WTJohnson

It seems to me that early-on there were quite a few pilots that flew low and showed off and hit power lines, etc. Today there are some second and third owners that do not have much of an idea as to what they have.....only that it flys and hope everything is okay under the cowl. If you build your plane (and have quite a bit of time in even a Cessna 152) and follow the pilot manual in doing canard only runway flights and do not get anxious and rationalize that everything should be ok or ' I feel lucky'.......you have an exellent chance in becoming a long-time EZ flyer. I would suggest that the cowl come off after each flight during the period of flying your hours off...and inspect closely for loose items, etc. I found my Varieze to be very stable and docile in flight and much easier to control that the Cessna 150 that I flew to get my license.....especially handling summer updrafts in So.Calif. Also, the canard will become your best 'flying instrument' on or in the plane for pitch and roll. My Varieze can on a calmer day be trimmed for hands-off flight for quite a period of time. The turn from base to final can be made at a bank that a convertional plane would have a hard time doing safely.....just do not follow another plane too closely and get involved in their vortice, etc. W.Johnson .........Varieze N725EZ

I do not really understand the big issue and discussion on canard weight. As far as I know, Burt was concerned about the elevator weight and balance. This was back for the Varieze and maybe things have changed since then, but it will need to be explained to me. Also on the Varieze and probably all canards with the engine in the rear, approaching the rear CG is often a problem. So having an extra pound in the canard may very well be helpful. When I built my plane I shifted whatever I thought I could to the nose including battery relay, voltage regulator, larger battery, etc. Overall aircraft weight is of course an issue and I just posted a reply about doing your fiberglassing in a high heat eg. 90 deg F or better. My epoxy flowed almost like water when I built the wings and they came out very light in weight. W.Johnson.........Varieze N725EZ

After reading the various suggestions for building a light weight plane, it does not appear that anyone has mentioned the temperature. I built my wings during the summer in my garage in So.Calif. The epoxy flowed like water and I know that resulted in very light weight wings. This was back in the late 1970's that the wings were built. This was using the slow epoxy hardnener on my Varieze. I recall that the temperature was at least 90 deg F. After moving up to Washington state, many Variezes and Longs were built in a much cooler environment and suffered with higher weights. So if Mother Nature does not provide the heat, I would suggest that you turn the thermostat way up. W.Johnson..........Varieze N725EZ

Good summary ........... When I took my 130 lb. wife to Jackpot, Nevada in the back seat years ago .....over the 4th of July, I was conservative in calculating the total load. We took off with only three hours of fuel, so I was figuring on stopping every two hours or about 300 miles. With warm/hot temperatures and high altitude at Jackpot, we left for home early in the morning to safely get airborne. This was with my 85hp Continental with the old heavy starter and generator. Burt Rutan after indicating in the engine plans that the starter was okay to use with an 85 hp engine, later changed saying it was a one-place airplane. He was right in some ways in that you have to be careful as to where you go and what you carry.....but that goes for about any airplane. (Now have a B & C starter) The trip was a marginal one considering the temperature, altitude and the small engine. Also did not fuel up at Jackpot, but stopped near Boise on the way home. Normally when I fly by myself, I load whatever will fit in the back seat and take off with full tanks which can take me out six hours and 900 miles plus reserve. However, I am ready to get out for a break at four to five hours, so have never flown any longer than that without stopping. WTJohnson... Varieze 725EZ

One other thing to consider is the weight of the aircraft and the ability to move it around. I have moved several very heavy canard airplanes. One was a three place Cozy and the other a 'wide' LongEZ. Both were hard to move around. With the nose down and a lot of gas in the forward part of the strakes, they became a real load. The solution is to be in good shape and have the ability to handle the load or to put in an electric nose gear to lift it .......or to have a friend always assist. It would be a good idea to check this out with several existing planes and lift them and move them around......if you are at all concerned. WTJohnson

I realize that flying high is a more economical/performance way to go, but that also costs money. Some of us consider it more fun to fly lower and a bit slower and enjoy the scenery .....and without oxygen. Point to point on a cross country flight, your plane is a great way to travel. Depends what one is after.... and the interested party that started cam consider. I can fly (at cruise) from Seattle to LA in seven hours with one stop for fuel and a break, so the Varieze is still a good way to travel. WTJohnson

How about the Varieze getting much better gas mileage? Seems to be a very good reason to fly one unless you have plenty of money to burn. I know about Variezes getting from 40 to 60 mpg. ( mine burns 4 gph at 2450 rpm and 150mph cruise)..........don't know what the Longs will get. More horsepower will get you there faster, but you will pay for it. WTJohnson

Since the price of many canard aircraft is so low compared to other aircraft, eg. Variezes in the $10 to $15k and Longs another $10k or so higher ...there are new owners that have gotten into the game on the cheap and are playing accordingly. I feel one way to stop or slow this down is to quit selling these canard aircraft at such a low price ....or not at all. Or screening the buyer to the max vs "Great, I unloaded it and now it's not my problem." Even building a plane does not prevent ignorant moves by a too anxious builder to get flyiing let alone the buyer who does not have any interest in at least reviewing the plans, etc. I must admit that today I would have at least stayed near or above the airport at Corona Calif. on my first flight vs heading out 25 miles away. (My rational was that it was out toward the desert away from homes). However, twenty-seven years ago I was obviously younger, a low time pilot and anxious to get airborne. Today, there are many more newbies doing the same and much worse.

If I recall correctlly, Dick Rutan test flew the Vari but most likely the Long in a hazardous severe rear CG position. I expect that was covered in an old CP. The Varieze pilot handbook covers the first flight box with the CG towards the front....for a reason. Of course the Velocity had a deep stall situation and did a splash in the water many years ago. Seriously,since there are so many non-builders involved today maybe someone that has apparently all the info may want to write a book or manual on canard aircraft. Probably, all the info is out there somewhere in the plans, CP's, etc. but a some of new owners are doing without.

And your point is ?

I believe that the lower winglet does decrease the vortice, but possibly at the expense of speed. It seems that the lower winglet would create an air dam and thus higher pressure at the lower side of the swept wing. Yes, I feel that the cruise AOA would be greater without a lower winglet, but since the racers take it off I expect they have found their speed greater. Looks like there is a trade-off ......lower AOA vs cleaner design. There is probably more variables involved, but since I only have one aircraft I can only comment on my situation....and my main desire all along has been to lower my take-off and landing speeds and distances. I have made quite a few changes in my Varieze since built and first flown in 1981 that were not documented very well and I may have a lower top end than years ago. I did modify my original prop back in the 80's per Gary Hertzler that increased my top end about 8 mph, later installed an almost constant speed wood prop (Performance Prop that lowered my top rpm and top speed but increased my static rpm), changed the bottom cowling and inlet, ram air box,etc.....so anyone interested in modifying their aircraft has that choice to experiment. Of course I have looked for extra speed, but with a C-85 I am quite happy to fly at 150 mph cruise and burn 4 gph (without leaning past max EGT) and also a touchdown at below 70 mph.....and turning off the runway at the first intersection at 1800 ft.

Prior to modifying the gear legs on my Varieze, I checked the AOA at cruise. It was 1.5 deg using a small level below the right side longeron. I expect that the AOA may be a bit lower than some other Variezes since I installed LongEz type lower winglets a number of years ago. I believe that the lower winglets provided more lift at the very rear most of the plane and thus a lower angle in flight. My ability to see over the nose at minimum touchdown speed was also much improved. They also greatly stabilized a slow 80 mph final approach.

Borris, If you get CHT probes on all four cylinders with your Continental engine, you may (probably) find that the #4 cyl is running cooler than the others. I have made a few adjustments to bring it up to the others by closing up the clam shells a bit. I think in cruise my CHT's are all within about 25 deg. I think the #4 runs cooler because it is so close to the prop.... If anyone has any other ideas, thoughts or observations they would be appreciated ..... Wayne

I have flown my Varieze since 1981 and from day one thought there was a lot of vibration and noise from the structure. So I added a closed cell foam piece (from a camping pad) to the back of the seat. I thought the large flat seat back acted like a sounding board. Also, I later added 1/4 inch closed cell foam on the floor......plus some light weight carpet. I also had the opportunity many years ago to fly a custom prop that was only 48 inches in diameter but had end plates to provide more thrust directed to the rear. This prop made the plane fly very, very smooth and quiet so the prop is the vibration maker in my experience. The small prop was not suited for the plane since it provided poor acceleration and allowed the rpm to go too high in level flight. It would be interesting to try one that was pitched differently and possibly more suited. The other small planes I have flown eg. older Cessnas and Pipers were noisey too, but hard to judge since no headset was used by me back then. The vibration was similar to the Varieze. Cloudman .......Varieze

I see in the January 2008 CSA Newsletter an article with some info on clam shell baffles. You may want to check out page 27 issue 89.

I will look thru various sources and see what I can find. I did it over ten years ago and know there was some info on the size of openings on each side of the cylinder, but also some seat of the pants experimenting..... Roughly, there is about 2.5 inches opening on the bottom side and 2.0 inches on the top (for up draft cooling). The upper and lower ends of the 'clam shells' turn out and are rounded at an approximate 5/8 inch diameter........think I used a piece of alum tubing to round the sheet metal with. I will get back with you if I find anything. I did have a friend who now lives down in Texas that was giving me some advice since he was a Boeing engineer......and I can check with him. If you have any specific questions, I may have an answer. Also, number four cylinder has always been the coolest, so I know that I was doing some compensating for that by cutting down the opening. And there are two sets for each cylinder over each set of fins. Maybe someone else can jump in with some good info. Good luck !

I replaced my heavy starter on my C-85 with a B and C and immediately noticed how much faster it cranked over than with the old original. I don't have any experience with the other one. No problems with the B and C. And I installed a lighter and smaller AH battery in nose.

Borris, You may want to look into making some additons/changes to the standard Varieze baffles. I would recommend you get some current info on installing 'clam shells' on the cylinders with radius entry and exits for the air. I installed something similar ten or so years ago and my cylinder temps are much closer to being equal than they were before. Also, you will need a four position switch for the cyl temps or you won't be getting any good temperature information.

lyondans, I think you will be pleased with the speed you get with no changes. Your plane should hit 170 mph with no changes. I think that most ez types that made the nose gear cover change didn't find any speed improvement. My 1981 Varieze with a C-85 Cont currently hits 165 mph or better with the current Performance prop. In a hot climate you can't beat updraft cooling. In So.Cal I could idle on the ground forever without overheating ( with good engine baffles ). If I were you I would not make many changes until I knew how it performed. Good flying !!....

Herb Sanders used to sell exhaust systems that were spring attached and outside the prop. I bought mine back in 1980 for my Varieze and have never been interested in going to the exhaust inside the cowling and close to the prop. Even if it is timed right, there is exhaust smoke on the forward side of the prop.

Mods have included wing fences, wing vortilons, wing trailing edge fences, Long Ez lower winglets, airfoil mod to main gear, access panel above instruments, access panel in bottom at main gear, various wheel pants, clam shell engine (cylinder) baffling, downdraft cooling, NACA air inlet, ram air box, and .......... the list could go on.

Big peope need bigger airplanes!!!

I could never find dimensions myself so just made them as large as I figured they would ever need to be........ And since have cut them down three times. I judged the size from Klaus' website picture.