Lynn Erickson

Ok,

 

I need some advice and/or admonishment here.

 

I just looked up on my builders log to see how many layers of spar cap tape I used on my canard to reply to a thread and discovered that the last time I worked on my plane was Feb. 8th, 2008. I am ashamed and shocked on how fast time flies.

 

My biggest reason for the delay is I need Matco brakes to finish my landing gear hoop in chapter 9, and a nose lift assembly to continue my work in chapter 13. Otherwise I am completed thru chapter 14, (the spar has been done since the end of '07).

 

I have been at a lack of funds to buy the brakes and lift, and don't see any extra spending money in the near future with this economy, so I am asking for a bit of advice on what you all think I could/should be doing in the interim to continue. I can figure it out myself, but would like any ideas from others that may have been down this road.

 

I have all the other materials to finish the nose, and I have made up most all of the bulkhead pieces but w/out at least a template for Jack's lift, I don't feel comfortable attatching the NG-30's and continuing with the nose. The brakes on the hoop can wait for a while, I know.

 

So, what say y'all. Do I start making a bunch of jigs for the wings and turttleback, or what?

 

Give me the kick I am looking for so I can stop procrastinating and get back to building.

 

Thanks,

 

Kraig

The nose lift is made replace the stock nose gear so if you continue the build of the NG 30s the nose lift will still fit. you could contact Jack and ask for the templets. you don't need the brakes to finish the main gear, all you need are the axles, if you bolt on and align the axles, the brakes just a bolt on the axles. do a little every day even if it is only 5 minutes and you will get finished. Like TMann said pick up a piece of sand paper. sand for 5 minutes, thats 5 minutes less sanding you will have to do to finish.

True. And the process of removing the cross stitch further distorts the fibers, even if you hold down the UND to stabilize it as the plans state.

 

When I did my spar cap, I let the UND hang several inches over the edge on both ends. This allowed me to give each bundle of UND a little tug, first from one end, then the other. Looking at the spar cap while doing this, it was evident how much this tension was straightening the fibers. I did this a few times throughout the squeegeeing process for each layer of UND. For the pieces that were shorter than the full span, the technique had to be modified a little, but is was still possible to pull on the strands to straighten them.

 

Joe Polenek

the best way to pull out the cross strands is to cut the strand in the middle and then pull the outboard end out from each end. this will pull the strands in the same way you are squeegeeing and will not catch and drag the fiber the wrong way

I'll be flying out of Chicago Executive KPWK. I got a old T hanger there. I hooked up with a great guy out of clow who gave me some flight tips in his Longeze before I came to get my Vareize. He keeps his Longeze at Lewis Airport. I'm heading back to KPWK tomorrow from West Memphis, KAWM. This is my only shot to get back or I'll be stuck in Memphis for a week due to weather. The Varieze is no C172..lol. She flys great and very responsive. My Varieze was built in 1992 by Frank Bibee and has a 100HP continental with one magnito and electronic ignition. She has a few cosmetic issues but I'm going to fix her up real good by repainting the interior and buy new seats. Her baggage pods look real sexy to. Anyone know where I can get some new seats for the Varieze and what kind of paint folks are using to get the splatter look? The Varieze has duel stick and throttle too with IFR instruments. I think the Garmin GX55 GPS is outdated so Im not sure if I going to keep it.

 

Dan

Congrats on your new bird

The speckled paint is called Zolatone http://www.zolatoneaim.com/palette.php can be had from Aircraftspruce or Wicks

if you want very good seats go to http://www.oregonaero.com/p33-2001.htm

Well! maybe but I don't see any other cowlings that aren't symmetrical. So no I don't think that was it, if it was, that seems a bit silly to me. It's off in places that have nothing to do with the engine. Funny thing is I have a set of LongEz cowls that had the same problem. Also I have a set of 540 cowls that don't have those discrepencys (way more symmetrical). The 360 cowls didn't realy line up the way they where supposed to at all. so I don't think it was done that way on purpose. Besides they look alot better symmetrical. I talked with a few LongEz guys who did the same thing I did. The whole thing was just out of whack. It was kinda like someone held a heat gun to the left side and it just kinda wilted. The bottom was worse than the top. I got them just about perfect now

 

Tony

that wilting as you call it is caused by the manufacturer. if the cowing is pulled from the mold to soon the resin is still in a green state and can warp or sag. the tops of the cylinder is where is seems to show up the most. also many of the molds that where made are polyester boat resin and it keeps shrinking with time.

i think the company did not change hands, just same people developing UAV platforms, this is not substantiated though.

Dave is building his designs for the people with the money. the government.

because every one in homebuilding wants it for cheap, and he could not make a living on every one wanting to be his friend and trying to get a deal.

Would it be utopic to think that we can get the specs (layup schedule) of the molded parts? with this info and a mold, one could make those molded parts, and a companie could build those mold a sell the parts to the poeple interested in an open-berkut...

I think this comes under the category of YES you can build anything given enough time and money. you know how to make a small fortune in aviation, right , start with a very large one.

So, just so I understand this. If one has the berkut plans AND the long-ez/Open-ez plans, one can build a Berkut? If so, that would be EXTREMELY COOL!

not really, the main part of the berkut that makes it a berkut is the fuselage and it was made in a mold. the berkut plans are used to assemble a plane that is made up from molded parts that are no longer being made. the long ez is made from raw materials.

I feel kinda silly asking this, but to build the wings, do I go through all of Chapter 19 twice? I've read through it a few times and didn't see any place where it said to stop and go back and build the left wing.

 

Are there no differences between the two, other than being a mirror image? I guess that's good. I guess I just reverse the order of the jigs and go - is that it? I'm terrible at turning things around in my head, I guess...

yes that is correct you do need a left and a right wing. funny as it may seem there have been people that hot wired two wings for the same side. I build mine at the same time. it saved time on set up for each step but you do need two sets of jigs. and two tables.

That is what I thought...thanks for the reply. Looks like I'll be building a canard...

 

Chris

why? there is nothing wrong with a GU canard. some have a slight pitch change in rain, most do not have enough to be of a concern. all but a few long ez's fly with a GU. any time someone has showed me a Gu that had a big pitch change in rain it was a very badly finished canard. Burt told people not to use to much filler on the plane so as not had weight. but some took it to far and did not even fill enough to make the contour correct and if you do that on a GU canard you will have trouble. contour them correctly and they fly fine.

Hi there!

 

First post there

 

I need to fit again my propeller and the extension: Does anyone know what is the torque for the extension and for the wood propeller?

 

My Bird is a long ez with O235.

 

Many thanks for help

 

Billlez

the prop torque is dependent on the type of prop and is set by the manufacture as for the extension go to

http://www.sabermfg.com/faq.htm

Back to building: I cut the openings in the front of the center spar last night, and did some prep work for the final 2-uni layup (and yes, I bought a gallon of EX poxy with the 87 hardener). I tried to use a Dremel sanding drum to cut down the foam along the edges of the holes to make the glass-to-glass mating, but cut through the inside fiberglass. I had just gotten started, so I stopped and decided to ask for some advise before I make a mess.

 

One thought is to just go ahead and put on the glass cloth, let it cure, and then make flox "corners" between the glass layers. Seems to me that since it looks like things are going to go in and out of these holes a lot over the plane's life that the edges of the holes will take a beating.

 

Or I could stick to the plans and maybe use an X-acto knife to trim away the foam, and then gently sand down to the bare glass.

 

How did y'all do this w/o taking 3 days?

sounds like you are talking about the cut edge of the holes in the spar. most do nothing the foam will get painted with the glass and be fine if you want to you can sand out a little of the foam and fill with micro. no need to cover the edge with glass

I've flown with Dave several times in this LEZ. I'm occasionally that GIB. Seeing that Dave hasn't bother to wake up this morning , here's want I know of the issues.

 

- It is definitely full forward trim. He can trim all the way forward and it's just not enough. His inquiries to the previous owners revealed that it has always been that way. We have discussed shortening the existing springs to add more tension. Before doing this Dave ordered in a spare set of springs. That way if the original 20 year old springs break, then the new ones can go on without waiting for them to be ordered.

 

-W&B. I know DaveB & his lame (A&P) maintain the plane to a very high level. Anytime something needs done, Dave has no problem spending the time & money to do it right. So Dave will have a current W&B and he does do the pre-flight calcs regularly.

 

-Buffeting. Hmm. Dave, is that new? I don't recall that from our conversations.

 

sorry for stepping on you Dave, but thought I would help stop some of the speculations.

He should just install the Alex Strong electric pitch trim system and get rid of the stock springs. its a very good system simple and easy to install

http://www.strongpitchtrim.com/

DaveB,

 

how does this differ from the feeling when you are 2 up in the plane ... is it still the same on the trim?

 

What is your calculated CofG position when you are experiencing this required forward stick force?

 

How does it feel when you come in to land, do you have sufficient up trim?

Solo and dual?

 

cvh

 

PS, I have experienced same and got a massive speed increase by forcing the stick forward (stick forces = quite tiring).... after altering the battery position in my Cozy I have not been able to replicate the speed! 200,454 Kt to 179 Kt ...

This is true when you fly with the CG at the rear end of the envelope the top speed is higher. its do to the less lift needed from the canard. when I have raced it that way it was faster but very tiring as the plane is very twitchy in pitch.

Nice, what's the blue tube, a breathalyzer?

engine shut off. your copilot pulls on it and it drains the tank into the cockpit and the engine shuts off. this is where keep it simple/stupid becomes stupid simple. As you can tell I just don't like a clear plastic tube holding fuel in the cockpit. yes it works but how safe is it in a crash. I had a friend who survived the crash but not the fire.

I'll fly what I build. I'm not asking anyone else to take that risk.

 

I'll be using landing gear that has been flown and has been in production for many years.

I'm using a rotary system that has been used in the RV world ..... for many years.

 

WOW, I just realized ..... the only difference between my plane and yours is the rotary.

 

Untested prototype ........ TRULY untested landing gear.

 

We're like two peas in a pod!

not quite, the gear you have, I was a test pilot on and they still need a lot of work. still not proven to be very good. the gear I have had been tested for many flight hours on several Berkuts and Eracers before I flew mine and has been proven to be a very good landing gear system. as for the rotary, I'm thankful every day I fly that I do not have to flight test a Rotary engine on every flight.

...... or just go to www.Mistral-Engines.com

 

What needs to happen is this:

Build it.

Fly it ......... then ask who would be interested.

 

It's aviation. No utested prototypes please.

Ya, do as TMann says, and do as he is doing. build an untested prototype of the long eze with untested landing gear and powered by an untested rotary engine. would you fly it ? he will?

Come now, I'm sure Marc has thicker skin then that. Besides, I'm just calling it how I see it. If you find that rude, so be it, your now officially the really thin skin of Marc.

 

Look, I'll be the 2nd to say that Marc seems like (and likely is) a very knowledgeable person. It's just that I asked one thing and got a load of something else.

The load of something you got is good sound advice. that is what you asked for isn't it.

Yes ..... you did.

 

 

At roughtly 32-33 inches off the ground, it's a kid hazard.

Thats true, but I think you will find that Kids are more of a hazard to the the plane then the plane is to them. airplanes are not kid proof, heck they can't even make them adult proof. if we are concerned about things at 32 " off the ground then in addition to the pitot tube you will need to make the canard tips, the vortilons, the rudders, the ailerons, the elevators, the prop tips, the spinner all have a quick disconnect for easy removal. better yet just rope off the plane and keep all kids, big and little away from it, because they will break something. oh Ya there is a need for some type of cowling detection device. one that can detect things such as toys and empty coke cans that these kids will leave for you to find during pre flight

Well done, you might add a micro switch to indicate that you are not retracted or unlocked before takeoff.

Nice work.

...Chrissi

or maybe a video camera connected to a computer that actuates a hammer that takes a swing at the pilot if he forgets to look at the picture to detemine it is not in place for takeoff. did I miss something here? why in hell do you need it to be retractable. mine is mounted in the nose and I use it as a handle to move the plane on the ground. If it is to keep someone from running into it. well if you run into mine you will remember to stay clear of it the next time or you will be going back to the emergency room again.

Pull-pull is two cables, could be wires, where you basically have twin connections on opposite sides of the pivot axis on both the throttle and at the carb or fuel injection servo. It would not require springs to keep tension on a bike cable type installation. I have not seen one on an aircraft, but it is very common on post 80s motorcycles to use twin throttle cables, one to pull the throttle open and one to pull it closed. It would be a trivial exercise to modify the Brock throttle to be pull-pull, and the carb or fuel injection servo could be the same.

thats what is used on the stock landing brake actuator. it is two pull pull cables around a sheave

The intersection points on the NG30s I radiused and raised the NG30 height by 2 inches. On the Cozy there's an old newsletter that Nat suggests adding an extra 2 layers of BID for strength for possible wheel shimmy. ...just some thoughts. Here's a couple crummy photos.

where you need the extra plys is on the sides at the front gear leg attach point. there is a lot of side to side flex in that area I would add a couple of plys that tie in the floor and bulkhead to the NG 30. I noticed a lot of flex and latter added 3 plys of heavy carbon bid. it helped a lot but there is still a little flex.

Any opinions on a good shock mount for my dynafocal mount and an O320.

 

Anyone use the Lord brand mounts? if so do you know which model or part#?

 

Thanks

these are the ones I have used in the past. heavy duty are for aerobatics but are cheaper but the work fine. the same thing from Lord is about $650 for the set.

http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/eppages/dynosandwich.php

It may beat the Infinity to the US market.

Just the fact that there is a picture of it being worked on gives it a 100% better chance

Hi guys

 

The wings are fine but outdated, they have some kind of slat that they used to do on the first VEs to reduce landing speed, so I should remove them and put vortilons.

 

Thank you all very much in advance.

I’ll appreciate all your inputs so much.

Luis

I would get some help from an experienced VE builder, read thur the plans and the mandatory changes in the CP's . the Central states is a good source for ideas on mods but remember the stuff is not been approved by anyone and many of it is just a way for someone to reinvent the wheel. as for the wing cuffs they are not out of date and will work just fine. the vortilons was just another way to do it and don't work any better. if they are to plans I would leave them on. they are also stronger and will not get knocked off by people leaning on them at air shows.

My next project is to put a rear throttle in my Long Ez. I know people have done this before so rather than re inventing the wheel does any one have photos or drawings I could upload.

 

Wildbird

If you have a really good reason to do so thats fine. most people that have put them in never find a reason to use them. But if you must, it is really simple if you use push pull type in both front and rear positions. just run both cables to the lever on the butterfly and when one moves they both move. I don't consider the old Brock controls a safe way to control a throttle so we won't go there.