months flew by fast. I was finally able to trailer it down to Covington last week and spend 3 days working with Robert, Mike, Steve, Bob, & Ryszard. I received a tremendous education! The Jet Guys are methodical in their inspection process and pointed out a few items that I needed to consider. We added heat shields to the brakes/gear legs and swapped out my original push-bar landing system with the wormgear mechanism. All other systems were inspected and adjusted as needed. I assisted with all tasks to continue learning about my VariEze and absorb all knowledge I could from these guys. They all fly Ez's and have been working on them for many, many years. In addition, they almost guaranteed to have or be able to make ANY part you need for your aircraft. Mike fabricated a few bushings, brackets, and linkage plates quickly when needed. My VariEze had been painted just before I purchased, and I had added several items in the engine area (starter, remote data box, etc.). It needed control surface rebalancing a new weight and balance. Robert, Mike, Bob, and I went through this process. Empty weight was 713 pounds, but needed an additional 22 pounds in the nose for balance (in the first-flight performance box). After just 2.5 days, we had completed all tasks and the plane was ready to go for it's "new" first flight. RAFE If you are a new Ez pilot, you need to go fly with Ryszard Zadow at RAFE. Aside from his great restorations of donated Rutan aircraft, he is a tremendous flight instructor. All of my 350 hours of flying time has been in a Cherkoee 140 or Cessna 172. I decided before purchasing my V.E. that I would not attempt to fly it without proper instruction. Ryszard uses the Gyroflug Speed Canard as the training plane. It has dual front/back controls. Ryszard worked with me to change my style of flying to be a safer pilot, especially in the pattern. Ryszard, as a former military pilot and now commercial pilot, stressed the verbal announcement of the checklist items (even when solo) at all critical portions during takeoff and landing. I was a little rough at the landings. With an approach speed of 80-85 knots all the way down to 1" above the touchdown zone, it was a bit different than the Cherokee. It took me 10-12 landings before I could grasp what is needed. I still need more training before I will fly my VariEze, and our plan is to connect in mid-to-late October to cleanup my rough spots. My VariEze will be flown by Ryszard at that time as well on a test flight to shake out any adjustments. He will be able to relate the differences to expect when I go for the first time (hopefully) on that visit. Conclusion It can be tempting to go at this alone without help or instruction. Many (or most) have done this with no issue. I had to trailer my VariEze 12+ hours from MN to TN to make this happen. I never questioned the value of it prior to going, and now after the fact, I realize it was the most important money I spent overall for this plane. If you go to Covington, you will see a minimum of 20-30 Ez's in various states: parts, in-construction, rebuilding, or completed flying examples. Every hangar door that opened contained several Ez's. For a a person who is absorbed in wanting to learn everything I can, it was an extremely valuable experience. And as a bonus, you will work with some of the nicest guys you will ever meet.
  18. 1 point
    I do test stand wiring for a living so I second the idea of removing the old wiring and starting fresh. It will probably take No more time and you will have the piece of mind of a robust electrical system. Not to mention will know every aspect of it while you create the schematic.
  19. 1 point
    What a helpful spouse! 🙂 It is probably best to tear all the wiring out and rewire. It's likely less work than trying to splice into what is already there. The main source for wiring homebuilts is www.aeroelectric.com (Bob Nuckolls) which has wiring diagrams, tips, and a great instruction book that will explain aircraft wiring. http://www.aeroelectric.com/ See "Getting Started" on this page http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles.html His book is well worth the price http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/pub/pub.html but he has lots of good reading on his website Nuckolls is also good about answering questions on the Matronics Aeroelectric List which can be linked from the same site. For now, read Bob Nuckolls's bookclean up (remove) the old wiring, collect your solder, stripping and crimping tools and examine the "Z-" diagrams from Aeroelectric with your A&P and figure out how you want to wire the airplane. Come back with more specific questions. Good luck.
  20. 1 point
    This is a very stock per plans VariEze with excellent workmanship. I was involved with the initial construction on the Fuselage, Wings & canard. I would go to Ron’s house and do a hot wire cut, foam carving or layup on his VariEze, then he would come to my house and do the same on my VariEze. For the next part, we would switch the order, so no one A/C was a learning curve. Ron was flying Ken Brock Gyrocopters before he built the VariEze, and gyros seem to have been his first love, developing into one of this nation’s leading Gyro instructors, and Gyro kit assemblers. His VariEze is being sold as he has not had the time for it the A/C deserves! This in a good solid well built VariEze that Ron has always kept in a hangar. Best regards John Lambert From Ron: My VariEze N 718 RM has the following history: First flight-- Sept 19, 1982 Last flight--march 12th 2010 Total time engine/ airframe 1,040 hrs Total time on new engine rebuilt 35 hrs New engine installed 2004 $25,000 Ronald Menzie [ronsgyros@gmail.com]VariEze For Sale.pdf 501-766-6456
  21. 1 point
    The sad Long-ez first discussed here, https://www.canardzone.com/forums/topic/21972-sales-ive-seen/?do=findComment&comment=65528 seen listed on ebay today with a few more pics. Item No. 153837533279. N25ED deregistered in 2014. Seller does not indicate he has title. That, of course, is the problem. The FAA will not normally let you re-register a previously-register airplane without proving chain-of-title from the last registered owner. A little sleuthing revealed that the builder/register owner Davis died in 2012 https://www.legacy.com/obituaries/sandiegouniontribune/obituary.aspx?n=eric-laurens-davis&pid=157868661 It only took a couple minutes to find one of his sons. https://www.usphonebook.com/858-705-0030 If I was interested in this airplane I would call the family up, offer my condolences and politely inquire if Davis' heir--probably his wife--would mind signing an FAA Bill of Sale. Offer a couple hundred bucks for her trouble. Then get a certified copy of the Davis' probate judgement and bingo, you have proof of chain-of-title that would likely satisfy the FAA. No need for a bill of sale from the recent seller since he never owned the airplane as far as the FAA is concerned. With title and the old N-number reapply for reissuance of the airwortlhiness certificate. Question is, is this airplane cheap enough to justify the trouble? With an engine included, it probably is. Oh what a detective I would make! 🙂 https://registry.faa.gov/AircraftInquiry/NNum_results.aspx?NNumbertxt=25ED

  • Newsletter

    Want to keep up to date with all our latest news and information?
    Sign Up

The Canard Zone

  • Create New...

Important Information