chris64 Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 I want to learn about the long eze. Where do I start? Is there a link or book that you can recommend? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fishla Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 It's my dream too! Check this out: The Long EZ Build: The Long EZ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiwi303 Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 Join the Canard Forum. There's a whle forum for Open-EZ and related design builders/owners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yenn Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 Never flown one nor in one and know next to nothing about them. The one thing that sticks in my memory is the sick look on Freds face after he landed a long EZ at a Bundaberg fly in in about 20kts cross wind. They have a rudder on each vertical fin, but it only goes outward, hence not so effective as some normal type planes. Very fast and cozy. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rgmwa Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 This may be helpful: Pirep: Rutan LongEze rgmwa 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bexrbetter Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 I you were considering building one then I would first review the build times that are somewhat extensive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AussieB1rd Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 There were two at Gayndah on the weekend, we gave a hand to push them over to the fuel bowser where they dropped the front wheel down, I hear they are very quick and have a long range, not my cup of tea though. Very sleek. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 Long runway required. Good in theory. Efficient in flight. Not my cup of tea. Prefer more conventional, but better designed than average. Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fishla Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 Well, Chris64, what do you think so far? It's 5 years to build one (maybe more - there are builders blogs that haven't finished yet after 5 years). You need to be careful about a warm building area. Material is available but the expoxy a little expensive in Australia and it's hard to import. Plans don't technically exist anymore but the Open EZ templates and the original manuals can be found on the Internet which is everything you need. There are people who still make and sell bits and pieces for it online in the USA. You can even buy CNC'd wings and canard foam cut outs which would save some time... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
408059 Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 Chris I have a Varieze, an earlier Rutan variant to the Longez. I've not had it long and I am still getting to know it idiosyncrasies. The Longez has a longer range, better payload and arguably not as good looking as the Varieze. As a general impression, canard aircraft are different to fly. Not harder but different. The biggest issue I have with my Varieze is seeing around the canard to spot land on a 10 foot wide bitumen strip that is 2,500 feet long. This is my home strip. Oval circuits and fast approach speed, (when I can see around the canard wing) is my solution. I have flown many taildraggers, such as the Pitts Special, and the challenge is about the same in seeing what is in front of you. The Varieze spends a long time on the ground before it gets airborne and consumes a lot of the strip on landing. It is not a short field aircraft and prefers bitumen to grass. The same applies to the Longez although the Longez will cope with grass if it has 5 inch wheels. In terms of performance, the Varieze cruises around 130 knots @ 6,500' (using a 100hp continental), circuit and approach speed is around 80 knots (although minimum speed is less than 45 knots) and I use 2/3 of the strip (1800') to get airborne and land. The Longez will do better if the engine is larger. The Varieze is slippery and uses an air-brake to help control the glide-path for a landing. If you have flown a variety of aircraft and have some gliding experience the transition should be easy. In fact, I ended up transitioning myself after research and discussions with the CFI. Steve 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fly_tornado Posted June 17, 2016 Share Posted June 17, 2016 save you a lot of work BARNSTORMERS.COM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Downunder Posted June 19, 2016 Share Posted June 19, 2016 There's a long or varieze at the back of my hangar for sale I believe. Owner fly's it regularly........ seems to go OK, but not my cup of tea........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bexrbetter Posted June 19, 2016 Share Posted June 19, 2016 Oval circuits and fast approach speed, (when I can see around the canard wing) is my solution. I have flown many taildraggers, such as the Pitts Special, and the challenge is about the same in seeing what is in front of you. For goodness sakes, it's 2016, go out and buy a $20 reversing camera so you can see where you're going. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skeptic36 Posted June 19, 2016 Share Posted June 19, 2016 For goodness sakes, it's 2016, go out and buy a $20 reversing camera so you can see where you're going. They might look like they're going backwards. But they actually use an ingenious device called a pusher prop which makes it appear that they are going backwards....... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobody Posted June 20, 2016 Share Posted June 20, 2016 Watch out if you fly in the rain as the canard.loses lift when it gets wet. That was a "feature" of the early airfoil chosen for the canard. The airfoil had good lift and drag properties when the flow was laminar but when the rain was on the surface it caused the flow to trip to turbulent. In the turbulent regime the foil had a lot less lift. The "Roncz" canard was developed to maintain lift in the turbulent flow and avoid this issue. Almost all Long EZE's would be the new foil shape. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgpete Posted July 6, 2016 Share Posted July 6, 2016 e-Go Aeroplanes - Welcome Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaba-who Posted July 6, 2016 Share Posted July 6, 2016 Only flown as passenger in one. We have a guy in our flying group has one ( actually it's his second). Took him over ten years to build ( but he's a perfectionist and essentially rebuilt it and painted it 3 times before he was happy. ( but it's won numerous awards for best aircraft at shows etc) but the point is if you're going to build it expect it to take you a long time. Some other thoughts - he can't go everywhere we go on a lot of the trips - small wheels don't do well on anything but the smoothest of gravel with only very small size stones and he won't land on many grass strips. Pusher prop has been minor dinged several times from stones thrown up by the wheels. Passenger essentially can't see a thing. The wings block all view downward and you can only see a small triangle down and forward way out to the side. No room for anything much apart from people. His first one had some baggage area in the wing root -accessed from in the passenger seat. But was still fairly minimal compared to most 2 seater aircraft. His second he made the space even smaller by filling in part with extended fuel tanks. So his trips are extremely travel-light. In its favour. It goes like the clappers! I think he cruises at 160 knots and it burns about 17 litres a minute at altitude and cruise. I think he has about 8 hours endurance. In his first he could fly Cairns to Melbourne non-stop with 45 minutes holding. Has a pee tube for the necessities. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mnewbery Posted July 6, 2016 Share Posted July 6, 2016 17 litres a minute About 1350 pounds per hour. About twice the consumption of a Citation Mustang *joke* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted July 7, 2016 Share Posted July 7, 2016 Slight error minute/hour . We know what you meant Jaba. Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old man emu Posted July 7, 2016 Share Posted July 7, 2016 Watch out if you fly in the rain as the canard.loses lift when it gets wet. Then how did the comment about rainy days (Good weather for ducks) come about? If a canard loses lift when wet, then on rainy days ducks would walk. (The term “canard” arose from the appearance of the Santos-Dumont 14-bis of 1906, which was said to be reminiscent of a duck (canard in French) with its neck stretched out in flight.) OME Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted July 7, 2016 Share Posted July 7, 2016 The real reason is "water off a ducks back", as they fly OILY and later in the day too. Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaba-who Posted July 7, 2016 Share Posted July 7, 2016 About 1350 pounds per hour. About twice the consumption of a Citation Mustang *joke* Oops!! His only problem is getting an inflight tanker when he needs it 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poteroo Posted July 8, 2016 Share Posted July 8, 2016 I want to learn about the long eze. Where do I start? Is there a link or book that you can recommend? For the best all-round combination of strength, safety,speed, STOL, economy and comfort - you just can't beat a VANS RV6/6A, RV7/7A,RV9/9A,RV12,RV14 series. I've flown and instructed in them all except the 14. I'm biased because that's been my own choice, (RV6-1996, RV9A-2008), but they now number some 9000 flying and most of the 'experimental' bugs have long since been rectified - look at how short the AD and SB listing is. If you buy or build something 'unusual', it will likely become more difficult to maintain, and later on, to sell - because of its' 'orphan' status. The same argument can be run for cars and boats I guess. happy days, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted July 8, 2016 Share Posted July 8, 2016 They are a quality Kit and always have been. I think they could be "cleaner" aerodynamically , and quieter engine wise, (Soundproofing). I worry about turning over on the ground and exiting the remains, so I would prefer a tailwheel hi wing, myself. Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now