Jump to content

Jon Matcho

Verified Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Jon Matcho

  1. Phil, welcome to the forum. Here are some additional responses to the numbered items in your mega-question 🙂: 1) Foam. The plans specify the foam to use. 2) Alternates to foams. Not worth the consideration in my opinion. I wouldn't even consider changing the foam material as the cost/effort-benefit would not be worth it. 3) MTOW vs Max Ramp Weight (and Max Taxi Weight). I just learned something trying to figure out what these two new MRW and MTW terms were. Most (all?) small airplanes only care about MTOW as the maximum weight the aircraft can be, whether in the hangar, or about to take off. I have never seen someone thinking about subtracting the 1 pound of fuel they might have burned from the hangar to the runway. 4) Round the World. Nobody is going to give you meaningful and specific advice on how to plan a round-the-world trip in a public forum, so expect that. Be prepared to deploy all your cash reserves here. Get in touch with Damon Meyer who was planning to do the same in his flying Cozy III, which he had fitted with a huge fuel tank occupying his entire back seat. After years of planning, campaigning, and real work, he has not been able to get off the ground though. It's a massive undertaking. 5) The Cozy plans include the Roncz canard plans (modified for the Cozy). 6) Engines... round-the-world... diesels... turbines... oh my. Build a Cozy IV with a Lycoming 360-type, take yourself to some places, and then your family when you trust everything. It's massive accomplishment considering the success rate of those intending to build and fly vs. those that actually do it. Once you've built and flown in standard configuration, look at your plane and revisit whether it's the one to fly around the world. At that point you will know enough to answer your own questions here. Your first step is to buy the plans.
  2. I am guessing that the fuselage parts are the upper and lower fuselage shells for an AeroCanard, unassembled and without bulkheads installed. I could be wrong.
  3. I split this into its own thread. Jim, as I mentioned in your private message to me... post a list of what's in there and attach a few pictures. You'll have tire kickers and serious buyers in no time.
  4. Not sure, if by "expired", you mean that prior thread is too old or actually expired, but it's still available here: https://www.canardzone.com/forums/topic/40245-cad-update-2/
  5. Here's an example of a beautiful Defiant with what appears to be equipped with dual C/S MT props: VH-OOU | Rutan Defiant | Private | Jarrod Swanwick | JetPhotos
  6. @A Bruce Hughes reminds me of another I left off my list: ERacer = a motorcycle w/side-by-side seating Cozy III = a motorcycle w/side-by-side seating and travel storage
  7. I agree with everything Kent says, which makes me question my own analogies... VariEze = a motorcycle that's a touch too small, but still a motorcycle. Long-EZ = a motorcycle. Cozy IV = a sports car. Velocity = a sporty SUV. These are relative to traditional aircraft, not aerobatic aircraft or actual racers. The Long-EZ is the evolution of the VariEze.
  8. It's safe to assume that you'll be quite free to do anything you like with the VariEze and/or Long-EZ (or other) silhouettes. For the COBA logo (formerly CSA logo) you should get permission from www.canardowners.com. Personally, I do not see how the COBA logo would be worthy of a jewelry design anyway (the logo is a bit too busy in my opinion, showing a VariEze on top of a runway in the shape of a red 'A', with words, etc.). If you showed up to Rough River with simple Long-EZ, VariEze, and Cozy earrings I think there'd be a fair amount of interest.
  9. Ben, the best thing you can do to create an aircraft is to get hangar space at the last possible time you can. In other words, building in your basement or any other room, even outside with a temporary canvas shelter, is far better than needing to drive to where your tools and such are. As Kent points out, some airports are difficult/unfriendly to homebuilders. You could keep on the waiting list, and just keep putting yourself at the bottom every time your name comes up.
  10. Yes, I now manage both. The Quickheads software needs a complete overhaul. I am trying to figure out how to maintain both sites. In the meantime I suggest sharing your build here in the Quickie sub-forums.
  11. Interesting engine and great walk-through! http://www.continental.aero/diesel/engines/cd155.aspx
  12. I did not know all that... thanks! There’s some mention of the Bateleur in another thread here.
  13. I am not selling my Tri-Q200 project, but do want to sell my unstarted Q2 kit which is in this post: I'm not doing the Q2 kit because I have since acquired this separate Tri-Q200 project/refurb shown in this thread. Once that's flying I will move back to my Cozy IV project.
  14. Jon Matcho


    Looks like a Solitaire to me! I would very much like to see a plans-built option for the Solitaire, but there are not many examples at all to verify references. I suspect Ole and Kjeld had access to an actual Solitaire?
  15. @Stack and anyone else who might be interested in seeing a tour of a great example of a Quickie TriQ-200, I put the details up on the Calendar here for the Zoom meeting tomorrow (September 12th). This one is of particular interest to me as Jerry was the hangar mate of the builder of the TriQ-200 that I now have (to repair).
  16. until
    (From the Quickie Q-LIST mailing list at https://q-list.groups.io/g/main) Join Jerry, from Asheville, NC, as he shows us his beautiful Tri-Q. One of the unique features of this aircraft is the dual side-stick controls. To join the meeting, click on the link at the end of this message. Please don't log in until 9:00 AM, Central Saving Time. Again, after Jerry's 40 minute Q-Tour ends, we can re-enter the Zoom meeting for an open mic session. Paul Fisher will be the host. As you probably know, we have had some technical problems with some of the Zoom Q-Tours, so we came up with a Plan B. If the connection is crappy and it’s apparent that the Zoom meeting will be unable to continue, Jerry & Paul will logout and stop the meeting, then Jerry will record his own private Q-Tour and we’ll get it uploaded to the YouTube channel in short order. Paul Fisher is inviting you to a Zoom meeting. Topic: Q-Tour - Jerry Marstall Time: Sep 12, 2020 09:00 AM Central Time (US and Canada) (10:00 AM Eastern Time; 14:00 UTC) Join Zoom Meeting https://us04web.zoom.us/j/3425118003?pwd=bkZ0ZXA3dVJWRVRZYmpYY0Z1WlNKQT09 Meeting ID: 342 511 8003 Passcode: Jerry
  17. Sorry to hear about your troubles, but sounds like you made a good decision.
  18. The fuselage, tail, and engine are currently separated, so I wouldn't consider it an airplane. Still, it's in Martinsville, NJ if you ever want to take a look. You should keep reading and make sure you're comfortable. There are many pros and cons to consider, and most important is to match an airplane to your goals and needs.
  19. Both the Dragonfly and the Q2 are good aircraft with similar qualities. The Qs are a bit faster, but not by much. The LS1 canard is what you want on a Q2/200, yes. I have a Quickie TriQ-200 project in NJ that's NOT flying if you want to look it over. Also, there's a builder/flyer Zoom meeting coming up on 9/12 this week that you can check out. I'll post the information here later, but you can find it being discussed on the Quickie mailing list here: https://q-list.groups.io/g/main
  20. @Evan so did you get some more information to convince you on this one? Or are you just "going for it". Regardless, good luck and let me know if you'd like some help to unload at its new home (around Allentown PA I assume).
  21. Welcome! You could do all sorts of things with that, and you can always fix the foam blocks together later if anything was too big for one session. Still, as Kent pointed out it would be faster not to bother unless you wanted to achieve something different/unique. Not yet, but there’s some movement with the Open-EZ to achieve that for the Long-EZ and Cozy dimensions. Bill Allen is the pioneer with working to fit the Deltahawk to a Long-EZ. I recall seeing a recent comment on the Canard Aviators mailing list (I think) that he remarked of the pain and suffering he’s gong through with it and I got the impression he would never do it again. It’s a massive amount of work to get the kinks out of new engines, and the Deltahawk is similar effort to an auto conversion in my opinion (for what that’s worth). Keep in mind that the completion rate is very low. Only a minority of those starting will actually finish. You need to be picky about how many projects you add to the already challenging project (although I’d be thrilled to have access to that CNC machine 😉 ). It’s about time you posted, welcome to the forum! 🙂 On behalf of those actually posting the interesting and informative stuff for you to read, thank you!
  22. CP 25 = Canard Pusher Newsletter #25. I'll get them uploaded to the Downloads section here. @GMalatrasi what CAD software are you using?
  23. @Kent Ashton that's the answer I came up with for the station points by dividing 103" by 10 segements to get 10" with 3" remaining, which I am GUESSING aligns with what was intended based on the "not to scale" diagram. I do not see how one truly knows these are 10" increments and not 9.9" (or even 5.0" with the "not to scale" qualifier) with whatever is left over at the end? I'd bet this is covered in a Canard Pusher, or old Canard Aviators (C-A) email list discussion. @GMalatrasi I totally understand your point... the Long-EZ plans leave a lot to be desired. I am more familiar with the Cozy IV plans and they're better in this particular area, but still not at the level you're looking for. The more I look at the Long-EZ plans, the more I feel the need to update the plans.
  24. The current Open-EZ 2D PDF drawings are sufficient, but are still pending the revisions that are detailed in the first post of this thread here: The effort is ongoing, but not at the point of being able to fully "show otherwise". Several folks have contributed various items, and have expressed a willingness to do more. The project is getting additional structure and is clearly not dead. You can see an example of progress from the official Open-EZ download section being recently added here at the Canard Zone (see link above, and the Downloads menu). The first step is to move forward with the Open-EZ Tandem 2.0 drawings in CAD as faithful representations of the Long-EZ drawings. After that a plans rewrite is possible but is much more ambitious as it would require a "proof of plans" aircraft to be built before truly being viable. Folks, including myself, hesitate to jump into this as liability concerns begin to surface from imagining a widow/er blaming the Open-EZ plans on the death of their former spouse. So true. This is why the Open-EZ Tandem 2.0 effort is 100% aligned with the stock Long-EZ. Several folks have pointed out missing dimensions which will get resolved with the effort to bring into CAD from Long-EZ paper. Many folks have done this, but do keep in mind that just because something is in CAD does not make it inherently any more accurate than the hand-drawn source. In other words, someone's CAD drawing could be very different and even incorrect to the point of being dangerous. Stay tuned...

The Canard Zone

  • Create New...

Important Information