Hi Luis! welcome to the club! I thought this was St Croix models, but is a different company, I think a Google search will help too!
https://www.rcgroups.com/forums/show...ze-Long-EZ-ARF

Originally Posted by Captain Canardly

Hi Luis! welcome to the club! I thought this was St Croix models, but is a different company, I think a Google search will help too!
https://www.rcgroups.com/forums/show...ze-Long-EZ-ARF

Hello..
Thanks for the help... Been having a hard time trying to get the manual...not even a build log...

Anara Entensegelflug Modell von Klaus Nietzer (3 min 30 sec)

Such a smooth bird! Thnx airboat!

Does seem very stable even under tow do you know this design.

Luis94, I have a manual for building the 1/5-scale Long-EZ. But mine has fiberglass covered foam wings, it looks like yours is wood. It is a St. Croix model manual and is 30 pages long

Originally Posted by KCStar

Luis94, I have a manual for building the 1/5-scale Long-EZ. But mine has fiberglass covered foam wings, it looks like yours is wood. It is a St. Croix model manual and is 30 pages long

Hello KCstar..
Thanks for the help....last week another member uploaded them so that i could copy them.

Luis.

Dear friends of the canard,

I wanted to share my concept for a canard seaplane. It's supposed to fly like a motor glide, hence a relatively large wing. The span will be 1.6m, the motor is mounted in a pusher configuration at the top of the vertical stabilizer.

When sitting in the water, the plane should be resting on the fuselage and the two floats underneath the wing. Due to the high position of the motor, I assume that on acceleration, the plane will rotate and glide on the step such, that the floats will come free of the water. I hope, the canard will be sufficiently effective, to keep the nose from digging into the water.

One main concern is the size and geometry of the vertical stab. Since it has to carry the motor as well, I designed it as two parallel stabs with a distance of just 4cm. The floats should also add some yaw stability. I'm just not sure if it will be sufficient. What's the opinion of everyone else?

I already started building this plane. It's made from foam board, mainly. In my opinion, it's the best material for use on and off water.

Please share your thoughts.

Best regards
Ronald

Nice concept! What's the angle of attack of the wing if you set the aircraft on a horizontal surface? My concern is, when planing with the rear floats out of the water, will the wing generate enough lift for takeoff?

Yaw stability is always a worry with canards, but yours doesn't seem any worse than many other successful designs.

this shape vert stab will function much better than what is shown in the above dwgs (also same shape for wing & fwd stab tips: very slightly raked w/ modest faired curve but of course not swept)

Thanks for the feedback!

Trevorh, the angle of attack is close to zero, when the plane sits flat. But it is free to rotate up to around 7 degree. If that is not sufficient, I could still change the rear floats to allow for more.

Xlcrlee, I'm not sure I understand. Do you mean I should change the shape of the vertical stab such that it is less swept?

it's good to sweep the vert stab and exactly copy the general planform I posted. Loosely copy the TIPS of the wings and empennage of this, for ex.:



But except for a very very gentle curve flaring into a straight line at a very slightly acute angle as it meets the T.E. in a point on the outermost tip edge .... DO NOT MAKE ANY CURVES!! The air does not like it and creates confused and energy-wasting mid-span vortices. Only straight lines meeting. See these very well-designed & very efficient small rotors with two straight lines to double-taper the T.E. (can do the same w/ L.E. also or instead) >

best example

clarification:

We humans got inspired to fly from observing birds. Birds as we know employ different construction methods and materials than we do. Their feathers bend and their skin is stretched between flexing bone structure .... so like the Spitfire they have pretty curves. The Me-109 which had straight lines for construction ease was just about equal to the Spit in performance (according to both RAF & Luftwaffe pilots), and I think the thinner wings of the Spit were more significant performance-wise than the pretty curves (also motors, props, etc.)

What I posted above re: straight lines (except for the gentle outer tip curve flaring into a straight line where it joins the T.E.) came directly from two of the TOP Boeing aerodynamicists and reflects NEW and very well-researched info and knowledge

Here's an idea for the vertical stabs / rudders. I had a great deal of fun with this plane. I called it my all-terain vehicle because it was fine from all sorts of rough fields as well as water.

Rudders on the fins like that gave me lots of options. It could do a really good flat spin. With a canard loaded so that the CG is behind the centre of lift, you can play with the idea of stalling backwards. I mean the main wing would stall before the canard. Sounds frightening but it was easy to recover by adding some power, provided there was enough altidude. Another foamy like yours, so not too much investment in the building process.

You will have loads of good fun with this.