Jump to content

King Racer

Members
  • Posts

    15
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by King Racer

  1. Astounding! I can't imagine what it would be like to enter the atmosphere or fly at those speeds. The Space Shuttle is truly a marvel of engineering. Is the four knots indicated speed a function of the atmospheric density? If NASA ever plans to take the average guy off the street, in the Shuttle, put my name on the top of the list; I have no problem sitting in the cargo bay area:D
  2. Thanks for the information Wayne. I realize the Space Shuttle reenters earth's atmosphere as a glider, and, therefore, requires more/better weather information when landing. I, also, realize airlines provide one of the safest means of transportation, but I would imagine, in the future, and possibly now, better information (i.e., sensors around the perimeters of the runways/airports etc. -anemometers, doppler radar?? etc.) would be relaid to onboard computers that would enable pilots to make better decisions (on marginal days) on final (or before) whether to land or not. I am sure people on this website know more about this topic than I do.
  3. Yes, under predetermined, chosen conditions with (possibly) cream of the crop test pilots. I believe the Lufthansa pilot (Airbus A320) in Hamburg Germany made a difficult call: He was given the option to use the other runway according to this website: http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2008/03/06/222034/crew-of-wing-strike-lufthansa-a320-was-offered-different.html And according to this website: http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iYG8SUnUOR9NfNAI-ZFekXsmN5GwD8V8I3UO3 "The maximum crosswind considered safe for landing the Airbus A320 — the plane flown by Lufthansa in the incident in Germany — is 33 knots (38 mph) gusting to 38 knots (almost 44 mph), according to an Airbus spokeswoman." "On March 1, the day of the abortive landing at Hamburg Airport, the average wind speed was 16 mph, with maximum sustained winds of 36 mph and top gusts of 56 mph, according to Weather Underground. The speed and exact direction of the wind at the moment when the landing was attempted is not known." Nevertheless, I believe (and I am, certainly, no expert on this), the Lufthansa pilot did get into a situation that crossed the line between safe and unsafe, but he wouldn't have known until a few seconds before the wing tip hit??? He did an excellent job flying everyone out of a bad situation. For my own curiosity: Wayne, I was wondering what is the maximum crosswind component that the NASA Space Shuttle could land in? Marc, I was wondering what the maximum crosswind component that SpaceshipOne ( and Two) could land in? Thanks, Tom
  4. Probably everyone has watched this (and others) video clip before: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2498234148335857479
  5. Another good reference is Dick Rutan's and Mike Melvill's around the world in 80 nights in two Long-EZs: http://www.dickrutan.com/page4.html . It goes without saying, they are way out of my league, and I wouldn't attempt the same route, but I admire their courage/skill etc ... If you are attempting the same/similar route (especially in single engine aircraft over open ocean), a second plane (or more) would add some safety in numbers. If the worst case scenario occurred and you ditched, contacting/directing shipping traffic, identifying last known location etc ... could be dealt with by the other aircraft(s) expeditiously. Good Luck, Tom
  6. I forgot to add that Long-EZ N3R carried a BRS in it, but I am not sure what type research went into its installation: http://www.atdd.noaa.gov/Research_Page_Additions/BATWEB/batweb.htm Tom
  7. If you can get a hold of the January 2000 issue of EAA'S monthly membership magazine (Sport Aviation), you will find Dave Lind's article entitled: "Flying to Hawaii". Dave flew his Long EZ from Carlsbad, California to Kona, Hawaii and back. It's an excellent article. My aspiration is also to circumnavigate the globe in my King Racer. Over the years I have read about many different composite canard type aircraft ditching, including the highly preventable, John Denver, tragedy. An example where a pilot must maintain control of the aircraft first (priority) and everything else becomes second priority. Based on all the ditchings I have read, John would have probably survived and would have drifted, if he maintained a controlled ditching. I've read about a few canards that submerged to the top longerons, but they never went to the bottom even with the front nose ripped off (foam cone and nose wheel) after the nose wheel came into contact with the water. The pilot had some lacerations to his legs. He was picked up by some boats. I read about a Velocity, which was incorrectly loaded with an extra fuel tank (if I recall correctly) going into a flat spin off the coast of Florida. The plane, amazingly, wasn't damaged when it ended up in the drink, and drifted to shore. If you're looking for a second plane, I plan to make the trip, in possibly 5 years (realistically 8 yrs - when I retire at 55). I live in B.C., Canada and plan to fly up through Alaska and the Bering Strait. I was scouting out a route this summer in my Cessna 150. I made a solo flight to the Arctic Ocean (3600 miles, 27 airports and 50 hrs of flying). I have been in contact with some Russian pilots, also, about fuel, etc. http://www.reaa.ru/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.pl?board=english_talk . I also have a pilot friend in Fairbanks Alaska who I have been in contact with, in regards to my plans. Tom
  8. 78 yards as per plans. I am using approx. 0.025" thick (when dry) UNI tape and Aeropoxy. I heard others have achieved better layup results with other epoxy (MGS) ??
  9. My E-Racer construction manual (Chapter 12) calls for 5 mm red PVC foam for top and bottom surface of the strakes and 0.25" Klegecell or PVC foam for the baffles. Would 0.25" divinycell (3 lbs/cuft ? or 6 lbs/cuft ? or 15.6 lbs/cuft ? - density is not specified in plans) be the correct material/density to use for the E-Racer strakes? Thanks
  10. Has anyone not been able to use all the spar cap plies (as per the the layup schedules in the plans), without overfilling the spar caps, when building the E-Racer wings and/or center spar? Is it critical to use all plies. Does overfilling the center spar (spar caps) by 1/16" to 1/8" have any aerodynamic repercussions or is it just an issue of having to use micro fill where the strakes and wings mate? The E-Racer is designed for +9g and -6g maneuvers, well beyond my flying requirements. Thanks
  11. Hi Mick, Glad to help! You may have already done it, but if you haven't, you should request (from Dave) a set of drawings/blue prints (he sent me 10 "E" size sheets) that show how the Berkut retract linkages are installed etc. The Berkut installation is different than the E-Racer's installation, but the drawings will enable you to improvise. I believe the "A" Arm and "H" Arm linkages used by Berkut are identical in functional dimension (i.e., regarding main hydraulic cylinder size/travel) to Shirl's, but the front and rear Berkut trunions are very different (i.e., than the E-Racer landing gear attach brackets that Shirl show's in the E-Racer plans (pg. 10-13 in the version of the plans that I purchased from Shirl - ER #352). You will have to modify/remove foam/fiberglass (add new layers etc.) where the trunions will be installed. Your rudder cable conduit installations may or may not be a problem with the location of the rear trunion/hydraulic cylinder; mine was because after I installed the rudder conduit I found out I had to add an additional 1/2" to the length of the fuselage (i.e., in the back where the rudder cable conduits ends) to make up for the new curve in the King Racers fuselage. If you use the Berkut trunions you will also find that the location of the E-Racer stringers may not be exactly correct because of the trunion's dimensions. I purchased my trunions before finalizing the installation of the stringers (chapter 7). If you already installed yours, you should be able to make additions/changes to your stringers or possibly build Shirl's gear attach brackets instead, but ,I believe, Berkut's trunions are more robust - talk to Dave to determine if his are necessary. I haven't finished my gear/strake installation, so I am not sure if I will have any problems with the fuel sump location etc. I hope this helps. Tom
  12. I purchased my retractable gear from a Berkut builder who advertised them on www.ez.org (I am not sure if the website still allows advertising) a few years ago. I purchased my linkages and main hydraulic cylinders from Berkut Engineering a little over a year ago. Berkut Engineering may still have some parts that you will require. George Graham (who passed away recently) used fixed gear on his E-Racer (see www. rotaryaviation.com - E-Racer for sale http://www.rotaryaviation.com/for_sale.htm ). Shirl was apposed to using retractable landing gear, such as the Infinity Gear, because the spar was not designed to take the loads. You will find Shirl's thoughts regarding the Infinity gear in the old archives (http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.eracer.org)
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information