tonyslongez

Mike Some of the progress is a bit slow as this is just for fun . I have a day job that keeps me pretty busy. I try to complete drawings as I have time. I try not to let it interfere with my building of the Long Ez. Some of these drawings that I did in 3D will really clarify what the plans say. It'll be nice to be able to post them up when Jon gets the site setup. It's gonna be great. Glad you liked the drawings so far. Tony

I talke to them at oshkosh last year, its a pretty thirsty little engine. and really exspensive. Cool though I'll givem that.

Mike yeah pretty cool indeed, something the canard family has needed for a while. Jon Matcho is heading up the organization of the drawings. I send him modified Long Ez drawings as I finish them. I don't know to much about the Cozy so I haven't had to modify those drawings. Since I can download the originals from the cozy site I can modify them in CAD with no problem. Tony

Dave No apology needed buddy, I know what you meant. We are all family here. Its hard to see the tonque in cheek when making the type of post I made earlier. I too have done my homework on this engine. I made what I thought where good sound judgements on the rotory's reliability. (back to this original thread resale value). I'm a machinist, I machined titanium 6al-4v studs for my motor. I'm using a dry sump, it's N/A with Tracy's redrive and Em2 Ec2. I'm as cautious as the next guy about this motor. We should be running as well in about 6-8 weeks. The test stand is complete and ready for the engine to be bolted on. Dave I'm certainly not one of those people. If the person I'm talking to wishes to discuss further the possibilities of the rotory in flight, I can give them more than enough information to chew on and certainly throw in the "it's not easy, the engine is simple, but certainly not easy" that is always one of my disclaimers. There is alot of work involved and I commend everyone trying it. We are looking at the birth of a new power plant, something we in the homebuilt world have needed for a long time now. Are we going to have failures? sure, I'll bet Lycoming wasn't so reliable when they first started either. good luck with your project I'm sure I'll see you at Oshkosh at some point. Tony

Mike Yeah I knew that I'm not sure about everyone else. We are focusing on 1. Long Ez stock and modified drawings 2. Cozy MKIV modified drawings 3. Berkut if possible the idea is to make scale drawings of the most popular mods being done to these 3 versions and maybe come up with a whole new bird. Tony

Dave You'll have to forgive my last post I forgot to mention that, I do infact have alot of the tools you described above and then some. Not all of which I used to rebuild my engine. As far as the impact was concerned I simply went down the street to a trany shop and gave the guy 10 bucks to take off the large nut in the back . Borrowed a nice torque wrench from my neighbor and used a rather rudamentory set of metric sockets hardly anything fancy and nothing to write home about. And yes 3 moving parts over simplyfied? Hardly, unless I missed something when I rebuilt my motor I only saw three, we'll call them Major parts. Two rotors and an E-shaft 1, 2, 3, yup that equalls three allright. Now lets make sure we are all talking the same lanquage here no redrive and a non stock intake manifold and non turbo sure you can add more moving parts but the core of the engine has 3. VERY SIMPPPPPPLLLLLLEEE. I'm not arguing here I'm sticking up for the rotary engine how can anyone say that is "injustice" are you kidding me ? some of these morons I've talked to! you have to break it down literally to the lowest common denominator forget thermodynamic cycles and all that other stuff. Some of these guys can barely see past the damn propeller. Yes 3 moving parts thats how I describe it to someone who knows nothing about a rotary engine, that gets the wheels turning. Then, they start looking into it themselves then the industry thrives. I'm not going to apologize for anything. You guys want to pick my posts apart have at it. I have an airplane to build and not alot of time to play semantics.

Jon Kens site looks great. Is that what you have in mind as far as a web site? Just have the different types of drawings for Long Ez, Cozy and maybe the Berkut if we can get it? I think that will be great. No rush steady as she goes Tony

LOOK OUT I GOT RHINO A friend of mine just gave me his Rhino program wait till you see this stuff !Holy cow, it does everything. I can barely contain myself Don't worry Jon I'm pretty sure your viewer will be able to see these drawings. Tony

david Sounds like good idea. The only thing is you might want to make sure the minwax poly doesn't put off to much odor when the canopy is down on a hot summer day (it'll give you a heck of a headache) it also tends to get ummm like a little tacky if it gets to warm. It's not a sort of industrial grade Poly. Home use you know is a little more susceptible to that kinda thing. Tony

Jon you really think that is a big leap? I agree we have to look at the failure possibilities of peripherals, but things are really comming around now. We are making leaps of progress in reliability and performance. As far as I can tell, the rotary is spinning the rotors, maybe not in a perfect circle but certainly not stop and start. I believe it sits right in between a piston engine and a turbine. It's as close as we're going to get to a turbine without beeing a turbine. Unfortunately it produces heat like a turbine as well but not quite as thirsty. That's just how I see it. Tony

Marc The bandying that is usually thrown about is generally directed toward LYCOMING, not other four cylinder water cooled CAR engines. Although, the fact still remains: 3 MOVING PARTS. I don't care how you slice it- 3 will be more reliable than 40+ and if you can't see that look at the rotary's big brother: it's called a turbine. Maybe you've heard of those. I don't see 40+ moving parts on them either, do you? And we would all like to have the level of reliability of a turbine, right? Alot of guys that are crying about the rotary are just pissed because they just realized they could've purchased a more reliable power source with less money and a longer TBO. Stick with your Lycoming, or Subaru, or whatever you have. That's your choice. In the end, I rebuild my motor with a 15$ set of sockets and a torque wrench. Try doing that with a piston engine. good luck!!! Tony

I would just like to add, I'm also using a rotary. (13b new turbo housings) I would like to bring up one very important fact here that I rarely read about in forums. It's pretty obvious and I'm not trying to insult anyone's intelligence The rotary has 3 moving parts. Lycoming, 52 for a standard 4 banger. A friend of mine was over the house tonight looking at the Long Ez with the engine mocked up on the back of it. He owned a cessna and brought up a very good point. Let's say you buy a brand new engine from Lycoming (which he did) and now you expect this thing to go to its TBO, right? Well O.K. sure. They do that, but do you know how much maintenance is involved nursing that engine to its 2000hr TBO? Jugs, magnetos, rocker arms, push tubes: the list is endless. He spent almost half the money in maintenance it cost to buy the engine new. I really don't think in the end it's going to hurt an airplane's resale. If anything, as people become more aware of the rotary engine your resale is going to go up. I'll bet anything you want on that. Who needs an A&P mechanic when you only have 3 moving parts? Gets rid of alot of guess work. lycomings slogan should read "Lycoming trying to come apart 2500 times a minute" Tony

Jon I was just suggesting that maybe we could have the viewer put on the site or where ever, so that anyone that needed it could simply grab it with the files Jon are your gear bulkheads modeled after the Long Ez? if so I have the 3D almost done of that if you want it. I'll send it anyway even if it isn't I think this is what you are looking for of course, I'm not real familiar with that airplane. (ooohhhh the shame) Tony

Jon My buddy is sending me a viewer we can supply here, so when these files are downloaded you can simply download the viewer file as well, This will make things alot easier. I should have it this week I'll send it to you, then we can add it to the drawings. I have the landing gear detail almost complete it is in 2D and 3D man I wish I had this stuff when I was building

Mike I believe Jon Matcho is working on a folder so you can download these files right from this site. As soon as I finish the rest of these drawings you'll be able to download them here. Maybe we can have a all formats, PDF,DXF,DWG, Etc. Etc......and all you would have to do is download which ever file/format you wanted this may eliminate forcing everyone into a cad viewer. I don't know I'll let Jon field that one. Tony

Ap3_c I'm glad you like the drawings. What we are trying to accomplish is a more friendly medium to view and print these drawings. I'm trying to get the point out that these can be built without printing them to full scale thats why you see all the dimensions something we didn't have in the originals but if they have to be printed in full scale (Accurate full scale) we need something better than PDF. I printed the DXF files at Kinkos and it was great. but apparently not every Kinkos is so well equiped. So! at this point, all I can do is finish these last drawings and let someone smarter than me figure out how everyone can use them. As far as layering goes I agree that would make things easier for me and you but for everyone else it has no merit they can barely view them now, forget about seperating layers. I'll bet when it's all said and done these drawings will be in some format that will not recognize the layers anyway. Tony

AVIIX Don't take this the wrong way, go back and read tha other 4 pages of posts on this thread and get caught up on the progress. What you are suggesting is basically what we have been talking about for the last 3 weeks Tony

Jon Just wanted to let you know you are doing a heck of a job coordinating all of this, it seemed a bit discouraging at first but it looks like it's coming together. I'll try to do a better job at keeping track of what I've drawn and what still needs to be drawn. I'll go over that 3D bulkhead and put in the stock dims. Your right, I'm initially drawing these for me and my airplane. I'll just send you the stock stuff first. I can modify the drawing after that, should help keep track of all the drawings. Tony

Jon Did you get that front seat Blkhed I sent you? I'm working on the rear now other than those two and the landing gear detail we will be pretty much done with the fuselage bulkheads(do we even need to draw those aren't they in the TERF cd's?) . What we really need scanned are the wing and winglet templates. If we know what airfoil the wing and winglet are I can have my buddy send it to me in digital format,eliminating any errors in drawing them by hand can you find that out? what else needs to be drawn? what about the wing strake baffles? are they in the TERF cd as well? is the TERF cd just the plans set copied into digital format? if so the only thing I really have to draw is the landing gear detail, (if I can get the naca foil for our wings and winglet). and some miscellaneous things that are on the sides of the original templates, showing longeron details and radius of the lower fuse nothing major though. Oh yes and I can make my ng30 detail into an original nose (YUUUUKKK) should I put that in 3D? sure would look cool the only thing is to really appreciate all that work you really have to have a CAD based program it really helps. this is the delemma I'm doing some really time consuming drawings that not everyone is going to be able to see really suxs Tony

Jon also, sorry! but I think I deleted your E-mail can you give to me again? The front seat blk-hed is done one side is 3D the other is 2D for ease of reading the dimensions. I'll send it right away still working on the rear seat bulkhead that one is a little trickier in cad because of the "HELL HOLE" Tony

Jon just wanted to clarify that the last post wasn't me. Tonyslongez, and I apologize for not sending the bulkheads to you yet, they are almost done just a liittttllllleeee moooorrrreeeeee LUV YA Tony

Jon sounds good. I'm off tomorrow and have class in the morning once that is taken care of I'll see if I can't have those to you by tomorrow. Tony

Jon I think I may have only drawn the modofied f-28. I haven't finished the gear attach bulkheads yet I'm trying to finish those now. Bear with me I'm a little busy I'm trying to make time to finish these and still get 4 hrs of sleep a night. did you get the firewall drawings? Tony

Dave and Jon I'll be sendng the 3D's here shortly I'll finish then up tonight. This is alot of fun. very challenging. I'm just trying to figure out some thru holes that won't get shaded over. If anyone has any ideas please speak up I'm kinda hunting and pecking here. this is a new one for me. Jon I sent the Firewall drawing to Avery on the Ez.org site do you have those? and yes all I did was draw the firewall 2"in wider, 1"in on either side of the center line obviously . Tony

Jon Which one don't you have that has the original and the modified version? I'm guessing by your post you have one or the other of the two is that correct? I may have not grabbed that one from the file sorry about that I'll be sending you the 3D models here shortly hang on to your socks Dave if you are still out there can you view 3D drawings? if so give me your E-mail and I'll send them to you as well, just to look them over. Then we can make them public for the group. Tony