Norm's Flying Boat UL Flight Test Progress

[Grant Smith]

Norman,

Do you have any reports on taxi testing progress?

[Norman Langlois]

Grant
Last week the first trip to the lake was fruitless at the last start up before taxing out on the lake the pull starter rope stayed pulled all the way out and had to shut down and go home

Today Sat at the lake 5:00am trying to beet the boaters to the launch. We had better luck. The first taxi took place with mixed results.
There is a steering system that didn't work at all (water ruder). After locking it out.the air ruder provided enough control to taxi. low speed taxi was fine . the plane moves through the water level and with minimal correction.
Adding throttle it bow planes,not to severe. I didn't take a lot of notes this time so I don't have the fine details.Somewhere near half throttle it quickly gets up on hull plane and builds speed, but here The problems begin . there are control problems that turn the plan resulting in sponsons dipping and and throwing water into the prop. I limited my test to taking the video and took the plane home to ponder the resolve.
It may be a while before I attempt more testing but should be this flying season.

The control problem has been found .After talking with Grant I went to inspect my prop for water strike damage and looked again at my cable mapping.After all this time its been reversed.I was stepping on my right ruder thinking I was just not getting a response I was it was left turn . I will make the changes and return to the lake next weekend.(weather permitting)

[Norman Langlois]

A photo bucket video of the water taxi test run.

video deleted addware the video early design V tail never flew

After thinking about the upload of the video I tried it works pretty good . the explanation above and this video tells the story.

[Norman Langlois]

Starting my first reply with bad info . please all take note of that I edited and applied the reason for the control problem.

The sponsons are a problem as well and the arch and style of the rear floats will be redone soon.Taxi testing will resume with a flip side reversing of the sponsons putting them tail first will make some difference in there behavior and may allow me to skim and make hops.

[WBNH]

I have little to add, but moral support, but if you need an extra pair of hands, I'd love to see the project. I live in Portsmouth, and have Family in Northwood (near Bow Lake and the Strafford line). Are you doing your taxi tests on Northwood Lake? Harvey? Bow?

[Norman Langlois]

WBNH
I will extend my hand and welcome any help.It has been difficult arranging to have a safety for the days I can fly.My son was operating the boat,and shot the video.
I had the last week of July off and couldn't get a day on the water with anyone. Help is scarce to say the least. people work and on the week end the launch is busy with other boaters.If you would like to attend I expect to do more testing Saturday first light to avoid the boater traffic. wind and weather permitting I test only in the morning.
The lake is Northwood lake. The launch is across the street from True Value Hardware . My #603 -942-6213
I would like to add this is only the beginning .

[WBNH]

I sincerely hope your test program moves along perfectly. I'll miss Saturday, however, as a lot of family is gathering at my place for B-fast and to avoid the traffic congestion and carpooling to the airshow at Pease. Front row, box 12. After B-fast, gates open at 8...I'll be there at 7:30 waiting...

...Thunderbirds just arrived...saw one over the area a half hour ago...just flying in circles. Drumming up business?

[Norman Langlois]

2nd taxi test Saturday 8-11-11 the video shows still having no control after hull plane and medium speeds [less than flying speed]
video deleted add ware

I am thinking its all due to a high angle of attack resulting in pushing the bow down and making it squirrel y and appearing as adverse yaw. Boats do not behave any better with there bow over loaded (down)
I will make the change and try again half what it is. presently at 10 degrees incidence to the hull.
Anyone wish to make a suggestion on this? I am listening.

[Norman Langlois]

The third taxi test Sunday 8-21-11
there are still multiple problems . the major difference is the angle of incidence to the hull plane.This is much improved .now a 6 degrees I will make this a permanent change . This video shows a lot of turning and most of it was uncontrolled. only at low throttle and large turn radius was it at my will.
One major adverse effect was the rotation around the vertical axis. not having enough ruder influence to counter this .The plane would flat spin or slip around being effected greatly by engine throttle more throttle more right spin.
I tried using the aileron to counter and this did have some effect right roll resulted in left turn slight as it was the down aileron acting as a brake. This proved dangerous because it produced an adverse roll to the turn. A tricycle tip over.
The video does not show anything that you can determine what kind of control I was applying. During the tight turns almost always trying to counter . None of these were intended.
When the plane was being put back in the hanger the sponson arch broke through . Until the rework is finished there will obviously be no more test runs
Here is the new video link .My son made one long video it a long one.
In -spite I was having intense fun !!!

Expand it to full screen if you can.
I made an error stating longitudinal axis for the slip turn. it is the vertical axis. If anyone still understood what I was trying to say about the behavior OK , I just felt this needed to be corrected.
video deleted addware
the videos early design V tail never flew

[fly2kads]

Norman,

Could you please post a photo of your current configuration? It is a bit hard to see from the video. It would be easier for people to evaluate it here, rather than having to try to find it on the old message board.

[Norman Langlois]

I looked for a picture that represents the plane .best I have is what was tested on the first run. the sponsons have since been turned around and the angle of incidence328329 was changed to 6 degree with a spacer on this last run.
The angle I refer to is the hull plane verses the wing

[Dana]

At a glance (hard to tell from these pictures), I suspect you may have inadequate vertical tail area. Also it looks like the tail is outside the prop wash, further limiting control at low airspeed.

Is there a water rudder?

[Norman Langlois]

Dana
There is not a typical water rudder. There is an experimental system there as built ,that steers the plane at low speed. I lock it straight during any high speed taxi attempt. It is the sponson float system they pivot with the controls can lock in or lock out.
The v-tail was always an unknown especially to me with no experience. I expect you are right on there .
I plan to replace the tail with the standard vertical and horizontal. The only consideration is a middle or high stabilator. Raising the horizontal will resolve my wet tail concerns. (that being when the pilot is absent the tail rides low enough to be in the water] the main reason for the odd sponson floats is support for the engine weight if the pilot exits with the plane in deep water. The V-tail takes on water if I let it go on to long.

The bottom line is I now believe the V-tail is a bad Idea for this short arm pusher. There is obviously insufficient area and the arm is to short. If this was a tractor engine things may be different.
A new float support system and new floats are being made .They should resolve much of the in water behavior.
The air frame will be modified slightly to accommodate the more reasonable angle of incidence of 5 or 6 degrees hull to wing. Lastly the new Tail.. there maybe another test run before the tail is replaced .But I am sure it is the reason for lack of ruder control and the right turn slip. That I believe is P factor ( more throttle = more severe right turn slip) this plane has a 68 inch prop . I know when I was up on plane I was slipping sideways over the water and turning to the right.
I thought it was odd since I didn't think I was flying But I was skipping sideways on the water the wing must have achieved G E flying speed. Every time I took the plane up to this speed there was virtually no ruder. I was able to keep it straight a bit longer using reverse aileron. But this proved dangerious when the plane rolls to the opposite of the turn. And added power made the effort feeble with immediate turn response.

Sorry I ramble on so.
Norm

[TomHenry3]

Nice looking little amphibian there. Too bad the V tail isn't working out, they always look nice.
If I might be so bold as to suggest looking at existing seaplanes for workable ideas. The SeaHawker design uses sponsons on both sides of the hull to provide lateral support when in the water and to help keep spray out of the prop. Perhaps a small float at the far aft end of the tail boom would keep the new tail out of the water when the pilot is not aboard and provide a location for a water rudder. It appears that (1) much more (air) rudder area is needed, (2) in the prop wash for low speed control and (3) elevators in the prop wash to allow low speed pitch attitude control. It looked in the video like the primary pitch control was power rather than the elevators. Take to look at the Lake Amphibian. It has a cruciform tail (horizontal stab in the prop wash) and the elevators are split to provide really huge trim surfaces at each end of the horizontal stab that are controlled separately from the normal elevators. Sort of secondary elevators controlled by the pitch trim control in the cockpit. Best wishes and good luck !

[Norman Langlois]

Tom thank you
A new float system has been fabricated. No trials were performed yet. As the season ended and the changes were worked out. The transport trailer needed a revision to accommodate the new configuration of the dolly that conveys the plane to the water.All those watching my progress will have to wait for early summer maybe in May.

I want to make a note to all there is something maybe significant in the works. That make up wings and control surfaces typically for use in Ultralights.


I need to put my new tail together before I toot this horn
For now here is a picture of the new float system. It was finished for testing but not for looks should they need alterations.They were created VIA suggestion of My mentor here in the forums. I do pay attention and ponder all suggestions. If I deem it practical to deviate and rework I will. Being an Ultralight I have the weight factor to consider.

My current portion of the project is the new tail. The V-tail weighed 6# and that was before covering and the root area connection plus control hardware. I would guess finishing at or near 8# I will confirm this sometime after I tare it all of and add the new tail. This new tail A mid tail stabilator . I have found a new way of using my channel to create structural rather than just airfoil members making the whole tail only about 10# vertical and horizontal. I am anxious to say the least and this is premature. Next week I will have my stabilator partially assembled and something to show. The picture was before sanding fiberglass was applied
1182
Regards to all

[1684zach]

Hi Norm,
Just wanted to encourage you to keep up the good work. It excites me to see other real "EXPERIMENTERS", that are willing to show/share what they are working on. I've been following your threads with keen interest; even though I am not much of a float guy -just happy to learn from what you have learned and shared. -Zach

[Norman Langlois]

I promised some pictures of what I was working on. A completely new way of making U/L ribs. I believe at least not done this way before.
I have been slow because of the extensive tooling.
What I have here is a stabilator and the vertical fin plus the ruder foam cores. Still yet to fab its rib channels.[special bender required] I also have no leading edge material its on order.
Laid out on the floor just to express the general idea.


The stabilator is a lift generating airfoil with a center bearing it is actually 2 pieces . Will be mounted mid way up the fin
The fin ribs will have porting done to allow for the control rod .
Looking at this you will assume its all heavy. you are deceiving yourselves if you think so the largest of the ribs having a 36 inch chord weighs 4 oz.the spar tubes are .035 1.75" and the fin is .035 X 2" ruder spar is .035 X 1.75

What you see is foam encapsulated by a full perimeter .035 channel splayed then compressed over the foam. each rib becomes complimented by combined materials character . The rib becomes like a stress skin panel in the vertical. Light and more structural than the usual U/L . I use them to reduce structure and end up light typically a single spar tube ,LE an TE.
I have very pleasing numbers so far.The V-tail when weighed all components was every bit of 10# I expect to be very near the same. with far more control surface.121712181219

[Norman Langlois]

Ok I guess I need to start begging for feed back. I really need to know what you all think of this process .
Has anyone seen any thing like this?. do you need more info?
I'm not the teacher here I am a student . So I can make stuff help me know its worth doing.
I have only a very few real people to talk with and show it to, that even have a clue about airplanes. They like it but that is only 4 people
Regards to all Norm
If you need to e-mail Me at pjlucky@metrocast.net

[Dana]

Norm, others have done foam ribs with aluminum cap strips... I'm planning something similar for the ultralight biplane design I'm working on. Some of this has been discussed over on homebuiltairplanes.com (http://homebuiltairplanes.com).

[Norman Langlois]

Finally the new tail is partially complete . Enough to show anyway. I still need to turn some hardware . After that I can cover. It will be ready for the spring.
Some may wounder why the inverted stabilator . I can only tell you I have had discussions with good authority,I am not qualified to debate it.
Generally you are seeing a fin, ruder and stabilator with lift generation airfoil in the lift down configuration. It will be reversible if need be.

The weight I wish was better but I am not displeased entirely. I expect 15# after covering.That includes all hardware and controls. brake down is like this each stabilator Half 142714281429is 3#4oz. the ruder is 2# and the fin with interface hardware and control horn 5#4oz. That is as you see it.

[Jim Heffelfinger]

Norm, Haven't been on the forum in a long time. Life gets in the way at times.
In the videos I noted a lot of spray coming from the prop/engine area. The sound of the engine changed during those spray moments. Is the prop picking up water? It will cause some problems with prop tip erosion.
I give you great credit for keeping going on this project.

[Norman Langlois]

Jim there are three video's .The first run was the worst and the prop was being hit with spray produced by the rear float system. In each test something was changing the middle test the sponson system was turned around and did produce less spray. In the last runs the arch support was failing from over the road damage.As a result One sponson was dragging more than the other.It did produce some spray .The control problems are what made the tests stop and the V-tail is being changed out .

[Norman Langlois]

A couple of pictures of the new tail configuration
I just finished rigging the controls so now its time to detail things and get to covering
A look down the air frame gives some Idea of the prop wash over the new tail the center of the prop is about 10 inches above the top of the frame. Ignore the object in the wing mount area its the pivot jack for the wing. looking only down the outer tube you will get the alignment described.
In the old archives there was notations about wet tail the V-tail was so low it was in the water when no pilots weight was applied.Causing many undesirables. This tail will be dry even if the boom rests low, That will quickly drain away when pilot is aboard. This new tail features a stabilator and it is cantilevered.Also its in the negative lift configuration, being an none symmetrical airfoil. It is however easily reversed if necessary. I am expecting much better control this time.
16791680

[FloridaJohn]

I like the idea of the new tail much better than the old V design. This one is up and in the prop wash, which should help immensely with low speed control. In looking at some of your old videos, I was also concerned about the (previous) low tail airflow getting blanked by the wings in a stall. That would make it more difficult to recover from a stall. This design should be better in that instance, also.

I can't say for sure that any of this will actually work, since I have only looked at the pictures you provided here, and I am not an aeronautical engineer. My thoughts are only observations from comparing your design to common airplane designs. Cessna and Piper put a lot of testing and engineering in their designs, so just by observing you can get the benefit of someone else's work. :)

[Norman Langlois]

Winter is over and I am on track for spring trials .I am expecting first or second week end in May.First runs are just straight taxi runs working on and gathering facts . dont be expecting to see it fly for a while .I will post the results and videos as they evolve.18251826182718281829

[1684zach]

Looking good Norm! Keep us posted. My project is slow getting started again this spring; just about to pay the house off, and had lightening strike the house -caused quite a bit of damage. That's put the plane on the back burner for a couple months :( It's encouraging to see others still moving forward! -Zach

[jedi]

Norm,

Do you think you have the clearance on the sponsons to rotate for take offf? Please let me respond before you do any attempt at high speed taxi, rotation or lift off. This could be a clasic case of an airplane that is difficult to rotate but once rotated it jumps off the ground/water climbs steeply and stalls at about 30 to 50 feet. Several have done that with fatal results. Mark Staul for the latest well known example. The airplane will fly at a slower speed than you will imagine once rotated.

[Norman Langlois]

Yes Jedi I do think there is enough for rotation.I will take another photo of the front view and try to show the elevations. If you can zoom in on the frontal shot and note that the side shot show a bit of an angle of attack on the hull bottom.I think now with the wing at a 6 to 8 degree angle for rotation there should be no contact from the ruder portion of the sponson. A higher angle of rotation may spike in about 3 inches or so. Do you see that as being enough resistance to create issues.
I have no intent to try flying yet, only straight taxi. The sponsons do not sport finish paint because they may need adjustment.

[Norman Langlois]

Looking again. I see some potential contact. It all depend how deep the hull sets at rotation. the tunnel hull effect developed by the chine flare . Is something I have not been able to verify. from any of my previous video . Here is a new side shot, It still can not be seen how far down the hulls V is only the chine.1836

[Flyfalcons]

You really don't want to rotate for takeoff anyway. Let the aircraft build speed on the water and it should fly itself off.

[Norman Langlois]

1936 Took the plane on its first road trip this year to work where the floor space permitted some weights and balance check. My boss like me LOL.
The best news I can tell you IT QUALIFIES!!! weighing in at 287 # The rest isn't so good I have some work fixing the CG.
I get right on that though .
Regards ALL

[jedi]

Tail heavy I presume. Where is current CG as a percent of MAC? For your weight ______ and for 140 pound 200 pound pilot?

[Norman Langlois]

The current CG was calculated with myself in the pilots seat I weigh in at 160# position was 39.7 % of a 68 inch MAC this is using the ailerons as part of the MAC. The wing plus the flaperons .Using the formula in the book Flight testing Home Built Aircraft. the point loads were taken with me on board.

My coworker tried calculating the point by a vector analysis. that didn't. verify but, a actually lifting the plane with the fork truck with me on board put it exactly where the calculation said it was. About 7 inches to the rear. of the 30% point
I have reconfigured the hang cage to accommodate an a adjustment . of about 6 inches to the rear wing and engine while lengthening the moment of pilot and hull and shortening the moment of the tail. This should be enough to bring it back into spec. I have had to argue this move already please don't
Those who don't see why its the best option. Here is why. I can move three of the 4 major inputs to the balance but that's the best I can do.My people couldn't see that they just think move the pilot but why that's only one of 4 and requires greater distance and much rework. The wing and engine are in a typical pusher moment arraignment. The new tail and the fact that I moved the hang cage forward last fall are the real reasons for the falling out of spec. Pivoting the hang cage to remove the steep angle of attack resulted in the 6 inch wing forward

[Norman Langlois]

CG corrected
Moving the hang cage . Has done the trick. All with no significant weight change.The Cg is corrected to 30% MAC for a 160# pilot and 25% MAC for a 200# pilot. calculations have been done for a MAC of 68 inches. I plan on adding my canopy it will help with 4# forward or I may have to eat more. My ruder pedals are a bit cheesy I have something much better on my computer I made . They would add about 2# far forward.
I am contemplating taking the plane to the lake tomorrow afternoon. It depends on getting some final things done and the weather . Since its Mothers day. That may also interfere and postpone til next week end ,weather permitting.

[Mark Calder]

Hey Norm, this is a really handy site for calculating your static margin of safety

http://www.geistware.com/rcmodeling/cg_super_calc.htm (http://www.geistware.com/rcmodeling/cg_super_calc.htm)

[Norman Langlois]

1980 Saturday morning back on the lake taxi tests. Unfortunately my camera operator couldn't figure the camera was on stills and not in video mode. This is one of the best shots.
All I can give you is a report for today. The plane did well the sponsons dint give any adversity but they didnt help where I need it . This is due to the recent balance changes moving the wing back with the engine put much more weight on the sponsons than they can support in static mode without a pilot they do nothing for me and it takes two people to launch and extract. On the water they behave reasonably no spray into the prop, they come up on plane and out of the water near the lift of speed. I have a lot of practicing to do . For me its a bit tense at higher speeds the little breeze was very adverse. Left ruder is very responsive while right ruder is mushy and becomes more effective with full ruder . The stabilator is also very effective ,I didn't put much atention there to day, since all I was interested in was ruder control. I did notice when I pulled back on the stick I had a rush of speed and the plane gained rapidly I did only three fast taxi runs and noticed the more sensitive ruder and the uncertainty of the trim I should have there left being better than right. Also I topped one run off at 23mph but didn't dare to hold very long I need more time on the stick first. I felt the great change it wasn't far from going into ground effect.
I must be patient.

Regards all

[1684zach]

Sounds great! Be careful, and keep us advised. -Zach

[patrickbrockhaus]

During the last 6 months or so, those of us in the Shelton Washington area have sighted what is obviously the top part of a weight shift trike attached to a Zodiac inflatible boat. It looks like it flies well. Nobody Ive talked to seems to knows who this is or where it lands, (lots of hidey holes around here). Colapsable seaplane? food for thought!

[Dana]

During the last 6 months or so, those of us in the Shelton Washington area have sighted what is obviously the top part of a weight shift trike attached to a Zodiac inflatible boat...

It's called a Flying Inflatable Boat (http://www.flyinginflatableboats.com/), and there are quite a few of them around.

[jedi]

Most likely it is a Polaris FIB (Flying Inflatable Boat). These were manufactured in Italy over the past 30 years or more and have been successfully sold worldwide. There were a few companies that copied the design but were not as successful as considerable development work was required to get the right combination into a practical machine that would work.

Doy, the developer and US supporter, died about 4 to 5 years ago but his son still manufacturers them, I believe. In the US market they are a casualty of the Light Sport legislation. There is not a SLSA version and it cannot be registered as a homebuilt experimental.

I believe there a still a few places to get a somewhat simlar craft or there are resale units available.

North Wing out of Wenatchee makes wings for trikes on floats and they may have a FIB model as they have had a few water projects.

There are two WSC Sea pilots in the Gig Harbor area and I believe they both fly from a smaller harbor directly west of town on the opposite shore of the peninsula. The harbor opens to the north and has a small island a mile or so further to the north. I do not recall the name of the harbor nor do I have convenient access to a map.

Dave Sherifinski is one of the pilots.

Most of the Polaris FIB are boat only but there is a conversion to wheels and an amphibious version. Contact me if you want more information.

Watch for the SEA ERA operating in the area out of Lake Samamish. It is a lifting body flying boat with more or less conventional configuration otherwise. It is a really cool, one off, singe seat ELSA of foam and composite construction powered by the 80 hp Jabiru. It will hopefully be making the trip to Mason Lake several times this summer and has been on display at the Arlington Airshow for the last 2 years.

If there is more interest in either of these projects, please start a new thread with comments or questions.

[Norman Langlois]

I want to share something with all of you that may be interested in foam composite creations. As I stated above I had need of additional floatation . Exiting the plane at any time would result in flip over tail first. So I have created a new float wing to resolve my problem . That is part of the story.

For all of you I have been using a new adhesive to build with .Its from a company called Fomo Products,Inc. I build with styrene and urethane. In the past I was using urethane expandable crack filler. It worked very well there are many formulas. All those I used took many hours to cure and usually require a days time per step.This product requires a dispenser. The product is not mine ,but has been in use more than a year .The dispenser has never clogged. It allows one to inject between when insufficient foam has been applied. MOST of all it cures in about 20 minutes enough to continue working and building I constructed the wing float in one day. What would have in the past taken 3 or more. I only stopped because I was tired.

A few pictures of my new float and how it will be applied to my plane20042005 The float is still open but will be closed and glassed over . Yes it is an airfoil and being applied inverted.

[jedi]

Yes it is an airfoil and being applied inverted.
Norm,
I think applying the airfoil inverted like you propose will create problems both on the water and in flight. I suspect you are still into the tail down load theory. The wing should be considered a biplane and needs to have the correct incidence angle. This is a major change and needs to be engineered. Call me.

[Norman Langlois]

I should have supplied the link to the product I was referring to so here it is. its called Handy Stick Its awesome . http://www.fomo.com/products/construction_adhesive.aspx

[Norman Langlois]

Taking a week to construct and now bad weather. I have not had a chance to try it out. Setting it up in this way is certainly a gloom on . I need to see how well it works before I add permanence to it. I am expecting full tail floatation and some additional flight behavior. The later will be a time away yet.
The most important thing is that I will be able to handle the plane alone to and from the water.20372038

[hydroguy2]

How's your flight training progressing? did you ever get any formal instruction?

[Norman Langlois]

All is well . I missed two week ends unable to go to the lake. The last week end was nearly a disaster. I took the plane to the lake for the first time alone. After all the system must be able to be handled by me alone in the end. I had made a resent change to the transport dolly . This turned out to be a big problem when I tried to unload from the trailer it behaved unexpectedly and collapsed prematurely nearly falling off and over into the road side and down into a wooded embankment. It would have been destroyed. Accept for a lady jogger passing at the time and offed her help .Witch a graciously accepted . With her help it was saved and even returned it to the trailer I returned home shaken and sore ,but undamaged. The revisions have since been made proper and I have added a capture rail to the trailer the plane can no longer behave contrary to my wish at least until it is on the ground and ready to be moved to the launch site20552056

the roller on the front wheel is captured under the rail preventing any tilt backward or to the side. the front wheel load is only 100 # the high and rearward center of gravity caused both when I tried to off load the tail came down hard on me and it rolled right the wheels are on a colapsable strut I did not have a lock on it, I do now. the rail is split and a portion lowers with the elivator.

[Norman Langlois]

Saturday and the testing today was very poor. the float mod did support the plane well. That was all it did . Out on the move I can not even get on step drag and adverse low speed roll makes that nearly impossible certainly dangerous.
Here some pictures .Don't be mislead by how the static position lies.With pilot aboard it is lower and fallows the blue water ine. Water flows over the tip holds me down and recovering from the roll is very difficult , so its back to the drawing board .

[Mark Calder]

Longitudinal stability

Norm, you might consider rerunning your stability margin calculation using the new wing sponson area, its possible you might actually be "too" stable.

http://www.geistware.com/rcmodeling/cg_super_calc.htm (http://www.geistware.com/rcmodeling/cg_super_calc.htm)

[Norman Langlois]

Mark
You may well be right on there.

First an update Saturday again 6/23 . Taxi test today was again less than desirable. Last week it was the cut off sponson and float wing diving under. Since adding back the lead portion of the float. control is back . Now it is all about drag. exactly where and what to do about it is going to be trial and modification till I get it right.
Water is flowing along the inside of the sponson piling up under the float wing at the attachment point as well as trailing edge of the wing adding its drag. here is a picture of my first attempt to reduce this . A return to the water will be as soon as I can find a helper . Help is scarce for me.20792080

[rosiejerryrosie]

Norm, have you ever thought of just putting wheels on it? Or is there no room for a runway other than the lake?

[Norman Langlois]

Jerry Yes I did.

My original was to have wheels and floatation was to be added the old thread had pictures of that on the start of the thread. Things do evolve . My main desire was to have a seaplane . I was far down the scale of knowledge thinking there was not much difference to fly one or the other. Still the lake is such a large taxi way it makes learning to control and having an accident via collision with something less likely .
I have enjoyed my excursions on the lake in-spite of the issues. This last taxi runs were very pleasing good ruder stability was right on with the roll control. It was just being a water plow that sucked. 23 mph 6200 rpm at 2.7: 1 ratio on a 68 inch IVO 2 blade prop at 26 pitch aprox. All I could get was 23 mph. very unlike my test back in May .I could have easily taken off then. I will get this drag issue resolved. and the ground handling. If I had a D9 I could cut a runway outside my door LOL Id make a a skid rail and land on the grass on return LOL. 600 ft runway do it.just joking

[Gordon Arnaut]

Hi Norm...

I just got caught up with the progress you have made since we talked last year...looks good and I'm sure you will have that ship lifting off the lake very soon...

Regards,

Gordon.

[Norman Langlois]

The after noon of July 4th. Another poor taxi run. Again not enough airspeed . Causes are excessive drag from the new float. The wind was a bit more than I like to deal with at this new launch site and there was a tail wind going out a channel into more open water. Full speed with a tail wind nothing good, not able to get on step.

Turns are very difficult not having a water ruder. And required leaning out at idle speeds to get around, and into the wind. heading back to the landing full throttle into the wind was a bit closer but still not able to get on step. also seems I can not rotate at all that wing float may be preventing it and adds drag when I try . with no video to see the problems (no boat anymore) It become more guess and trial and error.
Having a new assistant will insure I get more time to fix it.(My Grandson)

I plan to try less added float with no bridging and no contact when rotating . No idea what that is yet .

[Norman Langlois]

I took my plane to a local fly = in. It was well received. Still I felt a bit short having to tell them It has not been flown yet and why. Still all was good to have the enthusiasm for my project. This being an U/L fly - in . real U/L's are very scarce . I made the choice to show rather than run a test on Sat. even though I have already created a solution. Next week end I will be back at the lake. With this new resolve a high float attached tot the tail boom. It is actually one of my first sponsons. this will remain out of the water at any speed above slow taxi 2156

[Norman Langlois]

Test Saturday July 14th was on the positive side. The newest float worked well [pictured above attached to the tail boom]
A problem does still exists . I'm getting closer.
Parameters for the day fuel is several weeks old. local high test mo gas with 10 %
90+ deg. afternoon low wind. calm water. only the occasional wake chop. The lake is elongated east, west
Runs made in both directions. On plane at 6000 rpm speed to 25 mph, No lift off !
Throttle to full 6500 rpm speed to 30 mph no lift off !
The plane seams to be nosing down or hard level hull plane.It could due to a poor hull contour .Still good straight ahead control. One small instance of lift off occurred, when cresting a wake from another boat. A speed surge was present but short lived as well as probably me resisting flight. There was no rotation available full back stick . The plane refused. nose down is easy . I expect an angle of incidence change is needed as well as some other improvements.
Regards Norm

[Norman Langlois]

Its Sat. Again and I have returned safely from another Taxi test. Today's parameters are 4 gals. new 93 octane 10% Mo-Gas. weather is warm and breezy . first runs have altered pitch settings .Ground adjustable IVO 68 inch 2 blade 4 turns produced to much slippage and greatly reduce my max rpm. As well so did 3 and 2 turns I am now only 1 turn from the neutral pitch setting.
Another change was to add in a spacer block under the leading edge mount this produces a 2-1/2 Degree angle of incidence between the hull and wing. It was neutral.

Air born at approx. 32 MPH This being my first time in the air. I tried to keep it low and it refused . I quickly found my self 50 ft in the air. never out of control It just bumped up with each wind gust. I gained level flight and reduced my throttle to 6000 and level cruise was still gaining altitude . Control was good . I was just concerned with getting back down reducing to 4600 I descended to ground effect. I flared a bit to high but it still settled back onto the lake gracefully if a bit sudden. I plan further excursions into the air this week I am on vacation and have the time.
A video taken for the rotation problem shows that the last portion of my sponson are preventing the normal rotation, lift off I flew the plane off the water today.

[WBNH]

Congratulations...

...I've been away from this site a while, but still get e-mail updates when you update this thread.

I was fortunate to see your bird briefly in Greenland. I'm a Y.U.F. member, but was away most of the weekend and couldn't work the fly-in. But I did stop by briefly on Sunday and saw your u/l loaded up on the trailer. Wing rotated. Similar mechanism to the backyard flyer? Or something new?

Anyway. Glad to see so much progress.

[Norman Langlois]

A video from the test runs described above. This was on the second run after 1 prop pitch adjustment the camera was adjusted to shoot the float. Problems related to rotation this video shows that the float is preventing rotation. At least in part.
deleted photo bucket link

These pictures are my resolve and is to be tested tomorrow. I carved into the float where a triangle of planning surface was greatest during lift off speeds.228322842285

[Norman Langlois]

The modifications improved but has not eliminated the lift off speed problem .That being to much is required to break the bond with the water..

Lift off this morning was achieved twice both with much smoother landing . Actually the landings were smooth and well executed. The first was as achieved at 6000 rpm lift off was to around 7 ft and maintained comfortably but only long enough to prove the modification helped but is not the complete solution. The second lift off was again to fast and resulted in 30 + ft altitude. A gain the landing smooth and near perfect.The conditions for today were calm air smooth water conditions . yet still enough air movement in one direction to make all the difference .Yes the dummy that knows absolutely nothing about flying was in fact flying. Sorry that has to do with the other thread, witch was turning into a pissing match.

The relatively short flights are the result of the small lake and the need to land soon or commit and go for altitude and go around. That will come in time when I get the approval. Gee Norm is in training but that's none of anyone's bossiness who or what the plan form is.

[Norman Langlois]

A few additions to the plane
No flight test since the above mentioned. Adding in a yaw string pylon. and an companion pylon 12 in. away.
Also the planned add on of a step. the original intent was that the transom was to be located at the step point and none was needed. well its needed the CG is about 14 inches forward of the transom. The plane will fly off the water but takes excessive ground speed /water to get it done. the result is a controlled but undesirable rapid increase in elevation.
I have it reduced a bit by providing an increased angle of incidence, between the hull and wing. I rather have the transition from water to air at lower speed and not so abrupt. the plane should fly at 25 -27 mph and may require a bit more to break away.230123022303

[martymayes]

I rather have the transition from water to air at lower speed and not so abrupt. the plane should fly at 25 -27 mph and may require a bit more to break away.

That reminded me of flat bottom mud boats used in the marsh. On smooth water, they would accelerate and drag quickly matched the thrust from the motor. If you hit any chop or even ripples in the water, the suction on the bottom would break and the boat would accelerate another 10 mph. It was so abrupt if felt like you were hit from behind.

Sounds like a real 'experiment' in progress Norm.

[Norman Langlois]

There was no test the week end before last. The modifications were not ready. This past week end I did get the test done. The step was in fact a step backwards. The results were poor. this was and add on blister step . the result was a change of the hull plane . Nose down . this was terrible all the incidence angles were off. the thrust line was down because the engine incidence is a fixed 3 degree negative with the wing chord line. when I put a spacer under the leading edge to increase the incidence chord line to hull. it moves with it.When the blister was added it put the wing incidence to neutral with the hull plane and the engine thrust pushes 3 degrees down on the nose creating that bow loaded effect.so much drag I could get only 25 mph at full throttle. a good head wind and some ability to rock the boat [rotate] I got into the air. For just one time with a fine landing I could not repeat a lift off.

All the guilty effects removed I will try again this week end to get it right and move on with the program.
I expect I will finally have it right and this thread will turn into Flight Testing . But not by me.

[Norman Langlois]

Finally some acceptable take off control. But not before another week end of failure. Last week was only a fraction better than the previous post.I had only removed a portion of the step. Now completely removed and back to a point four week ends ago .I get favorable lift off and flying has become more pleasurable even if it is mostly only in ground effect. I have a 2 mile lake I get to fly for a mile at 5 or 6 ft if I wish. I flew 15 to 20 lift off and landings this morning.Till the wind kicked in and I chose to leave.
I have someone coming to give the plane a thorough test flight. before any more is added to my flying .
Something about the plane as it is flying is achieved after 26 mph is reached . With one turn on a 68 inch IVO grnd. adjustable . and a 440 Kawasaki 2.7 belt reduction. @ 5000 rpm and rotate. cruise at 4100 in ground effect. 5000 rpm will produce 50 mph in level cruise.. That engine will give me higher speed @ 6000 but I need to hold the stick hard forward. 6000 Its like an elevator and you need not add any attack angle.

I had a great time today finally getting to enjoy the air time instead of struggling to get into the air.
Looking forward to more such days.

Regards to all Norm

[1684zach]

Norm, Sounds great! Need some pictures! Congrats on getting it figured out, and wish you well with the flight testing. -Zach

[Norman Langlois]

Stand by for a end of August progress report on activities.

Quoting from the test pilots book of mandatory phrases,"the airplane behaves just as we thought it would"; no, correct that, "the airplane flies even better than predicted". OK, I have to admit, "The airplane is still in one piece".

Or as the pilot said, "Don't worry mom, every thing is fine".

Signed,

The Joker:)

[Norman Langlois]

I finally have some good pictures and good videos you need to click on the chevrons to cycle through the videos after the still shots. sorry pictures no longer available ( picasa ) web page 404

[WBNH]

Congratulations. Great video. "Pic 61" is a great touch and go sequence. Smooth looking. I got a chance to see your wing rotate for trailering at the YUF fly-in in Greenland. Nice. Hope you get to enjoy some flying this fall.

[rosiejerryrosie]

Major congrats, Norm. We can only imagine the time and effort you put into solving all the problems and questions that came up during the process of building your airplane. It is gratifying for me to see it flying, I can only guess how it must feel for you. Great work!!

[Norman Langlois]

Winter is approaching. It's going to be long and boring.
I remembered I never gave the final update for the years end.
The post 4th above was actually done by my test pilot signed the Joker.
After that week end I have been the test pilot. Student test pilot. I also conclude it flies better than expected and better than I hopped for . Since being a beginner it is very easy for me to take off and land. It is also gentle hanging in the 5 degree dihedral in calm condition and only a little roll sensitive when its windy when you have a wing up wind.

I flew a solid hour last week end until the cold got to me . I set down and went back to the landing. being that it is experimental I expect there will be some thing to improve and there is ,20 plus take off and landings have caused some flex and stress cracks to the hull cockpit walls.

For the rest of the airplane minor damage comes from road rash, and hanger rash .The plane is holding up well otherwise.

I will be tending to some small changes to the hull. All my issues are related to water behavior. and incidence angles related to the hull.that effect the take off . The balance was spot on. An addition to the elevator was made to trim out the stick pressure.
That now is neutral and only some slight roll pressure was noted last flight, That may have been just the wind condition .
I now have to wait a long looooong wait. for Spring

[WeaverJ3Cub]

Glad to hear everything is going well Norman.

Fix those cockpit/hull walls though—it's never good to hear that stuff is breaking after only 20+ takeoffs and landings.

[Norman Langlois]

Oops Sorry my reporting is rather lacking in detail. Looking at my log the aircraft has seem more stress than just 20 landings that 20 was for last Sat. touch and go practice. Although I never saw any sign before .And Sat. opps were of no sever consequence. The plane has seen several hard landings and one sever the kind that would if it were land based been catastrophic to the landing gear. seasons total landings are 50 + Last year there were no lift offs but still had some stressful opps
The blame goes to the Pilot ME The area will be reinforced I expect there will be no more bad behavior on ether part plane or Pilot

[jedi]

I have been wondering why these EAA pages do not have more posts. I recently rediscovered http://www.homebuiltairplanes.com/forums/forum.php It seems that is where the action is. http://www.homebuiltairplanes.com/forums/light-stuff-area/ is the UL stuff.

[Norman Langlois]

Another flying season is here. Mine is rather late this year . I did finally get the plane to the lake . The winter gave me time to work on some minor changes to the float system. A contour change to the bottom of the main hull. and addition of foam to the rear hulls. to increase displacement. that which was done seams to be good for the take off. the weather was not cooperative and quickly canceled activities. I could not draw any conclusions as to whether I can remove the wing attack angle spacers. [That is another subject from another change] lateral stability was good and static floatation [void of pilot] enough that after coming home I cut away the tail boom float. that tail float was 5# way back aft made the plane cg aft a bit more than I want. Hope next week end is a better one.

[Norman Langlois]

Sat June 22. Winds NW @ 0-1 Surface flat to slight ripple. takeoff is still difficult with no head wind. For every thing else its much better this year. with only a 1 mph head wind take off from idle to lift off is 6 seconds.
It was a real fine morning flew for 2 hrs till the tank was to low to trust any more flights since I can not see it in flight. Activities consisted of touch and goes and go a round's.

[Norman Langlois]

After discussions with my mentor. a trim control, a reflex trailing edge was removed. On the all flying stabilator. It was providing neutral stick pressure.Test trials for Sunday June 23. Again zero winds nothing detectable anyway. Take off in both direction off a glass surface was achieved in a reasonable time of about 10 seconds. I will be applying a bungee to reduce stick pressure. the next test will be to reconfigure the wing to zero applied attack .The wing needed a spacer applying a 2 degree fixed presentation. This is an incidence difference between the hull and wing only . The thrust line is fixed to the wing with a wing mounted engine.
I believe this will be an interesting test.The plane would not fly in this configuration. but do to a particular change that may have a different outcome. if so I have a most exceptional little seaplane I may be able to test on the 4th. It already pleases me extremely.
I will be taking the plane to a fly in by trailer no flying 6th and 7th.

[Norman Langlois]

Test flight Sun. June 30. The wing was lowered to the original attack attitude. This is a nearly neutral in appearance to the hull. Actually 3 degree to the wings chord . Conditions were a 5 to 10 mph head wind. Lift off was easy and repeatable with these conditions. Lift off from idle taxi was between 8 and 15 seconds the first was from a longer run at medium taxi . the other was test and both were videoed second proved to be 15 seconds. I hoped for better but last year this configuration would not even fly. No down wind take off and I think no windless take off ether.I will put back some spacer maybe one inch and call it done.

[Norman Langlois]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b02Q5p7YFpM&feature=youtu.be

This video from Sunday with calm water and no wind showing take off and landing performance.

This will likely end this thread as there will not be much more but to continue to fly and enjoy its been a long project 8 years aand now its complete . I can adjust for conditions with applied attack or fly with rotation only with a head wind.

[Norman Langlois]

I took the plane to a local fly-in. They have a small pond. I was asked to float the plane . So I agreed and also to demo the fast taxi without take off. I am not skilled enough to make the landing even though it is very possible.I am just not ready.
I did do a very fast run and some fine still pics were taken and e-mailed tome later here is one of the best.3059

[Toumaran]

I took the plane to a local fly-in. They have a small pond. I was asked to float the plane . So I agreed and also to demo the fast taxi without take off. I am not skilled enough to make the landing even though it is very possible.I am just not ready.I did do a very fast run and some fine still pics were taken and e-mailed tome later here is one of the best.3059Congrat.... Wow, you take time to optimize your plane... In French we said: La perseverance est les pré requis des resultats!!! Congratulation and Where are you at withy he modifications on your plane???

[Norman Langlois]

I put the plane to bed for the winter. I think to sum it up I am very pleased with how it performs take off is very acceptable , landing very smooth and easy for me. I guess I can not ask for anything more of it. Some damage to the hull from abrasion at launch. This ,will need to be repaired, and while doing so I will make one final modification. I will remove the center keel at the CG and flatten the hull going aft to about a 3 degree angle upward to the transom wall this will reduce the abrasion, and shear that has happened..It will also enhance rotation and reduce drag when on step.
Happy Holidays to all !! I will be around .

[Norman Langlois]

Hello all June is still away some . I am looking for help to gather and refine data relative to my aircraft. Much of data needs more than one pair of hands to obtain. Since I live in Northwood NH. obviously,That needs to be someone local. It does not have to be a person or persons that are engineers . only interested enough to volunteer .Pilots or wannabe pilots a plus. If a pilot that would fly as well there is a weight limit that being 180# stretching to 200#. The plane went through enough changes and still has UN-gathered flight data . Myself being a new pilot I still have just started to lighten up on the grip of the stick . That leaves the wandering eye also very straight ahead.
This 8 year project will end with this plane never going to kit, without further attention.

[jedi]

Norm,

Can you be more specific as to what kind of help you need.

If it is simple stuff you might check with the local high school and see if there are students interested in learning about airplanes. Also check the boys clubs and local airports for wantabees.

[Norman Langlois]

the simple things are just measurements the things it takes a third hand or eyes. weights and balances etc. the more complicated would be flight data. Where I once had family close by now I don't
Sadly my wife does not assist without argument, friends are few and have other agenda. Its just a jumble of things . where I have no one around me that has flying at interest. To document the plane and work out a kit plan would be a whole lot more fun with a partner than alone but of course that is all speculation and a partner would take someone dedicated to the cause. I found very little real interest when I socialized they all have there own agenda and family life, they now focus toward GA and L.S.A. I am alone in this and I feel my age wearing me down. I still have the dream but losing the stamina. I am close .I know my plane is maybe the best structural and a fine and easy to fly .As well I think none can beat for take off and landing ease.After all I am a beginner Its a piece of cake to fly and land for me. It should have a future and not die as a one of a kind plane.So I need that person or persons that would take an interest in ULTRALIGHT planes and the goal to keep the category alive and with the very best planes possible. I am sure I have the right build technique.

[Norman Langlois]

Hello all its been a while I flew one test last year I had promised to stay grounded while I built our new home. I had made a change it was all bad. barley got out of the water. The house finished I am undoing the bad . I raised the rear floats 2 inches today that will give me more rotation next I will add back the part I cut away replacing an enhancing. What I believe was making the whole concept work. I had thought the concave keel line to the stern was adding drag . It seems it was actually creating lift helping to get up on plane quickly.
So yes I am still around and all is well with me . Not with my house hold the wife is terminally I'll with cancer.That will determine If I get to fly a new test. I will post new pictures after I add things back on. Staying busy helps with getting through this bad times.

[Norman Langlois]

5012 This is the before it worked reasonable after I cut it away to a flattened bottom as indicted buy the lines I barley got airborne 5013 This compound addition I hope will provide more lift than drag getting up on plane quickly with the addition of the now raised rear float up by 2 inches5014 Some times to much change does no good at all I hope this works out this time Unfortunately I may no get to test this year.

[Norman Langlois]

Yep I am still at it. Sorry no updates for a few years . I lost my wife to cancer and flying was very limited. only two tests in 2016 the raising of the floats was a bad idea.I lost control of the static and low speed water control resulting in a damaged aircraft. after the repairs and replacing the floats where they where. I got one more shot before cold weather.It now waits for the new flying season.that last test proved what I concluded with that down curve in the hull and the add on works remarkably well. The plane gets up on step almost instantly, but still denies me quick takeoff. I have gone over my history looking for evidence of the most significant changes I made for the worst. I now draw from that and may change back to the original 3 inch spacer that did so well. Since I have made for more elevator travel giving me more up without compromising the down. The spacer will wait for the conclusion of elevator authority

[vaflier]

Norm. Very sorry to hear of the loss of your wife. You have my condolences and best wishes. Of I lived closer I would love to lend a hand on your project but Virginia would be a long commute. Good luck.

[Capndar]

Norm. As has been said - Sorry to hear of the loss of your wife. You have my sincere condolences. I have been lurking for some time. I applaud you and your diligent approach to making this a success.While I am a pilot, I am not an ultralight expert. As a sailboat racer, however, I would never expect to be competitive with the 'rough' surface of your hull, as seen in the photo above. I would expect all of the hull to be as 'slick' as the white appendage appears to be.In racing I sand hulls and keels to 800 or 1000 grit - I believe the hull is consuming a lot of energy.Please know there are lots of us out here pulling for your success.

[Norman Langlois]

Ty I am aware of the need to smooth it out. The surface most likely adds enough drag to create take off problem. Even though it is at low speed, that drag coupled with the arm of thrust is counter productive to elevator authority. I will be building new hull and floats. I will try to do that. Thick layup of resin to accommodate. May not give me that option this is a thin skinned solid foam structure.Being an Ultra light, weight of resin is avoided. I have also suffered structural damage to this thin skin and water infiltration, has added weight. I have a new as built image to share with all of you. I have forgotten to draw in the flapperon. 6219

[jedi]

....... I have a new as built image to share with all of you. I have forgotten to draw in the flapperon. 6219

Norm,

I think you would do well to use technology developed by Paul Weston for his Sea Era Light Sport seaplane hull. Use dual step hull with flat (not curved) surfaces in the water. Also replace the outriggers with a lifting body hull that has a large lifting area to get hull on plane at a low speed. Your wing and wing structure is great but hydro appears to suck. Pun intended. IMHO

Grant

[Norman Langlois]

There would be just one problem with what you propose. To heavy to stay Ultralight class. It is that simple I have never had an interest in building LSA class. I will persevere in the UL. I have been there with this plane I am going backwards now to the best configuration I had and then I will re-manufacture the the hull and rear floats. I can take some of the advise into a new hull but it will have to stay the same area and still use rear floats in the tricycle config producing lateral stability at the same time.

The rear floats Are not the problem and never have been. Viewer and reader perception will be modified soon. One more test !
Please read my post 86 most important to my evident view point.

[jedi]

There would be just one problem with what you propose. To heavy to stay Ultralight class. It is that simple I have never had an interest in building LSA class. I will persevere in the UL. I have been there with this plane I am going backwards now to the best configuration I had and then I will re-manufacture the the hull and rear floats. I can take some of the advise into a new hull but it will have to stay the same area and still use rear floats in the tricycle config producing lateral stability at the same time.

The rear floats Are not the problem and never have been. Viewer and reader perception will be modified soon. One more test !
Please read my post 86 most important to my evident view point.

I agree about staying in the UL Class.

Paul's flat surface and double step do not need to add weight, perhaps. You might like to see his latest designs. Let me know if you are interested in more discussions.

[Capndar]

What's the latest on the flying boat?

[Norman Langlois]

I have been away since April 25 through May 17th. Since my return I have taken the plane out of mothballs and fire her up . Made repairs to the transport. All I am waiting for is the day to be flyable and the time to do so. I expect this week end may provide one. As in the previous posts. I expect to prove I have optimized the configuration.

[Capndar]

Norm we are all pulling for you!


I have been away since April 25 through May 17th. Since my return I have taken the plane out of mothballs and fire her up . Made repairs to the transport. All I am waiting for is the day to be flyable and the time to do so. I expect this week end may provide one. As in the previous posts. I expect to prove I have optimized the configuration.

[Norman Langlois]

I have achieved my goal. Though this mornings test is a bit tainted by wind conditions the area used was not effected. I have achieved the 6+ second flat water take off without an official stop watch and a better standard it is approximate. I am pleased regardless it means I can not get trapped in a place with no wind. She flies on command when up elevator applied

The video a bit shaky but still good.
https://youtu.be/Cxr3ZfKNC10 I had waited for total calm conditions. they were predicted but not to be the air was ruff and conditions rapidly deteriorated I landed and before I even left it was UN-flyable wind conditions

[Capndar]

Awesome Norm!! That really looked too easy after all the challenges!

[jedi]

Awesome Norm!! That really looked too easy after all the challenges!
That looked like a great takeoff. Good job.

Your patience and perservence is rewarding. Continue to Be carefull of conditions until you get more current practice.

[Norman Langlois]

I did take the plane back for another test flight and more video on a much calmer day. Unfortunately the video did not come out. The results were as good as the above video so its not a fluke of wind conditions that were present during that video.The winds were aloft and not on the water. I have made permanent changes to the hang cage that fix the attack angle eliminating the spacer. During the last flight I experienced FLUTTER while descending. I believe over speed from a power on decent. causing the tail to oscillate. I have added cable tail brace. I will get some video of the next tests.

[Norman Langlois]

At this point I would like to draw some conclusion . Over the long process of the development of the plane ,many suggestions were made. All have real base for the opinions of those contributing . I now ask you to open your minds to what I have put forth. a true Ultra light is not general aviation applicable. Other conditions need to be assessed. the low speed required of a UL means less need for the optimized coefficient hull designs and all that has become considered necessary of heavy general aviation. Now based on my hull I can optimize it and achieve a max take off of maybe 2 seconds less with all the smoothing and sharpening of hull contour. But what for I ask I have proven all that unnecessary. An Ultra light does not have to be efficient it needs only to fly well and be safe. I tried hard to make a sturdy airplane and use good construction technique. And after all this Ultra lights have no future. I believe soon private aviation will be a thing of the past and only for a few wealthier individuals that have time and money. The economy says so even more than I . The cost of living put the big boy toys on the back burner for ever. If we let the Ultralight option slip away we all loose. I had hoped to make a difference .I was born to late. I expect I will keep tinkering a bit but it will be all for not. I now wounder what even to do with the plane soon I may be unable to fly the years are taking a toll . Don't be surprised if I offer it all up for sale. Who would want to invest in a dead market.

[choppergirl]

Choppergirl, that's who :)

You create your dream because you want your dream. Not for any other reason. So don't let any other reason stop you. How few people were building ultralights when Santos Dumont built his Demoiselle? How few saw any future in it at all?

Don't die with your music still in you (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=879JA4okBvg)...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o7ysZSensVk

Repeat after me: the roaring 80's Golden Age of Ultralights was probably pretty great. But I can singlehandedly make today even better. We have the technology, we can rebuild her. I *am* the Golden Age of Ultralights! Say it with me! I *am* the Golden Age of Ultralights!

I'll probably die myself before finishing my plane, from serious health problems. I want to fly under my own power before that happens. In a battle where I know I am ultimately going to lose the war, that is my win scenario. Therefore, I'm going down fighting to the end; it's the warrior way. Ad finem! To the end. Morituri te salutant!

My family also doesn't believe I can do it. I know my family thinks I'm crazy. But I keep getting all the major parts I need, one by one by one... and every time I scavenge a new piece, I show them, and still they roll their eyes at me. It's just par for the course.

So grab my hand and I'll lift you back in the boat, old man. Quitting ain't our style. We're the hardcore dreamers, warriors, fabricators, loners, mad scientists, and hopefully... pilots. The hardest road is the best road. Your welcome in my motley rag tag cheap skate Flying Circus (http://air-war.org/Cheapskate Flyer issue 1.jpg) any old time.

[Norman Langlois]

First Ty for that !

I have since taken the plane up again. The flight went well take offs are as before getting up on plane is the biggest time factor. The stick inputs to lift the nose then let it go forward takes a bit of practice if one want to break time records.
During the last outing I had a still shot of the plane floating static. I never showed one of these . Some in the past asked if I had one. here that is.6556

[Norman Langlois]

the still shot and videos were 6:45 PM very calm the wind direction UN-detectable
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPaGbKi8ysU.these are the latest video

[Norman Langlois]

I have said the hull will need to be replaced . That is because water weight from cracks and weight gain of the hack and chop from reworking the bottom. I am not liking the sharp incline of the forward portion that creates the cockpit it still presents some drag from the hump that was mostly removed but not all. I would also make it more flat bottomed in this forward area. Moving toward a planning hull and away from a cutting hull
The plane works fairly well and one may say leave well enough alone. Does anyone see any positive in the present shape, to leave it as is

[Bill Berson]

The up turned bow looks a bit odd but shouldn't effect performance. It sets very high in the water.
The aft mounted sponsons might drag in the water and limit takeoff rotation.

[Norman Langlois]

I have had many comment about those rear floats and the probability they would inhibit rotation. They do not when the correct wing incidence is used with the hull at plane.
My most recent flights and there were about 6 take offs only 2 videos were even visible. The posted video in the 10th thread speaks the truth. Every take off can be done in about 8 seconds with or without any head wind help. The above video clip was from the boat launch first take off . You can not tell much from it but, trying to beat the clock I discovered I was taking off to short with no head wind and the plane drops some even in ground effect. No more games.Please accept my word the plane flies, and does so without any adverse actions from the rear floats.The required rotation is so slight, none is actually required if you want to wait the plane flies off the water in about 12 seconds when the air speed is sufficient. The coupling between water and air speed is broken down slowly! with all the minor hull deficiencies , but eventual it is riding on such a small area at the stern, it just flies off as I always surmised possible. Shape off all the components even the angle on the rear floats reduce the time from static to on plane. After that if one was to count from on plane to inflight you would see its about 3 seconds. If I have any improving to do it will be cutting the firsts 5 seconds down.
My question was in reference to the changing incidence from static to plane . Maybe I should not have asked .I messed the whole plane up and delayed all by 3 years when I made those other unnecessary changes. I am afraid it will pitch forward if I make the forward hull flatter. the present shape could be needed . The little down curve at the stern certainly was.
Thank you all for any and all comments.

[Capndar]

Norm I thought the takeoff looked good - and love the static side shot! Congrats again

[Bill Berson]

Looks to be working fine. If you do decide to make a new hull/fuselage the tailboom could be a bit larger for increased torsional stiffness.

[Norman Langlois]

Bill you have asked me in another thread to bring the plane to OSH 18 . Im not much of a speaker but yes I would do a forum on the plane at OSH
That is a year away and I am spending the winter in FL. Back in NH in late April I expect. Planning a forum can be done. I have not q clue how to do that. I would need help.
I would like anyone to add what they want to see and hear projected at such a forum 8 years building lots of pictures of failures and redone.

[Bill Berson]

Norm, sounds good.
I am building a self-designed ultralight now. My plan is to bring it to Oshkosh either finished or not. Unfinished is just as good I think.
Perhaps we could do a forum together? "Designing your own ultralight" or something.
The forum request deadline is made in the middle of May 2018, so plenty of time.

[Norman Langlois]

We can plan for it and see what turns up in the spring I have been trying to correlate the time line by my photographic record . I can not testify to being a good record keeper. I did take pictures lots of them. some where lost but they were contemplated design even spent a season and built a model flying wing that never went anywhere. In 05 I was 57 years old then I think I started the plane with the commitment to build the roll former that makes the U channel the ribs are made from.Completed that Jan. 07 The rest of the story is all R & D tooling to attain a result acceptable to a 103- 7 compliant UL

[Norman Langlois]

While in Fl. I will be setting up another computer environment from which to communicate. complete with all my airplane stuff and work on it.

[Norman Langlois]

There is a little time left before going south for the winter. I have been working on the rear float support. I intend to redo the whole system. While doing the truss parts I though to share how I anneal and stamp bend or most any deforming of 6061 T6 and other hardened aluminum.
I use first a black marker where I intend to deform then heat with a torch preferably a plumbers torch since I have melted many with the rose bud at work. One needs only heat till the ink burns away. If using the propane torch a little extra time helps .

Attempting to deforms tubing without heating results in cracks . I needed to create flattened specific lengths to make a new truss. Welding aluminum on my plane has been avoided when ever possible . The rear truss is light duty . This sees landing but not sever forces applied . during taxi and take off again not much force. I have broken it once and that was over the road . I now support the plane so not to load the support subject to shock from ruts and bumps .
6711671267136714

[Norman Langlois]

The truss in the last picture can not be reused and shows the rear float in its first form.The latest revision has more foam applied and the new float will be less of the deep water portion and more of the upper. The last revision works well and supports the plane well when taxiing. I am chancing it again,by removing some of the lower portion. I am not sure that it has assist to getting up on plane, or actually inhibits. If the later is true than drag will be reduced while maintaining static and taxi stability.6715

I will be trying to reduce bow wave with a new hull and the piling up of that wave on the rear floats the latest video shows that to be responsible for much of the first 6 seconds after applied power.

[Bill Berson]

I use a Sharpie black marker and propane torch to anneal aluminum also. Works good.
Interesting tube truss connections. Should be some diagonal members however, I think, for a true truss.

[Norman Langlois]

True Bill
putting a name to the structure that's all. This type of support has worked well for me with the cable brace. It is very light and still resists rotation with the ends bent as they are they form 3 torsion tubes with the spreaders limiting deformation while still allowing some flex . the new one will also make use of torsion bar/tube configuration with the three members coming to the same plane. with complex bends. Then joined to the tube skeleton that is embedded in solid foam . these floats with there supporting structure weigh less than 10 lbs each.

I have been fortunate to have use of a stick mandrel tube bender this can make 4 sizes up to 7/8 and bend 180 degree with no heat required.
I used the anneal process for a lot of the build. One of the toughest bends is a 1 inch .062 tube had to always heat before bending. I found the ink worked well as the indicator, but still better when using the propane torch, I lost a few parts using high heat devices, was much harder to detect over heating.
The lighten holes that are also coined are cold pressed. The bending of sheet limited to 60 degrees eliminate other wise cracked structure since 6061-T6 does not bend well at 90 and greater . If I do another air frame I plan to use a 6 sided structure . Unlike the boom and spar having \_/ this shape . It will use three short and 3 long still forming the triangle with one main side riveted and joined at two shorts. I also taper my structure , both to reduce weight and to add torque resistance.

[Norman Langlois]

The new support frame work. After removing the old floats I weighed them .What was once under 10# now is 15
I do expect the remake will be less than 10
I'd like to point out all the compound angles and complex bends that make up the mount point these make a very good structure and have little give for the weight. this is better than the old setup. With the cable brace it works.
While most of the frame is identical The foam support skeleton is not but should be less and the reworked old floats have much more glass and resin. One might want less but often gets more. size and surface area will make the difference. I need to hold the same displacement.

67226723

[Norman Langlois]

I have made changes to the angle of the floats . Static should have the tips up more and the inflight angle will be level on top with bottom at attack yet to be determined.

the portion of the float frame that projects down is a rest point and will be protruding from the main float. this part is always suffering gravel abrasion at the launch. The old floats were glassed over but quickly worn down to raw aluminum. I may panel and fill that part since it acts like a ruder in the water and if weight allows, may create an actual water ruder attachment here.

[Norman Langlois]

After working out the angle of the old floats I drew and super imposed the new float. this new frame cam out higher than desired. so a change to float shape and inner skeleton was required. the new float is lighter and does in fact apply more displacement. While this may look to be more drag and inhibit to rotation they will be higher out of the water at high speed plan than the old system when finished.

To change the subject I had to revisit Hot Wire foam cutting and wondered if others had Ideas on home devices to get the job done.
When I looked online I saw hobby kits and home made cutters using 12 V battery chargers. I also used one . I also have integrated a dimmer switch in an extension cord to get a finer adjustment. This gives me control of the battery chargers output and make adjustments to different wire size and cutters. heavier wire bent to cut shape and knife cuts. Some pictures for you from the new floats.67346734673567366737
I also cored some of the panels. the make up is 3 two inch plus two 1 1/2 panel cored the middle 3 for a 10 oz. saving to each float

[Norman Langlois]

Some numbers,this foam weighs 2# per cubic ft. these floats weigh 3.25# each and equal 202# of displacement. After coring they weigh 2lbs 10 oz. each. This is before expanded foam applied. I use a urethane foam as adhesive and filler. total weight to this point 8.25# with aluminum all support structure

[Norman Langlois]

Almost time to go north.
I have been looking at my other posts. I have another blog and not all viewers see everything since they are not equal. Here is a short landing video. I have been studying the angles, assuming we all see the same static image before you activate the video. The angles at touchdown. Landing and take off are the same planing attitude, power off landing power max take off with applied elevator.In previous posts and discussions . The forward hull angles were seen to be hindrance, the hull bump now removed.
Does anyone see anything wrong withe these lines and angles ?
https://youtu.be/0IjlTAjXrYA

[Dana]

Seems an awful lot of wing incidence when the hull is level. How does it look in level flight (cruise)?

Edit, I see in the other video it doesn't look that bad, but it sure sits way back in the water. Perhaps some more flotation aft would help? But it seems to do OK on the water.

[Norman Langlois]

Thank you Dana
The static view angles are extreme . The above new float work is intended to reduce some of that. In the landing still view. I think the hull is level that is the main portion. I had thought the bow angle to be extreme ,now I think maybe not. I have no level flight to show. That which I have predates the as is. In the static the wing incidence is nearly 18 degrees. That does concern me , when wind conditions are unfavorable. When the plane is on step that actual angle is unknown. I assume it would be same as the landing. Excess power forces the nose down ,that makes some difference . Now that I have the elevator authority, that is not a problem. In level flight maybe 8 and 10 degrees to take off. I have made comments that what feels like level flight is difficult at full power it climbs. This wing has a negative 5 degree stall. A chart I was looking at stated that, and no stall all the way to 18 degree.
My early tests with the V-tail had a very high attack angle . It was difficult to control . The present does not .

I asked that if anyone see something wrong speak up and make a comment . Because I do plan to make an all new main hull. The angles appear to be correct. I wish only to change how the hull interacts with water during the transition to on step. this hull creates a significant bow wave . That I feel could be improved. It works it does not need to be changed but this hull needs to be replaced from hack and mod and water weight gain.

[Bill Berson]

The angle looks correct to me.
Might need a longer hull to get more buoyancy and lift over the bow wave. Or more tail authority if you can't get the nose up (Bigger tail)

[Norman Langlois]

Bill
Sorry if I was not clear there is plenty of elevator authority now. Flying it of the water is easy and on demand.
The angle is variable as photgraphed in any past photography do to the power applied and then insufficient elevator travel at that time. That was do to insufficient travel in the control for up elevator.
A lengthening of the flat portion going forward may be applied.

[jedi]

Norm,

When do you plan to start construction on the new hull?

I would like to have a discussion beforehand.

[Norman Langlois]

As soon as I am back in NH. I will finish up those new rear floats. Hope to make test flights with them early May. Considering the time line for Oshkosh 2018. Work on a new hull will need to begin soon or I will have to skip it till after. Jedi are you going to Sun n Fun?
I will be there with Amos April 12 & 13 . Now that I am in Fl for the winters I can go there easier than Oshkosh. Its a little over an hours drive from Brooksville.
Jedi shoot me an e-mail .I don't have your info on this PC . I have a cell Number but do not know if its a good one. I have time on my hands with little to do for a few weeks yet.

[jedi]

As soon as I am back in NH. I will finish up those new rear floats. Hope to make test flights with them early May. Considering the time line for Oshkosh 2018. Work on a new hull will need to begin soon or I will have to skip it till after. Jedi are you going to Sun n Fun?
I will be there with Amos April 12 & 13 . Now that I am in Fl for the winters I can go there easier than Oshkosh. Its a little over an hours drive from Brooksville.
Jedi shoot me an e-mail .I don't have your info on this PC . I have a cell Number but do not know if its a good one. I have time on my hands with little to do for a few weeks yet.

check your personal messages.

[Norman Langlois]

I have created a photo stream on i cloud.

I have added comments to help explain . The photo stream is not a time line its scrambled dragging your courser over an image brings out the comment to view if there is one. Videos are at the end

E-mail pjlucky282@gmail.com

or try this link https://www.icloud.com/sharedalbum/#B0kJtdOXm8VwHDv

[Norman Langlois]

New floats applied I hope the differences are all positive. The others originally tapered going aft then needed the upper 2 inch deck to have enough displacement to be stable. They became heavy,15#. These have more displacement and weigh less than 8# with the support frame , bare no fiberglass 71837184

[jedi]

New floats applied I hope the differences are all positive. The others originally tapered going aft then needed the upper 2 inch deck to have enough displacement to be stable. They became heavy,15#. These have more displacement and weigh less than 8# with the support frame , bare no fiberglass 71837184

I like the rear float design with no bottom curved surface. It could possibly be improved with a step at the angle break. Keep that edge sharp, not rounded. Hope that works for you. If needed I can make further suggestions.

Tell is more about the wheeled cart. Is it ground handling only?

[Norman Langlois]

Jedi to answer your question. The cart is for ground handling. It can be used for launch. It was used for that in the beginning. It was three wheel then and was unstable with wind conditions.
I use the special trailer for direct launch and the cart is used to move from the trailer to the hanger (garage)
If Oshkosh 18 is made possible for me. I will need to bring the cart ,the launch trailer will not be there with me.

On the float I hope no additional step is required.The floats will quickly be above water.

[Norman Langlois]

Update . Things are not going as planned. I think Oshkosh is not going to happen. If I go it will be just as a spectator.
The new floats are almost finished. I get my car back next week and maybe by the week after.72897290 I can get to the lake for a test flight. A little paint and out the door for inspection setup and run up.

[Norman Langlois]

I have posted those new photos. I took care to center the camera level with the top of the floats and leveled out the airplane. The piece of conduit across show the relation . So I can see that they are almost at the same elevation as the older setup. I detect that the old setup may have had the lower tube brace dragging in the water when the plane jacked before on plane was achieved. This new setup is 1 inch higher and there is more displacement and should be above water even when jacked back fore the thrust up on plane.
When the bow wave develops.There is a steep up angle this has not been a problem .I only hope with the increase of displacement. This does not result in a nose down drag by creating some incompatible relation to the main hull. This has been very tricky . I still don't understand why that after portion on the main hull was so important.

[wmgeorge]

Norm I have been reading all this and I am so impressed. My thought and its stupid I know, my wife uses a commercially built kayak that is maybe 11 ft long, poly something plastic and very tough and light. If a person was to put a internal keel/brace inside on the bottom and aluminum attachments like you have fab above and spray foamed filled. One of these floats on each side and these are made to flow very easily in the water. Just a thought and you already have these done.

[Norman Langlois]

wmgeorge
Thank you for your reply.
Over the years many suggestions have been made. One notable was that round surfaces where not good for aircraft floats.
I had round floats for the rear. They behaved very badly and thus I was told to pursue. shapes that had sharp edges and abrupt ends . as on a wing tip when air migrates to the top of the wing lift is lost. a similar bad happens the water also migrates around and this relates to a suction . From Jedi's post he suggests maybe a step. This would help reduce any suction.
Putting aside these suggestions. I would like to make this point. I have been convinced in my own mind that ultra light aircraft ,having a low take off speed. Do not need to adhere to the strict requirements of heavy general aviation seaplanes. these need a much faster take off speed. that means a much higher hydrodynamic drag ratio. The multiplier is not linear with aerodynamic drag. The suction that hold the hull and requires steps and air induction in some cases . Is not as relevant to ultralight aircraft. I be leave the my craft shows this to be so. I once related my conclusion to the the weight shift that used a zodiac hull and still lifts off. Round sided and no step. It still lifts off,maybe not as well.
Using a Kayak hull could fly . The FAA allows 30# exemption for each pontoon and 10# for each sponson and only 30# for a hull
Even though the Kayak plastic hull feels light it probably weighs close to the exemption. The addition of foam and structure would make it undesirable. If the air frame weight even allowed this option.
If I remember I started with a complete air frame weight of around 240# I realized I was not going to make a wheeled ultra light and deviated toward the seaplane. Removing all the gear structure nibbling away I have always been restricted from many suggested solutions because of weight. The use of more resin to smooth surfaces has always been out of the question since resin is very heavy again hydrodynamics are less of an concern because of lift off speeds. I have used resin and glass to seal out water and give the foam a thin skin .Also taking care to use less fiberglass and resin for structure. and using tubing instead. I also opted for solid core when I could .High density in combination with low density where possible. The high density for external glassed surfaces and low density internal. The main hull has a fiberglass spine, and contains no aluminum skeleton other than the air frame junction.

[Norman Langlois]

7292 I threw some paint on them. It shows the water line in blue. These should work well now I need to get to the lake .

[wmgeorge]

Norm thanks for the well thought out answer. I figured someone you or someone else had already covered those float. Your work on this project is a pioneering step forward and I think you have done a great job of getting it airborne!

[Norman Langlois]

I did not take the plane to the lake. Instead I had it weighed and found that over time, with all the hack and chop,water weight gain and a few add on for improvement, had become seriously over. Water is responsible for most of it. Some is dirt accumulation. the rest just plain extras.
I am now recalculating and a new hull is mandatory . Weight distribution will also need adjustment. I doubt it will fly again this year.
I cut the hull off and removed the luxury pedals they are 10# the hull went from 45# to 60# I have to find and remove 58#
That means a new hull of less than 30#73307331

[jedi]

I did not take the plane to the lake. Instead I had it weighed and found that over time, with all the hack and chop,water weight gain and a few add on for improvement, had become seriously over. Water is responsible for most of it. Some is dirt accumulation. the rest just plain extras.
I am now recalculating and a new hull is mandatory . Weight distribution will also need adjustment. I doubt it will fly again this year.
I cut the hull off and removed the luxury pedals they are 10# the hull went from 45# to 60# I have to find and remove 58#
That means a new hull of less than 30#73307331

I and a few friends would like to help with hull design if logistics can be worked out. Can you give some specifications on hard points and other limitations / requirements.

[Norman Langlois]

This is a copy of a email I sent to a yacht designer.


I have an update for you and another request for your opinion.
I did rework the rear floats. they came out well. Before I took the plane for testing I did a weigh in. the plane had become extremely over weight. to continue to fly would be a violation.
I decided to go forward with a new hull to attempt a severe reduction of weight. I need to get down from the original main hull weight of 45lb or 20.5 kg to 20 lb or 9.5 kg
That is only to show you how much my options are now minimized.
I n review of the last takeoffs I notice the plane uses only the same area for planing as it does at static that equates to 12.5 sq Ft or 1.161 Sq M
Only the angle of attack changes and the resulting lift generated at 22 MPH or 19.1 knots this is the speed at which the plane reaches lift to gross weight.With me as the pilot that the gross ,equates to 474LB or 215 kg at the max allowed US FAR. 103 -7 under which I must fly max empty weight is 304lbs. or 138.1kg. this does not have to include pilot weight. At 24 knots the plane reaches a gross lift of 560 lbs or 254 kg
24 knots is also a requirement this is the required power off stall not to exceed limit.

The area required to float is 7.5 cubic ft or .20105 cu m the area in square presented for planning is12.5 sq ft since the total displacement is shared with the rear system only the forward area is used to get lift to plane.
Is there an optimum area for a given weight that you know of . Or a table for calculating?
I'm forced to use the smallest area and use a shape that offers structure. I am considering a simple wedge with tunnel tri hull like some of the first tunnel three hull pickle forks.

I am a bit stuck for ideas on this. The imposed limits choice. A simple hydro plane has not enough structural shape. I think I need the tri hull for structure?
Any input will be appreciated. the project is stalled
regards Norm

[Norman Langlois]

The above is for info . It does not cover all the most pertinent . Here a some pictures to contemplate the previous solutions taken and the desired result achieved.
7338 This the original bottom later modified in 3 separate attempts to achieve a satisfactory hydro dynamic behavior. A hump at the forward incline was producing severe bow drag. After removal flying was easier, but still elusive ,without a head wind. These conditions were before the elevator control limit was discovered. So many discussions and suggested solutions before this was found out. 7339 Still searching ,I cut away the most important bottom feature the slight down curve at the stern. 7340 This cut made getting on plane impossible with the limited elevator still not discovered. I next raised the rear floats also a disaster. This resulted in no balanced control and a ripped up wing. Then I put the rear floats back approximately.where they were. and added back an enhanced , stern curve. 7341 With this added back on there was no more problem getting up on plane. It now could fly with any reasonable run but still liked a slight head wind. I gave myself a long think tank . Muddling over all the history, remembered a better time getting off the water . the suggestion that I did not have enough elevator authority . made me look into that linkage . I had made a second connector that was actually,longer. I removed and the short one and installed the long. All the take off problems were gone flight in any condition even down wind.

[Norman Langlois]

Now with good take off behavior . One thing kept creeping back into my mind,why did the plane have increased take off difficulty each time on the same day of use. I suspected a few things ,weight gain,or engine temp. It may have been both or just the one, water weight gain.

So now I must make a new hull . What have I proven to all my skeptics if only one thing an Ultra light does not share the same needs of general aviation. No step required, it flies off . It definitely could use a better shaped hull , maybe not anything like I was thinking. why not a simple planning hull like a hydro plane . these aircraft are not meant for use in rough water or windy conditions that create rough water. displacement required is 7.5 cu. ft min. a surface equal or better than the existing 12.5 sq ft presented before and running on at planning to lift off.

The final requirement is this must not weigh more than 20 lbs. I need a few lbs for adjustments to redistribute the weight to obtain balance of the CG. expect to move any hull forward 16 inches and like wise the pilot. those 10 lb ruder pedals will have to become hinged foot pedal with pulley.

[Norman Langlois]

Sorry for the long story. Anyone considering should remember the plane has a very thick USA 35 modified airfoil. This wing produces lift from the get go unlike many thinner wing designs that reach flying speed before rotation . This plane becomes lighter as each MPH is achieved. and reaches balance of 510 lbs with a 180 lb pilot and 30 lbs of fuel at or about 22 mph.

This to point out that the hydro dynamic drag is not linear. With the surface area rapidly reducing.
As the latest video shows that very poor hull bottom still gets the job done, in 6 seconds. That's time after planning is achieved. The first 6 seconds can be improved with design . That is now the great big problem to do it with the least amount of weight the better.

Lastly any improved hull will be a 58 lb or more reduction from what that last video showed the plane do

[Bill Berson]

Flat bottom floats have the least hydrodynamic drag. Your hull is almost flat bottom, so should be fine on calm water.
The early homebuilts from the 30’S had flat bottoms.
A guy in my RC model club built some flat bottom floats after watching mine fly off so well. His worked fine and then he wanted to experiment and carved a tunnel hull. It wouldn't lift off with the deep tunnel hull. It just adds water drag with no water lift.
Several float design articles in the Flying and Glider pamphlets from EAA.

[Bill Berson]

Norm, see if this link to Pietenpol Floats.
Edit, doesn't link.
Maybe someone has a copy of Pietenpol Floats article to put here?

[Norman Langlois]

adding more photos to define this subject. 7342 notice the hump removal defined here and the respective influence of that stern plate addition. That item is not understood by me . However it is very important to how this hull flew off the water. this next photo is trying to show the required thickness of the hull as a whole . In reference to the static photo (previous posts) draw a line through from the blue paint line to the bow this is the needed area I determined at 12.5 sq ft. the depth and cubic of same to be 7.5 cu ft for displacement. 7343

Now The whole plane float design change would represent a much bigger problem of balance . Such as twin floats. With no rear rear system. I personally do not wish to fly a float plane with its high center of gravity and potential for a flip over. Though it does have a higher weight allowance. Twin floats would be very difficult to support and build with only 60 lb allowance.
My existing air frame is also to heavy to add structure.
The shortest route and simple fix is to just create a new main float. This could be done.Yet balance is still a problem . The shorter lighter hull is not enough to balance the aircraft. The pilot must move forward also.
That will put more importance on the planning surface required in the high speed taxi.( watch one of the last take off videos the one that starts from the beach) Take notice of the hull at fast taxi . Much of the forward hull is not needed its just splash protection .A slight up curved surf board would do as well.
A tunnel hull shape is not required a V hull is not required . In my humbled opinion not much change other than to do a better transition from static to fast taxi planing surface. And remove any potential bow drag shape. Maybe a flattened spoon bow transition to a narrow flat bottom stern with that stern plate or just a slight down curve . The down curve ( because it seemed to play an important part for getting up on plane) the plate because this helps with separation and fly off.

One other desire would be a shape that also reduces the initial bow wave. Would a flat forward hull ,not unlike very early hydro planes do. I do mean early designs, before the forward sponson jet boats.

[Norman Langlois]

I got my hands on a rel big foam block. 15X48X192 . So I have been at work making templates and carved out a rough core for a new hull. this core weighs in at 15.4 # still and needs more removed. 737573767377
Compare this profile to the static photo and you can see where im going with this.
With the low density foam I wish to keep a thicker forward hull , while eliminating any upper cockpit and keep it open . I'm not sure I can afford to. I currently have a 32# total and need to have some other aluminum structure added for moving weight forward.

[Norman Langlois]

After some carving I have the weight down to 12.4 still in rough needs some more.7391 I'm not sure if many out there want to see how I get the foam cutting done. Its sometimes very difficult ,I have to make tools . There are some out there one can buy. The ones I saw would just not do. Even for this one I had to borrow a real hot wire power supply. Because of a few of my tools being made from 1/16 S/S tig wire my power supplier just burned up. It was just a fan dimmer switch, couldn't handle this one. Even with the real thing the cording needs to be heavy duty. Or time outs are required. these two tools are what I needed to go deep and cut cavities. The 1/16 S/S wire will hold a shape allowing contouring . 73927393

[Norman Langlois]

Today's work. the tool I used to cut the concave. 7395 the results 7396 After some sanding and blending 7397 lastly I made cuts to the bottom . I hope I have made a good choice. 7398 When finished, I see this having a behavior that is positive. Water first push up a forward bow wave, the center having a slight cutting hull . The rest would act like a chine. Water pushing up and as the hull rises the after portion is riding on the center portion where it transitions to flat ,not unlike my first hull. The contour should enhance the otherwise week foam hull. This is much lighter than the old hull. It is thicker , wider and actually has more displacement. the core now weighs 11 lbs.

[Norman Langlois]

Waiting on supplies. 7414 The latest stats I have the core down to 9 lbs 10 oz. and the ruder pedals to 4 lbs. 3 oz. after removing unnecessary metal tube and drilling weight reduction holes. I also cut the cockpit cavity deeper. I like my pedals and there is need for weight forward as long as I stay on track they will be part of the new setup.

[Norman Langlois]

After acquiring needed supplies. I did a vacuum bag peel ply using Kevlar . I was not set up for vacuum bagging so I had to get innovative. I had sat in on a carbon fiber forum .I Took note of the fine points. Since I was not about to go out and buy a vacuum pump as recommended [ diaphragm ] type . I used the suggested cheap path . A small venturi device and my compressor a 6.0 scfm at 90 psi system. The veturi device are sold by many sources. From $190.00 down to $32. If you know what you are looking at. The little black block in the pictures shown of said device is very little indeed about 1/2 inch thick 1 X 1 1/2 inch .Its small but very powerful. those shown have a muffler attached . If you want to use a venturi do this just type AIR -VAC you will understand after looking around a bit what I mean. I went further , but by the time I was through buying many brass fittings for my multi device . I chose to run a dual system with gate valves. Using not just the venturi but also the intake of my compressor. I had spent over $150 bucks on bits and pieces. But it worked. Even better than I could hope for. The intake side of the compressor is a high volume reduction while the little venturi is strong at 27.5 it is low volume and very slow for a large bag. with both turned on it took only a minute or 3 to suck it down tight. Baring the many leaks from folds after enough tape. I did the layup in 4 stages the socket, the cabin, the forward deck and last the entire bottom and transom
Each the resin to foam the kevlar. then work on the polyester fabric. next the polyester fiber fill [sponge] this sponges up the excess. I did by one of the best vacuum bagging material its very elastic and has good memory also reusable the tape pulls of the resin and other stick points. I also used a double sided bagging tape . When I needed direct to a former layup .I had found that applying the tape to the foam caused to much damage. In the beginning I Had purchased a $44. sheet of poplar ply 4X8 sheet for a vacuum table. This saved me alot of expensive double tape I just used blue painters tape, taping the bag directly to the wood. 74437444

[Norman Langlois]

After all the kevlar and resin applied the weight is only 16.8 Lbs. Had I used the high density foam it wold be 26.6 Lb
It is hoped that by using a full kevlar jacket I will have the strength of an otherwise glass and kevlar composite. Like the old hull. 74457446 7447

[robert l]

Are there any structural features inside the foam or does the Kevlar provide all the strength needed ?
Bob

[Norman Langlois]

Hi Bob
No there is no additional structures . The form shape contours and cockpit galley walls are about all there is. Better than a flat stress skin . With kevlar I certainly hope its enough . The 281 bi directional plain weave is strong stuff. I expect I will be adding a 3"wide perimeter layer on the top to bottom overlay. I think that will be all.

[robert l]

I've never done any composite stuff so that's the reason I was asking. I would like to try it someday and getting feed back from those who have done it, (like you) is a big help. I'll be lurking around.
Thanks,
Bob

[jedi]

Looks nice Norm.

[Norman Langlois]

74707471 Its back on the new total weight is 296.5 lbs
That includes all original parts and hardware. That weight may go up a bit or down the electric wire cabling will shorten and something needs to be made for instruments.
I moved the seat forward to offset the reduction of hull weight. A full assemble inside the garage and rerun the calculations to see.
The new hull weight after painting was only 19 lbs
The size of that in displacement is 9 cu ft the foam core was 9.8Lbs before all the resin and kevlar.

Anyone thinking of adding floats to an 103 legal UL might consider a foam construction method it is stronger than you may think and far lighter per pound than any other construction and totally unsinkable if perforated
Adding a tube skeleton would make for a secure attachment point or some thing of similar nature using a bonding as I used.
Example If I were to redo the rear floats I may opt for a pocket bond and eliminate the internal tube .and add only an wear strip for abrasion. further reducing my total weight by up to 10 lbs aft

[Norman Langlois]

I have it ready to go. I am at the last minute . I may yet make the lake before I leave for Fl., no I am not taking it with me.7490
Here I have it hanging from the ceiling ,its not touching the floor.
That point is 17 inches back from the LE.
In the last post I made claim of weight. Im not sure where it ended up, but it is close to the limit.
I plan next year to redo the rear floats .

[Norman Langlois]

Some of the latest pictures. setting it up for the transport. 74917492 It is ready and I do hope to get it to the lake.

[Norman Langlois]

A short video of the hydraulic lift in action When I referred to the redo of the rear floats again it will be do reduce weight further and to add wheels for to make it amphibious to do away with this transfer system and become direct launch or dry launch. I do not think it will be full amphibious mostly a ground handling and direct to hanger no cart.
https://youtu.be/6tea9wVWlF4

[Norman Langlois]

This is not a good report. I crashed the plane yesterday. This was like a ground loop . Diving the plane in the nose folded up crushing me in the sandwich. I am sore and bruised,but fine. I have vowed not to fly anymore. I feel this is pilot error and was avoidable .I'm not using good sense. I simply should not fly anymore I'm not ahead of the plane, and the conditions.There was a 5 mph east wind.
The best part is I am mostly unhurt. I am unsure what to do with this project from here forward. The air frame is undamaged only the new forward hull and the rudder pedal support suffered .

To say that the new hull performed well is mute now . It was very fast and maneuverable on step/plane I had flown it a short distance . On a second run in an unfavorable cross wind direction shortly after lift off it rolled suddenly and dove in.

This project needs a new owner !

[Norman Langlois]

The damage is more to how I feel about flying not so much to the plane. 75067507 the hull folded up onto me and compressed me into the seat. I would not expect the hull to resist breaking like it did entering the water at 45 degrees at 30 mph . I think not to bad over all no other damage except the rudder pedals and me.

[robert l]

Sorry to hear the bad news and I'm glad you are ok. In the home built aircraft community we are not only builders, but often test pilots also. When I was in the 8th grade I designed a couple of aircraft, well, designed is an over statement. I drew pictures of planes that weren't on the market so to speak. Many years later, with the introduction of Light Sport Aircraft, I saw similar designs as the ones I drew as a kid. Of course I knew nothing about structural design, or aerodynamics and they were only ideas I had of a flying machine. That being said, when I did start to build, I decided to pick what was already proven because there are so many great designs already out there. I didn't want to "re-invent the wheel". But I salute your efforts, after all, there wouldn't be so many different designs if people didn't put their own spin on something. I'll be 72 in a couple of weeks so I'd rather fly than build, although, I do enjoy the building process. Now if I had a flying airplane, I could still build and not be stressed out about getting it done anytime soon. LOL ! I hope you have much success in what ever you choose to do.
Bob

[CHICAGORANDY]

Glad you survived the incident - perhaps after a bit of time passage and reflection there will be factory made options that could spur your interest in resuming training and flight. I guess I subscribe to the whole "getting back on the horse that threw ya' " mentality. Learning to scuba dive once purt near drowned me but I persevered. After my other-driver caused motorcycle crash I rode the repaired bike back to the exact same spot once my broken leg healed.

Or maybe I'm just goofy - lol - but in a few months I'll be 70 and I simply refuse to let life scare me out of living it.

[Norman Langlois]

Hi all !!
I have been wondering if I should post my archive of building photos for the folks here in this forum. There was once an extensive amount of discussion of the build . It was lost when the Oshkosh 365 was deleted.
I began a thread in another forum .If the members here want a parallel I can duplicate that. I know many members here frequent that forum as well,but maybe not all. So speak up if a link is not enough. You will find all the photo log in building from scratch a dream . https://www.homebuiltairplanes.com/forums/forums/bush-float-flying.39/

[Capndar]

Norm I followed it with great interest - I think a photo log is a great resource

[Norman Langlois]

I have been pondering ,what to do about the plane and all the development of the structural technique. I plan to repair the plane when I return to NH. After that I need a pilot. ANY TAKERS OUT THERE.

With that said if there is . How about building another plane better than that one lighter stronger and cantilevered .

The things I have learned to do with the forming and mono spar. I believe I know how to do it with a removable 14 ft 1/2 span wing cradled for transit rather than the pivotal wing. A 28 to 32 ft wing span. weighing only 35 to 40 lbs per span.
This also means I can make any type low mid or high wing design, land, amphibian or sea only may be possible.

I have a new spar smaller = lighter stronger because it has special top diaphragm, all being the same thickness. [ the flying boat has a thin bottom diaphragm of .030 with many small holes ]
With this new spar installed wide side up it will be cantilevered.
Using it with the DAE 31 airfoil it will also have a much better L/D ratio than the USA 35 mod . Used on Norms flying boat.
I have gotten to like building more than flying. The crash has changed me. I'm sure it was my fault.

[jedi]

Norm,

Summer is about half over. Can you give us an update. You know where to find a pilot when you need one.

[Norman Langlois]

I did not invest any time toward the plane, this summer. It remains as the picture. I removed the engine last week and put it on a shelf. The plane will go in a storage . But not well covered . Next year maybe. I need someone with desire and interest to partner up with . Most likely I will offer the engine for sale and scrap the plane.

I had a dream to fly. I had no money to do that on the general aviation path. So I took the only option for me. I was to use my own skills and slowly over years of time design and build with lots of advisory help.
I have more ideas but no enthusiasm , everyone wants engineered guaranties . I can not provide, I have no will to argue .

[robert l]

There are a lot of well proven ultralights out there and some at a very reasonable price. I have owned two ultralights since the early '90's and most people will say they are just for very local and short flights, and for the most part, that's true. But, I just watched a video of the 14 y/o kid that flew his Aerolight 103 758 mi. from Va. to A/V 2019. 32 stops and 7 days. Wow, low and slow ain't all that bad. I have decided to sell the parts that I have built for a CH-701, in 60 days I'll be 73 and I've decided I need to fly instead of build so I'm selling off some stuff to purchase something flying, or, at least close to flying. The desire to fly has been with me since I was a child, I got my PPL in 1974 but I'm still a low time pilot, maybe 200 hrs, and about half of that has been in the last 4 years. Don't give up, you know the thrill of flight, and it will always be with you.
Bob

[jedi]

Norm,

Please let me know if there is anything I can do to help. When will you return to FL and will the aircraft remain in storage for the winter?

[Norman Langlois]

I am not sure about asking for help. Since, I am still not certain about making repairs. Yes the plane will remain in NH ,in storage. I will be returning to FL. around 9/10
Without having some involvement with another interested person or persons . I have not got the drive to work on it.
I have no industrial resources in FL. That would limit me to what resolve ,I could come up with. The plane still needs weight reduction.

There will be a major house project to deal with in FL., before I consider moving the project.