Jump to content

787Guy

Members
  • Content Count

    55
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

787Guy last won the day on January 29 2015

787Guy had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

9 Neutral

About 787Guy

  • Rank
    Member

Personal Information

  • Real Name (Public)
    Randy
  • Location (Public)
    South Florida
  • Bio
    Army Helicopter pilot, Airline Pilot
  • Interests
    All things that fly

Flying Information

  • Flying Status
    currently fly a gyrocopter

Project/Build Information

  • Plane
    Long-EZ
  • Plane (Other/Details)
    considering building
  1. Funny how the Internet pretty much killed the "Information Brochure" business. I wonder how much revenue those $10.00 checks created ? I know I sent out my fair share of them back in the day.
  2. I'm kind of picturing a Berkut/widebody EZ but who knows ? Hopefully we'll see something of it at SNF.
  3. Al Aldrich just emailed me in reference to my recent plans order and mentioned that they have a new design in the works. All he would say is that it's sort of a cross between a LEZ and an Aerocanard. I'm not sure what that means but it definitely has me wondering.
  4. I look forward to going thru the plans and may very well get a set of Cozy plans too. I wish they were available in PDF to facilitate easier travel viewing.
  5. Well it's worth it to me just for general information. I am thinking I might quickly outgrow the Long Ez I was planning on making. Although I am imagining the Long Ez would have been faster. Al has told that the plans are in the process of being updated so maybe all the OCR errors that I've read about will finally be addressed. If I do end up making the Four - place I am thinking on using the 200hp UL Power engine.
  6. IIRC the front seat weight limit for the Aerocanard was said to be 475lbs per Al Aldrich.
  7. Interesting article that kind of reaffirms some comments made by Burt Rutan. http://www.compositesworld.com/blog/post/despite-787-boeing-not-sold-on-composites
  8. 787Guy

    ICON Aircraft

    Marc, Wow, we're really far apart on this issue - I'm not even quite sure where to start. For one thing the weight limit for LSA aircraft was pretty much copied from the existing European Microlight category. This category of aircraft was initially where most of the S-LSA aircraft ended up coming from and proved to provide scores of completely safe aircraft for many years over in Europe. As a matter of fact the Pipistrel Virus which comes in well under this weight (circa 630lbs) is considered by NASA to be a very noteworthy aircraft and has won numerous awards and Challenges. The short wing version of this aircraft is so fast it's not even allowed to be considered an LSA - 160+knots from a Rotax 912 ULS ! And I'll guarantee you that Pipistrel did not spend anywhere close to 60+ million dollars to bring it to market. Furthermore Pipistrel has actually delivered into customers hands over 650 of these aircraft. How many has Icon delivered ? And that is just one aircraft of many flying around at this supposed dangerously unsafe weight. Have you ever been to the Aero Show in Friedrichshafen, Germany ? Every time I go I find myself wondering what ever happened to the innovation we used to have in this country when it comes to small aircraft ? If I had been on the FAA Light Sport Aviation Branch I would have happily allowed Icon to increase the aircraft weight by the actual weight of the stall/spin avoidance device and not a pound more. The rules are the rules and if the engineers and designers can't make it fit they shouldn't get a pass based on some device that doesn't weigh anywhere close to what they were given weight wise. But the rules are different for companies that have millions and millions of dollars. Look at the SportCub - allowed to have an O-360 engine in an LSA as long as they promise to only use it in take off and climb mode - Really ? Do you think Searey, Seamax and Mermaid might want to get a bump-up in weight too ? Well unfortunately none of them have anything close to the financial horsepower of Icon and or SportCub. The whole capture a different market thing is interesting. I remember seeing Icon at a Car Show and also a Boat Show. It's a great idea if you're trying to sell a single engine FIXED GEAR aircraft. It's a very different thing when you're selling a "re-positionable" gear amphibian and actively telling people that they will ONLY need 20 hours to fly it ! Flying an amphib is VERY different than just a regular retractable gear aircraft. There really isn't any muscle memory that sets in like it does in a regular retract because sometimes the gear must be down and sometimes it must be up. Even though it sounds very simple it is extremely easy to mess up. I don't know how many thousands of hours I had when I started flying the Grumman Widgeon but the whole time even at my hour level I was never quite at ease with it - not like in regular retracts anyway. So to tell people that it's very easy to learn and that they only need 20 hours of instruction seems more than disingenuous. I foresee a great deal of what I call "The Cirrus Effect" once Icons finally do go into service. By that I mean much like the Cirrus Aircraft owners - people with more money than aviation common sense. People that don't have the time for additional flight instruction - they're too important to be bothered with that. "Afterall this thing has got a ton of safety features built in to it, heck it's just a flying jetski -right?". Time will surely tell. In summary I'm unable to be favorably impressed by any company that has spent that much money trying to bring a Light Sport Aircraft to market and still not delivered. History is rife with truly innovative, unique and complex aircraft that came to market costing too much and selling for too little to make up the costs.
  9. 787Guy

    ICON Aircraft

    I just wonder who they paid off at the FAA to get that bump-up in empty weight to remain an S-LSA ? They were seriously dead in the water until that. I saw them at OSH 2008. They were really outsiders to the LSA market at that time and didn't really seem to have a clue back then. I know that Burt Rutan has not exactly said kind things about their design.
  10. Marc, Just curious - how much would you estimate Icon has spent trying to get their design to market ? I have a friend in Tehachapi that says they are throwing money around worse then a band of drunken sailors.
  11. How did you extend the chordline onto the hangar wall ? Did you just use a string or a laser ?
  12. Well I've known about this one since about 2007, I'm sure there are others if I really looked hard. If it could be faired into the gear leg I think it would be worth trying. http://www.aveoengineering.com/index.php/product-info-helios
  13. Wondering if I could instead put a small powerful one right on the portion of the nose gear that doesn't touch/rest on the ground while the aircraft is kneeling ? That way I don't need a second mechanism/ opening/control-lever in the aircraft. There are several small lights now available that put out a great deal of lumens at reasonably low voltage.
  14. In the decades since the original L.E. plans came out there have been all kinds of advances in terms of building material. Is there something lighter/stronger/better than good old BID and UNI ? How much more would it cost ? How much weight could I expect to save ?
  15. Where is the preferred location for a landing light on the L.E. ? I've seen some mention of "Landing Light Plans/Drawings" - how can I get a hold of these. Seems now with LEDs and HIDs you could put something pretty cosmic in there.

The Canard Zone

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information