Jump to content

coyote

Members
  • Posts

    13
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by coyote

  1. I don't know if some of you have already heard about this new homebuilt canard aircraft, but i haven't found any thread about it, and as i find it absolutely fantastic, i want to share !

     

    Here are some links about it :

    http://tagazous.free.fr/affichage2.php?img=15453

     

    http://lfai.blogspot.com/2009/02/f-psck-chudzik-cc-02.html

     

     

    The designer/builder is not new in canard aircraft design, he already produced CC-01, which was a very weird design

    http://www.1000aircraftphotos.com/Contributions/VanTilborg/7775.htm

  2. Hi guys,

    just a quick message to share with you a little winter trip to French central mountains.

    http://tagazous.free.fr/affichage2.php?img=14121

    http://tagazous.free.fr/affichage2.php?img=14124

     

    We have a good internet site dedicated to general aviation where you can see lot of French/european canards pictures

    Long Ez http://tagazous.free.fr/affichage.php?appareil=Rutan+Long+EZ

     

    VariEze http://tagazous.free.fr/affichage.php?appareil=Rutan+VariEze

     

    Cosy http://tagazous.free.fr/affichage.php?appareil=Rutan+Cozy

     

    ERacer http://tagazous.free.fr/affichage.php?appareil=E-Racer+Mk1

     

    Enjoy the visit

    post-13022-141090166278_thumb.jpg

    post-13022-141090166284_thumb.jpg

  3. Coyote, thanks for the description of your install, and the great photos; just an observation, is it possible that your install may be experiencing a pressure lock ? If the engine vent line and the oil return line are connected to the same place, wouldn’t the pressure venting from the crank case keep the recovered / separated oil from returning to the engine?

     

    Exactly, i forgot to tell that the picture is the config "2" that do not work...

    Basically, all lines are connected to the crankcase, so the pressure should be roughly the same wherever you connect it ... but in reality the pressure pumps up at each ignition due to leaks, so it is interesting to have the oil return line at a different location versus breather line. Also it is preferred to have it the lowest, thus gravity helps oil to return.

     

     

    From my experience, here is some basic rules to have in mind to lower oil consumption by breather port:

     

    - Reduce air flow : a good condition of cylinders/piston/rings will reduce air leaks that need to be rejected threw the breather

     

    - Lower oil content in air : the lower oil content is at separator inlet, the lower the oil content will be at separator outlet ...

    the breather port location is important; also here gravity helps, in most of case original location is on top of crankcase. In case of continental with no starter, it looks like top of starter cover plate works also quite good.

     

    - internal design of separator : it is a combination of

    * centrifugal load : inlet enters tangential to the wall to have oil coalescing on separator walls

    * air velocity change : when air enters separator, it slows down, then reaccelerate to go out. Oil having a higher density than air, they separate. the higher internal volume, the better the separator will work.

    * gravity : outlet is normaltime on top and shifted from the wall

     

    - the oil separated need to escape the separator fast and easily

     

    - in case of continental

    * the aerobatic type breather assy helps reduce oil in air

    * the vacuum pump gear needs to be removed from camshaft to avoid agitating oil close to breather; adding an oil return line between vacuum pump and sump to avoid the cavity to remain full of oil close to breather location.

  4. I installed the same oil/air separator from spruce. It took me a while and few iterations to find a working config ...

     

    1) to make the separator piping simple, i plugged the normal engine breather outlet, and located the new breather on the mag cover plate (the one supplied by LSE to close the mag hole when installing an EI)

    The oil return line was connected to 1/8 gallon tank

    ==> due to gears, this place is very oily, the oil return line was filling the 1/8 gallon tank in 1/2h flight, after this the oil separator fills up and is no more efficient.

     

    2) i changed for an elongated breather tube and added the oil return line on the same mag cover

    ==> the oil was not returned to the tank, the separator fills up with oil and after 1/4h-1/2h the rejected air is very oily

     

    3) i put back the original engine breather and connected it to the separator

    It works far better, separator do not fill up, oil rejected is lower.

    ==> the original breather location is a good one !!!

     

    4) in progress ... i change the oil return connection to engine, i have rebuilt a new mag plate cover without breather but just oil return with reduced ID

     

    Remark : on the bottom of the accessories case of O-200, there is a threaded hole for oil return ... i may use this one in a further test

  5. I have been flying a 0-200 equipped Long-Eze since November 2004. The 0-200 is turning a Great American prop 56/68. Static rpm is 2400 and max rpm is 2750.

    Happy to see that there is some Long flying with small engine is the country of low fuel price (Even at 4 bucks a gallons, the fule in USA is 2 times cheaper than in any european country...).

    My prop is 58/67, static is 2300 and max rpm is 2900

     

    Fuel system is configured like the Vari-Eze - no fuel pump and fuel selector valve is located forward of the firewall at the lowest point. Fuel flow check as required by the plans is more that required. I have had no fuel system problems - do I recommend this fuel system to others, NO.

    Do you mean you have a third tank like the vari ?

    Do you have the sump blisters or not ?

     

    I know my EZ is not the fastest in the sky but it is fun and economical. Getting about 28-30 miles per gallon on 100LL (do not and will not use auto fuel) and still can blow the doors off a lot of that production stuff.

    I often patrol fly with a friend of mine who has a vari, we have very similar parameters. I burn 4.5 gal/hour of 100LL at 125kt.
  6. My prop is diameter 1.47m / pitch 1.70m / 2 blades.

    Economical cruise is 125 Kt / 21" / 2400 rpm

    Fast cruise is 135kt / 24" / 2600 rpm

    Full power is 145kt / 2800 rpm

  7. I have an almost unique Long-Ez with O-200. This config may look like crazy for some of you ... but it works pretty fine and by the time it allows cheap flying.

    The bigger advantage is to have a light plane ... but i'd like to have it lighter !

     

    I have a big doubt about the need for the mechanical fuel pump (it weights around 2 Lbs including the additional pipework). I also have an electrical pump (facet 40108) on the firewall.

    Did any of you tried to remove this mechanical pump ? Is there any risk if i keep the electrical one ?

  8. Sorry to stop the dream and come back to a LongEz issue.

    When my speed increases upper than 150 kts, my canard trim is full forward, and i still have to push the stick. I modified the trim to ncrease the stroke, but it is still not enough.

    I've been said that i need to adjust my wings washers so that the wing incidence is better fitted with the canard one.

    Could one of you tell me if i need to increase or reduce the incidence of the wings ?

  9. Did one of you tried to use milar tape to seal the gap between canard and elevator on a GU profile?

    Is there any positive effect ?

    From a theoritical point of view, depending on the design, the gap may be used to blow the upper surface under high angle of attack to reattach the flow, then it may be detrimental to use some.

    If it is just a "mechanical" gap to allow the elevator movement, then it may be positive to seal ...

    I would clearly clasify the GU canard in the second category ... but i'm not 100% sure, and i feel lot of you guys may had the idea and have made the test already !

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information