Question - Regarding Canard Pushers...

[Tilt]

Hi,

I'm new to this newsgroup. I have a couple of questions.

Sometime within the next 10 years (hopefully a bit sooner), I will begin a
homebuilt project. Myself and a couple of friends plan to go in on a project
together. Basically splitting the costs and the final product. 2 of us do
not yet have our pilots licence and one is currently a Canadian Forces
fighter pilot. We've only had casual conversation about this project so far.
I've decided to start laying the ground work for this long term project.

We all really like the idea of a canard pusher design. 4 seats are also
desired. Details after that have not been discussed. But one thing that
popped up was the control stick position. I've noticed, while surfing the
net looking at Velocity's and Cozy's, that the stick is a side mount. I
would prefer a center mount stick and I know my fighter friend would want
the center stick. Does anyone produce a kit, along these lines, with a
center mount stick? Are there any other choices out there for a 4 place
canard pusher?

I've found some rough figures on costs of Velocity pushers. What are some
potential final tallies for Cozy's?

Lastly, what are some recommendations, for homebuilt canard pushers, that
any experts here can give?

Thanks,
Lyle

[Kevin Horton]

On Thu, 07 Aug 2003 06:46:00 +0000, Tilt wrote:

> We all really like the idea of a canard pusher design. 4 seats are also
> desired. Details after that have not been discussed. But one thing that
> popped up was the control stick position. I've noticed, while surfing
> the net looking at Velocity's and Cozy's, that the stick is a side
> mount. I would prefer a center mount stick and I know my fighter friend
> would want the center stick.

You might want to wrangle a flight in a canard with a side stick before
you write off the concept. It does work reasonably well, at least on the
Gyroflug Speed Canard that I flew.

4 seat canards are not the sort of aircraft you do aerobatics in, so you
don't need the leverage that a long centre stick gives you.

--
Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
Ottawa, Canada
http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/

[Big John]

Kevin

Note your Fighter Pilot's druthers.

With a side stick you can't fly with your knees while you do other
important things with ur hands.

Big John
Retired Fighter Pilot


On Thu, 07 Aug 2003 10:55:56 GMT, Kevin Horton >
wrote:

>On Thu, 07 Aug 2003 06:46:00 +0000, Tilt wrote:
>
>> We all really like the idea of a canard pusher design. 4 seats are also
>> desired. Details after that have not been discussed. But one thing that
>> popped up was the control stick position. I've noticed, while surfing
>> the net looking at Velocity's and Cozy's, that the stick is a side
>> mount. I would prefer a center mount stick and I know my fighter friend
>> would want the center stick.
>
>You might want to wrangle a flight in a canard with a side stick before
>you write off the concept. It does work reasonably well, at least on the
>Gyroflug Speed Canard that I flew.
>
>4 seat canards are not the sort of aircraft you do aerobatics in, so you
>don't need the leverage that a long centre stick gives you.

[Snowbird]

Big John > wrote in message >...
> Kevin
> Note your Fighter Pilot's druthers.

> With a side stick you can't fly with your knees while you do other
> important things with ur hands.

Well, one could install a simple wing-leveler/GPS tracker
autopilot, not?

Depending upon the plane's mission, which might be
"goin' places" if 4 seats are a must, an AP can be
highly desireable.

Sydney, whose autopilot is in Georgia as we speak

[RobertR237]

In article >, Big John
> writes:

>
>Kevin
>
>Note your Fighter Pilot's druthers.
>
>With a side stick you can't fly with your knees while you do other
>important things with ur hands.
>
>Big John
>Retired Fighter Pilot
>
>

That's what Autopilots are for.


Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

[Kevin Horton]

On Thu, 07 Aug 2003 10:48:51 -0500, Big John wrote:

> Kevin
>
> Note your Fighter Pilot's druthers.
>
> With a side stick you can't fly with your knees while you do other
> important things with ur hands.
>
> Big John
> Retired Fighter Pilot
>
>
> On Thu, 07 Aug 2003 10:55:56 GMT, Kevin Horton >
> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 07 Aug 2003 06:46:00 +0000, Tilt wrote:
>>
>>> We all really like the idea of a canard pusher design. 4 seats are
>>> also desired. Details after that have not been discussed. But one
>>> thing that popped up was the control stick position. I've noticed,
>>> while surfing the net looking at Velocity's and Cozy's, that the stick
>>> is a side mount. I would prefer a center mount stick and I know my
>>> fighter friend would want the center stick.
>>
>>You might want to wrangle a flight in a canard with a side stick before
>>you write off the concept. It does work reasonably well, at least on
>>the Gyroflug Speed Canard that I flew.
>>
>>4 seat canards are not the sort of aircraft you do aerobatics in, so you
>>don't need the leverage that a long centre stick gives you.

I got lots of hours holding sticks between my knees too. I would prefer a
centre stick too. But a properly built and rigged canard should be able
to keep right side up once you've got it trimmed, I would have thought.
So you should be able to release the stick for short periods if you really
need both hands.

I'm not aware of any four place canards with centre sticks. I suspect it
would be a very large job to cobble a centre stick onto one of the four
place canard designs. You would need quite a few bell cranks, etc, and
the number of pivots could lead to excessive friction, if you weren't real
careful with the design and construction.

--
Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
Ottawa, Canada
http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/

[Tilt]

I'm seeing this may be the case. We arn't getting real serious yet, but I
want to start researching this info now. My friends and I would certainly
prefer a stick between the knees. My fighter friend has flown this way since
the start of his flying career. I myself like that arrangment too. Maybe we
need to look at other homebuilt designs. We would like the craft to have
some light aerobatics abilities. Nothing real heavy...none of us wants to go
off and join the Air Show.

I did find a web site of a dude building an SQ-2000 canard pusher. His
cockpit was set up with 2 yokes. This leads me to think it wouldn't be hard
to set up a center (between the knees) stick.

Any SQ-2000 owners out there want to enlighten me?

Cheers,
Lyle


> >>You might want to wrangle a flight in a canard with a side stick before
> >>you write off the concept. It does work reasonably well, at least on
> >>the Gyroflug Speed Canard that I flew.
> >>
> >>4 seat canards are not the sort of aircraft you do aerobatics in, so you
> >>don't need the leverage that a long centre stick gives you.
>
> I got lots of hours holding sticks between my knees too. I would prefer a
> centre stick too. But a properly built and rigged canard should be able
> to keep right side up once you've got it trimmed, I would have thought.
> So you should be able to release the stick for short periods if you really
> need both hands.
>
> I'm not aware of any four place canards with centre sticks. I suspect it
> would be a very large job to cobble a centre stick onto one of the four
> place canard designs. You would need quite a few bell cranks, etc, and
> the number of pivots could lead to excessive friction, if you weren't real
> careful with the design and construction.
>
> --
> Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
> Ottawa, Canada
> http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/
>

[Ernest Christley]

Tilt wrote:
> I'm seeing this may be the case. We arn't getting real serious yet, but I
> want to start researching this info now. My friends and I would certainly
> prefer a stick between the knees. My fighter friend has flown this way since
> the start of his flying career. I myself like that arrangment too. Maybe we
> need to look at other homebuilt designs. We would like the craft to have
> some light aerobatics abilities. Nothing real heavy...none of us wants to go
> off and join the Air Show.
>
> I did find a web site of a dude building an SQ-2000 canard pusher. His
> cockpit was set up with 2 yokes. This leads me to think it wouldn't be hard
> to set up a center (between the knees) stick.
>
> Any SQ-2000 owners out there want to enlighten me?
>

What is the reasoning behind a pusher? If you want to get started
sooner than later, then take a look at the Dyke Delta. It's plans
built. $200 to get started, and then pick up tubing as you go along.


--
----Because I can----
http://www.ernest.isa-geek.org/
------------------------

[smf]

I have 500+ hours in a Q-200 (center stick) and am currently flying a
Glasair II (stick between the legs).
The position of the stick isn't an issue for me.At one time I thought it
was. I fly the Glasair left handed and am quite comfortable with it.
So many other things are issues!!! But certainly not the position of the
stick. The issues come and go as these machines are evolving, Issue at hand
is change both mags and harness or go with single electronic ignition.
It's always something!!!

Steve



"Tilt" > wrote in message
. ca...
> Hi,
>
> I'm new to this newsgroup. I have a couple of questions.
>
> Sometime within the next 10 years (hopefully a bit sooner), I will begin a
> homebuilt project. Myself and a couple of friends plan to go in on a
project
> together. Basically splitting the costs and the final product. 2 of us do
> not yet have our pilots licence and one is currently a Canadian Forces
> fighter pilot. We've only had casual conversation about this project so
far.
> I've decided to start laying the ground work for this long term project.
>
> We all really like the idea of a canard pusher design. 4 seats are also
> desired. Details after that have not been discussed. But one thing that
> popped up was the control stick position. I've noticed, while surfing the
> net looking at Velocity's and Cozy's, that the stick is a side mount. I
> would prefer a center mount stick and I know my fighter friend would want
> the center stick. Does anyone produce a kit, along these lines, with a
> center mount stick? Are there any other choices out there for a 4 place
> canard pusher?
>
> I've found some rough figures on costs of Velocity pushers. What are some
> potential final tallies for Cozy's?
>
> Lastly, what are some recommendations, for homebuilt canard pushers, that
> any experts here can give?
>
> Thanks,
> Lyle
>
>

[Richard Lamb]

Steve,
How does the Q-200 fly?
Have you ever written up the handling characteristics?


Richard

smf wrote:
>
> I have 500+ hours in a Q-200 (center stick) and am currently flying a
> Glasair II (stick between the legs).
> The position of the stick isn't an issue for me.At one time I thought it
> was. I fly the Glasair left handed and am quite comfortable with it.
> So many other things are issues!!! But certainly not the position of the
> stick. The issues come and go as these machines are evolving, Issue at hand
> is change both mags and harness or go with single electronic ignition.
> It's always something!!!
>
> Steve
>

[D.W. Taylor]

RobertR237 wrote:
> In article >, Big John
> > writes:
>
>
>>Kevin
>>
>>Note your Fighter Pilot's druthers.
>>
>>With a side stick you can't fly with your knees while you do other
>>important things with ur hands.
>>
>>Big John
>>Retired Fighter Pilot
>>
>>
>
>
> That's what Autopilots are for.

! no thats what the girl friend is for.... ;)

>
>
> Bob Reed
> www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
> KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....
>
> "Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
> pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
> (M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)
>

Had to be said...

Dave (daves not here)

[Big John]

Bob

I never heard two knees defined as an auto pilot before.

If you keep loading a bird down (A/P, etc) the weight growth will
seriously effect the performance of bird.

Since most pilots come with two knees, you don't add any weight to be
able to fly the bird with the knees when required.

Big John


On 07 Aug 2003 22:24:28 GMT, (RobertR237)
wrote:

>In article >, Big John
> writes:
>
>>
>>Kevin
>>
>>Note your Fighter Pilot's druthers.
>>
>>With a side stick you can't fly with your knees while you do other
>>important things with ur hands.
>>
>>Big John
>>Retired Fighter Pilot
>>
>>
>
>That's what Autopilots are for.
>
>
>Bob Reed
>www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
>KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....
>
>"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
>pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
>(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

[Big John]

Kevin

----clip----

>I got lots of hours holding sticks between my knees too. I would prefer a
>centre stick too. But a properly built and rigged canard should be able
>to keep right side up once you've got it trimmed, I would have thought.
>So you should be able to release the stick for short periods if you really
>need both hands.

Most GA birds don't have aileron trim (maybe a ground adjustable tab
on aileron). If you make the bird so inherently stable that it will
fly hands off, then it will fly like a truck and be no fun to fly at
all. Two hands to make a turn, etc.

Lots of ways to make airplanes. Homebuilts let you make what you want
(good or bad)..


Big John

[Barnyard BOb --]

>I have 500+ hours in a Q-200 (center stick) and am currently flying a
>Glasair II (stick between the legs).
>The position of the stick isn't an issue for me.At one time I thought it
>was. I fly the Glasair left handed and am quite comfortable with it.
>So many other things are issues!!! But certainly not the position of the
>stick. The issues come and go as these machines are evolving, Issue at hand
>is change both mags and harness or go with single electronic ignition.
>It's always something!!!
>
>Steve
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Stick, yoke, or whatever have been non issues
over the last 50 years of flying for me, but......
SINGLE electronic ignition scares the bejeezus
out of me.

What is your rationale, besides money?
Have you taken leave of your senses? <g>


Barnyard BOb -- 50 years of flight

[Barnyard BOb --]

On Thu, 07 Aug 2003 23:58:41 -0500, Big John >
wrote:

>Bob
>
>I never heard two knees defined as an auto pilot before.
>
>If you keep loading a bird down (A/P, etc) the weight growth will
>seriously effect the performance of bird.
>
>Since most pilots come with two knees, you don't add any weight to be
>able to fly the bird with the knees when required.
>
>Big John
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

The 'knee trick' will get you at least....
three snap rolls, two loops and a split-S in my RV-3
before you can decide it was a less than brilliant idea. <g>


Barnyard BOb - teller of tall tales

[Barnyard BOb --]

>
>>I got lots of hours holding sticks between my knees too. I would prefer a
>>centre stick too. But a properly built and rigged canard should be able
>>to keep right side up once you've got it trimmed, I would have thought.
>>So you should be able to release the stick for short periods if you really
>>need both hands.
>
>Big John
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Why are you picking on the early model Mooney's? <g>


Barnyard BOb --

[Barnyard BOb --]

> If you make the bird so inherently stable that it will
>fly hands off, then it will fly like a truck and be no fun to fly at
>all. Two hands to make a turn, etc.

>Big John
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

[Let's try this again}

Why are you picking on the early model Mooney's.




Barnyard BOb -- why am I doing this?

[smf]

Bob,

I would go leave one mag on and have Electronic Ignition in place of the
other mag.
It isn't about money, I can get a Slick mag kit (2 mags and harness) for the
price of one Elec. Ignition system.
The elec. ign. has no moving parts except for the sensor and has a much
hotter spark and the benefits of spark advance.

Steve

Oh...I take leave of my senses regularly. Flying experimental is a good sign
of that!!!:)
"> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
> Stick, yoke, or whatever have been non issues
> over the last 50 years of flying for me, but......
> SINGLE electronic ignition scares the bejeezus
> out of me.
>
> What is your rationale, besides money?
> Have you taken leave of your senses? <g>
>
>
> Barnyard BOb -- 50 years of flight

[smf]

Richard,
My Q-Bird was a Tri gear model so I didn't have the challanges of handling
on the ground. Some guys said "it was cheating" but it was a puppy on the
ground. In the air it was a pure "hands on airplane". Very responsive with a
rather high landing speed. I know of several fatalities in the planes. They
all seem to be in the test flight phase or in the first 20 hrs. of a new
owner.

These planes don't really stall, they just kinda porpoise. When the canard
stalls the rear wing is still flying so the nose drops and canard starts
flying again. It will do this over and over.

I'm convinced that after spending 570hrs in a Q I'm a better pilot.

Steve



"Richard Lamb" > wrote in message
...
>
> Steve,
> How does the Q-200 fly?
> Have you ever written up the handling characteristics?
>
>
> Richard

[Rick Pellicciotti]

> wrote in message ...
> In article <3f324aee$1@ham>, Rick Pellicciotti says...
>
> >My Velocity RG has a center stick. Came that way from the factory.
>
> I think he means a stick between your knees.
>
Oh. Ok. Having flown a lot of airplanes with side-sticks, I would never
want to go back to a yoke or a center stick. Especially for an airplane
that I intended to fly long trips in. Having you lap clear for a chart or
kneeboard sure is nice. Also, the instrument panel gains a lot of real
estate. The nicest feature is that the sticks are not in the way for
getting in or out. That may seem trivial but when it comes to pleasing the
wife or girlfriend and making her feel comfortable in the airplane, nothing
is trivial.

Rick Pellicciotti
http://www.belleairetours.com

[Rick Pellicciotti]

"Kevin Horton" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 08 Aug 2003 00:22:46 +0000, Tilt wrote:
>
> > We
> > would like the craft to have some light aerobatics abilities. Nothing
> > real heavy...none of us wants to go off and join the Air Show.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Lyle
>
>
> Lyle,
>
> If you also want to fly some aerobatics, I don't think you should
> belooking at a canard. A properly designed, built and loaded
> canardaircraft does have stall protection if the stall is approached
> gentlyenough. But, if you have a very dynamic entry to the stall (e.g.
> verynose high at low speed) you might stall the main wing. If the main
> wingever stalls you will quite likely enter an unrecoverable deep stall.
>
> I would not risk doing aerobatics in a canard aircraft. You might getaway
> with it for awhile, but if you ever screw up and stall the main wing,you
> have to bail out. With a conventional aircraft, you just centralizethe
> controls and wait until the aircraft enters a recognizable attitude,or
> recover from the spin.
>
> I recall a canard that was lost on a test flight up here in Canada when
> the test pilot tried some aerobatics.
>
> See:
>
> http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=392d6048.4743739%40news.ionsys.com
>
> This one is also interesting:
>
> http://www.canard.com/ntsb/LAX/95A289.htm
>
> There were quite a few Velocity accidents due to stalls in the early days.
> They made changes, and I think the issue is gone, but it highlights how
> bad a cliff edge there can be with stalls in canards.
>
> http://www.canard.com/ntsb/MIA/88A203.htm
> http://www.canard.com/ntsb/MIA/93A011.htm
> http://www.canard.com/ntsb/MIA/89A087.htm
> http://www.canard.com/ntsb/MIA/89A117.htm
>
> --
> Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
> Ottawa, Canada
> http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/
> http://www.canard.com/ntsb/LAX/95A289.htm

I won't dispute that there have been some accidents in canard airplanes
during aerobatic flight. I am confident that I could find an equal number
of accidents that happened during aerobatic flight in most any other make
and model, high-performance homebuilt. Flown properly, aerobatics can be
done in canard airplanes. They are very low drag airplanes and great care
should be exercised in the vertical mode. I have done most any "fun" type
manuvers you can name in a veri-eze and a long-ez. I have rolled a velocity
a couple of times. They are all delightful flying airplanes.

That said, the velocity is not really suited for that as much as it is
touring. I don't have any experience with the SQ-2000 except close
examination of the prototype on the ground. The wing area seems a little
small for the load it is said to carry.

Rick Pellicciotti
http://www.belleairetours.com

[smf]

Bob

I'm really having trouble with my reasoning about going to Elec. Ign. I
might save 5% on fuel. I have about 600 hrs on Mags and Plugs without any
trouble. "So if it ain't broke don't fix it" starts to make sense.
By the way...I have 600 hrs on Smith plugs. They are Iridium and work fine.
No fouling. A "Champion plug guy" at OSHkosh said that they haven't made
those plugs in 20 yrs. The Unison guys never heard of Smith. Heck...they may
last to TBO!!

Steve


> I hope you do spring for the electronic ignition.
> Perhaps you will report back that you are saving so much in
> fuel and spark plugs that you opened a service station and
> retired early from all the fuel you saved and sold to the thick
> headed magneto lovers like me.
>
> In the meantime, I'll just sit back and enjoy BOTH my current....
> and future set of Slicks and add another 50 years of dinosaur
> flight to my logbook.
>
>
> Barnyard BOb -- if it ain't broke why fix it at twice the price?
>

[Big John]

BOb

'I'm' not doing any picking. My Mark 20C (1962) didn't have a wing
leveler (came out a year or two later) so had to fly the bird all the
time like in a fighter. Was hard to fly with knees with the control
wheel(s) it had.

Was so light on controls, if I dropped something on floor (pencil) and
bent over to pick up, would end up almost on my back before I knew it.
Stick would have made all the difference in the world.

Bird was still a joy for old retired Fighter Pilot to fly.


Big John



On Fri, 08 Aug 2003 06:17:41 -0500, Barnyard BOb -- >
wrote:

>
>>
>>>I got lots of hours holding sticks between my knees too. I would prefer a
>>>centre stick too. But a properly built and rigged canard should be able
>>>to keep right side up once you've got it trimmed, I would have thought.
>>>So you should be able to release the stick for short periods if you really
>>>need both hands.
>>
>>Big John
>++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
>Why are you picking on the early model Mooney's? <g>
>
>
>Barnyard BOb --

[Big John]

BOb

My bird was a '62 (second year they made all metal). Never heard of
any Mooney flying like a truck??? Who, what , where, when???

Big John



On Fri, 08 Aug 2003 06:29:50 -0500, Barnyard BOb -- >
wrote:

>
>> If you make the bird so inherently stable that it will
>>fly hands off, then it will fly like a truck and be no fun to fly at
>>all. Two hands to make a turn, etc.
>
>>Big John
>+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
>[Let's try this again}
>
>Why are you picking on the early model Mooney's.
>
>
>
>
>Barnyard BOb -- why am I doing this?

[Big John]

BOb

The Taylor Cub I flew had single ignition. Whats the big deal about
single ignition?

Big John


On Fri, 08 Aug 2003 05:42:30 -0500, Barnyard BOb -- >
wrote:

>
>>I have 500+ hours in a Q-200 (center stick) and am currently flying a
>>Glasair II (stick between the legs).
>>The position of the stick isn't an issue for me.At one time I thought it
>>was. I fly the Glasair left handed and am quite comfortable with it.
>>So many other things are issues!!! But certainly not the position of the
>>stick. The issues come and go as these machines are evolving, Issue at hand
>>is change both mags and harness or go with single electronic ignition.
>>It's always something!!!
>>
>>Steve
>++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
>Stick, yoke, or whatever have been non issues
>over the last 50 years of flying for me, but......
>SINGLE electronic ignition scares the bejeezus
>out of me.
>
>What is your rationale, besides money?
>Have you taken leave of your senses? <g>
>
>
>Barnyard BOb -- 50 years of flight

[Foster]

The standard configuration for the SQ 2000 is dual center joysticks.
Paul Lee wanted yokes and so has departed from the design in that regard.

JJF

Tilt wrote:
> I'm seeing this may be the case. We arn't getting real serious yet, but I
> want to start researching this info now. My friends and I would certainly
> prefer a stick between the knees. My fighter friend has flown this way since
> the start of his flying career. I myself like that arrangment too. Maybe we
> need to look at other homebuilt designs. We would like the craft to have
> some light aerobatics abilities. Nothing real heavy...none of us wants to go
> off and join the Air Show.
>
> I did find a web site of a dude building an SQ-2000 canard pusher. His
> cockpit was set up with 2 yokes. This leads me to think it wouldn't be hard
> to set up a center (between the knees) stick.
>
> Any SQ-2000 owners out there want to enlighten me?
>
> Cheers,
> Lyle
>
>
>
>>>>You might want to wrangle a flight in a canard with a side stick before
>>>>you write off the concept. It does work reasonably well, at least on
>>>>the Gyroflug Speed Canard that I flew.
>>>>
>>>>4 seat canards are not the sort of aircraft you do aerobatics in, so you
>>>>don't need the leverage that a long centre stick gives you.
>>
>>I got lots of hours holding sticks between my knees too. I would prefer a
>>centre stick too. But a properly built and rigged canard should be able
>>to keep right side up once you've got it trimmed, I would have thought.
>>So you should be able to release the stick for short periods if you really
>>need both hands.
>>
>>I'm not aware of any four place canards with centre sticks. I suspect it
>>would be a very large job to cobble a centre stick onto one of the four
>>place canard designs. You would need quite a few bell cranks, etc, and
>>the number of pivots could lead to excessive friction, if you weren't real
>>careful with the design and construction.
>>
>>--
>>Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
>>Ottawa, Canada
>>http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/
>>
>
>
>

[Kevin Horton]

On Fri, 08 Aug 2003 09:21:47 -0500, Rick Pellicciotti wrote:

> I won't dispute that there have been some accidents in canard airplanes
> during aerobatic flight. I am confident that I could find an equal
> number of accidents that happened during aerobatic flight in most any
> other make and model, high-performance homebuilt. Flown properly,
> aerobatics can be done in canard airplanes. They are very low drag
> airplanes and great care should be exercised in the vertical mode. I
> have done most any "fun" type manuvers you can name in a veri-eze and a
> long-ez. I have rolled a velocity a couple of times. They are all
> delightful flying airplanes.
>
> That said, the velocity is not really suited for that as much as it is
> touring. I don't have any experience with the SQ-2000 except close
> examination of the prototype on the ground. The wing area seems a
> little small for the load it is said to carry.
>
> Rick Pellicciotti
> http://www.belleairetours.com

Sure, guys have accidents for all kinds of reasons during aerobatic
flights. Mess up in a loop or roll at low altitude, and that will get you
no matter what aircraft you are flying. Or get in a spin at too low an
altitude and you are toast. But a good aerobatic aircraft should not have
an unrecoverable stall or spin characteristic. So you can do aerobatics
safely if you fly at a high enough altitude to recover from a spin.

My concern about doing aerobatics in canards is that you quite likely have
an unrecoverable deep stall mode lurking to bite you, if you ever manage
to stall the main wing, so you have added one more way to kill yourself,
even if you fly at "safe" altitude. And that isn't even mentioning the
issue of low drag which you alluded to. You really, really need to watch
what you are doing any time you put the nose very far below the horizon in
something as slick as most canard designs.

Rolls don't concern me too much, as they don't need to involve large pitch
attitudes, or high angles of attack. The thought of someone building a
canard to go out and do vertical type manoeuvres with scares the heck out
of me though.

Good luck, and fly safe.

--
Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
Ottawa, Canada
http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/

[David O]

Kevin Horton > wrote:

>Rolls don't concern me too much, as they don't need to involve large pitch
>attitudes, or high angles of attack. The thought of someone building a
>canard to go out and do vertical type manoeuvres with scares the heck out
>of me though.

Perhaps Dick Rutan did a disservice in the early EZ days by flying
demos that included vertical loops. His routine sold plenty of plans
though. As a Long EZ flyer, I agree that the EZ and its variants are
definitely not aerobatic mounts. Even rolls in an EZ could bite the
inexperienced pilot because the roll rate is inherently slow and the
plane is so clean. A reasonably high entry speed is a must and full
rudder deflection in the direction of the roll will get the plane over
much quicker. As for loops in an EZ, don't even think about it unless
you have oodles of aerobatic experience and have talked to someone
like Dick Rutan about it first.

David O -- http://www.AirplaneZone.com

[Barnyard BOb --]

>BOb
>
>My bird was a '62 (second year they made all metal). Never heard of
>any Mooney flying like a truck??? Who, what , where, when???
>
>Big John
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Whoa, big fella.

The early Mooney's I flew way back, had very high aileron forces.
I absolutely HATED flying Mooney's because of this fact.
The CURVED ailerons of the day caused this nasty business.
The later model STRAIGHT bottom ailerons cure this ill.

As reference to this, I offer.....
http://www.mooneypilots.com/m20E.html

"The good news is that the later model ailerons can be retrofitted to
the pre'65 model Mooneys. They are expensive ($800 from the salvage
yard, $1500 from Mooney) but they make a dramatic improvement in
reducing roll forces. Incidently, this aileron change is required if
retrofitting a PC system or an autopilot to a pre'65 model Mooney."


Barnyard BOb - 50 years of flight

[Barnyard BOb --]

>BOb
>
>The Taylor Cub I flew had single ignition. Whats the big deal about
>single ignition?
>
>Big John
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Redundency....
or lack of it.


Barnyard BOb --

[Big John]

BOb

I think there's something wrong in Denmark as someone said many years
ago. Can't find out who wrote the article but his findings don't match
with my 4-500 hour experience in bird.

He says that prior to '65 model there was a high break out force on
ailerons. I had a '62 and could fly it all day with one finger. It
needed increasing force (elevator) as you tightened up in a turn to
hold nose up but that is normal in any well designed bird with
harmonized controls.

I had a good friend who had an old wood Mooney and never head him
talk about high control forces. As I recall he talked about how nice
the controls were harmonized.

Now, if you had one with the wing leveler and it was on then there was
high aileron control forces. The cutout button on the wheel let you
temp disable the wing leveler when you wanted to 'maneuver' without
the high aileron force.

I do agree with him on being a good two place with all the baggage
your wife wanted to bring though <G>

NB I'm going to slow down on my postings as other things have come up
that are going to take most of the time I have been spending on Group.
I'll try to lurk though to keep up to speed on current activities but
try to stay our of the 'fur balls'.


Big John

Tired and going to bed to make Church tomorrow.


On Fri, 08 Aug 2003 20:56:34 -0500, Barnyard BOb -- >
wrote:

>>BOb
>>
>>My bird was a '62 (second year they made all metal). Never heard of
>>any Mooney flying like a truck??? Who, what , where, when???
>>
>>Big John
>+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
>Whoa, big fella.
>
>The early Mooney's I flew way back, had very high aileron forces.
>I absolutely HATED flying Mooney's because of this fact.
>The CURVED ailerons of the day caused this nasty business.
>The later model STRAIGHT bottom ailerons cure this ill.
>
>As reference to this, I offer.....
>http://www.mooneypilots.com/m20E.html
>
>"The good news is that the later model ailerons can be retrofitted to
>the pre'65 model Mooneys. They are expensive ($800 from the salvage
>yard, $1500 from Mooney) but they make a dramatic improvement in
>reducing roll forces. Incidently, this aileron change is required if
>retrofitting a PC system or an autopilot to a pre'65 model Mooney."
>
>
>Barnyard BOb - 50 years of flight

[Big John]

BOb

Are you saying two wives are better than one since you would have
redundency?

Big John

On Fri, 08 Aug 2003 20:57:35 -0500, Barnyard BOb -- >
wrote:

>
>>BOb
>>
>>The Taylor Cub I flew had single ignition. Whats the big deal about
>>single ignition?
>>
>>Big John
>++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
>Redundency....
>or lack of it.
>
>
>Barnyard BOb --

[Barnyard BOb --]

>>>BOb
>>>
>>>The Taylor Cub I flew had single ignition. Whats the big deal about
>>>single ignition?
>>>
>>>Big John
>>++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>
>>Redundency....
>>or lack of it.
>>
>>
>>Barnyard BOb --

>BOb
>
>Are you saying two wives are better than one since you would have
>redundency?
>
>Big John
++++++++++++++++++++

Works great fer the Muslims, but..
gimme two eager virgins, instead.


Barnyard BOb -- made in the USA

[Barnyard BOb --]

>>>The Taylor Cub I flew had single ignition. Whats the big deal about
>>>single ignition?
>>>
>>>Big John
>>+++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>
>>Redundency....
>>or lack of it.
>>
>>
>>Barnyard BOb --

>BOb
>
>Are you saying two wives are better than one since you would have
>redundency?
>
>Big John
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Definitely...
As long as they aren't mine.


Barnyard BOb -- stranger than fiction