JakeC

Speaking from experience, those soldiers won't be home for at least 5-8 months. Even if they decided that the war was over this moment and there was no occupation to do, the bulk of those troops would still not be back for at least 2 months. Just the way the deployments like this work. Besides, when soldiers are in a situation like what is going on now, hearing news of things like the outcome of the playoffs or other big events is a big boost to moral. I think the last thing we need to do is cancel or postpone events. Just my .02 worth. Jake

I think this is just the problem my wife and I ran into the last time I was in the Middle East. The only way for us to communicate was by a chat program called ICQ and by email. We almost ended up in a divorce because what I thought was funny and was smiling about on my end, she saw as an insult or an insensitive comment. She couldn't see my body language or hear the inflection in my voice to know that I was teasing her with my dry sense of humor. Needless to say that, from then on, when I am trying to express my humorous side I have to go out of my way to show that it is meant in jest. I am not a very good writer so a lot of times I have to use the or the to get my point across. If internet communication has a downside, this is the big one on my list. Jake p.s. Multimillion dollar homebuilt blew up? Sounds like there is a big story behind this one

Largeprime, The flat areas in the picture you attached of the mk 80 series bombs actually have nothing to do with aerodynamics but are the nose fuzewell. When they are on the aircraft there is either an external fuse that sticks out the nose, an internal fuze, or the fuzewell is left empty (only if a tail fuze is used or if it is concrete filled). In the case of the last two there are a variety of nose plugs that fit on the nose to provide an aerodynamic shape. Although the aerodynamic nose plug is a pretty blunt cone and does not follow the overall shape of the bomb, it is not flat. Here is an example: External fuze Nose plug As far as torpedoes go, my Navy brethren would know more about them than I. I’ve seen several up close, but I was more concerned with the payload than the shape. There are several projectiles that have a blunt nose, but the shape has been engineered for armor penetration instead of aerodynamic efficiency. In fact, many projectiles that are made for penetration use a "ballistic windshield" made of light aluminum that covers the flat nose of the projectile to increase stability and range. Not to say that what you are saying about blunt nose aerodynamics is not true though. I think it definitely deserves more study. Jake

Very good then! I appreciate the response Mark. Jake

Thanks for the great explanation Mark. The fog has lifted considerably for me, but there is still a shadow or two. I'm about to show my ignorance but here goes. Is it possible to have two different engines that produce the same horsepower at the same RPM and yet produce different torque? Jake

Ok, I'm not sure if I am walking into a hornets nest, but here goes.... I think the arguments that the cozy is a proven design and has an excellent track record is very compelling evidence that you probably will never need to deploy a BRS because of an in-flight structural failure. Kudos to Burt and Nat, from what I have seen and read it's a very safe design. But...The quest for a system that would bring an aircraft to the ground with a reasonably good chance for the pilot and passengers to survive is, in my opinion, a legitimate thing to look at. In my mind (not a big place), there are situations that pilots get themselves into that cannot be gotten out of. The fact is that pilots are human and make mistakes. I can't think of anyone that wants to or expects to spring a fuel leak over a rugged mountain range. Or intentionally finds themselves in a situation where they are above the clouds with no recourse other than to descend IFR down into severe terrain. Would anyone willingly take off in an aircraft with their wife and kids in the passenger seats if they knew that they were 45 minutes from their first heart attack, stroke, acute food poisoning, etc? Freak turbulence? Unanticipated severe Icing? Think these situations were avoidable? Yes of course, most of them are, but pilots still find themselves in these situations. I've spent the majority of my adult life dealing with and learning to deal with extremely dangerous situations and if there is one thing that has become apparent to me it is that highly qualified and prepared people can still make mistakes and or bear the brunt of Murphy’s law. I’ve lost several friends this way. Now, that being said, would I use a BRS? Probably not, But I would love to see someone do it. Who knows, maybe the technology will come in to its own over the years. It would also give us a great deal to talk about . Side note: I read the other day in Kitplanes about the Mystere S-45 pusher having a BRS on its underbelly. Here is a quote: The article also makes it sound as if there is only one main attach point located right above the CG. I’m not suggesting that, because it was done in this case, it would be wise or easy to do it in a Cozy however. Anyway, just thought I would throw that out there for discussion. Jake

John, I couldn't help but notice the link to homebuiltaircraft.com. I think you might have meant www.homebuiltairplanes.com (I hope anyway ). There is a site going up at homebuiltaircraft.com but I have no Idea what it is going to be. It's not up and running yet. I talked to the admin over there and he didn't really want to let the cat out of the bag. Thanks for the mention though (at least I think it was a mention ) Jake admin@homebuiltairplanes.com

Here is a link to a supposed 100HP single rotor engine built for an aircraft. The people over at YAW power helped build it. I imagine it is a half 13B. http://personal.riverusers.com/~yawpower/onerotor.html I am no expert, but to me one of the selling points of the rotary is that, from what I've read, even if you overheat it and blow the engine, it will still continue to produce some power. Possibly enough to get you to a landing. Of course, this does not account for electrical and fuel failures, but it certainly makes me feel a lot better about having one engine. John, is this true? Jake

Wenatchee is the closest. All the rest are on the other side of the mountains. I was just hoping that someone from this area was already registered on the board. I understand about the junk mail. I've been lucky though. You would be surprised at how many vBulletin boards I belong to with my full email hanging out in the wind. I get about 1-3 junk emails a day. Crawlers can’t index a vB site unless you actually install a hack that allows them to do it. Good for avoiding spam, bad for search engines. Anyway, I'm off the subject. Maybe someone could mention my inquiry on the mail list and give them my email or something. Thanks a bunch. Jake

Is Felts field in Spokane? I also think I heard of someone way back building one in Wenatchee. Jake

Any builders in the Eastern Washington Area? Just looking to come check out a project and shoot the breeze. I won't drool too much on your work, I promise . Jake

Great! I'm glad you found that. I have it somewhere buried in my pile of magazines, probably never to surface again. Thanks. JakeC

Williams jet? 700lbs thrust. 700x4. hmmm...(silently gazes up at the stars and thinks of the x-prize). Interesting indeed. JakeC

I do agree with you that canard specific questions should be and will be directed to this forum. I definitely was not trying to take away from what you all are doing here. In fact, I hope to build a cozy one day myself, so I am extremely grateful for this forum. I created homebuiltairplanes.com as a place for the entire homebuilder community, and especially those without the benefits of a builders group, to get together into one giant builders group. Also, let’s face it some builders groups are too small to have the combined experience to help, or will discourage simply on principle, anyone who wants to try something new (i.e. auto conversions, adding retracts, etc..). This sport was founded on people that were doing something different and I believe that is where the future of this sport lays as well. I am very encouraged to see so many canard builders trying something different. I think this forum (canard community) will go a long way to helping them do it in a safe and reasonable manner. I believe you're right on this one. Still, I hope that those people that feel they still have some giving left will come on over to share their knowledge. You may not need to come to homebuiltairplanes.com looking for answers, but the experiences you all have acquired in your endeavors could really help others; especially those without the benefit of their own builders groups. Maybe the funnel could work both ways in that respect. Another objective of Homebuiltairplanes.com will be to give existing builder groups, which do not have the time or technical know-how to take their discussion to the net, a place of their own within homebuiltairplanes.com. I’m not sure if anyone will want such a thing but we will see. Anyway, thanks for a great forum and for promoting the free exchange of ideas and not discouraging it. JakeC

Thanks for mentioning it Rick . Hopefully it will catch on. JakeC