Page 1 of 2

PostPosted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 12:41 am
by Chappy
Does anyone have any idea of how many Enclosed Cockpit Lazairs were produce? I was looking through Tyler Paradis's list and only found 6, not counting mine. I've never seen one on the East Coast of the states.

Also, if anyone has flying experience in both open and enclosed Lazairs (the EC), how differently do they fly, how are speeds affected, fuel burn, etc.?

Chappy

PostPosted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 5:22 pm
by Shannon
EC Flight Considerations
Page 1

PostPosted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 5:24 pm
by Shannon
Page 2

PostPosted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 5:24 pm
by Shannon
Page 3

PostPosted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 5:25 pm
by Shannon
Last

PostPosted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 7:48 pm
by daffy1029
Hi Chappy,
I am taking this from memory, as the last time I flew was in 1989 for one flight.
I added my enclosure in 1985 (I had the Rotax 185's at that time), and what I remember was, the climb rate was very close the same as without the enclosure. So there must be reduced drag with enclosure. The other thing I notice later, with the JPX's, was when flying slow, that when you add lots of power, I always had to add a wee bit of up, on the stick, as it had a slight tendency to nose down on acceleration. It's possible that my plane wasn't balance properly, after I added the JPX's engines. Regardless, the plane flew very well. At 40 to 45 mph, it flew hands off, thanks to the factory trim tabs on the rudervators.
After installing the enclosure, I did most of my flying on the warm winter days. The air is stable and lots of places to land, here in the prairies.
In the summertime, I would have to admit, flying without the enclosure is more fun, because of the extra freedom you feel, with nothing around you (I actually miss that).
As for the fuel burn, can't help you there. I really never kept track, too busy enjoying the flying. I can tell you though, that from the Rotax 185's to the JPX's, cut my flying time to around half the time. That's one reason why I am going to try Solo engines next. Going from four cylinders to two should make a difference in the fuel economy.
The extra power of the JPX's was nice to have! I also found the JPX's were very reliable and smooth running. Hope this helps. Daffy

PostPosted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 9:08 pm
by Chappy
Hi Shannon,

Thanks for the factory provided notes. I was lucky enough to get the complete manual with the enclosure addition, but I skimmed over that section, I guess. Anyway, with all the experienced Lazair pilots, I was hoping for some of their observations.

One thing I did notice in looking over the Manual was that Ultraflight mandated the installation of the jury strut kit due to the increased weight and speed. My EC has never had jury struts, so that's on the list of things to do. I think I still have a factory kit that I purchased for dealer stock, and I never installed it on my series 1 as the factory didn't recommend them on the 0.016" spar wing. The lift struts were replaced early on in my Series 1 with a little larger diameter tubing after an engine failure and resulting forced landing when I bowed one original lift strut, so jury struts weren't quite so necessary. After that experience, I began making regular engine out landings, patterns, etc. With the multitude of Pioneer engine outs since then, the practice served me well.

Chappy

PostPosted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 9:35 pm
by Chappy
Thanks Daffy, for your observations. I suspect I too will find it very different from flying open cockpit style. I'm kind of apprehensive about whether I'll really enjoy it. I used to be active in our local Ultralight flying club, back when there were mostly Quicks, Weedhoppers, ect. Of course, for many years now most of the members have flown Fats, now classified as Light Sport planes, and the Series 1 was hopeless as far as participating in any cross-country activities. Maybe the III EC will let me fly some with them, while letting me still do it in a Lazair! With the new regs, there seems to be somewhat more interest in owning and operating true part 103 machines due to the reduced hassle factor. Anyway, that's not really a very important thing for me, as I prefer to fly solo most of the time. I enjoy the freedom to deviate from my course to go exploring whenever I spot something interesting. When flying with other planes, that drives their pilots crazy.

I've flown Rotax 185s, Westlake NGL twins, and small KFM twins (although never the JPX) on single and 2 place Lazairs. The big engines were awful hard on fuel, mostly because of the higher cruise speeds, and resultant increased drag of that nice thick wing. I found that although the high rate of climb was initially a rush, I soon lost interest in it. The electric start capability of the KFM was nice, though.

Anyway, I'm looking forward to trying out the enclosure experience.

Chappy

PostPosted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 10:16 pm
by Shannon
Data Sheet

PostPosted: Sat Nov 05, 2005 9:00 pm
by Chappy
Thanks, Shannon.

Sorry for the delay, but I missed your reply somehow. I'm looking forward to experiencing the enclosure. I've flown the Lazair with larger engines, but they were always the high drag, open cockpit configuration. I'm very curious to fly it in a lower drag, lower power configuration. I'm not interested in putting larger engines than the 185s on it, but the Prince props are on the list when I can round up the cash, along with solid state ignitions. I also will need to obtain a roll or two of Tedlar. With the house building project sucking up cash like a Black Hole, it might be a little while before I can put more money into my Lazair projects.

Did your Dad have an EC? Have you ever written about your Dad's experiences with his Lazairs, and as a dealer for Ultraflight? I'd be very interested in learning about them.

Chappy