Blackhawk D

http://www.wvec.com/

Jerry did a great job of thinking outside the "box" (pun intended). http://home.earthlink.net/~jerskip/FIRST/Workshop.html

I can't help you out but if anyone is curious (I was) as to what this thing is, here is a link to photo. http://www.k-aircraft.de/html/gyroflug_speed_canard.html

Thanks Marc.

Marc, I asked this on the other forum and got no response; I'll try again and directly elicit your opinion/knowledge. Understanding that there are a lot of variables (speed at impact, weight of bird, angle of impact, low probability, etc) do you believe that the canard is capable of surviving a bird strike intact? Given let's say cruise speed and a duck for example. I'm curious and don't really know. I've seen some damage done by bird strikes and wonder if the canard is strong enough not to break apart or break loose from the airframe if struck by your average Daffy at an airspeed over 100kts. Maybe it's a given that it is no problem, but I haven't seen anyone relate an experience with a canard strike nor do I pretend to know how to calculate the forces involved in such an impact. Anyway, thanks for your help.

"Look, this isn't that hard. It's all about thermodynamics, which summed up goes like this: You can't win the game. You can't break even, and you can't quit. Deal with it." That is the best definition I have ever read!! I always thought the many laws of thermodynamics could be summed up and now I have one. Thanks By the way, the Air force has two such sayings I guess; Anything will fly, given enough thrust and Give us enough money and we will find that thrust! Ideas like this are probably great intellectual engineering exercises but if they want money, don't look at me. One last thing. If it doesn't have a wing to provide a glide, damn thing better be able to autorotate. Don't believe there is a ducted fan capable of that performance. Could be wrong.

I was talking about your Cozy (the soon to be collection of those plane parts!), but kudos on the Web site as well.

Jon, Agreed on all points. Having experienced "skunk works" operations in the Army, I was able to see just how fast a technology can move from planning to the battlefield, realizing of course the considerable risk most of us took as the technology was proven is beyond what most people would accept. I too hope that change will accelerate in an exponential manner so that at least the most basic of our air transportation system could come out of the 50's. I have a friend who flies a G-V with EVS and he is amazed that the airlines aren't kicking the crap out of the manufacturers to get a like system certified and fielded. Simple stuff first, complex later. By the way, I really enjoy your site. Looks like you will end up with an excellent product. Regards

Thanks Wayne, If you try for the position, good luck! It is interesting that most pilots prefer to lose the colors on the background. I would have thought red for higher terrain would have been a preference. Never know till you test it I guess. And now a rant. The one thing that blows me away is how slow the aviation industry has been to really progress, mostly in the realm of scheduled carriers. I can't believe how little things have changed in the last 20 years (or even 40). That two human beings sit in front of the machine and must actually see (in the vast majority of landings) the runway is unbelievable. I share my life with a Part 121 pilot and with the exception of the FMS (the glass displays aren't much more than a reconfiguration of what's seen on the mechanical gauges), she may as well do exactly what I was doing 15 years ago in a Blackhawk. For god's sake, for the most part we are still talking to each other (and over each other in most airspace) using a radio!? I think the day will come when the brightest among us (yes - engineers) will win over the romantic among us (pilots) and the bungling among us (FAA) to create machines and an operating environment that can effectively do for the carriers (not just one or two - but most) what capital equipment is meant to do - provide a predictable and quality product for the customer and maximize the wealth of the stockholders. Godspeed to NASA and others who will someday turn all of this around. If you can't tell, I'm a huge fan of the X-45 and Global Hawk. And I know - the cost, the cost! Keep up the good work Wayne. Rant over.

Wayne, Great writeup. I flew out of RIC many years and AKQ was where we would go for night formation roll ons (helicopters with wheels don't ya' know) and I was curious about the terrain relief. Thought maybe things had changed a lot in the last couple of years. Hasn't one of the major avionic manufacturers already certified an EFIS system with HITS for GA? Can't remember if it is Chelton or Avidyne (sorry for the spelling) but it seems one of them got a mass certification for about 80 airframes and that the system uses HITS. I'm going to do a FW instrument add on one of these days and would prefer to go EFIS after years of steam gauges. I agree that most of IFR is reactive and if you're not accustomed to the approach and environment a lot of catch up is played on the AC configuration side of the house. It seems like this technology is years overdue. Anyway, I was wondering if you are somehow involved in the SATS program with NASA?

OK No4, I need to throw in my two cents worth here. I can't speak for the Brits, but I have thousands of hours in Army helicopters and I'm not sure how the theory of flight studies would dissuade you from flying rotary wing aircraft. The laws of physics apply just as well to an airfoil making its lift via rotational velocity as well as those that are fixed to the aircraft. No problems; just train and know what you're doing and all is well. It goes without saying that maintenance is king. In 20+ years of flying VMC, IMC, Nap of the earth (NOE), aided and unaided night tactical operations in both lift and attack units, I have seen most everything that can go wrong in a helicopter go wrong. Engine, drivetrain, electronic and hydraulic failures of most every sort and still, here I am with all my limbs and most of my senses still intact. So IMHO, helicopters are plenty safe, just make sure you have an ex US Army Warrant Officer running the show! BTW, I got my fixed wing ticket many years ago in a Piper Tomahawk. Survived that one too! Have fun with it - Darrell

Good luck Andrew. I'm up the road in Roanoke. If you're ever going north on 81 give me a call and you're welcome to stop by and see my "progress".

John, thanks for the sawing tips; I was considering the use of a jigsaw. I'll cut the foam and then glass. By the way, after a great deal of time reading your site, I have decided to wear a bright yellow "Florida" shirt while building. The shots of the palm trees and hot tub are inspiring for a western Va. resident! It feels like I'm on vacation just putting it on. And Dust, "Enjoy the Build" I will! After 20 years of Army flying, I find the act itself a bit of a bore, but building - that gets me smilin'. Yours is a great tag.

It looks like the plans call for both sides of the seatback to be glassed and allowed to cure prior to cutting the center holes. In fact, it looks like one should glass one side and allow it to cure prior to the corner/side notches being cut. Any reason all of the cuts can't be made prior to glassing and then trim (knife cut stage) the glass prior to cure? Sure seems like it would be easier to cut unglassed foam based on my limited experience from the chapter 3 practice layups. I've searched the archives and this site and cannot see where this is addressed. Lots of discussions on whether to cut now (chapter 4) or in later chapters and on glassing/not glassing the seatback edges, but I can't find a discussion on cutting the foam prior to glassing. Some of the builder's sites have the holes cut, others don't but I can't find an example of the cuts being made prior to glassing. Any advice would be appreciated.

My understanding is that a plain paper 8 ounce cup, no wax or other coatings, is the best choice for mixing epoxy prior to use. I understand that they are available from the normal suppliers, but I would think I should be able to find a local source. Problem is that I have been unsble to locate any. I have tried Wal-Mart, K-Mart, Ace Hardware, paint supply stores, commercial paper suppliers and almost anyone that sells paper products of any kind and the answer is HUH? Seems plastic or foam cups are the norm for hot/cold liquids. All of the paper cups I have found are coated. I cannot find a local supplier for the type menttioned in the plans - Lily 8SN1 Perhaps I have misread or misunderstood, so hopefully someone can help. Do I need to worry if the cup is coated? Is a plastic coating OK? Is wax OK? Does anyone know of a normal outlet for a plain paper uncoated cup? What is everyone using to hold the epoxy out of the pump? Thanks for the info.