Kent Ashton

Good luck. Have you ever seen flying model Quickies? I imagine there are some

Can I interest you in a Q-200? Here is one, pictures are in the ad on Barnstormers.com QUICKIE Q-200 TRI-Q PROJECT • $3,500 • PROJECT FOR SALE • I have a fairly complete Tri-Q project for sale. Has fuselage with header tank and split fuselage mod installed, canopy, wing, canard (bottom side glassed, top needs completing, appears all glass to do so is here and pre-cut), fin, cowling, spinner, landing gear (nose and main), wheel pants and fairings, wheels and brakes, tail wheel parts (should you need them) fuel tank, many many pieces and parts which I have not inventoried. Plans are included. Wing rack is not included. Project is located at KDTO (Denton, TX). Asking $3500.00 as is, where is. • Contact Dave Anderson , Owner - located Roanoke, TX United States • Telephone: 8502182427 • 850-218-2427 • Posted March 28, 2020

Just watching these videos of a Sukhoi airliner crash where about half the passengers died. Brutal. I count 10 seconds before the first passenger gets down the slide and observe how many got their bags. Ya know, we will never stop people from delaying to get their bags until everything has to go in the cargo hold. https://youtu.be/nuJfy5vCTbM Here at 2+07 you will see why they crashed: landed too fast, tried to force it to land. https://youtu.be/7NhvqAWJ4TU

Further info on retrieving old FAA records: Federal Records [storage] Centers are branches of the National Archives. The process for sending records to storage and getting them back is rather complex https://www.archives.gov/frc/toolkit and only the Records Manager at the Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center (OK city) can get their records back from storage. This page talks about the records system for the benefit of FAA employees https://www.faa.gov/about/initiatives/records/ The Records Manager for Ok City is on the bottom of the page here https://www.faa.gov/about/initiatives/records/contact/ It appears to me that the average records technician at Ok city does not understand the storage system. If you encounter problems getting long-expired records, I suggest emailing the Records Manager. I don't know if the FSDO that orginally issued an airworthiness certificate would have copies of long-expired certificates. They eventually send their old records to storage like Ok city, but I suppose it is worth a try. Nothing is easy. 🙂

The Odessa Varieze a few posts back https://www.canardzone.com/forums/topic/21972-sales-ive-seen/?do=findComment&comment=67960 put additional pictures on Ebay. A commenter throught this was 70S primer. In the early days Rutan recommended a graphite-rich dark primer to act as a UV shield. Trouble is, paint did not stick to it very well and after a while, the topcoat begins to come off. For the Cozy III I once owned, big thumb-sized topcoat flakes came off and I ended up stripping the entire airplane, refilling, and repainting. 😞 These days, I think I would hire one of the mobile Co2 blasting services that will come to your house Here's one https://pennmobiledryiceblasting.net/ You have to be careful blasting with water. It can flex the fiberglass and cause a delam. I've heard soda blasting works but it leaves soda in every crevice.

After a bit of research, here is some info about out-of-date, expired aircraft registrations and missing airworthiness certificates you may find helpful: After a period of time--I do not know how long, perhaps 5 years--the records of aircraft with expired registrations are purged from the active FAA files. Until then, you can apply to the FAA, pay a fee, and get copies of the records as described here https://www.faa.gov/licenses_certificates/aircraft_certification/aircraft_registry/copies_aircraft_records/ When an old aircraft record is purged by the FAA Records Center, it is sent to a Federal Records Storage facility in Fort Worth. The record can be retrieved and copies made for you by the FAA (Oklahoma City) upon request and payment of an additional fee. This is not discussed in the FAA's online information so you have to know to ask. I saw this on an aviation lawyer's website. Without specifying that the old record is in storage, the Records people will only search their online records. See https://www.faa.gov/licenses_certificates/aircraft_certification/aircraft_registry/interactive_aircraft_inquiry/ Here is a Federal Register Notice from 1979 discussing storage. https://books.google.com/books?id=-0hevbJxbuAC&pg=PA28443&lpg=PA28443&dq=aircraft+registration+records+federal+storage&source=bl&ots=0an6wFPTaH&sig=ACfU3U0NJGOUQizt4zM-AZqzMxUS5hA5XA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwicma7Sx-PoAhXqRt8KHWuFDo8Q6AEwBXoECAwQNA#v=onepage&q=aircraft registration records federal storage&f=false If you know the N-number of your old aircraft, and you have good title to the airplane (that's another story), you can apply for reissuance of a missing Airworthiness Certificate. If the N-number registration on the airplane has expired and been assigned to another airplane, you can request another N-number and from the Registration branch. The A.C. must reflect the actual N-number used. Per 14 CFR § 47.15(a)(1) you cannot just get a new number and paint it on an airplane that was previously registered. See https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/47.15 To prevent theft, the FAA wants to know you are changing from the old number to the new one, even if the old number has been assigned to another airplane. This can be done with a letter to the Registry. See https://www.faa.gov/licenses_certificates/aircraft_certification/aircraft_registry/n_numbers/ People often sell airplanes thinking to avoid liability by turning in the A.C. I do not know the precise rule but I know that in some cases, buyers who knew the N-number applied for the A.C. as a lost A.C. and it was reissued. These things will mostly likely require a FSDO or DAR inspection before the FAA will hand you the replacement A.C. They just want to make sure what you are doing complies with regs. Some people have advised "find a friendly DAR, do some work, take some pictures get a new N-number and apply as if it is a new airplane." This is dangerous and can get you 5 years in jail. See https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1001

Mike I edited my post after seeing that you have title now. The aircraft was approved as "amateur built" when it was first registered as N530W. Tell the FSDO to go to their files and check the A.C. for N530W and compare it to your application for registration. You DID show "N530W" on the bill of sale, didn't you? If you did not, then you did not transfer title to N530W, instead you invented a brand new airplane N55MQ, that the FAA must now assure itself was built by amateurs. The FAA does not like to reregister a formerly registered airplane as a new build. Otherwise people could steal airplane and just reregister them as newly built airplanes. It appears to me you may have registered it as a [new build] under N55MQ. You registered it as a "Wilson Rickey Vari-ez" but an experimental name does not mean anything. To the FAA, it looks like a new build applying for an A.C. You are probably going to have to correspond with Oklahoma City and get the whole thing corrected, presuming that you had a bill of sale to N530W signed by Teegarden.

Mike, here is my analysis: When you first talked to the local FSDO guy you did not have title to the airplane so naturally, the FSDO guy wasn't going to help you with an airworthiness certificate. I see today that you now have the aircraft registered in your name as N555MQ. I would guess you have two options (1) go back to the FSDO and request the former A.C. (N350W) be reissued to you under your new N-number. People change N-numbers all the time. N350W is no longer shown in an online search but they probably have the old A.C. in their records. Or (2) apply for a new A.C. under the N555MQ number which the FAA or a DAR will issue after inspecting the airplane (to prove to them it was built by amateurs). Since it was previously approved under N530W that should not be a problem. https://registry.faa.gov/aircraftinquiry/NNum_Results.aspx?NNumbertxt=55MQ

couple pics of the above Varieze. It appears to have had a airworthiness certificate at one time. It could be reissued with a new N-number. https://registry.faa.gov/aircraftinquiry/NNum_Results.aspx?NNumbertxt=N5584K Just blow the Odessa dust off and go!

A while back I mentioned that the Rotec line of throttle body injectors looked pretty nice. https://www.canardzone.com/forums/topic/18661-kents-long-ez-project/?do=findComment&comment=66841 But I was just reviewing this long thread on the Vans Air force site with guys complaining about problems and tech support. http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=114648 The thread is getting a bit dated now but I suggest reading it if you're interested in a Rotec. Maybe the problems have been resolved. The OP on the Vans thread, Phil Camarda, has a lot of experience with EZs and has a pretty good website himself. I imagine he'd be a good person to talk to about the Rotec. http://longezpilot.com/index.htm

Also this Cozy III project posted last week (B-stormers) COZY III • $7,500 • AVAILABLE FOR SALE • Cozy 111 project structure complete; Wings, winglets, canard, Cleveland wheels & brakes, fuel pump, electric nose lift and forward tilting canopy. • Contact Donald Berlin , Owner - located Tucson, AZ United States • Telephone: 520-904-9979 • Posted April 2, 2020 A very good price considering all the work done. Materials alone must be $15K or more. More pics in the ad.

This EZ today on Barnstormers: RUTAN LONGEZ • $28,000 • FOR SALE BY OWNER • 1986 TT 2550 hrs air frame. Engine 0-290D2- approximately 230 hours since rebuild and 3300TT. Electric nose gear. Electric spoiler. Heavy-duty Cleveland brakes. Sterba prop. Pods. • Contact Jamie Burgess, Owner - located Pinedale, WY USA • Telephone: 307-231-1463 • Posted April 9/2020 • Contact Jamie burgess - WYOMING AERO PHOTO , Owner - located Cora, WY United States • Telephone: 3072311463 • Posted April 8, 2020 N21LR https://registry.faa.gov/aircraftinquiry/NNum_Results.aspx?NNumbertxt=21LR Serial no. 104, one of the early ones. Not sure about that red crush velour. They say if you want to sell a house, paint the inside white or off-white. 🙂

Just reading the report on the Lance Hooley jet EZ accident. http://www.kathrynsreport.com/2020/04/aircraft-structural-failure-hooley-jet_8.html There is not much I can get out of it except there was a dry place noted in the layups and a possible flutter incident earlier. It seems to me he was expecting a lot out of the airplane. I have always been a little nervous flying either an F-4 or a Cozy at high Q, or high dynamic pressure--read of too many bad things happening there. The little I know about Q is that it increases with the square of the velocity. You go twice as fast, your dynamic pressure is 4 times higher. Goodness knows what happens to lift, drag and the other forces on the structure. When the F-4 was new, Operation Sage Burner intended to set a speed record. The F-4 was not very stable and had pitch dampeners to increase pitch stability. During one of those attempts, the dampeners did not work and the airplane got into a pitch oscillation and broke up. https://youtu.be/bQ6IhkxoNz8 In the video, you can see the airplane begin a small pitch oscillation and breakup shortly thereafter. I used to have a picture of the engines flying out of the wreckage. Here is the usual sequence: The F-4 had hydraulic flight controls with little natural feel or air resistance to stick movement. A "bobweight" was installed in the tail and linked to the stick to make the airplane feel normal. When you put positive G on the airplane, that G on the bobweight acted through the linkage to pull the stick forward as would happen in most airplanes. This gave a more natural pitch feel akin to air loads on the horizontal tail but the stick was still sensitive. When even a moderate positive G was put on the aircraft _suddenly_, the bobweight suddenly became heavier and suddenly pulled the stick forward as it was wont to do. If a pilot then over-corrected by making an overly-large forward stick input just as the bobweight was "helping" to apply forward stick, that might put negative G on the airplane. Then the reverse happened: the pilot might correct the negative G with aft stick just as negative G on the bobweight was helping to apply aft stick. A PIO (pilot induced oscillation) was often the result. All this was supposed to be controlled by a bellows which sensed airspeed and dampened pitch inputs but in the Sage Burner crash, the pitch dampener was inop. We were mainly taught never to "snatch" the airplane--i.e., make a sudden stick input, even with the dampeners working, and to hold the stick firmly when maneuvering with one's forearm braced on one's leg. After a while you got used to it However in one case an instructor and student WSO briefed an air combat training sortie with another airplane but the other airplane aborted after takeoff. The IP told the student they would go out to the practice area and he would demonstrate the high speed characteristics of the Phantom. Sometime during that demo, the pilot got into a PIO that put around 9-12 Gs on the airplane. When they returned, the engines were still running but they had broken away from the engine mounts and were retained on the bottom of the engine bay! So that's why I am generally content to putz around in my little homebuit and not explore extreme corners of the envelope. 🙂

I downloaded the Rev 5 drawings last year. They were spot on except some of the checking dimensions on the corners were a bit hard to read. As I recall, this was the thing Jon intended to fix. I printed mine at a Fedex store from a thumbdrive and they were correct. I think I printed from the PDF files.

Here ya go: An idea from my idle mind in these boring days to join two lines into one using Pro-seal or a fuel-resistant sealer. Just clean the ends of the lines and the holes in the block and don't get sealant in the lines themselves. There is no stress on the block and essentially no fluid so I think it would work and be easy to make or to make variations.

Some considerations: The plans only show one line per strake. That isn't enough. You need one line venting the highest point in the tank in cruise/climb and one line venting the highest point in the tank when parked on the nose (in order to prevent pumping fuel overboard on the ramp on warm day with full fuel). Two lines from one strake can be joined into one line but not until they are well above the highest fuel level in climb or nose-down on the ramp. So the lines from one strake normally run to the top of the turtledeck and then it's your choice. If you run them to the top, then outside the turtledeck, they might vent fuel in a rollover accident but that setup is still pretty common in older EZs. Better IMO to run the vents to the bottom of the airplane. It is not a good idea to connect all four lines into one external vent. A bug could plug the vent system. Personally, I join my two lines from a strake into a fitting at the top inside of the turtle deck and take that single line through the firewall and down the top of firewall to vent that runs down the aft face of the centerspar and bend the external line to about a 45° angle facing forward (pic from my EZ project). I used the blue union fittings so I could remove the line easily and get to the centerspar glass if I ever needed to. Sorry that doesn't quite answer your question about redoing the already-installed lines. My fitting that joins the two lines at the top is a little bulky or I'd post a drawing.

This EZ today on Ebay today. In Indiana, no canard. Item 264686001437 Ya know, if a builder had the choice of a pristine Vans pre-punched kit or this raw-looking EZ, you couldn't blame him for taking the Vans airplane. Still, at $3800, it is a lot of airplane for the money. I see no reason why it couldn't be filled, finished and be just as nice as any other EZ

Here are some photos posted by Terry Schubert elsewhere showing an oil flow check on an EZ. They are interesting to think about; these are just my opinions. In pic 1, pressure is pushing the surface flow away from the NACA. It is said the action of decellerating the flow [inside the cowl] increases pressure which I would seem to resist inflow. I have seen people add wedges (pink) to better-capture the flow. They say the wedges work but perhaps the pressure buildup is aggravated by insufficient exit area from the cowl. Pic 2 is about what you usually see. I believe pic 3 is a Klaus Savier (Lightspeed) preformed NACA inlet. The Savier idea is nice but it will make it harder to work on firewall stuff. Maybe a removable inlet cone would be better. In pic 4, I doubt the inlet cone does much good. NACA tests said the airflow needs about a 7° or less divergent angle to stay organized which is why a NACA inlet has such a long, shallow floor, Here, the air is probably in-flowing at 100+ knots. It is probably not going to turn the corners of the cone. I put a partial inlet cone in my Cozy--pic 5, the aluminum piece above the inlet--I couldn't see much difference. I am no Dr.-Ing Hoerner but one thing I always remember is that air is heavy and it's going 150kts. It wants to keep going in the same direction.

Saw this question on a FB page. It's a common question by people new to experimentals. Anyone can work on a Experimental airplane, even one you did not originally build. You can rebuild a wing, or an engine (even one that is allegedly "certified" but that's another subject). A similar question often heard is "where does it say anyone can work on a hombuilt airplane?". It is fun say "nowhere" and witness their disbelief. Nevertheless, under 14 CFR §43.1(b)(1), we enjoy freedom from regulation over how we maintain, rebuild or alter our aircraft. https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/43.1 However, not so fast. We ARE governed by Operating Limitations issued for the particular airplane that levy an annual condition inspection requirement by an A&P or person with a Repairman Certificate for the airplane, as well as say how to put our aircraft back into service after repairs, so it is not exactly true freedom but reasonably close. Point is, the chap above is free to rebuild his wing himself, re-enter the aircraft into Phase I testing, and when the tests are complete, certify himself that the airplane is safe for flight. To me, this is the true reason for owning an Experimental.

You have to apply some imagination: = "sn n CL 2dy, als ths Ltspd, gd prc" = Seen on CraigsList today, also this Lightspeed good price" 🙂 -------------- Ths CZ 2dy on 'bay. Tub + cnrd. Lks gud, dcnt prc. [Sorry, must remove my mask.] This Cozy on Ebay. Tube + canard in Tennessee. Looks good, decent price. Item # 254553810972 should you wish to pursue it.

LONGEZ 2001 • $43,000 • AVAILABLE FOR SALE • LongEZ2001 505TT LY320 new prop grmn eqp lghtsp ign elec spdbrke nsgr autplt bgpds intrcm whl pnts • Contact Irvine Smith, Owner - located Glade Park, CO United States • Telephone: 352 363 7236 • 352 727 0400 • Posted March 23, 2020 sn n CL 2dy, als ths Ltspd, gd prc 🙂 CD IGNITION • $750 • AVAILABLE FOR SALE • Light Speed Engineering:PlasmaII Electronic Ignition,Complete set-up. Replace 1 mag.863-698 8491 • Contact Craig Muth, - located Mulberry, FL United States • Telephone: 863-698-8491 • Posted March 24, 2020

Seen on FB today. N2617Z https://registry.faa.gov/AircraftInquiry/NNum_Results.aspx?NNumbertxt=2617Z No price, O-320

This EZ today on B-stormers: LONG EZ WITH O-320 • $13,995 • FOR SALE • 75% complete Fuse is on wheels, canopy is glassed and cut out but not finished on the inside. Wings are 80% complete, need tip sails mounted (supplied) and finished on the inner side next to fuse. All the major parts are built. Ronz canard built by Dennis Ollman. Lots of parts go with it, electric pitch trim, nose gear actuator and speed brake. Cozy Girls controls, engine mount, nav lights and power supply etc. Pre made strakes with baffles, Carbon cowl, upper and lower from a Berkut. 1 complete original set of plans. $15,000 with a 500 hour 0-320 out of a Cardinal • Contact Alfred Jones, Owner - located Marthasville, MO United States • Telephone: 3144986982 • Posted March 15, 2020 Not sure of his price. Is it $13,995 or $15,000-with-engine? A not-unreasonable price either way but I suspect the virus is going to make a lot of stuff a lot cheaper.

Coronavirus: I posting to this thread because it gets a lot of hits. Chris Martinson has a PhD and post-doc work in neurotoxicology. He has done a daily youtube on the C-virus but this one is particularly good because it discusses the importance of keeping your virus intake (inoculum) as low as possible in order to give your body time to recognize the virus and build antibodies. Apparently, we are all going to be infected eventually but you don't want a huge inoculum of the virus to start with. If you don't want to watch the whole thing jump in at 14+23. Good luck pals--see you on the other side. 🙂

Bruce, this was an ad I clipped from a FB page. I doubt seller Glover reads this site. If anyone is interested i suppose they’ll have to google him