Steve Innova

I recently purchased a set of Infinity main gear retracts, which I will be installing on my modified Cozy MkIV. I also have a Steve Wright's electric nose gear retract system, which weighs about 15 lbs. I'm considering using a hydraulic actuator to raise the nose-gear, replacing the Wright electric lift. This should [theoretically] save me about 10 lbs, as I'd be using the Infinity hydraulic pump, for which I've already paid the weight penalty. I seem to remember the SQ-2000 went this route, but some builders have opted for electric nose retracts instead. Is the 10lb weight savings worth the added complexity of additional hydraulic lines/valves? What are people's thoughts?

Hmm... I guess my reply was a little terse. Sorry for that!!

I have no direct experience w/Mazda rotaries, but I have watched others struggle for the last 4 years with turbos. Can I suggest initially installing the 20b without the turbos. You'll save lots of time and have a more reliable engine to test your aircraft. Then after a year or two, when you're getting the itch to build again, and your comfortable with the airframe and the engine cooling, then add turbos if you still want them.

All, I have a set of damaged Infinity Retracts for sale. Presently, the gear IS NOT in flight-worthy condition. I purchased this set about 6 months ago, with the intention of studying the gear design and possibly repairing or remanufacturing the gear. However, I just got a brand-new set of Infinity Retracts, so I won’t be needing these any more. A little about the gear: This came from Bill Oertel aircraft which crash-landed last year. The gear was damaged in the crash. Here is a basic summary of significant damage: - Main Strut tubes slightly bent - Wheel half-forks broken off - Attach plate twisted - Sizzor arms bent slightly - Internal oleo sliding/locking tubes slightly bent - Hydraulic actuators damaged Possibilities for Repair/Remanufacture: I've completely dissembled and inspected the gear, and was confident that I could re-manufacture all the damaged components. Despite what a lot of people say online, the basic design is not especially complex, and an accomplished machinist should certainly be able to re-manufacture the parts. The most expensive part of the gear is the Trunion Heads (the part that the gear rotates on to retract). From my initial inspection, these appear to be undamaged, though I make no claims as to their flight-worthiness. They have broken free from the attach plate (this was glued on, not welded, which probably prevented them from being excessively damaged) You would of course need to inspect them closely w/UV or other techniques to examine for microscopic cracks before deciding whether to remanufacture or reuse the part. Most other parts are basically a series of nesting AL and steel tubes, turned on a lathe to correct diameter and o-ring quality surface, with groves for locking rings and o-rings. Milling would be required to build some replacement parts, such as the scissor arms, internal locking mechanism, half-forks, and attach plate, but most parts would be made on a lathe. I had planned to use the original damaged parts as templates, take exact measurements, and make new parts to spec. I don’t have an estimate of what it would cost to re-manufacture the damaged parts. Depending on your skill and tools, you could probably make some of the parts yourself, and farm out others. You might even be able to order some parts direct from JD, depending on whether he has any of the parts in stock. However, considering the wait for new Infinity Retracts can be 4 years or more, this might be a good option for getting the gear sooner, and would be an interesting project. I originally purchased these as an insurance policy, in case I was never able to get a new set of Infinity gear. Best offer gets the gear. Send me an IM and I'll send you some pics of the dissassembled parts. Lastly, I’ll state again: This gear is sold “as is” in a damaged, non-flight worthy condition.

For the canard, vacuum bagging is a very simple and relatively inexpensive solution. Canard, Wings, winglets, bulkheads, roll-bar; are all parts that turn out great when vacuum bagging.

You all misunderstood my question. I asked if it anyone had done it, and stated, for $3,200, I wasn't considering it. Sometimes questions can be answered w/a yes or no, not a lecture on why it's not necessary to improve the design.

For these type of auctions, it's often better to sell the engine, prop, and experimental fuselage separately. The type of people that are looking for an inexpensive engine won't be interested in a crazy looking plane project, and those that would give the plane a chance, probably want an engine they've picked themselves. Selling separately would get a better return on investment.

those look cool, but unnecessarily heavy and complex.

I would assume, to reduce speed, maintain glideslope, etc... I don't particularly, not for $3,200 at least! All though they do look pretty snarky. But I am curious to know if anyone had implemented strake mounted speed brakes vs. the belly board.

Has anyone considered adding aerodynamic speed brakes to the strakes or wings? Something like this perhaps: http://preciseflight.com/products/speedbrakes/mooney_m20 http://preciseflight.com/products/speedbrakes/experimental Lancair sells their assembly for $3,200, but surely it can be made/acquired for less.

I would probably trust Velocity in this... Bear in mind, they don't make any money if you buy an already purchased kit. So what do they have to gain by tricking you?

At that point in the fuselage (extreme aft end), the boundary layer of air would be probably be too thick to exchange sufficient heat. Vortilons placed ahead of the cowling/radiator fins might help...

No, it's a modified Cozy MkIV.

Sure, but is the Aerocanard spar [and wingspan] 3" wider as well?

I have modified my fuselage to be 3" wider in the center. Should I also add 3" to the spar, or should I leave it as is? - If I widen the spar, the strake and wings will be the plans size, but the overall wingspan will increase by 3" - If I leave the spar plans length, the strakes will be 1.5" narrower on each side, at the root of the strake, but the overall wingspan will be per-plans. What are the possible aerodymanic consequences of either course of action?

In fairness, JD had a very serious illness last year and nearly died. He spent most of 2007 recovering.

I wish I was...

I've dissassembled and examined a set of damaged Infnity gear. Surprisingly the gear is not as complex as they would appear. There are relatively few parts, and everything could be made on a mill and lathe relatively easily. If mine never come (that I ordered in May 2004, "in stock" then btw), I'm pretty confident that I could machine replacement parts.

Perhaps people who "just want to talk" should consider Dust's forum: www.canardcommunity.com

Yeah, wrong forum for politics.

MGS 285 is available in addition to 335. I get my from CST composites.

I use this occassionally, but only on flat parts, b/c it does shrink as the epoxy cures, causing bubbles to lift on complex shapes. I prefer to use peel ply and a vacuum bag. I do the layup, apply peel ply, quilt batting from Walmart, stick it into a nylon vacuum bag tube, and seal the 2 ends w/ vacuum bag clamps. Quick, easy, and gives great results every time. Next time I'll try a release film between the peel ply and the quilt batting, but it's always worked fine w/out it.

Great.... So is someone going to go and start a new forum? We only have three now.

What peddles are we talking about? Link?

This kind of crash is the reason I'm rebuilding my roll-bar.