On Sun, 9 Nov 2003 08:09:57 -0600, "JJS" jschneider@REMOVE THIS SPAM
BLOCKpldi.net wrote:

:Richard,
: I sat in the cockpit of the Velocity a few days before the
:accident. During our conversation the pilot mentioned that there was
:a 50 pound bag of lead shot up front near the battery. I may go out
:to the airport today and look to see if it is still there. The front
:end was damaged when he hit trees and it may have been thrown clear,
r he may have removed it. I've seen pictures of the "Vortilons" you
:mention. His airplane did not have them. It did have an extension
:below the wing at the wing tips.

I can't find any pictures of vortalons on line, but they are an
important item, and if he didn't have them, that's probably a
contributing factor. If the plane had 50 lbs in the nose, it sounds
like he was at least fighting an aft CG. The WB chart is going to be
significant. How much does your friend weigh?

:I had not considered the wing or
:canard incidence being off.

It's just something to throw into the mix. Also remember, every
airplane has wings that are slightly different in profile. Foam wings
- like most canards - are particularly susceptible. Minor builder
errors lead to minor changes in airfoil, which may or may not have an
effect on how the plane flies.

:The airplane had approximately 50 hours
:TT with only 6 or so hours on an overhaul. Although it was very cold,
:there was no ice that day. It was my understanding that the vortex
:generators were added to the canard to combat a problem with loss of
:canard lift when flying through rain because the laminar airflow
:detached when the wing surface disturbed. Is that correct?

It's correct on the GU airfoil canard used on the Vari-Eze, 3 place
Cozy and earlier Long EZ's. The Roncz canard (1145MS airfoil) didn't
have those problems. I don' t know about the Velocity canard airfoil,
I've never seen one with vortex generators attached. None the less,
VG's keep attached flow at a higher angle of attack, and adding them
would have made it more likely that the elevators could drive the main
wing to stall.

:He
:received a vortex generator kit with the airplane but it was not
:installed at the time of the crash. I'm not sure if it was for both
:wings or just the canard.

It could have been for both, VG's on the main wing and the canard at
50% of chord can increase lift considerably. If you're using them
just on the canard, for rain, you want them at about 20-25% of chord.

:I'm currently a spam can pilot with a dream
f building an RV someday and trying to learn all I can about
:homebuilts. I'll read the information at the link you sent me and do
:a little more research. He is a very good pilot but I wish my friend
:had done his homework on this particular airplane. He told me that he
:had already contacted the current factory owner when I urged him to
:talk to other builders and Velocity pilots. I'm not sure if that was
:before or after the purchase or for that matter if it was not entirely
:true and he was trying to relieve my concern. I believe he was over
:confident in his abilities. We had actually discussed the loss of at
:least one Velocity that I'd read about a long time ago. He thought he
:might be able roll out of a deep stall. I tried to subtly convince
:him otherwise. Others at the airport tried to caution him to be
:careful as well. I appreciate your help very much. It is my hope
:that this thread develops into something useful for other
:homebuilders.

Mike Mellville - Burt Rutan's test pilot - got in a deep stall in a
Long EZ at 10,000 feet. He was barely able to bring it out by using
the rudders to get the nose swinging back and forth like a pendulum,
with greater and greater swings on each cycle. Eventually the nose
dropped and he started flying again, but it took something like 8000
feet. If you're nibbling at the lower end and you're not absolutly
sure what the envelope is, wear a parachute and don't be afraid to use
it.