361
Hangar Flying / Drew's Longez coming up for sale shortly---50K
« on: February 19, 2005, 07:59:50 PM »
Pictures can be seen on this site: http://home.earthlink.net/~swensonaw/
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.
362
Hangar Flying / Engine Mount
« on: February 19, 2005, 05:56:53 PM »
When I was changing engines from an 0235 to an 0320, I took my mount to Dave Ronneburg (Berkut Engineering) for modification. He said that the larger engines tended to crack the upper tubes. He welded one more tube to each upper biscuit to help spread the load. The bad news was that this extra tube got in the way of the brake master cylinders 
----so I had to put master cylinders up front-----oh wait a minute---that turned out to be good news :wink:
----so I had to put master cylinders up front-----oh wait a minute---that turned out to be good news :wink:
363
Hangar Flying / Performance Rudders vs. Standard
« on: February 19, 2005, 05:45:35 PM »
You have plenty of rudder authority with standard rudders airborne and I have demonstrated landings of up to 22 knots direct cross wind (varsity day for me though!). The large rudders do two things----they look cool----and they get you rudder authority quicker on the takeoff roll. The quicker rudder authority will let you get off the ground quicker in a crosswind (don't have to drag a brake as long to keep the nose straight). Converting to the larger rudders is a good first project for a new owner since it is relatively an easy foam and glass job. It should take about a weekend to do----then you need to add paint. You can buy the plans off the rutan website (about 15 bucks I think).
364
Hangar Flying / Drew's Longez coming up for sale shortly---50K
« on: February 15, 2005, 07:48:49 PM »
Ok---somehow I got logged off on my above post. It is my longez for sale.
Also, a copy of the plans, a copy of all the canard pushers, and the templates go along with this sale.
Also, a copy of the plans, a copy of all the canard pushers, and the templates go along with this sale.
365
Hangar Flying / baggage pods
« on: February 11, 2005, 10:57:35 PM »
I don't have pods (wouldn't mind having some though----but I have priorities elsewhere), but I can pack a longez for two for a week. I pack my travel duffle bag with clothes is large ziplock bags. When I get to the plane, I unload the ziplocks into the spar and the rear cockpit headrest area. The wings get packed and my wife stuffs a small duffle in the area underneath her knees. Not really a problem---but you do have to be creative---baggage pods should simplify things. If you need things to be nice and flat (like a tux or a dress-----done that one too), you can put it between the frontseat cusion and the frontseat bulkhead.
366
Hangar Flying / EZ plans for all...
« on: February 09, 2005, 02:40:44 AM »
Rutan contracted with Terf(www.terf.com) to sell a CD set of the plans. For $295 you can buy the plans for the Longez, Varieze, Defiant, Variviggen, and Solitaire, plus all the Canard Pushers, plus the moldless composite construction manual. None of the templates are included-----but if all you are trying to do is learn about it, you don't need the templates.
Aerocad plans are available for free download---see another post on this site.
Aerocad plans are available for free download---see another post on this site.
367
Hangar Flying / Nose Ballast with O-320
« on: February 05, 2005, 07:05:08 AM »
Gilbert,
I agree. W&B procedures are spelled out clearly in both the Varieze and Longeze owners manuals. You can still buy them from Rutan if you don't have them. I have mine from the TERF CD collection.
Full nose down fuel was the max gallons I could load into the airplane with the nose sitting on the ground (nose gear retracted)-----36 gallons. Actually, I think I can get more than 36 gallons into the tanks with the nose gear retracted-----but I used 36 gallons as my calculated fuel.
I went back to my prior post and replaced much of the "full nose down fuel" with "36 gal of fuel" to make it clearer.
I agree. W&B procedures are spelled out clearly in both the Varieze and Longeze owners manuals. You can still buy them from Rutan if you don't have them. I have mine from the TERF CD collection.
Full nose down fuel was the max gallons I could load into the airplane with the nose sitting on the ground (nose gear retracted)-----36 gallons. Actually, I think I can get more than 36 gallons into the tanks with the nose gear retracted-----but I used 36 gallons as my calculated fuel.
I went back to my prior post and replaced much of the "full nose down fuel" with "36 gal of fuel" to make it clearer.
368
Hangar Flying / Nose Ballast with O-320
« on: February 04, 2005, 11:08:22 PM »
After putting on an 0320 engine on a standard nose long and not adding or removing the lead that was already in there, I got this reading from the scales (nose gear needs to be down---and the longerons need to be level---use wood blocks to prop up the nose wheel until level---make sure to zeroize the scale with the wood blocks on it):
--------net-----arm--------moment
Right--485-----110--------53350
Left----483-----110--------53130
nose---29------19.6-------568.4
ballast-neg30--40---------neg1200 (this is temporary weight next to inst panel to keep nose from flipping over)
total----967-----109.4-----105848.4
You should then cross check these with several weight figures (pilot + 36gal of fuel, normal single cruise (16 gal of fuel), normal cruise with my wife, max gross wt).
As an example of me (pilot + 36 gal of fuel)
-----------------wt---------station-------moment
empty A/C-----967--------109.4--------105848.4
fuel (36 gal)---219.6------104.5--------22948.2
pilot------------145---------59-----------8555
total-----------1331.6------103.15------137351.6
If you check the CG of 103.15 with the CG limits, you will see that I am beyond the aft limit by .15 inches (the aft limit is the more dangerous of the two).
Doing some quick math, I found that 9 more pounds in my short nose would do the trick---here is what you get:
Same example of me but with ballast (pilot with 36 gal of fuel)
-----------------wt------station-------moment
empty A/C-----967----109.4--------105848.4
fuel (36 gal)----219.6--104.5-------22948.2
pilot-------------145-----59----------8555
ballast-----------9-------5------------45
total-------------1340.6--102.48-----137396.6
102.48 puts me pretty far back in the envelope (97 is the forward limit---103 is the aft limit------99 to 101.5 is the is the first flight limit-------keep in mind that weight is another dimension of the envelope----but I won't discuss here).
Doing a quick check with my other sample configurations, I get the following:
Normal single cruise (by myself with 16 gallons): 101.5
Normal wife cruise (wife and 16 gallons) 101.2
Load up (wife, bags, 36 gal of fuel): 102.12 and 1520 lbs
This little exercise shows that for the conditions I have listed, I have a safe balance. The other thing you need to check from here is how much deviation off of my pilot weight can I tolerate and still be within balance limits----you will want to post this weight tolerance in the front cockpit.
If you use a spreadsheet like Excel, this goes pretty fast
--------net-----arm--------moment
Right--485-----110--------53350
Left----483-----110--------53130
nose---29------19.6-------568.4
ballast-neg30--40---------neg1200 (this is temporary weight next to inst panel to keep nose from flipping over)
total----967-----109.4-----105848.4
You should then cross check these with several weight figures (pilot + 36gal of fuel, normal single cruise (16 gal of fuel), normal cruise with my wife, max gross wt).
As an example of me (pilot + 36 gal of fuel)
-----------------wt---------station-------moment
empty A/C-----967--------109.4--------105848.4
fuel (36 gal)---219.6------104.5--------22948.2
pilot------------145---------59-----------8555
total-----------1331.6------103.15------137351.6
If you check the CG of 103.15 with the CG limits, you will see that I am beyond the aft limit by .15 inches (the aft limit is the more dangerous of the two).
Doing some quick math, I found that 9 more pounds in my short nose would do the trick---here is what you get:
Same example of me but with ballast (pilot with 36 gal of fuel)
-----------------wt------station-------moment
empty A/C-----967----109.4--------105848.4
fuel (36 gal)----219.6--104.5-------22948.2
pilot-------------145-----59----------8555
ballast-----------9-------5------------45
total-------------1340.6--102.48-----137396.6
102.48 puts me pretty far back in the envelope (97 is the forward limit---103 is the aft limit------99 to 101.5 is the is the first flight limit-------keep in mind that weight is another dimension of the envelope----but I won't discuss here).
Doing a quick check with my other sample configurations, I get the following:
Normal single cruise (by myself with 16 gallons): 101.5
Normal wife cruise (wife and 16 gallons) 101.2
Load up (wife, bags, 36 gal of fuel): 102.12 and 1520 lbs
This little exercise shows that for the conditions I have listed, I have a safe balance. The other thing you need to check from here is how much deviation off of my pilot weight can I tolerate and still be within balance limits----you will want to post this weight tolerance in the front cockpit.
If you use a spreadsheet like Excel, this goes pretty fast
369
Hangar Flying / Nose Ballast with O-320
« on: February 02, 2005, 06:00:24 PM »
The point is---we can all give you an amount of lead that we had to add for preliminary sizing purposes----but you need to determine for yourself what you need by weighing the aircraft. If you flew my plane, we would need to add or subtract lead weight based on how much you weigh----if you are about my size, it would probably be ok---but would need to calculate. We would not need to weigh my aircraft since I have already done so and can mathematically figure out how much lead to add or subtract to fly you as the pilot. When I take passengers in my plane, I don't need to calculate balance since the passenger is basically sitting on the CG. Very generally (for standard nose), really heavy people don't need lots of lead. Light weight people like me need lots of lead. Longezs are a lot different from "normal" aircraft. In "normal" aircraft, the pilot generally sits on the CG. In a Longez, the pilot is way forward of the CG.
With your aircraft (and your body weight), we have no idea how much lead you will need. Don't even think of flying that plane without performing a proper weight and balance------It will kill you. You do not have to have the lead already in the nose to do a proper weight and balance. The proper weight and balance will tell you how much lead weight you will need to buy.
You will definately be able to keep your starter. The lead just eats into your load carrying capacity
With your aircraft (and your body weight), we have no idea how much lead you will need. Don't even think of flying that plane without performing a proper weight and balance------It will kill you. You do not have to have the lead already in the nose to do a proper weight and balance. The proper weight and balance will tell you how much lead weight you will need to buy.
You will definately be able to keep your starter. The lead just eats into your load carrying capacity
370
Hangar Flying / IFR instruments
« on: February 02, 2005, 05:44:48 PM »
The VOR check is every 30 days. Need to log somewhere and the following needs to be logged: date, error, place, and signature (DEPS).
Besides looking at the minimum equipment, need to think about what you are really trying to do. In a more normal configuration, you would want a vacuum att gyro and an electric T/B (or elect att and vacuum T/B----or all electric but 2 elect systems or all electric with batt backups on both instruments). The point is that you don't want the vacuum to go dead and take away all the instruments that keep you right side up (you have elect once backing you up). If you just install an EFIS, if the elect sys goes down, you do have a batt backup, but if the EFIS goes down, it takes attitude, hdg, alt, airspeed, and turn needle all at once. Make sure that you are properly backed up
I have:
Vac: att, hdg
elect: EFIS (att, airspeed, alt, turn needle)
other pitot static: airspeed, alt
Besides looking at the minimum equipment, need to think about what you are really trying to do. In a more normal configuration, you would want a vacuum att gyro and an electric T/B (or elect att and vacuum T/B----or all electric but 2 elect systems or all electric with batt backups on both instruments). The point is that you don't want the vacuum to go dead and take away all the instruments that keep you right side up (you have elect once backing you up). If you just install an EFIS, if the elect sys goes down, you do have a batt backup, but if the EFIS goes down, it takes attitude, hdg, alt, airspeed, and turn needle all at once. Make sure that you are properly backed up
I have:
Vac: att, hdg
elect: EFIS (att, airspeed, alt, turn needle)
other pitot static: airspeed, alt
371
Hangar Flying / Friction Lock on Throttle Quadrant
« on: January 29, 2005, 06:47:04 AM »
Inflight adjustable friction lock is not required----however, you will need to adjust the friction. If the friction is not high enough, the throttle will creep and drive you nuts. The bolt that holds the throttle in place is what adjusts the friction. Start light on the friction and adjust until the throttles no longer creep----then you never need to adjust.
372
Hangar Flying / Warning Horns
« on: January 28, 2005, 09:26:32 AM »
In addition to warning systems, another thing to think about is your aircraft trying to talk to you. Before taking off on the flight where my canopy lifted, my plane was trying to talk to me----and I ignored it----listen to your airplane.
On two occasions, I rolled in the groove with my gear still up (I was distracted in the cockpit by something else). On both occasions the plane was "talking" to me (speed, pwr setting, descent rate, general "feel" of the airplane was not right). On both occasions, I listened and found the gear to be still up---solved the problem in plenty of time-----but not happy.
The point is----pay attention to what your plane is trying to tell you. Configuration, engine health, cracked pipes, cracked engine mount, etc. It is rare (thankfully) that something catestrophic happens to an EZ. The plane is usually nagging at you for a while (for landing---the nag time is just not very long----but there nonetheless). Warning systems are good---but don't rely on them for your only source of information. I have known people to land aircraft gear up with the warning horn blaring. I have know people to push the defeat button ----only to be bitten by it later. I have known people to be careless since they think the warning system is protecting them (even though they can fail).
For the canopy, you can greatly reduce risk by only accepting 2 positions----down and locked-----and up. Then put on a warning system----but I would change your habit first.
Always brief your passenger on aircraft configuration changes and let them know that they are part of the crew. My passenger should always hear that the gear and board is down------if they did not, it isn't---speak up. They should also hear that I am putting the gear up on takeoff.
Warning systems, good habits, crew concept (if flying with a passenger)-----don't rely on just one----use them all.
On two occasions, I rolled in the groove with my gear still up (I was distracted in the cockpit by something else). On both occasions the plane was "talking" to me (speed, pwr setting, descent rate, general "feel" of the airplane was not right). On both occasions, I listened and found the gear to be still up---solved the problem in plenty of time-----but not happy.
The point is----pay attention to what your plane is trying to tell you. Configuration, engine health, cracked pipes, cracked engine mount, etc. It is rare (thankfully) that something catestrophic happens to an EZ. The plane is usually nagging at you for a while (for landing---the nag time is just not very long----but there nonetheless). Warning systems are good---but don't rely on them for your only source of information. I have known people to land aircraft gear up with the warning horn blaring. I have know people to push the defeat button ----only to be bitten by it later. I have known people to be careless since they think the warning system is protecting them (even though they can fail).
For the canopy, you can greatly reduce risk by only accepting 2 positions----down and locked-----and up. Then put on a warning system----but I would change your habit first.
Always brief your passenger on aircraft configuration changes and let them know that they are part of the crew. My passenger should always hear that the gear and board is down------if they did not, it isn't---speak up. They should also hear that I am putting the gear up on takeoff.
Warning systems, good habits, crew concept (if flying with a passenger)-----don't rely on just one----use them all.
373
Hangar Flying / To Vari Eze or Not, that is the question.
« on: January 27, 2005, 06:28:12 PM »
<snip>Now as far as landing and touch down speed, I disagree with those that think a LongEz will land slower and shorter than a Varieze. I don't believe that I am any better a pilot than the average Ez type, but I land and virtually always turn off at the first intersection while most every LongEz will go another 1500 feet down to the next turn off. <snip>
I feel comfortable landing on 2000 ft runways in my Longez (don't be doing this as a new guy---get experience and work your way down) but if I land on a 3000ft strip, you will probably see me roll out to the end
I feel comfortable landing on 2000 ft runways in my Longez (don't be doing this as a new guy---get experience and work your way down) but if I land on a 3000ft strip, you will probably see me roll out to the end
374
Hangar Flying / Warning Horns
« on: January 27, 2005, 06:21:26 PM »
<snip>I think the difference with a EZ airplane is that an open canopy can be a serious safety of flight issue, whereas an open door on a Cessna is a nuisance that is not.<snip>
I have already checked that block---and will never check that block again (even though I have no warning system). When I added power for takeoff at Chino airport, it sounded different in the cockpit but I could not quite put my finger on it (with the canopy latched, it actually muffles the sound quite a bit more than with it down and not latched). After getting 50 or so feet in the air, the canopy lifted up to the saftey catch. I immediately slowed to min flight speed (I usually accel to 120 mph for climb speed). My wife grabbed the canopy brace and helped me shut it with no further issues. The reason it will never happen to me again is that I only taxi with the canopy in two positions----down and latched, or open. What bit me on this particular flight was taxiing with the canopy closed and not latched-----don't do this.
I have already checked that block---and will never check that block again (even though I have no warning system). When I added power for takeoff at Chino airport, it sounded different in the cockpit but I could not quite put my finger on it (with the canopy latched, it actually muffles the sound quite a bit more than with it down and not latched). After getting 50 or so feet in the air, the canopy lifted up to the saftey catch. I immediately slowed to min flight speed (I usually accel to 120 mph for climb speed). My wife grabbed the canopy brace and helped me shut it with no further issues. The reason it will never happen to me again is that I only taxi with the canopy in two positions----down and latched, or open. What bit me on this particular flight was taxiing with the canopy closed and not latched-----don't do this.
375
Hangar Flying / Glass Instruments
« on: January 26, 2005, 11:31:03 AM »
I would be thinking 6 pack layout with the 3 1/8 inch holes, maybe add 1 or 2 holes of this same size and then fill up the panel nicely with the 2 1/4 inch holes while leaving room for required switches on the panel. Blank off the holes you don't need and put reducers in for the standard six pack if you go smaller. This will give you some upgrade room----and I have assumed that you don't really have to add any square gauges like radios (since you would be going for round ones). If you don't leave some upgrade room---because you generously spread out your gauges, the only way you will be able to upgrade is to recut a new panel.
Put enough holes so that you can eventually add equipment for IFR.
Don't fill up you panel with things just to fill it up. Don't need the trim gauges. You can mount the elt gauge just about anywhere (underneath the panel, in the head rest (not sure if the "phone cable" they give you will reach though)-----or in my case, I don't even use it---I reset it at the source), etc).
Be careful about switches and breakers in the panel. I have my most important switches on a side panel that always stays dry. Your panel switches can get wet----and in Beagle's case, looks like he lost his elec ignition and mags resulting in no more thrusties.
I do like manifold pressure----since it is the only way I know what % horsepower I am running-----but then again if you get above 9000 ft or so, full power won't exceed 75%
Put enough holes so that you can eventually add equipment for IFR.
Don't fill up you panel with things just to fill it up. Don't need the trim gauges. You can mount the elt gauge just about anywhere (underneath the panel, in the head rest (not sure if the "phone cable" they give you will reach though)-----or in my case, I don't even use it---I reset it at the source), etc).
Be careful about switches and breakers in the panel. I have my most important switches on a side panel that always stays dry. Your panel switches can get wet----and in Beagle's case, looks like he lost his elec ignition and mags resulting in no more thrusties.
I do like manifold pressure----since it is the only way I know what % horsepower I am running-----but then again if you get above 9000 ft or so, full power won't exceed 75%