longez360

I concur. ... and structural justification is only part of the requirement. Let's hope the few knots one might see in cruise and the ramp 'wank', excuse me, 'wow' factor are worth the risk of a structurally unjustified, perhaps partically flight tested 'mod' one might choose to emply. Seeking qualified assistance is key.

Lay up 100% per plans. Problem solved.

This is General J D Moore's old aeroplane. Very fast in one of the Kilo trials some years back. I guess we all have opinions about retractable gear, as do Columbia and Cirrus. ;-) Just thought I'd fire a few of the troops up.

Yes, 90 degrees to the hinge line laterally (to get past the opposing skin). Ensure you have a plans gap there too for gap under load. On another note, hinge lines are the reason I reeeeeally dislike the hotwiring process as the final cut. Lag causes binding in hinges. Hotwire oversize, sand to size per the Ronneberg method always gives perfect results. I used an aluminim rectuangular cross section about 5 foot long for the winglets.

Agree 100%. This also accounts for passengers who don't necessarily want to see down.

The advantages of the Roncz outweight the GU, however some accurate flight testing has clearly shown the GU is a slower canard than the 1145MS. That value was measured as 4mph. I work in knots, so about 3.5. The Savier section, will give you about 8-9 knots over a stock GU on a VariEze and about 5-6 knots over a GU Long EZ. If the Savier section gives the same characteristics in rain and out, give me the Savier unit in a heartbeat.

Hi Rowan, I think you're missing a lot of items that will affect your calc. E.g. engine installation area; what engine mount, extrusions, exhaust, accessories, where are you mounting your oil cooler (firewall, cowl, aft - add hose length too), cowls (you making them? or prefab?), prop bolt length (my savier prop needs much longer heavier bolts), baffling changes, alternator size, etc etc etc. Your firewall aft weight that you are going to generate will be highly innaccurate without them. What are your electrical system weights? Using 12V? What's in your panel. Changing canard thickness? That intregues me. Are you planning on going head to head with John Roncz? :-) Cheers Wayne

Without a type cert standard airframe with tooled structure and stabilised infusion and finishing processes, weight is added in a non-uniform fashion throughout the airframe during the build procecess so the tolerances are quite high in terms of final CG location. Accessories are one thing, but even cowlings can have an unanticiapted effect. If you add a 'long nose' and give room ahead of NG31 for the use of a variety of battery types (as small as an Odyssey PC680 and room for two so anything fits including baggage), you should be able to create an aircraft that balances as required. The associated wiring changes (particularly if 12V) should also be considered if you can move the battery(ies) aft which is desirable. So much changes with time. :-) My 360 Long EZ initially met the W&B balance requirements. The engine was 265lbs dry. I use the Wilhelmson retract (was a Wright initially), and an Odyssey PC680 battery (was two initially, lots of wiring gone too) ahead of NG31. My cowls have more than halved in weight. I have replaced my skytec with a B&C. My baffling is now all CFRP (with GRP and silicon as required) - reduction. Props - my lightspeed is way heavier than my hertlzer. Even with these changes, my CofG is acceptable. I recalc after most of the larger mods. If you do a W&B on a spreadsheet, it's a good rule of thumb but difficult to acheive as times change.

"FAR higher than anything else out there" - Come on Marc, stick to facts and data. You don't have that data. . . ""number of batches" is somehow more meaningful?" Yes, batches do matter , particualry to the FAA. So do statistics. Check FAR 25 on statistic based allowables on something like laminate performance... Try 25.613a... That's one we deal with daily. We had to use multiple batches. I wonder what the FAA cert plan would be for a bonded structure on a spaceship...?

I stand corrected on epoxy handling. Indeed Mike and I have been wreckless as have many others to varying degrees. I would caution use of barrier cream, although I will continue to use it - If it finds it's way into your laminate, it is a serious structural defect. I am cautious there. Agree with Marc, barrier cream does not provide protection. It only allows easy removal of what little uncured resin might find it's way onto my hands during a small layup. I would only recommend vinyl gloves. I remember HExcel stating "Use latex at your own risk" as it has marginal protection. I used vinyl gloves on all the large layups, as at 17-20 years of age, mum and dad ensured I did... IT's the small, 95% of the aircraft type layups I tend to only use barrier cream as I seldom get any on my hands. I even recall "This <material> is known to cause birth defects in the state of California". Might have been EZ poxy. I check the MSDS card. As for UV smoothprime, I disagree on the basis that I have used a number of batches, over a number of years, in a variety of different climates without any issue whatsoever. Perhaps the materials were not mixed, applied or cured correctly. That would be my guess. Perhaps the crosslinker was lifed. PErhaps it was the original smoothprime or silvershiled some of these guys used. I think it is incorrect to judge that material on such a small sample space without known quality controls, or heresay. I think Marc, with all due respect, you were one of the unlucky ones.

All, I used polyfiber silvershield and smoothprime with bad results - the material lifted in high humidity once the silvershiled was exposed during the sanding process. It rusted, as expected. I wouldn't paint over rust... Conversely, I used polyfiber 'UV smoothprime' with excellent results, both in Seattle and Melbourne Australia. Two diametrically opposite climates I can assure you. The UV smoothprime was however a skin irritant for me. It produced some pretty itchy chemical burns that occurred 'from the inside out' as my doctor stated. Not good. This occurs on less than 1% of the population, but even the slightest exposure during application, cure or sanding has the effect. Massive exposure is not advisable. Charcoal filters and a full chem suit did work for me, but when I visually checked the cure a week later for all of a minute or two, I got burns on my hands. I would recommend UV smoothprime if it's not an allergin to you. Product support was excellent. Check the MDA card. I have no issues with the paint over the top. I used PPG base and clear, 2004 Audi silver applied at less than 60F ambient in a carport booth from harbour freight and more lights than you can poke a stick at... :-) I have no allergic issues with any resin systems I used. I have used basically all recommended types; Safetpoxy (original and II), EZ poxy, MGS L285, West, Aeropoxy, Araldite K3600 and the list goes on. I never use gloves (I HATE GLOVES), and occasionally use barrier cream over the 16 year project + 18 months for downdraft conversion.

In my aircraft I made my engine mount angles (formerly extrusions) and plates from 4130. Dick's system of 4130 up top and alum plates is fine. I ran all my UNI layups full length.

I class Joe LaCour's Long EZ (N97EZ) as the most striking looking Long EZ I have ever seen. I believe he has sold the aeroplane, but it was the cutting edge Long EZ for it's time. I spent an entire Oshkosh at 17 years of age taking photos of that aeroplane, and I mean, an entire Oshkosh. :-)

I followed Dick Kreidel's 4130 system with my O-360 with the exception of using 4130 all 'round. I believe one guy here in Aus had them machined, but I had them bent to the OD of the engine mount tube. Mine are 1" x 1". Thanks Dick. We've never met, but good to see your name around the traps again. N888EZ is a beauty, I have not seen 26EZ but understand you and your late dad sure know how to build aeroplanes. All, add this guy to your list of people who know their way around EZ's at the Mike Melvill level/category.

Bruce, give the legal beagle a kick in the shins from me ;-) & get some shots of the Berkut. Cheers, Wayne

Thanks for posting. Very nice indeed. Would get pic of the month on avweb.com...

I concur. My experience with the Silver Bullet prop and Gary Hertzler has been nothing short of perfection. I cannot speak highly enough of the performance of the prop itself, or the gentleman himself. I have a lightspeed propeller (Berkut) that I use as a spare. I fly it very occasionally. It has wonderful top end performance but has always been a compromise in bottom end performance. I still love it though. In start contrast to Silver Bullet, Lightpseed product support has always left me completely astonished, even bewildered, but when you address the flaws with their parts yourself (or with the assistance of some fellow avionics/mechanical engineers at Boeing), they really perform very well. I'm not sure Klaus builds props anymore.

There is at least one VariEze that has a shortened Roncz R1145MS canard flying (Nigel Field, I'm told approx 118" span but not certain if that's with/without tips included), and there are a number of Vari-Ezes flying both in the USA and FRance with a modified Roncz known around the traps as the Savier aerofoil, and developed by Klaus Savier. The Savier appears to have a slightly longer chord and there is a small cove lip. In terms of the VEZE, the use of the Roncz should be evaluated with extreme caution and validated via compelling aerodynamic justification prior to flight test. The use of the Savier should be via Klaus's approval only as I understand it. Cove lips on slotted flaps is not something one should test fly without strong aerodynamic justficiation as well... There are incidence changes involved as well per Marc's statements.

What an awful shock, I am deeply saddened. Vickie was a true professional.

Right! Next we'll work on the retracts, then we'll hand you over to the Vans Air Force Forum... ;-)

TMann, With all due respect, Perry is as successful with his rotary as Lynn is with his Evolution EZ because of their attitude to development. It was a careful and considered approach that has not been shared by others. Both are experienced EZ operators - I note you are still building, but you probably have more than "zip" experience behind a steering wheel of a mazda which will go about "zip" far in experience for flying a rotary or an EZ, or a combination thereof. Clearly more people have installed rotaries and removed them than those that have actually been 'succesful'. No arguement there. I wont post the tens of thousands of posts reporting success with a Lycoming or Continental in all manner of ameteur built aircraft.

Personally I think the Long EZ is absolutely the wrong platform for experimental automotive engine development. I say that due to it's high approach and landing speeds, and the fact that the engine is not in view. Some have been 'successful', but very few. Plenty of builders over the years have nominated the rotary as a possibility and there are many on this list that are in the process of developing their installations. I wish them well, because I too am a proud experimenter. However, the difference between a builder and a flyer of a rotary conversion is that one has his/her backside firmly planted in the ground. They have yet to experience the reality; Trust me, when you strap your aeroplane on for the first time, or anytime after, and fly with a person or over a person, you don't wnat to be worried about your engine. Might be worth a chat to Joe Hull who was absoltuely committed to putting a Rotary in his Cozy, flew it, and then pulled it out for an O-360.

Jab 6 - VEZE in Oz - Greg Bakker. Probably a year away from flying. Fun video to watch. This one's going to be a beauty. mcjon77, in my experience pusher or puller config is irrelevant in cooling a flat 4, 6 or 8 jabiru as it is for a 4, 6 or 8cyl lycoming. What is the pressure drop required across the cylinders to cool the specific engine? Besides, don't they all use the same basic cylinder on a jabiru? In many respects, it's easier to cool a pusher because you have likely have diffuser length up your sleeve. There are O-235's that overheat on EZ's with 48sq in of inlet area and "tight baffles". My O-360 meets lycoming spec requirements with 20 sq in total, of which 15 sq in is used for 4 cylinders. It's all about the design IMO. Not criticising those that gave up on the installation, just wouldn't ditch an engine based on a lot of unknowns.

In support of Marc Z, I would urge those contemplating major changes to design to seek guidance from authorities on the subject matter, both structurally and aerodynamically. If not, perhaps reconsider the type of aircraft you are building. I would also urge those who may not necessarily adhere to Marc's professional advice due to personality conflicts to take a step back and understand his intent. You are not just risking your own life here. Please take care out there, gang.

I recall Tony Bingelis article - Sport Aviation Aug 1990 p28? or March 85 Homebuilt Aircraft Interiors, Part 3 - Seat Construction Details? Contact EAA they probably have it in pdf from the Sport Av CD series. Sorry I couldn't find a link.