Lynn Erickson

I love the look. I have seen many long ez's with different noses and variations on the standard canopy and they all seem to fly the same. it does seem that the angle of the seat back in your plane will be a lot more laid back then the original long ez. in my plane the seat back was set at 45 degrees and during construction I changed it to a more up right angle of 37 degrees. at 45 degrees it was found that you would have to use the head rest to hold your up or your neck will get very tired. having your head supported by the head rest during the entire flight is not comfortable. it does limit your visibility a lot. to see over the side of the plane requires you to lift your head and after awhile your neck will get tired.

I have an hyd. nose gear system in my plane designed by Shril Dickey. the components weight about 5 lbs. the cylinder is from a Cessna 210 gear door. the biggest problem is that you can not drop the nose for parking and my system will not lift the weight of the nose even it was actuated separately. a cylinder that would lift the nose will weigh well over ten lbs.. My plane does not park nose down so this is not a problem for me but would be for a Cozy IV. the lift system that can lift the nose with pilot and copilot is worth the weight. put the pump in the nose a cozy IV needs the ballast there anyway. the main retracts may get you 10 MPH on top end but the weight penalty is high and will take away from usefull load. not the best trade off since you will loose more in gas milage during climb the you will make up for in cruse. the retract gear makes no difference in milage during a 170 Kts. cruse. we have tested this during many flights. my plane with full retracts against a stock cozy IV with the same engine and same prop and we use the exact same amount of fuel on every trip.

what they meant was remove the old non impulse magneto and remove the gear and install it on the new pickupyou can not use the impulse coupling with the electroair. you need a solid gear ( non impulse mag gear ). the impulse coupling is for starting the engine with the mag. You can run a mag with an impulse but you do not need it with the EI as it will fire at the right timing for engine start. the engine will start better on the EI then the mag. so many run a non impulse mag and the EI system.

I used all carbon on my forward hinge canopy frame and have never seen any change in the fit from temperature

if it is a cozy IV with a 3 inch wider fuselage then it is the same as an aero canard. the infinity gear will fit in an aero canard if you compress the strut before retracting the gear

yes , my wings are that way . the trailing edge is straight

One my long eze plans the trailing edge is straight in the fore and aft direction but bends up 1 inch on the inboard section of foam block. the bend makes it look as if it bends forward. on the plans for the long eze, cozy, cozy IV there is the upward bend on the trailing edge. on the berkut, E racer and aero canard they took the trailing edge bend out.

you will realize one of the advantages of power coating by the time you have finished the engine install and the mount looks like it needs a new paint job due to all the assembly related scrapes and scratches. the amount of oil is only about 1/2 CC per tube just enough to coat the inside. linsead oil is one type used because it will creep over the surface and coat the inside evenly

He's not, he is just trying to keep a positive spin on things. he has not been waiting long enough, he's still in that positive vibe. "if you pay for it. it will come. " lets hope that all the negative vibe out there does not prevail as it has so many times in the past.

In my 35 years of building and repairing aircraft engine mounts the only crack that I found that did not show up in the surface coating was one that had been painted with aircraft poly urethane solvent based paint. I believe this is one of those old wives tales that says power coating sticks so good it won't shows cracks, I believe it is the opposite, as you have stated the stuff does not adhere as well solvent based paint and this is why it will crack or flake off at a point of stress and show a crack or bend even before some other coatings. 35 years ago this was a topic of discussion in A&P school with the instructor who also had little or no experience with the stuff on engines mounts to back up his statement. back then we may have been taking a chance by using the stuff. thats why the call it experimental aircraft . but after using it successfully for all these years I believe this experiment is over and is a success.

safety is the highest concern here, first where did the mount come from, was it used on a flying airplane or just stored for many years. if on a flying airplane , how many hours? you have a mount that was welded up with holes to releave pressure build up during welding and then they are used to inject a corrosion preventative oil. I have seen mounts welded using other methods but this is the FAA approve method. mounts that are welded up not using this method may work but for how long. how long will it be before the tube corrode from the inside out and ruin some ones day. if it has screws in the holes, why are the screws there? is there linseed oil in the tubes, if so then leave them there it is an acceptable way to plug the holes ,not the best way but it does work. oil in the tubes does help in the life span of the mount and if there is no corrosion inside the tube then there will not be a stress crack that is started by corrosion. the same applies to the outside of the tubes , some type of coating is needed to prevent corrosion. solvent based paint or non solvent based paint both do the job and either one will try to hide a crack but in every case I have found a crack it showed up with a crack in the paint. the best at hiding the crack is the new type aircraft paint. as it has a very high surface strength and stretches a lot before it cracks. paint like epoxy or power paint are brittle and will show cracks from bending or stress even before there is a crack.

The screws are there to try and keep the linseed oil inside the mount tubing but is not a good way to do it. the screws have been the cause of cracks starting at the holes due to stress risers made by the thread cutting action of the screws. the tubes should have the linseed oil put in and then the holes are welded up. a properly made mount should come from the builder with this procedure already done. if the mount is made with this procedure a light bead blast and powder coat is OK. if the mount was to crack the linseed oil will leak out and expose the crack better then any visual inspection will no matter what type of corrosion coating is used. repair to a cracked mount can be performed on a mount with linseed inside the tubes by re-drilling the holes and flushing the inside of the tube with a solvent and drying before welding. but before the cracked tube is repaired by welding there needs to be a complete inspection of the tube to determine the internal condition and wall thickness. many times it is better to replace the tube then repair it. simply welding up the crack is not acceptable and can be dangerous. I have been seeing more and more of the Brock long and vari eze mounts that have cracked. many of them did not get the proper corrosion treatment inside the tubes and the ones with screws are cracking at the screw holes.

Sky tec or B&C starter are both good - have seen skytec break from backfire never seen broken B&C. which ever brand, you need geared starter for O-540. don't buy until you know the starter ring gear tooth size 149 0r 122 tooth count.60 amp is plenty, many brands out there but B&C is very good but expensive but they always work out of the box . mags are usually slick, they are lighter less money and smaller ( fit between motor and firewall better ) remember if you use an O-540 you need a 6 cylinder mag. Airflow is very good but so is bendix, they work the same but if the engine if sooped up air flow per. can build to suit. for a stock engine there is no advantage to either one EI does give big advantage in performance and fuel flow over mags. starts easier and runs smoother. which ever brand of EI I would not use the mag hole sensor. the crank trigger type have been proven to be more dependable and there are no after market parts turning inside your engine this way. if a bearing goes out you could trash the whole engine. I had bearing go out in 150 hours and the second one was only 50 hours on brand new improved model sensor unit. switched to crank trigger and no more problems in 500 hours. all electric is OK. two aternators not really needed if there are two batteries. two batteries are better for starting . and will last for hours on the new electronic instruments. depends on type of flying. if no IFR one alternator is OK

check with a local alternator repair shop and tell them it is for your race car.

thanks for the article. that cleared up some of the mud about the power plant all I got from the web site was a mental picture when they explained the name meant "Sickle". So the thing will lift off with only 240 hp complete with one person and batteries. It must be that I only have 200 hp and and only one prop that I can't go straight up with only one person on board. maybe I need two props. and they will hold the record on building a prototype if the make Farnborough , its in july

Interesting design. it seems to me that the person that did the rendering also has developed a new concept for a powerless tilt rotor. I don't see where they left enough space for a power plant or two. maybe they are planing to using some of those new green engines that run on one of the new green fuels that only put out green vapors.

Stainless is one of the best choices. the best would be inconel or titanium. the stainless used in most aircraft is Type 321 or 347 an alloy that contains titanium. steel can be used and can be chromed as they do on hot rods. steel pipes will corrode from the inside out from the acid coming out the exhaust. still they could last 20 years. the pipes can be coated with ceramics that will look good for a long time but it is expensive and makes repair to the pipes very difficult. I use the 321 stainless on the pipes I build. the price of stainless has almost doubled in the last year making experimenting with stainless very expensive.

First of all it if it is a pusher you will get a dirty prop. three blades collect more dirt then 2 blades. exhaust outlet position can help some. you can position a 2 blade in one of three positions. a blade at 10 o clock at TDC is the best for exhaust dirt. a three blade can be only moved 180 degrees relative to the #1 cylinder on a 4 cylinder Lycoming. depending on the exhaust outlet positions there may be a slight difference in one of the two positions due to the fact that some of the standard eze exhaust have one pipe on top of the other and this does change the position relative to the Prop when the cylinder fires. with a 4 into 1 there is no difference in amount of dirt in either one of the two positions. the way the prop is drilled can make a difference, most all 2 blade props are drilled so that there is one hole that lines up with the blade and most 3 blade props have two holes that line up with a blade. this means that there is 30 degree difference in blade position between a 2 blade and a three blade at TDC. the engine model can make a difference some engines have a single lug line up with TDC and some have two lugs at TDC. as for a 6 cylinder well there is no hope for the 2 or three blade prop, there is a best position on both of them but there is little difference between positions. Outlet diameter is probably not as big as you would like to see. most of you guys think the bigger the better when speaking of exhaust systems ( that statement may apply to other subjects as well ) but the 4 into 1 outlet size for a IO 360 is 2.25" on a IO 540 with a 6 into 1 it is 3.25" and a IO540 with two 3 into ones is 1.75" as for stainless steel looking good, well they do until just after first engine start and they turn a dull brown color that just gets nastier with time

it needs to angle aft at the top if you don't the bottom corners will prevent it from opening. it also looks better with the angle

mine is a triangle cross section between the f 28 ,the top skin and the bottom of the F28. there is a foam wedge that is 1" smaller then the f28 and a glass to glass layup with the f28 on the bottom edge 1" wide running the full length of the f28 and tying into the fuselage sides. the skin has a flox edge on this layup of 6 plys. the hinge brackets are of glass and overlap onto the wedge layups

Need model number of engine, type fuel injection, type of starter, don't believe the 209 hp unless You can say why it would have that much. and why the 150 hrs? what was it on and when? why removed? overhauled by who? and when? the prop model? size? how many blades? where did it get the 75 hrs. and when was it new? the alum not that good for cozy. heavy. model of governor and mounted on front or back of engine?

Thats a bit low, I think, the prat with a prop is 250 to 300k used, the kit will go for 200k plus the 30K for the gear, the avionics are a 100K and up without the 25k for the auto pilot. even the tires will be 2K each. I'll bid 1.5 mil and be getting a good deal. this is not going to be a one man build kit. it will take a crew and i'll bet some of them might want to get payed for their time. and then they made it big enough that it won't fit in a tee hanger. so with hanger fuel and maintenance, operating cost will be only $2500 an hour. just a bit higher than a cozy or velo at $250 an hour. Oh did I forget the pilot training costs. but a very cool design and a way better idea then straping a rocket on the velo airframe and calling that fast and exciting.

the gross weight of an experimental is what ever you the designer/ builder says it is. the vari ez design can handle way more weight then the original plans state. this has been proven over along period of time by many builders. Bill's Vari ez had a O-290 D and was changed to a O-320 about 15 years ago. flies with two heavy adults and baggage pods and has been across the country many times and to mexico several times fully loaded. there are two others that I have flown in besides Bills. they are all very good on performance and milage too.

this old dog uses both old and new tricks. the difference is he is old enough to know when to use which trick so he can produce safe and lasting composite structures. I'm sure your layups are fine, it the stuff that is between your laups that is the concern. just make sure if you are going to use this new high tech release stuff with the 50 year old low tech composite technique us old dogs taught you that you use the proper high tech removal stuff, as it has been proven that the old dog technique of using sand paper even in the hands of a young guy does not work on this new high tech stuff.

the next layer of glass, filler, primer or paint will know the difference and sanding does not remove the stuff it just spreads it around. anyone that has done the micro filling of a moldless surface will understand why making the surface perfect and smooth under the fill is a waste of time and money. unless the surface is so perfect that it does not need any filler and can be primed and painted it will need a layer of micro fill over the entire surface to make it true anyway. if they are introducing flaws in the surface through a poorly finished final layup. the the mylar would be a cover up of the flaws and not good practice. why use a practice that has been known to cause problems. this is a big problem with molded parts where the mold has been waxed or silcone has been used. it is common practice for molded parts where gel coat is used, or the molded surface is the final finish, but when the part is to be filled, primed or painted other types of release agents should be used. PVA is one that will not effect adhesion of other products as it is water soluble and easy to remove.