homebuilt safety

Kevin Horton wrote...

I'm not Richard Riley, but I'll pipe up anyway.

It's getting crowded in Richard and Paul's phone booth g

I'm betting that there wasn't enough pitch authority to get the angle of
attack high enough to stall the canard. The situation might be quite
different if the CG was further aft (i.e. pilot only, or with pax in
back).

You beat me to it.

Dave 'control power' Hyde

Hey,

I'd taken you up on that just few weeks ago. But now I have
4 hours on a SQ2000 already. I read all of your flight test
report previously from your website trying to get as much info
as possible. But hey, I might fly in and compare things anyway.

As I have mentioned already to somebody else, we have two
6800 x 150 ft runways here and I am sure after I get lot
more practice I can do it at slower speeds.

"Marc J. Zeitlin" wrote in message news:TMAqc.75739$536.12331982@attbi_s03...

................... I'll be happy to check you out in my COZY MKIV
(left seat, if you'd like) if you'd like to come to MA before your first
flight, so you can see the difference. Let me know.

(Paul Lee) wrote:

Thats explained at my
website http://www.abri.com/sq2000

And now to open another can of worms, an IVO plastic prop on a 220 hp
pusher??? I thought this was a no-no for pushers. Your thoughts plz.
Other's thoughts plz. Thanks.

I hope I don't seem paranoid, but assuming I'm likely to be flying for 50
years, even accident rates down in the low percents seem quite alarming.


Assuming you plan on driving or even walking across a roadway in the same 50
years, accident rates are even more alarming.

"Kevin Horton" wrote in message
I'm not Richard Riley,

God be thanked.

It seems to me that such measures would be more important for a sailplane.
After all, you can't exactly go around if you botch the approach.


"Bill Daniels" wrote in message
news:KTPqc.80525$iF6.6835883@attbi_s02...
Yes, there are some negatives. However, re-enforced cockpits are becoming
the norm in sailplanes. Carbon-Kevlar composites provide a lot of
protection for the weight. Gliders land a lot more slowly than even RV's
but they are expected to land off airports without damage. If you
incorporate a ballistic parachute, re-enforced cockpits are required.

"Pete Schaefer" wrote in message
news:0cTqc.81388$iF6.6927599@attbi_s02...
It seems to me that such measures would be more important for a sailplane.
After all, you can't exactly go around if you botch the approach.

Not necessarily true, but also virtually never necessary. A good sailplane
gives you amazing glideslope control. With the spoilers fully deployed, I am
literally standing on the rudder pedals in some sailplanes approaching the
runway like a nicely controllable anvil; yet you can close them at any time to
instantly regain your full glide ratio, or modulate them anywhere in between.
It works! Just don't get low, slow, and downwind.

After years as a glider-guider (or a "dope on a rope" if you prefer) I have
finally taken up powered flight, and I am not at all sure that I have truly
internalized the concept that go-arounds are now an option.

Vaughn

On 19 May 2004 12:49:13 -0700, (Paul Lee)
wrote:

:Richard Riley wrote in message . ..
:
:.................................... When I say exactly, I mean
: exactly - to the fraction of an inch in planform, with the same
: templates, with the same modified Eppler airfoil on the mains, and the
: same Roncz 1145 MS on the canard.............
:
:Rich,
:
:There is a curiosity that I found about the SQ2000. When Stan
:demonstrated stall, the plane did not dip and dive (bobing) like
:typical canards, but simply descended at a steady rate - or climbed at
:a steady rate in a power stall. The canard just shakes slightly
:almost like conventional aircraft before a stall - i.e. it failed
:gradually and not suddenly. The feature shure wis handy if you
:inadvertendly land too slow - it would descend at steady rate and not
:dive into the ground.
:
:I haven't seen this behaviour mentioned for other canards and Stan would
:not tell me how he got that. Are there other canard designs that do
:that? Do you know how it works?

What you saw is basically how the EZ canard pushers behave. The
canard bob is never large. A lot of things affect it - density
altitude, humidity, how many bugs are on the leading edge, CG, the
shape of the canard and exact placement of the elevators in
relationship to the rest of the canard. If the entire surface is
stalling at exactly the same time, the bob is more noticeable. If
parts of it hold on slightly longer than other parts, the oscillation
will be smaller.

When Rick was doing the Berkut airshow, one of his moves was a low
speed level pass, showing the canard bob at minimum airspeed. But the
real canard bob couldn't be seen from the ground - it could barely be
seen from inside the plane. So he worked the elevator up and down to
bob the nose.

I've never seen a canard let go and "dive into the ground" - the nose
always stays well above the horizon. But if you're power off, your
decent rate at canard bob is much higher than it would be at best
glide.

"Vaughn" wrote in message
...

"Pete Schaefer" wrote in message
news:0cTqc.81388$iF6.6927599@attbi_s02...
It seems to me that such measures would be more important for a
sailplane.
After all, you can't exactly go around if you botch the approach.

Not necessarily true, but also virtually never necessary. A good
sailplane
gives you amazing glideslope control. With the spoilers fully deployed, I
am
literally standing on the rudder pedals in some sailplanes approaching the
runway like a nicely controllable anvil; yet you can close them at any
time to
instantly regain your full glide ratio, or modulate them anywhere in
between.
It works! Just don't get low, slow, and downwind.

After years as a glider-guider (or a "dope on a rope" if you prefer) I
have
finally taken up powered flight, and I am not at all sure that I have
truly
internalized the concept that go-arounds are now an option.

Vaughn

Don't forget and land that Cessna in the grass alongside the runway. It's
REALLY hard to explain that.

BTW, A glider can do a LOT more than most people think. A pilot from Reno
flew non-stop to Steamboat Springs, Colorado last month - about 843nm.

A story.

Long ago I was entering the pattern with a sailplane at a one runway tower
controlled airport in Texas. While I was on downwind, a Piper blew a tire
on the runway, blocking it. The tower asked me nervously where I could
land. I had noticed that there was weak lift in the pattern so I replied,
"no problem, I can hold".

It took about 15 minutes to move the Piper clear of the active. Meantime, I
slowly and silently circled at 1000' AGL. Each time I came around, I could
see the faces of the tower personnel pressed against the glass watching me.

When the landing clearance came, I landed long, took a high speed exit that
led to the transit parking area and stopped on a tiedown. Some local folks
bought me dinner and beer that night while I waited for my crew. I think
there were a few new glider pilots that came out of that.

Bill Daniels

John wrote in message . ..
(Paul Lee) wrote:

Thats explained at my
website http://www.abri.com/sq2000

And now to open another can of worms, an IVO plastic prop on a 220 hp
pusher??? I thought this was a no-no for pushers. Your thoughts plz.
Other's thoughts plz. Thanks.

No problem. There are a number of Velocities and other canards using IVO props.
See http://www.ida.net/biz/arlfrd/ (Crawford was a very experienced builder)
and http://www.lavoiegraphics.com/velocityrg/

I think you are confusing the triblade IVO problem with the giant Lycoming
IO-360 four banger issue. There are some problems with IO-360 engine resonance
and the three blade props particularly. But a six cylinder is much smoother,
and particularly Franklin is smooth - fluid filled flywheel to dampen out
vibration. The issue is not restricted to IVO but to most triblade props
on large four bangers. In fact that is one reason I chose Franklin 6,
its smoothnes. Large four banger vibration is not just a problem for props,
but for the rest of the aircraft and certain design care has to be taken to
cut down transmitted vibration.