Jump to content

Voidhawk9

Verified Members
  • Content Count

    175
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    25

Everything posted by Voidhawk9

  1. But where would be the fun in that? OK, this is a potentially very good deal. Once my airplane is done (on Tuesday) picking up an airframe like this and upgrading it could be a fun next project!
  2. Two contributing factors, I think. First, we were a pretty good source of military personnel in WW2, training thousands of pilots (and other kinds of soldiers of course) and sending them off to Europe (mostly). Second, being a rugged country of low population density, using aircraft made a lot of sense for travel and other applications in decades past. Both still apply in a broad sense, though the government is making things more difficult and expensive over time.
  3. Depends on the CS unit in question. If something like an MT, I would be very much inclined to agree with you, Kent! I should call into the Sprint Aero facility sometime and see what's what. In fact, I think I walked right by it 2 weeks ago while hunting for interesting aircraft at NZRT (found a V8 powered Mk26 Spitfire - boy did that sound great taking off!).
  4. These look interesting. Not sure of the price, but apparently they are light and effective? But if you're only going to operate from good sized runways and don't mind trading off a bit of climb rate, the fixed pitch is probably the way to go. On the other hand, if you want to be able to utilize the engine's full potential across a wide range of speed and altitude, fixed pitch cannot deliver that. I'd been doing some simulations with my Cozy, and using a fixed-pitch setup that works at acceptable RPM when cruising high and (really) fast, take-off and climb performance is quite poor for the installed power, and the pitch is very coarse. With a constant speed prop, the cruise is the same, but the acceleration and climb is stunning! For a 100hp Tri-Q, the difference is probably much less though.
  5. Hi Rafael, welcome. I too was very interested in a 13B powerplant. I researched and learned as much as I could for several years. Theoretically, it should be ideally suited, in reality, it seems few achieve acceptable performance. And, it's an old design that, while still popular, maybe be more difficult to support in the future. Plus, loud and thirsty. I'm still interested in using an auto-conversion when the time comes, but it will be reciprocating, require minimal modification (besides the necessary PSRU and ECU of course, but ZERO changes to the internals), and have a good history of prior use in aircraft (not necessarily canards, which are an increasingly small part of the homebuilt fleet). Your experience and education may save you time in airframe construction. You'll probably soak that up and more with an auto conversion, though, especially a complicated one like a rotary. But please share and discuss your progress, ideas, etc. as you go for the benefit (and entertainment!) of other users here! 😉 John Slade may have before his passing, but then again he never resolved his cooling issues, probably due to the suboptimal cooling design he was convinced to use. It seems a lot of Lycoming powered canards live with cooling issues as well, though!
  6. Photos of the spar construction to date. Click for larger images. Foam parts prepped and being installed. Glass and peel ply cut and labelled ready to easily find and apply. A few extra pieces of peel- ply that I didn't need in the end, but easier to have prepped and ready in advance in the event that I do. Glass in the process of being wet-out. Bulkheads in, hardpoints next. Weight on the wing attach hardpoints. As you can see, I didn't install the end caps bulkheads yet. As I will be installing Infinity retracts (I don't own a set yet - budget limited!), I will need access into this area when installing the fixed parts of the gear, so the end bulkheads will go on once that is done. This also made it very easy to weigh down the outboard hardpoints, as I could just clamp down on them. The inboard hardpoints had approx 5lb on each per plans. 1l peanut butter jars filled with water =1kg each plus the weight of the stand= approx 5lb. After cure, but before trimming. It came out nicely. Thanks, Jon - yes I have a lot of big projects going on! Hopefully, the Cozy won't take quite as long to grow up and leave home as some of the others. 😅
  7. Another slow couple of months for progress. I had the foam all done and joined and everything ready for the spar interior layups. But since I needed most of a day to get all that done, I had to hold there, as I was waiting for a very short-notice report that my wife was about to have a baby; "can you wait till four, darling, while I finish these layups that must be done together?" Family first! Baby arrived a month ago (boy #4!), and I've since been keeping myself available for my very capable but tired wife who now has 4 young guys to take care of. Finally, she told me to go ahead and restart plane days. So today I got the interior layups done. I took several photos, but the camera is out in the workshop and I don't feel like standing up again just yet. Will post some later. 🤓
  8. Plenty of room to the sides, but vertically a bit tight, yes. Custom cowl will be required - but if you are installing something other than an O-360 already, that should not be a big problem for you! It does appear to be a Ballistics redrive, which I like, well proven and numerous, but quite a low offset from the crank, so the engine has to be up fairly high. You are right about ballast. Putting batteries in the nose will help. I'm going to install hydraulic retracts, so the hydraulic pump can go up front, that should do the trick nicely.
  9. I get the impression from the Titan guys (I hang around the Titan Air Corps forum to feed on engine discussion) that few are installing Suzukis anymore. Ditto on the Hondas - I looked into that one a bit myself. The LS3 is not much heavier, and puts out way more power at more conservative RPMs, whereas the Honda is working really hard to hit its numbers. You might enjoy this video:
  10. That's a pretty rapid erosion. Freezing rain or hail?!
  11. Maybe Titan or Supermarine would sell you one of their LS V8 FWF setups. Heavier than the other options, but similar to a -540, which has been done several times. And WAAAAY better fuel economy than a rotary. Plus, they are common, still in production, reliable, multiple PSRU options, and relatively affordable. They appear to be in use on various types with great success, with little or no modification to the engine. 350-450hp at conservative RPMs.
  12. Another case of 'if it sounds too good to be true, then it probably is'. Anything more than a modest improvement over existing engines is probably marketing in an attempt to attract investors, nothing more. Still waiting on the Deltahawks to arrive as well! 🙄 In contrast, Aeromomentum is actually building and selling engines and gaining a very good reputation, I will continue watching their new engine developments with interest.
  13. That diesel is a 'dream' for sure. If I'm doing my numbers right, those sfc numbers are twice as good as the best high-efficiency diesels in use today - and I'm talking power generators and huge ship engines, which are much better again than their smaller counterparts!
  14. It is a neat project, and a shame he won't finish it. Being so heavily modified, it is a one-off design, and unfortunately therefore essentially worthless until completed and proven. Too much risk. There are some valuable parts on it, but I don't think it will sell for anything like what he wants.
  15. If you got a project that was complete except for finishing, would you still have 51% of the work to do? 😅 I've never flown in a canard yet, but busy building my own. I really like the look of the design, the easy to follow plans and the performance. Plus, I wanted to build something from scratch, rather than a kit.
  16. Hi Duane! You've been caught by the canard bug too, huh? If you can, find some builders or fliers in your area. Besides being fun to meet, you'll learn a lot. Maybe one of the people you meet would be able to assist you in inspecting a potential project purchase, too. For a builder, it is reasonably easy to determine quality, but if you are new to all this, it might be more difficult.
  17. A link from 17 years ago can't really be considered reliable.
  18. >One year later< I corresponded some months ago with a French supplier, and found where you can still buy the same tape, albeit not at 3" (75mm) wide: UD E glass cloth 600 g/m² Last week I laid up two test pieces to do a relative test between the plans spar tape from ACS, and this 'alternative spar tape'. Photos below. They are basically identical samples, 3 plies of the plans tape 12" long, and an equivalent weight of alternative tape, which ended up as about 5.5 plies (the half cut full-length, half width). They were laid up side-by-side (with dams, 3" apart) with the same batch of epoxy. You will see some waviness on the bottom, from the plastic ripples underneath. Both samples have similar ripples. I cured for 3 days, the last day or so in my hot box to ensure they were thoroughly cured. The samples are the same size and thickness, to within a small fraction of a millimetre. The alternative sample came out 16% heavier, probably largely a result of retaining the cross-threads (not removable) while the plans sample cross threads were removed per plans. Then I tried a stress test to see if there was any difference between the two. I clamped 50mm of one end to the bench, then clamped a bucket with various weights to the other end. I didn't measure the weights, only the deflection of each with the same weights applied for a relative comparison. The alternative sample deflected an average of 51% as much as the plans sample! This really surprised me. HALF the deflection?! I bent both samples about 120deg (using clamps, too much force required to do by hand and / or didn't want to be that close in case one failed!), neither had any problem with that as far as I can tell (no cracking noises either) except that they did twist a bit, thus the longitudinal cracks in the plans sample. Any ideas on other tests I could do with basic workshop equipment? Any ideas why the alternative sample was so much stiffer? I'm thinking maybe the fibre density was higher as the many smaller bundles are held together tightly by the cross-threads. Anyway, interesting results so far.
  19. That's a really nice looking example, I like the cooling plenums as well. Should be a very fun airplane!
  20. Is this is the SQ2000 referenced in this post, I wonder?
  21. The Cozy spar is not as thick in the middle section, but 2ft longer. Curious, I'd have expected it to be thicker.
  22. That's a short list! Outside of NZ, everywhere is far away, and I am not aware of anyone in NZ right now that would need one. Most builders over here are building aircraft capable of rough-field operation, which is sensible given the rarity of runways over here. I'll just fly high enough to glide to one most of the time. Yes, it seems a shame to ditch these carefully built jigs, so I hold on to them intact as long as practical. Parts of the fuselage side jig came in useful once I finished the tub, it is presently stored on its side using a side jig with some foam tape on it to protect the glass, and covered with a tarp.
  23. The last couple of months I didn't get much done on the project due to higher priority projects that are now complete. I learned a new dance move this week. I call it the 'spar jig'. The supports under the end are a bit different to plans to ensure stiffness of the jig hanging off the end of my slightly short table. Actually probably easier to do it this way anyway, since the long support is the off-cut from the big back panel. Also slightly visible is my 'cheap little sucker' vacuum system under the bench. It works great. I also laid up the crush plate required for installing the Infinity Retracts. Came out nicely. It will be cut in half (lengthwise) and trimmed to fit basically in place of the foam in the front face of the end of the spar. Was lucky enough to have a couple of canard pilots visit last week (a rare occasion in this part of the world), one of whom had previously worked at Scaled. He declared the quality of my fuselage tub to be very good. That's a good dose of builder motivation right there! 🤓
  24. Sounds like a Long is a perfect candidate, then! 5 years is ambitious, but doable, especially if you get a head start by buying an existing project.
×
×
  • Create New...