Firefly-YCTTSFM

One issue with canards is that you can never reach maximum lift coefficient (CLmax) of the wing. One result of this is a a faster touchdown speed. Flaps/slats are not possible because of the risk of stalling the wing before the canard. How could a greater CLmax be reached for takeoff/landing? Please note: this topic is THEORETICAL ONLY. I am not suggesting modifying the aerodynamics of a canard aircraft in any way without thorough stability and control analysis and *extensive* wind-tunnel / flight testing, all of which performed by someone smarter and braver than me...

Exactly, which is why I am *not* recommending changing the pitch of the canard. The canard has to stall before the wing, no discussion or arguments necessary. You raise a good point about having enough downward pitch available. I wonder what the minimum lift generated by the canard is?

Lift is a function of wing area and angle of attack (... and dynamic pressure, etc), so you could just reduce the angle of attack of the canard by pitching the stick / trimming. I wouldn't think changing the structure or the fixed pitch angle of the canard would be necessary. Changes to takeoff trim would have to be determined, but if we're talking a few inches on a 8? foot moment arm, without crunching numbers I don't see it causing a big impact (<-- Well, that's a bad phrase to use). Of course there's the dynamic modes to think about. I'll have to dig out some stability & control books.

I'm actually trying to get a net CG change of zero relative to the wing. The idea is that the shift forward will counteract the heavier powerplant. Moving the canard forward will increase the moment arm of the canard lift force, producing greater pitch moments. If the CG is the same relative to the wing, the wing moment remains the same. I'm not sure what you're driving at.

Very interesting. I'd be nervous at first about the load transfer from putting so much in the nose, but it's apparently working well for you. At the moment I'm still more comfortable with the thought of stretching the bathtub, as it would seem to be structurally simpler. Need to get the TERF CD and look at actual lengths & weights.

I've got a BS/MS in aerospace engineering.... but then immediately went into software. For those playing along at home: the CG is the fulcrum you're trying to balance the aircraft on. The AC is the point where a surface's lift is centered on, generally about the 25% aft of the leading edge. The smaller lift force of the canard/tail is balanced against the large wing lift by the canard having a longer moment arm. This is another reason why I thought an extension might be good, to increase the moment arm of the canard. I shouldn't have said "6 inches", as I haven't calculated any weights & moment arms yet.

I'm considering using a rotary engine in my OpenEZ project. Like O-320/360's, this is a heavier powerplant than the aircraft was originally designed for & shifts the CG noticeably aft. I've seen references to people putting ballast in the nose to achieve better CG ranges. What do you think about extending the fuselage by 6"? Option 1: Leave a gap between the backseat & firewall. Scoot the pilot, GIB, nose gear, canard, etc forward, leaving the strakes & wing attachments in the same place. Option 2: Leave the GIB seat in place, just increase the separation between him & his instrument panel (wasn't expecting anybody flying from the back seat anyway). Or is it just better to put some ballast into the nose? Thanks, Firefly

Oh, yeah: I'm in. Still need to find a plot of land, build a house & garage, convince my boss to let me telecommute a few days a week, and cleanup/sell my existing house... but I fully intend to commute via EZ before I'm 40 (2016). (Wonder what gas'll cost by then? ) Still a year or so before I do any work, set up the shop, or even order any supplies, but the bug has officially bitten me. Many thanks to all who are blazing a trail for me and others to folllow, hope to see you in the air before too long. If you need me, I'll be lurking...

After a little more internet research I think I'll start poking around airports. I've been very impressed by the homebuilt community so far, a lot of experienced people willing to offer advice/critiques/ideas. I suspect when the time comes the hard part will be staying in the shop and trying things rather than running to the PC every time I question myself. At the moment I'm thinking of a pretty standard EZ, but I'll look into the Mazda 13B or O-320 as the building years go by... electric start... maybe a low-end EFIS... and equipped for night VFR. Where was I? Ah, right... research. See ya in the forum.

Very nice of you to offer, I might take you up on that some time. At the moment, though, I don't know whether I need to hangar-fly a LongEZ, see how one gets built, or a have a long talk with the wife and accountant of flyer/builder . As in so many things, so far I don't even know enough to ask the right questions! Here's the obvious one: how many hours did it take you?

I was able to create http://www.canardzone.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3615, but now can't post replies to it. Am I still pending also? Or did I just set an all-time record for getting kicked off of a forum? Thanks.

As a primarily Cessna pilot (who works on F-15 simulators) I've often wondered about the sidestick configuration: Isn't it a pain to jot down information (ATIS, waypoints, etc) while flying with the right hand? Do you eventually learn to right lefty (or learn to decipher your chicken scratches)?