Jump to content

Jon Matcho

Verified Members
  • Posts

    2,929
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    28

Posts posted by Jon Matcho

  1. On 9/9/2020 at 12:03 PM, ElEsido said:

    There are two videos of this bird on youtube, here and here.

    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?

  2. 22 hours ago, Stack said:

    I might take you up on the offer to see the Tri-Q200. Where in NJ is the airplane?

    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.

    22 hours ago, Stack said:

    I should stop reading about canards because it’s putting doubt in my mind...

    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.

  3. On 9/6/2020 at 10:34 AM, Stack said:

    I looking into purchasing either a Dragonfly or a Q2, and I’m looking for some advise.... What to look for and what to stay away from.

    I found a Q2 with a LSI canard which I think is good....right?

    Is one a “better” flying airplane than the other?

    Is there anybody in the NY area that has a flying one of these that wouldn’t mind a “tour” of there airplane?

    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

  4. Welcome!

    18 hours ago, TRUEMAN said:

    Would a 5'x10'x9" CNC envelope be sufficient to carve the male plugs of a Cozy IV or Long EZ?

    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. 

    18 hours ago, TRUEMAN said:

    Is there a SOLIDWORKS or other 3D CAD plan set on the market that would save me from the potential errors of converting 2D plans into 3d plans?

    Not yet, but there’s some movement with the Open-EZ to achieve that for the Long-EZ and Cozy dimensions.

    18 hours ago, TRUEMAN said:

    Does anyone have an idea if this will be a relative  "bolt on" to a particular Long EZ variant or other Canard (Velosity kits and V-twin is out of my league but appear to be proven)?

    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 😉 ).

    18 hours ago, TRUEMAN said:

    I have been reading this forum for months, its got a much better vibe than almost forum on the internet. Great job pitching in and moderating!

    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! 

  5. 13 minutes ago, GMalatrasi said:

    Not sure what CP 25 is... All I have is the build instructions and the A1-14 Templates.

    CP 25 = Canard Pusher Newsletter #25. I'll get them uploaded to the Downloads section here.

    @GMalatrasi what CAD software are you using?

  6. On 8/27/2020 at 6:04 PM, Kent Ashton said:

    The intervals you have question-marked are 10 X 10" increments with 3" additional to reach the firewall.

    @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.

    On 8/27/2020 at 5:52 PM, GMalatrasi said:

    It's much easier to deal with 3D models and digital drawings for what I'm looking to do.

    @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.

     

  7. 22 hours ago, GMalatrasi said:

    Did this project die? Were the final drawings ever released?

    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: 

     

    20 hours ago, Kent Ashton said:

    I will say flatly that this project is dead and if someone can show otherwise, chime in.

    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.

    20 hours ago, Kent Ashton said:

    The problem is that when a person starts to put these drawings into CAD, the draftsman sees things that need to be upgraded like heavier gear and engine mounts, longer nose, electric nose lift, widen the back seat(?), rollover structure (?), add a stick and throttle in the back seat(?), downdraft or armpit cooling(?).   The original drawings are also missing some dimensions that help redrafting so dimensions have to be pulled off the paper plans.    After a while it gets to be a big project.

    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.

    20 hours ago, GMalatrasi said:

    Thanks Kent, I was just hoping to get the CAD drawings to I can import them and use them to do a 3D model and incorporate the mods I want in CAD first. Seems like I'll have to do it from scratch though.

    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...

  8. I was about to post this on the "what did you do today" thread, but then I remembered this one as a better place for this topic.  And then I remembered I had posted some shop progress in order to test out the Blogs feature here: https://www.canardzone.com/blogs (which I stopped using because I was not happy with the functionality, for which there's a major upgrade in the works from the software vendor -- I plan to get back to this and make available for members as well).

    I shared some of my follow-up in the "what did you do today" thread on my pursuit to have an insulated, heated, cooled, and organized shop, but this is a better place. I am going to do a mini-split as @Kent Ashton suggested, but first need to button up the shop so that the wind and small critters are not freely entering the shop (I have explored several mouse trap devices and have accidentally caught a chipmunk).

    Here's the next wall that I will be working on. It's been an accomplishment to have even managed the necessary approvals from "the boss" as this is a shared space. While there are no cars in here, there's quite a bit of gardening and household supplies that will need their own space. This wall is after having moved some things around, and am happy that I can look at this and see that I can make quick work of getting all the stuff out and better organized elsewhere. The closet thing will remain here, but to the left as the freezer will be moved there from the other corner in the garage. The brooms and poles in the corner will go "away", and that shelving unit will be moved into our storage tent. The wall will be insulated and covered in the same 1/4" plywood as the other walls shown in the blog posts above.

    Small steps, but still progress in my book -- if you saw the 360-view in here you might appreciate why all this must be done. It's been a long time coming for me to have an orderly and functioning shop.

    20200817_195746.jpg

  9. On 6/16/2020 at 3:57 PM, Royal said:

    I hit submit on this without an [intro] that I edited and now I cant edit it.

    Hi John, the forum allows posts to be edited for 15 minutes and then they're frozen. This is to ensure the continuity of the discussion remains intact over time.

    Feel free to give your intro though -- although you may have done that elsewhere, it's still good.

  10. 15 minutes ago, Evan said:

    Al said that if i decided not to take it I could get my deposit back.

    That's nice of him!

    15 minutes ago, Evan said:

    He is retooling with new designs and is looking to do what velocity did with A full shop and builder assistance I wish him luck with that 

    Interesting. I wish him luck too with that. I hope he keeps to the AeroCanard design.

    16 minutes ago, Evan said:

    I am still very interested  in buying this even though I probably added a year to my completion  time.

    I've been told that building one of these planes can be broken down as follows:

    • 1/3 building the airframe
    • 1/3 engine, electrical, and avionics
    • 1/3 finishing

    Even if this plane were in perfect shape you would have a lot of time in front of you. If you want to build, build. If you want to fly a canard, then you may want to buy a flying aircraft. 

    16 minutes ago, Evan said:

    would you guys look at these pics and be as critical as possible Id appreciate it.  

    the interior looks good  and I,ve  sent those pics already and have had some positive comments on the fit and build quality 

    my concern is how normal this is in an early stage of assembly, looks really rough

    The interior does look good, and likely because "Dennis Oelmann did the build" (I never heard that Dennis built whole planes, only wings and canards, but of course I can be wrong -- ask him). Maybe Dennis built the fuselage and wings but did not do the assembly? The sand-and-fill steps were completely skipped with someone prematurely spraying paint all over the place (horribly). You're looking at taking all of that off, but... that's "just" part of the expected work remaining. Try to find out the specifics of all this and be clear with Al that you are reconsidering because of the exterior workmanship.

    It's also interesting to compare the pictures that AeroCad sent to you with those that you took. Explains why there were no exterior close-ups.

  11. On 8/15/2020 at 4:48 PM, Kent Ashton said:

    I say this all this because it is not in the books.  If you are building an airplane and have dreams of  your own hangar where you can turn on the radio and spend a nice afternoon tinkering, this is the sort of stuff you may encounter.  I have read of too many airports that told a homebuilder "We don't allow any work in a hangar".   Happy to advise anyone who meets this sort of resistance.

    This topic was mentioned a week ago in a completely different conversation. It's good to see that you're speaking out. I could imagine being put on another hidden list that would keep you at the end of the hidden waiting list just for asking am airport manager these questions.

  12. 7 hours ago, jridge said:

    Where can I find the link in your first post of this thread?  I get an error when I access the link.

    Ah, that's my website for my build but is offline at the moment. I am thinking about turning on the Blog feature here and transposing everything into it when the new version is soon released. In the meantime you can find a PDF version of that page attached to this post.

    5 hours ago, Countach74 said:

    Check Cozy girls website. Think they call it low vac.

    That's where I got the idea. http://www.cozygirrrl.com/lovac.htm

    Jon Matcho Simple Vacuum Bagging.pdf

  13. On 8/12/2020 at 11:21 PM, bmckinney10 said:

    I saw Marc Zeitlin last Friday and he mentioned he has installed the lower cost uAvionix echoUAT on several Ez's.

    Thanks for that... I am looking at that same unit.

    On topic of this thread, as it was getting late in the day yesterday I realized I hadn't done any work in the shop so I put myself in there and looked around for what would move the ball forward. After 20 minutes I had managed to claim 1 more unit of floor space by eliminating more "stuff". I also wrote down the next steps I need to do on my composite side project to get that out of my hands.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information