Lynn Erickson

The purpose of the fuel tank screen is to prevent the fuel line from getting plugged so that screen should be fairly coarse. All certified airplanes have a screen of about 1/8th to 3/16th mesh size. It is basically there to catch the big stuff that would plug the fuel line or valves and such. The strainer and other down stream filters that can be easily cleaned catch the fine stuff.

Terry

most all aircraft have a finger strainers in the tank outlet and are 16 mesh screen. The wire centers are 1/16" apart with about a .055" opening. this is to protect the lines from foreign matter that gets into the tank from refueling.

Hi, everybody

 

I'm looking for a wiring diagram for KX 125. I'm working on the restauration of my long-EZ and my work is stopped because I didn't found the way to wire my KX 125.

 

Many thanks for your help!

 

Overtorque

try Bob at http://www.matronics.com/aeroelectric/ he has a list of pin outs for most models

Did you put the 12" stretch between the canard and main wing or does that include adding to the nose? I was looking at adding 6" between the back seat of the pilot and rear passenger for more leg room and dual controls.

there are no reason for dual rudder pedals in a long ez . the rudders are only used during landing and take off and you can not land one from the back seat. during cruse, turns that can be made safely from the back do not require any rudder to make a coordinated turn.

I was talking about the wheel swivel and fork. How often do the break? Does anyone use the bigger one that I think is for the Cozy Mark IV?

the bigger one is for the 10" dia. tire which is used on the Cozy IV. the Long Ez and cozy 3 use the smaller 8" tire.

I lost aerocanard chapter 3 & 19A, who can sent me that two chapter.

Much obliged

jun:)

I have them in PDF format send me private message with your Email

Bob,

 

I like very much your work and know very well how hard is to build something like that since I've done something similar.

the hardest part for me was to check it for right/left symmetry.

I have built the thing on an automotive frame repairing bench but I found that I could not do better then 1-1,5 millimeter error so at the end I decided to have the whole thing laser scanned and analyse it with a computer software.

How did you solve this problem?

Enzo Ferrari " you no-a can-a see-a both-a sides-a at the same-a time-a"

There are thousands of these planes flying and not one of them has both sides the same

Thanks.

I am looking for Cozy IV's ONLY.

I dont know of any REAL test of the Cozy "rollover- protection" [i.e. crash results]afforded by the plans built turtleback/canopy [TB-1, I believe].

what about the Len johnson accident, where the plane flipped after he had to land on the taxiway

http://www.ky3.com/news/local/33907724.html

 

Hey folks!

 

Iv'e had the plans for the long ez for many years now and my son and I were looking through them and verifying everything is still in tact and looks like we have everything, including the newer canard plans, and a bunch of paperwork for, what appears to be, a better rudder system??

 

Anyhow, I was doing some research here today and it looks like i will need the newsletters however. I used the search function but couldn't find out how I can get them. Is that what the Turf CD is all about? Is there any way I can get just the newsletters to find out about any changes over the years?

 

My plans are dated 1981 so I would imagine it has had a number of changes. I'm guessing I can still build the bulkheads with out them in the meantime, but not really sure. If any of you experienced folks could explain or direct us where to go we would sure appreciate it.

 

Michael

http://www.cozybuilders.org/Canard_Pusher/

This includes all the news letters for all the Rutan canards

Anybody tried an Akrapovic EVOLUTION SLIP-ON partial exhaust system built for Yamaha motors. When tested the temperature of the header tubes exceeded 800ºC and it held up.

 

I know that the exhaust heat from a rotary engine can destroy most mufflers... so I just wanted to know if poeple that fly these installation have though of using a motorcycle exhaust... as they are light and built, as far as racing exhaust are concern, to handle hi exhaust temps...

 

Maybe they can survive to the abuse of a rotary... and maybe not...

ever heard of photoshop. its called advertizing. if they are using a material thats gets that red on the entire pipe they are doing something wrong. it never happens like that. even a F1 engine exhaust does not glow that red unless seen in a dark room. 800c is 1475 degrees F and thats not that hot. again advertizing hipe. the reason they make these claims is that most of the industry uses Type 304 stainless and it will work but not hold up to the same temps. They may be using Type 321. The lycoming will run up to 1550F with out a problem. the aircraft exhaust should be made out of type 321 stainless. it will take 1800 F no problem. the rotary seems to get hotter because there are more power pulses coming out of fewer pipes so the pipe does not get a chance to cool between the pulses. so the pipe runs a bit hotter. should not be a problem for the 321 stainless but if you want a material that can stand up to higher temps you can use 625 Inconel but you may want to be seated when you hear the price. at $235 per foot for 1.75" tubing. 90 degree bends are only $425 each you may want to rethink your choice. that and the labor can make an F1 exhaust system cost as much as a lycoming engine. as far as mufflers go, most do not use them, they are heavy, take up space we don't have, have parts or packing that may come out and hit the prop and we really don't need them. Aircraft engines can seem loud when you stand next to them on the ramp but remember most of the noise is from the prop. on an EZ we have a natural muffler, the prop, it does help break up the exhaust noise. The loudest aircraft are the ones with the CS prop in low pitch for take off.

My friend Mark--also building a LEZ--came up with a nice bellcrank arrangement to take his push-pull cable straight into the Ellison TBI. I think I'll try something similar. His Ellison is mounted on an elbow facing forward. He didn't have room in his cowl to let the cable turn the usual 90 deg angle.

 

In pic 1 you can see the push-pull cable coming from the firewall at the top left corner of the pic. It moves a bellcrank mounted on the aluminum piece which actuates the Ellison slide left and right. Although the bellcrank is moving in an arc, there is very little angular displacement so it works very well. His mixture control works nicely, too

 

In pic 2, you can see the bellcrank a little better. Thanks Mark.

Pull only cables are lawnmower technology on a plane. It relies on the spring to get full throttle or mixture. if the spring breaks or the cable gets stiff and the spring cannot over come the stiffness you are done mowing the lawn on your new farm. if the mixture spring breaks or comes off the mixture will go to idle cut off as you try to lean during cruse. lean to far and it will quit with no way to get it back running. this has already resulted in several people owning farms.

You might be right, I'll have to see how it feels in use. Here's a picture of Steve Velovsek's setup. I haven't asked Steve about it but I suppose he's happy with it.

I know it won't, been there done that. Steve's his linkage contacts the back of the pedal at about the 1/3 up on the pedal, on yours the linkage folds up to the point where it contacts the back of the lever near the top of the pedal. This means you will have to push with about 150 lbs. of force on the pedal to get it stopped. you need 500 psi of fluid pressure to stop. the cylinder is a 5/8" or .3 sq. inches. So to get 500 psi you need to push on the cylinder with about 150 lbs. to get it stopped, thats way to much. So if you have the pedal pushing at the 1/3 point you will require about 50 lbs. of force from you legs.

This is an idea for brakes that I stole (and modified a bit) from Steve Velovsek's beautiful EZ. A very simple and light idea. Thanks Steve.

 

The forward mount (piece of 2024 machined into a U shape) uses two AN3 bolts into the fuselage but has three holes so it can be shifted fore or aft a little if necessary. The forward mount is bolted into a piece of birch plywood with two embedded nutplates, floxed into the side of the nose and glassed with about four layers. I put the remote reservoirs on the side of the NG box. (The brake cylinder is just sitting on top of the fwd mount in the pic).

 

If there is no good place for you to install the forward mount, you might use something like the third picture (found on the web) and mount them on the floor of the nose.

why is the master cylinder link up so high on the pedal? it should be pushing from about 1/3 up from the bottom or there will not be enough leverage to get the required pressure. the one in the third picture is correct. yours with the link in the up position, where is starts to push on the master cylinder is way to high.

thats right edge, you change the dynamics when you lengthen the tub. I thought this through before stretching, and I know I won't be carrying around ballast like a cozy. I just wanted the extra room in the back for luggage!!

the stretch has nothing to do with why a Cozy needs the ballast. in the side by side you are adding ballast when you do not have a copilot in the front seat. if you stretch a cozy the problem of ballast still exists and even worsens . if you stretch a cozy and move the pilot back then you lessen the ballast problem but loose the extra space in the back. in a tandem the front seat always has a pilot so there is no need for the heavy ballast. the copilot is sitting on the C of G. In a stretched tandem the back seat is just longer and the extra 12" does not give enough room for real luggage. in a side by side the 12" stretch and the extra width might give you enough space for small luggage. its still not enough room for luggage for four so it is still a two place with a larger luggage compartment.

just curious about overspeeding a prop, you know, mach at prop tip=!@#$%^

the high pitch prop will limit your RPM until you get up to top speed and then you control the RPM with throttle setting as you would in any plane. with a climb prop you would have to watch your throttle setting a little closer but not hard to do. the last thing you would want is a device that is going to limit your RPM and have that device fail. the less gadgets you have the less that can fail.

Hi Spodman

 

Thanks for your reply, well for now I am just trying to get a nice out line. Something that will please my eyes. After that I will go over it again, to see if everything is right. So please keep comming with all your suggestions and ideas, they are all wellcome.

 

Did some more on the engine cowling and made som more for-arm room.

engine size looks like it is half size unless you are doing a big scale long ez. cylinder bumps need to inline with the prop center line which is above the wing

I am wondering how he is capping his RPM? Rev limiting?

Its call a prop. why would you need a limiter its not like you are going to miss a shift

Another builder asked - on the mail list - for the specific Matco master cylinder model, and the reply was MC-4, but as luck woould have it, the are TWO MC-4 parts - MC-4 and MC-4 .625

 

Does it matter?

 

Also - I've seen photos on builder's sites where they use the Matco lay-down cylinders and have what looks like a glass fluid reservoir - what part number is that? I can't find anything like that in the AS&S site.

 

Thanks!

is this the one? some people have had the clear plastic one crack. I have been using them for 5 years with no problem

http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/lgpages/reservoirs.php

Some of the master cylinder have different bore and stroke. Give Matco a call they will know which one goes on the cozy. I have the Matco triple brake with 1.5" pistons and I use the MC 4 with the longest stroke

Keith, I have a spreadsheet for budgeting a build-up using the Open-EZ plans, can't put my finger on it right now but I think it worked out to about $6K in raw materials from AS&S. There is a guy here on the forum who does CNC hot wire cores that only add about $1-2K total but make a much faster build. All up with engine and avionics is about $30-45K depending on equipment and engine selection.

 

As far as metal tube frame with non-structural aerodynamic skins think all the Mooneys, Glastar and Sportsman, Titan T-51, Bellanca Lightning (fastest piston prop GA plane on the planet at one time), the beautiful Lionheart Staggerwing and a few others - it has been done before.

there is a big misconception with the time saved by buying the cores already cut. the templets take a day to cut out. one day to build the not wire tool and one day to cut out all the cores. so the three days saved cost you a lot. the wings are the easiest and fastest part of the project.

As of Sunday August 30 my forty hours are done. I flew every day for the first two weeks then would occasionally miss a day. I have been up to 10,000 feet and tested up to 235 mph indicated. The 320 gives such a great rate of climb it doesn't take long to get to a safe cruising altitude.

Just for peace of mind I pulled another compression test, changed the oil so that I could open the filter and see what was trapped. All is well and the 320 is healthy. The Electroair Ignition is working well but I kept an impulse mag on the left side. I know it's old school and I make no apologies.

I'm going to fabricate another prop. I REALLY like my first one but it is a climb prop and want a cruise prop. Having a spare may save down time one day. We hope the weather cooperates and see lots of canards at Rough River this year.

Did I mention that the airplane is a blast?

If you got 235MPH I would wonder if that is a climb prop. was that in level flight and what RPM. best way to tell about it is to go to 8500 ft. and see what rpm and average GPS speed you get on a triangle course. there is a lot of data for that situation from all the racing that has been done over the years. you did not tell us if it was worth all the work. I know what he is going to say.

Can anybody here tell me if a motor mount from a Varieze fit a Long EZ ????

No, the Vari eze is 1" narrower

The weight of the frame as shown is 131.86#

 

Thats heavy, a long ez at that stage is 65 lbs and thats with the outside skin. the one that we are currently repairing is only 195 lbs for the complete fuselage with nose, strakes, spar, firewall, seats, inst. panel and outside skin. a steel structure with the same rigidity as a fiberglass box structure is going to be a lot heavier. the only way to make it the same weight is to design every tube to the optimum size and wall thickness. very hard to do in aircraft because the loads change from tension to compression all during the flight and that requires that every tube is up sized so it can carry all types of loading. if the tube was taking only a tension load it would be light. but when you add for things like weldability, vibration, impact loading, flexing, point loading from attachments and shape requirements (curved tubes, space for the occupants and to fit under the outside skin) the upsizing required adds to the weight in a big way. thats why most light steel aircraft use fabric to cover the steel tubes. if you going to cover the tubes with a solid fiber glass skin then you might as well make the whole plane out of the same material and get the benefit of a sandwich structure. good thing for most of us that Burt figured this out 40 years ago.

Thats a very short pilot if his feet are behind the F22. a 6 footer will have his feet about 6" to 8" in front if it. also the toes need to be in front of the pedals during a flight not on the pedals. you need to relax your legs to a straight out position for all but takeoff and landing. if you try to fly with the legs bent and on the pedals your legs won't last more then 15 minutes in that position. And he does not seem to be able to reach the radios. if you think you can lean forward to do that, you can't. and then add some G's and you really can't. thats the problem a lot of engineers have with computer drawings. they design all kinds of contraptions that look good on paper but people can't fit in them.

I notice that Burt only listed two types of pilots. experimental test pilot and production test pilot. He knows that when flying any homebuilt aircraft you are always one of the two types of test pilot on every flight. There are no plain pilots flying homebuilt aircraft. No just a passengers either. Passengers are never just along for the ride. they are always part of the test. Burt never kept any of his aircraft flying beyond the test program. when he tested and decided there was no more to learn he stopped all flying of that model and moved on to the next one.

Its OK Steve I got it. the aircraft that called out in the position report was N211PJ which is the number of the velo with the diesel and they called it a C210. there is a c210 that is N210JP so it is most likely a miss understood radio call.

don't worry Steve, they will catch up some day

I know this has been covered before, but i cant find the post or remember what was said.

 

My question is finding the right size foam. Wicks, and Aircraft spruce carry the right foam but nothing is the .8mm or .2 mm long ez plans call for.

Do you go with the next larger size and somehow plane it down.

Ive been studing the plans for a while now before i start building.

 

thanks in advance for any help

 

Lynn

thats some very thin foam you are looking for. I don't think that is the size called for in the plans. if you mean .8 inch use 3/4" and if you mean .2 inch use 1/4" . they are very close in size and will work fine. you do not need to sand them down.