Aclouston

Ahhh. The consensus is then to never follow...😆

I scrolled through your EZ project but did not see the actual gear attachment. You may have it in an older blog? Any way I can figure out that it is better supported in all directions. If you have a good pic. I'd like to see it. In the end I think I would stick to the strenghtening of the fuselage sides that you mentionned.

What is the consensus among builders/flyers on making a stronger landing gear for the Long-EZ? Is it more layups than required by the plans? Or does it has to do with the alu. angles being too thin? Others?

One member talked about something in a CP, but I haven't seen anything in that regard other than the flox added to remove excessive longitudinal play.

Kent

are you saying that it would be possible to use a wing template and only cut a 64" portion of the trailing edge?

Hi Skyhigh...

Wer are both in similar situations. I'm in the verge of startin from scratch or importing a project (I'm not too optimistic beeing from Eastern Canada). So we may become "building brothers".

Here is my modest contribution:

-Anybody can learn building with fiberglass. Get a manual ( public domain) and see.

-Aileron is a steep learning curve because startin a new project you typically start with simple flat stuff, move up to fuselage were you learn to assemble stuff together straight, add  inserts and other basic important skills.

Main gear layup and installation might not look that much(as gar as glassing but it demands high precision.

Other builder will tell you better than me but I assume that by the timevyou have completed the main gear, you feel pretty confident about your abilities to work with foam and glass. 

 Then you move up to cutting foam to a wing shape with a hot wire cutter. I'm that it's not hard butcyou need special equipment and practice on cheap pink styrofoam before doing it on the good stuff. ( you can also buy foam already shaped from Eureka) and learn to really apply yourself to obtain a light yet straight and conformal canard and then the elevator.

Doing an aileron alone brings a few challenges

-Because in the manual it is cut (saw cut) from the foam shape of the entire wing. I would not know the precise procedure to cut one from a foam bloc, although I have a good idea. I would consult....

- It is probably the longest foam piece compared to it's thickness and width. IMO, after wire cut, it must be all twisted up. I'll let other builders comment on this...

For the rest (hardware, hinges, etc) it looks similar, if not simpler than a canard elevator. But here again it's only my opinion looking at the plans.

Idem for the rudder.

Suggestion; Have you considered aquiring those items from projects for sale. There is a guy (he is on Facebook) currently selling a complete set of wings.

Let us know if it works out.

Allan

Thanks

I did not see H250 on their site. Do you know where I can get it? I saw a few manuf. and large distributers but they don't appear to sell direct.

So...Here is what I could gather from A-C Spruce that is available about the foam requirements vs availability for the Long-EZ:

STRAKES, SKINS, FUSELAGE, +:        Divinycell PVC H45 avail. only in .375" (not .35"), 0.750" (not 0.8") and 1.750" (not 1.6") thicknesses

CENTER SPAR:                                    Divinicell PVC H100 avail.  in 0.250" thickness as per plans.

BULKHEADS:                                Last-a-foam 18#/ft^3 ( polyurethane) in place of R250, avail. in 0.200" thickness as per plans.

CENTER SPAR, CANOPY RAIL,+othr: Polyurethane foam 2#/ft^3 in place of urethane, avail. in 1" thickness as per plans.

NOSE, CANOPY, LE STRAKE, +othr: Polyurethane foam 2#/ft^3 in place of urethane, avail. in 2" thickness as per plans.

Is the difference in thicknesses for the H45 going to be an issue? Could the 0.8" required for sides be replaced with a 1" thick? Or the 3/4" would do?

I love the design.

Look for patent infrigement on my part. Coming soon.

Unless you want to lend it to me?

Thanks

Wow! This could be the one. Can you tell for which engine the cowl is for?

The strakes are prefab units right?

Ok, got it. I already requested  airframe kit quotes from all ( except Wicks). I'll be more specific  to request lead times for the big thick foam pieces, gear legs struts and canopy.

I see the complementarity between CG, Aircraft Spruce and Aero Composites. But what about Wicks?

Wow. I can't thank you enough. It's now on my father's day whish list.

Allan

I seem to recall somewhere in a CP that the recommended cutting wire had been increased from .032" to .04x" did I dream this? Also what is the transformer typically used for this? 12v?, 28 or 48v? Any particular tension and wire temperature we are looking for?

Thanks

0Ok let me run all of them and you can agree or disagree that if templates are made from the manual it could be an issue:

- engine baffles: no issues                - carb brackets: none                          - engine mount: Some dim missing    - carb heat: most dim are there          - throttle body:I don't think I'll make 

  - landing brake:no issues if scaled    - consoles: no issues                          - strakes: nothing to scale                  - rudder belhrn.I get hiden if poss.    - CS132L: no issues                           - CS127: if IhaveCS128,I can manag     - CS128: CAN'T DO unless scaled   - Canopy locking: no issues (has to be fitted any way)                               - Trims:  no issues                               - Control stick: no issues                   - Bell cranks CS15: no issues             - CS72 brckt: LOOKS complicated   - Center spar; no issues                     - Nose gear: I think I can manage     - Roncz: THAT IS SCARY ( in regard to foam cutting)                                   - Everything in earlier chapters I think I can manage.

Note ; I do nt see a full scale note on the control stick page 16-4, but assume it is?

So, yes Ken I agree, except for the foam cores of the RoncZ that scares me a little (mainly because the manual and CPs urges us to be extra careful with the contour), I think I can safely scale the rest from a printed manual "to size". A few brackets are probably best to be purchased instead of fabricated anyway.

How do I make a call for anyone who could supply me with solid templates used on an actually built Roncz canard? Isn't it the same canard used on the Cozy?

Thanks

How about the manuf manual. It has many patterns that are scaled with no measrements. How do I thrust that I print on the correct size?. The "A" drawings have scales at the bottom. Not the manual.

I must add that you have a very good sense of observation. I am at my third read of the manual and will read it again with simillar eyes as you just have. Are you a composite buff?

I'm not an aeronautical engineer, but if you may, I'll venture an answer. You're interrogation is implying two things: 

1) you have the impression that a foam to foam bond is a weak bond in the sense that we should try to avoid it.

2) you have the impression that a single glass to foam bond is weaker than a glass to glass bond.

On (1), I'll comment that most higly stressed parts of the plane have foam to foam bonds in both direction. Look at wings and canards. In those cases, the foam assembly is encapsulated in layers of glass from all sides. If this was extremely weak, the designer would never accepted to bond pieces together if it created a risk of separation. He would either have called for a one piece foam for the wing or have builder's glass one or bothe pieces before bonding them together.  I will agree however that we do not a whole lot of foam bonded perpendicularely. I want to insist that I am not saying here that the foam carries the load. I'm simply stating that bonded foam encapsulated in glass is part of the design everywhere on the plane.

Now, the center spar carries the load mainly in torsion and flexion. Internally - layer by layer - that means that foam and glass want to shear off from each other. If you look at the location of the spar caps, which takes a lot of sweeping flex and some limited vertical flex load, they have been positioned by the designer at the aft end of the spar. This means the designer has calculated that the back of the spar is more critical ( in flex anyway) than the front. It makes sense since the aft part of the spar is bolted to the wing. The shear in the front is obviously less than at the back. If it was more the spar cap would have been positionned at the front or extended to cover the entire top section. 

Looking in torsion, ideally we want a round shape to distribute evenly the load. When not practicle for the application, the designer will however try to homogenize the section, to be basically the same all around hence the foam to foam in all corners. A junoir designer - not knowing any better or designing without weight limits -  would have made cs1 and cs4 the same thickness as cs2,cs3 as they would carry more torsionnal load and also more flex load not because there is more foam but because the distance between the outer and inner glass of both fwd and aft wall would be greater so more stable (less likely to encounter buckling during flex). 

I'll add that the further you are from the point of application of a force, the less strong you have to be. This is the simple lever effect. Here the bolting joint is where almost  everything the wing feels is transmitted to the spar. So again it makes sense that the fwd section is "simpler".

On (2), consider the shear web of the canard. It is basically a foam - the leading edge microed to the multi-layer shear web. Then everything is surrounded with glass. A pure glass to foam of a highly stressed part.

Also, don't forget that the whole strake is installed over the taper of that fwd section giving it added support.

With all that said, your suggestion is, I think a good one, especially if it is accepted that glass to glass bond is generally significally stronger than any other cases. Obvoiusly Mr. Rutan has decided to go that way because he was cconfident in that all the loads were being taken care of.

Sorry I'm french speaking in my native tongue and I used to many words trying to express my comprehension of why this is. I hope it helped... or is maybe making you ask more questions!

Regards

Allan

Thanks Bruce and Ken

Ken 

In investigating the build option I think I see from you a cost range starting from 30K. I'm going through the links to builders you forward me. I see a guy that planned 40K in 2003. His last update is 2008. He has center spar to finish, wings and canopy. To do:  winglet and rudders, strakes, engine, electrical, instrumentation, fairings and finishing among others. He is at 16K and far from beeing done. ( He is showing an engine price nor instrunents). So It's clear to me this fellow is going to hit 50-60K. Nothing wrong with that I shall say, I'm trying to get an idea of a range for my would be O-235, all manual longez. Assuming a fairly low time engine, I'll assume this $Usd 50-60K. I'll reajust based on poeple's comment. 

Thanks for the links. I'll investigate..

Allan

The Arkansas project was posted by Zolotiyeruki Thursday at 3:10 pm. 

The owner has a long and a Cozy MK. The longez was a flying plane however; N775AM. (I was mixing it up with the one in Denver Colorado $1500 that has wings not done yet). I'll re-check the procedure with EAA but I know it's a lot more complicated process to bring a registered plane into Canada. I have to have the owner de-register the plane, and have detailed paperwork when I'll be crossing the border.

So, unless there something else that I'm not aware of, the two other longez projects are in Utah and Denver Colorado. That is 37hrs of driving at 60 m/h. Coming back with the load at say 30 m/h staying away highways that is probably 120 hrs+ of trailoring. Ouch!

I will need help finding something closer to Montreal.

Thanks 

I've look at many models before and pretty much fell in love with the canard design. Have read the manuf. Manual 2,3 times and the related cps until it got either boring or filled with a clear impression of panic where every accident/incident (many stupids) seemed to justify a kind of state of alert and translate automatically mandatory grounds. May it's just me... Although as a mechanical engineer, I must say I agreed with most them. Anyway, sorry that was my editorial bit for the day. The point beeing it's defi nitly going to be: 1st a longez, 2nd a Varieze to complete, if that exist, or 3rd a Cozy (I love the Cozy it's just a bit too much of a plane for my needs right now). That part is solved.

I'm very sorry to be asking many basic questions. I'll be out of network all of next week and I'm climbing a steep learning curve. As you might expect I will calm dowm once I start working. So here it goes:

1- Once I throw my inqueries at C-girrrls, Aircraft Spruce and Aero Composites and for a basic longez kit, am I delusional to expect to receive the fraction from each suppliers that will equate exactly to everything I need? (you can read that sarcastically) including quantities of same items? Quoted by chapter? Or is it going to be "Dear valued customer, the catalogue is there, take your manual and figure it out!" in a polite tone of course...

May be a most recent longez starter, later than Ary Glantz, could give me some insight?

Note: The wood, glass, epoxy and miscellaneous glass/epoxy material requirement seems pretty straightforward to order I have to say.

2- If I find a project that seems worth investigating, like may be the one in Arkansas, can someone put me in contact with an experienced builder in that area that is a good critique and could come with me to inspect? is there such a thing as a builder's registry for the East US on Northeast?

How do I get the most of the Central State Newslettre for which I'm totally unfamiliar with. Can someome tell me which back letters relates only to the longez? If not, how far back should I go to be relevant for each of the 3 models? I am not interested in re-reading again anything that has already been discussed in the 82 cps I've read already, only if it gives new insight or perspective on a particular issue or precious builder's hints (I enjoy those).

That's all for now. I guess it wasn't so bad? Wasn'tit? But you tell me.

thank much in advance.

 Allan

Thank you very Ken for  your comments.

On the topic of Minister's Delegate Recreational Aviation (MD-RA), our Dar, I just spoke to the in my area and he made a point on insisting that pictures will not do it. He has to whitness first hand the prep work, the building and the finalization of the steuctural element. Welcome to Canada!

I would like to build ( or completed a project while maintaining the original concept as much as possible (save for the Roncz canard)

Small engine, manual landing gear and air brake. However, the engine support beams would be ready for a O-320 engine. This is what "I would like", but is it realistic?

Can everything still be found at Cozy Girrrls and Aircraft Spruce to build an original one? For ex: I see the worm gear but not the other prefab alum. stuff. I don't see prefab fiberglass like the gear struts, front wheel storage houzing, sumps etc. Where do I get those?

Sorry. That early stage Longez project is in Denver, Colorado. Yikes!! That is far...

Hi guys 

First post ever!

I'm looking for an early stage Longez project it could also be Varieze or a Cozy. Our canadian DAR requires that they inspect wings, canard and center spar during fabrication. I do not have much hope of finding such an early stage project (be it a Varieze or a Cozy for that matter) that even the center spar is not done. Also I can't bring in a previously flying plane turned in a project. Is is worth to buy a project that may even have wings and canard made, remove the center spar and start over from there?

I see for example that there is currently an opportunity to buy a project available is the "sales i've seen" where the wings are not started but the center spar is of course installed. I'm no tsure where is located though? There is also one more advanced in Arkansas and that is pretty much the furtherest(Is that a word? )i'd be willing to trailer it to Montreal, Quebec

Having no concrete experience with fiberglass fabrication, it's quite a steep learning curve to start with a canard or center spar do you agree? Should I still consider this "buy a partial project" option or should I resolve to start from scratch? Is that even possible today?

Thanks for helping out with your comments.

Allan Clouston