Show Posts - Bill James

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Bill James

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 ... 14
136
Hangar Flying / Re: The max pilot weight for front seat of Varieze aircraft
« on: June 11, 2010, 01:48:30 PM »
It's the weekend! I'll take a stab-
I understand that the 1080 lb max gross weight VariEze was designed for
a 175 lb pilot,
a 175 lb GIB,
and a 175 lb engine.
Plus two toothbrushes if absolutely required.
If built to plans (<620 lbs), there might be room for an hour's or so fuel   :)

137
Hangar Flying / Re: some Varieze questions - looking for info and suggestions
« on: June 11, 2010, 12:04:40 PM »
Flyoz
I assume you are talking about my wing incidence increase and that we are talking about the same thing  :)
No adjustments were made to waterlines, other than extending them with wood strips. The point of change here is the relationship between the attachment of the main spar to the aft fuselage, specifically within that 6x6x24 inch area where the spar is floxed to the fuselage sides. Again it has nothing to do with the shape of the wing airfoils.
Specifically on the center spar/wing installation to the fuselage - after following the plans to this point - The spar/wing assembly is inserted in the fuselage with the wings fully attached to the main spar, i.e. with the VariEze attach bolts tightened. Everything related to the wing and spar are per plans at this point. The exception would be my level no-anhedral wings, unrelated to this canard/wing incidence discussion.
The main spar may or may not have some wiggle room in the fuselage. The wooden wing template is set on top of the wing per plans to set the incidence. The wooden template is now modified, for example with a spacer, to establish a one degree higher AOA for the wing. I enjoyed pulling out my old textbooks here and conferring with patient advisors.
Here is where I waterleveled the wings for accuracy between them and the fuselage. If the canard is already hard-mounted it should also be installed fully for confirmation of the wing relationship.
This template spacer and slight main spar tilt is the only adjustment or modification involved in raising the main wing incidence. On mine the wing angle was almost right already. I used a few swipes with some coarse sandpaper inside the fuselage openings to provide room for the spar tilt.
Now the spar is floxed in place.
The canard is also unchanged, just installed slightly nose up using a modified canard template on top, retaining the plans relationship with the wings.
A few extraneous thoughts.
You are in extremely critical territory here, not the wing incidence thing, but building and flying your own airplane  :)
Everything about interpreting the plans and CPs should be a group discussion and plenty of productive mental wrestling matches.
For our discussion here with the wing incidence you are installing the wing the same plans way. It is possible that other VariEze spars have been installed very nearly at the same incidence as mine, only mine was done this way on purpose  :)   
In fact, with the fairly crude method of installing the attach fittings to the wings, any two or three main spars can have slightly different "tilts" to them between the wings, up and down, fore and aft.  That's why the fence and string setup when leveling the wings for the attachment (insertion) of the raw main spar between them is so useful. Wings and the spar are a matched set. A different wing may not match unless you are just extremely lucky.
  My wings are pretty well matched to each other. In fact they are very well matched based on flight characteristics. But while the wings are level and matched at the roots and tips, the spar is not "level". While both wings are “To Plans”, one wing attach assembly is about 1/8th inch higher than the other. This is totally normal, almost undetectable, insignificant and appropriate.
I have looked at numerous ezes that fly well, that from the front and rear critical examination show that the wings and canard are not “perfectly” aligned. It’s wonderful that they are flying well.
I will finally agree with many honest others as to having made as many mistakes on one side as the other  :)
While my plane could be cited as an example of rampant modifications, I feel the opposite, that the plane has followed the plans predominantly, and more significantly the intent of the Eze movement overall. The Ezes have been and are being honed by time. I know of no other airframe that allows so much of what Charles Lindberg spoke of, “Science, freedom, beauty, adventure: what more could you ask of life?”
We can all add our own passions to the list.
In agreement with Wayne’s prior comments on perfection, and the lack of it, I have been working on a note about the significance of the “Margin of Error” that seems to be the element of flying that we can actually influence or affect; practices like personal discipline, training, checklists, check flights, newsletters, etc that have evolved over the years. My efforts on capturing this in type have not matured adequately so far, particularly related to luck versus skill versus intelligence, but the significance of that margin is ever with me.
I hope working through this progression is helpful -- and a little unsettling, in the best possible way of course  :)

Lindberg's full comments containing the quote can be Googled.

138
Hangar Flying / Re: some Varieze questions - looking for info and suggestions
« on: June 09, 2010, 09:43:31 PM »
The airfoils were not changed. The canard and wing have precisely the correct relationship to each other.
The canard and wing were built exactly to plans, as was the entire aircraft structure. The nose and forward strake installations are per LongEZ plans.
The wings are per plans. The main spar was built with the Brock spar fittings put on the opposite ends, upside down, with exactly the plans layups and materials on the spar.
The canard and main spar were both set up for installation on the fuselage per plans. They were both then adjusted to have one degree of additional incidence added to their angle of attack. That way, with a slightly higher AOA, when the canard and wing settle in in cruise where they are designed to, the fuselage attitude is slightly lower. –This is the adjustment that was made to the LongEZ installation, as I was told by a reputable person.
If you have studied the plans procedure for canard and main spar installation then you are familiar with the wooden template that sits on top of the canard and the approximately two foot long one that sits on the wing for setting the incidence with a level. The template is where the change is incorporated. The wings and canard are stock. With appropriate awareness and knowledge of what is involved in the plans installation, which takes some doing, then one can easily determine what would be involved to add one degree to their AOAs, canard and wings angle of incidence, relative to the fuselage. Very simple. If I can do it…
This involved a lot of head scratching for me and i wouldn't want to rob you of a similar, full experience by listing calculations and such. I have been very pleased with the results. I dont take changes lightly. Extra care and attention was involved. I am not naturally a detail person but am extremely aware of the results of complacency or lack of preparation or attention. I have mentioned that building and flying the plane has made me a better person. This is one of the layers on that onion, for me, involving using caution and getting good advice, becoming better at some things that are not natural or easy. I hope for you all to have as fulfilling of a journey and hope it is as demanding for you and requires your best in many areas of life to get your airplane brass ring. I encourage you to research and confirm everything i or anyone says.
After first flight, with the addition of a 3/16 shim to hold the left rudder out slightly, the plane flew straight and hands off on the second flight. The overall good alignment is mainly because in addition to the wooden template that sits on top of the wing - i added 6 foot wood trim extensions to the waterlines on the wing roots and tips, which allowed much more precise alignment of the wings when mated to the spar. When mating the center spar to the wings i put stanchions (metal fence poles with bases) around both wings. A string was run around the perimeter attached to the stanchions and using a home-made water level on the string all around, then the long wood trim strips on the wing waterlines were adjusted to set just on top of that perfectly level string. It’s interesting that with this string and water level setup the floor doesn’t need to be level  :)
The string and waterline trim pieces were also used later when installing the canard and spar to the fuselage. The wings were fully mounted to the main spar. This provided much more ability to achieve accuracy with three feet of waterline (trim) tool in front of and in back of the wings to run the string around, and using the simple and accurate water level. A similar, simpler process with long trim pieces was used when installing the winglets.
Enough. See you later. Clarification questions welcome and probably needed  :)

139
Hangar Flying / Re: some Varieze questions - looking for info and suggestions
« on: June 04, 2010, 08:42:51 PM »
Hand propping. Hmmm.
Several months ago 4 yellow Piper Cubs stopped in here. Preparing to depart they did a mini-Blue Angles/Thunderbirds show. In unison they all chocked their planes, stood over the right tire with their left hand in the cockpit and propped the propeller with their right hands. They all started on the second pull and purred like kittens at what sounded like 100 rpm.
At Oshkosh a couple of years ago I stood by the throttle while Klaus started his dual LSI ignitioned VariEze. I think he said he said the plane had not run in 9 days. After his priming sequence it started on the second pull and purred at idle.
Approaching a thousand flights, I am still learning how to set up my 0-290 VariEze for the easiest start. For me this is mostly a priming thing. The bottom line from advisors is 3 prime strokes in winter and one in the summer, and then just start pulling. I will accept more advisors.
I have never seriously thought about adding a starter. If my engine would start within a dozen pulls, as it often does, I would never even think about a starter. The first time I started the engine it started on the first pull. If I am doing that airplane owner thing right, it should still start predictably most of the time. As with many things related to the VariEze, instead of building a DC-3 size Eze I use these elements as an incentive to be better.
Hand propping means that the pilot is very aware of the general engine condition, including compression. Working a little harder for our flight time, having awareness of good spark plugs, wires, mags, priming heads working (not stopped up), etc. is a more intimate thing.  I happen to be in a learning mode right now, recently starting the plane every day for about a week even if I didn’t fly. There is still some learning to do, along with checking some of the hardware. I have an impulse mag and one LSI electronic ignition with the red brick.
Since the LSI has a start bolt and a run bolt for the pickups, I have always expected it to be the significant player on hand starting rather than the Mag. During my present time of learning I found that the engine would start better on the one impulse mag with the LSI electronic ignition off. Once started, immediately after shut down with the switches, not the mixture cutoff, it started on the first pull with either the mag or EI or both. I am examining both sources of ignition for improvement.
In the past there have been a few episodes of trouble starting after landing and refueling for 20 minutes, maybe because of vapor lock. My best results there have been to leave the throttle at 1000 rpm and shut down with the switches, hoping for proper mixture still present and a one-prop start after refueling.
So much for positives and neutral opinions.
I think your comment might be more related to safety...?
I pay attention to those that have experience, good and bad. I try to be very deliberate. If I am interrupted during the preflight I start over. I also do the start the same way every time. On both main gear, I insert a quarter-inch steel rod through the strut and Matco brake disc, locking the brake. With the nose on the ground the plane won’t move at full throttle. I have never started with the throttle accidently left at full, but have moved the throttle to full with the steel pins in and it doesn’t move. The Matco disc already has three bolt holes drilled in them, I added 6 more, with no cracking or other issues.
I have observed folks hand prop until the engine pops and then shut off the mags and put the throttle open and the mixture off, and pull the prop backwards four revolutions, eight blades. This has resulted in an immediate start for me several times. This is also the place where we have to be very deliberate to re- set up the levers and switches to the correct positions.
On the other electric niceties, oh well, I have said enough here. Those might be the things I was thingking of that could be done after getting the plane in the air, if one still wants them.
Good building and flying-

140
Hangar Flying / Re: some Varieze questions - looking for info and suggestions
« on: June 02, 2010, 07:49:06 PM »
Since getting hooked on this Eze thing in 1975, I believe this is the third or fourth “fix the VariEze wing attach” series that I have enjoyed following. Please don’t stop, this is a good one. I appreciate the serious and deliberate progression through good questions. I will just slide in a couple of fellow-traveler comments.
My bottom line early -- I got started late building the plane. My labor-intensive business and building the plane benefitted from my not being on the computer until after getting the VariEze flying. Combined with several other factors like "The List", the plane was in the air several years earlier than projected. My experience with the VariEze fittings has been positive. Like most long term VariEze types, I feel little inclination to counter anyone's opinion on the fittings, but dont mind stating mine.
Like you, I also researched the wing fittings. One example, having seen some early VariEze drawings of tapered ‘through-the fuselage’ sailplane-type wing plug-ins, I considered trying to design and build those myself for a ‘better’ design and quick attach. What could go wrong?   :)

I corresponded for several years with a VairEze driver that had flown his plane 2400 hours and never paid hangar rent. His plane was kept at home in an enclosed trailer and was taken to the airport on Fridays and assembled and then tied down in ideal weather, or pushed into a friend’s hangar overnignt, and then packed up and trailered home on Sundays. With the simple supports he had, removing or attaching the wings and canard was 20 minute process. A few years ago I heard he was over 4000 hours. This and other examples helped to wrap up my research, with the awareness that the VariEze fittings have some significant advantages, like no adjustments, and as Joe Person points out above, are just an excellent design. And like all of the other elements of the plane, they must be built correctly and maintained properly. 

While I was building I was strongly encouraged to put LongEZ wings and spar on  my VariEze, as several others had done.
We have been traveling to see grandkids lately and my wife has mentioned several things she would have liked the plane to have, like a toilet, and popcorn machine. I have written articles on the advantages of the LongEZ, but having a LongEZ would not have solved this   :)

I still enjoy chewing on the "law of thermodynamics" that was recently explained to me because it covers so much of life... You always lose, you never win, and you have to play.  I am enjoying finding the exceptions...

With 14 years and a thousand takeoffs and landings, including the three flights last weekend, I believe and have experienced that to have an operationally friendly plane there are many other fish to fry besides the wing fittings.  And lots of these things can be done after the plane is flying. If a guy is interested in flying   :)

You play the game and you take your best shot. Good luck. Many qualified engineers looked into this and decided not to go into the wing fitting business. And so far no non-engineers have made their fortune with this either. I got some good advice once, from someone you would know. "If you can make a living doing anything else besides trying to sell stuff to people that build their own airplanes, do it.
Oh, now i remember the thought that triggered this response - To get yourself up and flying you only need one set of fittings. There are probably still some out there.
Good building  :)

141
Hangar Flying / Re: Engine Replacement Criteria
« on: May 18, 2010, 07:46:04 PM »
Good advice from tdarden.
My point here is detailed records. I should assume you have a rock solid track on all of the indications you are interested in on your plane, and will have little use for encouragement to keep detailed records. But here goes-
I am not naturally a detail person. However, the Eze life has forced me to become appropriately more so. Paying more attention to certain things often results in an overall awareness that kinda expands. Luck and preparedness has resulted in catching several significant events early. And there are actually more benefits now that I pay more attention to my surroundings besides my wife and i having higher level, more detailed arguments.
Besides the four notebooks of fabulous ideas that i didn't end up putting on the plane, i have several notebooks of lists consisting of everything i could remember from particular flights. I was inspired by a retired test pilot that after shutting down sat in his SX-300 for a good ten minutes writing notes, i assume about the flight. Ten minutes is a long time to stand there in the hot sun waiting for him to get out so you can just touch the spectacular aircraft helping him push it into the hangar.
To make this shorter I will just mention that from two pages of notes over a couple of months i was able to pull four seemingly unrelated things together to pinpoint a bad intake valve seal. We didn't know it was leaking and causing the plug to foul. This was combined with an erratic electronic tach that got its reading from the plug wire on that cylinder. Because it was erratic it took me about four weeks to confirm all this. Nice thing was the bird was safe and we were in the air instead of in the engine rebuild shop. After I took the cylinder in for rework and had three weeks of uneventful aerial bliss.

Then the engine started missing erratically again. Since i had had the cylinder fixed, i proceeded to remove a unique intake tube which i surmised must be the problem. But no. It still missed occasionally.  We retraced the problem using the same checklist as before and viola, against the odds, it pointed to a leaking intake valve again.
The detailed records (finally getting to the point here) helped us to confidently return our gaze to the leaking intake valve, which had supposedly been fixed. When i returned it for inspection they said "oh no, even though we normally do mostly exhaust valves,  we actually did do your intake valve, really... but ... just for you we will redo the intake again for no charge."   ;)
What do you know. They did the intake valve and no more erratic firing or erratic tach readings. And the reinstalled innocent intake tube worked fine, as always.  ;D
At first, the myriad indications seemed overwhelming and unrelated. Now looking back, it seems anyone could have figured it out sooner.
This is an example of several fairly minor issues that have been resolved fairly simply and economically.
Point is, performing safe flights we can make some pretty gratifying progress on pinpointing what the real problem is while benefitting from our proximity and interest in the plane.
 And like this note, no charge   :)   

142
Hangar Flying / Re: Nose Gear Mounting
« on: April 14, 2010, 04:04:41 PM »
The nose wheel pivot pin should be approximately vertical with the airplane loaded for takeoff.

143
Hangar Flying / Buzzard Contrails
« on: April 11, 2010, 08:30:11 PM »
Buzzard Contrails
You had to be there. Today I’m sitting in the rumbling aerosteed at the runup area. Scanning for traffic I see that buzzard over there gliding across the approaching sunset leaving a contrail. I blink twice, three times…the motionless bird is still sailing trailing that white contrail. The buzzard is black against the golden orange sky and you can see the fine shape of the wings and curved tip feathers. The contrail is thin and defined but starting to fluff out further back. Amazing. A buzzard contrail. You had to be there.
You had to be there, literally. Because anywhere else, even a few feet askance, the convergent confluence, the coming and flowing together of angle and distance and drifting buzzard and that Boeing 757 would not have provided the simply astounding extremely satisfying vision. You don’t think it was a Boeing 757? Prove it.
I don’t call it a trick because it was what it was. Though doubted initially, then real for a few seconds, then debunked, and then before it got away, pronounced true and real again for as long as it is pleasing. And it is pleasing.  What a wonderful experience for a few seconds in a special moment to personally witness such a truly astounding event.
For the time being I chose to hold the validity of the buzzard contrail and move along through this earthly existence for a time as if it was real. So shoot me. This sighting is a much preferable experience for stance on truth than any other thing man-made that I can find at this moment in history.

The flight was smooth and easy, just what you would want. My intent was to enjoy the magic of flight anew. On recent previous flights i had concentrated on mechanical details and such and had now admonished myself to also take a few minutes and soar and drift along with the currents and have some fun. I did. While i expected the warmer weather to negatively affect the lift and thrust some, the takeoff and landing were very gratifying.

Nice to be so pleasantly distracted with you for a few enjoyable moments.  Now get back to your taxes   :D



 

144
Hangar Flying / Re: Nose tie-down?
« on: April 11, 2010, 07:06:28 PM »
Probably not your question, but,
For tying the nose down with the nose gear extended -
I installed a single vertical chain link under the nose forward of the nose strut near the nose bumper with an AN-3 bolt through it and the nose bulkhead. Very stout. The link slides up and down (in or out) centered on the longitudinal bolt. When not in use it is held up inside by a light spring. It is usually covered by a piece of masking tape. I think most folks tying down level just tie the rope to the nose strut.
Hopefully others will answer your real question   :)

145
Hangar Flying / Re: 0-200 with ellison tb
« on: April 05, 2010, 08:18:03 PM »
Allan-
Lots of other things i could have mentioned above, in particular, that one of the best things i did was in fact flying the VariEze with a stock 0-235, with the carb on the oil sump. Specifically, the plane was prepared for first flight using a stringent list of things ONLY that kept me out of the air. Thus i flew about 8 years earlier than feared. The engine came off a Long EZ with 150 hours. So a simple airframe and proven engine. The engine setup i fly now was thought through for several years, years while i was already flying a simple airplane.
Other than a 7 amp battery to run the elec fuel boost pump for engine priming, the plane had no electrical system. It also had no paint, but rather white primer that had been done so well by buddy Jerry McAdams that everyone thought it was final paint. The wheel pants and other niceties were figured out during the 40 hour restricted period, which i planned to fly off in 4 days but actually took 3 months. Three very good months to fly, come back and sit and reflect. And end up not doing a lot of (heavy) things on my other lists.
The upholstery was a camping mat and a sheepskin from my mom.  The handeld com and GPS got me everywhere i wanted to go, including Terry Yake's Kansas City GIG, Oshkosh, Jackpot, Kanab and Rough River. I flew non-stop 1400 miles from Ft Worth to Reno with that carb on the oil sump, 31 gallons at 3.8 gph at 175 mph average against the wind.
I still use the same GPS. It hangs from the canopy lip and is right in line with the altimeter, and my flight path out ahead. The GPS pointer arrow and altimeter needle tell me all i need. The engine gauges are right below the airspeed indicator.
While i agree that it is important to win the race to lunch and back at RR, a big part of that is getting the plane there in the first place. By default, you have beat dozens, maybe hundreds, that arent' there yet.
While i dont think there is a wrong way to do this stuff, including using an Ellison, as long as you do it right, point is, my intent with the above comment was to encourage you to get the plane in the air, not to give you more things to deliberate  :)
 

146
Hangar Flying / Re: 0-200 with ellison tb
« on: April 01, 2010, 08:50:40 PM »
Howdy Alan-
I should just say "Yeah, what Joe Person said."
But with the usual caveat of being a late starter and now finding myself somehow in the middle of the gaggle, I will offer a few details of my fairly stringent perusal of the Ellison up to the point of actually trying to obtain one, and then choosing instead to lengthen the carb induction on my current 0-290. My observations are worth what you are paying for them  :)
First, the facts as I see them:
A. Some really fast guys use the Ellison throttle body. Some really fast folks use a carb, and fly a lot rather than tinker.
B. Several years ago I saw the letter from Ellison where the company denies any benefit to the 0-235 Lyc, which was my VariEze engine at the time. I gave this factor proper weight, keeping up the Ellison chase, but lowering the amount I was willing to pay for ‘nothing’ according to them, and expanding my pursuit, looking sideways at other forks in the yellow brick road to efficiency.
Second, Physics. The following details have been explained to me by some very patient people. I believe they are true:
A. The carb has a jet spraying to one side.
B. The Lyc carb induction system has a hard hill to climb from the get-go because of being located on the oil sump with only about 3 inches of flow before the split. That is a very short run, especially combined with the jet spraying more fuel to one side than the other. Not a big deal when I was putting around in a Cessna 120 at 70 mph where you never think of such things, but a very significant factor when thinking of lean of peak ops in a highly-refined steed. The Lyc sump design and its immediate fuel distribution imbalance became a sore spot for me.
B. The Ellison advantage would seem to come from using a spray bar rather than a carb jet, immediately being a step ahead of the carb in expanded fuel distribution. My imaginary vision of the spray bar was probably somewhat accurate and it intrigued and beguiled me for a long time. It still does, but I am easily distracted by more shapely curves, especially on intake tubes, so that hunt increased.
C. I heard that the Ellison advantage requires the equivalent of a straight, undisturbed two-foot run (probably less) into the inlet, or there is no benefit. I heard of a couple of things that folks had done to approximate this and made notes in my book of tricks, with visions of a two-foot inlet going through the firewall and up under the belly. Or not. Standing around at fly-ins invisibly listening in, it wasn’t hard to hear a story or two of an Ellison installed and finally replaced with a carb.
D. After many hours of listening to very knowledgeable people, I began to realize that this is kinda like the “law of thermodynamics” that I saw explained recently: “You never win, you always lose, and you have to play.” No free lunch. One step forward and two steps back.
As I saw it, if you have an intake that is long enough to enable equal fuel mixing, there is going to be some fuel pooling. Oh great. It occurred to me that it wouldn’t hurt for this longer intake that I was becoming more inclined toward to have some twists and turns to keep the mixture non-liquid to the greatest extent possible. So some turns and zigs and zags in the induction tube might not be all bad.

With several years of use and benefit now from the 0-290 extended intake tube,  a recent observation  made sense: Some folks were documenting fuel mixture characteristics looking through clear tubes, and observed that the fuel was not totally vaporized, but besides the vaporized fuel, some was liquified and flowing through the tubes like pencil-sized strings wriggling toward the carb. I can’t vouch for the veracity of that, but it makes as much or more sense as anything else I have observed and experienced.
The surprise for me was that my extended intake tube works, that there is no throttle delay or hesitation, and that takeoff power improved with the better fuel balance, as well as comfortable  higher altitude lean of peak operation. If you haven't seen them there are pics here on ez.org at Featured Canards.

At the end I was at a place where the lengthened induction tube had become a solid element of my desired design. From what I had learned it would work as well with either a carb or throttle body, and provide what I wanted - even distribution. The chase ended, thankfully, as a boater-friend and I were blowing a couple of decades of settled dirt off of his old Evinrude outboard mini-carbs, holding them against the underside of the Lyc cylinder head intake ports.

All to say, my point of arrival with the Ellison hunt was that I wasn’t going have a perfect enough installation to allow the Ellison to truly do its thing. The over-riding fact is that many of the fast guys and gals have combined numerous meticulous elements that blend to enable their magical performance.
My journey is quite satisfying with the extended intake tube and carb. No issues. It is also true that from my study I have nothing negative to say about the Ellison throttle body, and would offer only positive comments and congratulation to successful users, with any negative issues being related the limits of the installation.
I would suppose that about half of what I have said here holds water. Thankfully my intent is to fly, not stand around holding water. Good luck with your project.
Next time I see you, you owe me $.02.

147
Hangar Flying / Thank You For Your Service
« on: November 10, 2009, 09:52:18 AM »
In honor of those of you have been willing to potentially place yourself in the opening scene of Private Ryan. Thank you for your service.

http://www.ezchronicles.com/2007/03/what-flying-is-really-all-about.html

148
Hangar Flying / Re: v.e. winglets
« on: October 21, 2009, 02:10:04 PM »
Small lower winglets - I too have heard they are useful to protect the rudder if a wing tip touches, otherwise not effective in drag reduction as hoped.
If you are talking about LongEZ-type lower surfaces on a VariEze, I have had two that have been fabricated for several years. They are are about 3 or 4 inches tall and roughly the length of the upper winglet, going under the rudder. Cloudman described his on the wing cuffs thread here, and mine are similar to his. Am thinking that i will eventually install them and also incorporate the fairing from the wing trailing edge going back along inside the rudder, as others have talked about and as Scott Carter has on his Extra Eze if you see those pictures. Scott said that he flew with and without the lower rudders installed and they made a difference so he permanently installed them.
I think you are talking about the small lower winglets, which i have never had. But as far as any difference in the VariEze not having the larger lower winglet area, i don't know. The TE Fences make a difference on my plane and am hoping that these other lower surfaces are also beneficial at liftoff and on landing. The change in winglet drag or not will be interesting to observe. Not that i have ever experienced it personally, but i have heard that not all additions work as expected   :)

149
Hangar Flying / Rough River 2009
« on: October 03, 2009, 09:07:43 PM »
Rough River 200
I was trying to remember how many times N95BJ has taken me to Rough River. One of our hosts Dave Russell told me right away. Three. This is my third trip across the river and through the trees to the bluegrass of Kentucky. I envy those of you that had the presence of mind to start building and get in on the good life early. As time goes on and the miles fall away behind the prop I appreciate the effort and discipline that went into your accomplishment. And how getting a plane in the air requires discipline that positively affects our lives in other ways. Those of us that made it to the party later find a welcome place in the Canard movement,  and can readily settle in at our chosen place to fit in. 
This year Oshkosh was the most fun I have had there. The same for Rough River this time. Just great fun. It helps if you spent Saturday on the ramp with bright people chasing air molecules over the airfoils and cowls, which is always the case. And especially if you can end the night asking the right person what they do for a living, Especially if he starts out saying that he is a machinist and is soon describing how he was recently making a smooth surface on titanium  by blasting off layers of molecules with ions. Especially if there are two others in the group agreeing with him and finishing his sentences with him. Yeha. Oh, and it helps if you enjoy talking about airplanes in the rain, which I do. While growing up we usually didn’t haul hay in the rain. Usually.
Bruce Sinclair made the trip interesting. If you met him at RR you know what I mean. Two weeks earlier he had come in from Australia and had taken my place at Reno sleeping on Tim LaDolce’s kitchen floor and working Security at the Races. Then he spent a couple of days at our home in Fort Worth. I was surprised that with all the things to do in Cowtown, while I was at work he spent most of his time on our back porch. Thursday night we did the last minute buttoning up on the plane and solved many of the secrets of aerodynamic efficiency. Also, it is interesting to listen to the thoughts of others at this time in our American history.
On the flight east we paralleled the frontal system that was pinwheeling over Kentucky. We had smooth and clear sailing between layers until approaching RR. Arriving at mid-afternoon, with a little patience we found long holes it the pinwheel spokes and dropped down under the deck and made the flyby over the eleven planes at the park. By evening there were several more. And more on Saturday. While the decks were often at 4 or 5 thousand with blue patches of sky around, it seemed that most folks arrived while there was some mist in the air. Bruce was in eze haven no matter how many planes were there. Me too.
Next time you are there at RR be sure to be present when hosts Dave Russell and Sam Chambers recount the history of the event. Also, if you can get in on any of their lunch or dinner conversations it will be a treat, especially if they describe trying to get their own planes finished and to the event, specifically the personal awards they have presented each other. A hint, Dave is a urologist. He mentioned some of his thoughts on augmentation and i cant wait to see the results.
This year there were several folks that were particularly enjoyable and interesting to be around. For those of us that haven’t made all of these canard flyins, we are surely aware of the things we must have missed. Which makes it all the more enjoyable and worthwhile to spend time on the ramp and dining with special folks that are normally mostly an apparition at the keyboard. 
The first year with the VariEze I flew 200 hours and made Jackpot, Kanab and Oshkosh. And RR soon thereafter. Thirteen years is long enough to observe some trends and cycles. The last couple of years here we moved out of a 28 year home and built another, so little new idea work has been done on the plane. I have flown the plane on most weekends and did arrange to fly 31 times in 31 days. The obvious characteristic of the plane during this time has been its dependability and ease of maintenance. The early investment of time into researching the plans and CPs, and extra work that went into building a sound structure is paying off, along with a few items that make it user friendly. And with grandkids sprouting up, my wife is finding her way in to the plane again.
I believe that while at RR Bruce got much the same answer as mine on minimizing accessories on the plane until well into the restricted period. Many emotions fade and facts come into focus during that time. Even after flying for several years there is still time and interest in sprucing things up a little here and there.
So much for a few thoughts on Rough river. Thanks to you that made it fun and interesting. Already on my calendar for next year.





150
Hangar Flying / Re: long ez plans
« on: September 11, 2009, 05:27:57 PM »
About the serial number. Mine is #619, plans ordered the day the plans became available. As i remember it, RAF supported only the person that bought the plans. If a different person bought the plans, the original buyer was responsible for supporting them. The serial number had to match the original name. I got a letter from Mike Mellville around 1992 stating that they were no longer supporting builders that weren’t past a certain stage, which included me. Nor does it include you. I think they were right to cut off support after going the extra mile.
No problem thought. I never had a need to call RAF anyway. That's because when i started building i joined Central States and within a couple of weekends about a dozen CSA members had come by for a visit. Lots of fun to make new and interesting friends, but i soon realized that i was now part of this self-policing network. Over the years most folks that came by were just enthusiasts and we talked about the latest crazes. But some were obviously checking up on my incorporation of plans changes, proper building techniques and materials. It's a good way to be in the loop on concerns and cautions from lessons learned. 
Now, besides that kind of personal interaction, we do a lot of good work on communication here.
The only bad thing is that if you don't have an original serial number it costs you five knots  :)

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 ... 14