AP3_C

Tony, Sorry for quoting the obvious, but thought I would try and get the ball rolling. F/I pro's No carb heat No Carb iceing. less baffeling (???) Depending on F/I unit, self leaning (less controls) Carb pro's No power required to run (redundant system, all elecs could fail but still have fuel and spark as long as ignition is mechanical). Simple (means cheap) Easy to re-build Tony this is just an outside looking in point of view as I am still in the planning to build stage but sometimes being totally new to an area can help. I have to stop with the cliche' stuff. Jamie

On the news last night (in the land of OZ) there was an article on weather research being carried out in Darwin, Northern Territory and they quote "using specialist weather sensing equipment". Low and behold on came a picture of Proteus taxing in from a sortie. Just thought might be of interest for those Canard spotters out there. www.bom.gov.au/bmrc/wefor/research/twpice/twpice_exec_summary.htm Jamie

My 2 cents worth, At least with .DXF (or what ever autocad type file) those that want to modify the aircraft are easily able to. With .PDF the drawings are not so easily changed then printed. The idea of being able to supply the end product in multiple formats would be ideal (more work obviously, but ideal). Jamie

Tony Point taken. Jamie

Tony, I went to get bulk heads plotted (have access to A1 inkjet plotter) and was suggested the following. a). each individual bulk head be saved as one drawing in paper space (believe drawing has been done in model space). Rather than having multiple pics of the one bulk head in the one drawing. Thus reducing the size paper requied to print on (A1 rather than A0). b)if not already, have text and bulk heads on different layers. Myself I don't really follow what this is all about as I am a self certified AutoCAD numpty. so do not fully understand what the suggestion is all about. Only suggestions. Great work by the way.

I cannot find an answer to Jon's question though. Jamie

I have the West System Epoxy R105 data sheet attached has all the good guts info. Attached also is the specific engineering data. Jamie westsystems data.pdf westsystems eng data.pdf

Reading through the Long Eze plans there are references to three types of Epoxy Fast/Slow and 5min. My question pertains to the fast and slow hardeners. With the reading I have done over various posts there is a lot of references to people using a 50/50 mix of fast and slow hardener(correct me please if I have misunderstood). Do you use this mix for the entire construction and have one epoxy pump or do you have two pumps one with fast hardener and one with slow? Or have I missed the point entirly and found myself in some other gelatinus goo? Jamie

Just wondering if anyone in the Long Eze community has had anything to do with West Systems Epoxy? Like other countires, here in Australia we also attract the Hazardous goods cost. I do believe there is an MGS distributor here in Australia but I know for a fact I can get hold of West Systems epoxy. Opinions??? Jamie

It's amazing what can be done. I had the oppertunity to get an up close and personal look at the Global Hawk UAV. The construction really looks like something that homebuilt aircraft builders and model aircraft builders have been doing for years, just on a bigger scale. Obviously this statement is an over simplification of it and the technology involved in the composite construction of the airframe is way beyond what could be achieved in the garage on the average joe's income. But all the same you take a walk around it and you start to notice little things that you would have done/do yourself in the construction of a full size or model aircraft. Jamie

Re:- Wing section Correct me if I am wrong but hasn't the wing section for the Long-Eze been slightly modified from the basic aerofoil? I cannot remember but it is I believe a slightly modified Eppler or NACA foil. Because the foil is modified (?) you may find it very difficult to obtain the co-ordinates to plot the foil. Keep up the great work. Jamie

Just wondering if any of the Australian Canard builders could make some suggestions on where to buy things like Epoxy, Fibreglass, foam and various other building materials in Australia or do you have to order them in from USA? Jamie.

Jon, Was/is that the "King Cozy"? Seen a couple of pics on a web site, that thing is big. A short bugger like me would get lost in something like that. Jamie

Forgot to mention, I grew up on a farm. The shed is never big enough. Due to council restrictions I was unable to build it any bigger 54 square metres was as large as I could go. So 20'x30' (6mx9m) was it. I have to say the garage was not built specifically to build aeroplanes in. I have an interest in wood work as well and hence have some wood working equipment that takes up a bit of space. Once again thanks for the suggestions. Jamie

Thanks for the suggestions, I had power point at 1st 2nd and 3rd positions in the list of things to have. I know when my wife and I built our house we went silly getting power point put in and sometimes I don't think we still have enough. Anyway I have a couple of photos, one is without the roller doors put on. I know some mods are going to have to be done to the front regarding acess. Hind sight is a wonderful thing. I really should have just had one roller door at least 12ft wide but instead I have two standard car garage roller doors. Oh well. The second photo is my quality control inspector doing her bit. (the cat) Jamie

I cannot talk from any experiance hot wiring homebuilt aircraft foam cores but I have made quite a number of r/c aircraft cores. Principles all the same. For templates we just used plywood but ran a bead of cynoacrolate type glue (instant glue, super glue) along the edge which gave a very hard and when given a light sand became very smooth. The hot wire also ran quite well across it. Jamie

Hi, I have just finished building a 20X30 ft shed. Just after suggestions on what sort of fit outs eg cupboard/bench locations and a like people have found useful during aricraft construction. I know this is a pretty vague and open question but just looking at ideas and what other feel is perhaps essential or not required or would be nice type items. Jamie

You could look at the re-tract system from Shirley Dicky's E-Racer. Only prob is it will take up rear space. Like you I'm no engineer, no idea if it is possible, also unsure if still available. Jamie

I agree, setting foot in an aircraft that has zero redundancy is asking for trouble. The aircraft I work on for a living has a full EFIS system with dual redundancy for the EFIS itself, being screens and symbol generators with reversionary capability (Airliner type EFIS system, pilot able to use co-pilot data and vice versa). Attached to this is two EGI's (GPS/INU's) as an attitude source reference along with a clunky old vertical gyro as a triple redundancy. With all of those sources of info you are given all attitude and speed info. BUT, sitting pride of place underneath is a $200 2"(roughly) artificial horizon along with pilot and co-pilot altitude, airspeed and vertical speed gauges from the pitot/static system. Hey what could go wrong? Well we have had a case where the entire EFIS system went down short final, zip, nadda, nothing, BLANK SCREENS!!!!! All that I can say is if the big guys are required to have redundancy built into their systems, just on the remote chance there might be (will be) a failure. I think that is good enough reason for me to do the same. I understand that not all people intend on flying IFR, but even back to the basic instruments just flying VFR, some redundancy is better than none. An interesting topic is mean time between failures as advertised by manufactures. A lot of, I am not saying all, give the figures based on tests run on the bench, perfect enviroment, no changes in temp, pressure or vibrations and a like. Now add all of the above and the figure might be totally different. An example I have personally seen was an item being trialed in an aircraft. The item had a 10,000 hr mean time between failure, it lasted 4hrs before it had to be changed. Surfice to say it was not used. That is an extream case but food for thought. Myself when I get to the point of fitting instruments I am looking at an EFIS system but I will also have the basics in gyro/pitot/static instruments as well. Jamie

Oh well, I guess it is possible to use the copy of plans I have if I want. If what has been said about the RAF agreement is the go. I think I am still going to go for the Cozy IV, suits my purposes better. I really have no way of telling how accurate the copy of plans I have are (I am guessing they are fairly inacurate due to quality, not good) dpaton, Best of luck with the Long-Eze, I hope you get your plans soon. myself I think I am a ways off purchasing plans so at the moment I am just dreaming about it and looking at all the web sites I can about people fufilling what I would like to one day.

If you are after Long-Eze plans, suggest you get in contact with Canard finder. Just do a search for canard finder on the net and it will come up with a possible e-mail address and name. I am being a little vague as I don't want to post personal name and email address of the person in question. I myself was in the same situation as yourself. Always keen on the Long-eze, but I have basically decided to go for the Cozy IV as I like the idea of side by side seating (keep wife happier and get her involved in navigation) I don't like the idea of trying to handle all the maps and other stuff us flying types seem to accumulate in the cockpit of the aircraft on my own. I like the idea of having the extra space for carrying stuff in general and having two side sticks means pilot in control flys with left hand and has right hand free to write with (good for me being right handed). Best of luck with your search. P.S If you build using Photocopies of the plans/templates it violates the licencing agreement. Also when it comes to issurance you may find you require a licence/plans number.(I could be wrong) Be careful there are a few people selling photocopies of plans and claiming them as originals. I got burnt on that one. Bought a set of plans that were claimed to be original but turned out to be copies. For my own safety, others and out of respect of the designer the plans are only held as reference material only. Never to be built from. Jamie

Just wondering if many people have fitted HF radios to their composite aircraft. I figure that there must be some considering some of the long distant flights/records that are attempted in various canards. Just don't seem to hear very much about it. With the aircraft I work on (military) they are not allowed to fly any great distance over water unless they have at least one HF. Due to the power output of the HF radio are there concerns of fitting the antennas in the skin of wings and a like. I know in the publications I work to there are all sorts of associated warnings and cautions pertaining to safety distances due to the power of the radio. All of these distances would put the occupant of any canard well inside the danger area and I am sure would give a warm fuzzy feeling over time (not good). This is only a quey just out of interest sake and I am not looking at fitting one to an aircraft, purely curiosity. AP3_C

Thanks to everyone for the input, you all have given me plenty to think about. At this stage I think the Cozy IV is looking like the way I would like to go. David Orr would be happy about that, he spent ages trying to talk me out of the Long-Eze because I would regret not having more space. Thanks for the Advice David. Being an Australian I would like to seriously look into using the 5.1ltr Jabiru engine. Have to support local industries. Issues being the length of the engine, it's just under 1m long (969mm I think) at least it is lighter than equivilant Lycoming. Anyway this is all getting ahead of myself, I am still building my shed or should I say hanger at the moment. I need to be really, REALLY good and maybe I might get some Cozy plans for Christmas. To give a little info on my backgound: I am 28 years old. Spent some time trying to get a commercial job flying. Ended up flying PA-30 twin Comanche's for a little while. Joined the Royal Australian Airforce and have been working on the Avionics systems of the AP3-C Lockheed Orion (military version of the old Lockheed Electra) for the last six years. Bit of a change, I fix aeroplanes rather than fly them. There is one story I have to tell though. I was on a night flight in country Victoria Australia, when my passenger asked me how I was able to tell where I was going at night. I tried giving an explination of VOR, ADF, VFR navigation and GPS to all this I got this vague look of not understanding so in the end I reverted to something someone else had told me once. "You see that little red light out there to the left and the little blue one out to the right. Well if I stay between those two lights I know where I am going". To this the passenger was happy and we continued on with a smooth flight. Unfortunatly the art of ZEN navigation is a bit harder in an aeroplane (to follow someone who looks as though they know where they are going). I think I will stop gas bagging now, not a lot to do at 0030hrs just got back from work. Jamie

The old telephone book theory. Hey I guess it works. During my flight training many moons ago I was flying a Cherokee 140 and I had a 5" thick foam cushion I carried with me every where. Has anyone played with the idea of an adjustable seat back or false seat back that can be taken out to suit? I assume the seat back is an integral part of the fuse structure so why not fit the seat back in standard position but mount a false back that is fixed to original seat back and not the fuse sides. Perhaps false back can be made in two halves so as the short pilot being myself could take someone that is considerably taller for a flight with out being cooped up. The space behind the seat could be used as storage for long narrow items or a custom made tool roll/kit. Darn the Experimental Bug Jamie

Thanks for the replies, has given me some info to think about. From the suggestions being put out there it is really looking like the Cozy IV may be the way to go. Regarding the Cozy III, as I live in Australia there has not been to many of them up for sale, so buying one from the states and shipping it here would not be very cost effective. There are not that many Cozy IV's about either. But at least there are some flying. I do like the E-racer but the level of support is just not there and I belive there are none registered in Australia (I could be wrong). I see a lot of questions being asked about pilots that are big be it tall or heavy set fitting into Canard aircraft. But what about the other way. Myself I am a bit of a short bugger. 160cm tall (5ft 2", I think?). Jamie