Date   

Re: COZY: Vortilon adhesive

Keith Spreuer
 

I bonded mine on permanently with epoxy and never regretted it.

Keith

On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 11:06 AM Greg Norman <gnorm76@...> wrote:
I've not had good long term results with the RTV silicone and wonder if anyone has found a better adhesive for the vortilons? 

Greg Norman

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "COZY Builders Mailing List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cozy_builders+unsubscribe@....
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cozy_builders/CADg3d5oVFjfFk%2Bje7yO1U-jqyCaj__tyJXDwzRhC9M%3DsN%2BbQcA%40mail.gmail.com.


Re: COZY: Wing tie down holes

Kevin R. Walsh
 



On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 9:03 AM Marc J. Zeitlin <marc.j.zeitlin@...> wrote:
Your tie-downs are beautiful, but you cannot possibly believe, as an engineer, that a 1/8" thick aluminum part could cause a failure (by being stronger) in the wing attach fittings in the spar or wing, or of the 1/2" wing attach bolts :-). To what "expensive part" might you be referring?

I can believe anything I like, despite being an engineer.  B-)

So, 6061-T6 has an ultimate strength of 42ksi.  (The book basis says 45ksi, but having pulled literally thousands of samples of 0.063 6061-T651, it is 42ksi in the real world) . The smallest portion of the tie down I made is the 3/4" diameter, with a 1/4" hole (which is not really big enough, drill them out to 5/16").  So I get:  0.0625 * (0.750-0.250) * 42ksi =  1312 pounds. 

So, I've created a mechanical fuse at 1312.  As this is a per-side limit, it means my wings cannot generate any more then 2624 pounds of lift (with a wind directly behind the plane, in the parked configuration.)  Besides, on everything I've seen from pull-out tests of the pound-in style tie downs for parking at Oshkosh, as well as for the 1" webbing ratchet straps I use to tie my plane down, this is NOT the weak link in the system, but it is a safety feature.

Now, if I change this to 1/8", the numbers double to 5248 pounds of lift.  This represents a 2.56g loading at the listed max gross of 2050#.  So, you are correct, nothing should break except the tie down, or more probably the tie down rope that has been UV exposed for years, maybe the rusted Steel S hook, probably the ring that was concreted into the ground probably in the 50s...   On that, AC20-35B says that you should have everything in that load path (the tie down ring, the rope or chain, etc) each be able to hold 3000#.  So that would indicate the 1/8" is just barely inadequate, and the 1/16" is definitely not.  

--
Kevin


Re: Vortilon adhesive

Tom Smith <trcsmith@...>
 

I've used white RTV for years and not had any problems.


Tom Smith  A&P/IA
Long-EZ N12TS
Cell-707-592-0869
KVCB
KJ6PZN


-----Original Message-----
From: Greg Norman <gnorm76@...>
To: canard-aviators@canardzone.groups.io; Cozy Builders <cozy_builders@...>
Sent: Mon, May 4, 2020 11:05 am
Subject: [c-a] Vortilon adhesive

I've not had good long term results with the RTV silicone and wonder if anyone has found a better adhesive for the vortilons? 

Greg Norman


Vortilon adhesive

Greg Norman
 

I've not had good long term results with the RTV silicone and wonder if anyone has found a better adhesive for the vortilons? 

Greg Norman


Re: COZY: Roll servo

Del Schier
 

I put my Cozy IV Trio roll servo in the hell hole under the spar above the gear leg on the left side and attached it to the firewall.  I had seen them in the engine compartment on the firewall but I figured it would be happier inside the airplane.  It is a bit hard to get at but I had it out and back in for service in under an hour.  Putting rivet nuts on the mounting brackets made it easy to unscrew the fasteners.

 

The picture was a dry fit before I put a taper pin in to secure the custom bell crank to the aileron tube.

 

Del Schier

Cozy IV N197DL

Cannon Creek Airpark 15FL

 

 

 

From: cozy_builders@... <cozy_builders@...> On Behalf Of Greg Norman
Sent: Sunday, May 3, 2020 8:09 PM
To: canard-aviators@canardzone.groups.io; Cozy Builders <cozy_builders@...>
Subject: COZY: Roll servo

 

I was ready to attach my Ray Allen roll servo per the Wright/Hanka setup. As fate may have it the attach point for the spring is right over the wing quick disconnect. ....details

I was thinking moving to the center of the firewall - shorter wires, less wire ties, no wire disconnect. Anyone know if the RA servo is ok near the engine (heat). Or have a better suggestion?

Greg Norman

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "COZY Builders Mailing List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cozy_builders+unsubscribe@....
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cozy_builders/CADg3d5oybUyqkfBOkcRsfgYz36V_W%2B1p-jvcQh%3D8qDzwbaPuYQ%40mail.gmail.com.


Re: Roll servo

Greg Norman
 

Rick,
Quick disconnect was made a long time ago. Could have been in my plans or the Canard Pages somewhere. At any rate it made the assembly much easier as I now have the wings permanently attached it was easy to make the correct control rod length by simply lobbing off one end and drilling the pin hole. 
For my situation I may have to remove the wings one more time for flight testing at a larger airport. My airport has more than enough runway length but it also gives the opportunity to land on the roof of a Home Depot. Better options are 30 minutes drive from my home.

Greg

On Sun, May 3, 2020 at 10:51 PM Rick Hall <rickh@...> wrote:
Weld up a cantilever bracket, a flattened 'Z' shape if you will, clamp
it onto CS-125 (I think) inboard of the quick disconnect, go fly.

RAC 1.0 series roll trim servo/Hanka spring here, near left wing root,
but all installed on firwall/main spar (use click-bonds!), +300 hours.

Note I'm unsure why you have a quick disconnect there. The few times you
remove the wing (at Condition?) it takes just as long to remove a rod
end bolt. Less slop too, lighter weight ;)

Rick

On 5/3/2020 6:08 PM, Greg Norman wrote:
> I was ready to attach my Ray Allen roll servo per the Wright/Hanka
> setup. As fate may have it the attach point for the spring is right
> over the wing quick disconnect. ....details
> I was thinking moving to the center of the firewall - shorter wires,
> less wire ties, no wire disconnect. Anyone know if the RA servo is ok
> near the engine (heat). Or have a better suggestion?
> Greg Norman
>






Re: Varieze Modification Questions

nosedragger48154
 

Thank you Gilbert!

 

Sincerely,

 

Mike Scovel

SE Michigan

VariEze

 

Mbl     (313) 608-7202

Email   ezdriver@...

Email   info@...

             http://www.brighterstick.com

 

 

 

From: canard-aviators@canardzone.groups.io <canard-aviators@canardzone.groups.io> On Behalf Of gilbert_drieux
Sent: Monday, May 4, 2020 12:58 PM
To: canard-aviators@canardzone.groups.io
Subject: Re: [c-a] Varieze Modification Questions

 

Hi Mike, Hi gang,

 

Attached is a file related to VariEze' Vortilons .
As made for my VariEze.

Best regards.

 

 

Gilbert-Pierre DRIEUX

 

                 (_

|-------==(_)==--------|  VE  #1736.
      
       o/ | \o               F-PMPZ @ LFPK.

 

Such is life und es wird immer sucher.

 


De : canard-aviators@canardzone.groups.io <canard-aviators@canardzone.groups.io> de la part de nosedragger48154 <ezdriver@...>
Envoyé : lundi 4 mai 2020 15:25
À : canard-aviators@canardzone.groups.io <canard-aviators@canardzone.groups.io>
Objet : Re: [c-a] Varieze Modification Questions

 

Thanks Mike for the info.  I will be installing the “3” V’s and figure things out as I go.

 

Sincerely,

 

Mike Scovel

SE Michigan

VariEze

 

Mbl     (313) 608-7202

Email   ezdriver@...

Email   info@...

             http://www.brighterstick.com

 

 

 

From: canard-aviators@canardzone.groups.io <canard-aviators@canardzone.groups.io> On Behalf Of Mike Tooze via groups.io
Sent: Sunday, May 3, 2020 3:35 PM
To: canard-aviators@canardzone.groups.io
Subject: Re: [c-a] Varieze Modification Questions

 

Hi Mike,

You are correct, the vortilon plans show three per wing.

Three per wing is fine as when I transitioned from cuffs to (3/w) vortilons I had to reevaluate the way I few both t/o and landing, mainly landings.  Difficult to describe but compared to cuffs she flies-in rather that bombs-in.

 

However such was the difference in takeoff that I decided to add a further v per wing.  This I scaled up from the plan's sequence of three and placed it with respect to the stagnation point/line.  I placed each extra midway between the innermost v and the wing root/ strake joint.

I used sealant as it was only an experiment - but they are still there!

 

The up side is that a friend says that in a formation t/o with two-up I get off the ground sooner than he with only one-up.  But it's not apples for apples as he has an O-200 powered VE. 

(There is also the possibility that the airflow from the new, innermost, vortilon may help aileron effectiveness - uncertain as my ailerons are slightly longer than standard.)

 

The down side is the 'switch-off' when, after a t/o you might lower the nose to gain speed more quickly, the AoA is inadvertently reduced leading to the vortilon affect reducing hence loss of some lift.  Not good if in a shorter field t/o.  

Caution - With four vortilons this is accentuated.

 

As this is against the standard I have never publicized this before now but I know of at least one other who has tried similar. (Not counting Gene who it seems to have acquired his V-E with four fitted.)

 

In summary:  Definitely do fit the vortilons, three per wing as plans, do not fly without them.(Or the cuffs which the vortilons superseded very effectively)

Only after fully evaluating the full flight envelope and becoming fully familiar with your particular Vari Eze should you consider changing anything at all.

 

Best regards,

 

Mike T O-235 Vari Eze

Trying not to confuse, (or write too often ;^)

 

 

 

 

 

 

On Sunday, 3 May 2020, 19:26:16 BST, nosedragger48154 <ezdriver@...> wrote:

 

 

Gentlemen, I am about to install my newly mad Vortilons on my VariEze wing.  However everything I saw when building my Vortilons, stated to use 3, never saw anything that said 4.  Am I missing something?

 

Sincerely,

 

Mike Scovel

SE Michigan

VariEze

 

Mbl     (313) 608-7202

Email   ezdriver@...

Email   info@...

             http://www.brighterstick.com

 

 

 

From: canard-aviators@canardzone.groups.io <canard-aviators@canardzone.groups.io> On Behalf Of Mike Tooze via groups.io
Sent: Saturday, May 2, 2020 7:37 AM
To: canard-aviators@canardzone.groups.io
Subject: Re: [c-a] Varieze Modification Questions

 

I would not normally think of backing up a point of Ken but this is such a safety issue.  Whatever you do,Gene, ensure this new Vari Eze has the plans design vortilons.

If removing what you call a 'vortilon' made a 3mph difference then it is not a vortilon. Not the vortilon that we are recommending

Please go back to the plans to re-check what you have against what you should have.  (I once saw a photo on [c-a] of a Rutan type with the vortilons mounted upside down, i.e. with the vorilons above the stagnation point. That would have a drag affect)

BTW Just for clarification.  My 720lb empty wt was the 1982 wt.  Much air has flown over the wings since then, example I'm minus the two Bendix mags (put those in your pocket to see the difference;-), the nav/com for a Terra760D then for a FUNKE 8.33.

Lastly check all the mails re wt&balance and trimming out, incl my contribution.

 

Above is not directed at Todd who welcome as doing a careful job in bringing his Vari Eze back into, I'm sure, good satisfying service.

 

Mike T

 

 

 

 

On Friday, 1 May 2020, 21:15:44 BST, KEN4ZZ via groupsio <ken4zz@...> wrote:

 

 

Do not, repeat, DO NOT remove your VariEze's vortilons unless you plan to retrofit wing cuffs, especially if you have a full electric O-235 = butt heavy. 

I flew my first several hundred hours slick winged, before Burt developed the cuffs - which I still have.  With a modestly aft, but within CG limits loading, the 'Saber Dance' divergent Dutch roll that was clearly spelled out in the original POH is indeed present.  I did a full exploration of the flight envelop - at altitude - during my phase one and at aft CG limit the aircraft would roll off after just a few cycles.  It almost certainly would not be survivable if it inadvertently happened in the pattern.  Cuffs or vortilons significantly reduce the Dutch roll to usually nothing but occasionally at most a mild, stable wing rock.

Ken

On 5/1/2020 1:05 PM, Gene via groups.io wrote:



 Plane came with vortilons, 4 per wing. I knocked one off (outboard starboard) flew it, picked up 3 MPH, re installed, lost the 3, knocked it back off and have flown 300 hours with the asymmetric 3 and 4 configuration. I'm considering removing all of them when I paint.


Re: Varieze Modification Questions

gilbert_drieux
 

Hi Mike, Hi gang,

Attached is a file related to VariEze' Vortilons .
As made for my VariEze.
Best regards.


Gilbert-Pierre DRIEUX

                 (_
|-------==(_)==--------|  VE  #1736.
             o/ | \o               F-PMPZ @ LFPK.

Such is life und es wird immer sucher.



De : canard-aviators@canardzone.groups.io <canard-aviators@canardzone.groups.io> de la part de nosedragger48154 <ezdriver@...>
Envoyé : lundi 4 mai 2020 15:25
À : canard-aviators@canardzone.groups.io <canard-aviators@canardzone.groups.io>
Objet : Re: [c-a] Varieze Modification Questions
 

Thanks Mike for the info.  I will be installing the “3” V’s and figure things out as I go.

 

Sincerely,

 

Mike Scovel

SE Michigan

VariEze

 

Mbl     (313) 608-7202

Email   ezdriver@...

Email   info@...

             http://www.brighterstick.com

 

 

 

From: canard-aviators@canardzone.groups.io <canard-aviators@canardzone.groups.io> On Behalf Of Mike Tooze via groups.io
Sent: Sunday, May 3, 2020 3:35 PM
To: canard-aviators@canardzone.groups.io
Subject: Re: [c-a] Varieze Modification Questions

 

Hi Mike,

You are correct, the vortilon plans show three per wing.

Three per wing is fine as when I transitioned from cuffs to (3/w) vortilons I had to reevaluate the way I few both t/o and landing, mainly landings.  Difficult to describe but compared to cuffs she flies-in rather that bombs-in.

 

However such was the difference in takeoff that I decided to add a further v per wing.  This I scaled up from the plan's sequence of three and placed it with respect to the stagnation point/line.  I placed each extra midway between the innermost v and the wing root/ strake joint.

I used sealant as it was only an experiment - but they are still there!

 

The up side is that a friend says that in a formation t/o with two-up I get off the ground sooner than he with only one-up.  But it's not apples for apples as he has an O-200 powered VE. 

(There is also the possibility that the airflow from the new, innermost, vortilon may help aileron effectiveness - uncertain as my ailerons are slightly longer than standard.)

 

The down side is the 'switch-off' when, after a t/o you might lower the nose to gain speed more quickly, the AoA is inadvertently reduced leading to the vortilon affect reducing hence loss of some lift.  Not good if in a shorter field t/o.  

Caution - With four vortilons this is accentuated.

 

As this is against the standard I have never publicized this before now but I know of at least one other who has tried similar. (Not counting Gene who it seems to have acquired his V-E with four fitted.)

 

In summary:  Definitely do fit the vortilons, three per wing as plans, do not fly without them.(Or the cuffs which the vortilons superseded very effectively)

Only after fully evaluating the full flight envelope and becoming fully familiar with your particular Vari Eze should you consider changing anything at all.

 

Best regards,

 

Mike T O-235 Vari Eze

Trying not to confuse, (or write too often ;^)

 

 

 

 

 

 

On Sunday, 3 May 2020, 19:26:16 BST, nosedragger48154 <ezdriver@...> wrote:

 

 

Gentlemen, I am about to install my newly mad Vortilons on my VariEze wing.  However everything I saw when building my Vortilons, stated to use 3, never saw anything that said 4.  Am I missing something?

 

Sincerely,

 

Mike Scovel

SE Michigan

VariEze

 

Mbl     (313) 608-7202

Email   ezdriver@...

Email   info@...

             http://www.brighterstick.com

 

 

 

From: canard-aviators@canardzone.groups.io <canard-aviators@canardzone.groups.io> On Behalf Of Mike Tooze via groups.io
Sent: Saturday, May 2, 2020 7:37 AM
To: canard-aviators@canardzone.groups.io
Subject: Re: [c-a] Varieze Modification Questions

 

I would not normally think of backing up a point of Ken but this is such a safety issue.  Whatever you do,Gene, ensure this new Vari Eze has the plans design vortilons.

If removing what you call a 'vortilon' made a 3mph difference then it is not a vortilon. Not the vortilon that we are recommending.

Please go back to the plans to re-check what you have against what you should have.  (I once saw a photo on [c-a] of a Rutan type with the vortilons mounted upside down, i.e. with the vorilons above the stagnation point. That would have a drag affect)

BTW Just for clarification.  My 720lb empty wt was the 1982 wt.  Much air has flown over the wings since then, example I'm minus the two Bendix mags (put those in your pocket to see the difference;-), the nav/com for a Terra760D then for a FUNKE 8.33.

Lastly check all the mails re wt&balance and trimming out, incl my contribution.

 

Above is not directed at Todd who welcome as doing a careful job in bringing his Vari Eze back into, I'm sure, good satisfying service.

 

Mike T

 

 

 

 

On Friday, 1 May 2020, 21:15:44 BST, KEN4ZZ via groupsio <ken4zz@...> wrote:

 

 

Do not, repeat, DO NOT remove your VariEze's vortilons unless you plan to retrofit wing cuffs, especially if you have a full electric O-235 = butt heavy. 

I flew my first several hundred hours slick winged, before Burt developed the cuffs - which I still have.  With a modestly aft, but within CG limits loading, the 'Saber Dance' divergent Dutch roll that was clearly spelled out in the original POH is indeed present.  I did a full exploration of the flight envelop - at altitude - during my phase one and at aft CG limit the aircraft would roll off after just a few cycles.  It almost certainly would not be survivable if it inadvertently happened in the pattern.  Cuffs or vortilons significantly reduce the Dutch roll to usually nothing but occasionally at most a mild, stable wing rock.

Ken

On 5/1/2020 1:05 PM, Gene via groups.io wrote:



 Plane came with vortilons, 4 per wing. I knocked one off (outboard starboard) flew it, picked up 3 MPH, re installed, lost the 3, knocked it back off and have flown 300 hours with the asymmetric 3 and 4 configuration. I'm considering removing all of them when I paint.


Re: COZY: Wing tie down holes

Marc J. Zeitlin
 

Kevin R. Walsh wrote:

Here are the version of Robin's tie-downs I made.  


These are 1/16" aluminum, which I selected on purpose to fail if they're overloaded.  You could do the same with 1/8" and simply choose a more expensive part as your failure point.  

Your tie-downs are beautiful, but you cannot possibly believe, as an engineer, that a 1/8" thick aluminum part could cause a failure (by being stronger) in the wing attach fittings in the spar or wing, or of the 1/2" wing attach bolts :-). To what "expensive part" might you be referring?

--
Marc J. Zeitlin                      marc_zeitlin@...
                                            http://www.cozybuilders.org/
Copyright © 2020                     Burnside Aerospace


Re: COZY: Wing tie down holes

Greg Gullikson
 

Kevin,

Those tie downs look great.

Off topic, but do you have a full sized drawing of the throttle quadrant levers for push-pull cables you could forward? I don’t have the programs necessary to open the ones shown on Marc’s website.

Thanks,
Greg Gullikson

On May 4, 2020, at 8:23 AM, kent ashton <kjashton@vnet.net> wrote:

A Cozy/EZ sitting on the nose is pretty resistant to wind but I would think a tie-down near the wing tip has greater leverage holding the wing down. Most tie-down systems for grass are not that secure anyway. If the wind gets under the wing, I would think the wing tip/spar cap tiedown is less likely to pull the device out of the ground and closer to standard airport tiedown points. However, I cannot recall a Rutan airplane being flipped by the wind.
-Kent

On May 4, 2020, at 11:12 AM, Kevin R. Walsh <krwalsh@gmail.com> wrote:

Here are the version of Robin's tie-downs I made.

https://photos.app.goo.gl/25d1h8RgTVZzgR9o8

These are 1/16" aluminum, which I selected on purpose to fail if they're overloaded. You could do the same with 1/8" and simply choose a more expensive part as your failure point.

On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 4:58 PM Marc J. Zeitlin <marc.j.zeitlin@gmail.com> wrote:
Greg Norman wrote:

This is something I should have asked years ago before paint. Where has been the best wing tiedown hole location? Through the spar tape, aft of the tape, ahead of the tape? How far from the wing root?

In a perfect world, if you're going to drill holes through the wings, the best place to do it is on a plate bonded to the forward face of the shear web. For the life of me, I can't find in the plans where the tiedown hole is defined for VE's, LE's or COZY's, but I know that this perfect world isn't it and that folks have drilled holed through skins and spar caps.

However, the best tiedown holes are no tiedown holes. See the Chapter 19 section here:

http://cozybuilders.org/cad_files/

for the Robin DuBois style tiedowns. Way better than holes through the wings.

--
Marc J. Zeitlin marc_zeitlin@alum.mit.edu
http://www.cozybuilders.org/
Copyright © 2020 Burnside Aerospace




--
Kevin



Re: COZY: Wing tie down holes

kent ashton
 

A Cozy/EZ sitting on the nose is pretty resistant to wind but I would think a tie-down near the wing tip has greater leverage holding the wing down. Most tie-down systems for grass are not that secure anyway. If the wind gets under the wing, I would think the wing tip/spar cap tiedown is less likely to pull the device out of the ground and closer to standard airport tiedown points. However, I cannot recall a Rutan airplane being flipped by the wind.
-Kent

On May 4, 2020, at 11:12 AM, Kevin R. Walsh <krwalsh@gmail.com> wrote:

Here are the version of Robin's tie-downs I made.

https://photos.app.goo.gl/25d1h8RgTVZzgR9o8

These are 1/16" aluminum, which I selected on purpose to fail if they're overloaded. You could do the same with 1/8" and simply choose a more expensive part as your failure point.

On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 4:58 PM Marc J. Zeitlin <marc.j.zeitlin@gmail.com> wrote:
Greg Norman wrote:

This is something I should have asked years ago before paint. Where has been the best wing tiedown hole location? Through the spar tape, aft of the tape, ahead of the tape? How far from the wing root?

In a perfect world, if you're going to drill holes through the wings, the best place to do it is on a plate bonded to the forward face of the shear web. For the life of me, I can't find in the plans where the tiedown hole is defined for VE's, LE's or COZY's, but I know that this perfect world isn't it and that folks have drilled holed through skins and spar caps.

However, the best tiedown holes are no tiedown holes. See the Chapter 19 section here:

http://cozybuilders.org/cad_files/

for the Robin DuBois style tiedowns. Way better than holes through the wings.

--
Marc J. Zeitlin marc_zeitlin@alum.mit.edu
http://www.cozybuilders.org/
Copyright © 2020 Burnside Aerospace




--
Kevin


Re: COZY: Wing tie down holes

Kevin R. Walsh
 

Here are the version of Robin's tie-downs I made.  


These are 1/16" aluminum, which I selected on purpose to fail if they're overloaded.  You could do the same with 1/8" and simply choose a more expensive part as your failure point.  

On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 4:58 PM Marc J. Zeitlin <marc.j.zeitlin@...> wrote:
Greg Norman wrote:

This is something I should have asked years ago before paint. Where has been the best wing tiedown hole location? Through the spar tape, aft of the tape, ahead of the tape? How far from the wing root?

In a perfect world, if you're going to drill holes through the wings, the best place to do it is on a plate bonded to the forward face of the shear web. For the life of me, I can't find in the plans where the tiedown hole is defined for VE's, LE's or COZY's, but I know that this perfect world isn't it and that folks have drilled holed through skins and spar caps.

However, the best tiedown holes are no tiedown holes. See the Chapter 19 section here:


for the Robin DuBois style tiedowns. Way better than holes through the wings.

--
Marc J. Zeitlin                      marc_zeitlin@...
                                            http://www.cozybuilders.org/
Copyright © 2020                     Burnside Aerospace



--
Kevin


Re: Trutrak Sorcerer autopilot.

Franco Lagana <franco.lagana@...>
 

I installed Vision 385 in my Long EZ

Regards
Franco Laganà 
Long EZ I-VORI

Il giorno 4 mag 2020, alle ore 15:37, Jean-joseph Foe via groups.io <foe_amougou@...> ha scritto:

Hi all.
Has anyone installed a Trutrak sorcerer autopilot in a Cozy or a Long Ez?
Thank you.

Jean Joseph 
Cozy mark iv builder
Bordeaux, France. 


Trutrak Sorcerer autopilot.

Jean-joseph Foe
 

Hi all.
Has anyone installed a Trutrak sorcerer autopilot in a Cozy or a Long Ez?
Thank you.

Jean Joseph 
Cozy mark iv builder
Bordeaux, France. 


Re: Varieze Modification Questions

nosedragger48154
 

Thanks Bernie!

 

Sincerely,

 

Mike Scovel

SE Michigan

VariEze

 

Mbl     (313) 608-7202

Email   ezdriver@...

Email   info@...

             http://www.brighterstick.com

 

 

 

From: canard-aviators@canardzone.groups.io <canard-aviators@canardzone.groups.io> On Behalf Of Bernie Nitz
Sent: Sunday, May 3, 2020 10:47 PM
To: canard-aviators@canardzone.groups.io
Subject: Re: [c-a] Varieze Modification Questions

 

Three is the correct number

 

Bernie

 

On Sun, May 3, 2020 at 1:26 PM nosedragger48154 <ezdriver@...> wrote:

Gentlemen, I am about to install my newly mad Vortilons on my VariEze wing.  However everything I saw when building my Vortilons, stated to use 3, never saw anything that said 4.  Am I missing something?

 

Sincerely,

 

Mike Scovel

SE Michigan

VariEze

 

Mbl     (313) 608-7202

Email   ezdriver@...

Email   info@...

             http://www.brighterstick.com

 

 

 

From: canard-aviators@canardzone.groups.io <canard-aviators@canardzone.groups.io> On Behalf Of Mike Tooze via groups.io
Sent: Saturday, May 2, 2020 7:37 AM
To: canard-aviators@canardzone.groups.io
Subject: Re: [c-a] Varieze Modification Questions

 

I would not normally think of backing up a point of Ken but this is such a safety issue.  Whatever you do,Gene, ensure this new Vari Eze has the plans design vortilons.

If removing what you call a 'vortilon' made a 3mph difference then it is not a vortilon. Not the vortilon that we are recommending.

Please go back to the plans to re-check what you have against what you should have.  (I once saw a photo on [c-a] of a Rutan type with the vortilons mounted upside down, i.e. with the vorilons above the stagnation point. That would have a drag affect)

BTW Just for clarification.  My 720lb empty wt was the 1982 wt.  Much air has flown over the wings since then, example I'm minus the two Bendix mags (put those in your pocket to see the difference;-), the nav/com for a Terra760D then for a FUNKE 8.33.

Lastly check all the mails re wt&balance and trimming out, incl my contribution.

 

Above is not directed at Todd who welcome as doing a careful job in bringing his Vari Eze back into, I'm sure, good satisfying service.

 

Mike T

 

 

 

 

On Friday, 1 May 2020, 21:15:44 BST, KEN4ZZ via groupsio <ken4zz@...> wrote:

 

 

Do not, repeat, DO NOT remove your VariEze's vortilons unless you plan to retrofit wing cuffs, especially if you have a full electric O-235 = butt heavy. 

I flew my first several hundred hours slick winged, before Burt developed the cuffs - which I still have.  With a modestly aft, but within CG limits loading, the 'Saber Dance' divergent Dutch roll that was clearly spelled out in the original POH is indeed present.  I did a full exploration of the flight envelop - at altitude - during my phase one and at aft CG limit the aircraft would roll off after just a few cycles.  It almost certainly would not be survivable if it inadvertently happened in the pattern.  Cuffs or vortilons significantly reduce the Dutch roll to usually nothing but occasionally at most a mild, stable wing rock.

Ken

On 5/1/2020 1:05 PM, Gene via groups.io wrote:



 Plane came with vortilons, 4 per wing. I knocked one off (outboard starboard) flew it, picked up 3 MPH, re installed, lost the 3, knocked it back off and have flown 300 hours with the asymmetric 3 and 4 configuration. I'm considering removing all of them when I paint.


Re: Roll servo -photos attached

Marc J. Zeitlin
 

Dale Martin wrote:
 
Another consideration of "item placement" is keeping the weight forward and not aft.

And this is a difference between LEs and COZYs. Generally, O-320 Long-EZ's need to move weight forward as much as possible to avoid rear CG issues. However, the opposite is usually true on COZY's, particularly MKIV's, where, in order to ensure maximum front seat weight capability, it's important to move as much weight as possible to the rear of the plane (except on the few O-540 powered MKIVs).

Fuel flow senders and A/P servos (and wiring) tend to be relatively light by themselves, but weight does add up and should be one of the considerations in placement decisions.

--
Marc J. Zeitlin                      marc_zeitlin@...
                                            http://www.cozybuilders.org/
Copyright © 2020                     Burnside Aerospace


Re: Varieze Modification Questions

nosedragger48154
 

Thanks Mike for the info.  I will be installing the “3” V’s and figure things out as I go.

 

Sincerely,

 

Mike Scovel

SE Michigan

VariEze

 

Mbl     (313) 608-7202

Email   ezdriver@...

Email   info@...

             http://www.brighterstick.com

 

 

 

From: canard-aviators@canardzone.groups.io <canard-aviators@canardzone.groups.io> On Behalf Of Mike Tooze via groups.io
Sent: Sunday, May 3, 2020 3:35 PM
To: canard-aviators@canardzone.groups.io
Subject: Re: [c-a] Varieze Modification Questions

 

Hi Mike,

You are correct, the vortilon plans show three per wing.

Three per wing is fine as when I transitioned from cuffs to (3/w) vortilons I had to reevaluate the way I few both t/o and landing, mainly landings.  Difficult to describe but compared to cuffs she flies-in rather that bombs-in.

 

However such was the difference in takeoff that I decided to add a further v per wing.  This I scaled up from the plan's sequence of three and placed it with respect to the stagnation point/line.  I placed each extra midway between the innermost v and the wing root/ strake joint.

I used sealant as it was only an experiment - but they are still there!

 

The up side is that a friend says that in a formation t/o with two-up I get off the ground sooner than he with only one-up.  But it's not apples for apples as he has an O-200 powered VE. 

(There is also the possibility that the airflow from the new, innermost, vortilon may help aileron effectiveness - uncertain as my ailerons are slightly longer than standard.)

 

The down side is the 'switch-off' when, after a t/o you might lower the nose to gain speed more quickly, the AoA is inadvertently reduced leading to the vortilon affect reducing hence loss of some lift.  Not good if in a shorter field t/o.  

Caution - With four vortilons this is accentuated.

 

As this is against the standard I have never publicized this before now but I know of at least one other who has tried similar. (Not counting Gene who it seems to have acquired his V-E with four fitted.)

 

In summary:  Definitely do fit the vortilons, three per wing as plans, do not fly without them.(Or the cuffs which the vortilons superseded very effectively)

Only after fully evaluating the full flight envelope and becoming fully familiar with your particular Vari Eze should you consider changing anything at all.

 

Best regards,

 

Mike T O-235 Vari Eze

Trying not to confuse, (or write too often ;^)

 

 

 

 

 

 

On Sunday, 3 May 2020, 19:26:16 BST, nosedragger48154 <ezdriver@...> wrote:

 

 

Gentlemen, I am about to install my newly mad Vortilons on my VariEze wing.  However everything I saw when building my Vortilons, stated to use 3, never saw anything that said 4.  Am I missing something?

 

Sincerely,

 

Mike Scovel

SE Michigan

VariEze

 

Mbl     (313) 608-7202

Email   ezdriver@...

Email   info@...

             http://www.brighterstick.com

 

 

 

From: canard-aviators@canardzone.groups.io <canard-aviators@canardzone.groups.io> On Behalf Of Mike Tooze via groups.io
Sent: Saturday, May 2, 2020 7:37 AM
To: canard-aviators@canardzone.groups.io
Subject: Re: [c-a] Varieze Modification Questions

 

I would not normally think of backing up a point of Ken but this is such a safety issue.  Whatever you do,Gene, ensure this new Vari Eze has the plans design vortilons.

If removing what you call a 'vortilon' made a 3mph difference then it is not a vortilon. Not the vortilon that we are recommending.

Please go back to the plans to re-check what you have against what you should have.  (I once saw a photo on [c-a] of a Rutan type with the vortilons mounted upside down, i.e. with the vorilons above the stagnation point. That would have a drag affect)

BTW Just for clarification.  My 720lb empty wt was the 1982 wt.  Much air has flown over the wings since then, example I'm minus the two Bendix mags (put those in your pocket to see the difference;-), the nav/com for a Terra760D then for a FUNKE 8.33.

Lastly check all the mails re wt&balance and trimming out, incl my contribution.

 

Above is not directed at Todd who welcome as doing a careful job in bringing his Vari Eze back into, I'm sure, good satisfying service.

 

Mike T

 

 

 

 

On Friday, 1 May 2020, 21:15:44 BST, KEN4ZZ via groupsio <ken4zz@...> wrote:

 

 

Do not, repeat, DO NOT remove your VariEze's vortilons unless you plan to retrofit wing cuffs, especially if you have a full electric O-235 = butt heavy. 

I flew my first several hundred hours slick winged, before Burt developed the cuffs - which I still have.  With a modestly aft, but within CG limits loading, the 'Saber Dance' divergent Dutch roll that was clearly spelled out in the original POH is indeed present.  I did a full exploration of the flight envelop - at altitude - during my phase one and at aft CG limit the aircraft would roll off after just a few cycles.  It almost certainly would not be survivable if it inadvertently happened in the pattern.  Cuffs or vortilons significantly reduce the Dutch roll to usually nothing but occasionally at most a mild, stable wing rock.

Ken

On 5/1/2020 1:05 PM, Gene via groups.io wrote:



 Plane came with vortilons, 4 per wing. I knocked one off (outboard starboard) flew it, picked up 3 MPH, re installed, lost the 3, knocked it back off and have flown 300 hours with the asymmetric 3 and 4 configuration. I'm considering removing all of them when I paint.


Re: May COBA CanardCast released

Izzy
 

Your personal experience is appreciated. It’s not the same as everyone else's or even the majority according to the telemetrics I’m getting back.  

From a publishing perspective, Spotify and some others don't require additional “vetting” steps like Apple or Sketcher. As a result the podcasts are more accessible on other players, your experience demonstrates. 

I wonder what other content the companies who censor podcasts are blocking. 

Izzy


On May 3, 2020, at 18:08, Wolf D. via groups.io <bd5wingnut@...> wrote:


Spotify is for music, everything I saw on there, is geared towards music.
I have been using Stitcher for years, and have dozens of subcategories for, Aviation, Woodworking, Model Aviation, Political, etc..
Easy. 
Plus, I see no need for multiple "Casting" apps.

-Wolf



Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.


-------- Original message --------
From: "I. N. Briggs via groups.io" <inbriggs@...>
Date: 5/3/20 13:49 (GMT-06:00)
To: canard-aviators@canardzone.groups.io
Cc: COZY Builders <cozy_builders@...>
Subject: Re: [c-a] May COBA CanardCast released

Spotify issues are not issues with Spotify ;)




Izzy


On May 3, 2020, at 11:39, aviationeyes <skyeyecorp@...> wrote:


I also had trouble w Spotfy and a few others using my iPad mini V1. However, Anchor.fm, the antenna symbol, worked very well. Good job, Izzy. 
--Jose

On Sat, May 2, 2020, at 2:22 PM, I. N. Briggs via groups.io wrote:
Thanks for the feedback, i will make it happen Wolf. 



Izzy


On May 2, 2020, at 13:39, Wolf D. via groups.io <bd5wingnut@...> wrote:

Hey Izzy

Any chance you could get on Stitcher? Spotify is a PITA, and I don't use Apple products.


Peace, Wolf


Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.


-------- Original message --------
From: "I. N. Briggs via groups.io" <inbriggs@...>
Date: 5/2/20 07:54 (GMT-06:00)
To: canard-aviators@canardzone.groups.io, COZY Builders <cozy_builders@...>
Subject: [c-a] May COBA CanardCast released

Good Day!

CanardCast has two new releases today, Mike Beasley and Damon Meyer in two separate short interviews. 

We ate still experimenting with technology to improve the sound quality so we appreciate any feedback. 

You can find CanardCast on Spotify, Anchor.FM, Apple Podcast and many other podcast players. 



Enjoy the show!

Izzy


-- 
  
  skyeyecorp@...



eznoselift report; PASS

Tony Rothwell
 

I've fitted Jack's electric nose gear to my Mk III and it works as advertised, including the auto extend system - and has been doing so for many years now.
What is more, when I broke a (Brock) nosegear fork in the outback of western Queensland, Jack shipped me a new fork in double quick time.
I've only met him once 33 years ago but know he has been making quality parts for a very long time so let's just have a reality check here.
Marc has pointed out a deficiency, Jack has worked with him to come up with a solution.
Sounds like the right way to do things to me!

Tony,
Oz


On Sat, 2 May 2020 at 09:48, Jack Wilhelmson <eznoselift@...> wrote:
I really don't have time to answer all these Emails, but several builders have called on the phone asking me too. 

If the nose gear forks (NG16A) are so unsafe? How come Jose didn't send them back to me and collect the refund I offered.
and how come he is using it on his plane. When he complained about the threads not fitting his nuts. I offerd him a new nut that would fit because it was checked to fit on the assembly (NG401B) I had to cannibalize to send the fork to him. He refused and insisted he needed to buy a die to work on the threads. The castings in the pictures are raw castings before any 
machine work on them.

Now about the so called personal aspects ot this. Jose threatened to do just what he is doing. I ask him what he wanted and he said he wanted me to "make it right". I told him that all the castings I had would be the same. So I ask him if a $100 refund would satisfy him. He then said that it would and that I should be happy that he would not complain to others in our "small community of canard builders and flyers".  I told him that I only wanted to find out what the real problem was? and the offer was withdrawn. Apparently he thought that the price he paid was too high and he wanted to show me that he had the power to correct that after the sale. Of course, I realized that this would turn him into just what it did. So I guess this is what he calls personal.

Well I guess this story will scare any other suppliers of parts for canards. I am thankful that I have been blessed with many builders and flyers that really live up to the quote " do unto others as you would have them do unto you". After over 16 years building my own airplanes and twenty years supplying parts.I am living up to my promise to Nat Puffer that Ii would support his Cozy aircraft as long as I could.

Regards

Jack Wilhelmson
EZnoselift.com




On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 6:08 PM aviationeyes <skyeyecorp@...> wrote:
Hey, it is the responsibility of anyone in this community to report what they believe to be potentially risky issues or problems with Commercial parts that are sold and used on our planes. That's what I did. I was reluctant to do so, but Jack would not work with me to resolve the issues. I supplied evidence of substandard parts that did not work as intended. Again, look at the casting pictures he recently posted and those on his website and look at what I received. Who here is ready to say that the deep vertical stress risers on the fork arms and fractured threading that didn't even accept the nut is a good thing? Now, if you want to look the other way and accept that it is ok for substandard basic machining to be delivered unchecked, for what ever reason, then that is what this community will get.

There were several happy and obvious remedies to the problem that any vendor, whether amateur, professional, small or large, would have pursued, but Jack immediately made this personal, especially in his emails to me. Its not a personal thing, its a commercial product quality and support thing. Others have privately communicated to me similar experiences with his workmanship, but I guess I'm the first to make it public. As I said before, YMMV, so good luck.
--Jose


On Fri, May 1, 2020, at 12:14 PM, Jenatepilot wrote:
What Don said. 

On May 1, 2020, at 11:27 AM, Don B via groups.io <donberlin475=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:
Everyone, if you have a problem with a vendor, work it out with them.  Public viscous attacks on them may just end up having them quit suppling parts.  The Canard group is a very small group (compared to the RV group), so our vendors aren’t doing this to get rich!  Let’s work with Jack and other vendors to keep them suppling what our small group needs.
Don



On May 1, 2020, at 7:15 AM, aviationeyes <skyeyecorp@...> wrote:

It's rather amazing what you perceive as "lies, threats and insults"? Might you simply have shipped unsatisfactory product?


On Fri, May 1, 2020, at 8:50 AM, Jack Wilhelmson wrote:
It's rather amazing that some people think that because they buy something from me, I am supposed to accept all their lies, threats and insults.

Regards

Jack Wilhelmson

On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 11:59 AM Joe Person <ezejoe@...> wrote:
Why would one work to roll a thread on 4130 steel tubing that has no appreciable tensile load in service?

-Joe Person
> On Apr 30, 2020, at 8:55 AM, longezn911gg via groups.io <longezn911gg=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:
>
> First of all any thread used in aviation should be rolled and not cut. Much stronger and less fatiguing. Those threads look hideous. Wow!
> Unacceptable.
>> On Apr 30, 2020, at 10:21 AM, aviationeyes <skyeyecorp@...> wrote:
>>
>> I have now ordered two products from Jack Wilhelmson, eznoselift.com. The first, quite a while ago, was his WH4 nosewheel with his bearings and supposedly fitted bushings. The wheel wobbled excessively no matter how tight the axle nut. After talking with him, I had to face-cut the inside surfaces of the bushings because they were shipped too long. OK, no big deal, I guess, but not what I expected to have to do by buying a vendor's product.
>>
>> The second more recent item is an NG16A nose fork replacement for my Long-EZ. The pictures attached show what I got. The bottom line is that I received a very rough, not sand blasted (as advertised) casting with badly machined threading that would not accept any standard 3/4-16 castle nut. Go to his website and look at the nice picture of the item he shows. Go to his posting on April 11 where he posted pictures of his better finished NG16A castings. Instead of owning the problem, Jack took offense to my pointing out these defects and responded by charging me a 10% restocking fee for returning a defective part. (He could have easily just exchanged the part for a better part.) Attempting to make the best of the situation with minimum delays, I cleaned up the worst of the scratches and pits and offered to purchase a thread chasing die (<$20), if he would reimburse me. He would not do that and instead fabricated senseless motives for my dissatisfaction with what he sent me. If Jack wants to dispute any of this, and of course he will, I would ask if he is OK with posting all our emails to show the ridiculous firewall he put up.
>>
>> Please ignore the saga if you want, but I submit my experience in support of my opinion is that this is not a reliable vendor in our community. Marc Z. apparently has had a more favorable recent experience with a weakness in one of Jack's other products. With Jack, "Your mileage may vary" I guess, but my suspicion is that Jack perceives Marc Z. as a profitable influencer and me as an unimportant dissatisfied customer. Based on this report, maybe Jack will clean up his act to look good for a while and disprove me. All I know is that in my time of need, after a failed fork and grounded airplane, this canardian had to suffer the indignity of receiving an unfinished and defective part and worse, that the vendor would not help make right. Furthermore, when I recently posted a picture of my failed fork, he attempted to discredit my fork incident (or me?) with a fictitious and totally erroneous account of what had happened. I can't fathom why Jack has reacted as such, but it says something about his business practices. I did all I could as a responsible customer which is to send him money, expect a product as represented, respond to what was actually sent, and offer a reasonable remedy. This is the first and only time anyone in this community has failed me as a canardian and I have had many interactions. One would think that a vendor having received feedback from an unhappy customer would address the situation in a manner beneficial to both parties. One would think that a $17 reimbursement from the vendor, after causing me great delay and effort to correct the situation, would be a peaceable gesture. Actually, I don't really care about the money (though Jack does), but is this the kind of customer support that this community deserves?
>> --Jose
>> PS-After waiting a couple weeks for the thread chaser die to arrive I am now happily flying again. I can only hope that the fork is truly vacuum cast from quality alloy, normalized and tempered to T6 as Jack claims. Why would I be suspicious, if it is so much trouble for him to ship a finished, properly machined part?
>>
>>
>>
>> <jacksfork1.jpg>
>> <jacksfork2.jpg>
>> <jacksfork3.jpg>
>> <jacksfork4.jpg>
>
>
>
>





-- 
  



-- 
  



Re: Varieze Modification Questions

Mike Tooze
 

Hi Todd,

It was a bit of a wrench when I sawed off my beautiful cuffs.

However I soon recovered and I am definitely pleased that having flow many hours with both configurations I prefer the vortilons, as incidentally Burt recommended.
There are things that you can easily do with cuffs that you can't so much with vortilons. (High rate of decent at low a/s was one I mentioned)  However, I would recommend the vortilons especially to any newcomer to the Vari Eze - without question.
Nothing wrong with an O-200 but I must relate that I purchased an O-200 during my build.
I did a comparison against the O-235, just one of many points impressed, the main bearing shells for the O-235 are of far greater dia. than for the O-200....
I sold-on the O-200 and have been very happy with the O-235 that I re-built. ( The French didn't allow engines to go beyond their 'max hours' so France was my source for a complete overhaul.)
With an O-235 (or O-290) you have that extra shove that makes a difference but you will have to take-on hand propping to keep the weight and W&B to an acceptable level.  The 'dangers' of hand propping are way overstated.  Yes, extreme care and attention is required but actually the engine is a pussy/pleasure to swing.
Just what I did OMV.

Mike T




On Monday, 4 May 2020, 00:13:50 BST, Todd DeVito via groups.io <devitotl@...> wrote:


Thanks for everyone's input.

I'm bringing an old build to life so it currently has wing cuffs.  How much effort was it to transition from cuffs to vortilons?

Has anyone tried adding a vortilon or 2 (per wing) to an Eze with cuffs?

I have an O-200 that I plan to install in my Eze in case that makes a difference for this discussion.


Todd DeVito


On Sunday, May 3, 2020, 12:38:55 PM PDT, Mike Tooze via groups.io <miketooze@...> wrote:


Hi Mike,
You are correct, the vortilon plans show three per wing.
Three per wing is fine as when I transitioned from cuffs to (3/w) vortilons I had to reevaluate the way I few both t/o and landing, mainly landings.  Difficult to describe but compared to cuffs she flies-in rather that bombs-in.

However such was the difference in takeoff that I decided to add a further v per wing.  This I scaled up from the plan's sequence of three and placed it with respect to the stagnation point/line.  I placed each extra midway between the innermost v and the wing root/ strake joint.
I used sealant as it was only an experiment - but they are still there!

The up side is that a friend says that in a formation t/o with two-up I get off the ground sooner than he with only one-up.  But it's not apples for apples as he has an O-200 powered VE. 
(There is also the possibility that the airflow from the new, innermost, vortilon may help aileron effectiveness - uncertain as my ailerons are slightly longer than standard.)

The down side is the 'switch-off' when, after a t/o you might lower the nose to gain speed more quickly, the AoA is inadvertently reduced leading to the vortilon affect reducing hence loss of some lift.  Not good if in a shorter field t/o.  
Caution - With four vortilons this is accentuated.

As this is against the standard I have never publicized this before now but I know of at least one other who has tried similar. (Not counting Gene who it seems to have acquired his V-E with four fitted.)

In summary:  Definitely do fit the vortilons, three per wing as plans, do not fly without them.(Or the cuffs which the vortilons superseded very effectively)
Only after fully evaluating the full flight envelope and becoming fully familiar with your particular Vari Eze should you consider changing anything at all.

Best regards,

Mike T O-235 Vari Eze
Trying not to confuse, (or write too often ;^)






On Sunday, 3 May 2020, 19:26:16 BST, nosedragger48154 <ezdriver@...> wrote:


Gentlemen, I am about to install my newly mad Vortilons on my VariEze wing.  However everything I saw when building my Vortilons, stated to use 3, never saw anything that said 4.  Am I missing something?

 

Sincerely,

 

Mike Scovel

SE Michigan

VariEze

 

Mbl     (313) 608-7202

Email   ezdriver@...

Email   info@...

             http://www.brighterstick.com

 

 

 

From: canard-aviators@canardzone.groups.io <canard-aviators@canardzone.groups.io> On Behalf Of Mike Tooze via groups.io
Sent: Saturday, May 2, 2020 7:37 AM
To: canard-aviators@canardzone.groups.io
Subject: Re: [c-a] Varieze Modification Questions

 

I would not normally think of backing up a point of Ken but this is such a safety issue.  Whatever you do,Gene, ensure this new Vari Eze has the plans design vortilons.

If removing what you call a 'vortilon' made a 3mph difference then it is not a vortilon. Not the vortilon that we are recommending.

Please go back to the plans to re-check what you have against what you should have.  (I once saw a photo on [c-a] of a Rutan type with the vortilons mounted upside down, i.e. with the vorilons above the stagnation point. That would have a drag affect)

BTW Just for clarification.  My 720lb empty wt was the 1982 wt.  Much air has flown over the wings since then, example I'm minus the two Bendix mags (put those in your pocket to see the difference;-), the nav/com for a Terra760D then for a FUNKE 8.33.

Lastly check all the mails re wt&balance and trimming out, incl my contribution.

 

Above is not directed at Todd who welcome as doing a careful job in bringing his Vari Eze back into, I'm sure, good satisfying service.

 

Mike T

 

 

 

 

On Friday, 1 May 2020, 21:15:44 BST, KEN4ZZ via groupsio <ken4zz@...> wrote:

 

 

Do not, repeat, DO NOT remove your VariEze's vortilons unless you plan to retrofit wing cuffs, especially if you have a full electric O-235 = butt heavy. 

I flew my first several hundred hours slick winged, before Burt developed the cuffs - which I still have.  With a modestly aft, but within CG limits loading, the 'Saber Dance' divergent Dutch roll that was clearly spelled out in the original POH is indeed present.  I did a full exploration of the flight envelop - at altitude - during my phase one and at aft CG limit the aircraft would roll off after just a few cycles.  It almost certainly would not be survivable if it inadvertently happened in the pattern.  Cuffs or vortilons significantly reduce the Dutch roll to usually nothing but occasionally at most a mild, stable wing rock.

Ken

On 5/1/2020 1:05 PM, Gene via groups.io wrote:



 Plane came with vortilons, 4 per wing. I knocked one off (outboard starboard) flew it, picked up 3 MPH, re installed, lost the 3, knocked it back off and have flown 300 hours with the asymmetric 3 and 4 configuration. I'm considering removing all of them when I paint.

2281 - 2300 of 109970