Voidhawk9

3 hours ago, Jon Matcho said:

Personally, I am about to leave X-Plane and move to Microsoft's upcoming rework of their flight simulator.  They have moved from table-based aerodynamics to surface physics (and then some), which was X-Plane's key feature. 

Certainly it sounds like they have greatly improved their flight model, but in all my research, I have yet to be convinced it can come close to what X-plane does.

I'll get a copy to compare when their Linux edition is released.

Yes, he's done a few videos lately. Supposedly extra motivation is the opportunity to drive his new Tesla over to Michael Brown's place (the voice in the background).

But in saying that, not EVERY change is documented - thus my conversations with him referenced above!

Never say never:

There is a big update in the flight model with the current version (it IS optional though, you can still run with the old one).

I had some extensive discussions with the developer over it, as canard aircraft were reaching min speeds 5-10kts too fast. It turns out that control effectiveness has been substantially reduced (in line with actual test data etc.) and does indeed seem much better for ailerons, but led to inadequate control power for the elevators and canards.

What the developer correctly noted was that in real aircraft the pressure region generated, in this case by our canard, continues across the fuselage to the other side. It isn't 100% as much of course - X-plane makes it 70% effective inside a fuselage or other body in fact. But by continuing the canard and the elevator through the middle to simulate this continued pressure region, performance is restored to what is expected from the real world. This wasn't necessary before, as controls were over-effective.

Just one data point in regards to recent X-plane changes.

Mike Arnold's series is educational as well, though does much further than needed for building from our plans unless you intend to make your own wheel pants, etc.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCVDILmX2ylWP1YLQmYi9nPw

Here's some bulkheads with fresh tapes and peel-ply on them.

Joins like bulkheads to fuselage side get floxed in place (make a nice little fillet) then 2" wide 2-BID tapes over the joins.

A Velocity or Cozy would probably suit you very well, then.

Sounds like you enjoy building and modding more than flying! Does sound like a good airplane, though, as a result.

What calculations are you using?

The people on this site are primarily building and flying full-scale!

Changing the engine to something proven would solve a lot of engine issues, but would not solve many other serious problems with the aircraft.

Put a -540 on a Cozy and go fly fast and high.

JD's site is here: http://infinityaerospace.com/product-category/other/

Though rumour is he may be in poor health and unreachable at the moment. Hopefully that resolves soon.

You can get them from the Cozy Girrrls too: http://www.cozygirrrl.com/aircraftparts.htm

7 minutes ago, Barry said:

"I'm hoping to get back to layups on my Cozy in December..."

Had to read that a 2nd time before remembering you're "down under"

😃 Right! I wish I had a heated workshop. Well, I do, it is heated by a nearby star, but that's all!

Hi Curt!
Yeah e-mail lists have problems sometimes - I'm not a fan. This site is much nicer (just need to convince people to come here).

Sound like you'll have a Vari-modern VariEze. I'm hoping to get back to layups on my Cozy in December - the half-done centre spar hasn't made any progress on finishing itself! Weather here is warming up again, and I just need to find some time between my 3 jobs, 4 kids and lovely wife. 🙄

8 hours ago, Jon Matcho said:

Easy fix... change your plans and "settle" for fixed gear 🙂

Not when the plans LG bulkheads are absent!

There are other options...

That's a concern for those building with plans to install the gear (but haven't ordered yet).

Bring it all here, I say. Easily the best of the options.

I don't care for the 'politics' of the past that some may be in to. This site has, IMHO, the best software and ease of use of the options I have looked at. And I've spent time on essentially all of them.

All advice strictly worth what you paid for it, of course. 

Hi Justin,

Building (when the warmer weather returns) across the ditch here in NZ!

-Cameron

Some images from my collection of prior examples of staggered seating in EZs, for your interest:

Xtra-EZ

Stagger-EZ:

Stag-EzR:

There might be an easier way. By my understanding, the max front seat weight is a largely arbitrary number designed to to ensure the rotate speed is not too high (and thus extending the take-off roll), not a structural limit.

Moving the standard front seat back a couple of inches might solve the problem while minimising the fall of dominoes, as the moment of the front seat weight would be reduced. You lose some back seat space, but this may be solved with smaller girlfriends?  Also any light pilots would need to be extra careful to carry enough ballast as a rear CG would be more likely with the layout changed this way.

Staggered seating may be a good solution for you, yes. I'd recommending leaving as much as possible stock though, don't change any more then you have to, it eats a lot of time and adds complexity. Leave the IP where it should be, etc as much as possible.

For a Cozy 3, not a MkIV. The MkIV is larger.

Cozy, I am pretty sure.

7 hours ago, Jon Matcho said:

Plans or kits, us types take much longer to complete builds and the quest for perfection needs to be kept in check IMO.  I think "good" and finished is quite close to "perfect", unless you're aiming to win Plans-built Grand Champion at EAA AirVenture. 

Absolutely right, and it is something I try to be reasonable about. I had a well-known and respected canard builder visit my project once, and he told me I need to be more sloppy and get on with it! 😅 Point taken!

This may just be ego or a twisted mind, but:

I'm building it myself, I'm not just assembling a bunch of parts. No disrespect to those building kits, as they are still a major commitment and achievement. But I want to fabricate the major parts myself. Plus, I like the ability to 'make them my own' with a little customization.

As you allude to above, I prefer to do things myself where possible to ensure the best quality - I'm more than a little perfectionist, and I am often disappointed in the quality of purchased parts or services when it comes to my vehicles.