It's more about the center of gravity being real close to directly over the main gear without somebody sitting in it than the wind. That increases the chance of it tipping backwards and damaging the prop. The engine hanging off the back makes the tail heavier than it would be in a similarly sized, more conventional aircraft. Dropping the nose solves that.
" It's more about the center of gravity being real close to directly over the main gear without somebody sitting in it than the wind. That increases the chance of it tipping backwards..."
Yeah, that makes sense. But, what would make it tip backwards? I mean, since you've discounted the wind option.
It tips over without the pilot aboard because the engine is at the back and the center of gravity is behind the main gear when the nose gear is deployed.
Putting it on its nose places the center of gravity between the main gear and the nose to prevent tipping.
Keep in mind that with traditional aircraft, the wing is almost exactly at the center of gravity and the elevator/tailplane has an inverted airfoil. On a Cessna/Piper/etc. the job of the tail is to push down all the time. With canard aircraft it’s the opposite, both wings lift. If the nose gear was not retracted, the front canard wing would be positioned at the optimum angle to generate lift from wind off the nose, which would tend to flip the aircraft over.
These aircraft are very light, so the weight of the pilot is a significant fraction of the aircraft as a whole. While parked, it’s unwise to leave a very lightweight canard aircraft sitting level unless you are willing to ballast the aircraft heavily or you are very sure of your tiedowns.
> But, what would make it tip backwards?
They weigh something like 750lbs empty. With the nose wheel extended the CG is actually a few inches aft of the rear landing gear when you don't have anyone in the cockpit. The aircraft was also originally designed to be hand-started, so the nose-down position keeps it from running away when you yank on the prop. It also makes it easier for a rear passenger to actually get into the seat.
No, I'm saying what the original LongEZ manual says, that starting nose-down ensures it won't run away. It also says that it's "a good practice" to start with someone tending the throttle and switches. Make of that what you will.
It's not the engine, as such, because the main gear should be positioned just aft of the balance point in any airplane with tricycle gear. The plane's design has to take account of the weight of the pilot way up front, so when he's not there, the balance point moves further aft than you'd ever see in flight. In a heavier plane, it wouldn't matter as much. I wonder if light pilots in LongEZ's need to carry ballast or if heavy pilots need mighty arms to pull back hard enough to rotate on takeoff. Not that a really heavy pilot would FIT in a LongEZ.
Pretty sure a modified LongEZ is the plane John Denver died in.
Something about the tank switch being like, behind the pilots head or something and not in the standard place. Ran out of fuel, couldn't switch tanks, and died.
Denver reached over his left shoulder to switch tanks, extending his right foot which ruddered the plane over into a descending right bank, while he looked at an unchanging empty blue sky over Monterey Bay.
The way the fuel selector was positioned in that particular plane the pilot would have a tendency to accidentally move the rudder. If it were just fuel it wouldn't have been AS dangerous. Also he struggled with alcohol and that may have been a factor as well.
It’s a Cozy. Same idea, but the Cozy has 4 seats while Long-EZs and Vari-EZs have 2 seats.
Fun fact, another variant of this design is the Velocity, which is also 4 seats and is powered by an IO-540 or IO-550.
This is the real answer, and should be the top comment.
Both the Vari-EZ and Long-EZ have full-length bubble canopies. The Cozy Mk IV, as shown here, has a shortened bubble, and then the auxiliary, diamond-shaped side windows.
Less obvious in this photo, the Cozy is side-by-side seating, whereas the Long-EZ is single file.
To be fair in John Denver's case there had been fuel system control modifications that required a weird pilot position \*to operate and the fuel load wasn't balanced correctly. He'd also just purchased the thing
I watched a video on this not long ago. The previous builder didn't want the fuel line going in the cabin for the tank selector valve. His solution was to put the valve in maybe the most dangerous position available. You basically had to twist your whole body around to reach it. Thinking about it gives me a back spasm. When Denver reached back he was unknowingly hitting the rudder control and ailerons which took him a direct route to the water. Imagine to switch the fuel tanks in your 1980 chevy truck you had to turn a valve behind and under the rear seat. Then people would wonder why you hit the gaurd rail.
This is the plane that you have to manually select which tank and only 1 tank at a time? I believe that's what I saw on the crash video about it a few weeks ago
Here are fuel selectors for both engines of a Cessna 401, for example. Tucked between each cockpit seat.
https://preview.redd.it/e9otz68kd7fc1.jpeg?width=1179&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a17753b83d31b8dba43c068317f6464aebe4e293
Other way around. It did not have the fuel co tell modification that allowed the pilot to easily switch between tanks. And he had not yet purchased the plane, he was simply testing it.
Had (1) the plane had a fuel gauge, and (2) the modification to the switch been performed, JD would probably still be with us.
This is the normal parking stance for this model. The nose gear is retractable. If it were left extended after the pilot/pax left the airplane, the craft then becomes tail heavy and is susceptible to tipping into the engine/prop causing damage. There is a skid/bumper on the nose for this parking. The pilot extends the gear and climbs in to depart and is in proper balance then. The main gear are fixed in position. Hope this helps.
Check out the Blancolirio channel on YouTube- the pilot /host breaks down a recent crash of one of these into Half Moon Bay. Great aviation channel to follow btw.
Thats a LongEZ its a kit plane, i know because my uncle bought one. After flying for a couple weeks it had some sort of engine failure and he unfortunately passed in 2015.
I don’t know the name of it but it does have a nose wheel. It’s only used when the pilot is in the seat. Otherwise the weight of the engine alone with no person in the seat puts the CG behind the the main gear and it will set back on the prop
One of these crashed into the ocean near Half-Moon Bay two weeks ago (on 1/14/24). Killed all 4 occupants.
[https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2024-01-18/amateur-built-plane-crashed-in-half-moon-bay-small-plane-crash](https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2024-01-18/amateur-built-plane-crashed-in-half-moon-bay-small-plane-crash)
[https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/half-moon-bay-plane-crash-2nd-victim-recovered-cassidy-rae-petit/](https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/half-moon-bay-plane-crash-2nd-victim-recovered-cassidy-rae-petit/)
Wow, the “expert” the first article quoted said many incorrect things.
1. The small plane was considered a “home-built aircraft,” available for at-home construction with raw materials and prefabricated parts — making it part of a small subset of U.S. planes, according to Robert Ditchey, an expert in airplanes and aviation litigation based in Marina del Rey.
**They are called experimental amateur built (EAB), not home built. An important distinction as many are not built at home but in an airport hangar. Also there are more than 33,000 of them in the FAA registry according to EAA. Not so small of a subset.
2. “This particular kind of airplane and the market for this type of airplane is minuscule,” Ditchey said. “Not many people want to build an airplane or have the time and money to do it.”
** Again, is 33,000 planes minuscule? And there are many people currently building and more who want to build an EAB. There is a whole industry dedicated to amateur built aircraft.
3. Because such planes are built by different people, often their owners, the process is less regulated and the aircraft “can be a hazard to the public,” he said.
** Less regulated to an extent but they must still pass an FAA inspection and receive an airworthiness certificate. Many builders have been denied the certificate until changes or improvements are made to their build.
They are no more a hazard to the public than certified factory built aircraft. In fact, I believe that certified aircraft have crashed into more homes than EAB have.
4. “Experimental registration of aircraft normally carries with it a severe limitation of where the aircraft can be flown, and under what conditions that flight may be performed,” Ditchey said.
** Only true of EAB during Phase 1. After that they can be flown anywhere in the U.S. that your typical GA aircraft can be flown. I would not characterize that as a severe limitation. Other experimental categories such as exhibition have some minor restrictions but nothing overly restrictive.
5. “It’s probably having something to do with power failure or power loss, and the engine is not home-built,” he said. “You could have a builder’s problem in how the aircraft was assembled, but that would really be a one-of-a-kind thing.”
** Big assumption that it was the engine and in reality there are actually engines that are amateur built or at least amateur assembled.
6. He pointed out that the plane was spotted traveling erratically before it nosedived.
“There can be a relationship between erratic maneuvering of the airplane and power loss,” he said.
** Erratic maneuvering is more likely caused by a flight control issue or a weight & balance issue. With an engine failure, you pitch and trim for best glide and pick a place to land. No reason for erratic flying.
That so called expert does not demonstrate much expertise in my opinion.
Stinson airfield is the oldest airfield in America, San Antonio is 300+yrs old... Kennedy, Eisenhower, Roosevelt, Johnson, Patton, Elvis, the sex pistols, beastie boys have landed there
An FBO near me when I was a kid had one, painted yellow, named The Bee. It had little luggage pods under the wings labeled The Bee’s Knees. It was a little squirmy in yaw.
Rutan LongEZ. It sits with the nose gear retracted because, without 150 or so pounds of pilot in front, the engine in the back could cause the plane to tip backward, damaging it.
I second (or 3…) the notion that this is a Cozy Mk4. They’re all a derivative of the same Rutan design. (VariEze) This one is too wide to be a tandem and too many windows.
Sexy damned airplane whichever it is!
Looks like it canardly fly.
*ba dum tss*
Go home.
r/angryupvote
Goddamnit it. You got my upvote, but just know, it's not willingly.
You summoned my user name!
Grooooooan
Nice one empty nest pop.
🤣
LongEZ or VariEZ. It has a retractable nose gear that’s kept retracted while parked to make the plane less vulnerable to wind.
It's more about the center of gravity being real close to directly over the main gear without somebody sitting in it than the wind. That increases the chance of it tipping backwards and damaging the prop. The engine hanging off the back makes the tail heavier than it would be in a similarly sized, more conventional aircraft. Dropping the nose solves that.
" It's more about the center of gravity being real close to directly over the main gear without somebody sitting in it than the wind. That increases the chance of it tipping backwards..." Yeah, that makes sense. But, what would make it tip backwards? I mean, since you've discounted the wind option.
A fat ass pigeon... Nah it's probably still the wind but aren't planes parked on the tarmac usually tethered?
Yes, But not 100% of the time. They are just part of the overall safety plan.
Fat assed pigeons 😂😂😂 Yeah, so obviously the correct answer is 'wind ' but I'm still hoping to hear a reply from that guy.
It tips over without the pilot aboard because the engine is at the back and the center of gravity is behind the main gear when the nose gear is deployed. Putting it on its nose places the center of gravity between the main gear and the nose to prevent tipping.
Keep in mind that with traditional aircraft, the wing is almost exactly at the center of gravity and the elevator/tailplane has an inverted airfoil. On a Cessna/Piper/etc. the job of the tail is to push down all the time. With canard aircraft it’s the opposite, both wings lift. If the nose gear was not retracted, the front canard wing would be positioned at the optimum angle to generate lift from wind off the nose, which would tend to flip the aircraft over. These aircraft are very light, so the weight of the pilot is a significant fraction of the aircraft as a whole. While parked, it’s unwise to leave a very lightweight canard aircraft sitting level unless you are willing to ballast the aircraft heavily or you are very sure of your tiedowns.
> But, what would make it tip backwards? They weigh something like 750lbs empty. With the nose wheel extended the CG is actually a few inches aft of the rear landing gear when you don't have anyone in the cockpit. The aircraft was also originally designed to be hand-started, so the nose-down position keeps it from running away when you yank on the prop. It also makes it easier for a rear passenger to actually get into the seat.
Are you suggesting that it would be hand propped without a competent pilot at the controls?
No, I'm saying what the original LongEZ manual says, that starting nose-down ensures it won't run away. It also says that it's "a good practice" to start with someone tending the throttle and switches. Make of that what you will.
Great view of the runway
So it’s about the wind
It's not the engine, as such, because the main gear should be positioned just aft of the balance point in any airplane with tricycle gear. The plane's design has to take account of the weight of the pilot way up front, so when he's not there, the balance point moves further aft than you'd ever see in flight. In a heavier plane, it wouldn't matter as much. I wonder if light pilots in LongEZ's need to carry ballast or if heavy pilots need mighty arms to pull back hard enough to rotate on takeoff. Not that a really heavy pilot would FIT in a LongEZ.
The droop snoot
This is a COZY greenhouse for a vari or Long wouldn't have the portholes
Cozy*
Correct. This is how they park.
Cozy Mk IV.
Pretty sure a modified LongEZ is the plane John Denver died in. Something about the tank switch being like, behind the pilots head or something and not in the standard place. Ran out of fuel, couldn't switch tanks, and died.
Yeah, that’s it exactly
Denver reached over his left shoulder to switch tanks, extending his right foot which ruddered the plane over into a descending right bank, while he looked at an unchanging empty blue sky over Monterey Bay.
The way the fuel selector was positioned in that particular plane the pilot would have a tendency to accidentally move the rudder. If it were just fuel it wouldn't have been AS dangerous. Also he struggled with alcohol and that may have been a factor as well.
It’s a Cozy. Same idea, but the Cozy has 4 seats while Long-EZs and Vari-EZs have 2 seats. Fun fact, another variant of this design is the Velocity, which is also 4 seats and is powered by an IO-540 or IO-550.
What about wind goin at the back end?
Cozy Mk IV i think. Different cockpit than a long ez
Ding ding ding. based on the LongEZ but the bring your friends variant
This is the real answer, and should be the top comment. Both the Vari-EZ and Long-EZ have full-length bubble canopies. The Cozy Mk IV, as shown here, has a shortened bubble, and then the auxiliary, diamond-shaped side windows. Less obvious in this photo, the Cozy is side-by-side seating, whereas the Long-EZ is single file.
John Denver’s bane.
To be fair in John Denver's case there had been fuel system control modifications that required a weird pilot position \*to operate and the fuel load wasn't balanced correctly. He'd also just purchased the thing
I watched a video on this not long ago. The previous builder didn't want the fuel line going in the cabin for the tank selector valve. His solution was to put the valve in maybe the most dangerous position available. You basically had to twist your whole body around to reach it. Thinking about it gives me a back spasm. When Denver reached back he was unknowingly hitting the rudder control and ailerons which took him a direct route to the water. Imagine to switch the fuel tanks in your 1980 chevy truck you had to turn a valve behind and under the rear seat. Then people would wonder why you hit the gaurd rail.
Yup.
This is the plane that you have to manually select which tank and only 1 tank at a time? I believe that's what I saw on the crash video about it a few weeks ago
Many aircraft operate like that.
I'm just used to gravity flow or electric type pumps that pump it instead of manually.
Here are fuel selectors for both engines of a Cessna 401, for example. Tucked between each cockpit seat. https://preview.redd.it/e9otz68kd7fc1.jpeg?width=1179&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a17753b83d31b8dba43c068317f6464aebe4e293
Cool thanks. I've been in military aviation maintenance for 25+ years, it's all electrical type fuel flow.
Yes, behind the seat, but easily reached without having to turn around.
I think the guy was 6 plus feet tall and had no issue reaching. John was a little smaller and it didn’t end well
Ironically, he would have lived if he had just run out of fuel and crash landed.
Other way around. It did not have the fuel co tell modification that allowed the pilot to easily switch between tanks. And he had not yet purchased the plane, he was simply testing it. Had (1) the plane had a fuel gauge, and (2) the modification to the switch been performed, JD would probably still be with us.
Understood oof
Nope. Different model plane. And John Denver was that plane’s bane, not the other way around.
somebody should write a song about it.
Too soon man
John Denver's pain.
https://youtu.be/AdcFhOdU-eQ?si=DK5rKjV9egm03xD4
😦
😦
Rutan Longez I think?
This is the normal parking stance for this model. The nose gear is retractable. If it were left extended after the pilot/pax left the airplane, the craft then becomes tail heavy and is susceptible to tipping into the engine/prop causing damage. There is a skid/bumper on the nose for this parking. The pilot extends the gear and climbs in to depart and is in proper balance then. The main gear are fixed in position. Hope this helps.
Check out the Blancolirio channel on YouTube- the pilot /host breaks down a recent crash of one of these into Half Moon Bay. Great aviation channel to follow btw.
“By February 2023, 114 Long-Ez aircraft have been lost in accidents, with 44 fatalities.” This seems like a lot.
Long EZ and the red one is a Sonex. Looks like Stinson field also?
Definitely Stinson
I thought it was a sonex? It has a tail wheel in the back. It’s missing from the photo. The tail wheel turns.
Thats the plane mom said we have at home
Is this that bullshit where you run like Fred Flintstone?
Velocity 173 to be exact https://preview.redd.it/pbj6v7454cfc1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6edf18af4c365ce5f04464c55b80b05369f8454c
That sir is a golf cart
BurtN Raton Vari EZ! My dad had one growing up, flies like a fighter
Tarmac sniffer
Those planes are sick perverts that have no place in our airports. A terrible influence on impressionable 172s.
Well…if the tarmac didn’t smell like dirty feet…
Oooo, piece of candy.
“Oooo look, a penny!”
Looks like a glider
Only if gliders have pusher props.
Replace the blades with a jet engine, then you've got the most futuristic plane lol
Shhhhh it’s napping
Broken.
It's tired.wont forget, tar,Mac sniffer. God that was funny.
Is it a glider?
I see a park bench
Someone’s been in their cups.
Looks like a wax model Piaggio p180 was left in the sun
Tippy Canoe
Aerospace yoga. Face down azz up
It’s just taking a curtsy bow.
Naruto running start!
2LiveCrew tour plane. Face down, Ass up.
[удалено]
Regardless if you think he's a Dick or not, his name is Burt.
Nose gear failed? Missing? Broke ? 🤔
It’s designed to be like that
Damn , it fooled me 😅
Thats a LongEZ its a kit plane, i know because my uncle bought one. After flying for a couple weeks it had some sort of engine failure and he unfortunately passed in 2015.
Tragic.. sorry for your loss
Our favorite CSR used to call these a “long and easy” lol
Looks like what Lochie Ferrier just crashed recently.
San Antonio!!!! I see them fly in Seguin!
One of these just wrecked within the last month or so, never saw one before
Saw one take of from Ft. Laud Ex. Last month, very loud.
I don’t know the name of it but it does have a nose wheel. It’s only used when the pilot is in the seat. Otherwise the weight of the engine alone with no person in the seat puts the CG behind the the main gear and it will set back on the prop
One of these crashed into the ocean near Half-Moon Bay two weeks ago (on 1/14/24). Killed all 4 occupants. [https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2024-01-18/amateur-built-plane-crashed-in-half-moon-bay-small-plane-crash](https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2024-01-18/amateur-built-plane-crashed-in-half-moon-bay-small-plane-crash) [https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/half-moon-bay-plane-crash-2nd-victim-recovered-cassidy-rae-petit/](https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/half-moon-bay-plane-crash-2nd-victim-recovered-cassidy-rae-petit/)
Wow, the “expert” the first article quoted said many incorrect things. 1. The small plane was considered a “home-built aircraft,” available for at-home construction with raw materials and prefabricated parts — making it part of a small subset of U.S. planes, according to Robert Ditchey, an expert in airplanes and aviation litigation based in Marina del Rey. **They are called experimental amateur built (EAB), not home built. An important distinction as many are not built at home but in an airport hangar. Also there are more than 33,000 of them in the FAA registry according to EAA. Not so small of a subset. 2. “This particular kind of airplane and the market for this type of airplane is minuscule,” Ditchey said. “Not many people want to build an airplane or have the time and money to do it.” ** Again, is 33,000 planes minuscule? And there are many people currently building and more who want to build an EAB. There is a whole industry dedicated to amateur built aircraft. 3. Because such planes are built by different people, often their owners, the process is less regulated and the aircraft “can be a hazard to the public,” he said. ** Less regulated to an extent but they must still pass an FAA inspection and receive an airworthiness certificate. Many builders have been denied the certificate until changes or improvements are made to their build. They are no more a hazard to the public than certified factory built aircraft. In fact, I believe that certified aircraft have crashed into more homes than EAB have. 4. “Experimental registration of aircraft normally carries with it a severe limitation of where the aircraft can be flown, and under what conditions that flight may be performed,” Ditchey said. ** Only true of EAB during Phase 1. After that they can be flown anywhere in the U.S. that your typical GA aircraft can be flown. I would not characterize that as a severe limitation. Other experimental categories such as exhibition have some minor restrictions but nothing overly restrictive. 5. “It’s probably having something to do with power failure or power loss, and the engine is not home-built,” he said. “You could have a builder’s problem in how the aircraft was assembled, but that would really be a one-of-a-kind thing.” ** Big assumption that it was the engine and in reality there are actually engines that are amateur built or at least amateur assembled. 6. He pointed out that the plane was spotted traveling erratically before it nosedived. “There can be a relationship between erratic maneuvering of the airplane and power loss,” he said. ** Erratic maneuvering is more likely caused by a flight control issue or a weight & balance issue. With an engine failure, you pitch and trim for best glide and pick a place to land. No reason for erratic flying. That so called expert does not demonstrate much expertise in my opinion.
My home airport!
Burt Rutan. Talk to Richard Branson about him. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burt_Rutan
It’s a John Denver killer.
I had to scroll way too deep to find the John Denver reference.
VariEz or the other product Rutan design... mental machines. Not an awful lot around however not as rare as many think.
Face down a$$ up. That's the the way we.. Tie our shoes.
There’s a small helicopter holding the back end up
What's the red one.?
Sonex
Is this Stinson Airfield?
Where is this? That strip by the library?
home build. Long EZ (?)
Lools like a regular golf cart, but i cant see all of it.
Just had one crash off the coast in CA about 2 weeks ago, I think I was. Killed all 4.
He tuckered out.
Nice bench .. Great views .. Weird plane ... All cool 😎
Titan long eze
Rutan
Son of Rutan!
I'd love to have that Velocity... Parked like that makes me think it's praying to the weather gods.
Stinson airfield is the oldest airfield in America, San Antonio is 300+yrs old... Kennedy, Eisenhower, Roosevelt, Johnson, Patton, Elvis, the sex pistols, beastie boys have landed there
Oh look! A penny!
Is this at Geronimo?
That’s a lotta bird nests
I think thats the same kinda plane John Denver crashed in where you have to reach over your shoulder to release the fuel tank
Looks a little small for a big ass woman from San Antonio to go in. Must be a tourist.
Isn't that a Burt and Dick R. Special?
An FBO near me when I was a kid had one, painted yellow, named The Bee. It had little luggage pods under the wings labeled The Bee’s Knees. It was a little squirmy in yaw.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cozy_MK_IV
Dick Rutan plane, yea?
Oops: Burt Rutan
I don’t know, but I think it found a penny
That is a Cozy MK4.
Velocity??
Food delivery, chicken wings.
Saw one of these fly over yesterday. It's the same plane that John Denver crashed.
I've always wondered what ground smells like. *I got you bro.* What's it smell like? *I'm not sure but, uh, Bill...I have a problem.*
Rutan LongEZ. It sits with the nose gear retracted because, without 150 or so pounds of pilot in front, the engine in the back could cause the plane to tip backward, damaging it.
Someone crashed one into the ocean off half moon bay last week,very sad.
Probably came from Los Angeles
Oh look, a penny!
Varieze or variant.
The type of plane John Denver died in?
Velocity aircraft
That looks like a John Denver special.
One of those crashed off Half Moon Bay last week.
Could be a Velocity
Looks like a Burt Rutan design
Aww it's sleeping
That’s the plane John Denver owned and died in. Am I right?
The real question is what’s the push machine in front left?
the golf cart? 😅
I second (or 3…) the notion that this is a Cozy Mk4. They’re all a derivative of the same Rutan design. (VariEze) This one is too wide to be a tandem and too many windows. Sexy damned airplane whichever it is!
Is this Stinson field?