Europa-Archive.digest.vol-fb
November 20, 2005 - November 30, 2005
>>Mike
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "Craig Ellison" <craig.ellison2(at)verizon.net>
>>To:
>>Subject: Europa-List: 914 throttle stops
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>All 914 builders and flyers,
>>>
>>>I attempted to do throttle calibration yesterday and also set the stops
>>>for
>>>max power(100%) and take-off(115%). The Europa install manual for 914
>>>says
>>>there are detailed instructions in the Rotax install manual. I couldn;t
>>>find any but went ahead anyway. The program page asked for idle and max
>>>throttle settings and that was it and said the calibration was complete.
>>>My
>>>question is how do you set the max contunuous thrattle setting? And is
>>>it
>>>done with the computer or with RPM and engine running?
>>>
>>>BTY I did start the engine for the first time. She caught on the first
>>>blade and ran very smooth at 1800rpm and above. Carb bal. is next.
>>>
>>>Thanks for any and all input.
>>>
>>>craig ellison
>>>A205
>>>----- Original Message -----
>>>From: <NevEyre(at)aol.com>
>>>To:
>>>Subject: Re: Europa-List: Close Out Flanges
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>Hi Jim and Heather,
>>>>Look carefully at the foam cores, they should have been cut, for the
>>>>closeout pieces, they may have ''fused'' themselves back on.
>>>>Failing that, check with Andy for the length of the cores before you
>>>>trim
>>>>any more off.
>>>>Cheers,
>>>>Nev.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Paul Stewart <europa(at)pstewart.f2s.com> |
Not that I understand the approval system, but I did enquire of the CAA
about the XCOM as it had Finnish approval and what the role of EASA was.
I have to say that the CAA were extremely efficient and responded to
several enquires within the day. Unfortunately the reply was a
categorical 'NO' for the XCOM in the UK
Paul
Duncan McFadyean wrote:
>
>The CAA don't approve anything in the UK anymore, so far as I understand,
>and its List of Approved Equipment has disappeared. We are instead invited
>to contact them on 01293 573134 or e-mail aircraft.systems(at)srg.caa.co.uk .
>Things are now done through EASA. Who knows what they approve?!
>
>
>Duncan McF.
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Bill and Sue" <billandsue(at)billbell.co.uk>
>To:
>Subject: Europa-List: RE: radios
>
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>Paul,
>>
>>I was interested in the XCOM which seemed to be ideal for our purposes and
>>reportedly rather better than the Microair. I wrote to Michael Coates at
>>XCOM who replied thus:
>>
>>------
>>
>>Hello Bill, the UK is a funny market where they don't accept US
>>certification, we currently know of about 60 being used in the UK but they
>>don't have approval..... We have no plans of certification in the UK
>>because of the cost, sorry.....
>>
>>-----
>>
>>I can imagine why people may be tempted to have a handheld as their
>>'official' radio and fit the XCOM for the intercom and to use a receiver
>>only- not something I would contemplate of course!
>>
>>Anyone care to own up to being one of the 60 or to report their
>>experiences
>>in places where the use of this radio isn't deemed to be a Danger to All
>>Aviation?
>>
>>
>>regards
>>
>>Bill
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Peter Rees" <peter.rees05(at)ntlworld.com> |
| Subject: | Carb Heat and Coolant |
Think we had a problem with carb ice this morning - apparently, the engine
felt as if it wasn't running on all cylinders - could imply a carb partially
blocked with ice? G-MFHI has the plenum air intake so no heating of the air
on the way in, on a cold morning, still a little fog about - could well be
pretty ideal conditions for carb ice.
Can someone who has fitted the skydrive carb heat kit please tell me - is it
a pretty straight forward job? I seem to recall that fitting the water
'jackets' over the carbs is a but tricky to say the least. Is this a job
better entrusted to skydrive / Conrad?
When we have the carb heat kit fitted, we will be changing the coolant. As
we've had over temperature problems with the oil, I'm reluctant to put the
Evans coolant in as I believe it will raise the temperatures even more. Can
I just buy ordinary antifreeze from the motor factor and mix this 50 / 50
with water? If so, tap water or some form of purified water?
Thanks in anticipation
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Carb Heat and Coolant |
Hi Peter,
Fitting the Skydrive carb heat system is pretty straight forward, as you
say, pressing the carbs into the bodies can be a little nerve racking.....
All you need, is either a press, or a large bench vice with soft jaws,[ or
pieces of wood], and a good eye,or verniers, to ensure you are going in square,
not beyond the skill of your average homebuilder.
Recon on 3 to 4 hours to get it all together.
The rubber ''skirt'' on the inside of the upper cowl might need modding, to
get a good seal onto the plenum, the airbox will move aft about 3/4'', also if
there are items on the firewall behind the airbox, check for interference.
50 / 50 Antifreeze / Tap water works just fine, use a quality brand of
antifreeze, I always use the brand sold at Vauxhall Dealers.
What happened re Wilson and the PFA ? How many letters got forwarded?
Cheers,
Nev.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | RE: interior carpet |
| From: | "steve v." <s.vestuti(at)virgin.net> |
0.64 REPLY_TO_EMPTY Reply-To: is empty
hi Bill & Sue,
i am still in the process of gathering information, but yes ,
i think the saving is substancial however, i do not think i will attempt the
seating upholstrey myself as the thought of me "doing " the seat upholstry is making
me uncomfortable on this chair im sitting on !
steve #573
yes i think your right Duncan McF ( K+W =0 )
but, (K+W+PFA=quids in!)
----------------
Visit EuropaOwnersForum http://www.europaowners.org/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Sven den Boer" <svendenboer(at)quicknet.nl> |
| Subject: | Re: Carb Heat and Coolant |
Peter,
Teh skydrive carbheat is straightforward except for fitting the jackets,
which should be done with care.
Works fine for me.....
Cheers
Sven den Boer
PH-SBR
A168
----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Rees" <peter.rees05(at)ntlworld.com>
Subject: Europa-List: Carb Heat and Coolant
>
>
> Think we had a problem with carb ice this morning - apparently, the engine
> felt as if it wasn't running on all cylinders - could imply a carb
> partially
> blocked with ice? G-MFHI has the plenum air intake so no heating of the
> air
> on the way in, on a cold morning, still a little fog about - could well be
> pretty ideal conditions for carb ice.
>
> Can someone who has fitted the skydrive carb heat kit please tell me - is
> it
> a pretty straight forward job? I seem to recall that fitting the water
> 'jackets' over the carbs is a but tricky to say the least. Is this a job
> better entrusted to skydrive / Conrad?
>
> When we have the carb heat kit fitted, we will be changing the coolant. As
> we've had over temperature problems with the oil, I'm reluctant to put the
> Evans coolant in as I believe it will raise the temperatures even more.
> Can
> I just buy ordinary antifreeze from the motor factor and mix this 50 / 50
> with water? If so, tap water or some form of purified water?
>
> Thanks in anticipation
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "ivor.phillips" <ivor.phillips(at)ntlworld.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Carb Heat and Coolant |
Hi peter
Buy a good quality ethylene glycol antifreeze, Bluecol is one, But mix it
with distilled/demineralised water, A good source for this is from a
dehumidifier,
> I just buy ordinary antifreeze from the motor factor and mix this 50 / 50
> with water? If so, tap water or some form of purified water?
Ivor Phillips
XS486
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Holder <rholder(at)avnet.co.uk> |
| Subject: | Re: Carb Heat and Coolant |
> Think we had a problem with carb ice this morning -
> apparently, the engine felt as if it wasn't running on
> all cylinders - could imply a carb partially blocked
> with ice? G-MFHI has the plenum air intake so no
> heating of the air on the way in, on a cold morning,
> still a little fog about - could well be pretty ideal
> conditions for carb ice.
>
> Can someone who has fitted the skydrive carb heat kit
> please tell me - is it a pretty straight forward job? I
> seem to recall that fitting the water 'jackets' over
> the carbs is a but tricky to say the least. Is this a
> job better entrusted to skydrive / Conrad?
>
> When we have the carb heat kit fitted, we will be
> changing the coolant. As we've had over temperature
> problems with the oil, I'm reluctant to put the Evans
> coolant in as I believe it will raise the temperatures
> even more. Can I just buy ordinary antifreeze from the
> motor factor and mix this 50 / 50 with water? If so,
> tap water or some form of purified water?
>
> Thanks in anticipation
I have had a slight misfire at the top of the climb. I
have the Skydrive kit. I tried to fit the jackets but i
could see myself screwing up the carbs so i sent the whole
lot back to Skydrive to fit. It was only 15 plus postage.
I couldn't even start the press of the units onto the
carbs - they seemed to be far too small !
The carb heaters only work if there is plenty of heat in
the water system. So I blank off most of the air flow to
the water radiator.
This is 912S. No carb heaters are required on a 914.
I use 50-50 water Anti-freeze with the 1.2 bar pressure
cap - max placarded 120 C.
I can't see the over temperature problem with the oil.
There is more than 3 litres of oil compared with only a
litre or so of water. My oil is always significantly
cooler than the water, and indeed went through the hot
summer of two years ago with half the oil radiator blanked
off.
I am trying to get the OK to put an oil thermostat in.
Nigel Beale put one on a 912 engined plane he built but
doesn't seem to have generated a formal mod for it. the
engine has since done 1100 hours with the thermostat.
Richard, who some DOTHers have now met !
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rowland Carson <rowil(at)clara.net> |
| Subject: | Re: off-topic: Re: Display of the Pound Symbol |
>If I send myself an email with pound sterling symbols inserted it all comes
>out correct. Why is this?
Patrick - because the packing agent and the unpacking agent (who both
work for you in this case and so speak the same language, etc) both
honour the same instructions. Mail lists, for reasons already
explained, tend to take a more cautious approach and just accept &
deliver packages that fit in a standard rail wagon (7-bit ASCII).
This way they can avoid (in the worst case) re-assembling a primed
bomb and having it go off, either in their own hands or on the
property of the folk they're delivering to.
If you want to know the full story, google for "MIME RFC" and you'll
get as much as anyone can handle on the subject!
I suggest we wrap this up now as I'm sure the rest of the list is
tired of it - the bottom line is just to use UKP instead of trying to
type a pound sign, if you don't know how the recipient's e-mail
system will treat your message (ie, always, unless talking to
yourself!).
regards
Rowland
--
| Wilma & Rowland Carson <http://home.clara.net/rowil/>
| ... that's Rowland with a 'w' ...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Joyce" <davidjoyce(at)doctors.org.uk> |
| Subject: | Re: DOTH Tuesday/Wed? |
Bryan, I am up for that if the fog (which is being a bit of a problem
hereabouts at present) has cleared. Regards, David, G-XSDJ
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bryan Allsop" <bryan(at)blackballclub.com>
Subject: Europa-List: DOTH Tuesday/Wed?
>
> The listing has not been accepting my mail recently, and I have not been
able to respond to DOTHs. Hopefully this has been rectified.
>
> Anyone up for a doth to Peterborough (Conington) EGSF, Tues or Wed?
>
> Cheers. Bryan Allsop
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> "Fantastic service... saves a lot of time for me... I only have to go to
one page."
> http://www.doctors.net.uk/journalwatch
> _______________________________________________________________________
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Flying a heavy Europa XS? |
| From: | <rparigor(at)suffolk.lib.ny.us> |
Taking more notice of completed aircraft empty weights of Europa XS, there
have been many to come in a lot heavier than 750 pounds.
Flight testing on short wings I don't think exceeded 1370 pounds.
I was wondering if those out there who flew at or over 1450 pounds could
share weights, CG and how aeroplane handeled and general comments.
Especial interested in what it may have taken to wipe out Monowheel
undercarriage and at what weight.
Also spin entry and recovery handeling, especial in thin air at more aft
CGs.
I learned (the hard way) from models, that a fair manored craft, can
become a bear , in other words more easily enter a spin, and essential
become unrecoverable if you make the air thin,or increase the weight.
Sometimes a time honored CG is too aft for heavier weights, and acceptable
control throws for a lighter weight are unacceptable for heavy.
Info on long wings at heavy weights also appreciated.
Thx.
Ron Parigoris
Here in the US the builder can choose the gross weight. Not prudent to
regularly fly a 1500 pound 912 XS out of a 1500 foot strip that has a high
density altitude. For an occasional long flight with a intercooled 914
with CS prop flying out @ sunrise from a wide mile long runway over
reasonable hospitable terrain, near sea level at 60F sounds to be an
acceptable practice? Problem is if you exceed gross weight listed in
operating limitations, besides the potential for FAA to get on after you,
even from a plain vanella ramp check, Insurance coverage may be void. If a
plane were ever to be sold, easy to go back into phase 1 and change gross
weight limit.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Flying a heavy Europa XS? |
| From: | <rparigor(at)suffolk.lib.ny.us> |
Taking more notice of completed aircraft empty weights of XS Europas,
there have been many to come in a lot heavier than 750 pounds.
Flight testing on short wings I don't think exceeded 1370 pounds.
I was wondering if those out there who flew at or over 1450 pounds could
share weights, CG and how aeroplane handeled and general comments.
Especial interested in what it may have taken to wipe out Monowheel
undercarriage and at what weight.
Also spin entry and recovery handeling, especial in thin air at more aft
CGs.
I learned (the hard way) from models, that a fair manured craft, can
become a bear , in other words more easily enter a spin, and essential
become unrecoverable if you make the air thin,or increase the weight.
Sometimes a time honored CG is too aft for heavier weights, and acceptable
control throws for a lighter weight are unacceptable for heavier weight.
Info on long wings at heavy weights also appreciated.
Thx.
Ron Parigoris
Here in the US the builder can choose the gross weight. Not prudent to
regularly fly a 1500 pound 912 XS out of a 1500 foot strip that has a high
density altitude. For an occasional long flight with a intercooled 914
with CS prop flying out @ sunrise from a wide mile long runway over
reasonable hospitable terrain, near sea level at 60F sounds to be an
acceptable practice? Problem is if you exceed gross weight listed in
operating limitations, besides the potential for FAA to get on after you,
even from a plain vanilla ramp check, Insurance coverage may be void. If a
plane were ever to be sold, easy to go back into phase 1 and change gross
weight limit.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Sidsel & Svein Johnsen" <sidsel.svein(at)oslo.online.no> |
| Subject: | Preparing for first flight |
In anticipation of first flight this coming spring and the 50 hours of verification
program after that, I have the following question to the U.S. participants
on this forum:
- I am considering attending FCI's unusual attitude/upset recovery training course
conducted in Mesa, AZ. Do any of you know this company or their 3 day/5 mission
Emergency Maneuver Training course?
- Is there anywhere in the U.S. where I can get transition training in a Europa,
with a CFI? Have valid FAA PPL/medical.
- Will the Diamond Katana offer similar (to a certain extent) flying characteristics
as the Europa? This aircraft is operated by several flying schools in the
U.S., and therefore may be more readily available for relevant practice than
a Europa.
Regards,
Svein
A225 - XS Trigear - now in Norway
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "KARL HEINDL" <kheindl(at)msn.com> |
Propeller Experts !!
I wish to upgrade to a CS prop with full feather option, the main reason
being the feathering capability. The obvious choice for many is the
Airmaster AP332. Now the Woodcomp SR3000 has the same options, and I believe
is a lot cheaper. In addition it has the option for a 2 or 3-bladed
propeller. My question is this :
What are the pros and cons between 2 and 3 blades, apart from the
considerable weight saving of 4 kg. Why are we all using 3-bladed Warp
Drives ? The Katana, which is a similar but much heavier aircraft uses a
2-bladed CS Hoffmann on a Rotax 912.
Any ideas ?
Karl
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Preparing for first flight |
| From: | "Al Stills" <astills(at)senecawholesale.com> |
Svein,
I've been wanting to take the same class from FCI. I live in Phoenix, just a short
hop ovet to Mesa. I've heard nothing but "good" from anyone who's been there.
I have a friend scheduled for 11/29/05 for one of their flights. Good school
with """"very""" experienced pilots. As for the Katana, I've logged approximately
40 Hrs in the DA20 and can confirm it's probabbly as close as we can get
to the Europa. Great flying plane and a
great trainer. Very hot in the summer with that "Big" window.The Europa is a little
faster but pretty close.
If you come this way let me or Steve Hager know....(Steve lives in Mesa)
Al Stills
N625AZ
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Fred Klein <fklein(at)orcasonline.com> |
I'm certainly not an expert, but I suspect that available ground
clearance and allowable prop diameter would factor into any
Europa/Katana comparison rather than the use of the same engine.
I suspect that with the small area of Europa prop, three blades can
absorb more hp for a given diameter at a given rpm than two blades, and
keeping the rpm down is key to the low noise level of the Europa.
A factor to consider w/ the Airmaster/Europa combination is the cut
down WD blade length which results in insufficient twist which in
turn...according to some knowledgeable folks I've corresponded
with...leads to negative thrust being generated by the inner portions
of the blade at coarse pitch. Airmaster acknowledges that the WP blades
are not optimal for the Europa due to diameter limits; unfortunately,
WD has no apparent interest in producing a small diameter blade w/ more
twist. I'm not familiar w/ the blades used in the Woodcomp set up.
Fred
A194
On Monday, November 21, 2005, at 01:13 PM, KARL HEINDL wrote:
>
>
> Propeller Experts !!
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Sven den Boer" <svendenboer(at)quicknet.nl> |
Karl
SR 3000 seems good choice to me, will fit one myself early next year.
Beautifully crafted piece of prop I bought.
3 blades save noise and vibration and there is always the nice 2/3 blade
compare on required diameter.
With a monowheel you definately would like to have some ground clearance.
I suggest you also check the archives, loads of stuff on props...
Cheers
Sven den Boer
A168
----- Original Message -----
From: "KARL HEINDL" <kheindl(at)msn.com>
Subject: Europa-List: Propellers
>
>
> Propeller Experts !!
>
> I wish to upgrade to a CS prop with full feather option, the main reason
> being the feathering capability. The obvious choice for many is the
> Airmaster AP332. Now the Woodcomp SR3000 has the same options, and I
> believe
> is a lot cheaper. In addition it has the option for a 2 or 3-bladed
> propeller. My question is this :
> What are the pros and cons between 2 and 3 blades, apart from the
> considerable weight saving of 4 kg. Why are we all using 3-bladed Warp
> Drives ? The Katana, which is a similar but much heavier aircraft uses a
> 2-bladed CS Hoffmann on a Rotax 912.
>
> Any ideas ?
>
> Karl
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jeff B <topglock(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Flying a heavy Europa XS? |
Ron,
I listed N55XS, a tri-gear, at 1450, gross. The plane weighs 925 lbs
and CG comes in at about 60". With the wife and I and a full load of
fuel, it is impossible to go beyond the aft CG and still remain within
the gross weight. We made a 900 mile cross country at, or very close to
gross, taking off from various fields, some of which were at 3500 ft,
without any problems. The Europa seems to be happy with this
configuration, at these altitudes. Handling, in the air was delightful...
rparigor(at)suffolk.lib.ny.us wrote:
>
> Taking more notice of completed aircraft empty weights of XS Europas,
> there have been many to come in a lot heavier than 750 pounds.
>
> Flight testing on short wings I don't think exceeded 1370 pounds.
>
> I was wondering if those out there who flew at or over 1450 pounds could
> share weights, CG and how aeroplane handeled and general comments.
>
> Especial interested in what it may have taken to wipe out Monowheel
> undercarriage and at what weight.
>
> Also spin entry and recovery handeling, especial in thin air at more aft
> CGs.
>
> I learned (the hard way) from models, that a fair manured craft, can
> become a bear , in other words more easily enter a spin, and essential
> become unrecoverable if you make the air thin,or increase the weight.
> Sometimes a time honored CG is too aft for heavier weights, and acceptable
> control throws for a lighter weight are unacceptable for heavier weight.
>
> Info on long wings at heavy weights also appreciated.
>
> Thx.
> Ron Parigoris
>
> Here in the US the builder can choose the gross weight. Not prudent to
> regularly fly a 1500 pound 912 XS out of a 1500 foot strip that has a high
> density altitude. For an occasional long flight with a intercooled 914
> with CS prop flying out @ sunrise from a wide mile long runway over
> reasonable hospitable terrain, near sea level at 60F sounds to be an
> acceptable practice? Problem is if you exceed gross weight listed in
> operating limitations, besides the potential for FAA to get on after you,
> even from a plain vanilla ramp check, Insurance coverage may be void. If a
> plane were ever to be sold, easy to go back into phase 1 and change gross
> weight limit.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tony Krzyzewski" <tonyk(at)kaon.co.nz> |
Received-SPF: none
>> A factor to consider w/ the Airmaster/Europa combination is the cut
down WD blade length which results in insufficient twist which in
turn...
What cut down blade length?
Airmaster don't alter the blade length from the standard warp drive
supplied by the factory, all they do to the standard blade is add a
fitting in the base to allow the airmaster hub to rotate the blade.
Tony
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "KARL HEINDL" <kheindl(at)msn.com> |
Sven and Fred,
Thank you for your reply. I will try the archives but I think the SR3000
with constant speed must be a very recent option. With the trigear clearance
should't be a problem if I were to choose the 1700mm, but I don't really
know at this point. I know in theory there could be a little more noise, but
is that a problem ? Weight is important to me as my empty cg is already
quite far forward.
Actually, I find the cockpit noise quite loud with my headphones off, but
who knows how much of that is wind, engine, or propeller noise. Another
consideration is reduced drag when in glider mode.
According to Bryan Allsop the 3-blade SR2000 is much smoother than the WD he
had previously.
I have all winter to think about it.
Karl
>From: "Sven den Boer" <svendenboer(at)quicknet.nl>
>Reply-To: europa-list(at)matronics.com
>To:
>Subject: Re: Europa-List: Propellers
>Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 00:16:28 +0100
>
>
>
>Karl
>
>SR 3000 seems good choice to me, will fit one myself early next year.
>Beautifully crafted piece of prop I bought.
>3 blades save noise and vibration and there is always the nice 2/3 blade
>compare on required diameter.
>With a monowheel you definately would like to have some ground clearance.
>I suggest you also check the archives, loads of stuff on props...
>
>Cheers
>
>Sven den Boer
>A168
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "KARL HEINDL" <kheindl(at)msn.com>
>To:
>Subject: Europa-List: Propellers
>
>
> >
> >
> > Propeller Experts !!
> >
> > I wish to upgrade to a CS prop with full feather option, the main reason
> > being the feathering capability. The obvious choice for many is the
> > Airmaster AP332. Now the Woodcomp SR3000 has the same options, and I
> > believe
> > is a lot cheaper. In addition it has the option for a 2 or 3-bladed
> > propeller. My question is this :
> > What are the pros and cons between 2 and 3 blades, apart from the
> > considerable weight saving of 4 kg. Why are we all using 3-bladed Warp
> > Drives ? The Katana, which is a similar but much heavier aircraft uses a
> > 2-bladed CS Hoffmann on a Rotax 912.
> >
> > Any ideas ?
> >
> > Karl
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "GLENN CROWDER" <gcrowder2(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Flying a heavy Europa XS? |
I flew my 930 lb Monowheel with EA81 power and 125 hp yesterday with a 195
lb passenger. I am 210. My home base is at 5090 ft. I have a fixed pitch
3 bladed prop pitched for cruise. Takeoff was a breeze on my 4700 ft
runway, breaking ground in about 800 ft, staying in ground effect for
another 1200 then climbing at about 750 fpm for the first thousand feet.
Cruising about 4600 rpm
gives about 145 mph. On part of the flight, we slowed to about 100 and were
getting 2.0 gph
on the fuel computer for about 30 minutes. My passenger felt the ailerons
were very light and
sensitive but the elevator was sensitive but heavier than the Mustang II he
had just ridden in last week (probably due to the all flying stab on the
Mono). The landing was sweet at the normal 70 mph approach speed with no
bounce or tail wagging common on a lot of taildraggers. Very enjoyable! I
did weld in some additional steel supports to the swingarm area. Back when
I was first learning to fly the Mono, I botched some landings not getting
the tail down far enough (easy to do now!) and got some very severe bouncing
(almost hit the prop) before I decided to do a go around. I thouroughly
inspected the swing arm area afterwards and could find nothing bent. That
was 3 yrs ago and haven't had a landing with more than one extra bounce
since.
I recently received some wheel landing training in a brand new Citabria
and felt the Citabria was quite a bit touchier on landing than the
Monowheel. With the Mono, as soon as the tail touches, you just pin the
tail with the stick and hold it, with the Citabria if you do that the tail
wheel will start shimmying badly. Also with the Citab, you can occasionally
get a wing to lift on one side after touchdown and have to roll it level
again. This never happens with the Mono. Landing the Mono
seems no harder than a C172, just a bit different! Just my $ .02.
Glenn
>From: Jeff B <topglock(at)cox.net>
>Reply-To: europa-list(at)matronics.com
>To: europa-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Europa-List: Flying a heavy Europa XS?
>Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 18:18:17 -0600
>
>
>Ron,
>
>I listed N55XS, a tri-gear, at 1450, gross. The plane weighs 925 lbs
>and CG comes in at about 60". With the wife and I and a full load of
>fuel, it is impossible to go beyond the aft CG and still remain within
>the gross weight. We made a 900 mile cross country at, or very close to
>gross, taking off from various fields, some of which were at 3500 ft,
>without any problems. The Europa seems to be happy with this
>configuration, at these altitudes. Handling, in the air was delightful...
>
>rparigor(at)suffolk.lib.ny.us wrote:
> >
> > Taking more notice of completed aircraft empty weights of XS Europas,
> > there have been many to come in a lot heavier than 750 pounds.
> >
> > Flight testing on short wings I don't think exceeded 1370 pounds.
> >
> > I was wondering if those out there who flew at or over 1450 pounds could
> > share weights, CG and how aeroplane handeled and general comments.
> >
> > Especial interested in what it may have taken to wipe out Monowheel
> > undercarriage and at what weight.
> >
> > Also spin entry and recovery handeling, especial in thin air at more aft
> > CGs.
> >
> > I learned (the hard way) from models, that a fair manured craft, can
> > become a bear , in other words more easily enter a spin, and essential
> > become unrecoverable if you make the air thin,or increase the weight.
> > Sometimes a time honored CG is too aft for heavier weights, and
>acceptable
> > control throws for a lighter weight are unacceptable for heavier weight.
> >
> > Info on long wings at heavy weights also appreciated.
> >
> > Thx.
> > Ron Parigoris
> >
> > Here in the US the builder can choose the gross weight. Not prudent to
> > regularly fly a 1500 pound 912 XS out of a 1500 foot strip that has a
>high
> > density altitude. For an occasional long flight with a intercooled 914
> > with CS prop flying out @ sunrise from a wide mile long runway over
> > reasonable hospitable terrain, near sea level at 60F sounds to be an
> > acceptable practice? Problem is if you exceed gross weight listed in
> > operating limitations, besides the potential for FAA to get on after
>you,
> > even from a plain vanilla ramp check, Insurance coverage may be void. If
>a
> > plane were ever to be sold, easy to go back into phase 1 and change
>gross
> > weight limit.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | grroberts3(at)juno.com |
"The Aviation Consumer" magazine did an article on just that topic in
August 2005. Bottom line: for aircraft under 250 HP, gains in
performance were subjective and variable. In general, three blades gave
better climb, less noise, less vibration, more ground clearance, and
looked sexy. Two blades produced higher cruise speed on less fuel , were
lighter, and were cheaper: but not always.
I don't care to defend these conclusions, I'm merely summarizing the
article.
GRoberts
A187
writes:
>
>
> Propeller Experts !!
>
> I wish to upgrade to a CS prop with full feather option, the main
> reason
> being the feathering capability. The obvious choice for many is the
>
> Airmaster AP332. Now the Woodcomp SR3000 has the same options, and I
> believe
> is a lot cheaper. In addition it has the option for a 2 or 3-bladed
>
> propeller. My question is this :
> What are the pros and cons between 2 and 3 blades, apart from the
> considerable weight saving of 4 kg. Why are we all using 3-bladed
> Warp
> Drives ? The Katana, which is a similar but much heavier aircraft
> uses a
> 2-bladed CS Hoffmann on a Rotax 912.
>
> Any ideas ?
>
> Karl
>
>
> =======================================
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "GLENN CROWDER" <gcrowder2(at)hotmail.com> |
I gained a solid 20 mph by dumping my NSI CAP140 3 bladed electrically
adjustable prop
with the Warp Drive blades for a custom designed fixed pitch 3 blade on my
125 hp EA81 powered mono.
Whenever I flew with the NSI, I would be constantly fiddling with with the
pitch control.
It was just adding too much workload to be fun. I really like the fixed
pitch. It is far
smoother than the NSI and since it is custom fitted to my engine climbs just
as well.
The WD blades were designed for a 100 mph max ultralight and have only an
18 degree
twist on a 74" blade. All WD blades are cut down to length from the same
74" blanks. When you cut them down to 64" they have even less twist. A
proper twist for a 150 mph plane is between 40 and 45 degrees. The WD
blades are a good climb type blade but were never designed for higher
speeds.
I do have a slightly longer takeoff roll as I need some speed for the prop
to start to bite but
I fly off a 4700 ft runway so is not an issue for me.
Glenn
Golden, Colorado
USA
>From: grroberts3(at)juno.com
>Reply-To: europa-list(at)matronics.com
>To: europa-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Europa-List: Propellers
>Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 19:39:56 -0700
>
>
>"The Aviation Consumer" magazine did an article on just that topic in
>August 2005. Bottom line: for aircraft under 250 HP, gains in
>performance were subjective and variable. In general, three blades gave
>better climb, less noise, less vibration, more ground clearance, and
>looked sexy. Two blades produced higher cruise speed on less fuel , were
>lighter, and were cheaper: but not always.
>
>I don't care to defend these conclusions, I'm merely summarizing the
>article.
>
>GRoberts
>A187
>
>
>writes:
> >
> >
> > Propeller Experts !!
> >
> > I wish to upgrade to a CS prop with full feather option, the main
> > reason
> > being the feathering capability. The obvious choice for many is the
> >
> > Airmaster AP332. Now the Woodcomp SR3000 has the same options, and I
> > believe
> > is a lot cheaper. In addition it has the option for a 2 or 3-bladed
> >
> > propeller. My question is this :
> > What are the pros and cons between 2 and 3 blades, apart from the
> > considerable weight saving of 4 kg. Why are we all using 3-bladed
> > Warp
> > Drives ? The Katana, which is a similar but much heavier aircraft
> > uses a
> > 2-bladed CS Hoffmann on a Rotax 912.
> >
> > Any ideas ?
> >
> > Karl
> >
> >
> > =======================================
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Fred Klein <fklein(at)orcasonline.com> |
Hi Tony,
...I didn't mean to imply that Airmaster alters the blades they
receive; rather, my understanding is that Warp Drive produces a
"generic" blade (actually 2 blades, one tapered, on not tapered) of a
given length from their moulds and shortens them if necessary for
specific installations by whacking off the tip end of the blade; I
presume that WD supplies Airmaster with blades to meet Airmaster's
specified lengths. Consequently, the more of the tip which is removed,
the less twist in what remains.
Glenn C. mentions an 18 degree twist in the WD blade...if I recall
correctly, I believe I've been told that the WD blades on a Europa have
only a 13 degree twist due to their reduced length. (About a year ago
I went over this w/ a number of folks including Airmaster; I can
retrieve the thread if you're interested.) Though serviceable,
Airmaster conceded that the WD blade was less than optimal for the
Europa given the limitations on diameter.
Cheers,
Fred
A194
On Monday, November 21, 2005, at 05:24 PM, Tony Krzyzewski wrote:
>
>
>>> A factor to consider w/ the Airmaster/Europa combination is the cut
> down WD blade length which results in insufficient twist which in
> turn...
>
> What cut down blade length?
>
> Airmaster don't alter the blade length from the standard warp drive
> supplied by the factory, all they do to the standard blade is add a
> fitting in the base to allow the airmaster hub to rotate the blade.
>
> Tony
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Joyce" <davidjoyce(at)doctors.org.uk> |
Karl, The SR3000 is a very recent Woodcomp output with first production
props coming out this year, so archives won't be much help directly. However
nearly all you find on their SR2000 will apply. Currently the blades are
identical, although Woodcomp are working on a higher twist version to
optimise performance for faster planes than the 100+ knots that the SR2000
was designed for (which doesn't stop my SR2000 managing 160 kts with my
914). The current differences between SR2000 and 3000 are a totally
redesigned hub which cycles much faster,( like 3 secs instead of 14), is
likely to be more durable and allows feathering or indeed reverse thrust if
you choose those options. The Europa Club contingent of 12 who visited the
factory were thoroughly impressed with the design and quality. Regards,
David Joyce
----- Original Message -----
From: "KARL HEINDL" <kheindl(at)msn.com>
Subject: Re: Europa-List: Propellers
>
>
> Sven and Fred,
>
> Thank you for your reply. I will try the archives but I think the SR3000
> with constant speed must be a very recent option. With the trigear
clearance
> should't be a problem if I were to choose the 1700mm, but I don't really
> know at this point. I know in theory there could be a little more noise,
but
> is that a problem ? Weight is important to me as my empty cg is already
> quite far forward.
> Actually, I find the cockpit noise quite loud with my headphones off, but
> who knows how much of that is wind, engine, or propeller noise. Another
> consideration is reduced drag when in glider mode.
> According to Bryan Allsop the 3-blade SR2000 is much smoother than the WD
he
> had previously.
> I have all winter to think about it.
>
> Karl
>
>
> >From: "Sven den Boer" <svendenboer(at)quicknet.nl>
> >Reply-To: europa-list(at)matronics.com
> >To:
> >Subject: Re: Europa-List: Propellers
> >Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 00:16:28 +0100
> >
> >
> >
> >Karl
> >
> >SR 3000 seems good choice to me, will fit one myself early next year.
> >Beautifully crafted piece of prop I bought.
> >3 blades save noise and vibration and there is always the nice 2/3 blade
> >compare on required diameter.
> >With a monowheel you definately would like to have some ground clearance.
> >I suggest you also check the archives, loads of stuff on props...
> >
> >Cheers
> >
> >Sven den Boer
> >A168
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "KARL HEINDL" <kheindl(at)msn.com>
> >To:
> >Subject: Europa-List: Propellers
> >
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Propeller Experts !!
> > >
> > > I wish to upgrade to a CS prop with full feather option, the main
reason
> > > being the feathering capability. The obvious choice for many is the
> > > Airmaster AP332. Now the Woodcomp SR3000 has the same options, and I
> > > believe
> > > is a lot cheaper. In addition it has the option for a 2 or 3-bladed
> > > propeller. My question is this :
> > > What are the pros and cons between 2 and 3 blades, apart from the
> > > considerable weight saving of 4 kg. Why are we all using 3-bladed Warp
> > > Drives ? The Katana, which is a similar but much heavier aircraft uses
a
> > > 2-bladed CS Hoffmann on a Rotax 912.
> > >
> > > Any ideas ?
> > >
> > > Karl
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> "Fantastic service... saves a lot of time for me... I only have to go to
one page."
> http://www.doctors.net.uk/journalwatch
> _______________________________________________________________________
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michel Auvray" <mau11(at)free.fr> |
Hello David,
Last year september 2004 I am in Woodcomp factory and I buy SR2000. The informations
comming from Jiri are:
The difference between SR2000 and SR3000 is the next:
SR2000 is made for Small aircraft and/or Ultralight. There is no "reverse" position.
The SR3000 is made for seaplane with reverse position. The blades are the same
mechanism same but setting is different.
bientt,
======= le 22/11/2005, 11:21:13 vous criviez: =======
>
>Karl, The SR3000 is a very recent Woodcomp output with first production
>props coming out this year, so archives won't be much help directly. However
>nearly all you find on their SR2000 will apply. Currently the blades are
>identical, although Woodcomp are working on a higher twist version to
>optimise performance for faster planes than the 100+ knots that the SR2000
>was designed for (which doesn't stop my SR2000 managing 160 kts with my
>914). The current differences between SR2000 and 3000 are a totally
>redesigned hub which cycles much faster,( like 3 secs instead of 14), is
>likely to be more durable and allows feathering or indeed reverse thrust if
>you choose those options. The Europa Club contingent of 12 who visited the
>factory were thoroughly impressed with the design and quality. Regards,
>David Joyce
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "KARL HEINDL" <kheindl(at)msn.com>
>To:
>Subject: Re: Europa-List: Propellers
>
>
>>
>>
>> Sven and Fred,
>>
>> Thank you for your reply. I will try the archives but I think the SR3000
>> with constant speed must be a very recent option. With the trigear
>clearance
>> should't be a problem if I were to choose the 1700mm, but I don't really
>> know at this point. I know in theory there could be a little more noise,
>but
>> is that a problem ? Weight is important to me as my empty cg is already
>> quite far forward.
>> Actually, I find the cockpit noise quite loud with my headphones off, but
>> who knows how much of that is wind, engine, or propeller noise. Another
>> consideration is reduced drag when in glider mode.
>> According to Bryan Allsop the 3-blade SR2000 is much smoother than the WD
>he
>> had previously.
>> I have all winter to think about it.
>>
>> Karl
>>
>>
>> >From: "Sven den Boer" <svendenboer(at)quicknet.nl>
>> >Reply-To: europa-list(at)matronics.com
>> >To:
>> >Subject: Re: Europa-List: Propellers
>> >Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 00:16:28 +0100
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >Karl
>> >
>> >SR 3000 seems good choice to me, will fit one myself early next year.
>> >Beautifully crafted piece of prop I bought.
>> >3 blades save noise and vibration and there is always the nice 2/3 blade
>> >compare on required diameter.
>> >With a monowheel you definately would like to have some ground clearance.
>> >I suggest you also check the archives, loads of stuff on props...
>> >
>> >Cheers
>> >
>> >Sven den Boer
>> >A168
>> >----- Original Message -----
>> >From: "KARL HEINDL" <kheindl(at)msn.com>
>> >To:
>> >Subject: Europa-List: Propellers
>> >
>> >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Propeller Experts !!
>> > >
>> > > I wish to upgrade to a CS prop with full feather option, the main
>reason
>> > > being the feathering capability. The obvious choice for many is the
>> > > Airmaster AP332. Now the Woodcomp SR3000 has the same options, and I
>> > > believe
>> > > is a lot cheaper. In addition it has the option for a 2 or 3-bladed
>> > > propeller. My question is this :
>> > > What are the pros and cons between 2 and 3 blades, apart from the
>> > > considerable weight saving of 4 kg. Why are we all using 3-bladed Warp
>> > > Drives ? The Katana, which is a similar but much heavier aircraft uses
>a
>> > > 2-bladed CS Hoffmann on a Rotax 912.
>> > >
>> > > Any ideas ?
>> > >
>> > > Karl
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> ________________________________________________________________________
>> "Fantastic service... saves a lot of time for me... I only have to go to
>one page."
>> http://www.doctors.net.uk/journalwatch
>> _______________________________________________________________________
>>
>>
>
>
= = = = = = = = = ========= = = = = = = = = =
Michel Auvray
mau11(at)free.fr
22/11/2005
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Beck <n9zes(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Flying a heavy Europa XS? |
From: GLENN CROWDER <gcrowder2(at)hotmail.com>
Date: Mon Nov 21 20:06:41 CST 2005
Subject: Re: Europa-List: Flying a heavy Europa XS?
I recently received some wheel landing training in a brand new Citabria
and felt the Citabria was quite a bit touchier on landing than the
Monowheel. With the Mono, as soon as the tail touches, you just pin the
tail with the stick and hold it, with the Citabria if you do that the tail
wheel will start shimmying badly. Also with the Citab, you can occasionally
get a wing to lift on one side after touchdown and have to roll it level
again. This never happens with the Mono. Landing the Mono
seems no harder than a C172, just a bit different! Just my $ .02.
Glenn
--->Glenn, if you were getting a tailwheel shimmy with that Citabria, it had either
a poorly setup or worn out tailwheel assembly. I recently finished up my
10 hours of dual in our 'new' '46 C-140 and am busy flying as much as possible
before the winter weather starts to close in here in the upper Midwest. I've
put probably 70 landings on the plane already with nothing so much as a wiggle
from the tailwheel, and some of those landings weren't real pretty. I've been
on grass the most, with a good bit of pavement work, also.
Indeed, now that I've unlearned most of my 'bad' habits from flying with the training
wheel out front, I find landing the 140 to be very easy. It's an amazingly
responsive plane and very forgiving. It will be interesting to transition
into our monowheel when she's ready to fly and see how they compare from a landing
standpoint.
Happy flying!
Chris
A159
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "GLENN CROWDER" <gcrowder2(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Flying a heavy Europa XS? |
Hey Chris!
I didn't mean to impugn the Citab, it is a very fun plane. I wish the
Europa could do
wheel landings like the Citab. The main difference I experienced was that
with the
Citab, you're never quite sure when its done flying. With the Mono, as long
as you get
the tail wheel down first and pin it hard, the plane is done flying and will
roll out straight
just like a 172 (with a little help of course). With the all flying tail,
you can pin the
tailwheel so hard that it won't skid and this eliminates any tail wagging.
If you don't
pin the tail all the way, then your'e in for a thrill!
Glenn
>From: Chris Beck <n9zes(at)verizon.net>
>Reply-To: europa-list(at)matronics.com
>To: europa-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Re: Europa-List: Flying a heavy Europa XS?
>Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 07:56:27 -0600 (CST)
>
>
>From: GLENN CROWDER <gcrowder2(at)hotmail.com>
>Date: Mon Nov 21 20:06:41 CST 2005
>To: europa-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Europa-List: Flying a heavy Europa XS?
>
>I recently received some wheel landing training in a brand new Citabria
>and felt the Citabria was quite a bit touchier on landing than the
>Monowheel. With the Mono, as soon as the tail touches, you just pin the
>tail with the stick and hold it, with the Citabria if you do that the tail
>wheel will start shimmying badly. Also with the Citab, you can
>occasionally
>get a wing to lift on one side after touchdown and have to roll it level
>again. This never happens with the Mono. Landing the Mono
>seems no harder than a C172, just a bit different! Just my $ .02.
>
> Glenn
>
>--->Glenn, if you were getting a tailwheel shimmy with that Citabria, it
>had either a poorly setup or worn out tailwheel assembly. I recently
>finished up my 10 hours of dual in our 'new' '46 C-140 and am busy flying
>as much as possible before the winter weather starts to close in here in
>the upper Midwest. I've put probably 70 landings on the plane already with
>nothing so much as a wiggle from the tailwheel, and some of those landings
>weren't real pretty. I've been on grass the most, with a good bit of
>pavement work, also.
>
>Indeed, now that I've unlearned most of my 'bad' habits from flying with
>the training wheel out front, I find landing the 140 to be very easy. It's
>an amazingly responsive plane and very forgiving. It will be interesting
>to transition into our monowheel when she's ready to fly and see how they
>compare from a landing standpoint.
>
>Happy flying!
>
>Chris
>A159
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | TELEDYNMCS(at)aol.com |
Greetings all,
Here's what I'm going with in regard to a prop.
http://www.sensenichprop.com/sen_html/news.htm
Sensenich tells me they are working with a vendor to develop an electrically
adjustable hub for this blade, but it's likely 6-8 months before it'll be
released. The good news is the manually adjustable blades will retrofit into the
new electric hub. I've heard this prop has been used on a Jabiru 3300 powered
Esqual just up the road from me in Nashville with very good results.
Regards,
John Lawton
Dunlap, TN
A-245 (Waiting for my prop so I can mount the spinner, cowls, paint them,
then go fly! Everything else is pretty much done.)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Joyce" <davidjoyce(at)doctors.org.uk> |
Michel, The hub mechanism is entirely different in the SR3000, completely
redesigned in fact, with differences in performance as in my previous
message. Regards, David
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michel Auvray" <mau11(at)free.fr>
Subject: Re: Re: Europa-List: Propellers
>
> Hello David,
> Last year september 2004 I am in Woodcomp factory and I buy SR2000. The
informations comming from Jiri are:
> The difference between SR2000 and SR3000 is the next:
> SR2000 is made for Small aircraft and/or Ultralight. There is no "reverse"
position.
>
> The SR3000 is made for seaplane with reverse position. The blades are the
same mechanism same but setting is different.
> bientt,
>
> ======= le 22/11/2005, 11:21:13 vous criviez: =======
>
> >
> >Karl, The SR3000 is a very recent Woodcomp output with first production
> >props coming out this year, so archives won't be much help directly.
However
> >nearly all you find on their SR2000 will apply. Currently the blades are
> >identical, although Woodcomp are working on a higher twist version to
> >optimise performance for faster planes than the 100+ knots that the
SR2000
> >was designed for (which doesn't stop my SR2000 managing 160 kts with my
> >914). The current differences between SR2000 and 3000 are a totally
> >redesigned hub which cycles much faster,( like 3 secs instead of 14), is
> >likely to be more durable and allows feathering or indeed reverse thrust
if
> >you choose those options. The Europa Club contingent of 12 who visited
the
> >factory were thoroughly impressed with the design and quality. Regards,
> >David Joyce
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "KARL HEINDL" <kheindl(at)msn.com>
> >To:
> >Subject: Re: Europa-List: Propellers
> >
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> Sven and Fred,
> >>
> >> Thank you for your reply. I will try the archives but I think the
SR3000
> >> with constant speed must be a very recent option. With the trigear
> >clearance
> >> should't be a problem if I were to choose the 1700mm, but I don't
really
> >> know at this point. I know in theory there could be a little more
noise,
> >but
> >> is that a problem ? Weight is important to me as my empty cg is already
> >> quite far forward.
> >> Actually, I find the cockpit noise quite loud with my headphones off,
but
> >> who knows how much of that is wind, engine, or propeller noise. Another
> >> consideration is reduced drag when in glider mode.
> >> According to Bryan Allsop the 3-blade SR2000 is much smoother than the
WD
> >he
> >> had previously.
> >> I have all winter to think about it.
> >>
> >> Karl
> >>
> >>
> >> >From: "Sven den Boer" <svendenboer(at)quicknet.nl>
> >> >Reply-To: europa-list(at)matronics.com
> >> >To:
> >> >Subject: Re: Europa-List: Propellers
> >> >Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 00:16:28 +0100
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >Karl
> >> >
> >> >SR 3000 seems good choice to me, will fit one myself early next year.
> >> >Beautifully crafted piece of prop I bought.
> >> >3 blades save noise and vibration and there is always the nice 2/3
blade
> >> >compare on required diameter.
> >> >With a monowheel you definately would like to have some ground
clearance.
> >> >I suggest you also check the archives, loads of stuff on props...
> >> >
> >> >Cheers
> >> >
> >> >Sven den Boer
> >> >A168
> >> >----- Original Message -----
> >> >From: "KARL HEINDL" <kheindl(at)msn.com>
> >> >To:
> >> >Subject: Europa-List: Propellers
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > Propeller Experts !!
> >> > >
> >> > > I wish to upgrade to a CS prop with full feather option, the main
> >reason
> >> > > being the feathering capability. The obvious choice for many is the
> >> > > Airmaster AP332. Now the Woodcomp SR3000 has the same options, and
I
> >> > > believe
> >> > > is a lot cheaper. In addition it has the option for a 2 or 3-bladed
> >> > > propeller. My question is this :
> >> > > What are the pros and cons between 2 and 3 blades, apart from the
> >> > > considerable weight saving of 4 kg. Why are we all using 3-bladed
Warp
> >> > > Drives ? The Katana, which is a similar but much heavier aircraft
uses
> >a
> >> > > 2-bladed CS Hoffmann on a Rotax 912.
> >> > >
> >> > > Any ideas ?
> >> > >
> >> > > Karl
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> "Fantastic service... saves a lot of time for me... I only have to go
to
> >one page."
> >> http://www.doctors.net.uk/journalwatch
> >> _______________________________________________________________________
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
> = = = = = = = = = ========= = = = = = = = = > Michel Auvray
> mau11(at)free.fr
> 22/11/2005
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> "Fantastic service... saves a lot of time for me... I only have to go to
one page."
> http://www.doctors.net.uk/journalwatch
> _______________________________________________________________________
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Beck <n9zes(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Flying a heavy Europa XS? |
From: GLENN CROWDER <gcrowder2(at)hotmail.com>
Date: Tue Nov 22 09:13:28 CST 2005
Subject: Re: Re: Europa-List: Flying a heavy Europa XS?
Hey Chris!
I didn't mean to impugn the Citab, it is a very fun plane. I wish the
Europa could do
wheel landings like the Citab. The main difference I experienced was that
with the
Citab, you're never quite sure when its done flying. With the Mono, as long
as you get
the tail wheel down first and pin it hard, the plane is done flying and will
roll out straight
just like a 172 (with a little help of course). With the all flying tail,
you can pin the
tailwheel so hard that it won't skid and this eliminates any tail wagging.
If you don't
pin the tail all the way, then your'e in for a thrill!
---> I've always wondered why everyone says you can't wheel land a Europa... why???
Is it due to the angle of attack on the ground? Clearance? Seems to me
you should be able to just like any other tailwheel plane (although I indeed
realize the Europa ISN'T just any other tailwheel plane....)
3-pointers in the 140 are just stupid simple. Flaps or not, your choice, and come
down final at 60 mph. Flare, keep pulling the yoke back until it's in your
lap and she'll gracefully set down like a big pillow.
Wheel landings are a bit more challenging, as you come in faster and hold a level
angle as you stop the descent rate. When the mains kiss the ground, nail them
on with a bit of forward yoke. The challenge is that 1) it is a very 'wrong'
feeling from a trike gear training regimen, and 2) if you have too much rate
of descent or a bumpy runway, the spring gear will happily bounce you right
back into the air as you still have enough flying speed. That leads to a bouncing
episode that if not too bad, you can correct just by holding the yoke back
and turning it into a 3-pointer, or if it starts looking ugly, just go around
and try again. My toughest task to learn for wheel landings is nailing it
on with the forward yoke consistently. Done right, though, it's a pretty thing,
and I can hold the tail up all through the rollout almost to a walking speed.
Not to start a big debate or anything, but I find flying a tailwheel plane to be
much more satisfying and fun than the usual 152 or 172. I was all nervous and
uptight about learning to fly a tailwheel, but it really turned out to be more
a matter of unlearning all my trike habits rather than learning the tailwheel
part.
Chris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DuaneFamly(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Flying a heavy Europa XS? |
Good Day All,
So am I to believe that people looking to transit into a Europa are training
in a Citabria? Will this be acceptable to the FAA, CAA, and an insurance
company? Or is the Diamond more closer to the Europa? With no Europa to train in
what are people doing to meet any requirement?
Mike Duane A207
Redding, California
XS Conventional Gear
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Beck <n9zes(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Flying a heavy Europa XS? |
Good Day All,
So am I to believe that people looking to transit into a Europa are training
in a Citabria? Will this be acceptable to the FAA, CAA, and an insurance
company? Or is the Diamond more closer to the Europa? With no Europa to train in
what are people doing to meet any requirement?
Mike Duane A207
Redding, California
XS Conventional Gear
----> Mike, by stating 'conventional gear' do you mean the conventional Europa
monowheel? Or have you converted to a true 'conventional gear' with tailwheel?
The way I see it, if you are building a Europa with the little wheel on the wrong
end, i.e. tri-gear, you need nothing more than basic training, and a Katana
is the closest airplane to a Europa (except the Liberty) in size, weight, performance
and power.
If flying a Europa with the little wheel in the back, you definitely need to get
a proper tailwheel endorsement by an instructor. Citabrias are commonly used
for tailwheel instruction as they are both tailwheel and aerobatic, so can be
used for more than one purpose, and also they are good handling planes on the
ground. A Piper J-3 Cub would not be as good of a trainer as they are just
too darn easy to handle on the ground, but I did my first lesson in a Cub before
transitioning to our 140.
I can't imagine trying to perform test flights on a Europa not knowing how to fly
the plane itself very well let along trying to figure out how to handle a tailwheel
plane.
Chris
A159
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Thomas Scherer" <thomas(at)scherer.com> |
| Subject: | Rotax 912 Hi compression Pistons |
Greetings,
in my quest to convert N81EU for Altitude operations, I was wondering whether enyone
knows where those hi-compression pistons that were offered for the Rtx 912
some years ago (basically making it a Rtx 912S) are available ? Or somebody
has them lying around in his shack after getting a bad conscience and not installing
them ?
Also ... still looking for glider wings in any condition.
fly well !
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Steve Crimm" <steve.crimm(at)stephenscott.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Flying a heavy Europa XS? |
Mike,
My insurance company (AIG) required me to have 5 hours in type from a Europa
instructor. I used Lee Omerick out of Valrico, FL near Lakeland. Lee is a
retired Air Force and has done test flying etc on several Europa's. Contact
me off list and I will send you his contact information. Also Bob Burbe I
believe has worked with Lee a lot. I purchased my Europa completed and did
my training in this aircraft with Lee.
Steve
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chris Beck
Subject: Re: Re: Europa-List: Flying a heavy Europa XS?
Good Day All,
So am I to believe that people looking to transit into a Europa are training
in a Citabria? Will this be acceptable to the FAA, CAA, and an insurance
company? Or is the Diamond more closer to the Europa? With no Europa to
train in what are people doing to meet any requirement?
Mike Duane A207
Redding, California
XS Conventional Gear
----> Mike, by stating 'conventional gear' do you mean the conventional
Europa monowheel? Or have you converted to a true 'conventional gear' with
tailwheel?
The way I see it, if you are building a Europa with the little wheel on the
wrong end, i.e. tri-gear, you need nothing more than basic training, and a
Katana is the closest airplane to a Europa (except the Liberty) in size,
weight, performance and power.
If flying a Europa with the little wheel in the back, you definitely need to
get a proper tailwheel endorsement by an instructor. Citabrias are commonly
used for tailwheel instruction as they are both tailwheel and aerobatic, so
can be used for more than one purpose, and also they are good handling
planes on the ground. A Piper J-3 Cub would not be as good of a trainer as
they are just too darn easy to handle on the ground, but I did my first
lesson in a Cub before transitioning to our 140.
I can't imagine trying to perform test flights on a Europa not knowing how
to fly the plane itself very well let along trying to figure out how to
handle a tailwheel plane.
Chris
A159
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Duncan McFadyean" <ami(at)mcfadyean.freeserve.co.uk> |
John,
When you've got the new prop., perhaps you could let us know what the pitch
distribution (twist) is in the blade. I'd ask Sensenich, but I fully expect
they would not tell me or provide any performance curves.
Construction and planform are nice; possibly lighter than the WD too.
Duncan McF.
----- Original Message -----
From: <TELEDYNMCS(at)aol.com>
Subject: Europa-List: Propellers
>
> Greetings all,
>
> Here's what I'm going with in regard to a prop.
>
> http://www.sensenichprop.com/sen_html/news.htm
>
> Sensenich tells me they are working with a vendor to develop an
> electrically
> adjustable hub for this blade, but it's likely 6-8 months before it'll be
> released. The good news is the manually adjustable blades will retrofit
> into the
> new electric hub. I've heard this prop has been used on a Jabiru 3300
> powered
> Esqual just up the road from me in Nashville with very good results.
>
> Regards,
>
> John Lawton
> Dunlap, TN
> A-245 (Waiting for my prop so I can mount the spinner, cowls, paint them,
> then go fly! Everything else is pretty much done.)
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "ivor.phillips" <ivor.phillips(at)ntlworld.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Rotax 912 Hi compression Pistons |
I think this is what you where looking for Thomas
http://www.craftworks.biz/pistonsite/6318.htm
Subject: Europa-List: Rotax 912 Hi compression Pistons
Ivor Phillips
XS486
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Duncan McFadyean" <ami(at)mcfadyean.freeserve.co.uk> |
| Subject: | Re: Rotax 912 Hi compression Pistons |
See:
http://www.rotaxking.com/wst_page9.php
for one version; not sure if hits is the version that was offered a few
years back.
I can't see the benefit of the above forged alternative as piston strength
is not an issue with the 912 and the standard cast pistons likely have a
much higher silicon content, which would make them far more seize-resistant.
Duncan McF.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Thomas Scherer" <thomas(at)scherer.com>
Subject: Europa-List: Rotax 912 Hi compression Pistons
>
> Greetings,
>
> in my quest to convert N81EU for Altitude operations, I was wondering
> whether enyone knows where those hi-compression pistons that were offered
> for the Rtx 912 some years ago (basically making it a Rtx 912S) are
> available ? Or somebody has them lying around in his shack after getting a
> bad conscience and not installing them ?
>
> Also ... still looking for glider wings in any condition.
>
> fly well !
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Duncan McFadyean" <ami(at)mcfadyean.freeserve.co.uk> |
Yes, but your Subaru engine has such a large surfeit of power that it can
get away with such high amounts of twist whilst retaining acceptable levels
of climb (due to the excess of power). Try that on a 912 and it may all end
in tears!
Duncan McF.
----- Original Message -----
From: "GLENN CROWDER" <gcrowder2(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Europa-List: Propellers
>
> I gained a solid 20 mph by dumping my NSI CAP140 3 bladed electrically
> adjustable prop
> with the Warp Drive blades for a custom designed fixed pitch 3 blade on my
> 125 hp EA81 powered mono.
> Whenever I flew with the NSI, I would be constantly fiddling with with
> the
> pitch control.
> It was just adding too much workload to be fun. I really like the fixed
> pitch. It is far
> smoother than the NSI and since it is custom fitted to my engine climbs
> just
> as well.
> The WD blades were designed for a 100 mph max ultralight and have only an
> 18 degree
> twist on a 74" blade. All WD blades are cut down to length from the same
> 74" blanks. When you cut them down to 64" they have even less twist. A
> proper twist for a 150 mph plane is between 40 and 45 degrees. The WD
> blades are a good climb type blade but were never designed for higher
> speeds.
> I do have a slightly longer takeoff roll as I need some speed for the
> prop
> to start to bite but
> I fly off a 4700 ft runway so is not an issue for me.
>
> Glenn
> Golden, Colorado
> USA
>
>
>>From: grroberts3(at)juno.com
>>Reply-To: europa-list(at)matronics.com
>>To: europa-list(at)matronics.com
>>Subject: Re: Europa-List: Propellers
>>Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 19:39:56 -0700
>>
>>
>>"The Aviation Consumer" magazine did an article on just that topic in
>>August 2005. Bottom line: for aircraft under 250 HP, gains in
>>performance were subjective and variable. In general, three blades gave
>>better climb, less noise, less vibration, more ground clearance, and
>>looked sexy. Two blades produced higher cruise speed on less fuel , were
>>lighter, and were cheaper: but not always.
>>
>>I don't care to defend these conclusions, I'm merely summarizing the
>>article.
>>
>>GRoberts
>>A187
>>
>>
>>writes:
>> >
>> >
>> > Propeller Experts !!
>> >
>> > I wish to upgrade to a CS prop with full feather option, the main
>> > reason
>> > being the feathering capability. The obvious choice for many is the
>> >
>> > Airmaster AP332. Now the Woodcomp SR3000 has the same options, and I
>> > believe
>> > is a lot cheaper. In addition it has the option for a 2 or 3-bladed
>> >
>> > propeller. My question is this :
>> > What are the pros and cons between 2 and 3 blades, apart from the
>> > considerable weight saving of 4 kg. Why are we all using 3-bladed
>> > Warp
>> > Drives ? The Katana, which is a similar but much heavier aircraft
>> > uses a
>> > 2-bladed CS Hoffmann on a Rotax 912.
>> >
>> > Any ideas ?
>> >
>> > Karl
>> >
>> >
>> > =======================================
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "R.C.Harrison" <ptag.dev(at)tiscali.co.uk> |
| Subject: | DOTH Tuesday/Wed? |
Hi! David and Bryan....others.
I would have enjoyed a trip to the original DOTH strip tomorrow but alas
I am laid low with a chest infection again and I must give the
antibiotics a chance this time !
Have a good day. Fly Safe.
Best regards
Bob Harrison G-PTAG Europa MKI/Jabiru 3300
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of David Joyce
Subject: Re: Europa-List: DOTH Tuesday/Wed?
Bryan, I am up for that if the fog (which is being a bit of a problem
hereabouts at present) has cleared. Regards, David, G-XSDJ
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bryan Allsop" <bryan(at)blackballclub.com>
Subject: Europa-List: DOTH Tuesday/Wed?
>
> The listing has not been accepting my mail recently, and I have not
been
able to respond to DOTHs. Hopefully this has been rectified.
>
> Anyone up for a doth to Peterborough (Conington) EGSF, Tues or Wed?
>
> Cheers. Bryan Allsop
>
>
> "Fantastic service... saves a lot of time for me... I only have to go
to
one page."
> http://www.doctors.net.uk/journalwatch
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ronald J. Parigoris" <rparigor(at)suffolk.lib.ny.us> |
| Subject: | Re: Rotax 912 Hi compression Pistons |
Hello Thomas
"I was wondering whether anyone knows where those hi-compression pistons that were
offered for the Rtx 912 some years ago"
I saw them for sale at E-Bay from these guys:
http://www.rotaxking.com/
The 912S is not only higher compression but a larger displacement (Larger bore).
I also saw a Bulletin from Rotax to not use any aftermarket pistons, I think specific
mentioned was higher compression for 912s.
For better altitude performance on a 912, besides variable pitch prop, installing
a kit to lean mixture with 2 EGTs and a Split second O2 Monitor would be my
choice as compared to boring and raising compression:
http://greenskyadventures.com/
Keep in mind with manual control if you lean at altitude in cruise if you descend
and throttle back without richening, you will be running lean and could get
the engine to quit. The Split second will help out with that giving you a lean
picture the second you throttle back.
Of course adding a turbo makes the most sense, for the most "Cents".
Sincerely
Ron Parigoris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JTHURSBY(at)tampabay.rr.com |
| Subject: | Re: Flying a heavy Europa XS? |
I have flown a 914 powered monowheel at 1,525.00 LBS. Takeoff at
Montrose Colorado was over 8,500 density. I used about a thousand
feet to get airborne and it was climbing around 700 FPM. If you are
mindfull of the C of G it will handle it fine. Forward loading with a
trike can be a problem as can aft with either configuration. Flying
to and from airshows the planes were ALWAYS heavy.
Jim
----- Original Message -----
From: rparigor(at)suffolk.lib.ny.us
Date: Monday, November 21, 2005 1:02 pm
Subject: Europa-List: Flying a heavy Europa XS?
>
> Taking more notice of completed aircraft empty weights of Europa
> XS, there
> have been many to come in a lot heavier than 750 pounds.
>
> Flight testing on short wings I don't think exceeded 1370 pounds.
>
> I was wondering if those out there who flew at or over 1450 pounds
> couldshare weights, CG and how aeroplane handeled and general
> comments.
> Especial interested in what it may have taken to wipe out Monowheel
> undercarriage and at what weight.
>
> Also spin entry and recovery handeling, especial in thin air at
> more aft
> CGs.
>
> I learned (the hard way) from models, that a fair manored craft, can
> become a bear , in other words more easily enter a spin, and
essential
> become unrecoverable if you make the air thin,or increase the weight.
> Sometimes a time honored CG is too aft for heavier weights, and
> acceptablecontrol throws for a lighter weight are unacceptable for
> heavy.
> Info on long wings at heavy weights also appreciated.
>
> Thx.
> Ron Parigoris
>
> Here in the US the builder can choose the gross weight. Not
> prudent to
> regularly fly a 1500 pound 912 XS out of a 1500 foot strip that
> has a high
> density altitude. For an occasional long flight with a intercooled
914
> with CS prop flying out @ sunrise from a wide mile long runway over
> reasonable hospitable terrain, near sea level at 60F sounds to be an
> acceptable practice? Problem is if you exceed gross weight listed in
> operating limitations, besides the potential for FAA to get on
> after you,
> even from a plain vanella ramp check, Insurance coverage may be
> void. If a
> plane were ever to be sold, easy to go back into phase 1 and
> change gross
> weight limit.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rowland Carson <rowil(at)clara.net> |
| Subject: | wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
>I've always wondered why everyone says you can't wheel land a Europa... why???
Chris - some have tried, and many have failed!
Consider the situation: you are rolling along on that one wheel just
after touchdown and slowing down, to the speed where the rudder
becomes ineffective. At this point, you are now in contact with the
ground through one point only, and have lost directional control; you
are no longer the pilot but have become a passenger on the way to a
groundloop or worse.
A similar possibility arises at takeoff. As the elevator is more
powerful than the rudder, you can lift the tail and find yourself
balancing on the head of a pin without directional control; however,
as you should be accelerating smartly here, the rudder may start to
bite before disaster overtakes you.
I must say that I speak as an observer at this stage - I have never
landed a Europa myself yet, but I have seen the sort of mess other
folk have made because they neglected to keep the tailwheel in good
contact with the ground. The old tailwheel habit of getting the tail
up, or of doing wheeler landings, will not serve you well in a
monowheel Europa.
regards
Rowland
--
| Rowland Carson PFA #16532 <http://home.clara.net/rowil/aviation/>
| 750 hours building Europa #435 G-ROWI e-mail
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "GLENN CROWDER" <gcrowder2(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Flying a heavy Europa XS? |
One of the most helpful things one can do to transition to the mono in my
opinion is just go out and rent a garden variety POC 172 spam can and
practice soft field landings and takeoffs. The
soft field landing technique is basically identical, just fly into ground
effect and keep pulling
back the yoke until the mains touch, then hold the nosewheel off until you
decide to let it down.
Try to get the timing down so the mains touch just when you achieve full
back yoke.
The runway should start to disappear for a moment or two before touching the
mains.
If the nose wheel touches prematurely, you flunked and possible bounce or
ground loop. Its OK
to grind a little flat spot on the tail tie down! Nobody will notice!
Soft field takeoffs are very similiar too. Use 15 deg flaps and start the
takeoff run with
full back yoke. When you break ground, quickly go forward on the yoke (very
little on the mono)
to avoid a stall and go into ground effect. As you gain speed, retract the
flaps and fly away. This
technique works exactly the same on the mono and works well for windy
crosswind
conditions. For a normal takeoff in light wind conditions, you would
normally gain about 35 kts groundspeed and then go forward on the stick just
slightly to raise the tail, at which point
the ailerons become effective and you get the sensation of balancing on a
beach ball for
a few moments until the plane rotates. This is the only real difference as
far as I can
tell after several hundred landings and takeoffs with the mono. Of course,
you would
still need some actual taildragger time but doing the above exercise could
shorten your
transition time dramatically! Your mileage may vary however!
Glenn
>From: Chris Beck <n9zes(at)verizon.net>
>Reply-To: europa-list(at)matronics.com
>To: europa-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Re: Europa-List: Flying a heavy Europa XS?
>Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 13:46:07 -0600 (CST)
>
>
>Good Day All,
>
>So am I to believe that people looking to transit into a Europa are
>training
>in a Citabria? Will this be acceptable to the FAA, CAA, and an insurance
>company? Or is the Diamond more closer to the Europa? With no Europa to
>train in
>what are people doing to meet any requirement?
>
>Mike Duane A207
>Redding, California
>XS Conventional Gear
>
>----> Mike, by stating 'conventional gear' do you mean the conventional
>Europa monowheel? Or have you converted to a true 'conventional gear' with
>tailwheel?
>
>The way I see it, if you are building a Europa with the little wheel on the
>wrong end, i.e. tri-gear, you need nothing more than basic training, and a
>Katana is the closest airplane to a Europa (except the Liberty) in size,
>weight, performance and power.
>
>If flying a Europa with the little wheel in the back, you definitely need
>to get a proper tailwheel endorsement by an instructor. Citabrias are
>commonly used for tailwheel instruction as they are both tailwheel and
>aerobatic, so can be used for more than one purpose, and also they are good
>handling planes on the ground. A Piper J-3 Cub would not be as good of a
>trainer as they are just too darn easy to handle on the ground, but I did
>my first lesson in a Cub before transitioning to our 140.
>
>I can't imagine trying to perform test flights on a Europa not knowing how
>to fly the plane itself very well let along trying to figure out how to
>handle a tailwheel plane.
>
>Chris
>A159
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cliff Shaw" <flyinggpa(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Flying a heavy Europa XS? |
All
This past summer, Betty and I came home from Oshkosh with lots of extra load (120
lb over). The plane flew very normally and had no trouble climbing and flying
to 10000 ft. In fact I had to slow down to allow the other Europa to keep
up with me. He was over heating in the clime-out. ( Jerry could out clime me,
but not on a long clime)
I do see a difference is performance when lightly loaded. It is rather fun to fly
by myself and zip around like a bee.
On the Mono ground handling/landing: I would not agree with those who might thing
the rudder on the Europa is not "powerful". I have found that the rudder
will easily steer me on the runway in my tri-gear All the way to the turn-off
(remember there are no cables to my little wheel) In fact when taxing at 2800
RPM and no tail wind, I can steer with the rudder to keep it on the line.
Just my thoughts.
Cliff Shaw
1041 Euclid ave.
Edmonds, WA 98020
425 776 5555
http://www.europaowners.org/WileE
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Brown <acrojim(at)cfl.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
I would also suggest, to those of you who want to "TRY" to wheel land a mono
wheel, you need to do one thing first. With the engine off, have a friend or
helper raise the tail to normal flight attitude, then take a look at how close
the
prop is to the ground or pavement. One bounce on landing, and you may be buying
new prop blades.
The center of gravity is behind the mono wheel, which will make the tail drop
down, as soon as the wheel touches the runway, if you counter with some forward
stick, re-read the above paragraph.
I'm a high time Pitts driver, who loves wheel landings, but NEVER in our mono
wheel.
Jim Brown
N398JB
Rowland Carson wrote:
>
>
> >I've always wondered why everyone says you can't wheel land a Europa... why???
>
> Chris - some have tried, and many have failed!
>
> Consider the situation: you are rolling along on that one wheel just
> after touchdown and slowing down, to the speed where the rudder
> becomes ineffective. At this point, you are now in contact with the
> ground through one point only, and have lost directional control; you
> are no longer the pilot but have become a passenger on the way to a
> groundloop or worse.
>
> A similar possibility arises at takeoff. As the elevator is more
> powerful than the rudder, you can lift the tail and find yourself
> balancing on the head of a pin without directional control; however,
> as you should be accelerating smartly here, the rudder may start to
> bite before disaster overtakes you.
>
> I must say that I speak as an observer at this stage - I have never
> landed a Europa myself yet, but I have seen the sort of mess other
> folk have made because they neglected to keep the tailwheel in good
> contact with the ground. The old tailwheel habit of getting the tail
> up, or of doing wheeler landings, will not serve you well in a
> monowheel Europa.
>
> regards
>
> Rowland
> --
> | Rowland Carson PFA #16532 <http://home.clara.net/rowil/aviation/>
> | 750 hours building Europa #435 G-ROWI e-mail
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Brown <acrojim(at)cfl.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Preparing for first flight |
Svein;
There is a company called Flightcrafters just a few miles out of Tampa Florida
USA. They are a builders assist center, and they have pilots available for checkouts
in the Europas.
The phone is 813-655-6411 talk to Russell, or Bob.
I thank their web site is Flightcrafters.com
Jim Brown
Sidsel & Svein Johnsen wrote:
>
> In anticipation of first flight this coming spring and the 50 hours of verification
program after that, I have the following question to the U.S. participants
on this forum:
>
> - I am considering attending FCI's unusual attitude/upset recovery training course
conducted in Mesa, AZ. Do any of you know this company or their 3 day/5
mission Emergency Maneuver Training course?
>
> - Is there anywhere in the U.S. where I can get transition training in a Europa,
with a CFI? Have valid FAA PPL/medical.
>
> - Will the Diamond Katana offer similar (to a certain extent) flying characteristics
as the Europa? This aircraft is operated by several flying schools in
the U.S., and therefore may be more readily available for relevant practice than
a Europa.
>
> Regards,
> Svein
> A225 - XS Trigear - now in Norway
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul McAllister" <paul.mcallister(at)qia.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Flying a heavy Europa XS? |
Mike,
I logged about 10 hours in a Citabria as part of my transition training for
my Mono wheel and it worked out fine for me.
Paul
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DuaneFamly(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Flying a heavy Europa XS? |
All,
I have about 25 hours in a Citabria and am already signed off for my
tailwheel. Has anyone needed to do anything else for their "conventional gear"
(two
mains and a tailwheel Berube style) Europa in order to meet any requirements for
FAA, CSA, or insurance company? Being in "very" northern California, I am not
around any other Europa's that do transition training. Bob Berube has been a
very big assistance with my conventional gear modification.
Mike Duane A207
Redding, California
"Berube" Conventional Gear
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Steve Crimm" <steve.crimm(at)stephenscott.com> |
| Subject: | Flying a heavy Europa XS? |
I would say a tail wheel endorsement is a tail wheel endorsement whether it
is a Cessna 140 or a Europa with conventional gear it is a tail wheel
aircraft. I would double check and push the point with the insurance
company it's gear configuration so they don't require anything but a tail
wheel endorsement which you have. Just my thoughts
Steve Crimm
A058
N42AH
Monowheel - Motor Glider
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
DuaneFamly(at)aol.com
Subject: Re: Europa-List: Flying a heavy Europa XS?
All,
I have about 25 hours in a Citabria and am already signed off for my
tailwheel. Has anyone needed to do anything else for their "conventional
gear" (two mains and a tailwheel Berube style) Europa in order to meet any
requirements for FAA, CSA, or insurance company? Being in "very" northern
California, I am not around any other Europa's that do transition training.
Bob Berube has been a very big assistance with my conventional gear
modification.
Mike Duane A207
Redding, California
"Berube" Conventional Gear
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Beck <n9zes(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
Rowland Carson wrote:
>
>Chris - some have tried, and many have failed!
>
>Consider the situation: you are rolling along on that one wheel just
>after touchdown and slowing down, to the speed where the rudder
>becomes ineffective.
>
Good point. I notice the size of the rudder on the Europa compared to
our 140. The 140 rudder is really quite huge! In addition, the 140
won't raise the tail on takeoff until 20 kts. or so, and will hold it up
a bit slower on landing, but never even hints of loosing rudder
effectiveness. If anything, it's a bit TOO sensitive to the rudder, and
I end up skidding all over if I don't pay attention with the
coordination while flying.
Is that in fact a problem with ground handling - loss of rudder
effectiveness - in the Monowheel? That could make for some interesting
moments with crosswinds....
Chris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Beck <n9zes(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
Jim Brown wrote:
>
>I would also suggest, to those of you who want to "TRY" to wheel land a mono
>wheel, you need to do one thing first. With the engine off, have a friend or
>helper raise the tail to normal flight attitude, then take a look at how close
the
>prop is to the ground or pavement. One bounce on landing, and you may be buying
>new prop blades.
>
>The center of gravity is behind the mono wheel, which will make the tail drop
>down, as soon as the wheel touches the runway, if you counter with some forward
>stick, re-read the above paragraph.
>
>
>
Jim, what sort of clearance are we talking about?? 2"? 6"? I've got a
mile on the 140. I'd have to be looking straight at the dirt to get the
prop grounded.
Regarding the C of G, it's the same issue on any taildragger. It's
behind the mains, which causes the tail to drop when landing due to the
inertia. Trick is to zero out the rate of descent just as the mains
touch, then nail it with that bit of forward stick (as I'm sure you know
very well from the Pitts). Again, is it strictly a prop clearance issue
that prevents wheelies in the monowheel? Has this been beaten to death
in the past where I can look it up in the archives?
I'm just very curious about the mechanics of landing a monowheel. I've
flown in a few different ones (a Classic and an XS). Now that I'm
flying a tailwheel plan, I understand a lot more of what's going on.
Chris
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Converting to Monowheel |
| From: | Peter and Chris Timm <cptimm(at)telus.net> |
As a former Citabria pilot with several years of glider towing (lots of
take-offs and landings), I still found my first test flight of my Classic
Mono to be different in the landing phase. Speed control on final and a
perfectly executed flare are essential. Not only does the rudder lose it's
effectiveness at this time, but the ailerons do likewise and the outriggers
are only in contact with the ground when the tail is down. You must nail the
tailwheel as soon as possible, especially in a crosswind. A few circuits in
a monowheel would make all the difference. Take-off in a taildragger always
means: stick forward, to get the tail up. Never, never check stick forward
in the monowheel Europa during landing and very little at take-off.
On another subject I find the load carrying ability of our little wonder
quite amazing, even though, as Cliff suggests, it is most fun to fly solo
and lightly loaded.
We are off to Australia this Sunday for a couple of months; Cairns,
Brisbane, Sydney, Albury, Melbourne, Adelaide, Perth, and some places in
between. Would like to meet with Down Under Europa builders and pilots for a
chat and look-see if possible.
Let me know off list if interested. cptimm(at)telus.net
Peter Timm, #110
Pemberton, British Columbia
>
on 05/11/21 6:06 PM, GLENN CROWDER at gcrowder2(at)hotmail.com wrote:
>
> I flew my 930 lb Monowheel with EA81 power and 125 hp yesterday with a 195
> lb passenger. I am 210. My home base is at 5090 ft. I have a fixed pitch
> 3 bladed prop pitched for cruise. Takeoff was a breeze on my 4700 ft
> runway, breaking ground in about 800 ft, staying in ground effect for
> another 1200 then climbing at about 750 fpm for the first thousand feet.
> Cruising about 4600 rpm
> gives about 145 mph. On part of the flight, we slowed to about 100 and were
> getting 2.0 gph
> on the fuel computer for about 30 minutes. My passenger felt the ailerons
> were very light and
> sensitive but the elevator was sensitive but heavier than the Mustang II he
> had just ridden in last week (probably due to the all flying stab on the
> Mono). The landing was sweet at the normal 70 mph approach speed with no
> bounce or tail wagging common on a lot of taildraggers. Very enjoyable! I
> did weld in some additional steel supports to the swingarm area. Back when
> I was first learning to fly the Mono, I botched some landings not getting
> the tail down far enough (easy to do now!) and got some very severe bouncing
> (almost hit the prop) before I decided to do a go around. I thouroughly
> inspected the swing arm area afterwards and could find nothing bent. That
> was 3 yrs ago and haven't had a landing with more than one extra bounce
> since.
> I recently received some wheel landing training in a brand new Citabria
> and felt the Citabria was quite a bit touchier on landing than the
> Monowheel. With the Mono, as soon as the tail touches, you just pin the
> tail with the stick and hold it, with the Citabria if you do that the tail
> wheel will start shimmying badly. Also with the Citab, you can occasionally
> get a wing to lift on one side after touchdown and have to roll it level
> again. This never happens with the Mono. Landing the Mono
> seems no harder than a C172, just a bit different! Just my $ .02.
>
> Glenn
>
>> From: Jeff B <topglock(at)cox.net>
>> Reply-To: europa-list(at)matronics.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Nigel Graham" <nigel_graham(at)btclick.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Rotax 912 Hi compression Pistons |
Hi Thomas,
I believe that Kim Prout used a set of these 912 Xtra pistons on his first
Europa with great success.
It might be worth contacting him for confirmation/sage advice?
Nigel
----- Original Message -----
From: "ivor.phillips" <ivor.phillips(at)ntlworld.com>
Subject: Re: Europa-List: Rotax 912 Hi compression Pistons
I think this is what you where looking for Thomas
http://www.craftworks.biz/pistonsite/6318.htm
Subject: Europa-List: Rotax 912 Hi compression Pistons
Ivor Phillips
XS486
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Paul Stewart <europa(at)pstewart.f2s.com> |
Does anyone have experience of either the XCOM or Microair intercoms -
good or bad ?
regards
Paul
G-GIDY
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Paul Stewart <europa(at)pstewart.f2s.com> |
I've just realised the 'microair' intercom is infact made by ps
engineering (the PM501)
Paul
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Brown <acrojim(at)cfl.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
Chris
My son has the Europa for about a week. Once its back in the hanger I will measure
clearance and advise the forum.
Jim
Chris Beck wrote:
>
> Jim Brown wrote:
>
> >
> >I would also suggest, to those of you who want to "TRY" to wheel land a mono
> >wheel, you need to do one thing first. With the engine off, have a friend or
> >helper raise the tail to normal flight attitude, then take a look at how close
the
> >prop is to the ground or pavement. One bounce on landing, and you may be buying
> >new prop blades.
> >
> >The center of gravity is behind the mono wheel, which will make the tail drop
> >down, as soon as the wheel touches the runway, if you counter with some forward
> >stick, re-read the above paragraph.
> >
> >
> >
> Jim, what sort of clearance are we talking about?? 2"? 6"? I've got a
> mile on the 140. I'd have to be looking straight at the dirt to get the
> prop grounded.
>
> Regarding the C of G, it's the same issue on any taildragger. It's
> behind the mains, which causes the tail to drop when landing due to the
> inertia. Trick is to zero out the rate of descent just as the mains
> touch, then nail it with that bit of forward stick (as I'm sure you know
> very well from the Pitts). Again, is it strictly a prop clearance issue
> that prevents wheelies in the monowheel? Has this been beaten to death
> in the past where I can look it up in the archives?
>
> I'm just very curious about the mechanics of landing a monowheel. I've
> flown in a few different ones (a Classic and an XS). Now that I'm
> flying a tailwheel plan, I understand a lot more of what's going on.
>
> Chris
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike Parkin" <mikenjulie.parkin(at)btopenworld.com> |
It seems to me that there is a lot of 'hearsay' being used about the various pro's
and con's of the available propellers for the Europa. Whether this twist
or that twist is right for cruise seems somewhat esoteric to me. The choice of
a prop is, I believe, a little like the choice of engine - very subjective and
is influenced by how much cash one has and what the individual 'likes the look
of'. Most of us are very proud of our aircraft and tend to defend our choice
of this item and that item. The bottom line is that no one could live on
the difference between the propeller installations. I have only seen a few of
the different installations and as such am not an expert. David Joyce's woodcomp
looks particularly nice and David is obviously very pleased with it. My
own Airmaster is an early model and is not without warts. However, there is not
a lot wrong with an installation that gives:
a: 130kt (IAS) cruise at 18lts/hr.
b: Take Off distance of less that 300m on grass with nil wind.
c: An aircraft that can reach Vne (165 kIAS) in straight and level flight at
5000ft.
d: A climb rate in excess of 1200 fpm.
All these figures are typical with a weight on the heavy side of average (it must
be my streamlined figure). GJULZ is a monowheel XS fuselage with classic wings,
Rotax 914 and Airmaster 308 constant speed prog.
On the point of prop strikes during take-of or landing. I am not very experienced
on my monowheel < 250 hours. Having had the ground loop experience, my recollection
of the incident was that the tail high/wheelbarrow attitude was particularly
excessive before the prop blade struck the tarmac - not an attitude
one would get in under normal circumstances. The advice I have read about holding
the tail down until lift-off followed by a check forward of the stick, does
not fit with my experience.
For what it is worth, I find that on take-off the following works best for me.
Hold the stick hard back to enhance the tailwheel steering, I find that on take
off that the rudder is quickly effective because of the propwash. As the IAS
rises through 40 KIAS the ailerons are effective and relaxing the back pressure
on the stick allows the tail to rise. As the aircraft accellerates I find
it is necessary to apply a gentle but increasing forward pressure to prevent the
aircraft trying to fly before it really has the speed (this is particularly
important on rough ground as a good bump can launch you airborne before the aircraft
is really ready to fly). At about 50 knots or so, just releasing the
forward pressure with perhaps a slight pull will fly the aircraft gracefully into
the air. When you get this right (it is a red letter day - put it in the
diary), the Europa seems to transfer from ground to air without any fuss at all
- almost like levitation - that is very satisfying. Once airborne, accellerate
to an initial climb speed of 65-70 knots - wheel and flaps gently up/in and
the pocket rocket is away.
On landing, it really is time to wake up and take notice!! I aim to flair just
off the ground and keep the stick coming back, as the speed decays, the stall
warner sounds shortly followed by the tailwheel touching just before the mainwheel.
All that is left is to keep the aircraft perfectly straight ( as well
as you are able) and bring the speed under control. Avoid hard breaking, particularly
if the aircraft is not perfectly straight and, once on the ground always
keep the stick fully back until at walking pace. I have also found that an
approach speed of 60-65 KIAS works in normal conditions with perhaps a 'trickle
more' power at heavy gross weights.
regards,
Mike
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul McAllister" <paul.mcallister(at)qia.net> |
Paul,
I have an XCOM and it works fine. I did have an intermittent problem early
on and the support was excellent. The guy air mailed me another one and
gave me a return envelope for the old one.
I made my own wiring loom and despite my care I did make some mistakes. If
you want to make you own loom XCOM have really good instructions on their
WEB site. They do sell a wiring loom and I thought it was expensive at
first, however after messing around for a day the ready made one seemed like
a bargain.
Regards, Paul
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Raimo Toivio" <raimo.toivio(at)rwm.fi> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: door push rods |
thanks Steve,
its helps but anyway I remade them
and now the doors are almost too
tight (from point to point exactly 947 mm).
Raimo #417
----- Original Message -----
From: "steve v." <s.vestuti(at)virgin.net>
Subject: Europa-List: RE: door push rods
>
> hi Raimo,
>
> i too constructed the shoot bolts " within a mm " of the manual spec., and ,
as you have described , i also had variations in the protruding distance of the
shootbolts when extended. the factory reply was that if there is " 1/2" of the
flat area of the shoot bolt protruding " then that is suficient for the installation
- i did not remake them as mine were within spec. hope this is of some
help.
>
> steve #573.
> ----------------
> Visit EuropaOwnersForum http://www.europaowners.org/
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fergus Kyle" <VE3LVO(at)rac.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
Chris,
The main impression you want to take with you is that a tri-gear
can be landed at any speed below that which touches nosewheel first - so you
can slide in a few knots fast and nail the main gear then lower the
nosewheel. That's what the 'big guys' do. It gives them latitude and
flexibility. This is mainly true also for the conventional tailwheel types
(with some reservations).
BUT the answer to the monwheel Europa is that it should be landed on the
stall, so that the she's not flying when you touch. Thus the tailwheel (if
not first) is prompted to earth quickly in order to transfer directional
control from the limpid rudder.
Crosswinds are, yes, trickier. Fore the first two types
(kiddycar and conventional) the trick is to fly in, dip the upwind wheel
onto the tarmac and rudder the aircraft straight before the rest of the main
gear takes the weight. All this happens in a short time with a heavy machine
because of inertia. Again that's what the 'big guys' do. Slight misjudgement
as to height makes a jolt but little else. BUT on a monowheel, you are like
a Tiger moth - feather in the wind - susceptible to every whim and fancy of
a gust. The difference in the Europa is the wonderful pitch control the
stabilator gives you. The real answer is to practice landing into a steady
wind and mark yourself on the accuracy of your estimate of the touchdown
instant. When you can say "now" as the mainwheel touches, five times in a
row, you are ready for crosswinds, and later gusts. The entire exercise is
based on your knowledge of the impending stall and that takes practice. You
don't want to be untrained in that before you try crosswind approaches and
landings. Be prepared to go around the instant you are unsure of the
touchdown - hand on throttle and stick. Having instructed on Harvards and
Otters, I can bet Tony K and Nigel will agree with me. The best place to
stall any aircraft is one inch off the surface. When you can do that, you
are master.
Flames invited.
Ferg
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris Beck" <n9zes(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Re: Europa-List: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?]
|
| Jim Brown wrote:
|
| >
| >I would also suggest, to those of you who want to "TRY" to wheel land a
mono
| >wheel, you need to do one thing first. With the engine off, have a friend
or
| >helper raise the tail to normal flight attitude, then take a look at how
close the
| >prop is to the ground or pavement. One bounce on landing, and you may be
buying
| >new prop blades.
| >
| >The center of gravity is behind the mono wheel, which will make the tail
drop
| >down, as soon as the wheel touches the runway, if you counter with some
forward
| >stick, re-read the above paragraph.
| >
| >
| >
| Jim, what sort of clearance are we talking about?? 2"? 6"? I've got a
| mile on the 140. I'd have to be looking straight at the dirt to get the
| prop grounded.
|
| Regarding the C of G, it's the same issue on any taildragger. It's
| behind the mains, which causes the tail to drop when landing due to the
| inertia. Trick is to zero out the rate of descent just as the mains
| touch, then nail it with that bit of forward stick (as I'm sure you know
| very well from the Pitts). Again, is it strictly a prop clearance issue
| that prevents wheelies in the monowheel? Has this been beaten to death
| in the past where I can look it up in the archives?
|
| I'm just very curious about the mechanics of landing a monowheel. I've
| flown in a few different ones (a Classic and an XS). Now that I'm
| flying a tailwheel plan, I understand a lot more of what's going on.
|
| Chris
|
|
|
|
|
|
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Beck <n9zes(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
Chris,
The main impression you want to take with you is that a tri-gear
can be landed at any speed below that which touches nosewheel first - so you
can slide in a few knots fast and nail the main gear then lower the
nosewheel. That's what the 'big guys' do. It gives them latitude and
flexibility. This is mainly true also for the conventional tailwheel types
(with some reservations).
BUT the answer to the monwheel Europa is that it should be landed on the
stall, so that the she's not flying when you touch. Thus the tailwheel (if
not first) is prompted to earth quickly in order to transfer directional
control from the limpid rudder.
---> Good points, Ferg. It's really an issue of directional control with the fairly
weak rudder on the Europa, then (Along with limited prop clearance for 'oops'
wheel landings)?
Interesting, as my tailwheel training centered around making 3-point landings for
'good' conditions, but wheel landings for crosswinds and/or gusty days due
to the added control you have over the airplane. Sounds like the monowheel doesn't
give you that option.
Well, I suppose until I'm actually flying ours, it's all just so much discussion.
It will be interesting to be able to compare flying the 140 to the Europa.
Chris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Erich Trombley" <erichdtrombley(at)juno.com> |
| Subject: | Preparing for the first flight |
Regarding transition training for the Europa. This what I did.
I have a classic mono that has been flying now for almost three years. Prior to
the first flight I worked with the local FSDO to amend my Operating Limitations
to include the following:
During the flight testing phase, no person may be carried in this aircraft
during flight unless that
person is a qualified certificated flight instructor.
I did this for several reasons. First, there aren't very many Europas around my
neck of the woods and as such I wanted to perform transition training in my
Europa with a CFI. Two, I need ten (10) hours dual in the Europa for insurance
purposes.
I worked with Bob Lindsay, a retired Navy test pilot and CFII, who is fantastic!!!!
Can't say enough great things about him ,as well as Kim Prout ,who recommended
Bob to me. Bob required that the aircraft first be inspected by Kim.
In the days leading up to the first flight I worked with Kim, who not only inspected
the aircraft, but worked with me on the ground handling of the Europa.
Boy, did we have some fun taxing the plane to and fro. With two thumbs up from
Kim, Bob agreed to perform the first flight.
Bob conducted the first flight in such an organized and professional manner you
would have thought he was test flying a military fighter. He conducted several
test flights before checking out a local CFI in the Europa. Due to time constraints
Bob wasn't able to transition me into the Europa, hence the need to
get a local CFI checked out. With my CFI current and competent in the Europa
I received my ten hours of dual, and a tail wheel endorsement to boot! I had
contemplated getting my tail wheel endorsement in a traditional taildragger but
decided that the Europa is just too unique and therefore decided that I would
just learn in the Europa. Although I can't speak for others. I am sure glad
I took this approach. I didn't have to worry if a C140 or a Citabria would
mimic the characteristics of the Europa since I was learning in the EUROPA.
Both Bob and my CFI are great instructors! What a great feeling it was transitioning
into the Europa from my many hours in Cessna's and other tri-cycle gear
aircraft. Was I nervous? You bet I was. Was it challenging? Yes, but learning
a new skill always is. Was it worth it? Without a doubt.
Erich Trombley
N28ET Classic Mono 914
Las Vegas, NV
Regarding transition training for the Europa. This what I did.
I have a classic mono that has been flying now for almost three years. Prior to
the first flight I worked with the local FSDOto amend my Operating Limitations
to include the following:
During the flight testing phase, no person may be carried in this aircraft during
flight unless that
person is a qualified certificated flight instructor.
I did this for several reasons. First, there aren't very many Europas around my
neck of the woods and as such I wanted to performtransition training in my Europa
with a CFI. Two, I needten (10) hours dual in the Europa for insurance purposes.
I worked with Bob Lindsay, a retired Navy test pilot and CFII, whois fantastic!!!!
Can't say enough great things about him ,as well as Kim Prout ,who recommended
Bob to me. Bob required that the aircraft firstbe inspected by Kim.
In the days leading up to the first flight I worked with Kim, who not only inspected
the aircraft, but worked with me on the ground handling of the Europa.Boy,
did we have some funtaxing the plane to and fro. Withtwo thumbs upfrom Kim,
Bob agreed to perform the first flight.
Bob conducted the first flight in such an organized and professional manner you
would have thought he was test flyinga military fighter. He conducted several
test flights before checking outa local CFI in the Europa. Due to time constraints
Bob wasn't able to transition me into the Europa, hence the need to geta
local CFI checked out. With my CFI current and competent in the Europa I received
my ten hours of dual, and a tail wheel endorsement to boot! I had contemplated
getting my tail wheel endorsement in a traditional taildragger but decided
that the Europa is just too unique and therefore decided that I would just
learn in the Europa. Although I can't speak for others. I am sure glad I took
this approach.I didn't have to worry if a C140 or aCitabria would mimic the characteristics
of the Europasince I was learning in the EUROPA. Both Bob and my
CFIare great instructors! What a great feeling it was transitioning into the
Europa from my many hours in Cessna's and other tri-cycle gear aircraft. Was I
nervous? You bet I was. Was it challenging? Yes, but learning a new skill always
is. Was it worth it? Without a doubt.
Erich Trombley
N28ET Classic Mono 914
Las Vegas, NV
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bryan Allsop" <bryan(at)blackballclub.com> |
| Subject: | Re: DOTH Tuesday/Wed? |
Hi Bob,
Sorry to hear that you are not well.
You missed nothing in Doth terms. Twas fogged off on Tuesday and just not go
enough for some today.
Get well soon.
See yer! Bryan
----- Original Message -----
From: "R.C.Harrison" <ptag.dev(at)tiscali.co.uk>
Subject: RE: Europa-List: DOTH Tuesday/Wed?
>
> Hi! David and Bryan....others.
> I would have enjoyed a trip to the original DOTH strip tomorrow but alas
> I am laid low with a chest infection again and I must give the
> antibiotics a chance this time !
> Have a good day. Fly Safe.
> Best regards
> Bob Harrison G-PTAG Europa MKI/Jabiru 3300
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of David Joyce
> To: europa-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Europa-List: DOTH Tuesday/Wed?
>
>
>
> Bryan, I am up for that if the fog (which is being a bit of a problem
> hereabouts at present) has cleared. Regards, David, G-XSDJ
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bryan Allsop" <bryan(at)blackballclub.com>
> To:
> Subject: Europa-List: DOTH Tuesday/Wed?
>
>
>
>>
>> The listing has not been accepting my mail recently, and I have not
> been
> able to respond to DOTHs. Hopefully this has been rectified.
>>
>> Anyone up for a doth to Peterborough (Conington) EGSF, Tues or Wed?
>>
>> Cheers. Bryan Allsop
>>
>>
>> "Fantastic service... saves a lot of time for me... I only have to go
> to
> one page."
>> http://www.doctors.net.uk/journalwatch
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "jim" <jim(at)pellien.com> |
| Subject: | Spark Plugs and Oil Filters for the 912ULS |
Does anybody know of a cheap place to buy spark plugs and oil filters for the Rotax
912ULS engine?
Jim
Jim Pellien
Mid-Atlantic Sports Planes
www.MASPL.com
703-313-4818
jim(at)sportsplanes.com
Sent via the WebMail system at Engage IT
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Sidsel & Svein Johnsen" <sidsel.svein(at)oslo.online.no> |
| Subject: | Preparing for first flight |
Many thanks to all who responded to my questions, some of whom I have already been
in touch with off-list.
The experience Erich shared with us today seems to be very much the way to go,
in principle, and is also used here in Norway, if the builder is not doing the
first flight himself.
For some unexplainable reason, I just want to do that first flight myself!
Although the trigear is easier to land and handle on the ground than the monowheel,
I would still like to get some feel of it beforehand.
Flightcrafters in Florida have helped out builders in their shop with qualified
first flight/transition training pilots from the area, using the builder's own
Europa. Flightcrafters have no Europa to lend.
I talked with Liberty Aerospace today, thinking that Liberty XL might be the closest
thing to Europa as far as flying characteristics. The person I talked to
(also a CFI) told me that even though the wings are the same as on the Europa,
Liberty XL does not fly just like the Europa (apart from the fact that no Liberty
has yet been sold to a flying school and therefore is not readily available
for training). His opinion on the Diamond DA20 Katana was that it is a different
airplane altogether, further away from Europa than the Liberty is.
Hmmm - still want to do that first flight, safely - - - - - - -
Regards,
Svein
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
| From: | <rparigor(at)suffolk.lib.ny.us> |
Thx. to all who replied to "Flying a heavy Europa XS?"
I owned a 1948 Cessna 170 for some time. When landing within what a
reasonable crosswind may be (POH) full stall or wheel didn't matter much,
both relative straight forward.
Now if you were landing in what is considered unreasonable by most, the
best approach I found was to fly the airplane unbelievable fast 80MPH plus
and try and get the side slip to match the crosswind. The faster you fly
the faster you are flying sideways. I have landed where I had full right
rudder in a sideslip with left wing down and still needed a crab to keep
things going down the runway. As long as your timing is superb as to kick
it straight at the right second, it was a very controllable landing.
I suspect the Europa is the same, you need to time things just right.
Since there are a number of Europa fliers out there who fly Cessna 140s
perhaps they can pursuaded into modifying their planes to more resemble a
monowheel and allow some prospective pilots a try ??
What I am talkin bout is toe in. The Cessna 170 steel axles are prone to
cracking. The cessna 170 club made harsh warnings to switch to solid
aluminium ski axles. I allowed my A+P to make the change. HE DIDN"T
REALIGN!!! It had a little toe in. I have never flown an airplane so
touchy in my life. It ended up since my plane was a 1948 there was no
cross for wheel shims so i needed to trig things out and used measured off
the shelf cessna shims for other craft.
Since I was set up and foolin I was able to try different amounts of toe
in. Better to start with Max toe out that is reccomended, this way when
plane begins to pull Gs in a turn it gets thrown out of the turn. If you
have toe in the opposite happens! Anyway just like aft CG, the less Toe
out you have the more "Responsive" your handeling will be. I think it
would be easy to have 2 sets of shims, 1 training and 1 set near
europalike. If you have too much toe out, you would not want to lose your
brakes when landing in a crosswind.
Ron Parigoris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tim Ward" <ward.t(at)xtra.co.nz> |
| Subject: | Re: Spark Plugs and Oil Filters for the 912ULS |
Jim,
Try sparkplugs.com
Cheers,
Tim
Tim Ward
12 Waiwetu Street,
Fendalton,
Christchurch, 8005
New Zealand.
Ph +64 3 3515166
Mobile 021 0640221
ward.t(at)xtra.co.nz
----- Original Message -----
From: "jim" <jim(at)pellien.com>
Subject: Europa-List: Spark Plugs and Oil Filters for the 912ULS
>
> Does anybody know of a cheap place to buy spark plugs and oil filters for
> the Rotax 912ULS engine?
>
> Jim
>
> Jim Pellien
> Mid-Atlantic Sports Planes
> www.MASPL.com
> 703-313-4818
> jim(at)sportsplanes.com
>
>
> Sent via the WebMail system at Engage IT
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Spark Plugs and Oil Filters for the 912ULS |
Jim , if it is like in U.K. your best bet is your local motorcycle dealers
who will have the rcommended plugs at about one quarter the Rotax ot Eurpoa
Price.
Patrick
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gavin & Anne" <gavanne(at)iconz.co.nz> |
Hello all
When I purchased my engine installation kit from the previous Europa factory
they sent me a plenum chamber for a Classic Europa whereas mine is an XS=85=85.I
didn't know the plenums where different, but the classic plenum is about an
inch taller and has a 45 degree chamfer on the front right hand corner
Is anyone out there in the opposite situation =85..ie have a classic Europa
and an XS plenum?
In retrospect I guess an XS plenum would easily fit under a classic cowling.
The other option is to modify my existing Plenum or purchase a XS one as
there is just not enough room under an XS cowling to comfortably fit it.
Gavin Lee=85=85.#355
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Current sales & production |
| From: | Fred Klein <fklein(at)orcasonline.com> |
Cliff,
That sound's fascinating...when you say the kit could "have new all
molded parts, I saw the prototypes.", do you literally mean
"all"?...e.g., did you see new moulds for...say...cowls?, wings?,
fuselage?
What evidence did you see of complete kits going out the door?
With the new Light Sport Aircraft category, I've wondered whether they
might put the Europa on a diet, discard the retractable mono, go back
to the 80 hp 912, and just slip under the maximum allowable performance
for the LSA(?).
...just speculation on my part,
Fred
On Wednesday, November 23, 2005, at 06:20 PM, Cliff Shaw wrote:
>
> All
>
> In July when Betty and I visited Europa04, I got the idea they were
> working hard of something. I did not get a hint, but there was a lot
> of "work" being done.
>
> The Europa kit could have new all molded parts, I saw the prototypes.
> I hope they get it all going soon so the Europa stays in the "popular"
> list.
>
> Cliff Shaw
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cliff Shaw" <flyinggpa(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Current sales & production |
Fred , All
I guess I should have been more explicit. I was shown by Andy replacement molded
parts for the "glass over foam" parts.
They had a fuselage and other parts setting there getting ready for shipping to
a UK customer. They said that there most urgent effort was to support the builder
who are in the process of building their kit.
I did over hear a conversation (before the door was closed) of "flight test" on
something that is being worked on.
You suggest LSA , very possible. I know for sure they are not just sitting around
and taking it easy. There is something going on.
Cliff Shaw
1041 Euclid ave.
Edmonds, WA 98020
425 776 5555
http://www.europaowners.org/WileE
----- Original Message -----
From: Fred Klein
To: europa-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2005 6:51 PM
Subject: Re: Europa-List: Current sales & production
Cliff,
That sound's fascinating...when you say the kit could "have new all
molded parts, I saw the prototypes.", do you literally mean
"all"?...e.g., did you see new moulds for...say...cowls?, wings?,
fuselage?
What evidence did you see of complete kits going out the door?
With the new Light Sport Aircraft category, I've wondered whether they
might put the Europa on a diet, discard the retractable mono, go back
to the 80 hp 912, and just slip under the maximum allowable performance
for the LSA(?).
...just speculation on my part,
Fred
On Wednesday, November 23, 2005, at 06:20 PM, Cliff Shaw wrote:
>
> All
>
> In July when Betty and I visited Europa04, I got the idea they were
> working hard of something. I did not get a hint, but there was a lot
> of "work" being done.
>
> The Europa kit could have new all molded parts, I saw the prototypes.
> I hope they get it all going soon so the Europa stays in the "popular"
> list.
>
> Cliff Shaw
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Current sales & production |
| From: | Fred Klein <fklein(at)orcasonline.com> |
Cliff,
Regarding Europa 04, you write that, "their most urgent effort was to
support the builders who are in the process of building their
kit"...that's good to know, and I salute them for doing so...but that's
not much of a revenue generator.
Time will tell!
Fred
On Wednesday, November 23, 2005, at 07:38 PM, Cliff Shaw wrote:
>
> They had a fuselage and other parts setting there getting ready for
> shipping to a UK customer. They said that there most urgent effort
> was to support the builder who are in the process of building their
> kit.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "G-IANI" <g-iani(at)ntlworld.com> |
| Subject: | Rotax 912, 914 Mandatory Bulletin |
As UK owners will have noticed the PFA have published (Popular Flying Page
42) the existence of a Service bulletin No. 270905.
This bulletin cannot be found on the Skydrive and Rotax web sites as stated
by the PFA.
The bulletin refers to the elbow supplied with the Rotax oil cooler (Which
is black in colour).
IT DOES NOT apply to the Grey oil cooler supplied with the Europa kit.
Ian Rickard #505 G-IANI XS Trigear
Europa Club Mods Rep (Trigear)
e-mail mods(at)europaclub.org.uk
or direct g-iani(at)ntlworld.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kingsley Hurst" <hurstkr(at)growzone.com.au> |
| Subject: | Re: wheel landings |
> BUT the answer to the monwheel Europa is that it should be landed on the
> stall, so that the she's not flying when you touch.
Hello Ferg and others,
With the sum total of a couple of landings in a mono, I speak from
observation rather than experience.
When people talk about stalling the mono on landing (the ideal thing to do
IMHO), I cannot help but wonder how the mono CAN stall unless the tail wheel
only is on the ground and the main wheel considerably above. My reasoning
is that because the deck angle of the fuse (with main and tail wheels on the
ground) is around 7 degrees from memory. (too lazy to check the manual at
the moment) and the wing incidence is 2.5 degrees, this means the angle of
attack of the wings with both wheels on the ground is around 9.5 degrees.
If I remember correctly, a wing stalls with an AOA of around 14 degrees.
Considering that when landing the wing is also in the influence of 'ground
effect', can somebody explain to me how the wing can possibly properly stall
with such a low AOA ?
Cheers
Kingsley
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: wheel landings |
.............................a wing stalls with an AOA of around 14 degrees.
Considering that when landing the wing is also in the influence of 'ground
effect', can somebody explain to me how the wing can possibly properly stall
with such a low AOA ?.....................................
Regardless of AOA the wing will stall when the speed drops to the level
appropriate for the loading.
Patrick
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Thursby" <jthursby(at)tampabay.rr.com> |
| Subject: | wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
Hi Chris,
If you are that gung ho, by all means try it yourself but don't say you
weren't warned. I thought I was smarter than Ivan Shaw once too. Against
his wishes (and unknown to) I spent the better part of two hours trying to
wheel land one of the company planes. I've been told it was some of the
most entertaining stuff the controllers at Lakeland had ever seen. It will
squeak the main on ever so gently with just a touch of power, then the tail
slams to the runway and you are rewarded for your carelessness with another
chance or two at landing it properly. If you recover from the resulting
three to ten foot bounce and haven't clipped your propeller, and if you
haven't ground looped it, and if you haven't stalled and dropped it in, you
can attempt another landing. I tried many times and NEVER got it to stay on
the ground. If you must attempt wheel landings in a tail dragger aircraft
please buy or build an RV and save the Europa community from losing another
aircraft from the ranks. And the prop is VERY close when on the main wheel
with the plane in a slight nose down attitude.
Jim T.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chris Beck
Subject: Re: Europa-List: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?]
Jim Brown wrote:
>
>I would also suggest, to those of you who want to "TRY" to wheel land a
>mono wheel, you need to do one thing first. With the engine off, have a
>friend or helper raise the tail to normal flight attitude, then take a
>look at how close the prop is to the ground or pavement. One bounce on
>landing, and you may be buying new prop blades.
>
>The center of gravity is behind the mono wheel, which will make the
>tail drop down, as soon as the wheel touches the runway, if you counter
>with some forward stick, re-read the above paragraph.
>
>
>
Jim, what sort of clearance are we talking about?? 2"? 6"? I've got a
mile on the 140. I'd have to be looking straight at the dirt to get the
prop grounded.
Regarding the C of G, it's the same issue on any taildragger. It's behind
the mains, which causes the tail to drop when landing due to the inertia.
Trick is to zero out the rate of descent just as the mains touch, then nail
it with that bit of forward stick (as I'm sure you know very well from the
Pitts). Again, is it strictly a prop clearance issue that prevents wheelies
in the monowheel? Has this been beaten to death in the past where I can
look it up in the archives?
I'm just very curious about the mechanics of landing a monowheel. I've
flown in a few different ones (a Classic and an XS). Now that I'm flying a
tailwheel plan, I understand a lot more of what's going on.
Chris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Thursby" <jthursby(at)tampabay.rr.com> |
Hi Kingsley,
If done properly the tail wheel will be on the ground first. Then you
"simply" feel the plane out with the stick until its ready to quit. all the
while keeping it straight and level. You'll feel it when its done and then
you can pin it full back and it stays planted. Interesting point about a
tail wheel first landing. While on a cross country to the Arlington air
show in 2000 with Jim and Augustine Brown we landed at Gillette Wyoming
which has a 7% upslope/down slope in the runway. After I got the tail wheel
on the ground I had rolled what seemed like 3,000 feet of a 7,500 foot
runway on the tail wheel only, I had to cut the ignitions in order to get
it to quit flying! Jim reported a similar experience when he landed. Very
weird feeling.
Jim T.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Kingsley Hurst
Subject: Re: Europa-List: wheel landings
-->
> BUT the answer to the monwheel Europa is that it should be landed on
> the stall, so that the she's not flying when you touch.
Hello Ferg and others,
With the sum total of a couple of landings in a mono, I speak from
observation rather than experience.
When people talk about stalling the mono on landing (the ideal thing to do
IMHO), I cannot help but wonder how the mono CAN stall unless the tail wheel
only is on the ground and the main wheel considerably above. My reasoning
is that because the deck angle of the fuse (with main and tail wheels on the
ground) is around 7 degrees from memory. (too lazy to check the manual at
the moment) and the wing incidence is 2.5 degrees, this means the angle of
attack of the wings with both wheels on the ground is around 9.5 degrees.
If I remember correctly, a wing stalls with an AOA of around 14 degrees.
Considering that when landing the wing is also in the influence of 'ground
effect', can somebody explain to me how the wing can possibly properly stall
with such a low AOA ?
Cheers
Kingsley
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fergus Kyle" <VE3LVO(at)rac.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: wheel landings |
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kingsley Hurst" <hurstkr(at)growzone.com.au>
Subject: Re: Europa-List: wheel landings
|
| > BUT the answer to the monwheel Europa is that it should be landed on the
| > stall, so that the she's not flying when you touch.|
| Hello Ferg and others,|
| With the sum total of a couple of landings in a mono, I speak from
| observation rather than experience.|
| When people talk about stalling the mono on landing (the ideal thing to do
| IMHO), I cannot help but wonder how the mono CAN stall unless the tail
wheel | only is on the ground and the main wheel considerably above. My
reasoning | is that because the deck angle of the fuse (with main and tail
wheels on the
| ground) is around 7 degrees from memory. (too lazy to check the manual at
| the moment) and the wing incidence is 2.5 degrees, this means the angle of
| attack of the wings with both wheels on the ground is around 9.5 degrees.
| If I remember correctly, a wing stalls with an AOA of around 14 degrees.
| Considering that when landing the wing is also in the influence of 'ground
| effect', can somebody explain to me how the wing can possibly properly
stall | with such a low AOA ? Cheers Kingsley
KH:
I guess several others answered for me. I believe if you learn
to master this machine, you will be able to fly the length of the runway
with power and only the tailwheel aground. We used to do this with Otters at
airshows.
My mistake was in speaking of absolutes. Landing is some
science, much art so my purpose was to infuse a 'feeling' for what is
happening during approach and landing. None of us has ever done this first
time out - it takes perserverence and dedication. Nevertheless, once
acquired it stays with you and every landing after that adds to the
appreciation.
Both Patrick and Jim answered your question which was not
frivilous because when the tailwheel hits, it pitches the craft forward and
down which does indeed reduce the AoA. However during this exercise, the
speed is falling below that necessary for sufficient lift and the aircraft
flops down where no amount of noseup pressure will resurrect flight. The
advantage is in knowing when this occurs, because there is a speed at which
the stab will have sufficient authority to lift the wings against the
tailwheel. You should be well below that to start with. This brings up gusts
which is another skill altogether.
As several others will attest, big 'planes carry 'way' (a marine
term for momentum) and so when a gust arrives, the first thing that happens
is the airspeed rises accordingly. This can ruin your day if the gust
reduces headwind because the airspeed jumps below stall. The 'big guys' take
half the value of a gust and add it to the approach speed, thus reducing the
risk by half (on average). Of course they never subtract 1/2 the gust for
obvious reasons.
BUT in a small a/c (like the Euro or Moth) you're leaf in the
wind. The machine is up with a headgust, down with a loss of gust. Because
the Euro is so slick, extra speed translates into late landing. All this
should be going through the gray stuuf as you approach. Lightplane drivers
will confirm that they have learned to sniff the wind, look for signs, watch
the windsock. Really, big machine aviators should too but for other reasons.
I'm sure you find the Air France chap in Toronto was suckered into
continuing because he was not told of a lowlevel wind component - perhaps
indetected - and you can bet your boots the insurance lawyers won't bring it
up. At many US fields, lowlevel wind sensors reveal previously-unrecognised
outflow winds from nearby cu-nims. To absolve aviators of faulty charges
they should be available everywhere. Until then, a healthy respect for the
50foot wind is priceless and no less true with light aircraft.
Jim and the others will probably tell you their noses are
sniffing the wind vector out every ten seconds, until they don't even
realise it - it's like riding a bike - it becomes instinctive. You read the
wind from all these inputs during an approach, (from first contact if by
radio to 20 or 30 feet above the ground) and you'll never be surprised.
Another thing: This is often missed during checkout, but a
quick, short burst of power will often straighten out an impending swerve.
Yes, it can tend to add speed, but it's first effect is to pull the machine
straight ahead. Got to be short, mind you. Try it out in the air to see if a
swift burst doesn't work on occasion. It sure works with a Stearman or
Harvard. The other advantage is, if it doesn't have the desired effect -
you're on your way to a Go Around earlier. Naturally this applies only to
tractors!
I'll shut up now.
Ferg
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: wheel landings |
>
>Regardless of AOA the wing will stall when the speed drops to the level
>appropriate for the loading.
>
>
>
Hi, all
There must be some confusion between stall and sink.
Patrick, I believe you mean "the wing *sinks* when the speed drops...."
A stall happens when, due to high AOA, the airflow separates from the
upper surface to a significant extent. Stall is entirely AOA related,
and when flying aerobatics, we can stall at any speed. That's what flick
(or snap) manoeuvres are. Of course if you exceed a safe flick entry
speed, you may overstress the aeroplane.
Kinglsey is right in his demonstration. Contrary to the popular saying,
there is no such thing as a "full stall landing". I mean, if you stall
near the ground, the consequence cannot possibly be called a "landing",
but rather "some plastic/metal/wood heap on the runway" ;-)
Consider that during a stall, the nose of the aircraft drops rather
sharply. An if the airplane is not too well behaved, so does a wing.
What happens during ground effect deceleration is a *gradual* reduction
in lift, compensated by a gradual increase in AOA, until, when the
aeroplane has run out of speed, and the pilot out of pitch, lift cannot
be maintained any longer and the aeroplane gently sinks on to the ground.
For what it's worth,
Regards,
Gilles Thesee, aerobatics FI
Grenoble, France
http://contrails.free.fr
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Garry" <garrys(at)tampabay.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
I remain completely baffled as to why so many Europa pilots have chosen the
mono over the trigear when given a choice. There is absolutely zero
performance advantage to the mono, in rate of climb, in cruise speed, in
fuel burn, or whatever. The difference is that the mono is inheritantly
unstable in landing (and takeoff) configuration. Everyone (almost) else in
the aircraft business, both large and small, has abandon the taildragger
design, and no one else is building mono wheel planes. For the life of me I
cannot understand why Ivan thought he could be successful when the rest of
the world says it's an unstable design. The proof is in the results.
Europa mono's are ground looping, wheelbarrowing, bending props, running off
the tarmac, and generally destroying themselves with regularity. Perhaps
that is a smart marketing strategy........to design a product that requires
regular parts replacement and rebuilding, but as a pilot I'm not impressed.
I do acknowledge that there are a few among our ranks who get a certain
thrill out of placing themselves in danger on every flight, and love the
challenge of taming a wild and unpredictable beast. It makes for good chest
thumping and bragging rights at the local pub, but might I suggest that you
take up the (American) sport of bull riding. It's probably safer and more
satisfying than trying to land a mono. I'm not trying to stir up the ranks,
but simply trying to understand the motivation of choosing an unstable
design over a proper one. Both Europas are fabulous planes in the air, but
one operates on the ground in a proper fashion while the other acts like a
drunk and wounded gooney bird. Let's hear some logical and unemotional
arguments in favor of the mono.
Trigear pilot
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Thursby" <jthursby(at)tampabay.rr.com>
Subject: RE: Europa-List: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?]
>
>
> Hi Chris,
> If you are that gung ho, by all means try it yourself but don't say you
> weren't warned. I thought I was smarter than Ivan Shaw once too. Against
> his wishes (and unknown to) I spent the better part of two hours trying
> to
> wheel land one of the company planes. I've been told it was some of the
> most entertaining stuff the controllers at Lakeland had ever seen. It
> will
> squeak the main on ever so gently with just a touch of power, then the
> tail
> slams to the runway and you are rewarded for your carelessness with
> another
> chance or two at landing it properly. If you recover from the resulting
> three to ten foot bounce and haven't clipped your propeller, and if you
> haven't ground looped it, and if you haven't stalled and dropped it in,
> you
> can attempt another landing. I tried many times and NEVER got it to stay
> on
> the ground. If you must attempt wheel landings in a tail dragger aircraft
> please buy or build an RV and save the Europa community from losing
> another
> aircraft from the ranks. And the prop is VERY close when on the main
> wheel
> with the plane in a slight nose down attitude.
>
> Jim T.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chris Beck
> To: europa-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Europa-List: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?]
>
>
> Jim Brown wrote:
>
>>
>>I would also suggest, to those of you who want to "TRY" to wheel land a
>>mono wheel, you need to do one thing first. With the engine off, have a
>>friend or helper raise the tail to normal flight attitude, then take a
>>look at how close the prop is to the ground or pavement. One bounce on
>>landing, and you may be buying new prop blades.
>>
>>The center of gravity is behind the mono wheel, which will make the
>>tail drop down, as soon as the wheel touches the runway, if you counter
>>with some forward stick, re-read the above paragraph.
>>
>>
>>
> Jim, what sort of clearance are we talking about?? 2"? 6"? I've got a
> mile on the 140. I'd have to be looking straight at the dirt to get the
> prop grounded.
>
> Regarding the C of G, it's the same issue on any taildragger. It's behind
> the mains, which causes the tail to drop when landing due to the inertia.
> Trick is to zero out the rate of descent just as the mains touch, then
> nail
> it with that bit of forward stick (as I'm sure you know very well from the
> Pitts). Again, is it strictly a prop clearance issue that prevents
> wheelies
> in the monowheel? Has this been beaten to death in the past where I can
> look it up in the archives?
>
> I'm just very curious about the mechanics of landing a monowheel. I've
> flown in a few different ones (a Classic and an XS). Now that I'm flying
> a
> tailwheel plan, I understand a lot more of what's going on.
>
> Chris
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Thursby" <jthursby(at)tampabay.rr.com> |
| Subject: | wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
Hi Garry,
Actually I have flown a couple of trikes that track worse than a
mone-wheel. But I guess the three main reasons I had chosen it were;
1. Looks. A mono on a low pass just looks plane sexy, though I've only seen
it from the pilots perspective. A trike looks like it "might" be landing, a
mono to me only implies speed and you just know a steep pull-up is soon to
come. Very fun.
2. Rough field performance. A trike "can" utilize rough fields but will
never be as comfortable as a mono on one, nor will it have the takeoff
performance in the tall grass. I landed a mono in twenty inch high grass
once. And got it airborne again. A trike would need a trailer.
3. Weight. A trike will always weigh more than a like equipped mono will.
To the tune of 20 to 30 pounds. While Europa's are very pound/kilo tolerant
excess always hurts performance.
4. Sorry one more, Speed. Believe it or not a mono has less drag than a
trike. Ask Kim Prout. 801. lbs 172 mph 650 takeoff.
(and that's on 80 or 85 HP) :-0
Jim T.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Garry
Subject: Re: Europa-List: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?]
I remain completely baffled as to why so many Europa pilots have chosen the
mono over the trigear when given a choice. There is absolutely zero
performance advantage to the mono, in rate of climb, in cruise speed, in
fuel burn, or whatever. The difference is that the mono is inheritantly
unstable in landing (and takeoff) configuration. Everyone (almost) else in
the aircraft business, both large and small, has abandon the taildragger
design, and no one else is building mono wheel planes. For the life of me I
cannot understand why Ivan thought he could be successful when the rest of
the world says it's an unstable design. The proof is in the results.
Europa mono's are ground looping, wheelbarrowing, bending props, running off
the tarmac, and generally destroying themselves with regularity. Perhaps
that is a smart marketing strategy........to design a product that requires
regular parts replacement and rebuilding, but as a pilot I'm not impressed.
I do acknowledge that there are a few among our ranks who get a certain
thrill out of placing themselves in danger on every flight, and love the
challenge of taming a wild and unpredictable beast. It makes for good chest
thumping and bragging rights at the local pub, but might I suggest that you
take up the (American) sport of bull riding. It's probably safer and more
satisfying than trying to land a mono. I'm not trying to stir up the ranks,
but simply trying to understand the motivation of choosing an unstable
design over a proper one. Both Europas are fabulous planes in the air, but
one operates on the ground in a proper fashion while the other acts like a
drunk and wounded gooney bird. Let's hear some logical and unemotional
arguments in favor of the mono.
Trigear pilot
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Thursby" <jthursby(at)tampabay.rr.com>
Subject: RE: Europa-List: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?]
>
>
> Hi Chris,
> If you are that gung ho, by all means try it yourself but don't say you
> weren't warned. I thought I was smarter than Ivan Shaw once too. Against
> his wishes (and unknown to) I spent the better part of two hours trying
> to
> wheel land one of the company planes. I've been told it was some of the
> most entertaining stuff the controllers at Lakeland had ever seen. It
> will
> squeak the main on ever so gently with just a touch of power, then the
> tail
> slams to the runway and you are rewarded for your carelessness with
> another
> chance or two at landing it properly. If you recover from the resulting
> three to ten foot bounce and haven't clipped your propeller, and if you
> haven't ground looped it, and if you haven't stalled and dropped it in,
> you
> can attempt another landing. I tried many times and NEVER got it to stay
> on
> the ground. If you must attempt wheel landings in a tail dragger aircraft
> please buy or build an RV and save the Europa community from losing
> another
> aircraft from the ranks. And the prop is VERY close when on the main
> wheel
> with the plane in a slight nose down attitude.
>
> Jim T.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chris Beck
> To: europa-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Europa-List: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?]
>
>
> Jim Brown wrote:
>
>>
>>I would also suggest, to those of you who want to "TRY" to wheel land a
>>mono wheel, you need to do one thing first. With the engine off, have a
>>friend or helper raise the tail to normal flight attitude, then take a
>>look at how close the prop is to the ground or pavement. One bounce on
>>landing, and you may be buying new prop blades.
>>
>>The center of gravity is behind the mono wheel, which will make the
>>tail drop down, as soon as the wheel touches the runway, if you counter
>>with some forward stick, re-read the above paragraph.
>>
>>
>>
> Jim, what sort of clearance are we talking about?? 2"? 6"? I've got a
> mile on the 140. I'd have to be looking straight at the dirt to get the
> prop grounded.
>
> Regarding the C of G, it's the same issue on any taildragger. It's behind
> the mains, which causes the tail to drop when landing due to the inertia.
> Trick is to zero out the rate of descent just as the mains touch, then
> nail
> it with that bit of forward stick (as I'm sure you know very well from the
> Pitts). Again, is it strictly a prop clearance issue that prevents
> wheelies
> in the monowheel? Has this been beaten to death in the past where I can
> look it up in the archives?
>
> I'm just very curious about the mechanics of landing a monowheel. I've
> flown in a few different ones (a Classic and an XS). Now that I'm flying
> a
> tailwheel plan, I understand a lot more of what's going on.
>
> Chris
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cliff Shaw" <flyinggpa(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: wheel landings |
Trigear pilot (Garry)
Someone told me a long time ago "You can not justify owning an experimental airplane"
If that is true, then how can you justify having a practical one? People
chose the Europa in the momowheel configuration because it is different and
special, not because it is practical. And I am told by my UK friends it works
best in "cow pastures landing sights"
I just had to chime in ! Sorry. I made that decision, the first time.
To al the Europa builders on the left side, like me, happy ThanksGiving !
Cliff Shaw
1041 Euclid ave.
Edmonds, WA 98020
425 776 5555
http://www.europaowners.org/WileE
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "GLENN CROWDER" <gcrowder2(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
I remain completely baffled as to why so many Europa pilots have chosen
the
trigear over the mono when given a choice. The mono is lighter, faster and
much safer to land on a rough field. I feel like I could get the mono down
just
about anywhere if the little whirly thing stops.
I got in 6 circuits around the field last nite and every landing was a
yawner.
Just get into ground effect, slowly bring the stick back till it hits the
stop and
hold it. "Thunk" down, nice straight roll out, bring in the power, lift the
tail an
inch and do it again. I make no claim to any piloting skill, I was just a
FBO 172
rental scum before the Europa. In a light crosswind all you have to do is
put
in a little rudder. Sure if it gets nasty you have to go to work, but you
have
to in any plane. I love the mono!
Glenn
>From: "Garry" <garrys(at)tampabay.rr.com>
>Reply-To: europa-list(at)matronics.com
>To:
>Subject: Re: Europa-List: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?]
>Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 10:37:23 -0500
>
>
>I remain completely baffled as to why so many Europa pilots have chosen the
>mono over the trigear when given a choice. There is absolutely zero
>performance advantage to the mono, in rate of climb, in cruise speed, in
>fuel burn, or whatever. The difference is that the mono is inheritantly
>unstable in landing (and takeoff) configuration. Everyone (almost) else in
>the aircraft business, both large and small, has abandon the taildragger
>design, and no one else is building mono wheel planes. For the life of me
>I
>cannot understand why Ivan thought he could be successful when the rest of
>the world says it's an unstable design. The proof is in the results.
>Europa mono's are ground looping, wheelbarrowing, bending props, running
>off
>the tarmac, and generally destroying themselves with regularity. Perhaps
>that is a smart marketing strategy........to design a product that requires
>regular parts replacement and rebuilding, but as a pilot I'm not impressed.
>I do acknowledge that there are a few among our ranks who get a certain
>thrill out of placing themselves in danger on every flight, and love the
>challenge of taming a wild and unpredictable beast. It makes for good
>chest
>thumping and bragging rights at the local pub, but might I suggest that you
>take up the (American) sport of bull riding. It's probably safer and more
>satisfying than trying to land a mono. I'm not trying to stir up the
>ranks,
>but simply trying to understand the motivation of choosing an unstable
>design over a proper one. Both Europas are fabulous planes in the air, but
>one operates on the ground in a proper fashion while the other acts like a
>drunk and wounded gooney bird. Let's hear some logical and unemotional
>arguments in favor of the mono.
>
>Trigear pilot
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Jim Thursby" <jthursby(at)tampabay.rr.com>
>To:
>Subject: RE: Europa-List: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?]
>
>
> >
> >
> > Hi Chris,
> > If you are that gung ho, by all means try it yourself but don't say you
> > weren't warned. I thought I was smarter than Ivan Shaw once too.
>Against
> > his wishes (and unknown to) I spent the better part of two hours trying
> > to
> > wheel land one of the company planes. I've been told it was some of the
> > most entertaining stuff the controllers at Lakeland had ever seen. It
> > will
> > squeak the main on ever so gently with just a touch of power, then the
> > tail
> > slams to the runway and you are rewarded for your carelessness with
> > another
> > chance or two at landing it properly. If you recover from the resulting
> > three to ten foot bounce and haven't clipped your propeller, and if you
> > haven't ground looped it, and if you haven't stalled and dropped it in,
> > you
> > can attempt another landing. I tried many times and NEVER got it to
>stay
> > on
> > the ground. If you must attempt wheel landings in a tail dragger
>aircraft
> > please buy or build an RV and save the Europa community from losing
> > another
> > aircraft from the ranks. And the prop is VERY close when on the main
> > wheel
> > with the plane in a slight nose down attitude.
> >
> > Jim T.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com
> > [mailto:owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chris Beck
> > To: europa-list(at)matronics.com
> > Subject: Re: Europa-List: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa
>XS?]
> >
> >
> > Jim Brown wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>I would also suggest, to those of you who want to "TRY" to wheel land a
> >>mono wheel, you need to do one thing first. With the engine off, have a
> >>friend or helper raise the tail to normal flight attitude, then take a
> >>look at how close the prop is to the ground or pavement. One bounce on
> >>landing, and you may be buying new prop blades.
> >>
> >>The center of gravity is behind the mono wheel, which will make the
> >>tail drop down, as soon as the wheel touches the runway, if you counter
> >>with some forward stick, re-read the above paragraph.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> > Jim, what sort of clearance are we talking about?? 2"? 6"? I've got a
> > mile on the 140. I'd have to be looking straight at the dirt to get the
> > prop grounded.
> >
> > Regarding the C of G, it's the same issue on any taildragger. It's
>behind
> > the mains, which causes the tail to drop when landing due to the
>inertia.
> > Trick is to zero out the rate of descent just as the mains touch, then
> > nail
> > it with that bit of forward stick (as I'm sure you know very well from
>the
> > Pitts). Again, is it strictly a prop clearance issue that prevents
> > wheelies
> > in the monowheel? Has this been beaten to death in the past where I can
> > look it up in the archives?
> >
> > I'm just very curious about the mechanics of landing a monowheel. I've
> > flown in a few different ones (a Classic and an XS). Now that I'm
>flying
> > a
> > tailwheel plan, I understand a lot more of what's going on.
> >
> > Chris
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fergus Kyle" <VE3LVO(at)rac.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
----- Original Message -----
From: "Garry" <garrys(at)tampabay.rr.com>
Subject: Re: Europa-List: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?]
|
| I remain completely baffled as to why so many Europa pilots have chosen
the
| mono over the trigear when given a choice. There is absolutely zero
| performance advantage to the mono, in rate of climb, in cruise speed, in
| fuel burn, or whatever. The difference is that the mono is inheritantly
| unstable in landing (and takeoff) configuration. Everyone (almost) else
in
| the aircraft business, both large and small, has abandon the taildragger
| design, and no one else is building mono wheel planes. For the life of me
I
| cannot understand why Ivan thought he could be successful when the rest of
| the world says it's an unstable design. The proof is in the results.
| Europa mono's are ground looping, wheelbarrowing, bending props, running
off
| the tarmac, and generally destroying themselves with regularity. Perhaps
| that is a smart marketing strategy........to design a product that
requires
| regular parts replacement and rebuilding, but as a pilot I'm not
impressed.
| I do acknowledge that there are a few among our ranks who get a certain
| thrill out of placing themselves in danger on every flight, and love the
| challenge of taming a wild and unpredictable beast. It makes for good
chest
| thumping and bragging rights at the local pub, but might I suggest that
you
| take up the (American) sport of bull riding. It's probably safer and more
| satisfying than trying to land a mono. I'm not trying to stir up the
ranks,
| but simply trying to understand the motivation of choosing an unstable
| design over a proper one. Both Europas are fabulous planes in the air,
but
| one operates on the ground in a proper fashion while the other acts like a
| drunk and wounded gooney bird. Let's hear some logical and unemotional
| arguments in favor of the mono. Trigear pilot
Garry,
I guess you knew what would happen. .......even got a reply out
of David Miller over here! I agree with all the replies. I suppose the
retracting gear and the wing design attracted me the most. Mind you, like
"did you remember to take out the garbage?", you're saved - 'did you
retract the gear?'
Yes, with a tick of power, and the stick at the back you could
sift into a tight strip at the same speed (maybe), but I have 17 inches of
lovely golf caddy rubber and you have a tiddly disc on a stalk to contend
with the uneven lumps that follow. I think I'll be saying, "where do I sign
in?" about the same time you're saying, ".... on the overshoot, may see you
next year.....".
I could be wrong - I was wrong once before.
Cheers, Ferg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fergus Kyle" <VE3LVO(at)rac.ca> |
| Subject: | wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
| ----- Original Message -----
| From: "Garry" <garrys(at)tampabay.rr.com>
| To:
| Sent: Thursday, November 24, 2005 10:37 AM
| Subject: Re: Europa-List: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?]
I remain completely baffled as to why so many Europa pilots have chosen the
mono over the trigear when given a choice.
Bafflement counts.
There is absolutely zero performance advantage to the mono, in rate of climb,
in cruise speed, in fuel burn, or whatever.
The dangling doughnuts ADD speed?
The difference is that the mono is inheritantly unstable in landing (and takeoff)
configuration. Everyone (almost) else in the aircraft business, both large
and small, has abandon the taildragger design, and no one else is building mono
wheel planes.
U2R, TR1A, come to mind. You say 'bicycle', I say mono/tailwheel.
For the life of me I cannot understand why Ivan thought he could be successful
when the rest of the world says it's an unstable design. The proof is in the
results.
Europa mono's are ground looping, wheelbarrowing, bending props, running
off the tarmac, and generally destroying themselves with regularity. Perhaps
that is a smart marketing strategy........to design a product that requires
regular parts replacement and rebuilding, but as a pilot I'm not impressed.
I do acknowledge that there are a few among our ranks who get a certain
thrill out of placing themselves in danger on every flight, and love the
challenge of taming a wild and unpredictable beast. It makes for good chest
thumping and bragging rights at the local pub, but might I suggest that you
take up the (American) sport of bull riding.
The ancient Cretans were doing it in Greek times.
It's probably safer and more satisfying than trying to land a mono.
I liked it better when you said chest-thumping.
I'm not trying to stir up the ranks, but simply trying to understand the motivation
of choosing an unstable design over a proper one.
Unstable and proper are not necessarily opposites. The odd spouse is both.
Both Europas are fabulous planes in the air, but one operates on the ground in
a proper fashion while the other acts like a drunk and wounded gooney bird.
Let's hear some logical and unemotional arguments in favor of the mono. Trigear
pilot
Garry,
I guess you knew what would happen. .......even got a reply out
of David Miller over here! It's hard not to be emotional - the hobby attracts
emotion. I agree with all the replies. I suppose the
retracting gear and the wing design attracted me the most. Mind you, like
"did you remember to take out the garbage?", you're saved - 'did you
retract the gear?'
Yes, with a tick of power, and the stick at the back you could
sift into a tight strip at the same speed (maybe), but I have 17 inches of
lovely golf caddy rubber and you have a tiddly disc on a stalk to contend
with the uneven lumps that follow. I think I'll be saying, "where do I sign
in?" about the same time you're saying, ".... on the overshoot, may see you
next year.....".
I could be wrong - I was wrong once before.
Cheers, Ferg
|
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "R.C.Harrison" <ptag.dev(at)tiscali.co.uk> |
| Subject: | wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
Hi! Garry
I really didn't wish to defend the mono, but after all I did buy both
landing gears and actually built a convertible. Why? Because the flight
profile of the mono is brilliant. However there is another likely
advantage of staying right way up in a forced ditching. There is nothing
so sure that a trike will flip over onto it's back. However there will
be no way I get to use G-PTAG as a mono thanks.
I don't think you should allege there is mono aircraft doing ground
loops and nosing over onto props. big time because that is not the case.
There are thousands of flights happening per annum in Mono Europa's
without any hitches. But like landing gear up there's those who have and
those who will.
My biggest beef now would be handling the mono because without wings or
a suitable dolly they fall over and for a one man rigging situation from
a covered trailer that makes for extreme problems and IMHO is a total
pain in the butt.
Regards
Bob Harrison G-PTAG Europa MKI/Jabiru 3300
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Garry
Subject: Re: Europa-List: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa
XS?]
I remain completely baffled as to why so many Europa pilots have chosen
the
mono over the trigear when given a choice. There is absolutely zero
performance advantage to the mono, in rate of climb, in cruise speed, in
fuel burn, or whatever. The difference is that the mono is inheritantly
unstable in landing (and takeoff) configuration. Everyone (almost) else
in
the aircraft business, both large and small, has abandon the taildragger
design, and no one else is building mono wheel planes. For the life of
me I
cannot understand why Ivan thought he could be successful when the rest
of
the world says it's an unstable design. The proof is in the results.
Europa mono's are ground looping, wheelbarrowing, bending props, running
off
the tarmac, and generally destroying themselves with regularity.
Perhaps
that is a smart marketing strategy........to design a product that
requires
regular parts replacement and rebuilding, but as a pilot I'm not
impressed.
I do acknowledge that there are a few among our ranks who get a certain
thrill out of placing themselves in danger on every flight, and love the
challenge of taming a wild and unpredictable beast. It makes for good
chest
thumping and bragging rights at the local pub, but might I suggest that
you
take up the (American) sport of bull riding. It's probably safer and
more
satisfying than trying to land a mono. I'm not trying to stir up the
ranks,
but simply trying to understand the motivation of choosing an unstable
design over a proper one. Both Europas are fabulous planes in the air,
but
one operates on the ground in a proper fashion while the other acts like
a
drunk and wounded gooney bird. Let's hear some logical and unemotional
arguments in favor of the mono.
Trigear pilot
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Thursby" <jthursby(at)tampabay.rr.com>
Subject: RE: Europa-List: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa
XS?]
>
>
> Hi Chris,
> If you are that gung ho, by all means try it yourself but don't say
you
> weren't warned. I thought I was smarter than Ivan Shaw once too.
Against
> his wishes (and unknown to) I spent the better part of two hours
trying
> to
> wheel land one of the company planes. I've been told it was some of
the
> most entertaining stuff the controllers at Lakeland had ever seen.
It
> will
> squeak the main on ever so gently with just a touch of power, then the
> tail
> slams to the runway and you are rewarded for your carelessness with
> another
> chance or two at landing it properly. If you recover from the
resulting
> three to ten foot bounce and haven't clipped your propeller, and if
you
> haven't ground looped it, and if you haven't stalled and dropped it
in,
> you
> can attempt another landing. I tried many times and NEVER got it to
stay
> on
> the ground. If you must attempt wheel landings in a tail dragger
aircraft
> please buy or build an RV and save the Europa community from losing
> another
> aircraft from the ranks. And the prop is VERY close when on the main
> wheel
> with the plane in a slight nose down attitude.
>
> Jim T.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chris
Beck
> To: europa-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Europa-List: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa
XS?]
>
>
> Jim Brown wrote:
>
>>
>>I would also suggest, to those of you who want to "TRY" to wheel land
a
>>mono wheel, you need to do one thing first. With the engine off, have
a
>>friend or helper raise the tail to normal flight attitude, then take a
>>look at how close the prop is to the ground or pavement. One bounce on
>>landing, and you may be buying new prop blades.
>>
>>The center of gravity is behind the mono wheel, which will make the
>>tail drop down, as soon as the wheel touches the runway, if you
counter
>>with some forward stick, re-read the above paragraph.
>>
>>
>>
> Jim, what sort of clearance are we talking about?? 2"? 6"? I've got
a
> mile on the 140. I'd have to be looking straight at the dirt to get
the
> prop grounded.
>
> Regarding the C of G, it's the same issue on any taildragger. It's
behind
> the mains, which causes the tail to drop when landing due to the
inertia.
> Trick is to zero out the rate of descent just as the mains touch, then
> nail
> it with that bit of forward stick (as I'm sure you know very well from
the
> Pitts). Again, is it strictly a prop clearance issue that prevents
> wheelies
> in the monowheel? Has this been beaten to death in the past where I
can
> look it up in the archives?
>
> I'm just very curious about the mechanics of landing a monowheel.
I've
> flown in a few different ones (a Classic and an XS). Now that I'm
flying
> a
> tailwheel plan, I understand a lot more of what's going on.
>
> Chris
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike Parkin" <mikenjulie.parkin(at)btopenworld.com> |
| Subject: | Re: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
Trying to remain unemotional and logical !!!!!!!!
You are obviously a late comer to the Europa fraternity, when many of us
started building - training wheels/stabilisers were not an option.
> I remain completely baffled as to why so many Europa pilots have chosen
> the
> mono over the trigear when given a choice. There is absolutely zero
> performance advantage to the mono, in rate of climb, in cruise speed, in
> fuel burn, or whatever.
With respect this statement is complete unadulterated rubbish!! Ask Andy
Draper why on X-country they always flew with the tri-gear fuel state in
mind. Answer - it always ran out of fuel before the monowheel. I have yet
to fly with a tri-gear that can out climb or out cruise my monowheel.
The difference is that the mono is inheritantly
> unstable in landing (and takeoff) configuration. Everyone (almost) else
> in
> the aircraft business, both large and small, has abandon the taildragger
> design, and no one else is building mono wheel planes. For the life of me
> I
> cannot understand why Ivan thought he could be successful when the rest of
> the world says it's an unstable design. The proof is in the results.
> Europa mono's are ground looping, wheelbarrowing, bending props, running
> off
> the tarmac, and generally destroying themselves with regularity. Perhaps
> that is a smart marketing strategy........to design a product that
> requires
> regular parts replacement and rebuilding, but as a pilot I'm not
> impressed.
The original design concept was to produce an aircraft that could operate
from an short, unprepared farm strip. The same aircraft should be able to
cover distance at a good speed and be kept at home on a trailer - avoiding
hangarage costs. Ivan achieved all those points with style - it is fact
that experience has shown that a monowheel can be operated from some strips
that would be a no-go with a tri-gear.
It is true that if it is mis-handled, the monowheel is likely to bite back.
I have only witnessed one major Europa incident and that was a tri-gear that
entered into a PIO and wiped out the prop and the nosewheel on the third
bounce - fortunately the crew walked away unharmed.
> I do acknowledge that there are a few among our ranks who get a certain
> thrill out of placing themselves in danger on every flight, and love the
> challenge of taming a wild and unpredictable beast. It makes for good
> chest
> thumping and bragging rights at the local pub, but might I suggest that
> you
> take up the (American) sport of bull riding. It's probably safer and more
> satisfying than trying to land a mono. I'm not trying to stir up the
> ranks,
> but simply trying to understand the motivation of choosing an unstable
> design over a proper one.
A wild and unpredictable beast -- oh pleeeease !!!! all it requires is
average skill and a little practice. Thats why people choose to fly a Pitts
or an RV - or perhaps the ultimate a Mustang or a Spitfire. If all you want
is a safe aircraft, then why not stick with a wallowing SpamCan.
Both Europas are fabulous planes in the air, but
> one operates on the ground in a proper fashion while the other acts like a
> drunk and wounded gooney bird. Let's hear some logical and unemotional
> arguments in favor of the mono.
>
> Trigear pilot
You may be right in what you say, but as someone else commented - a
monowheel in flight looks sexy. Have you ever tried handling a monowheel or
do you just criticise from a distance.
signed Monowheel Pilot (Slightly twisted, living on the edge with
absolutely no sense at all - BUT IT IS FUN!!)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Non-certificated engines & night ops |
| From: | Fred Klein <fklein(at)orcasonline.com> |
All USA builders/flyers,
Some of you may recall my postings regarding the wingtip lite covers
I've made and my interest in the CAM 125 Honda-based engine with which
Alex Bowman is flying; I'm also, of course, considering a Rotax
installation. As a consequence, I've been trying to educate myself on
any issues regarding night flying here in the USA with non-certificated
engines and the necessary inspections and sign-offs. In this process,
I've learned a few things which have, in turn, raised some questions to
which I hope some of you may have answers.
I've quoted from various sources and provided the URL source in
parentheses...my questions are at the end of my email.
"Rotax's operating instructions prohibit the use of a Rotax engine at
night or in IFR conditions unless it is the FAA type-certificated
engine; that is, certificated to FAR Part 33. Rotax's non-certificated
engines are indicated by the letters "UL" after the engine series
number; for example, 912UL, 912ULS, and 914UL."
(http://www.sportpilot.org/news/051013_ifr.html)
"Rotax engines supplied for the Europa are 4 stroke, geared, liquid/air
cooled, 4 cylinder horizontally opposed engines. As engines supplied
for homebuilt aircraft, they are non-certificated.
Rotax 912 UL -=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 80 bhp
@ 5800 engine rpm - normally
aspirated=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 =A38,100.84
Rotax 912 ULS -=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 100 bhp @ 5800 engine rpm
- normally
aspirated=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 =A38,940.84
Rotax 914 UL - 115 bhp@ 5800 engine rpm -
turbocharged.=A0 =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A313345.84
"The engines as supplied by Europa will be complete with:
Rotax ring mount , Prop flange collar nuts , Slipper clutch (to
protect the engine in case of prop strike) , Stainless steel exhaust
system (914 UL only) , Vacuum pump drive , Air guide hood (912 ULS
only) , Regulator/rectifier , Overflow bottle"
(http://www.europa-aircraft.co.uk/)
"Normal Operation of Your Amateur-Built Aircraft
Once again, all of the general operating rules under FAR Part 91 apply
to daily operations of your aircraft. In addition, the operating
limitations presented under FAR 91.319 and as issued by the FAA
Inspector at the time of inspection govern."
(http://www.sportair.com/articles/
Rules%20&%20Regulations%20of%20Airplane%20Building.html)
"Upon satisfactory completion of the inspection you will be issued
three documents: (1) the airworthiness certificate, (2) Phase I
operating limitations, and (3) Phase II operating limitations. The
inspector is also authorized to issue further restrictions under FAR
91.319 (e) if necessary. An appropriate logbook entry will also be made
in the airframe logbook. Occasionally, the inspector will issue only
Phase I operating limitations. These limitations only apply to the test
flying phase and they have a limited duration of one year. You may not
fly your airplane under Phase I after you have completed the required
flight test hours or after one year unless you have approval from the
FAA. Another inspection is often necessary. Phase II operating
limitations apply to the operation of the aircraft after the required
test flying and exist for the life of the aircraft. Usually, the
inspector will issue both Phase I and Phase II at the time of
inspection. To legally fly your airplane under Phase II after it has
been test flown, you must make the following entry in the aircraft
logbook: "I certify that the prescribed flight test hours have been
completed and this aircraft is controllable throughout its range of
speeds and throughout all maneuvers to be executed, has no hazardous
operating characteristics or design features, and is safe for
operation." The number of flight test hours is 25 when a type
certificate (FAA approved) engine/propeller combination is installed or
40 hours when a non-certificate engine and/or propeller is installed."
(http://exp-aircraft.com/library/alexande/begin.html)
Questions:
1. In practice, with 912ULS and 914UL installations, are inspectors
issuing Phase II operating limitations which preclude night operations,
?
2. Are USA builders/flyers buying the Rotax from Europa (in order to
get the listed ancillaries in one box) and just finessing the
distinction between the "UL" and the certificated versions?...assuming
its wise to attempt to do so w/ your inspector.
3. Does the "40 hours when a non-certificate engine and/or propeller in
installed" during Phase I trump Rotax's own operating limitations which
prohibit night ops with the "UL" engines?
4. Does anyone know the approx. price difference between the "UL" and
the certificated version of the Rotax 912?
5. Is the distinction between the "UL" and certificated 912/914 one of
those "elephants in the living room which no one wants to bring
attention to?
Any answers would be much appreciated and (perhaps) reassuring!..thanks,
Fred
A194
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bryan Allsop" <bryan(at)blackballclub.com> |
| Subject: | Re: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
Learning to land a Mono is just like learning to ride a bicycle. It takes
some getting used to, but one you have mastered it you cannot recall what
all the fuss was about, and you get some useful benefits
Similarly. You do not find many grown ups choosing to ride a tricycle.
Cheers Bryan Allsop
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Thursby" <jthursby(at)tampabay.rr.com>
Subject: RE: Europa-List: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?]
>
>
> Hi Chris,
> If you are that gung ho, by all means try it yourself but don't say you
> weren't warned. I thought I was smarter than Ivan Shaw once too. Against
> his wishes (and unknown to) I spent the better part of two hours trying
> to
> wheel land one of the company planes. I've been told it was some of the
> most entertaining stuff the controllers at Lakeland had ever seen. It
> will
> squeak the main on ever so gently with just a touch of power, then the
> tail
> slams to the runway and you are rewarded for your carelessness with
> another
> chance or two at landing it properly. If you recover from the resulting
> three to ten foot bounce and haven't clipped your propeller, and if you
> haven't ground looped it, and if you haven't stalled and dropped it in,
> you
> can attempt another landing. I tried many times and NEVER got it to stay
> on
> the ground. If you must attempt wheel landings in a tail dragger aircraft
> please buy or build an RV and save the Europa community from losing
> another
> aircraft from the ranks. And the prop is VERY close when on the main
> wheel
> with the plane in a slight nose down attitude.
>
> Jim T.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chris Beck
> To: europa-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Europa-List: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?]
>
>
> Jim Brown wrote:
>
>>
>>I would also suggest, to those of you who want to "TRY" to wheel land a
>>mono wheel, you need to do one thing first. With the engine off, have a
>>friend or helper raise the tail to normal flight attitude, then take a
>>look at how close the prop is to the ground or pavement. One bounce on
>>landing, and you may be buying new prop blades.
>>
>>The center of gravity is behind the mono wheel, which will make the
>>tail drop down, as soon as the wheel touches the runway, if you counter
>>with some forward stick, re-read the above paragraph.
>>
>>
>>
> Jim, what sort of clearance are we talking about?? 2"? 6"? I've got a
> mile on the 140. I'd have to be looking straight at the dirt to get the
> prop grounded.
>
> Regarding the C of G, it's the same issue on any taildragger. It's behind
> the mains, which causes the tail to drop when landing due to the inertia.
> Trick is to zero out the rate of descent just as the mains touch, then
> nail
> it with that bit of forward stick (as I'm sure you know very well from the
> Pitts). Again, is it strictly a prop clearance issue that prevents
> wheelies
> in the monowheel? Has this been beaten to death in the past where I can
> look it up in the archives?
>
> I'm just very curious about the mechanics of landing a monowheel. I've
> flown in a few different ones (a Classic and an XS). Now that I'm flying
> a
> tailwheel plan, I understand a lot more of what's going on.
>
> Chris
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Nose gear springs |
Hi all,
I had the chance to look over one of the Dutch trigear Europa's this week,
in my workshop.
It had been fitted with the spring system, in place of the bungee.
Looks a very neat set up. In my opinion, only needs the addition of some
sort of collar to keep the springs as close to the leg as possible [ they were
free to migrate outboard along the ''tee bar'']
BTW, if you have ever had to listen to the Dutch speaking, and not been able
to fathom out ANY word, I had the ''pleasure'' to see it written this week,
and that makes it all very much clearer, written Dutch is very close to
Dyslexia !
Cheers,
Nev
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jeff B <topglock(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
I think both sides are becoming a bit emotional on the subject.
My own experience dictated that I build a tri-gear. I bought my kit, as
a mono, from a guy who had purchased it 4 years prior and never started
it. Lucky me as the price was right. Before buying, however, I flew a
mono, with John Hurst, in Lakeland. In the air it was pure art. On the
ground, on pavement, it just plane sucked. Had nothing to so with
landing or take-offs. It just handled terribly on the pavement.
Incidently, John had the same impression. Now, because most of my
flying was to be from paved runways, it was a no brainer for me. "But
Jeff", you say, "you're based at a grass strip". True, however that
came about after the build was finished and, besides, that strip serves
three puropses; first takeoff, last landing and storage. Like I said,
most of my flying is from paved strips and it is. I realize that the
mono, with its larger wheel, is better suited for rough terrain, but the
tri-gear, even with a speed kit, does just fine on less that smooth
grass surfaces. Add to that, the less complex mechanism and that sewed
it up, for me.
Don't get me wrong, I'm certainly not bashing the mono. It is a
beautiful bird and a bit faster, than its "small wheel up front" sister,
though not enough to make any real difference to me. I believe the
problem, here is, "defence of your own". We're all guilty of it. Fact
is, though, whether you fly a mono or a trike, you have one of the
finest homebuilts in the sky. It is one of the most unique aircraft
that I've seen, anywhere. Attending as many fly-ins as I do, "Baby
Blue" has been the talk of them all. Oh, and BTW, at every gathering
she's attended, she's been dubbed "sexy". ;)
So, guys, argue til you're blue in the face. Fact remains, the Europa,
in any flavor, is fun, economical and shear joy to fly. So stop beating
your chests and go enjoy your birds... ;)
Jeff - N55XS
109 hours and grinning more, every day...
Mike Parkin wrote:
>
> Trying to remain unemotional and logical !!!!!!!!
>
> You are obviously a late comer to the Europa fraternity, when many of us
> started building - training wheels/stabilisers were not an option.
>
>
>>I remain completely baffled as to why so many Europa pilots have chosen
>>the
>>mono over the trigear when given a choice. There is absolutely zero
>>performance advantage to the mono, in rate of climb, in cruise speed, in
>>fuel burn, or whatever.
>
>
> With respect this statement is complete unadulterated rubbish!! Ask Andy
> Draper why on X-country they always flew with the tri-gear fuel state in
> mind. Answer - it always ran out of fuel before the monowheel. I have yet
> to fly with a tri-gear that can out climb or out cruise my monowheel.
>
> The difference is that the mono is inheritantly
>
>>unstable in landing (and takeoff) configuration. Everyone (almost) else
>>in
>>the aircraft business, both large and small, has abandon the taildragger
>>design, and no one else is building mono wheel planes. For the life of me
>>I
>>cannot understand why Ivan thought he could be successful when the rest of
>>the world says it's an unstable design. The proof is in the results.
>>Europa mono's are ground looping, wheelbarrowing, bending props, running
>>off
>>the tarmac, and generally destroying themselves with regularity. Perhaps
>>that is a smart marketing strategy........to design a product that
>>requires
>>regular parts replacement and rebuilding, but as a pilot I'm not
>>impressed.
>
>
> The original design concept was to produce an aircraft that could operate
> from an short, unprepared farm strip. The same aircraft should be able to
> cover distance at a good speed and be kept at home on a trailer - avoiding
> hangarage costs. Ivan achieved all those points with style - it is fact
> that experience has shown that a monowheel can be operated from some strips
> that would be a no-go with a tri-gear.
> It is true that if it is mis-handled, the monowheel is likely to bite back.
> I have only witnessed one major Europa incident and that was a tri-gear that
> entered into a PIO and wiped out the prop and the nosewheel on the third
> bounce - fortunately the crew walked away unharmed.
>
>
>>I do acknowledge that there are a few among our ranks who get a certain
>>thrill out of placing themselves in danger on every flight, and love the
>>challenge of taming a wild and unpredictable beast. It makes for good
>>chest
>>thumping and bragging rights at the local pub, but might I suggest that
>>you
>>take up the (American) sport of bull riding. It's probably safer and more
>>satisfying than trying to land a mono. I'm not trying to stir up the
>>ranks,
>>but simply trying to understand the motivation of choosing an unstable
>>design over a proper one.
>
>
> A wild and unpredictable beast -- oh pleeeease !!!! all it requires is
> average skill and a little practice. Thats why people choose to fly a Pitts
> or an RV - or perhaps the ultimate a Mustang or a Spitfire. If all you want
> is a safe aircraft, then why not stick with a wallowing SpamCan.
>
> Both Europas are fabulous planes in the air, but
>
>>one operates on the ground in a proper fashion while the other acts like a
>>drunk and wounded gooney bird. Let's hear some logical and unemotional
>>arguments in favor of the mono.
>>
>>Trigear pilot
>
>
> You may be right in what you say, but as someone else commented - a
> monowheel in flight looks sexy. Have you ever tried handling a monowheel or
> do you just criticise from a distance.
>
>
> signed Monowheel Pilot (Slightly twisted, living on the edge with
> absolutely no sense at all - BUT IT IS FUN!!)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cliff Shaw" <flyinggpa(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Non-certificated engines & night ops |
Fred
question #1
I think we all get our Phase II at the first inspection. I did. My plane had
nav-lights and panel lighting installed and the inspector looked at them. I have
not restriction.
#2
I bought from Europa because they designed it for my plane. I had an installation
manual to guide me. If you buy piecemeal you do all the designing.
#3
Rotax has not control what you do with your UL engine. The notation they make is
an attempt to free them selves of liability, IMHO.
#4
You will have to make a phone call to find the current prices. I can not find
anything on the web.
Cliff Shaw
1041 Euclid ave.
Edmonds, WA 98020
425 776 5555
http://www.europaowners.org/WileE
Questions:
1. In practice, with 912ULS and 914UL installations, are inspectors
issuing Phase II operating limitations which preclude night operations,
?
2. Are USA builders/flyers buying the Rotax from Europa (in order to
get the listed ancillaries in one box) and just finessing the
distinction between the "UL" and the certificated versions?...assuming
its wise to attempt to do so w/ your inspector.
3. Does the "40 hours when a non-certificate engine and/or propeller in
installed" during Phase I trump Rotax's own operating limitations which
prohibit night ops with the "UL" engines?
4. Does anyone know the approx. price difference between the "UL" and
the certificated version of the Rotax 912?
5. Is the distinction between the "UL" and certificated 912/914 one of
those "elephants in the living room which no one wants to bring
attention to?
Any answers would be much appreciated and (perhaps) reassuring!..thanks,
Fred
A194
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | RE: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
| From: | "josok" <josok-e(at)ukolo.fi> |
0.64 REPLY_TO_EMPTY Reply-To: is empty
On top of all other good reasons for the mono, it was my choice because hope to
land it and take off from snow. Just tonight Ivan told me he has been doing just
that in 30 cm of snow on car track rutted ice. Now try that with a tricycle.
Btw, this week i have been looking at a tricycle with all legs bent as result
of a mishap landing. Which only confirms that the trigear can have bad landings
as well. I wonder if the owner will now be converting back to mono?
Regards,
Jos Okhuijsen
----------------
Visit EuropaOwnersForum http://www.europaowners.org/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jeff B <topglock(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Non-certificated engines & night ops |
Fred, I don't know where sport pilot got the info, though I could
probably look it up, however my phase II limitations state that my bird
may not be flown at night, unless equipped with proper lighting, which
it has. The FAA inspector (not a DAR), when questioned about night
flying, said that my bird had proper lighting, thus could be flown at
night. BTW, it has an uncertified Rotax on the nose. Limitations went
on to state that the bird must be flown VFR only, unless it had the
minimum required IFR equipment installed. In other words, if I install
IFR gear, I can fly IFR (given I attain my instrument rating). There
are a lot of myths and misconceptions floating around, but I've found
that most FAA folks are pretty reasonable in their thinking. The folks
around here are anyway. If there is any question about night or day,
IFR/VFR, I'll just show them my AW certificate and phase II limitations...
Now, get that bird finished and get it in the air...
Jeff - N55XS
109 hrs
Fred Klein wrote:
>
> All USA builders/flyers,
>
> Some of you may recall my postings regarding the wingtip lite covers
> I've made and my interest in the CAM 125 Honda-based engine with which
> Alex Bowman is flying; I'm also, of course, considering a Rotax
> installation. As a consequence, I've been trying to educate myself on
> any issues regarding night flying here in the USA with non-certificated
> engines and the necessary inspections and sign-offs. In this process,
> I've learned a few things which have, in turn, raised some questions to
> which I hope some of you may have answers.
>
> I've quoted from various sources and provided the URL source in
> parentheses...my questions are at the end of my email.
>
> "Rotax's operating instructions prohibit the use of a Rotax engine at
> night or in IFR conditions unless it is the FAA type-certificated
> engine; that is, certificated to FAR Part 33. Rotax's non-certificated
> engines are indicated by the letters "UL" after the engine series
> number; for example, 912UL, 912ULS, and 914UL."
> (http://www.sportpilot.org/news/051013_ifr.html)
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Nigel Graham" <nigel_graham(at)btclick.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Nose gear springs |
Nev,
I read somewhere that Dutch is not derived from another language but from an
ancient throat disease called "phlegm-ish".
This of course would explain some of the sounds you heard.
No offence intended to our Dutch friends ;-)
Nigel
----- Original Message -----
From: <NevEyre(at)aol.com>
..............................................BTW, if you have ever had to
listen to the Dutch speaking, and not been able
to fathom out ANY word, I had the ''pleasure'' to see it written this week,
and that makes it all very much clearer, written Dutch is very close to
Dyslexia !
Cheers,
Nev
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
Gosh and I thought it was something to do with wheelbarrows :-)
Alan
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mike Parkin
Subject: Re: Europa-List: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa
XS?]
-->
Trying to remain unemotional and logical !!!!!!!!
You are obviously a late comer to the Europa fraternity, when many of us
started building - training wheels/stabilisers were not an option.
> I remain completely baffled as to why so many Europa pilots have
> chosen
> the
> mono over the trigear when given a choice. There is absolutely zero
> performance advantage to the mono, in rate of climb, in cruise speed,
in
> fuel burn, or whatever.
With respect this statement is complete unadulterated rubbish!! Ask
Andy
Draper why on X-country they always flew with the tri-gear fuel state in
mind. Answer - it always ran out of fuel before the monowheel. I have
yet
to fly with a tri-gear that can out climb or out cruise my monowheel.
The difference is that the mono is inheritantly
> unstable in landing (and takeoff) configuration. Everyone (almost)
> else
> in
> the aircraft business, both large and small, has abandon the
taildragger
> design, and no one else is building mono wheel planes. For the life
of me
> I
> cannot understand why Ivan thought he could be successful when the
rest of
> the world says it's an unstable design. The proof is in the results.
> Europa mono's are ground looping, wheelbarrowing, bending props,
running
> off
> the tarmac, and generally destroying themselves with regularity.
Perhaps
> that is a smart marketing strategy........to design a product that
> requires
> regular parts replacement and rebuilding, but as a pilot I'm not
> impressed.
The original design concept was to produce an aircraft that could
operate
from an short, unprepared farm strip. The same aircraft should be able
to
cover distance at a good speed and be kept at home on a trailer -
avoiding
hangarage costs. Ivan achieved all those points with style - it is fact
that experience has shown that a monowheel can be operated from some
strips
that would be a no-go with a tri-gear.
It is true that if it is mis-handled, the monowheel is likely to bite
back.
I have only witnessed one major Europa incident and that was a tri-gear
that
entered into a PIO and wiped out the prop and the nosewheel on the third
bounce - fortunately the crew walked away unharmed.
> I do acknowledge that there are a few among our ranks who get a
> certain thrill out of placing themselves in danger on every flight,
> and love the challenge of taming a wild and unpredictable beast. It
> makes for good chest thumping and bragging rights at the local pub,
> but might I suggest that you
> take up the (American) sport of bull riding. It's probably safer and
more
> satisfying than trying to land a mono. I'm not trying to stir up the
> ranks,
> but simply trying to understand the motivation of choosing an unstable
> design over a proper one.
A wild and unpredictable beast -- oh pleeeease !!!! all it requires is
average skill and a little practice. Thats why people choose to fly a
Pitts
or an RV - or perhaps the ultimate a Mustang or a Spitfire. If all you
want
is a safe aircraft, then why not stick with a wallowing SpamCan.
Both Europas are fabulous planes in the air, but
> one operates on the ground in a proper fashion while the other acts
> like a drunk and wounded gooney bird. Let's hear some logical and
> unemotional arguments in favor of the mono.
>
> Trigear pilot
You may be right in what you say, but as someone else commented - a
monowheel in flight looks sexy. Have you ever tried handling a
monowheel or
do you just criticise from a distance.
signed Monowheel Pilot (Slightly twisted, living on the edge with
absolutely no sense at all - BUT IT IS FUN!!)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Wheel landings etc. |
The subject of aerodynamics is endlessly interesting and I have read with
interest the comment by some experts and hope I have learned a little more.
I am not convinced that the difference between stall and sink exists ...in
the end result..
Sure the aircraft will sink if there is insufficient airflow over the wing
to maintain sufficient lift for a given weight. A stall occurs when the
airflow breaks up because the AOA becomes too high, and to me this is what happens
when you get too slow , even if in level flight. The 'sink' will induce a
stall because the angle between the wing chord and the airflow increases
beyond the limit at which breakup of the airflow commences. This seems to me to
be much the same thing.
That is just an opinion and no doubt someone will tell me different.
I am not really qualified to join in the argument between Tri and Mono but
suffice to say that my only two trips in a Mono (right hand seat) have
resulted in a huge bouncy landing and a go around. Not so in the Tri. Maybe
that
is just down to the pilot.?
Patrick
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fergus Kyle" <VE3LVO(at)rac.ca> |
Cheers,
This involves the Rotax 914 ancillary bits for a Classic mono:
I am in the process of offering up the engine to the firewall intially to
give me an idea of where some controls etc. will poke through.
In the process, I have instructions to mount the Turbo Control Unit
on the rear face of the firewall, utilising "SAC1196C10 Tinnerman washers"
of which I have none (kit bought from previous company.
Nor can I find same in AirSpruce, Wicks or any other catalogue.
What are they, please?
Ferg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fergus Kyle" <VE3LVO(at)rac.ca> |
Lord, forgive them - they know not what they do. I think that's the quote.
I found the washers referred to in my previous panic call.
However, while you're here, why did Europa slide plastic sleeves on the
AN5-40 mounting bolts twixt Gear mount and Intermediate mount for 914?
Apologies for filling your screen unnecessarily.
Ferg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "karelvranken" <karelvranken(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Nose gear springs |
----- Original Message -----
From: "Nigel Graham" <nigel_graham(at)btclick.com>
Subject: Re: Europa-List: Nose gear springs
>
>
> Nev,
>
> I read somewhere that Dutch is not derived from another language but from
> an
> ancient throat disease called "phlegm-ish".
> This of course would explain some of the sounds you heard.
>
> No offence intended to our Dutch friends ;-)
>
> Nigel
>
To all those confident imperialistic speaking english people: the most
beautifull language is your mothertongue even if it's flemish.
Karel Vranken.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Sven den Boer" <svendenboer(at)quicknet.nl> |
| Subject: | Re: Nose gear springs |
Heren,
U begrijpt er dus niets van...............:-)
BTW how many of those "Islanders" speak any other language.
Cheers (De Groeten)
Sven den Boer
PH-SBR
----- Original Message -----
From: "Nigel Graham" <nigel_graham(at)btclick.com>
Subject: Re: Europa-List: Nose gear springs
>
>
> Nev,
>
> I read somewhere that Dutch is not derived from another language but from
> an
> ancient throat disease called "phlegm-ish".
> This of course would explain some of the sounds you heard.
>
> No offence intended to our Dutch friends ;-)
>
> Nigel
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <NevEyre(at)aol.com>
> ..............................................BTW, if you have ever had to
> listen to the Dutch speaking, and not been able
> to fathom out ANY word, I had the ''pleasure'' to see it written this
> week,
> and that makes it all very much clearer, written Dutch is very close to
> Dyslexia !
> Cheers,
> Nev
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rowland Carson <rowil(at)clara.net> |
>tri gear aircraft are more popular but Hey, Windows is the most popular
>operating system in computers
Kingsley - I do so agree! But I think the term should be "most
frequently encountered"; popularity, on the other hand, is something
else!
regards
Rowland
(the man with a Mac [fully operational] and a monowheel [not yet operational])
--
| Rowland Carson PFA #16532 <http://home.clara.net/rowil/aviation/>
| 750 hours building Europa #435 G-ROWI e-mail
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "ivor.phillips" <ivor.phillips(at)ntlworld.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Missing bits |
http://www.aircraftspruce.com/menus/ha/washers.html
They are the dished stainless steel washers,
regards
Ivor
----- Original Message -----
From: "Fergus Kyle" <VE3LVO(at)rac.ca>
Subject: Europa-List: Missing bits
>
> Cheers,
> This involves the Rotax 914 ancillary bits for a Classic mono:
> I am in the process of offering up the engine to the firewall intially to
> give me an idea of where some controls etc. will poke through.
> In the process, I have instructions to mount the Turbo Control Unit
> on the rear face of the firewall, utilising "SAC1196C10 Tinnerman washers"
> of which I have none (kit bought from previous company.
> Nor can I find same in AirSpruce, Wicks or any other catalogue.
> What are they, please?
> Ferg
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DuaneFamly(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: wheel landings SORRY! |
Good Day All,
I have been reading with great interest all the messages on this
subject...and I have only one thing to say.......CONVENTIONAL GEAR!!!!!!! The
mono
scared the heck out of the wife while on the ground and she cannot see it in the
air, so her message to me was very clear. But I wasn't willing to go back to
training wheels (my opinion for my flying style, no offense intended, as I'm
an ex-spamcan flyer)
This option gives all the landing options that the mono has but with better
stability. Speed seems to not be a problem. And can be rigged by one person.
Thank you Bob Berube.
Mike Duane A207A
Redding, California
XS Conventional Gear
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Graham Singleton <graham(at)gflight.f9.co.uk> |
| Subject: | Re: Europa-List Digest: 17 Msgs - 11/25/05 |
From: "Sven den Boer" <svendenboer(at)quicknet.nl>
Subject: Re: Europa-List: Nose gear springs
Heren,
U begrijpt er dus niets van...............:-)
BTW how many of those "Islanders" speak any other language.
Cheers (De Groeten)
Sven den Boer
Sven
leider Ik sprehk gehn Hollands,Ik bin Engles, aber bischen Deutsch, francais, espanol.
Nigel even speaks Flemmish!
Graham
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Beck <n9zes(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
Jim Thursby wrote:
>
>Hi Chris,
>If you are that gung ho, by all means try it yourself but don't say you
>weren't warned. I thought I was smarter than Ivan Shaw once too. Against
>his wishes (and unknown to) I spent the better part of two hours trying to
>wheel land one of the company planes. I've been told it was some of the
>most entertaining stuff the controllers at Lakeland had ever seen. It will
>squeak the main on ever so gently with just a touch of power, then the tail
>slams to the runway and you are rewarded for your carelessness with another
>chance or two at landing it properly. If you recover from the resulting
>three to ten foot bounce and haven't clipped your propeller, and if you
>haven't ground looped it, and if you haven't stalled and dropped it in, you
>can attempt another landing. I tried many times and NEVER got it to stay on
>the ground. If you must attempt wheel landings in a tail dragger aircraft
>please buy or build an RV and save the Europa community from losing another
>aircraft from the ranks. And the prop is VERY close when on the main wheel
>with the plane in a slight nose down attitude.
>
> Jim T.
>
>
---> Hi, Jim! I recall Paul McAllister making a comment regarding this
when I was flying with him in his Mono some time ago. He said you told
him it was impossible to wheel land a monowheel. Some of these landing
issues might be related to the position of the main gear in relation to
the CG. To wit: Cessna 140s had two gear versions, straight and swept
forward, with the axle centerline 3" farther forward. My flight
instructor made the comment that my 140, which has the straight gear,
was much easier to wheel land than the 140 that the FBO owns, which has
the swept gear. Indeed, the extra weight behind the CG with the swept
gear would make the tail tend to rotate downward with any vertical
velocity component when the aircraft touches down on the main(s). As
the tail drops, presto, you're flying again. I've pulled a few of those
with my 140, and usually after the nice *sproing* from the spring gear
and finding yourself 10' high with no speed, firewall it and go-around
for another try.
I'll have to look at some drawings of the mono to see where the main
gear axle CL is compared to the LE of the wing. That might be a clue.
Nevertheless, I find this most interesting discussion, and good
prevention of having our prop eat the ground someday.
Chris
A159
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Thursby" <jthursby(at)tampabay.rr.com> |
| Subject: | wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
Yes, Take the word of a man responsible for the demise of a couple warp
drive blades! ;-)
Jim T.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chris Beck
Subject: Re: Europa-List: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?]
Jim Thursby wrote:
>-->
>
>Hi Chris,
>If you are that gung ho, by all means try it yourself but don't say you
>weren't warned. I thought I was smarter than Ivan Shaw once too.
>Against his wishes (and unknown to) I spent the better part of two
>hours trying to wheel land one of the company planes. I've been told it
was some of the
>most entertaining stuff the controllers at Lakeland had ever seen. It
will
>squeak the main on ever so gently with just a touch of power, then the
>tail slams to the runway and you are rewarded for your carelessness
>with another chance or two at landing it properly. If you recover from
>the resulting three to ten foot bounce and haven't clipped your
>propeller, and if you haven't ground looped it, and if you haven't
>stalled and dropped it in, you can attempt another landing. I tried
>many times and NEVER got it to stay on the ground. If you must attempt
>wheel landings in a tail dragger aircraft please buy or build an RV and
>save the Europa community from losing another aircraft from the ranks.
>And the prop is VERY close when on the main wheel with the plane in a
slight nose down attitude.
>
> Jim T.
>
>
---> Hi, Jim! I recall Paul McAllister making a comment regarding this
when I was flying with him in his Mono some time ago. He said you told him
it was impossible to wheel land a monowheel. Some of these landing issues
might be related to the position of the main gear in relation to the CG. To
wit: Cessna 140s had two gear versions, straight and swept forward, with
the axle centerline 3" farther forward. My flight instructor made the
comment that my 140, which has the straight gear, was much easier to wheel
land than the 140 that the FBO owns, which has the swept gear. Indeed, the
extra weight behind the CG with the swept gear would make the tail tend to
rotate downward with any vertical velocity component when the aircraft
touches down on the main(s). As the tail drops, presto, you're flying
again. I've pulled a few of those with my 140, and usually after the nice
*sproing* from the spring gear and finding yourself 10' high with no speed,
firewall it and go-around for another try.
I'll have to look at some drawings of the mono to see where the main gear
axle CL is compared to the LE of the wing. That might be a clue.
Nevertheless, I find this most interesting discussion, and good prevention
of having our prop eat the ground someday.
Chris
A159
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
| From: | <rparigor(at)suffolk.lib.ny.us> |
Curious, can you wheel land a conventional gear Europa with sucess?
Thx.
Ron Parigoris
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: wheel landings SORRY! |
| From: | Fred Klein <fklein(at)orcasonline.com> |
On Friday, November 25, 2005, at 01:35 PM, DuaneFamly(at)aol.com wrote:
>
> Good Day All,
>
> I have been reading with great interest all the messages on this
> subject...and I have only one thing to say.......CONVENTIONAL
> GEAR!!!!!!!
> This option gives all the landing options that the mono has but with
> better
> stability. Speed seems to not be a problem. And can be rigged by one
> person.
>
> Thank you Bob Berube.
>
> Mike Duane A207A
Point well made Mike...BTW, do you have a figure for the net change in:
- airframe weight, and
- performance (i.e., airspeeds) (from Bob B.)
Fred
A194
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert Berube" <bberube(at)tampabay.rr.com> |
| Subject: | wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
Conventional geared Europa's do very well with wheel landings.
Bob Berube
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
rparigor(at)suffolk.lib.ny.us
Subject: RE: Europa-List: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?]
Curious, can you wheel land a conventional gear Europa with sucess?
Thx.
Ron Parigoris
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
Conventional geared Europa's do very well with wheel landings.
Bob Berube
I have never seen a conventional gear Europa. Presumbly you have one in
Florida? Any photos? I quite like the idea and wonder if there are possible
conversions to be done. Probably too much in the way of weight shift etc to be
a
viable project?
Patrick
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | irampil(at)notes.cc.sunysb.edu |
12, 2005) at 11/27/2005 03:46:02 PM,
Serialize complete at 11/27/2005 03:46:02 PM
Alan quotes Andy to the effect that the trike always ran out of petrol
first in a cross country....
Might have something to do with the extra tank capacity available for
mono's whilst we still
wait for it in trike's. I wouldn't mind an extra 10 US gallons (though my
bladder might), especially
to meet IFR fuel reserve requirements (i.e., from primary to alternate
airport, thence 45 min
at standard cruise).
Also, having flown a bit with Jim, I could vouch for him not being able to
wheel land ;-),
but then I certainly could not and would not try.
Ira N224XS Trike
Currently down for an unresolved oil temp/pressure problem
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Europa (Alfred Buess)" <ykibuess(at)bluewin.ch> |
| Subject: | wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
A nice Europa taildragger (with a BMW engine) can be seen at
http://ccande.isuisse.com/europa.htm
Unfortunatly this aircraft was destroyed in a hangar fire some time ago.
Alfred Buess
-----Ursprngliche Nachricht-----
Von: owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com] Im Auftrag von
BEBERRY(at)aol.com
Gesendet: Sonntag, 27. November 2005 21:04
An: europa-list(at)matronics.com
Betreff: Re: Europa-List: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa
XS?]
-->
Conventional geared Europa's do very well with wheel landings.
Bob Berube
I have never seen a conventional gear Europa. Presumbly you have one in
Florida? Any photos? I quite like the idea and wonder if there are
possible
conversions to be done. Probably too much in the way of weight shift
etc to be a
viable project?
Patrick
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Duncan McFadyean" <ami(at)mcfadyean.freeserve.co.uk> |
| Subject: | Re: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
Or one that still flies at:
http://www.devonstrut.co.uk/pages/gallery/130.html
Duncan McF.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Europa (Alfred Buess)" <ykibuess(at)bluewin.ch>
Subject: AW: Europa-List: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?]
>
>
> A nice Europa taildragger (with a BMW engine) can be seen at
> http://ccande.isuisse.com/europa.htm
> Unfortunatly this aircraft was destroyed in a hangar fire some time ago.
>
> Alfred Buess
>
>
> -----Ursprngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com] Im Auftrag von
> BEBERRY(at)aol.com
> Gesendet: Sonntag, 27. November 2005 21:04
> An: europa-list(at)matronics.com
> Betreff: Re: Europa-List: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa
> XS?]
>
>
> -->
>
> Conventional geared Europa's do very well with wheel landings.
>
> Bob Berube
>
>
> I have never seen a conventional gear Europa. Presumbly you have one in
>
> Florida? Any photos? I quite like the idea and wonder if there are
> possible
> conversions to be done. Probably too much in the way of weight shift
> etc to be a
> viable project?
>
> Patrick
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rowland Carson <rowil(at)clara.net> |
| Subject: | conventional gear [was: wheel landings] |
>I have never seen a conventional gear Europa
Patrick - check in the "member list" folder in your Europa Club CD -
there's an Excel file of all known flying Europas (also available to
download on the Europa Club website). In there you'll see 6
conventional-gear Europas:
C-GUNN
G-CCRJ
G-IVET
G-NIGL
HB-YIA
N712EA
- but there may be others I don't know about (all data welcome!).
You can use the other listings on the CD to track down the owners of
those aircraft & make contact if you wish.
Also, if you look in the grafix folder, then in the 3 view drawing
folder, you'll find an AutoCAD-type file showing a conventional gear
mod.
Another folder in the grafix folder is called berube conv gear - no
prizes for guessing what that contains pictures of .....
regards
Rowland
--
| Rowland Carson (retiring) Europa Club Membership Secretary - email for info!
| Europa 435 G-ROWI (750 hours building) PFA #16532
| e-mail website
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "R.C.Harrison" <ptag.dev(at)tiscali.co.uk> |
Hi! Ira.
I have a 9 IMP gallon full width long range tank across my Trike behind
the main tank bulkhead. It siphons in to the main tank and utilises the
Europa supplied priming pump to initiate the siphon.
Not wishing to leave an "Achilles heel" opportunity ...some would say
with a Jabiru 3300 that I need it !
Regards
Bob Harrison G-PTAG Europa MKI/Jabiru 3300
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
irampil(at)notes.cc.sunysb.edu
Subject: Europa-List: Trikes vs Monos
Alan quotes Andy to the effect that the trike always ran out of petrol
first in a cross country....
Might have something to do with the extra tank capacity available for
mono's whilst we still
wait for it in trike's. I wouldn't mind an extra 10 US gallons (though
my
bladder might), especially
to meet IFR fuel reserve requirements (i.e., from primary to alternate
airport, thence 45 min
at standard cruise).
Also, having flown a bit with Jim, I could vouch for him not being able
to
wheel land ;-),
but then I certainly could not and would not try.
Ira N224XS Trike
Currently down for an unresolved oil temp/pressure problem
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cliff Shaw" <flyinggpa(at)comcast.net> |
All
I worked a little in the hanger for John Hurst in August of 03. One of the things
he had be do was to install an Aux-tank in the factory tri-gear demonstrator.
He told me that the company was developing it so the tri-gear had a long ranger
tank too. The tri-gear has a flat bed in the baggage bay, as you all know.
The new tank was much wider and just laid on the baggage bay and was strapped
down similar to the original aux-tank.
I don't know whether the tank was ever put into the inventory, but the kit I installed
was written up like a regular Europa kit.
If any one is really interested I suggest they call Andy.
Cliff Shaw
1041 Euclid ave.
Edmonds, WA 98020
425 776 5555
http://www.europaowners.org/WileE
----- Original Message -----
From: R.C.Harrison
To: europa-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, November 27, 2005 3:53 PM
Subject: RE: Europa-List: Trikes vs Monos
Hi! Ira.
I have a 9 IMP gallon full width long range tank across my Trike behind
the main tank bulkhead. It siphons in to the main tank and utilises the
Europa supplied priming pump to initiate the siphon.
Not wishing to leave an "Achilles heel" opportunity ...some would say
with a Jabiru 3300 that I need it !
Regards
Bob Harrison G-PTAG Europa MKI/Jabiru 3300
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
irampil(at)notes.cc.sunysb.edu
To: europa-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Europa-List: Trikes vs Monos
Alan quotes Andy to the effect that the trike always ran out of petrol
first in a cross country....
Might have something to do with the extra tank capacity available for
mono's whilst we still
wait for it in trike's. I wouldn't mind an extra 10 US gallons (though
my
bladder might), especially
to meet IFR fuel reserve requirements (i.e., from primary to alternate
airport, thence 45 min
at standard cruise).
Also, having flown a bit with Jim, I could vouch for him not being able
to
wheel land ;-),
but then I certainly could not and would not try.
Ira N224XS Trike
Currently down for an unresolved oil temp/pressure problem
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: conventional gear [was: wheel landings] |
Thanks Rowland. Gerry sent me a pic of one and I am impressed. It looks a
beautiful aeroplane.
Patrick
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "G-IANI" <g-iani(at)ntlworld.com> |
| Subject: | conventional gear [was: wheel landings] |
Patrick
If you want to find out more information on UK aircraft it is well worth
trying http://www.caa.co.uk/ginfo. They now have photos of many aircraft.
Unfortunately this will not help with G-CCRJ and G-NIGL as they are both far
from completed.
Ian Rickard #505 G-IANI XS Trigear
Europa Club Mods Rep (Trigear)
e-mail mods(at)europaclub.org.uk
or direct g-iani(at)ntlworld.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: conventional gear [was: wheel landings] |
Thanks Ian,
Patrick
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michel Auvray" <mau11(at)free.fr> |
| Subject: | Re: Trikes Aux-tank |
Bonjour Cliff ,
Do you have other informations on this new auxiliary tank. I am interested
Thanks,
======= le 28/11/2005, 03:16:26 vous criviez: =======
>
>All
>
>I worked a little in the hanger for John Hurst in August of 03. One of the things
he had be do was to install an Aux-tank in the factory tri-gear demonstrator.
He told me that the company was developing it so the tri-gear had a long ranger
tank too. The tri-gear has a flat bed in the baggage bay, as you all know.
The new tank was much wider and just laid on the baggage bay and was strapped
down similar to the original aux-tank.
>
>I don't know whether the tank was ever put into the inventory, but the kit I installed
was written up like a regular Europa kit.
>
>If any one is really interested I suggest they call Andy.
>
>Cliff Shaw
>1041 Euclid ave.
>Edmonds, WA 98020
>425 776 5555
>http://www.europaowners.org/WileE
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: R.C.Harrison
> To: europa-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent: Sunday, November 27, 2005 3:53 PM
> Subject: RE: Europa-List: Trikes vs Monos
>
>
> Hi! Ira.
> I have a 9 IMP gallon full width long range tank across my Trike behind
> the main tank bulkhead. It siphons in to the main tank and utilises the
> Europa supplied priming pump to initiate the siphon.
> Not wishing to leave an "Achilles heel" opportunity ...some would say
> with a Jabiru 3300 that I need it !
> Regards
> Bob Harrison G-PTAG Europa MKI/Jabiru 3300
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> irampil(at)notes.cc.sunysb.edu
> To: europa-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Europa-List: Trikes vs Monos
>
>
> Alan quotes Andy to the effect that the trike always ran out of petrol
> first in a cross country....
> Might have something to do with the extra tank capacity available for
> mono's whilst we still
> wait for it in trike's. I wouldn't mind an extra 10 US gallons (though
> my
> bladder might), especially
> to meet IFR fuel reserve requirements (i.e., from primary to alternate
> airport, thence 45 min
> at standard cruise).
>
> Also, having flown a bit with Jim, I could vouch for him not being able
> to
> wheel land ;-),
> but then I certainly could not and would not try.
>
>
> Ira N224XS Trike
> Currently down for an unresolved oil temp/pressure problem
>
>
= = = = = = = = = ========= = = = = = = = = =
Michel Auvray
mau11(at)free.fr
28/11/2005
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Nigel Graham" <nigel_graham(at)btclick.com> |
| Subject: | Re: conventional gear [was: wheel landings] |
Ahhhhh! ....but the carbon/Kevlar cross-member came out of the mould on
Sunday, and very pretty it looks too.
So technically .... I am getting a bit closer. Another ten years and I'll be
there ;-)
Nigel
----- Original Message -----
From: "G-IANI" <g-iani(at)ntlworld.com>
Subject: RE: Europa-List: conventional gear [was: wheel landings]
Patrick
If you want to find out more information on UK aircraft it is well worth
trying http://www.caa.co.uk/ginfo. They now have photos of many aircraft.
Unfortunately this will not help with G-CCRJ and G-NIGL as they are both far
from completed.
Ian Rickard #505 G-IANI XS Trigear
Europa Club Mods Rep (Trigear)
e-mail mods(at)europaclub.org.uk
or direct g-iani(at)ntlworld.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Brown <acrojim(at)cfl.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
Garry;
You are painting a picture with a very large brush.
One example;
In 2001, or 2002, Europa had the Glider wings at Sun and Fun and had installed
them on the Mono wheel. This was the first public showing of the glider wings
installed on the mono wheel. Keith wanted to get pictures of the Tri-gears and
a mono wheel in formation. So a photo shoot was put together.
Jim Thursby flew a customers tri-gear, Clive flew the company tri-gear
demonstrator, I flew our mono wheel, and Andy flew the company mono wheel with
the long wings attached. All four planes were topped off with fuel.
We were in the air over two hours with all four planes and the camera ship.
After landing all four planes were refueled. The two tri-gear's took over two
gallons each, more fuel than my mono wheel. I had used over a gallon more than
the glider winged mono wheel.
We were all at about the same airspeed, in the same area for the flight,
so the conditions were the same on each aircraft.
The tri-geared just simply burned more fuel.
Jim Brown
N398JB
Garry wrote:
>
> I remain completely baffled as to why so many Europa pilots have chosen the
> mono over the trigear when given a choice. There is absolutely zero
> performance advantage to the mono, in rate of climb, in cruise speed, in
> fuel burn, or whatever. The difference is that the mono is inheritantly
> unstable in landing (and takeoff) configuration. Everyone (almost) else in
> the aircraft business, both large and small, has abandon the taildragger
> design, and no one else is building mono wheel planes. For the life of me I
> cannot understand why Ivan thought he could be successful when the rest of
> the world says it's an unstable design. The proof is in the results.
> Europa mono's are ground looping, wheelbarrowing, bending props, running off
> the tarmac, and generally destroying themselves with regularity. Perhaps
> that is a smart marketing strategy........to design a product that requires
> regular parts replacement and rebuilding, but as a pilot I'm not impressed.
> I do acknowledge that there are a few among our ranks who get a certain
> thrill out of placing themselves in danger on every flight, and love the
> challenge of taming a wild and unpredictable beast. It makes for good chest
> thumping and bragging rights at the local pub, but might I suggest that you
> take up the (American) sport of bull riding. It's probably safer and more
> satisfying than trying to land a mono. I'm not trying to stir up the ranks,
> but simply trying to understand the motivation of choosing an unstable
> design over a proper one. Both Europas are fabulous planes in the air, but
> one operates on the ground in a proper fashion while the other acts like a
> drunk and wounded gooney bird. Let's hear some logical and unemotional
> arguments in favor of the mono.
>
> Trigear pilot
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jim Thursby" <jthursby(at)tampabay.rr.com>
> To:
> Subject: RE: Europa-List: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?]
>
> >
> >
> > Hi Chris,
> > If you are that gung ho, by all means try it yourself but don't say you
> > weren't warned. I thought I was smarter than Ivan Shaw once too. Against
> > his wishes (and unknown to) I spent the better part of two hours trying
> > to
> > wheel land one of the company planes. I've been told it was some of the
> > most entertaining stuff the controllers at Lakeland had ever seen. It
> > will
> > squeak the main on ever so gently with just a touch of power, then the
> > tail
> > slams to the runway and you are rewarded for your carelessness with
> > another
> > chance or two at landing it properly. If you recover from the resulting
> > three to ten foot bounce and haven't clipped your propeller, and if you
> > haven't ground looped it, and if you haven't stalled and dropped it in,
> > you
> > can attempt another landing. I tried many times and NEVER got it to stay
> > on
> > the ground. If you must attempt wheel landings in a tail dragger aircraft
> > please buy or build an RV and save the Europa community from losing
> > another
> > aircraft from the ranks. And the prop is VERY close when on the main
> > wheel
> > with the plane in a slight nose down attitude.
> >
> > Jim T.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com
> > [mailto:owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chris Beck
> > To: europa-list(at)matronics.com
> > Subject: Re: Europa-List: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?]
> >
> >
> > Jim Brown wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>I would also suggest, to those of you who want to "TRY" to wheel land a
> >>mono wheel, you need to do one thing first. With the engine off, have a
> >>friend or helper raise the tail to normal flight attitude, then take a
> >>look at how close the prop is to the ground or pavement. One bounce on
> >>landing, and you may be buying new prop blades.
> >>
> >>The center of gravity is behind the mono wheel, which will make the
> >>tail drop down, as soon as the wheel touches the runway, if you counter
> >>with some forward stick, re-read the above paragraph.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> > Jim, what sort of clearance are we talking about?? 2"? 6"? I've got a
> > mile on the 140. I'd have to be looking straight at the dirt to get the
> > prop grounded.
> >
> > Regarding the C of G, it's the same issue on any taildragger. It's behind
> > the mains, which causes the tail to drop when landing due to the inertia.
> > Trick is to zero out the rate of descent just as the mains touch, then
> > nail
> > it with that bit of forward stick (as I'm sure you know very well from the
> > Pitts). Again, is it strictly a prop clearance issue that prevents
> > wheelies
> > in the monowheel? Has this been beaten to death in the past where I can
> > look it up in the archives?
> >
> > I'm just very curious about the mechanics of landing a monowheel. I've
> > flown in a few different ones (a Classic and an XS). Now that I'm flying
> > a
> > tailwheel plan, I understand a lot more of what's going on.
> >
> > Chris
> >
> >
> >
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "nigel charles" <nigelcharles(at)tiscali.co.uk> |
| Subject: | wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
Another benefit of the monowheel over the trigear is when it comes to
strip operation. When the grass is soft conditions can prevent the
trigear getting airborne due to increased rolling drag. This was proved
when the trigear demonstrator was flown into a grass strip in northern
England. With two on board it proved impossible to reach rotate speed on
take-off. The only solution was to leave the passenger behind. On the
same day the monowheel operated two up with no problems.
Nigel Charles
> > I remain completely baffled as to why so many Europa pilots have
chosen
> the
> > mono over the trigear when given a choice. There is absolutely
zero
> > performance advantage to the mono, in rate of climb, in cruise
speed, in
> > fuel burn, or whatever. The difference is that the mono is
inheritantly
> > unstable in landing (and takeoff) configuration. Everyone (almost)
else
> in
> > the aircraft business, both large and small, has abandon the
taildragger
> > design, and no one else is building mono wheel planes. For the life
of
> me I
> > cannot understand why Ivan thought he could be successful when the
rest
> of
> > the world says it's an unstable design. The proof is in the
results.
> > Europa mono's are ground looping, wheelbarrowing, bending props,
running
> off
> > the tarmac, and generally destroying themselves with regularity.
> Perhaps
> > that is a smart marketing strategy........to design a product that
> requires
> > regular parts replacement and rebuilding, but as a pilot I'm not
> impressed.
> > I do acknowledge that there are a few among our ranks who get a
certain
> > thrill out of placing themselves in danger on every flight, and love
the
> > challenge of taming a wild and unpredictable beast. It makes for
good
> chest
> > thumping and bragging rights at the local pub, but might I suggest
that
> you
> > take up the (American) sport of bull riding. It's probably safer
and
> more
> > satisfying than trying to land a mono. I'm not trying to stir up
the
> ranks,
> > but simply trying to understand the motivation of choosing an
unstable
> > design over a proper one. Both Europas are fabulous planes in the
air,
> but
> > one operates on the ground in a proper fashion while the other acts
like
> a
> > drunk and wounded gooney bird. Let's hear some logical and
unemotional
> > arguments in favor of the mono.
> >
> > Trigear pilot
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Jim Thursby" <jthursby(at)tampabay.rr.com>
> > To:
> > Subject: RE: Europa-List: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa
> XS?]
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi Chris,
> > > If you are that gung ho, by all means try it yourself but don't
say
> you
> > > weren't warned. I thought I was smarter than Ivan Shaw once too.
> Against
> > > his wishes (and unknown to) I spent the better part of two hours
> trying
> > > to
> > > wheel land one of the company planes. I've been told it was some
of
> the
> > > most entertaining stuff the controllers at Lakeland had ever seen.
> It
> > > will
> > > squeak the main on ever so gently with just a touch of power, then
the
> > > tail
> > > slams to the runway and you are rewarded for your carelessness
with
> > > another
> > > chance or two at landing it properly. If you recover from the
> resulting
> > > three to ten foot bounce and haven't clipped your propeller, and
if
> you
> > > haven't ground looped it, and if you haven't stalled and dropped
it
> in,
> > > you
> > > can attempt another landing. I tried many times and NEVER got it
to
> stay
> > > on
> > > the ground. If you must attempt wheel landings in a tail dragger
> aircraft
> > > please buy or build an RV and save the Europa community from
losing
> > > another
> > > aircraft from the ranks. And the prop is VERY close when on the
main
> > > wheel
> > > with the plane in a slight nose down attitude.
> > >
> > > Jim T.
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com
> > > [mailto:owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chris
> Beck
> > > To: europa-list(at)matronics.com
> > > Subject: Re: Europa-List: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy
Europa
> XS?]
> > >
> > >
> > > Jim Brown wrote:
> > >
> > >>
> > >>I would also suggest, to those of you who want to "TRY" to wheel
land
> a
> > >>mono wheel, you need to do one thing first. With the engine off,
have
> a
> > >>friend or helper raise the tail to normal flight attitude, then
take a
> > >>look at how close the prop is to the ground or pavement. One
bounce on
> > >>landing, and you may be buying new prop blades.
> > >>
> > >>The center of gravity is behind the mono wheel, which will make
the
> > >>tail drop down, as soon as the wheel touches the runway, if you
> counter
> > >>with some forward stick, re-read the above paragraph.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > > Jim, what sort of clearance are we talking about?? 2"? 6"? I've
got
> a
> > > mile on the 140. I'd have to be looking straight at the dirt to
get
> the
> > > prop grounded.
> > >
> > > Regarding the C of G, it's the same issue on any taildragger.
It's
> behind
> > > the mains, which causes the tail to drop when landing due to the
> inertia.
> > > Trick is to zero out the rate of descent just as the mains touch,
then
> > > nail
> > > it with that bit of forward stick (as I'm sure you know very well
from
> the
> > > Pitts). Again, is it strictly a prop clearance issue that
prevents
> > > wheelies
> > > in the monowheel? Has this been beaten to death in the past where
I
> can
> > > look it up in the archives?
> > >
> > > I'm just very curious about the mechanics of landing a monowheel.
> I've
> > > flown in a few different ones (a Classic and an XS). Now that I'm
> flying
> > > a
> > > tailwheel plan, I understand a lot more of what's going on.
> > >
> > > Chris
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
In 2001, or 2002, Europa had the Glider wings at Sun and Fun and had
installed
them on the Mono wheel. This was the first public showing of the glider wings
installed on the mono wheel. Keith wanted to get pictures of the Tri-gears
and
a mono wheel in formation. So a photo shoot was put together.
Jim Thursby flew a customers tri-gear, Clive flew the company tri-gear
demonstrator, I flew our mono wheel, and Andy flew the company mono wheel
with
the long wings attached. All four planes were topped off with
fuel...................
..............................
Jim,
An interesting comparison. I think your general assumptions are probably
correct but the actual fuel usage for a Tri Gear of just over 1 gall i.e.
(assuming U.S. gallons) of some 4 litres per hour is a bit enviable!
Were any of the Tri Gears fitted with speed kits and do you or anyone else
have figures which prove - or otherwise- the claim that a speed kit will give
10 knots more, or looked at another way, use less fuel?. Does the speed kit
go anyway towards getting the Tri Gear fuel usage anywhere down towards the
Mono?
Patrick
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
Another benefit of the monowheel over the trigear is when it comes to
strip operation. When the grass is soft conditions can prevent the
trigear getting airborne due to increased rolling drag. This was proved
when the trigear demonstrator was flown into a grass strip in northern
England. With two on board it proved impossible to reach rotate speed on
take-off. The only solution was to leave the passenger behind. On the
same day the monowheel operated two up with no problems....................
Nigel Charles
Interesting Nigel - but what about the respective propellers? I would have
thought that props would make a lot more difference to acceleration than the
type of undercarriage.
Patrick
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cliff Shaw" <flyinggpa(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
Patrick
I have flown my Europa both ways. I converted to a tri-gear about 22 hours of
flight. I had installed fairing around the large main wheel. I had wheel pant
on the tail wheel and on the outrigger. I used GPS and recorded 151 mph on a couple
of different days. Now as a tri-gear with speed kit on everything, just
as I had as a mono, the plane flies 153 mph.
I have not published these number before because I had no explanation. But now
I think I have it figured out. My Rotax 912S in now fully broke in. I think
it is running stronger. Your agree?
I do know that there was a big difference when adding the gear fairings.
Cliff Shaw
1041 Euclid ave.
Edmonds, WA 98020
425 776 5555
http://www.europaowners.org/WileE
----- Original Message -----
From: BEBERRY(at)aol.com
To: europa-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Monday, November 28, 2005 6:37 AM
Subject: Re: Europa-List: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?]
In 2001, or 2002, Europa had the Glider wings at Sun and Fun and had
installed
them on the Mono wheel. This was the first public showing of the glider wings
installed on the mono wheel. Keith wanted to get pictures of the Tri-gears
and
a mono wheel in formation. So a photo shoot was put together.
Jim Thursby flew a customers tri-gear, Clive flew the company tri-gear
demonstrator, I flew our mono wheel, and Andy flew the company mono wheel
with
the long wings attached. All four planes were topped off with
fuel...................
..............................
Jim,
An interesting comparison. I think your general assumptions are probably
correct but the actual fuel usage for a Tri Gear of just over 1 gall i.e.
(assuming U.S. gallons) of some 4 litres per hour is a bit enviable!
Were any of the Tri Gears fitted with speed kits and do you or anyone else
have figures which prove - or otherwise- the claim that a speed kit will give
10 knots more, or looked at another way, use less fuel?. Does the speed kit
go anyway towards getting the Tri Gear fuel usage anywhere down towards the
Mono?
Patrick
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "nigel charles" <nigelcharles(at)tiscali.co.uk> |
| Subject: | wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
When the ground is soft or rough the rolling resistance can be far more
significant than prop or engine. This is easily observed by the
increased rpm needed just to get the aircraft moving from a standstill.
Nosewheels in particular can suffer over soft or rough terrain.
Taildraggers or monowheels also have a small advantage in that the
positive wing incidence provides lift even from fast taxi speeds
reducing wheel loading and therefore rolling drag.
In the particular case in question the monowheel was using a ground
adjustable prop and the 80hp engine. I do not know the trigear
configuration but it was unlikely to be disadvantaged in this respect.
Nigel
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-europa-list-
> server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of BEBERRY(at)aol.com
> Sent: 28 November 2005 14:42
> To: europa-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Europa-List: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa
XS?]
>
>
>
>
> Another benefit of the monowheel over the trigear is when it comes to
> strip operation. When the grass is soft conditions can prevent the
> trigear getting airborne due to increased rolling drag. This was
proved
> when the trigear demonstrator was flown into a grass strip in
northern
> England. With two on board it proved impossible to reach rotate speed
on
> take-off. The only solution was to leave the passenger behind. On the
> same day the monowheel operated two up with no
> problems....................
>
> Nigel Charles
>
>
> Interesting Nigel - but what about the respective propellers? I
would
> have
> thought that props would make a lot more difference to acceleration
than
> the
> type of undercarriage.
>
> Patrick
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
In a message dated 28/11/2005 15:43:57 GMT Standard Time,
flyinggpa(at)comcast.net writes:
I have flown my Europa both ways. I converted to a tri-gear about 22 hours
of flight. I had installed fairing around the large main wheel. I had wheel
pant on the tail wheel and on the outrigger. I used GPS and recorded 151 mph
on a couple of different days. Now as a tri-gear with speed kit on everything,
just as I had as a mono, the plane flies 153 mph. ...................
Cliff...useful info. I am in the middle of a longish renovation and upgrade
(Autopilot etc) and speed kit so will not have the opportunity to do any
tests for some time.
Thanks Patrick (Tri gear 914)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
Nigel - agree your points. I had no trouble getting off grass fairly
smartish with the old warp drive prop and 914 and have not got to the flight test
stage as yet with the new Arplast VP.
Patrick
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Butcher" <europa(at)triton.net> |
| Subject: | MG Core Closeouts |
We are working on our MG wings. It appears that our aileron and airbrake cores
have not been cut to make the pre cut close outs. Our airbrake cores measure
74 inches and our aileron cores measure 87 1/2 inches in length. Can someone
with completed wings verify the length of their completed ailerons and airbrakes
for us?
Thank you.
Jim & Heather Butcher A185
N241BW short wings flying
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jac van Heeswijk" <jac.vanheeswijk(at)hetnet.nl> |
| Subject: | Re: conventional gear [was: wheel landings] |
Rowland,
I am about to fly. The airplane is complete and all the paperwork is on its way.
The first flight is planned for the spring (April/May) of 2006.
I have a request to you: Are you able (and willing) to mail me a survey of the
Europa's that are flying with a 912S Rotax engine and a Woodcomp (or Kremen)
propeller type SR 200 (3 blades). You would do me a great favour since dutch CAA
is asking for it.
Thank you in advance. I hope to send you the news of my first flight within some
months.
Regards, Jack
PS. Maybe it's usefull to adjust my record to the new situation:
a.. Under Notes: 100 % complete and Expect to fly in the spring of 2006
b.. Registration: PH-LOB
c.. Trailer: Open
d.. Build hours: 4000
e.. Empty weight: not yet assigned
f.. Modifications: Fuel tank hatch, finger brakes
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fred Fillinger" <n3eu(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
> ...
> We were in the air over two hours with all four planes and
the camera ship.
>
> After landing all four planes were refueled. The two
tri-gear's took
> over two gallons each, more fuel than my mono wheel.
> The tri-geared just simply burned more fuel.
I believe all we demonstrated here was a drag penalty for
that particular tri-gear. If such speed penalty is say 7%,
then that will take about 20% more fuel to keep up with the
faster aircraft. IOW, a mono at 75% power flying abreast a
trigear at 95% power. There may have also been aerodynamic
build variations between the two planes having nothing to do
with the gear legs, one of which is further fighting the
prop.
Reg,
Fred F.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael Scherf" <michael.scherf(at)free.fr> |
| Subject: | Landing light ref and source wanted to fit into outrigger |
fairings
I heard there was a reference or suggestion circulated on this forum
concerning a pair of landing lights small enough to fit onto the fwd face of
the outrigger pants.
I am thinking of something std from automotive supplies with std halogen
bulbs 55watts.
The smallest seen in supermarket was oval 70mm x 60mm but with too flat fwd
glas (not very aerodynamical).
Would much appreciate some comments/suggestions/pictures.
Many thanks in advance
Michael Scherf, Nr257 in Toulouse
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike Parkin" <mikenjulie.parkin(at)btopenworld.com> |
| Subject: | Re: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
A drag penalty for both particular tri-gears !! and the ones previously
mentioned.
chus.
MP
----- Original Message -----
From: "Fred Fillinger" <n3eu(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Europa-List: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?]
>
>
>> ...
>> We were in the air over two hours with all four planes and
> the camera ship.
>>
>> After landing all four planes were refueled. The two
> tri-gear's took
>> over two gallons each, more fuel than my mono wheel.
>
>> The tri-geared just simply burned more fuel.
>
> I believe all we demonstrated here was a drag penalty for
> that particular tri-gear. If such speed penalty is say 7%,
> then that will take about 20% more fuel to keep up with the
> faster aircraft. IOW, a mono at 75% power flying abreast a
> trigear at 95% power. There may have also been aerodynamic
> build variations between the two planes having nothing to do
> with the gear legs, one of which is further fighting the
> prop.
>
> Reg,
> Fred F.
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rowland Carson <rowil(at)clara.net> |
| Subject: | woodcomp/kremen props [was: conventional gear] |
>Are you able (and willing) to mail me a survey of the Europa's that
>are flying with a 912S Rotax engine and a Woodcomp (or Kremen)
>propeller type SR 200 (3 blades)
I have sent a fuller response direct to Jack. As far as I know, the
only Europas that have flown with any type of Kremen/Woodcomp
propellers are:
F-PSLY 912
G-XSDJ 914
HB-YIE 912S
OK-EUR 914
(I just remembered that Tim Houlihan's G-BZTH with a 912 is getting
one fitted, but not sure if it has flown or been cleared for flight
with it yet.)
In addition to Jack, builders 402, 438, 486, 529, 556, A064, A061 all
plan to fit Kremen/Woodcomp props of some type.
If anyone knows of any other Europas fitted with Kremen/Woodcomp
props, please let us know!
regards
Rowland
--
| Rowland Carson (retiring) Europa Club Membership Secretary - email for info!
| Europa 435 G-ROWI (750 hours building) PFA #16532
| e-mail website
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "gleinberger" <gleinberger(at)millersville.edu> |
0.64 REPLY_TO_EMPTY Reply-To: is empty
I am working on the cockpit module and am trying to assemble the parts for the
fuel system. I want to use a 914 Turbo Rotex - do I need the Andair FS22D2 Duplex
Valve? My understanding is that the 914 needs a return line.
Also, I want to use the Van RV fuel sensor (capacitance) and hook it to the Blue
Mt. EFIS/One (BM has a interface board that allows the hookup). Where do I
get the Van Rv capacitance sensor? It doesn't seem to be listed separately on
the Van Rv site.
Any help is greatly appreciated.
Gary Leinberger
A237 Motorglider Trigear
Lancaster, Pa. USA
----------------
Visit EuropaOwnersForum http://www.europaowners.org/
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | RE: Landing light ref and source wanted to fit into outrigger |
fa
| From: | "SteveD" <Post2Forum(at)comcast.net> |
Rob Neils' Europa's wheel pants landing lights.
----------------
This Email contains Photos or Attachments located at the following link:
http://www.europaowners.org/viewtopic.php?p=8548#8548
----------------
Visit EuropaOwnersForum http://www.europaowners.org/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | D Wysong <hdwysong(at)gmail.com> |
Gary -
Look at the Princeton capacitive fuel probes available from Aircraft
Spruce instead. They already contain the signal conditioning necessary
to output a DC voltage proportional to fuel level... which makes them
"plug and play" with the Blue Mountain unit. The Blue Mountain guys
sell those converters to turn the "Van's" probes (raw capacitors) into
Princeton-like probes.
D
----------
gleinberger wrote:
>
> I am working on the cockpit module and am trying to assemble the parts for the
fuel system. I want to use a 914 Turbo Rotex - do I need the Andair FS22D2 Duplex
Valve? My understanding is that the 914 needs a return line.
>
> Also, I want to use the Van RV fuel sensor (capacitance) and hook it to the Blue
Mt. EFIS/One (BM has a interface board that allows the hookup). Where do
I get the Van Rv capacitance sensor? It doesn't seem to be listed separately on
the Van Rv site.
>
> Any help is greatly appreciated.
>
> Gary Leinberger
> A237 Motorglider Trigear
> Lancaster, Pa. USA
> ----------------
> Visit EuropaOwnersForum http://www.europaowners.org/
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "SteveD" <Post2Forum(at)comcast.net> |
Hey Gary,
We still need to get together, I'm off this week, email me if anything works out
for you.
OK...
Vans probes:
http://www.vansaircraft.com/cgi-bin/catalog.cgi?ident=1133218810-264-750&browse=ei&product=ei-fuelgauge
Europa USA used to sell Digital capacitive fuel level probe:
Princeton Electronic Inc. 616 281-5193
Photos at: http://www.europaowners.org/album21
I think they're the same unit. Call Princeton, I'm sure they can get you a probe
pre-made for the Europa and info on the EFIS interface.
Attached is the Van's to BlueMountain Engineering note. Follow the attachment link
back for the doc.
I'm using the 912s, but the fuel return line goes right back to the tank on the
reserve tank side. Not having separate tanks allows the fuel to simply be return
to the common tank (on the reserve side). So return line switching is not
required.
I'm using the Andair FS20x2-F
ACS P/N 05-29505
Chat Later,
Steved
----------------
This Email contains Photos or Attachments located at the following link:
http://www.europaowners.org/viewtopic.php?p=8550#8550
----------------
Visit EuropaOwnersForum http://www.europaowners.org/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "R.C.Harrison" <ptag.dev(at)tiscali.co.uk> |
| Subject: | woodcomp/kremen props [was: conventional gear] |
Hi! ...and Bryan Allsop
Regards
Bob Harrison. G-PTAG
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rowland
Carson
Subject: Europa-List: woodcomp/kremen props [was: conventional gear]
>Are you able (and willing) to mail me a survey of the Europa's that
>are flying with a 912S Rotax engine and a Woodcomp (or Kremen)
>propeller type SR 200 (3 blades)
I have sent a fuller response direct to Jack. As far as I know, the
only Europas that have flown with any type of Kremen/Woodcomp
propellers are:
F-PSLY 912
G-XSDJ 914
HB-YIE 912S
OK-EUR 914
(I just remembered that Tim Houlihan's G-BZTH with a 912 is getting
one fitted, but not sure if it has flown or been cleared for flight
with it yet.)
In addition to Jack, builders 402, 438, 486, 529, 556, A064, A061 all
plan to fit Kremen/Woodcomp props of some type.
If anyone knows of any other Europas fitted with Kremen/Woodcomp
props, please let us know!
regards
Rowland
--
| Rowland Carson (retiring) Europa Club Membership Secretary - email for
info!
| Europa 435 G-ROWI (750 hours building) PFA #16532
| e-mail website
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul McAllister" <paul.mcallister(at)qia.net> |
| Subject: | Landing light ref and source wanted to fit into outrigger |
fairings
Hi,
I put some rectangular lights in my outrigger fairings and they were worst
than uselss. All I wanted was something to taxi with and they wern't even
any good for that.
I know Cliff Shaw has some small round lights in his fairings, perhaps this
might work better.
Dave Anderson mounted his landing lights in the bottom of his cowlings and
he tells me that they work pretty nicely.
Paul
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Brown <acrojim(at)cfl.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
Fred
There were (TWO) tri- gears that day. One mono wheel, one mono wheel with
the glider wings. All I was saying was all four a/c were in same airspace
at same time, same speed. When tanks were topped off each tri- gear
took approx. 2 gal more that the mono wheel.
We were using a 172 as the camera ship. We were all flying about 120 mph.
Jim Brown
Fred Fillinger wrote:
>
>
> > ...
> > We were in the air over two hours with all four planes and
> the camera ship.
> >
> > After landing all four planes were refueled. The two
> tri-gear's took
> > over two gallons each, more fuel than my mono wheel.
>
> > The tri-geared just simply burned more fuel.
>
> I believe all we demonstrated here was a drag penalty for
> that particular tri-gear. If such speed penalty is say 7%,
> then that will take about 20% more fuel to keep up with the
> faster aircraft. IOW, a mono at 75% power flying abreast a
> trigear at 95% power. There may have also been aerodynamic
> build variations between the two planes having nothing to do
> with the gear legs, one of which is further fighting the
> prop.
>
> Reg,
> Fred F.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Brown <acrojim(at)cfl.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
I do not understand your first paragraph. The total fuel that went into each
plane was around 10 gallons. Each tri-gear had burned 2 gal more than the mono
wheel.
As far as the speed kit. I installed one on my mono wheel and I picked up 2 kts.
I know of a couple more mono wheels with speed kits installed, and they have told
me 1 to 2 kts increase.
What about it ??? All you mono wheel, and tri-gear drivers out there who have
installed the speed kits, what increased speed did you get ?
Jim Brown
BEBERRY(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>
> In 2001, or 2002, Europa had the Glider wings at Sun and Fun and had
> installed
> them on the Mono wheel. This was the first public showing of the glider wings
> installed on the mono wheel. Keith wanted to get pictures of the Tri-gears
> and
> a mono wheel in formation. So a photo shoot was put together.
>
> Jim Thursby flew a customers tri-gear, Clive flew the company tri-gear
> demonstrator, I flew our mono wheel, and Andy flew the company mono wheel
> with
> the long wings attached. All four planes were topped off with
> fuel...................
>
> ..............................
>
> Jim,
>
> An interesting comparison. I think your general assumptions are probably
> correct but the actual fuel usage for a Tri Gear of just over 1 gall i.e.
> (assuming U.S. gallons) of some 4 litres per hour is a bit enviable!
>
> Were any of the Tri Gears fitted with speed kits and do you or anyone else
> have figures which prove - or otherwise- the claim that a speed kit will give
> 10 knots more, or looked at another way, use less fuel?. Does the speed kit
> go anyway towards getting the Tri Gear fuel usage anywhere down towards the
> Mono?
>
> Patrick
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Garry" <garrys(at)tampabay.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
Jim,
Ok, I give up. You have objective data to support your position. Here's my
story............I took my first demo ride at Sun N'Fun, I think in 1998. I
went up in a mono (only thing available) with Europa's English test pilot.
I can't remember his name but he was later killed in a plane crash. During
taxi, takeoff and landing he was fighting the plane mightily, and I was
scared out of my wits. Once in the air, we were fine and he put me through
his aerobatic routine that he flew during the air show portion of Sun N'Fun.
Jump ahead a year or so. I met with Bob Berube at Lakeland and asked about
demo rides. By now he had both a mono and a trigear on site. Bob WOULDN'T
fly the mono, but we went up in the trigear. I love every aspect of it and
bought the kit on the spot.
Jump ahead another year or so. A local guy finished his mono and was
looking for a test pilot to do the first flight. The most famous,
experienced and respected test pilot in west central Florida was contacted
and he agreed to do the flight. Upon landing he lost control, ran off the
side of the runway and put it into the weeds. Fortunately, no significant
damage. This is a guy who's flown hundreds of different aircraft, flown for
the military, has 20,000 hours plus, and is a certified test pilot. He
cursed the Europa as the worst ground handling airplane he'd ever flown, and
swore to never get near another one as long as he lived.
Shortly thereafter, the Europa accidents began to become frequent, and
Europa was dropped from every insurance carrier's list of insurable planes.
I had a devil of a time convincing them that MY Europa wasn't like all those
that were having accidents.
Over the last 7 years or so we've all read on the forum about the number of
people who have converted from mono to trigear, after having their wits
scared out of them. Many others describe their harrowing tales of accidents
or near accidents with the mono. For what? a few gallons of gas savings?
I'm sure the savings in fuel bills is more than offset in higher insurance
premiums.
I've flown a number of times in monos with Bill Stewart and others. Even
after 100 or more hours in the mono, Bill's face would break out with
perspiration on final, and I'd nearly soil my skivies. I've NEVER felt
comfortable in a mono.
Can it be flown safely? Of course it can. You and many others are proof of
that. I guess it's like owning a pit bull dog. Many owners have great pit
bulls as pets, but always lurking around the corner is the possibility of
the dog biting you. Same with the Europa mono. Given a choice, I chose a
Laborador Retriever and a trigear.
I hope you take no personal offense to my postings. I respect and admire
you too much to want that to happen. In the end, it's all a matter of
personal preference.
Best regards and holiday wishes,
Garry
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Brown" <acrojim(at)cfl.rr.com>
Subject: Re: Europa-List: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?]
>
> Garry;
>
> You are painting a picture with a very large brush.
>
> One example;
>
> In 2001, or 2002, Europa had the Glider wings at Sun and Fun and had
> installed
> them on the Mono wheel. This was the first public showing of the glider
> wings
> installed on the mono wheel. Keith wanted to get pictures of the Tri-gears
> and
> a mono wheel in formation. So a photo shoot was put together.
>
> Jim Thursby flew a customers tri-gear, Clive flew the company tri-gear
> demonstrator, I flew our mono wheel, and Andy flew the company mono wheel
> with
> the long wings attached. All four planes were topped off with fuel.
>
> We were in the air over two hours with all four planes and the camera
> ship.
>
> After landing all four planes were refueled. The two tri-gear's took over
> two
> gallons each, more fuel than my mono wheel. I had used over a gallon more
> than
> the glider winged mono wheel.
>
> We were all at about the same airspeed, in the same area for the flight,
> so the conditions were the same on each aircraft.
>
> The tri-geared just simply burned more fuel.
>
> Jim Brown
> N398JB
>
> Garry wrote:
>
>>
>> I remain completely baffled as to why so many Europa pilots have chosen
>> the
>> mono over the trigear when given a choice. There is absolutely zero
>> performance advantage to the mono, in rate of climb, in cruise speed, in
>> fuel burn, or whatever. The difference is that the mono is inheritantly
>> unstable in landing (and takeoff) configuration. Everyone (almost) else
>> in
>> the aircraft business, both large and small, has abandon the taildragger
>> design, and no one else is building mono wheel planes. For the life of
>> me I
>> cannot understand why Ivan thought he could be successful when the rest
>> of
>> the world says it's an unstable design. The proof is in the results.
>> Europa mono's are ground looping, wheelbarrowing, bending props, running
>> off
>> the tarmac, and generally destroying themselves with regularity. Perhaps
>> that is a smart marketing strategy........to design a product that
>> requires
>> regular parts replacement and rebuilding, but as a pilot I'm not
>> impressed.
>> I do acknowledge that there are a few among our ranks who get a certain
>> thrill out of placing themselves in danger on every flight, and love the
>> challenge of taming a wild and unpredictable beast. It makes for good
>> chest
>> thumping and bragging rights at the local pub, but might I suggest that
>> you
>> take up the (American) sport of bull riding. It's probably safer and
>> more
>> satisfying than trying to land a mono. I'm not trying to stir up the
>> ranks,
>> but simply trying to understand the motivation of choosing an unstable
>> design over a proper one. Both Europas are fabulous planes in the air,
>> but
>> one operates on the ground in a proper fashion while the other acts like
>> a
>> drunk and wounded gooney bird. Let's hear some logical and unemotional
>> arguments in favor of the mono.
>>
>> Trigear pilot
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Jim Thursby" <jthursby(at)tampabay.rr.com>
>> To:
>> Subject: RE: Europa-List: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?]
>>
>> >
>> >
>> > Hi Chris,
>> > If you are that gung ho, by all means try it yourself but don't say you
>> > weren't warned. I thought I was smarter than Ivan Shaw once too.
>> > Against
>> > his wishes (and unknown to) I spent the better part of two hours
>> > trying
>> > to
>> > wheel land one of the company planes. I've been told it was some of
>> > the
>> > most entertaining stuff the controllers at Lakeland had ever seen. It
>> > will
>> > squeak the main on ever so gently with just a touch of power, then the
>> > tail
>> > slams to the runway and you are rewarded for your carelessness with
>> > another
>> > chance or two at landing it properly. If you recover from the
>> > resulting
>> > three to ten foot bounce and haven't clipped your propeller, and if you
>> > haven't ground looped it, and if you haven't stalled and dropped it in,
>> > you
>> > can attempt another landing. I tried many times and NEVER got it to
>> > stay
>> > on
>> > the ground. If you must attempt wheel landings in a tail dragger
>> > aircraft
>> > please buy or build an RV and save the Europa community from losing
>> > another
>> > aircraft from the ranks. And the prop is VERY close when on the main
>> > wheel
>> > with the plane in a slight nose down attitude.
>> >
>> > Jim T.
>> >
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com
>> > [mailto:owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chris Beck
>> > To: europa-list(at)matronics.com
>> > Subject: Re: Europa-List: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa
>> > XS?]
>> >
>> >
>> > Jim Brown wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >>I would also suggest, to those of you who want to "TRY" to wheel land a
>> >>mono wheel, you need to do one thing first. With the engine off, have a
>> >>friend or helper raise the tail to normal flight attitude, then take a
>> >>look at how close the prop is to the ground or pavement. One bounce on
>> >>landing, and you may be buying new prop blades.
>> >>
>> >>The center of gravity is behind the mono wheel, which will make the
>> >>tail drop down, as soon as the wheel touches the runway, if you counter
>> >>with some forward stick, re-read the above paragraph.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> > Jim, what sort of clearance are we talking about?? 2"? 6"? I've got
>> > a
>> > mile on the 140. I'd have to be looking straight at the dirt to get
>> > the
>> > prop grounded.
>> >
>> > Regarding the C of G, it's the same issue on any taildragger. It's
>> > behind
>> > the mains, which causes the tail to drop when landing due to the
>> > inertia.
>> > Trick is to zero out the rate of descent just as the mains touch, then
>> > nail
>> > it with that bit of forward stick (as I'm sure you know very well from
>> > the
>> > Pitts). Again, is it strictly a prop clearance issue that prevents
>> > wheelies
>> > in the monowheel? Has this been beaten to death in the past where I
>> > can
>> > look it up in the archives?
>> >
>> > I'm just very curious about the mechanics of landing a monowheel. I've
>> > flown in a few different ones (a Classic and an XS). Now that I'm
>> > flying
>> > a
>> > tailwheel plan, I understand a lot more of what's going on.
>> >
>> > Chris
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fred Fillinger" <n3eu(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
----- Original Message -----
> A drag penalty for both particular tri-gears !! and the
ones previously
> mentioned.
>
> chus.
>
> MP
So get rid of much of that drag; it need be only relative to
a big, even faired bump on the fuselage bottom, and stowed
outriggers but in a place where some wing lift suffers.
Like laminar flow wheel pants, if one has a way to trust the
fairing mfr's sales literature. With laminer flow, fairing
drag goes down something like 60%.
Fred F.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "GLENN CROWDER" <gcrowder2(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
I haven't noticed any speed increase with the speed kit fairings installed
on
the monowheel. I still have to install the tail wheel fairing tho.
Glenn
>From: Jim Brown <acrojim(at)cfl.rr.com>
>Reply-To: europa-list(at)matronics.com
>To: europa-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Europa-List: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?]
>Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 19:58:12 -0500
>
>
>I do not understand your first paragraph. The total fuel that went into
>each
>plane was around 10 gallons. Each tri-gear had burned 2 gal more than the
>mono
>wheel.
>
>As far as the speed kit. I installed one on my mono wheel and I picked up 2
>kts.
>I know of a couple more mono wheels with speed kits installed, and they
>have told
>me 1 to 2 kts increase.
>
>What about it ??? All you mono wheel, and tri-gear drivers out there who
>have
>installed the speed kits, what increased speed did you get ?
>
>Jim Brown
>
>BEBERRY(at)aol.com wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > In 2001, or 2002, Europa had the Glider wings at Sun and Fun and had
> > installed
> > them on the Mono wheel. This was the first public showing of the glider
>wings
> > installed on the mono wheel. Keith wanted to get pictures of the
>Tri-gears
> > and
> > a mono wheel in formation. So a photo shoot was put together.
> >
> > Jim Thursby flew a customers tri-gear, Clive flew the company tri-gear
> > demonstrator, I flew our mono wheel, and Andy flew the company mono
>wheel
> > with
> > the long wings attached. All four planes were topped off with
> > fuel...................
> >
> > ..............................
> >
> > Jim,
> >
> > An interesting comparison. I think your general assumptions are
>probably
> > correct but the actual fuel usage for a Tri Gear of just over 1 gall
>i.e.
> > (assuming U.S. gallons) of some 4 litres per hour is a bit enviable!
> >
> > Were any of the Tri Gears fitted with speed kits and do you or anyone
>else
> > have figures which prove - or otherwise- the claim that a speed kit
>will give
> > 10 knots more, or looked at another way, use less fuel?. Does the
>speed kit
> > go anyway towards getting the Tri Gear fuel usage anywhere down towards
>the
> > Mono?
> >
> > Patrick
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fred Fillinger" <n3eu(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
> Fred
>
> There were (TWO) tri-gears that day. One mono wheel, one
> mono wheel with the glider wings. All I was saying was all
four
> a/c were in same airspace at same time, same speed. When
tanks
> were topped off each tri- gear took approx. 2 gal more
that the
> mono wheel.
>
> Jim Brown
>
I got that part, but I was just trying to restate "trigear
burns more gas" to simple math. Assuming all were same
engine/prop combination, at 75%, all will burn same gas.
Well, ignoring that a heavier aircraft will burn more in
climb. Fuel burn is proportional to power (though not
always linearly), and power required, in formation flight,
to overcome add'l relative drag has a "cube" in Dr.
Hoerner's handy little formula.
Reg,
Fred F.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | kbcarpenter(at)comcast.net |
| Subject: | Re: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
I would say 2 knots for mine.
Ken Carpenter N9XS 914 Mono
-------------- Original message --------------
>
> I do not understand your first paragraph. The total fuel that went into each
> plane was around 10 gallons. Each tri-gear had burned 2 gal more than the mono
> wheel.
>
> As far as the speed kit. I installed one on my mono wheel and I picked up 2 kts.
> I know of a couple more mono wheels with speed kits installed, and they have
> told
> me 1 to 2 kts increase.
>
> What about it ??? All you mono wheel, and tri-gear drivers out there who have
> installed the speed kits, what increased speed did you get ?
>
> Jim Brown
>
> BEBERRY(at)aol.com wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > In 2001, or 2002, Europa had the Glider wings at Sun and Fun and had
> > installed
> > them on the Mono wheel. This was the first public showing of the glider wings
> > installed on the mono wheel. Keith wanted to get pictures of the Tri-gears
> > and
> > a mono wheel in formation. So a photo shoot was put together.
> >
> > Jim Thursby flew a customers tri-gear, Clive flew the company tri-gear
> > demonstrator, I flew our mono wheel, and Andy flew the company mono wheel
> > with
> > the long wings attached. All four planes were topped off with
> > fuel...................
> >
> > ..............................
> >
> > Jim,
> >
> > An interesting comparison. I think your general assumptions are probably
> > correct but the actual fuel usage for a Tri Gear of just over 1 gall i.e.
> > (assuming U.S. gallons) of some 4 litres per hour is a bit enviable!
> >
> > Were any of the Tri Gears fitted with speed kits and do you or anyone else
> > have figures which prove - or otherwise- the claim that a speed kit will give
> > 10 knots more, or looked at another way, use less fuel?. Does the speed kit
> > go anyway towards getting the Tri Gear fuel usage anywhere down towards the
> > Mono?
> >
> > Patrick
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
I would say 2 knots for mine.
Ken Carpenter N9XS 914 Mono
-------------- Original message --------------
-- Europa-List message posted by: Jim Brown
I do not understand your first paragraph. The total fuel that went into each
plane was around 10 gallons. Each tri-gear had burned 2 gal more than the mono
wheel.
As far as the speed kit. I installed one on my mono wheel and I picked up 2 kts.
I know of a couple more mono wheels with speed kits installed, and they have
told
me 1 to 2 kts increase.
What about it ??? All you mono wheel, and tri-gear drivers out there who have
installed the speed kits, what increased speed did you get ?
Jim Brown
BEBERRY(at)aol.com wrote:
-- Europa-List message posted by: BEBERRY(at)aol.com
In 2001, or 2002, Europa had the Glider wings at Sun and Fun and had
installed
them on the Mono wheel. This was the first public showing of the glider wings
installed on the mono wheel. Keith wanted to get pictures of the Tri-gears
and
a mono wheel in formation. So a photo shoot was put together.
Jim Thursby flew a customers tri-gear, Clive flew the company tri-gear
demonstrator, I flew our mono wheel, and Andy flew the company mono wheel
with
the long wings attached. All four planes were topped off with
fuel...................
..............................
Jim,
An interesting comparison. I think your general assumptions are probably
correct but the actual fuel usage for a Tri Gear of just over 1 gall i.e.
(assuming U.S. gallons) of some 4 litres per hour is a bit enviable!
Were any of the Tri Gears fitted with speed kits and do you or anyone else
have figures which prove - or otherwise- the claim that a speed kit will give
10 knots more, or looked at another way, use less fuel?. Does the speed kit
go anyway towards getting the Tri Gear fuel usage anywhere down towards the
Mono?
Patrick
.buildersbooks.com,
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jeff B <topglock(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
Near as I can tell, about 6 kts in my trike, which burns between 4.3 and
4.5 GPH at 75%. With the Airmaster CS and a 912S she's making 130 kias
at 2000 ft... I am very happy with the performance...
Jeff - N55XS
110 hrs
Jim Brown wrote:
> What about it ??? All you mono wheel, and tri-gear drivers out there who have
> installed the speed kits, what increased speed did you get ?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JTHURSBY(at)tampabay.rr.com |
| Subject: | Re: Flying a heavy Europa XS? |
Jim, I might add that was Marvin Alvarez's trike and was 914 powered
like yours and the glider/mono. The other trike was a 912S and always
burned more than the 914 powered birds. I used to fly to Griffin GA
with all the planes and I could make it nonstop with a mono wheel. I
tried it with Marv's trike once and had to hit reserve 30 miles out
and stopped for fuel. (once is enough of THAT nonsense!) Never used a
lone ranger tank in either bird. As you remember from our great trip
out to Arlington, when flown hard, a Europa is pretty short legged.
Jim T.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul McAllister" <paul.mcallister(at)qia.net> |
| Subject: | wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
Well, since we are all sharing tail dragger stories, here is mine.
When I ordered my kit in 1997 it was the only choice. At the time I had
only ever flown sailplanes and I thought it would not be much different to
what I already knew... well I was wrong.
In the time I was building the Europa I got my private pilots rating, then
my instrument rating and logged about 600 hours, all on tri gear aircraft.
I reckon if I hadn't been doing all that flying then I would have finished
the Europa in 3 years instead of 5 but that's another story.
So... then it comes time for me to get ready to fly mine. I went and did a
bunch of training in a Citabira. I have to say that after about 6 hours I
was still wondering if I was ever going to get the hang of this tail wheel
stuff. I mean I was really getting worried that I had made a big mistake and
I was never going to figure it out. After about 10 hours I got the hang of
it, and then I managed to get 15 take off's with Andy Draper in the factory
mono which was very helpful.
I really did "sneak up" on flying my mono wheel and I freely admit that I
was about 100 hours into it before I got comfortable with it, but now I
don't really think about it too much.
As an interesting aside, I now land my Comanche better than I ever did, so I
think its true that stick and rudder with tail wheel experience improves
piloting skills.
Would I change now, I doubt it, it kinds fits like an old glove these days.
That's my 2 cents worth.
Paul - N378PJ
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JTHURSBY(at)tampabay.rr.com |
Garry, I read your other message earlier and all I can say is BS.
Jaybo ground looped the plane because he got full throttle long after
he expected it. He was attempting a go around and the throttle cables
kinked in the box. Then it went wide open when he did not expect it.
Blame the wound wire throttle cables that should be solid wire. That
and the fact that he refused to accept that it was any different than
any other taildragger, and it is. A lot of pilots let the thing get
farther away than they should counting on differential braking to bail
them out. You have none in a mono. I once sweated landings in the
mono, then I threw Lee out of the right seat, slowed the airplane down
like it should and all was fine. Float will keep the pucker factor
high and the mono suffers from it. The trike on the other hand has
almost no float if your approach speed is on. Plus you can dump the
flaps in the flare and plant it solidily. Not a wise idea in a mono.
I've always said you can land a trike shorter more consistently, but a
mono wins the takeoff game hands down. I flew into Bob Knapps 700
foot grass strip in N914EA and while the landing got my attention the
takeoff was a breeze. Used half of it. I also used over 2,500 feet at
Manatee airport's grass strip in the trike two up and thought I might
have to leave Mike Gallar there! Have I got a prop in a Europa?
Yes. I tried to expedite at Vandenburg for a Lear behind me and stood
it on the nose. I learned that if I'm on the runway I'M the most
important guy at the moment. But I have never, ever gone around in
over 500 landings from zero to gusting to 45 knots winds. Am I master
of the taildragger? Hardly. I had less than 5 hours tailwheel time
when Lee checked me out in the Europa. Maybe my inexperience is what
worked for me. I didn't try to fly it like a P51. I didn't know any
better. Jaybo and I talked about that incedent quite a bit before his
death and he admitted to prior prejudice before even flying the plane.
Either way they both work and we can all use what we like without
bashing others. BTW what are you cruising at? I have Claude's up to
138MPH without fairings. Race soon? where are you hangered now?
Jim T.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike Parkin" <mikenjulie.parkin(at)btopenworld.com> |
| Subject: | Re: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
"This is a guy who's flown hundreds of different aircraft, flown for
the military, has 20,000 hours plus, and is a certified test pilot."
An instructor of mine once told me that to get a true feeling for the
experience of a pilot, divide his total flying hours by the number of pilot
seats multiplied by the number of engines the aircraft has.
For example, an airline pilot who has flown 20,000 hours in a big 4 jet
would be 20000/(2*4) equals 2500. The rationale behind this is that if you
fly long haul, in 2 by 13 hour sectors you might get one landing and one
take-off. How many take-off and landings would you get in your Europa in 26
hours of flying.
I am afraid that spending 10,000 hours monitoring an FMS does not a good
stick and throttle man make!!
regards,
Mike.
PS. If you have 20,000 hours then you are probably quite old and therefore
not as quick as you were in your prime.
________________________________________________________________________________
Speed Kit,
Still no answers! I am fitting my speed kit to my Tri Gear and still hoped
that someone would tell me if I am doing this to gain extra
performance/better fuel figures , or am I just doing a cosmetic job?
Any more comments?. The correspondence has been interesting and I suppose
that we shall only get subjective points of view on many aspects of the
aeroplane but the question of whether a speed kit is effective, performance wise,
should be relatively easy to answer - or do I have to wait until I can get
airborne again.?
Please !!!
Patrick
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Nigel Graham" <nigel_graham(at)btclick.com> |
| Subject: | Lies, Damned Lies .... and Statistics |
I read Mike's posting with interest as his observations match the
statistical evidence.
As the first Europe's took to the air in the UK in the mid '90s, reports of
"incidents" started to filter through the "grape vine". I started monitoring
and downloading every UK CAA Air Accident Investigation Bulletins relating
to the Europa.
After about six years I had a health stack and being devious by nature,
decided to compile some statistics - which among other things illustrated to
my great surprise, that the type of pilot most likely to "loose it" (usually
on landing) was the high time airline professional.
For your interest - here are those statistics:
Pilot
Average Age: 55 yrs
Average Flying Time: 2687 Hrs
Variant
Monowheel: 94%
Tri-Gear: 6%
Flight Phase
Take Off: 25%
Flying: 6%
Landing: 69%
Of these, 38% involved un-commanded gear retraction or (in the case of more
than one high time professional) forgetting about the gear altogether!
By far and away, the greatest problem is "Loss of Control" at take-off and
landing.
Once the Europa is in the air, it is a remarkably safe aircraft. The only
problems are running out of fuel (not really the planes fault) and cockpit
doors departing if the PFI has not been carried out to ensure that the shoot
bolts are home.
There was a spate of in-flight engine stoppages with the NSI (Subaru)
engine, but these never seemed to get reported - so are not reflected in
these numbers.
Nigel
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Parkin" <mikenjulie.parkin(at)btopenworld.com>
Subject: Re: Europa-List: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?]
................An instructor of mine once told me that to get a true
feeling for the
experience of a pilot, divide his total flying hours by the number of pilot
seats multiplied by the number of engines the aircraft
has...........................
Mike.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Brown <acrojim(at)cfl.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
Fred
Your point is well taken..
Jim
Fred Fillinger wrote:
>
> > Fred
> >
> > There were (TWO) tri-gears that day. One mono wheel, one
> > mono wheel with the glider wings. All I was saying was all
> four
> > a/c were in same airspace at same time, same speed. When
> tanks
> > were topped off each tri- gear took approx. 2 gal more
> that the
> > mono wheel.
> >
> > Jim Brown
> >
>
> I got that part, but I was just trying to restate "trigear
> burns more gas" to simple math. Assuming all were same
> engine/prop combination, at 75%, all will burn same gas.
> Well, ignoring that a heavier aircraft will burn more in
> climb. Fuel burn is proportional to power (though not
> always linearly), and power required, in formation flight,
> to overcome add'l relative drag has a "cube" in Dr.
> Hoerner's handy little formula.
>
> Reg,
> Fred F.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | TELEDYNMCS(at)aol.com |
In a message dated 11/29/2005 2:58:14 AM Eastern Standard Time,
europa-list-digest(at)matronics.com writes:
> So get rid of much of that drag; it need be only relative to
> a big, even faired bump on the fuselage bottom, and stowed
> outriggers but in a place where some wing lift suffers.
> Like laminar flow wheel pants, if one has a way to trust the
> fairing mfr's sales literature. With laminer flow, fairing
> drag goes down something like 60%.
>
> I've seen a dozen or so flying Europas now and I've been very surprised that
> no one I've seen is installing flap gap seals and positive seals on the
> ailerons, rudder and trim tabs. Stopping the pressure equalization between the
> upper and lower surfaces of the wings and stab, plus the left and right side
of
> the rudder has been shown to significantly improve sailplane performance.
> It's puzzling to me that more Europaphiles aren't using these techniques.
>
> On another note, my Sensenich hollow carbon prop arrived yesterday. All I
> can say is "WOW". The quality is excellent! I'll let everybody know what it
> weighs shortly.
>
> Regards,
>
> John Lawton
> Dunlap, TN
> A-245 (Installing the prop today....)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Fred Klein <fklein(at)orcasonline.com> |
On Tuesday, November 29, 2005, at 06:38 AM, TELEDYNMCS(at)aol.com wrote:
>> On another note, my Sensenich hollow carbon prop arrived yesterday.
>> All I
>> can say is "WOW". The quality is excellent! I'll let everybody know
>> what it
>> weighs shortly.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> John Lawton
>> Dunlap, TN
>> A-245 (Installing the prop today....)
John,
The pixs of the blades are indeed awesome...do you have any specs on
the twist of them or can you take some measurements before you mount
them?
Fred
A194
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "GLENN CROWDER" <gcrowder2(at)hotmail.com> |
I am interested in trying some negative flap settings. This has the effect
of removing wing
area at cruise speeds. I've been back thru the archives and found a lot of
opinions, but
nobody seems to have actually done it. Might be tricky on the mono, but I'm
initially thinking
of a two position cam over type linkage on the flap rod that would shorten
the flap rod in
cruise. It really helps on my R/C sailplanes, raising the cruise speed
noticeably. Also used on
Lancairs and other hight speed a/c.
Glenn
>From: TELEDYNMCS(at)aol.com
>Reply-To: europa-list(at)matronics.com
>To: europa-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Europa-List: Drag Reduction
>Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 09:38:52 EST
>
>
>In a message dated 11/29/2005 2:58:14 AM Eastern Standard Time,
>europa-list-digest(at)matronics.com writes:
>
>
> > So get rid of much of that drag; it need be only relative to
> > a big, even faired bump on the fuselage bottom, and stowed
> > outriggers but in a place where some wing lift suffers.
> > Like laminar flow wheel pants, if one has a way to trust the
> > fairing mfr's sales literature. With laminer flow, fairing
> > drag goes down something like 60%.
> >
> > I've seen a dozen or so flying Europas now and I've been very surprised
>that
> > no one I've seen is installing flap gap seals and positive seals on the
> > ailerons, rudder and trim tabs. Stopping the pressure equalization
>between the
> > upper and lower surfaces of the wings and stab, plus the left and right
>side of
> > the rudder has been shown to significantly improve sailplane
>performance.
> > It's puzzling to me that more Europaphiles aren't using these
>techniques.
> >
> > On another note, my Sensenich hollow carbon prop arrived yesterday. All
>I
> > can say is "WOW". The quality is excellent! I'll let everybody know what
>it
> > weighs shortly.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > John Lawton
> > Dunlap, TN
> > A-245 (Installing the prop today....)
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul McAllister" <paul.mcallister(at)qia.net> |
| Subject: | wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
Dave,
My C o G is on the front of the envelope in my 914 mono. I do know that is
goes noticeably faster when its loaded up with a lot of gear in the back.
It is also significantly easier to land.
I need 4 pounds in the tail to fix it, but after spending so much care in
keeping the weigh off I just can't bring myself to add wieght. I might move
the battery further aft one of these days.
Cheers, Paul
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Butcher" <europa(at)triton.net> |
| Subject: | MG Core Closeouts |
Andy replied as follows:
Dear Jim,
We neglected to pre-cut the ends of your ailerons and airbrakes, sorry. You need
to cut 1/2" from all the ends except the aileron root which should be cut at
1". This makes life easier for making the close-outs, but it would not be impossible
to chevel out the foam after the cores had been laid up. What you want
to end up with is a reasonably flat and smooth end on which to lay up the
close-out. ( You'll know this from the other close-outs youll have done).
Regards
Andy
Jim Butcher A185
N241BW short wings flying
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
| From: | Dave_Miller(at)avivacanada.com |
29/11/2005 11:47:30 AM,
Serialize complete at 29/11/2005 11:47:30 AM
Thanks Paul,
I should do the arithmetic and see what it would take to optimise the C of
G. If adding a few pounds would add a knot or two, then it would be
worthwhile.
My battery is on the firewall and I can't see moving it.
The next question would be, has anyone come up with a safe, secure and
simple method of adding weight in the tail.
Dave A061
"Paul McAllister"
Sent by: owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com
11/29/2005 10:52 AM
Please respond to europa-list
To:
cc:
Subject: RE: Europa-List: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa
XS?]
Dave,
My C o G is on the front of the envelope in my 914 mono. I do know that
is
goes noticeably faster when its loaded up with a lot of gear in the back.
It is also significantly easier to land.
I need 4 pounds in the tail to fix it, but after spending so much care in
keeping the weigh off I just can't bring myself to add wieght. I might
move
the battery further aft one of these days.
Cheers, Paul
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michel Auvray" <mau11(at)free.fr> |
| Subject: | Re: Drag Reduction |
Hello John;
I am inerested by your information concerning laminar flow.
What is your idea to reduce drag?
bientt,
Michel Auvray builder 145, 270 hours fly with my Europa (monowheel)
======= le 29/11/2005, 09:38:52 vous criviez: =======
>
>In a message dated 11/29/2005 2:58:14 AM Eastern Standard Time,
>europa-list-digest(at)matronics.com writes:
>
>
>> So get rid of much of that drag; it need be only relative to
>> a big, even faired bump on the fuselage bottom, and stowed
>> outriggers but in a place where some wing lift suffers.
>> Like laminar flow wheel pants, if one has a way to trust the
>> fairing mfr's sales literature. With laminer flow, fairing
>> drag goes down something like 60%.
>>
>> I've seen a dozen or so flying Europas now and I've been very surprised that
>> no one I've seen is installing flap gap seals and positive seals on the
>> ailerons, rudder and trim tabs. Stopping the pressure equalization between the
>> upper and lower surfaces of the wings and stab, plus the left and right side
of
>> the rudder has been shown to significantly improve sailplane performance.
>> It's puzzling to me that more Europaphiles aren't using these techniques.
>>
>> On another note, my Sensenich hollow carbon prop arrived yesterday. All I
>> can say is "WOW". The quality is excellent! I'll let everybody know what it
>> weighs shortly.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> John Lawton
>> Dunlap, TN
>> A-245 (Installing the prop today....)
>
>
= = = = = = = = = ========= = = = = = = = = =
Michel Auvray
mau11(at)free.fr
29/11/2005
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "gdhetrick" <gdh(at)isp.com> |
John,
A couple of questions concerning your new prop.
1. What was the delivery time?
2. What is the weight?
Looking forward to your in-flight tests as well as temp readings during
taxi.
Regards,
Dale
----- Original Message -----
From: "Fred Klein" <fklein(at)orcasonline.com>
Subject: Re: Europa-List: propellers
>
>
> On Tuesday, November 29, 2005, at 06:38 AM, TELEDYNMCS(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>>> On another note, my Sensenich hollow carbon prop arrived yesterday.
>>> All I
>>> can say is "WOW". The quality is excellent! I'll let everybody know
>>> what it
>>> weighs shortly.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> John Lawton
>>> Dunlap, TN
>>> A-245 (Installing the prop today....)
>
> John,
>
> The pixs of the blades are indeed awesome...do you have any specs on
> the twist of them or can you take some measurements before you mount
> them?
>
> Fred
> A194
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Drag Reduction |
| From: | Fred Klein <fklein(at)orcasonline.com> |
On Tuesday, November 29, 2005, at 06:38 AM, TELEDYNMCS(at)aol.com wrote:
>> Stopping the pressure equalization between the
>> upper and lower surfaces of the wings and stab, plus the left and
>> right side of
>> the rudder has been shown to significantly improve sailplane
>> performance.
>> It's puzzling to me that more Europaphiles aren't using these
>> techniques.
>>
>> John Lawton
John,
Can you describe the nature of the gap seals you allude to?
With regard to flap seals, would they be on the top, underside, or on
both wing surfaces?
If on the underside, are you suggesting a closure strip attached to the
wing and tight to the underside of the flap which would flex and slide
along the flap surface when the flaps are lowered?
Would such a strip be taped to the wing, or glued, with the forward
edge faired into the wing surface to mitigate any bump caused by the
thickness off the gap seal strip?
What material would you propose to use for such seals?
Any thoughts on Glenn Crowder's inquiry regarding negative flap
settings?
Fred
A194
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul McAllister" <paul.mcallister(at)qia.net> |
| Subject: | wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
Dave
The interesting thing about moving your battery is that it often ends up a
wash from a weight perspective. The weight of the extra cable is often more
than the amount of weight you have to put in the tail, so your better off
just adding the lead in the back.
Paul
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Andy Silvester" <andy(at)suncoastjabiru.com> |
| Subject: | Sensenich Carbon propellers |
As a dealer for Sensenich, we can offer better-than-retail pricing for
these props. You also might like to know that Sensenich sell a spinner
($160) for the carbon ground - adjustable prop, in 9", 10" and (I think
maybe) other sizes. The prop can't mount a spinner front bulkhead so the
solution has to be one which has a stiff enough backplate to mount the
spinner without other support. Where Customers opt for our Suncoast
Europa cowling, we're now providing a different backplate for our
matching spinner with this prop.
Andy Silvester
Suncoast Sportplanes, Inc.
www.suncoastjabiru.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of gdhetrick
Subject: Re: Europa-List: propellers
John,
A couple of questions concerning your new prop.
1. What was the delivery time?
2. What is the weight?
Looking forward to your in-flight tests as well as temp readings during
taxi.
Regards,
Dale
----- Original Message -----
From: "Fred Klein" <fklein(at)orcasonline.com>
Subject: Re: Europa-List: propellers
>
>
> On Tuesday, November 29, 2005, at 06:38 AM, TELEDYNMCS(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>>> On another note, my Sensenich hollow carbon prop arrived yesterday.
>>> All I
>>> can say is "WOW". The quality is excellent! I'll let everybody know
>>> what it
>>> weighs shortly.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> John Lawton
>>> Dunlap, TN
>>> A-245 (Installing the prop today....)
>
> John,
>
> The pixs of the blades are indeed awesome...do you have any specs on
> the twist of them or can you take some measurements before you mount
> them?
>
> Fred
> A194
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Duncan McFadyean" <ami(at)mcfadyean.freeserve.co.uk> |
| Subject: | Re: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
< simple method of adding weight in the tail.>>
If you have the Classic and the vestiges of the old style tailwheel mount,
then bolt some lead onto that mount using a 1" dia. "railway" bolt.
PFA-approved!
Duncan McF.
----- Original Message -----
From: <Dave_Miller(at)avivacanada.com>
Subject: RE: Europa-List: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?]
>
> Thanks Paul,
>
> I should do the arithmetic and see what it would take to optimise the C of
> G. If adding a few pounds would add a knot or two, then it would be
> worthwhile.
> My battery is on the firewall and I can't see moving it.
> The next question would be, has anyone come up with a safe, secure and
> simple method of adding weight in the tail.
>
>
> Dave A061
>
>
> "Paul McAllister"
> Sent by: owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com
> 11/29/2005 10:52 AM
> Please respond to europa-list
>
>
> To:
> cc:
> Subject: RE: Europa-List: wheel landings [was: Flying a
> heavy Europa XS?]
>
>
>
>
> Dave,
>
> My C o G is on the front of the envelope in my 914 mono. I do know that
> is
> goes noticeably faster when its loaded up with a lot of gear in the back.
> It is also significantly easier to land.
>
> I need 4 pounds in the tail to fix it, but after spending so much care in
> keeping the weigh off I just can't bring myself to add wieght. I might
> move
> the battery further aft one of these days.
>
> Cheers, Paul
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Raimo Toivio" <raimo.toivio(at)rwm.fi> |
| Subject: | Re: Lies, Damned Lies .... and Statistics |
cockpit
> doors departing if the PFI has not been carried out to ensure that the shoot
> bolts are home.,
> Nigel,>
Nigel,
whats PFI?
I am going to install 2 microswitches per door
to tell the shoot bolt position.
Raimo
====
Raimo M W Toivio
OH-XRT #417, 1233 hrs so far
OH-CVK
OH-BLL
37500 Lempaala
Finland
tel + 358 3 3753 777
fax + 358 3 3753 100
gsm + 358 40 590 1450
raimo.toivio(at)rwm.fi
www.rwm.fi
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | NEEL Jean Philippe <jeanphilippeneel(at)yahoo.fr> |
| Subject: | Re: Drag Reduction |
Salut Michel
Il s'agit tout simplement d'appliquer des solutions tres connues dans le monde
du vol voile. Tu peux voir ca sur les planeurs plastiques modernes.
On pose un scotch cot charniere et un joint a levre de l'autre cot pour empecher
une circulation parasite entre l'intrados en pression et l'extra dos en depression.
Cette circulation est generatrice de traine.On peut appliquer ca au aileron
au tab et la derive.
Par contre le faire sur les volets me semble etre une mauvaise ide, car cela
supprimerait l'effet de soufflage du a la fente des volets de l'europa . Ce soufflage
ameliore beaucoup l'efficacit des volets.
En ce qui me concerne je vole depuis le debut avec un scotch cot charniere.
Ne me demande pas combien de Kt ca m'a rapport!
Vole bien
JP
Michel Auvray a crit :
Hello John;
I am inerested by your information concerning laminar flow.
What is your idea to reduce drag?
bientt,
Michel Auvray builder 145, 270 hours fly with my Europa (monowheel)
======= le 29/11/2005, 09:38:52 vous criviez: =======
>
>In a message dated 11/29/2005 2:58:14 AM Eastern Standard Time,
>europa-list-digest(at)matronics.com writes:
>
>
>> So get rid of much of that drag; it need be only relative to
>> a big, even faired bump on the fuselage bottom, and stowed
>> outriggers but in a place where some wing lift suffers.
>> Like laminar flow wheel pants, if one has a way to trust the
>> fairing mfr's sales literature. With laminer flow, fairing
>> drag goes down something like 60%.
>>
>> I've seen a dozen or so flying Europas now and I've been very surprised that
>> no one I've seen is installing flap gap seals and positive seals on the
>> ailerons, rudder and trim tabs. Stopping the pressure equalization between the
>> upper and lower surfaces of the wings and stab, plus the left and right side
of
>> the rudder has been shown to significantly improve sailplane performance.
>> It's puzzling to me that more Europaphiles aren't using these techniques.
>>
>> On another note, my Sensenich hollow carbon prop arrived yesterday. All I
>> can say is "WOW". The quality is excellent! I'll let everybody know what it
>> weighs shortly.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> John Lawton
>> Dunlap, TN
>> A-245 (Installing the prop today....)
>
>
= = = = = = = = = ========= = = = = = = = = =
Michel Auvray
mau11(at)free.fr
29/11/2005
---------------------------------
Tlchargez le ici !
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Duncan McFadyean" <ami(at)mcfadyean.freeserve.co.uk> |
I found a 9+ mph speed increase from fitting spats to 500x5 wheels on my TD.
I got a further 10 mph from leg fairings, but in this instance you have to
bear in mind that the rectangular section gearleg provides about 50 sq. ins
of flat plate area; whereas the tri-gear legs present an elliptical section
to the relative airflow.
Further, the low point of application of undercarriage drag means that an
equal and opposite moment has to be provided by the tailplane, creating more
trim drag. So the effect of the fairings was a win-win benefit.
Have not found anything like as much gain in any other single area of drag
reduction.
Duncan McF.
----- Original Message -----
From: <BEBERRY(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: Europa-List: Hey Guys...
>
>
> Speed Kit,
>
>
> Still no answers! I am fitting my speed kit to my Tri Gear and still
> hoped
> that someone would tell me if I am doing this to gain extra
> performance/better fuel figures , or am I just doing a cosmetic job?
>
> Any more comments?. The correspondence has been interesting and I
> suppose
> that we shall only get subjective points of view on many aspects of the
> aeroplane but the question of whether a speed kit is effective,
> performance wise,
> should be relatively easy to answer - or do I have to wait until I can
> get
> airborne again.?
>
> Please !!!
>
> Patrick
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Duncan McFadyean" <ami(at)mcfadyean.freeserve.co.uk> |
| Subject: | Re: Drag Reduction |
Interestingly, the owner of G-KIMM oiled his TP bearings. The excess oil
formed a nice dribble down the outside of the fuselage. After a flight there
were numerous streaks formed aftwards from the dribble. These streaks showed
disturbed flow close to the underside of the fus./TP junction, indicative of
the leakage and disruption that occurs through this gap, as one would
expect. I haven't heard that anyone came up with an effective way of sealing
this, and wouldn't expect to see it approved in the UK. Although merely
infilling the internal rebate on the root of the TP may discourage flow of
air through this gap; perhaps someone in the US could find out!
Duncan McF.
----- Original Message -----
From: <TELEDYNMCS(at)aol.com>
Subject: Europa-List: Drag Reduction
>
> In a message dated 11/29/2005 2:58:14 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> europa-list-digest(at)matronics.com writes:
>
>
>> So get rid of much of that drag; it need be only relative to
>> a big, even faired bump on the fuselage bottom, and stowed
>> outriggers but in a place where some wing lift suffers.
>> Like laminar flow wheel pants, if one has a way to trust the
>> fairing mfr's sales literature. With laminer flow, fairing
>> drag goes down something like 60%.
>>
>> I've seen a dozen or so flying Europas now and I've been very surprised
>> that
>> no one I've seen is installing flap gap seals and positive seals on the
>> ailerons, rudder and trim tabs. Stopping the pressure equalization
>> between the
>> upper and lower surfaces of the wings and stab, plus the left and right
>> side of
>> the rudder has been shown to significantly improve sailplane performance.
>> It's puzzling to me that more Europaphiles aren't using these techniques.
>>
>> On another note, my Sensenich hollow carbon prop arrived yesterday. All I
>> can say is "WOW". The quality is excellent! I'll let everybody know what
>> it
>> weighs shortly.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> John Lawton
>> Dunlap, TN
>> A-245 (Installing the prop today....)
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "KARL HEINDL" <kheindl(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Drag Reduction |
Fred,
Go to the nearest gliding club to check it out. They will also tell you
where you can buy it.
It is a self-adhesive strip which is attached to the wing, and takes only
minutes to apply. I doubt that it makes any improvement to the Europa, but a
high performance glider is in a different class
in regards to aerodynamics.
Karl
>From: Fred Klein <fklein(at)orcasonline.com>
>Reply-To: europa-list(at)matronics.com
>To: europa-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Europa-List: Drag Reduction
>Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 10:36:26 -0800
>
>
>On Tuesday, November 29, 2005, at 06:38 AM, TELEDYNMCS(at)aol.com wrote:
>
> >> Stopping the pressure equalization between the
> >> upper and lower surfaces of the wings and stab, plus the left and
> >> right side of
> >> the rudder has been shown to significantly improve sailplane
> >> performance.
> >> It's puzzling to me that more Europaphiles aren't using these
> >> techniques.
> >>
> >> John Lawton
>
>John,
>
>Can you describe the nature of the gap seals you allude to?
>With regard to flap seals, would they be on the top, underside, or on
>both wing surfaces?
>If on the underside, are you suggesting a closure strip attached to the
>wing and tight to the underside of the flap which would flex and slide
>along the flap surface when the flaps are lowered?
>Would such a strip be taped to the wing, or glued, with the forward
>edge faired into the wing surface to mitigate any bump caused by the
>thickness off the gap seal strip?
>What material would you propose to use for such seals?
>
>Any thoughts on Glenn Crowder's inquiry regarding negative flap
>settings?
>
>Fred
>A194
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rowland Carson <rowil(at)clara.net> |
| Subject: | woodcomp/kremen props [was: conventional gear] |
>and Bryan Allsop
DOH! and he's only had 3 articles in the Europa Flyer about it ...
thanks, Bob, for waking me up.
Jack - Bryan's engine is a 912S - see EF for his contact details.
regards
Rowland
--
| Rowland Carson (retiring) Europa Club Membership Secretary - email for info!
| Europa 435 G-ROWI (750 hours building) PFA #16532
| e-mail website
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cliff Shaw" <flyinggpa(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
Dave
Kim Prout put me on to a slick way to add weight to the Europa tail. He showed
me a short section of pipe of brass rod that was sized just right. He pulled
off his TPs and slipped this weighted pipe inside the tube that the TPs mount
on.
I did this with an alum pipe filled with melted tire weights. I made two 5.5 lb
pipes and moved my CG one inch aft. I am now fly this way and think that it
is easier to land.
Cliff Shaw
1041 Euclid ave.
Edmonds, WA 98020
425 776 5555
http://www.europaowners.org/WileE
The next question would be, has anyone come up with a safe, secure and
simple method of adding weight in the tail.
Dave A061
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Hey Guys...Speaking of drag... |
| From: | "Terry Seaver (terrys)" <terrys(at)cisco.com> |
No one has said anything about the XS cowl. I would bet that is where
the most improvement in drag reduction could be made. Besides having
rather poor cooling characteristics, I believe it has rather bad
aerodynamics. For example;
1) After very carefully fairing our monowheel in, we found no
improvement in cruise speed. We suspect because the lower cowl is
messing up the air so badly in front of the main gear (mono-wheel).
2) In a recent magazine article on a mono-wheeled motor glider, they
said they measured no difference in glide ratio, gear-up vs gear-down,
again, I suspect because the lower cowl is producing copious amounts of
turbulence in front of the gear.
Just my $.02,
Terry Seaver
A135 / N135TD
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Duncan
McFadyean
Subject: Re: Europa-List: Hey Guys...
-->
I found a 9+ mph speed increase from fitting spats to 500x5 wheels on my
TD.
I got a further 10 mph from leg fairings, but in this instance you have
to bear in mind that the rectangular section gearleg provides about 50
sq. ins of flat plate area; whereas the tri-gear legs present an
elliptical section to the relative airflow.
Further, the low point of application of undercarriage drag means that
an equal and opposite moment has to be provided by the tailplane,
creating more trim drag. So the effect of the fairings was a win-win
benefit.
Have not found anything like as much gain in any other single area of
drag reduction.
Duncan McF.
----- Original Message -----
From: <BEBERRY(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: Europa-List: Hey Guys...
>
>
> Speed Kit,
>
>
> Still no answers! I am fitting my speed kit to my Tri Gear and still
> hoped
> that someone would tell me if I am doing this to gain extra
> performance/better fuel figures , or am I just doing a cosmetic job?
>
> Any more comments?. The correspondence has been interesting and I
> suppose
> that we shall only get subjective points of view on many aspects of
the
> aeroplane but the question of whether a speed kit is effective,
> performance wise,
> should be relatively easy to answer - or do I have to wait until I
can
> get
> airborne again.?
>
> Please !!!
>
> Patrick
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Received-SPF: pass (congo.terra.com.br: domain of terra.com.br designates 200.176.10.2
as permitted sender) client-ip=200.176.10.2; envelope-from=kaarsber(at)terra.com.br;
helo=terra.com.br;
(authenticated user kaarsber)
| From: | Alexander Kaarsberg <kaarsber(at)terra.com.br> |
| Subject: | Battery location |
Has anybody ever considered putting the battery under the center console
in the trigear?
I was thinking of a sleigh-type arrangement for the battery with a trim
handle input to it, could kill a few birds with one stone...(?)
It would obviously need some extra strength in the area to support the
weight, but could be worth some work.
Alex, kit 529
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jeff B <topglock(at)cox.net> |
Patrick,
I got a 6kt gain in cruise and it looks a hell of a lot better... Sexy,
it has been called, on many occasions...
Jeff - N55XS
110 hrs
BEBERRY(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>
>
> Speed Kit,
>
>
> Still no answers! I am fitting my speed kit to my Tri Gear and still hoped
> that someone would tell me if I am doing this to gain extra
> performance/better fuel figures , or am I just doing a cosmetic job?
>
> Any more comments?. The correspondence has been interesting and I suppose
> that we shall only get subjective points of view on many aspects of the
> aeroplane but the question of whether a speed kit is effective, performance
wise,
> should be relatively easy to answer - or do I have to wait until I can get
> airborne again.?
>
> Please !!!
>
> Patrick
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cliff Shaw" <flyinggpa(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Drag Reduction |
Fred
I found help looking at pages like this.
http://www.wingsandwheels.com/textindex.htm
After building as careful as I could, I decided that gap seals on the ailerons
would not be of much help. My fit is very close and works smoothly.
Now on your rudder you might need some help if you don't use a 48" hinge like I
did. On the flaps, I think something might help, but remember they are slotted
/fowler flaps and must vent air when deployed. The gap seal would only be active
when the flaps are up and mine fit nearly as tight as my ailerons. I have
not installed any glider type gap seals.
A note here, I did close-out all the ends of my control surfaces smoothly fining
in the void after the regular close-out. I think this makes for less air turbulence
spilling over the end of the surfaces. Also I made a smooth faring from
my flaps to the fuselage. I would build it a bit bigger and a little differently
if I were to do it again.
I know your guys in the UK have a devil of a time making these kinds of mods to
your Europas, but us in the left side have still some latitude to "experiment".
I love building, only if my wife would let me do anothere one :) !
Cliff Shaw
1041 Euclid ave.
Edmonds, WA 98020
425 776 5555
http://www.europaowners.org/WileE
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Duncan McFadyean" <ami(at)mcfadyean.freeserve.co.uk> |
| Subject: | Re: Hey Guys...Speaking of drag... |
Regarding point 2,.... not necessarily so.
According to research reported in NACA Paper no ** (haven't got no. to hand
currently, but will find if you're interested), the amount by which the
monowheel retracts (i.e. with 1/2 to 1/3 still hanging out) provides
insignificant drag reduction. Added to which there is probably a lot of drag
caused by circulation of air in the wheel well, although your fairing (if
also well sealed around the edges of the wheel) had no benefit.
Duncan McF.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Terry Seaver (terrys)" <terrys(at)cisco.com>
Subject: RE: Europa-List: Hey Guys...Speaking of drag...
>
>
> No one has said anything about the XS cowl. I would bet that is where
> the most improvement in drag reduction could be made. Besides having
> rather poor cooling characteristics, I believe it has rather bad
> aerodynamics. For example;
>
> 1) After very carefully fairing our monowheel in, we found no
> improvement in cruise speed. We suspect because the lower cowl is
> messing up the air so badly in front of the main gear (mono-wheel).
>
> 2) In a recent magazine article on a mono-wheeled motor glider, they
> said they measured no difference in glide ratio, gear-up vs gear-down,
> again, I suspect because the lower cowl is producing copious amounts of
> turbulence in front of the gear.
>
> Just my $.02,
> Terry Seaver
> A135 / N135TD
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Duncan
> McFadyean
> To: europa-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Europa-List: Hey Guys...
>
> -->
>
> I found a 9+ mph speed increase from fitting spats to 500x5 wheels on my
> TD.
> I got a further 10 mph from leg fairings, but in this instance you have
> to bear in mind that the rectangular section gearleg provides about 50
> sq. ins of flat plate area; whereas the tri-gear legs present an
> elliptical section to the relative airflow.
>
> Further, the low point of application of undercarriage drag means that
> an equal and opposite moment has to be provided by the tailplane,
> creating more trim drag. So the effect of the fairings was a win-win
> benefit.
>
> Have not found anything like as much gain in any other single area of
> drag reduction.
>
>
> Duncan McF.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <BEBERRY(at)aol.com>
> To:
> Subject: Re: Europa-List: Hey Guys...
>
>
>>
>>
>> Speed Kit,
>>
>>
>> Still no answers! I am fitting my speed kit to my Tri Gear and still
>
>> hoped
>> that someone would tell me if I am doing this to gain extra
>> performance/better fuel figures , or am I just doing a cosmetic job?
>>
>> Any more comments?. The correspondence has been interesting and I
>> suppose
>> that we shall only get subjective points of view on many aspects of
> the
>> aeroplane but the question of whether a speed kit is effective,
>> performance wise,
>> should be relatively easy to answer - or do I have to wait until I
> can
>> get
>> airborne again.?
>>
>> Please !!!
>>
>> Patrick
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cliff Shaw" <flyinggpa(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Hey Guys...Speaking of drag... |
Terry
I sometimes don't agree with you Terry, but on this cowling thing, I second your
guess. Maybe that is what I will work on next ?! :)
Cliff Shaw
1041 Euclid ave.
Edmonds, WA 98020
425 776 5555
http://www.europaowners.org/WileE
No one has said anything about the XS cowl. I would bet that is where
the most improvement in drag reduction could be made.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <beecho(at)beecho.org> |
| Subject: | wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
Cliff
"I did this with an alum pipe filled with melted tire weights. I made two
5.5 lb pipes and moved my CG one inch aft. I am now fly this way and think
that it is easier to land. "
Perhaps that is why your speed is the same with the nose drag as it was with
the tail wheel?
Tom
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Cliff Shaw
Subject: Re: Europa-List: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?]
Dave
Kim Prout put me on to a slick way to add weight to the Europa tail. He
showed me a short section of pipe of brass rod that was sized just right. He
pulled off his TPs and slipped this weighted pipe inside the tube that the
TPs mount on.
I did this with an alum pipe filled with melted tire weights. I made two
5.5 lb pipes and moved my CG one inch aft. I am now fly this way and think
that it is easier to land.
Cliff Shaw
1041 Euclid ave.
Edmonds, WA 98020
425 776 5555
http://www.europaowners.org/WileE
The next question would be, has anyone come up with a safe, secure and
simple method of adding weight in the tail.
Dave A061
--
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Steve Hagar" <hagargs(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?] |
If you are adding weight back there make it something useful. If you have
a taildragger put on a beefier tailwheel. If you have a 914 put an oxygen
bottle back there.
Steve Hagar
hagargs(at)earthlink.net
> [Original Message]
> From: <Dave_Miller(at)avivacanada.com>
> To:
> Date: 11/29/2005 9:48:10 AM
> Subject: RE: Europa-List: wheel landings [was: Flying a heavy Europa XS?]
>
>
> Thanks Paul,
>
> I should do the arithmetic and see what it would take to optimise the C
of
> G. If adding a few pounds would add a knot or two, then it would be
> worthwhile.
> My battery is on the firewall and I can't see moving it.
> The next question would be, has anyone come up with a safe, secure and
> simple method of adding weight in the tail.
>
>
> Dave A061
>
>
> "Paul McAllister"
> Sent by: owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com
> 11/29/2005 10:52 AM
> Please respond to europa-list
>
>
> To:
> cc:
> Subject: RE: Europa-List: wheel landings [was: Flying a
heavy Europa XS?]
>
>
>
>
> Dave,
>
> My C o G is on the front of the envelope in my 914 mono. I do know that
> is
> goes noticeably faster when its loaded up with a lot of gear in the back.
> It is also significantly easier to land.
>
> I need 4 pounds in the tail to fix it, but after spending so much care in
> keeping the weigh off I just can't bring myself to add wieght. I might
> move
> the battery further aft one of these days.
>
> Cheers, Paul
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Hey Guys...Speaking of drag... |
| From: | Fred Klein <fklein(at)orcasonline.com> |
For a very slick cowl and mono fairing, see Europa Photoshare, Oct. 23,
2004, a pix of Alex Bowman's ship...his cowl was made from a production
quality mould. I'll post some more pix later this evening detailing his
wheel fairing and showing some frontal views. The cowl has been
specifically designed to minimize cooling drag and IMHO is a beauty to
boot.
Fred
A194
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Hey Guys...Speaking of drag... |
| From: | Fred Klein <fklein(at)orcasonline.com> |
I've just sent six pixs of Bowman's cowling, cooling, and (almost)
fully enclosed mono fairing to the matronics "Europa-list" photoshare.
As I mentioned, he's paid particular attention to cowling aerodynamics
and cooling drag to which he credits much of his ability to climb out
of 2,000 feet w/ two on board at "over 200 mph". Unfortunately, I don't
have more specific information (like rate of climb, ATP, etc.) for this
performance anecdote, but I've talked w/ Alex at length and he's not
the kind of guy to exaggerate or aggrandize...he is after all a retired
RCAF senior test pilot; I do have some performance data he gave me back
at Arlington/EAA, 2004 if anyone's interested. He also, of course, has
the 130 hp Honda-based engine.
Fred
A194
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michel Auvray" <mau11(at)free.fr> |
| Subject: | Re: woodcomp/kremen props [was: conventional gear] |
Bonjour Rowland,
I use a SR2000 on my aircraft since 9 month the result is good.
But the problem in France is French civil aviation administration (DGAC) they recognize
only the kit manufacturer not the PFA.
To day this propeller is not recognize by Europa because they sales Airmaster propeller,
and the company do not give a letter to the French administration to
use the woodcomp propeller, and to day we are grounded with this propeller.
In France many ultralight aircraft use this propeller with 912. Sames engine same
propeller.
But with Europa aircraft is no authorised for the reason explained on top.
What solution do we have?
I think this attitude is a high brakes and contrary the sales of many kits aircraft.
Now mainly of the customers buy ultralight aircraft. The sales exploded in France
mainly for the non open attitude of kit manufacturers in accordance with aviation
administration.
Personnally I am satisfied of my aircraft, but my next aircraft is not Europa for
this attitude.
bientt,
Michel AUVRAY
Builder N145 "F-PFGT"
======= le 28/11/2005, 22:12:00 vous criviez: =======
>
>
>>Are you able (and willing) to mail me a survey of the Europa's that
>>are flying with a 912S Rotax engine and a Woodcomp (or Kremen)
>>propeller type SR 200 (3 blades)
>
>I have sent a fuller response direct to Jack. As far as I know, the
>only Europas that have flown with any type of Kremen/Woodcomp
>propellers are:
>
>F-PSLY 912
>G-XSDJ 914
>HB-YIE 912S
>OK-EUR 914
>
>(I just remembered that Tim Houlihan's G-BZTH with a 912 is getting
>one fitted, but not sure if it has flown or been cleared for flight
>with it yet.)
>
>In addition to Jack, builders 402, 438, 486, 529, 556, A064, A061 all
>plan to fit Kremen/Woodcomp props of some type.
>
>If anyone knows of any other Europas fitted with Kremen/Woodcomp
>props, please let us know!
>
>regards
>
>Rowland
>--
>| Rowland Carson (retiring) Europa Club Membership Secretary - email for info!
>| Europa 435 G-ROWI (750 hours building) PFA #16532
>| e-mail website
>
>
= = = = = = = = = ========= = = = = = = = = =
Michel Auvray
mau11(at)free.fr
30/11/2005
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michel Auvray" <mau11(at)free.fr> |
| Subject: | Re: Drag Reduction |
Bonjour NEEL Jean Philippe,
bientt,
======= le 29/11/2005, 21:50:58 vous criviez: =======
>
>Salut Michel
> Il s'agit tout simplement d'appliquer des solutions tres connues dans le monde
du vol voile. Tu peux voir ca sur les planeurs plastiques modernes.
>On pose un scotch cot charniere et un joint a levre de l'autre cot pour empecher
une circulation parasite entre l'intrados en pression et l'extra dos en depression.
Cette circulation est generatrice de traine.On peut appliquer ca au aileron
au tab et la derive.
> Par contre le faire sur les volets me semble etre une mauvaise ide, car cela
supprimerait l'effet de soufflage du a la fente des volets de l'europa . Ce soufflage
ameliore beaucoup l'efficacit des volets.
> En ce qui me concerne je vole depuis le debut avec un scotch cot charniere.
> Ne me demande pas combien de Kt ca m'a rapport!
> Vole bien
> JP
>Michel Auvray a crit :
>
>Hello John;
>I am inerested by your information concerning laminar flow.
>What is your idea to reduce drag?
>
>bientt,
>Michel Auvray builder 145, 270 hours fly with my Europa (monowheel)
>
>======= le 29/11/2005, 09:38:52 vous criviez: =======
>
>>
>>In a message dated 11/29/2005 2:58:14 AM Eastern Standard Time,
>>europa-list-digest(at)matronics.com writes:
>>
>>
>>> So get rid of much of that drag; it need be only relative to
>>> a big, even faired bump on the fuselage bottom, and stowed
>>> outriggers but in a place where some wing lift suffers.
>>> Like laminar flow wheel pants, if one has a way to trust the
>>> fairing mfr's sales literature. With laminer flow, fairing
>>> drag goes down something like 60%.
>>>
>>> I've seen a dozen or so flying Europas now and I've been very surprised that
>>> no one I've seen is installing flap gap seals and positive seals on the
>>> ailerons, rudder and trim tabs. Stopping the pressure equalization between
the
>>> upper and lower surfaces of the wings and stab, plus the left and right side
of
>>> the rudder has been shown to significantly improve sailplane performance.
>>> It's puzzling to me that more Europaphiles aren't using these techniques.
>>>
>>> On another note, my Sensenich hollow carbon prop arrived yesterday. All I
>>> can say is "WOW". The quality is excellent! I'll let everybody know what it
>>> weighs shortly.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> John Lawton
>>> Dunlap, TN
>>> A-245 (Installing the prop today....)
>>
>>
>
>= = = = = = = = = ========= = = = = = = = = =
>Michel Auvray
>mau11(at)free.fr
>29/11/2005
>
>
>
>---------------------------------
> Tlchargez le ici !
>
>
= = = = = = = = = ========= = = = = = = = = =
Michel Auvray
mau11(at)free.fr
30/11/2005
________________________________________________________________________________
Hi Jeff,
The answers I have had vary from a 6 knot to a 9 knot gain. Not quite the
10 that the manufacturers but encouraging.
Thanks. Patrick
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Hey Guys...Speaking of drag... |
Recent correspondence on drag seems to indicate that the only significant
improvement (after speed kit for the Tri Gear) would be a mod to the lower
engine cowling. Has anyone any suggestions about method?
Patrick (Classic)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Hey Guys...Speaking of drag... |
| From: | Dave_Miller(at)avivacanada.com |
11/30/2005 09:03:28 AM,
Serialize complete at 11/30/2005 09:03:28 AM
Terry,
Chris Staines re-worked his 914 mono cowl last winter.
Moved the "chin" back to just in front of the radiator and cut down the
size a bit. Also cleaned up the outflow area at the rear of the cowl.
As the cowling is now closer to the muffler and exhaust pipes he had to
add some reflective heat shield material to the inside of the cowl.
Looks neat, sort of Mustang like and seems to have improved cooling.
As to speed, Chris thinks he has picked up 1 or 2 knots, really hard to
measure as so many things come into play.
It is a lot of work for a small gain.
Dave
"Terry Seaver (terrys)"
Sent by: owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com
11/29/2005 06:16 PM
Please respond to europa-list
To:
cc:
Subject: RE: Europa-List: Hey Guys...Speaking of drag...
No one has said anything about the XS cowl.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "R.C.Harrison" <ptag.dev(at)tiscali.co.uk> |
Hi! Cliff/Fred/all
I extended my flaps and faired them to fit the fuselage with a close out
when flaps are up.
I also included a tapered guide tube to direct the flap drive on to the
pin automatically for single man rigging. See:-
http://www.crixbinfield.freeserve.co.uk/europa.htm
Click on "Bob Harrison's Europa G-PTAG and scroll to "Flap slot covers".
Regards
Bob Harrison G-PTAG Europa MKI/Jabiru 3300
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Cliff Shaw
Subject: Re: Europa-List: Drag Reduction
Fred
I found help looking at pages like this.
http://www.wingsandwheels.com/textindex.htm
After building as careful as I could, I decided that gap seals on the
ailerons would not be of much help. My fit is very close and works
smoothly.
Now on your rudder you might need some help if you don't use a 48" hinge
like I did. On the flaps, I think something might help, but remember
they are slotted /fowler flaps and must vent air when deployed. The gap
seal would only be active when the flaps are up and mine fit nearly as
tight as my ailerons. I have not installed any glider type gap seals.
A note here, I did close-out all the ends of my control surfaces
smoothly fining in the void after the regular close-out. I think this
makes for less air turbulence spilling over the end of the surfaces.
Also I made a smooth faring from my flaps to the fuselage. I would build
it a bit bigger and a little differently if I were to do it again.
I know your guys in the UK have a devil of a time making these kinds of
mods to your Europas, but us in the left side have still some latitude
to "experiment". I love building, only if my wife would let me do
anothere one :) !
Cliff Shaw
1041 Euclid ave.
Edmonds, WA 98020
425 776 5555
http://www.europaowners.org/WileE
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "R.C.Harrison" <ptag.dev(at)tiscali.co.uk> |
| Subject: | woodcomp/kremen props [was: conventional gear] |
Hi! Michel.
I REALLY don't think you are entitled to decry Europa for promoting the
propeller of their choice. Would you "shoot yourself in the foot"?
Seems to me that your own authority has it's head up it's anus.
You should make an approach to Kremen and and get the French Authorities
November 20, 2005 - November 30, 2005
Europa-Archive.digest.vol-fb