Hangar Flying

FWIW, the Cozy MK IV design specifies .2 inch thick, 18-pound Last-A-Foam (ACS P/N 01-14400) for the IP and the F22 bulkheads.  I'd stick with the specified PVC foam (ACS P/N 01-13000, H100, per the MK IV plans) for the NG30's, etc., for durability properties.  I used 18-pound Last-A-Foam for my VariEze IP & F22 buklheads (500 hours on the airplane now).

 

Mike,

As constructed (per the Aileron Addendum to the VEZ first edition plans, or per the VEZ second edition plans), the VEZ ailerons do not have a weight value indicated.  Weight is what it is, by virtue of design.  As-built, the ailerons must balance at least with the plans-defined waterline of the aileron level, with a trailing-edge-up condition even better.  The ailerons must not balance trailing-edge-low (i.e. aileron waterline low on the aft end). 

The ailerons can be of different weights, but must balance correctly (neither aileron can be TE-low).  Ideally, as close to matching weight and balance angle is the best configuration.  Do not fall in to a false belief that one "light" aileron with a good TE up balance will counteract an opposite aileron that is not balanced correctly.

The big question here is, if you did not build your Eze, do you have all the plans and Canard Pushers?  If not, you need to acquire that data.  For a one-off plans-built airplane, that data is essential to have.

Some have seen some improvement with low-speed aileron authority on the Long-EZ, with a fence installed on the wing TE just outboard of the outboard end of the aileron.  A former hangarmate put fences on in 2 or 3 locations on each wing, with little discernable change in characteristics.  I was just puzzling as to where Burt indicated that Long-EZs should have TE fences.  No reference to them is made in any of the CPs.

I need to comment on a few things posted on this thread:

(3) I found that you MUST double back the wire at the end or the connector will pull off.
That means that you will have little use for the end connectors with red plastic
covers; the hole is too small for most wires when you double back the wire.  See (4)

Not true - using the properly-sized AMP (or equivalent) connector for the wire size employed does NOT require any folding of the wire to obtain correct wire CAU (Circular Area Unit).  Also, it is possible to fold over a wire to install in an oversize terminal, and still fall short of achieving the necessary CAU that hits at least the minimum CAU for the terminal itself.  You can end up with a not-as-good-as-it-should-be terminal installation as you might like, by eyeball-engineering here.  If you don't have the wherewithall to look up the specs and requirements to make sure you can "fudge" a wire terminal installation where the terminal is "oversize", then stick to using the correct parts.



(4) If the tables say to use #24 wire, use #20, and the same for # 22 or #20, use
    bigger wire because the wire is going to be vibrating and will break.

Not true.  24 Gauge wire is great for certain things (audio systems, etc.).  To generalize that "bigger wire will not break because it is stong enough" (under vibration) is a false premise.  Properly installed, secured, strain-relieved, etc., there is NO reason that specified wire gauges cannot be employed.  There are just as many circumstances, in a vibration-rich environment, that can cause a heavier-gauge wire to break, when a small-gauge wire won't.



(9) If you run all of those wires down the right side, you will not have space enough for
    the push rod for the elevators.   Guess how I know that.

I've looked at plenty of VEZ/LEZ wire installations that have entailed wires on the right side, forward of the instrument panel.  As long as correct provisions are made to secure such bundles to keep them out of the way of flight control runs, etc., there is no problem.


(13) Label your wires at least 3 places so you can troubleshoot later.   It is required
anyway.   That is IN ADDITION to color coding.

Not required in any of the regs that apply to homebuilts, but good practice



(16) The plans system to prevent takeoff with nthe canopy unlatched and landing with
the nose gear up is AWFUL.   You had better use it but you will have a problem when
some part of it is not working correctly.   I spent ENDLESS hours debugging it.    I
finally put a terminal block on the surface of the inside of the fuselage where I can
get to it (inside the nose compartment so I cannot reach it in flight, of course).
EVERY wire in the system runs to that block.  Then I close the canopy (get a friend
to do it and sit there while you do the check) and check voltages with throttle
back vs throttle forward.  Then I put a sawhorse under the fuselage and retract
the nose wheel.  Check voltages with throttle back and forward.  ETC.  If some
part of the system is not working correctly, you can tell.


Plans-built warning system works just fine, properly built & wired & installed.

Arnold,

Best way to "tap" the pressure off of a O-200 is with either a oil filler cap modified with a hose barb brazed to it, or a homebrew rig that allows for the same type of bayonet fixity to the oil filler tube.  I made the latter version with some scrap aluminum and a barbed hose fitting threaded into the aluminum plate that makes up the cover.  Seal is a scrap piece of silicone baffle material.  Two tabs with screws form the bayonet section.  I use a simple U-tube manometer.  You may have a bit of a vacuum effect where your breather exit is - mine runs out the right side as well, but is closer to the prop hub than being outboard.  An Adel clamp with an addtional worm clamp for safety positions an aluminum tube downward and out, with the clamp bolted to a reinforced section of the aft baffle.  Works like a charm, and I lose only drops of oil.  As I noted, my breather tube runs in a 180 degree loop across the top of the O-200.  It is secured to the lifting eye.  I also use the "Aerobatic" breather elbow, made by brazing a short section of tubing on the threaded end.  With wht crankshaft config and the vacuum pump gear at the prop end of the O-200, the stock breather can yield extra oil out the elbow.   See the following website for details:

http://www.mooneymite.com/maintenance/continentalbreatherfix.htm

My O-200 runs about a half-inch of case pressure, FWIW.

Cheers,

Anybody out there in canard-dom have an original (i.e. the "push-pull") VariEze Nose Gear Retract System in good condition collecting dust in a basement/hangar/workshop?  I already have one in use on my Eze, and am seeking another on behalf of another builder with similar inclinations towards antique (but very effective & simple) VariEze technology...

Thanks!

-Joe Person

What Bill said.

If you were to land with a partially-extended nose gear, you run great risk of getting nosewheel shimmy, which, at touchdown speeds, has high probability of failing the fork assembly, with the resultant departure of the nosewheel from the fork assembly, etc.  Such a freed-up nosewheel can destroy your landing brake, take out your prop, etc.  Seen this twice.

The strippable gear acts as a "structural fusible link" in a sense - keeps overloads or unwanted loads from compromising other components in the overall nose landing gear installation.

Wood is not in the structure to pick up any primary loads per-se  It helps provide a bit of a hardpoint for clamp-up and such, and helps facilitate/stabilize the point-load dump from the bolt into the glass.  The more correct approach is "how much additional glass structure was added, and what was the layup schedule used to ensure satisfactory load distribution into the rest of the airframe?" 

Careful with eyeball engineering when dealing with composite primary structures - it will likely lead to undesired and even unfortunate results.