Roof tar paper should be played horizontally starting from the lowest part of the roof and overlapped so that rain cannot penetrative under the paper. The way you played it won't stop any water penetration
Yeah. I wish I didn’t have to go to work, so i could’ve caught this and other errors. Thus the reason for this time lapse, to at least see what this crew did after the fact. Luckily, no ill effects at all 10 years later!
For their 24" OC studs, did they double up the 2x4s? If so, that's interesting to realize that those LP panels might need a little extra width for nailing the overlapping seams.
Hey! Just a viewer, their are 12” studs on long wall which means theyre 12” OC. They dont look doubled to me either ❤ , they could possibly be thicker than 2” as well
yeah, i think every other 12” stud(so every 24”) they look like a 4x4 or doubled 2x4 if so, i’m wondering if it’s to give the siding extra meat to nail to? 🤷♂️
I met John Chotia back when he was first getting started producing the Weedhopper in Ogden Utah. It's amazing that his design still flys, when so many early ultralights have come and gone. It's a testament to his simple, sturdy and no nonsense design.
My grandfather was an aviator and aircraft builder. I grew up around aircraft and eventually became an aircraft maintenance engineer... etc. One thing I learned was in experimental aircraft, especially the real basic ones, is never fly higher or faster than you're willing to crash and harm yourself. Good advice... common sense stuff.
I have the plans to build a legal eagle xl. but have not started yet. I love this design but could never find any prints to purchase......would love to build this! I live in North Alabama and we just purchased 41 acres and I'm finally going to have my own private grass strip!
Здравствуйте дорогие любители полетать, очень красиво, сразу видно что человек в звене природы, и все время стремится взлететь , я сибе иногда задаю вопрос, раз ми так стремимся к небу, значит когда-то наши предки умели летать, как бы там ни было, молодцы ребята, я за вас рад, желаю всем вам здоровья и кавказского долголетия.🙌 жму руку двумя руками, Черкесс с Кавказа.
Hi Das..!! To Spain ( Europe). This Video, for my, is my Favorite de RU-vid. Is my favorite of ULM. I view , five o eight views. Thanks for supervideo with your magnifique ULM.!!!!!!!!!!! Saludos Das, Un abrazo Piloto.
There are plans for the Weedhopper on which the fuselage is based, but the rest (mainly the wing) is pure imagination combined with aerodynamic science. The tail feathers are modified versions of the OEM (mostly just the vertical and horizontal stabilizers. The rudder is OEM. The hStabilizer was originally a single surface. I cut it in two in order to make them foldable).
CG is spot on at 29% MAC (4% behind the mean aerodynamic center of 25% MAC). The NP (neutral point) is at 36% MAC, resulting in a middle of the road Static Margin of 7.5% (NP - CG). The "tail heavy" appearance is due to the wing's angle of attack being around 7 degrees. This angles the whole plane tail down. I reduced this "down tail" by 3.5 deg by dropping the wing TE mounting brackets below the main boom center line to give the wing a +3.5 deg incidence angle. The engine is also tilted down at the prop by 2 deg to give a more parallel thrust line. I reassure you, all the math has been done and the plane built according to those results.
@@chrusion In any case, you did a really good job. I am very excited. I only know aircraft construction from model making. That's why I can't do anything with your mathematical data. We simply center our models under the wings to balance the plane. The fine adjustment is then based on the flight behavior. If the weight is too far back, the rear will float a little. In model building, the center of gravity can usually be easily changed by individual components. I think it might not be that easy with your plane.
Going on 9 years and no settling or shifting of the four corner posts set in concrete, nor the several block riser supports (similar to houses with crawl space pillar supports).
4x4 treated ground contact in concrete, about a foot down. 10 years old and no rot, even in the path of water runoff from sloping terrain. Structure is as sound as the day it was built. No settling, no sag.
back in the 80's, I owned and flew an Eipper Quicksilver MX. Doing research on different brands, I looked at a Weedhopper, which I believe is identical to this machine, if not nearly identical. After inspecting the machine up close, I decided you couldn't get me in that piece of junk for a million dollars. You're a brave person.
Excuse me? You think I DESIGN and BUILD junk and then TRUST my LIFE to it? NO, of course this is NOT a piece of junk design. It uses the exact SAME 6061 T6 aircraft aluminum, the exact SAME military AN hardware, and the SAME nylon load spreader saddles and washers as your Quicksilver. Since they share the same raw materials and load triangulation structure, just differently ARRANGED, HOW come YOUR QS isn't a piece of junk, but mine is? Ya think times have changed since the early 1980's and user/manufacturer information has evolved and increased, especially since the advent of the internet full of user flight forums, etc? Yeah, you might want to revise your comment a bit to address these items. Thanks.
This person clearly has no idea what they’re talking about. While the quicksilver MX was a great success and has been time tested, the weedhopper was also successful. Sure there are far more quicksilvers out there, but the weedhopper shares in its simplicity, light weight, and strong structure.
