Again you demonstrate the Rutan design reigns supreme for flight characteristics and safety. And, yes, I was enticed by the description by saying you would spin it, you foolster! Got me interested immediately. I've been in aviation for over 50 years and was at OSH when Bert introduced his Cozy and other canards. Interestingly, I was in the audience there when he demonstrated the strength of the canard at a seminar by having an audience member (me at just over 200 lbs) stand on supported one. Very impressive at the time and memorable, indeed. Great video! Nice Cozy, Too!!
That's not the whole story, this design comes with notable tradeoffs: A maximum front seat weight that limits who can sit up front, because that canard has to carry a substantial part of the plane's weight. Scott mentions the ballast.... if you don't manage your CG carefully in this airplane very, very bad things can happen. It's possible to "deep stall", which is not recoverable (if you're not some right-stuff test pilot).. this basically means straight up plummeting to the ground. I love the cozy design, I like this safety feature. But there are definitely downsides.
@@Chatsu8oit’s not really plummeting. A deep stall in a Cozy or LongEZ is (nearly) unrecoverable indeed, however it’s descent rate in a deep stall is very low, comparable to an airplane under CAPS parachute. Survivability is relatively high.
@@MegaDada1995with canard stalls there are no departures from controlled flight. The title was click bait. A deep stall CAN occur if the aircraft is loaded way aft of CG. I have over 2000 hrs in canards. Mostly the Defiant
@@johnsteichen5239 A deep stall is by definition a departure from controlled flight, otherwise. My point was that in the instances of deep stalls we've seen from Cozys and LongEZs, the descent rate was usually low enough for there to be a relatively high probability of surviving impact (even though the aircraft will be total-loss). I assume a Varieze would be similar in this characteristic.
- That does indeed look like fun. Impressive that such a relatively small machine can get you so high up in the air. Must be a great feeling of freedom. Very enjoyable and educational video !
A local pilot set the South African single piston altitude record in a Cozy. I think it was just around 30k ft. It is extremely cold and uncomfortable. But it's entirely possible.
thanks for demonstrating this. 19:04 I watch your videos for this kind of hard-hitting content: "airplanes are fun." 27:50 thanks for the tour. I remember visiting in 2008 when Hurricane Ike hit, and then motorcycling along the next day and seeing a bunch of cars floating in the middle of the interstate.
Hi, I do not miss any of your videos and I love the information you pass us. If you love flying you,ll find out that following an experimented pilot always pays in the end. More important is to follow good people, those who give their opinions within a positive moral frame. In fact you may be proud of your loyalty to your principles and to your points of view. Thanks for being loyal yo your beliefs. Mário following you from Lisbon, Portugal.
7:06 During my Introduction to Aircraft Engineering courses I was corrected on this: The wing still produces lift when stalled, just not enough. It won't stop producing lift completely!
Correct. The critical angle of attack is the Angle of Attack with the highest lift coefficient. Slightly exceeding it he wing will still be producing a lot of lift, but also a ton of drag (quickly pulling you deeper into the wrong side of the lift curve).
@@crazymonkeyVII actually I really appreciate how visible this is by how the nose stays up and the aircraft keeps climbing even though the canard is technically stalling. Engineering is awesome, seeing it in practice is even better.
@@MegaDada1995 I don't think that's quite why he can still climb while the canard is stalling. The main wing produces the most lift and that one is supposedly never stalling whatsoever. I do agree with you that engineering is awesome though!
@@crazymonkeyVII a canard is nearly stall-proof because once the peak of lift production of the canard is passed, the canard will sink and thus decrease angle of attack. The canard may be stalled but it’s still very very close to the peak lift generation… Generating a lot of lift, albeit with increased drag. The main wing of course will also be near peak Cl but on the other side of the curve. However, if it were just the main wing generating a ton of lift and the canard generating very little, the nose would simply drop and neither would generate much lift.
I had built a Canard pusher airplane, electrified. and it had exactly those characteristics. It followed the elevator without problems including loopings, but when you SLOWLY pulled all the way through, the nose went up, but then went to a stable slight sink with elevator full way through. The guy who had designed it had ensuired that in the design, while the wing airfoil was half-symmetric, the canard had lots of camber, had a concave underside. More camber ensures that the canard stalls first, so that the nose that is too far up comes down again (and the airflow on the canard reattaches) Would the wing stall first, that would be a deathtrap. The wing BEHIND the center of gravity loses lift, the rear drops down, but the canard stays up. About the worst that can happen. A conventional plane has the wing BEFORE the center of gravity, so the nose drops and the lift from the elevator rotates the nose down, reduces the angle of attack - exactly what is required. I did not fly it often, we are pretty restricted where we can fly here in Germany, and due to the pusher layout the propeller slashing through the high/low pressure region directly behind the wing is was almost as loud as a combustion engine.
I’ve always thought the Beechcraft Starship was one of if not the most innovative design in GA ever. They installed vortex generators and other aerodynamic additions to make the aircraft much safer. I’ve actually been privileged enough to get to fly in a few. What a beautiful airplane that was way ahead of its time. It also flies beautifully. Their failure with it was that it was too expensive and a complies design that pilots were very unsure of. The Cozy looks like it would be a lot of fun with a turboprop behind it.
A turboprop with the power required for a Cozy would be extremely lightweight...which would throw off the C/G. It would have to stick out much farther. You'd also lose a lot of usable load because you'd need much bigger fuel tanks to feed that thirsty turbine. You can't get a Cozy much past 220 KIAS without significant flutter issues (Vne on mine is 190 KIAS) so you'd need a lot of engineering and redesign to make use of a larger, more powerful turbine. What you WOULD get from it is lots of performance up high...but you'd need some cabin heat and oxygen!
@@CanardBoulevard Makes perfect sense, I just thought it might have been cool with one. Knowing me I’d pull a Mike Patey and completely modify it for fun. Wondering could you get away with a 300 horsepower engine or build the stock engine to accept a Turbo Charger.
As long as the fan in the back continues to keep the pilot cool all is good! But if the fan fails then sadly as John Denver found out, you’ll probably be coming back down backwards. I do love the D. Rutan designs though! But they do look weird “grazing”! 😂 Nice flight!
Canards are great little planes as long as you don't make a mistake with your cg. If you want to see your canard aircraft spin like a top, load it with an aft cg and do the same demonstration again. In some aircraft this can be as simple as sliding the seat rearward and putting a heavy pilot at the controls.
Yes, I was! I stopped there on the way home from Kentucky to wait out some weather that was passing over my home airport. I figured I'd stop at an airport with a nice FBO. :)
I like this video. Seems the Canard is a very forgiving airplane, if ya know the basics. Also notice the control stick is on the left, seems odd, but maybe not.
It is very forgiving...and it didn't take much to get used to the stick on the left - I usually fly with my left hand on a typical control yoke anyway!
Oh my God, I've been familiar with Co-ez for years. I thought I was going to build one in my twenties, and as far as Cleveland goes the only thing I know is Lincoln electric and they burned the river.
The Dynon AP occasionally has a mind of its own, likely operator error. ;-) Usually punching enough buttons beats it into submission. ATC in the DFW area occasionally routes folks in less than optimal routes, so often I'll fly VFR under the Bravo, but monitor local towers and ATC and rock my wings when ATC calls me out to other aircraft.
I recently had ATC issue me a climb...but I don't think they realized how fast I climb. I realized with only about 50 feet left that I was about to punch up into the Bravo, I grabbed the stick and levelled off...then gave them a call and they quickly cleared me in.
@@CanardBoulevard I had a tower call me as I was transitioning that she "wanted to hold on to me for a bit". I advised that I was landing at T67, ETA was less than a couple of minutes and I needed to make calls. I was buzzing past the tower above pattern altitude at 200 mph. She replied "frequency change approved"! lol
Medina !!! Wow.... I grew up and learned how to fly in Ohio more Southeastern Ohio but I went to college in northeastern Ohio Portage County Geauga County Kent State Akron Fulton :)
Nice flight! I enjoyed the view of downtown Cleveland. Is that the stadium where the Packers and Browns will be playing in the Pre-season on Aug. 10th? I wish there was a way for me to see your SD card flight data log for this flight. I could tell you why the autopilot was doing what it was doing. This autopilot is never in the wrong, just operator error in using the modes. I have been flying with it for over 12 years.
Looks like a really nice-flying airplane. The prop and engine noise is in the back. And, if flown correctly, they're very safe. I still can't believe that John Denver managed to kill himself in a VariEze. He should have just ditched it in the ocean instead of trying to switch fuel tanks.
Okay I know they are all covered but my curiosity can stop me from asking. Are you a Synthesizer musician or a recording engineer? Do you have more channels for the music too? We have very similar interests it appears!
Yes, I am adjusting trim on it, particularly immediately after takeoff, when leveling for cruise, coming into the pattern, and when I extend the landing brake.
@@Lyle-In-NO yes, which is why I was at 5000 feet over rural farmland. The specific regulations: 14 CFR § 91.303 - Aerobatic flight www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/91.303
I'm reciting the GUMPS checklist. Gas (fullest tank), Undercarriage (down and locked), Mixture (full rich), Prop (no prop control on this airplane), Switches/Seatbelts (switches set as required, seatbelts fastened and tight).
Did I miss something?’no stall, no spin, just demonstrating configurations resistance due to canard stalling first. I’d be interested to see the main wing stalled but wouldn’t want to be in it.
I talk about them in this video: ua-cam.com/video/ycLQaiX4ylE/v-deo.html Deep stalls are typically unrecoverable in a canard, which is why the aircraft is designed so that they are not possible (as long as the aircraft is kept within C/G).
I did for the approach stall, as that is the normal configuration for landing. I had it retracted for the departure stall, again because that's what the normal configuration would be for that type of stall.
The theoretical problem (theoretical because I have zero time in canards) for me is if you can’t stall the main wing you also can’t max-perform the main wing. For instance; say you’re in a low energy state (approach/landing for example) and you need to aggressively maneuver to avoid a collision with another aircraft. If your canard stalls limiting the AOA of your main wing your maneuvering capability is also limited. I fully understand the benefits to safety canard designs offer. But you give up something for that safety.
And how often are you in a low-energy state with no reserve airspeed and need to do an aggressive avoidance maneuver? :) That's a pretty extreme corner case, and can be mitigated by simply carrying a bit more airspeed.
I stopped watching the moment that he said that, in a conventional plane, you recover from a stall with the rudder and didn't mention the elevator which is how you ACTUALLY recover from the stall. Remember. The stall is too much angle of attack. You are not going to reduce the angle of attack with rudder (or with power for the matter, which is the other thing he mentioned). Only with elevator. Stall is too much AoA, so to recover reduce AoA FIRST, care about everything else after the AoA is back in a non-stalled range.
You weren't listening. I said you recover from a DROPPED WING in a stall using rudder. Of course you still need to push elevator, but if a wing drops in the stall, you need to "pick it up" with rudder, not aileron (which is the natural reflex).
@@CanardBoulevard Then the maker of that autopilot NEEDS to be informed, as forcefully as required-to-communicate, what the thing is doing. It can kill people by highjacking the flight, in some situations, with its throwing-away-the-last-setting nonsense. Aviation's safe *because* such things get stomped-out, up-front, systematically. Please read the *excellent* little book by William Schneider "Lead Right For Your Company's TYPE". He does it upside-down ( many profound-insight authors get some improtant detail backwards, for some reason ), so he's got pie-in-the-sky Potential on the ground, & the concrete actuality up in the sky, but if one simply flips his 2x2 Matrix upright, it's *BRILLIANT*: Upper-half: Potential Left-Side People, Right-Side Tasks Bottom-Half: Concrete-Actuality --- Quadrant1: NurturingEnrichment ( these are my labels for them ), so Learning & Infirmaries/Healing go here. He has religion/Church in here, too. Quadrant2: DrivenDiscovery, Science, Exploring ( I have the striving breaking-Eternal-imprisonment of AwakeSoulism/Buddhism in here, my natural home ), Invention, etc. Quadrant3: ConsensusCollaborating, Urban-planning, Mediation, etc.. Quadrant4: ControlPredictability. *Once I understood this, & understood that making aviation safe means keeping aviation's operations in Quadrant4* .. then suddenly everything got clearer.. Aircraft-*development* is in Quadrant2, where I innately want to be living, all the time, but manufacturing NO-crashes, is Quadrant4. ( his book is filled with what-management-process goes where, why, etc: it's a real treasure! ) It is because of Schneider that I understood that the FAA ( & the CAA, here ) should actually be having distinctly-culturally-different "organs" within itself, the DrivenDiscovery of *better* ways being Quadrant2, but they're operating in an overwhelming Quadrant4 mode, apparently.. Anyways, *PLEASE* do not accommodate your autopilot's manufacturer's not-understanding-how-bad-its-products-are-for-aviation-safety: PLEASE force them into understanding, *& fixing* the things, not just for you, but for everybody who's got them. Salut, Namaste, & Kaizen, eh? _ /\ _
You must have some special knowledge not held by any expert on canards. Would you care to explain how a canard can go into a "flat spin" if it can't stall the main wing?
Oh, it can spin without question your not letting it get slow enough to induce a spin. It good thing you are not, I agree a bad idea to spin a Canard. What is it with people showing how their plane won't spin and every time the demonstration is very manipulative that Canard will spin. Many planes also have a place where it will buff stall or leaf fall and not spin, in your case you have an envelope where you can buff stall and turn some. But it will spin and my guess is you will not be able to pull it out of that spin if it does spin. Every time someone tries to convince the world their plane will not spin I call them out, it just wrong to teach people that, now people who don't know what they are doing fully will buy a Canard thinking they are safe and if the mess up no problem it won't spin. Well, it will spin.
How do you spin an airplane? You first stall the wing, then induce a yawing motion. So, tell me...how do you spin an airplane if you can't stall the wing? The answer: you cannot. Stall MUST happen for a spin to occur. By definition, one wing is stalled during a spin. And it has absolutely nothing to do with speed. Speed does not induce spin, YAW induces spin, when the wing is already stalled - regardless of airspeed. It's entirely about critical angle of attack and yaw. "Buff stall" and "leaf fall" - I have no idea what you're talking about (those aren't aviation terms), but you're just wrong. I'm sorry...but it's pretty clear that you're not a pilot, or you would not be posting clearly incorrect statements like this.
I'm not a pilot, but the more I watch these aviation videos, the less I can stand the little phrases you guys have to use, like "Airspeed's alive"... what the hell does that mean? "Airspeed's alive"? Can't you just say "fifty, sixty, seventy... I'm TAKING OFF NOW"? Ugh. Can't stand it. And "clear prop". You know, people who aren't familiar with airports who hear that probably think... "What? Clear what? Why is the prop clear"? How about "Look out for the propeller!!! Or, Watch out for the prop!" No. It has to be some damn coded phrase - that only pilots understand the meaning of. And WHY do you have to repeat your friggin' tail number after EVERY SINGLE TIME YOU SAY SOMETHING? I mean, you were JUST talking to the tower guy. It's not like he's going to go, 'Hey! Who's this... pilot who sounds exactly like the guy I was talking to THREE SECONDS AGO!!!? Ugh! Can't stand it.
This is not "coded phrases" - this is called STANDARDIZATION. These phrases are not just something we say to sound cool or whatever, it is actually defined in regulations as standardized phraseology that must be used. All of the things you hear us say are said for a very good reason. "Airspeed alive" means that the airspeed has started indicating, which shows that the pitot static system is not blocked and is operating correctly. If you continue to accelerate and the airspeed has not come alive, you must abort the takeoff. Same goes for airspeed callout, it is a check to ensure that acceleration is continuing as expected. If not, the takeoff must be aborted. "Taking off now" is not the same as "rotate". Rotate is a specific thing you do to change the deck angle, to allow the wings to generate lift to take off. The terminology is brief and standardized. Does "Taking off now" mean I'm starting my takeoff run? Does it mean I'm taxiing on to the runway? Does it mean I'm already 500 feet in the air? It's ambiguous. "Rotate" is specific and meaningful, and STANDARDIZED. "Clear Prop" is again, standardized language. Anyone who has any reason to be near the prop is going to know what it means - if you spend ANY time around airplanes, it is very well known exactly what "clear prop" means. It means "stand clear of the prop, it's about to start." And why we repeat the tail number is because controllers are talking to MANY planes on MANY frequencies all at the same time. You want them to discern who is doing what by guessing what the pilot's voice sounds like? Are you seriously suggesting that? So...the answer is...you answered it yourself. All of this is something "only pilots understand the meaning of" and part of pilot training is LEARNING these standardized words and phrases, so that there is NO AMBIGUITY when it comes to communications and procedures. I would suggest you not criticize something which you clearly admit to knowing nothing about. Particularly in a public forum like this.
Again you demonstrate the Rutan design reigns supreme for flight characteristics and safety. And, yes, I was enticed by the description by saying you would spin it, you foolster! Got me interested immediately. I've been in aviation for over 50 years and was at OSH when Bert introduced his Cozy and other canards. Interestingly, I was in the audience there when he demonstrated the strength of the canard at a seminar by having an audience member (me at just over 200 lbs) stand on supported one. Very impressive at the time and memorable, indeed.
Great video! Nice Cozy, Too!!
Now I am tempted to build an RC canard design where the aft wing stalls first, allowing it to enter a spin. I don’t think it would be recoverable.
@@pa11owner you're probably correct. I wonder if it would enter a flat spin, just flutter down, or do something violent...
Really cool! Seems like the Carnard design would be much more prevalent in GA aircraft for the built in safety reasons.
That's not the whole story, this design comes with notable tradeoffs: A maximum front seat weight that limits who can sit up front, because that canard has to carry a substantial part of the plane's weight. Scott mentions the ballast.... if you don't manage your CG carefully in this airplane very, very bad things can happen. It's possible to "deep stall", which is not recoverable (if you're not some right-stuff test pilot).. this basically means straight up plummeting to the ground.
I love the cozy design, I like this safety feature. But there are definitely downsides.
@@Chatsu8oit’s not really plummeting. A deep stall in a Cozy or LongEZ is (nearly) unrecoverable indeed, however it’s descent rate in a deep stall is very low, comparable to an airplane under CAPS parachute. Survivability is relatively high.
They are quite prevalent in the experimental universe. I’ve built 2 of them. Varieze and. twin Defiant
@@MegaDada1995with canard stalls there are no departures from controlled flight. The title was click bait. A deep stall CAN occur if the aircraft is loaded way aft of CG. I have over 2000 hrs in canards. Mostly the Defiant
@@johnsteichen5239 A deep stall is by definition a departure from controlled flight, otherwise. My point was that in the instances of deep stalls we've seen from Cozys and LongEZs, the descent rate was usually low enough for there to be a relatively high probability of surviving impact (even though the aircraft will be total-loss). I assume a Varieze would be similar in this characteristic.
I just spent 10 mins of my life trying to learn how a canard could spin. I'll never recover that time.
But now you know
- That does indeed look like fun. Impressive that such a relatively small machine can get you so high up in the air. Must be a great feeling of freedom. Very enjoyable and educational video !
Oh it will go three times that altitude 😊
A local pilot set the South African single piston altitude record in a Cozy. I think it was just around 30k ft. It is extremely cold and uncomfortable. But it's entirely possible.
this very scare, cat sad
thanks for demonstrating this.
19:04 I watch your videos for this kind of hard-hitting content: "airplanes are fun."
27:50 thanks for the tour. I remember visiting in 2008 when Hurricane Ike hit, and then motorcycling along the next day and seeing a bunch of cars floating in the middle of the interstate.
That was great to see a canard stall, these aircraft amaze me!
As a 2004 CWRU grad, I really enjoyed the flight over the lakefront!
I thoroughly enjoy these videos.
Took me a moment to realise.. that room contains synths! How nice!
Fellow muso/synth affecionado here!
Yup! youtube.com/@scottssynthstuff
@@CanardBoulevardnice someone else also caught onto this little detail in the video I’m going to check out the music channel now!
Hi, I do not miss any of your videos and I love the information you pass us. If you love flying you,ll find out that following an experimented pilot always pays in the end. More important is to follow good people, those who give their opinions within a positive moral frame. In fact you may be proud of your loyalty to your principles and to your points of view. Thanks for being loyal yo your beliefs.
Mário following you from Lisbon, Portugal.
Great explanation! & illustration for the stall & spin!
Thanks for the lakeside tour! Wayne County is a nice airport.
7:06 During my Introduction to Aircraft Engineering courses I was corrected on this: The wing still produces lift when stalled, just not enough. It won't stop producing lift completely!
Correct. The critical angle of attack is the Angle of Attack with the highest lift coefficient. Slightly exceeding it he wing will still be producing a lot of lift, but also a ton of drag (quickly pulling you deeper into the wrong side of the lift curve).
@@MegaDada1995 exactly
@@crazymonkeyVII actually I really appreciate how visible this is by how the nose stays up and the aircraft keeps climbing even though the canard is technically stalling. Engineering is awesome, seeing it in practice is even better.
@@MegaDada1995 I don't think that's quite why he can still climb while the canard is stalling. The main wing produces the most lift and that one is supposedly never stalling whatsoever. I do agree with you that engineering is awesome though!
@@crazymonkeyVII a canard is nearly stall-proof because once the peak of lift production of the canard is passed, the canard will sink and thus decrease angle of attack. The canard may be stalled but it’s still very very close to the peak lift generation… Generating a lot of lift, albeit with increased drag. The main wing of course will also be near peak Cl but on the other side of the curve. However, if it were just the main wing generating a ton of lift and the canard generating very little, the nose would simply drop and neither would generate much lift.
Enjoyed your instructional video, well done.
Keep making great content. Love these planes
Fascinating! Burt is my design hero.
That's Scott from Gold Wing Docs!
Yup! :)
I had built a Canard pusher airplane, electrified. and it had exactly those characteristics. It followed the elevator without problems including loopings, but when you SLOWLY pulled all the way through, the nose went up, but then went to a stable slight sink with elevator full way through.
The guy who had designed it had ensuired that in the design, while the wing airfoil was half-symmetric, the canard had lots of camber, had a concave underside.
More camber ensures that the canard stalls first, so that the nose that is too far up comes down again (and the airflow on the canard reattaches)
Would the wing stall first, that would be a deathtrap. The wing BEHIND the center of gravity loses lift, the rear drops down, but the canard stays up. About the worst that can happen.
A conventional plane has the wing BEFORE the center of gravity, so the nose drops and the lift from the elevator rotates the nose down, reduces the angle of attack - exactly what is required.
I did not fly it often, we are pretty restricted where we can fly here in Germany, and due to the pusher layout the propeller slashing through the high/low pressure region directly behind the wing is was almost as loud as a combustion engine.
Interesting. Thanks for sharing.
George was getting back at your for doing stalls 😀
I’ve always thought the Beechcraft Starship was one of if not the most innovative design in GA ever. They installed vortex generators and other aerodynamic additions to make the aircraft much safer. I’ve actually been privileged enough to get to fly in a few. What a beautiful airplane that was way ahead of its time. It also flies beautifully. Their failure with it was that it was too expensive and a complies design that pilots were very unsure of.
The Cozy looks like it would be a lot of fun with a turboprop behind it.
FAA mandated too many "improvements" making it not only more expensive but also heavy.
A turboprop with the power required for a Cozy would be extremely lightweight...which would throw off the C/G. It would have to stick out much farther. You'd also lose a lot of usable load because you'd need much bigger fuel tanks to feed that thirsty turbine. You can't get a Cozy much past 220 KIAS without significant flutter issues (Vne on mine is 190 KIAS) so you'd need a lot of engineering and redesign to make use of a larger, more powerful turbine. What you WOULD get from it is lots of performance up high...but you'd need some cabin heat and oxygen!
@@CanardBoulevard Makes perfect sense, I just thought it might have been cool with one. Knowing me I’d pull a Mike Patey and completely modify it for fun. Wondering could you get away with a 300 horsepower engine or build the stock engine to accept a Turbo Charger.
As long as the fan in the back continues to keep the pilot cool all is good! But if the fan fails then sadly as John Denver found out, you’ll probably be coming back down backwards. I do love the D. Rutan designs though! But they do look weird “grazing”! 😂 Nice flight!
Canards are great little planes as long as you don't make a mistake with your cg. If you want to see your canard aircraft spin like a top, load it with an aft cg and do the same demonstration again. In some aircraft this can be as simple as sliding the seat rearward and putting a heavy pilot at the controls.
Very nice!
Bill
N80UF Velocity XL
very interesting
An ironically it looks like you were just at my original home airport today!!! ZZV !!! I soloed there January 5th 1992 on runaway 4 !!! :) small world
Yes, I was! I stopped there on the way home from Kentucky to wait out some weather that was passing over my home airport. I figured I'd stop at an airport with a nice FBO. :)
Thanks enjoyed the trip
So many positives. Love this design. What are the negatives of flying this airplane. The trade offs. Thanks for a great flight and explanations.
I like this video. Seems the Canard is a very forgiving airplane, if ya know the basics. Also notice the control stick is on the left, seems odd, but maybe not.
It is very forgiving...and it didn't take much to get used to the stick on the left - I usually fly with my left hand on a typical control yoke anyway!
Oh my God, I've been familiar with Co-ez for years. I thought I was going to build one in my twenties, and as far as Cleveland goes the only thing I know is Lincoln electric and they burned the river.
27:55 It's caught fire multiple times in fact.
The Dynon AP occasionally has a mind of its own, likely operator error. ;-) Usually punching enough buttons beats it into submission. ATC in the DFW area occasionally routes folks in less than optimal routes, so often I'll fly VFR under the Bravo, but monitor local towers and ATC and rock my wings when ATC calls me out to other aircraft.
I recently had ATC issue me a climb...but I don't think they realized how fast I climb. I realized with only about 50 feet left that I was about to punch up into the Bravo, I grabbed the stick and levelled off...then gave them a call and they quickly cleared me in.
@@CanardBoulevard I had a tower call me as I was transitioning that she "wanted to hold on to me for a bit". I advised that I was landing at T67, ETA was less than a couple of minutes and I needed to make calls. I was buzzing past the tower above pattern altitude at 200 mph. She replied "frequency change approved"! lol
Medina !!! Wow.... I grew up and learned how to fly in Ohio more Southeastern Ohio but I went to college in northeastern Ohio Portage County Geauga County Kent State Akron Fulton :)
Thank you Sir.
Nice flight! I enjoyed the view of downtown Cleveland. Is that the stadium where the Packers and Browns will be playing in the Pre-season on Aug. 10th?
I wish there was a way for me to see your SD card flight data log for this flight. I could tell you why the autopilot was doing what it was doing. This autopilot is never in the wrong, just operator error in using the modes. I have been flying with it for over 12 years.
Next content is how to build a Cozy step by step maybe?
Not on my channel, but there are definitely other channels that show this!
Is a Cozy considered experimental? Are all homebuilt aircraft experimental?
@@Lyle-In-NOyes
@@Lyle-In-NO yes to both questions
Looks like a really nice-flying airplane. The prop and engine noise is in the back. And, if flown correctly, they're very safe. I still can't believe that John Denver managed to kill himself in a VariEze. He should have just ditched it in the ocean instead of trying to switch fuel tanks.
well...is then the canard design the savest plane version ??
I’d be surprised it it’s the probe…such a Simple device. Have you put it into another cylinder to see of the problem follows the probe?😊
I already replaced it, and it fixed the problem - so it was the probe.
Okay I know they are all covered but my curiosity can stop me from asking. Are you a Synthesizer musician or a recording engineer?
Do you have more channels for the music too? We have very similar interests it appears!
Scott, Thank you for another great educational video on the Canard. Question.......Do you "trim" the Canard as this is never mentioned?
Yes, I am adjusting trim on it, particularly immediately after takeoff, when leveling for cruise, coming into the pattern, and when I extend the landing brake.
How different are turns around a point in a canard? If any.
Exactly the same.
Not all of the power stations in the video use coal.
did you suss out the overheating issue caused by the big fat boss on the new Three bladed propeller.
I would have guessed there are FAA regulations against high risk maneuvers (stall, spin, aerobatic, etc) over populated areas.
@@Lyle-In-NO yes, which is why I was at 5000 feet over rural farmland. The specific regulations: 14 CFR § 91.303 - Aerobatic flight
www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/91.303
stalled and still climbing . demonstrating that it has a stalled canard and a flying wing surface .. so what causes dead canard pilots .Old Age ?.
Poor decision making. VFR into IMC. Aircraft out of C/G. Fuel exhaustion. Same things that are the cause of most GA accidents...except the stall/spin.
something about,
a stall can occure at any speed but only one angle of attack ..... that the right one??
Where did you find the Cozy model you showed us?
It was a hand-built one-off.
Question, short final switch seat belt or something like that. Did I and captions misunderstand what you said?
I'm reciting the GUMPS checklist. Gas (fullest tank), Undercarriage (down and locked), Mixture (full rich), Prop (no prop control on this airplane), Switches/Seatbelts (switches set as required, seatbelts fastened and tight).
Did I miss something?’no stall, no spin, just demonstrating configurations resistance due to canard stalling first. I’d be interested to see the main wing stalled but wouldn’t want to be in it.
Main wing stall in a canard is typically unrecoverable, so you really don't want to do that.
Any experience with deep stalls in canards? I keep hearing about them but never seen one or heard of how one is entered.
I talk about them in this video: ua-cam.com/video/ycLQaiX4ylE/v-deo.html Deep stalls are typically unrecoverable in a canard, which is why the aircraft is designed so that they are not possible (as long as the aircraft is kept within C/G).
do you also lower the landing gear to do the stalls
I did for the approach stall, as that is the normal configuration for landing. I had it retracted for the departure stall, again because that's what the normal configuration would be for that type of stall.
@@CanardBoulevard thanks...do any gliders have canards
Stall speed increases in a turn IF YOU ARE FLYING LEVEL.
Nice but you didn't explain the slip.
The theoretical problem (theoretical because I have zero time in canards) for me is if you can’t stall the main wing you also can’t max-perform the main wing. For instance; say you’re in a low energy state (approach/landing for example) and you need to aggressively maneuver to avoid a collision with another aircraft. If your canard stalls limiting the AOA of your main wing your maneuvering capability is also limited. I fully understand the benefits to safety canard designs offer. But you give up something for that safety.
And how often are you in a low-energy state with no reserve airspeed and need to do an aggressive avoidance maneuver? :) That's a pretty extreme corner case, and can be mitigated by simply carrying a bit more airspeed.
Fine vid! Just subbed? Thanks
6K ft msl is what agl?
Depends where you are!
I stopped watching the moment that he said that, in a conventional plane, you recover from a stall with the rudder and didn't mention the elevator which is how you ACTUALLY recover from the stall. Remember. The stall is too much angle of attack. You are not going to reduce the angle of attack with rudder (or with power for the matter, which is the other thing he mentioned). Only with elevator. Stall is too much AoA, so to recover reduce AoA FIRST, care about everything else after the AoA is back in a non-stalled range.
You weren't listening. I said you recover from a DROPPED WING in a stall using rudder. Of course you still need to push elevator, but if a wing drops in the stall, you need to "pick it up" with rudder, not aileron (which is the natural reflex).
get the firmware updated on your autopilot: you can't afford to have it do that when you're in some situations.
_ /\ _
It's already running the latest firmware!
@@CanardBoulevard Then the maker of that autopilot NEEDS to be informed, as forcefully as required-to-communicate,
what the thing is doing.
It can kill people by highjacking the flight, in some situations, with its throwing-away-the-last-setting nonsense.
Aviation's safe *because* such things get stomped-out, up-front, systematically.
Please read the *excellent* little book by William Schneider
"Lead Right For Your Company's TYPE".
He does it upside-down ( many profound-insight authors get some improtant detail backwards, for some reason ),
so he's got pie-in-the-sky Potential on the ground, & the concrete actuality up in the sky,
but if one simply flips his 2x2 Matrix upright, it's *BRILLIANT*:
Upper-half: Potential
Left-Side People, Right-Side Tasks
Bottom-Half: Concrete-Actuality
---
Quadrant1: NurturingEnrichment ( these are my labels for them ), so Learning & Infirmaries/Healing go here. He has religion/Church in here, too.
Quadrant2: DrivenDiscovery, Science, Exploring ( I have the striving breaking-Eternal-imprisonment of AwakeSoulism/Buddhism in here, my natural home ), Invention, etc.
Quadrant3: ConsensusCollaborating, Urban-planning, Mediation, etc..
Quadrant4: ControlPredictability.
*Once I understood this, & understood that making aviation safe means keeping aviation's operations in Quadrant4* .. then suddenly everything got clearer..
Aircraft-*development* is in Quadrant2, where I innately want to be living, all the time,
but manufacturing NO-crashes, is Quadrant4.
( his book is filled with what-management-process goes where, why, etc: it's a real treasure! )
It is because of Schneider that I understood that the FAA ( & the CAA, here ) should actually be having distinctly-culturally-different "organs" within itself,
the DrivenDiscovery of *better* ways being Quadrant2, but they're operating in an overwhelming Quadrant4 mode, apparently..
Anyways, *PLEASE* do not accommodate your autopilot's manufacturer's not-understanding-how-bad-its-products-are-for-aviation-safety:
PLEASE force them into understanding, *& fixing* the things, not just for you, but for everybody who's got them.
Salut, Namaste, & Kaizen, eh?
_ /\ _
Can you roll a Cozy?
I've seen it done...but I won't be doing it. :)
Some of the canard planes will go into a flat spin if put into an accelerated stall.
You must have some special knowledge not held by any expert on canards. Would you care to explain how a canard can go into a "flat spin" if it can't stall the main wing?
@@CanardBoulevard in the accident record, if you take the time to look
Which accident report? There are no documented accidents in which a canard entered a spin.
@@CanardBoulevard I will look . They are just as dangerous as tractor planes, ask John Denver. I have seen 3 such reports in the last 30 years or so.
John Denver's accident had nothing to do with the aircraft, it was 100% pilot error: ua-cam.com/video/Q17uzUe0bAk/v-deo.html
Oh, it can spin without question your not letting it get slow enough to induce a spin. It good thing you are not, I agree a bad idea to spin a Canard. What is it with people showing how their plane won't spin and every time the demonstration is very manipulative that Canard will spin. Many planes also have a place where it will buff stall or leaf fall and not spin, in your case you have an envelope where you can buff stall and turn some. But it will spin and my guess is you will not be able to pull it out of that spin if it does spin. Every time someone tries to convince the world their plane will not spin I call them out, it just wrong to teach people that, now people who don't know what they are doing fully will buy a Canard thinking they are safe and if the mess up no problem it won't spin. Well, it will spin.
How do you spin an airplane? You first stall the wing, then induce a yawing motion.
So, tell me...how do you spin an airplane if you can't stall the wing? The answer: you cannot. Stall MUST happen for a spin to occur. By definition, one wing is stalled during a spin.
And it has absolutely nothing to do with speed. Speed does not induce spin, YAW induces spin, when the wing is already stalled - regardless of airspeed. It's entirely about critical angle of attack and yaw. "Buff stall" and "leaf fall" - I have no idea what you're talking about (those aren't aviation terms), but you're just wrong.
I'm sorry...but it's pretty clear that you're not a pilot, or you would not be posting clearly incorrect statements like this.
I never saw the spin. Click bait.
19:13 ALLAH AKBAR
I'm not a pilot, but the more I watch these aviation videos, the less I can stand the little phrases you guys have to use, like "Airspeed's alive"... what the hell does that mean? "Airspeed's alive"? Can't you just say "fifty, sixty, seventy... I'm TAKING OFF NOW"? Ugh. Can't stand it. And "clear prop". You know, people who aren't familiar with airports who hear that probably think... "What? Clear what? Why is the prop clear"? How about "Look out for the propeller!!! Or, Watch out for the prop!" No. It has to be some damn coded phrase - that only pilots understand the meaning of. And WHY do you have to repeat your friggin' tail number after EVERY SINGLE TIME YOU SAY SOMETHING? I mean, you were JUST talking to the tower guy. It's not like he's going to go, 'Hey! Who's this... pilot who sounds exactly like the guy I was talking to THREE SECONDS AGO!!!? Ugh! Can't stand it.
Get your pilots license and all of that will make sense.
This is not "coded phrases" - this is called STANDARDIZATION. These phrases are not just something we say to sound cool or whatever, it is actually defined in regulations as standardized phraseology that must be used.
All of the things you hear us say are said for a very good reason. "Airspeed alive" means that the airspeed has started indicating, which shows that the pitot static system is not blocked and is operating correctly. If you continue to accelerate and the airspeed has not come alive, you must abort the takeoff. Same goes for airspeed callout, it is a check to ensure that acceleration is continuing as expected. If not, the takeoff must be aborted.
"Taking off now" is not the same as "rotate". Rotate is a specific thing you do to change the deck angle, to allow the wings to generate lift to take off. The terminology is brief and standardized. Does "Taking off now" mean I'm starting my takeoff run? Does it mean I'm taxiing on to the runway? Does it mean I'm already 500 feet in the air? It's ambiguous. "Rotate" is specific and meaningful, and STANDARDIZED.
"Clear Prop" is again, standardized language. Anyone who has any reason to be near the prop is going to know what it means - if you spend ANY time around airplanes, it is very well known exactly what "clear prop" means. It means "stand clear of the prop, it's about to start."
And why we repeat the tail number is because controllers are talking to MANY planes on MANY frequencies all at the same time. You want them to discern who is doing what by guessing what the pilot's voice sounds like? Are you seriously suggesting that?
So...the answer is...you answered it yourself. All of this is something "only pilots understand the meaning of" and part of pilot training is LEARNING these standardized words and phrases, so that there is NO AMBIGUITY when it comes to communications and procedures.
I would suggest you not criticize something which you clearly admit to knowing nothing about. Particularly in a public forum like this.
@@CanardBoulevard Some of these foolish comments just don't deserve a response.
💀💀💀💀 💀💀 you had me dead laughing my az off for real. Wife and kid looking at me like I’m crazy, scratching their heads. SUPER FUNNY
@@Tony-xj8lp Tony, some folks are just way short of a full deck, not much can be done about that.