CFernandez

Looking at the Grove site it looks like the gear is going to weigh more than the glass gear. The geometry looks a different also. The aluminum gear would come straight out of the gear well, with the axles approx. 9 inches behind the plans position. Interesting thought.

Sounds good Carlos,

 

The only correction that I would suggest is to have more than one line to the highest point and then return down. The single tube gives a single point of failure at which time your entire fuel system is shut down. why bring a second line with a check valve into the picture, especially into the cockpit. Check valves don't always work as planned. KIS

 

 

The thought behind the check valve is the valve is in the cabin where it wouldn't be affected by external foreign matter like ice. Two vent lines will ice up as good as one.

Should the main vent tube be clogged the check valve will open and allow the tanks to vent properly. If the vent line is clear the check valve will remain closed.

That's what I'm thinking to do... That and 1/2" fuel and 3/8" vent lines.

I'm planning for left, right, and a 3-4 gallon sump tank under the main spar; behind the rear seat back. I've eliminated the switch valve and associated tubing.The only "switch" will be between the sump tank and fuel pump, ON or OFF .

The system has vent lines from each tank, left, right and sump, joining together high on the firewall. From there a single line continues to the highest possible point on the firewall before coming back down.

The system will also have a check valve with a "P" trap loop in it as a second vent in the cabin should the primary vent line become plugged from ice or other material. This is an idea from my friend Andy, he's building a Velocity.

FWIW...

What doesn't a glass panel setup do?

 

That's hard to answer. What do you want it to do?

Its like thinking about building and flying an airplane. Picking a particular design for a particular mission is where one should start.

There are enough EFI out there with varying capabilities that you can do anything from just engine monitoring to fully coupled approaches.

Most EFI will have primary flight instruments to start, from there the sky is not the limit.

You might have wanted to check with the EFIS manufacturers...

The GRT Sport (internal AHRS) can take up to a 15 degree panel tilt. The Horizon has external AHRS(s) and can take a 35 degree panel tilt.

The important part of the installation is that the AHRS and magnetometer are installed in parallel planes, no pun intented.

(I work for GRT if you wondered.)

Joe,

The Cozy looks like it might be a Classic. It looks similar to Mark Scaglia's Classic on Marc's cozybuilders.org site.

The canopy on the SX300 looks like it may give you the look/room you're looking for. http://www.sx300group.org/

Hi Drew,

My $.02 After the fact...

Using plastic wrap on flat surfaces is tricky with little benefit. The only time I use plastic wrap is on small compound curves when the glass and peel ply won't stay still on their own. Then you still have to be careful to get all the air out and not stretch the plastic wrap.

On large flat the plastic wrap will stretch and pull and make bubbles, its not worth it.Your biggest benefit is using peel ply and rolling the air out of it.

PS Jon, how's your project coming?

Excellent,

 

And don't drool inside their plane :-)

 

Waiter

A friend of mine is selling his BM EFIS One -Gen 2. It is very complete with lots of extras thrown in.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Blue-Mountain-Avionics-EFIS-One-Gen-2-complete-system_W0QQcmdZViewItemQQcategoryZ26436QQihZ002QQitemZ120139422752QQrdZ1QQsspagenameZWDVW

or search Ebay item no. 120139422752

I'm checking...

Great work on the revised GRT manuals that you did. Will you be at AirVenture? If so, I will come by and say, "Hello".

If it is ok, I will probably send you my wire tables for review after I get them more finalized.

Rick,

If you need any help with the GRT setup let me know. The install is looking good.

Carlos

My day job is sales and support for an avionics company, we build EFIS for experimental aircraft.

Good job, Jon! Looking good.

Do you have any pictures of your FHC installation?

I'm going to use trunk lid hinges out of a Pontiac. They are just over 12" which should fit inbetween F28 and IP. I think... I will probably need additional or stronger pistons if the plans canopy is kept and one piece.

We'll see.

Go for it Jon!

I use a brass wire brush on a drill. Takes a little while but it cleans the Permagrit well.

So, basically you had to jig the fuselage for both the upside down method and the right side up method. So, there is extra work involved.

 

Not really, after it was taped and cured the fuse was pretty rigid. I checked it right side up but just floxed and taped the bulkheads in.

I installed all bulkheads except the IP and F28 upside down. I didn't want to cut the table. After cure and tape I flipped the whole thing over and installed the IP and F28.

Upside down also allows you to hang the LG bulkheads on the bottom longerons and they set there.

The plans way seems like a balancing act. I'm sure it works fine but I knew that the longerons were level with checking them once or twice because the table they were on was level.

It seems to me less jigging is involved with the upside method.

Thanks Wayne.

Upside down...

So what do you think about on a long drive or commute.

Lately I've been thinking about a forward hinged canopy and the turtleback on my plans AeroCanard.

Here it goes... I want to move the turtleback cut line back exactly 12", split the turtleback (just behind the shoulder support) from the forward canopy portion. This will give me a forward hinged canopy and aft hinged turtleback. This would leave 5" of turtleback at the top of the firewall and 15" along the longeron. I plan to gusset the firewall near the engine mounts.

The plans leave 17" at the top and 27" along the longeron.

The reason is I want a one piece window in the back instead of two. Worth it or not, I don't know yet. I know it will add weight and time to build. It's fun to think about while driving though.

Your thoughts?

The original poster did not actually mean to put jet engines on the canard wing itself -- just on the airframe in a pusher setup.

It could work...

Hey, Brett!

I saw your engine running on your website, how sweet it is.

As to the posts about Velocity wanting or not wanting a twin, is about putting engines on the canard. I think it is likely that arrangement is not something Velocity wants to do (oops I said it ). I do think Velocity would do a twin just not one with the engines on the canard.

I'm not an engineer but the idea seems extremely difficult, having engines on the canard; cg, engine-out ops, etc.

Vayoodev, if cost is a factor one engine is less costly than two. Building a proven design is less costly than designing one.

My $.02, but don't let naa sayers stop you, this is the beauty of this thing we call EXPERIMENTAL. Experiment, learn.

 

I also spoke with Al a couple weeks ago and he did say he's working up new plans/drawings which would be ready in "3 months".

 

Well its been a little over 3 months but Al came through today with new CAD drawings and new plans book. They look great!

Keep it up Al!

Jon Matcho said:

On the brighter side, I understand that Al has "update plans" on his list of things to do for the future of AeroCad...

Ahhh.