23 years later and we don't have anything better than this. If only it came in a pre-made kit form that you just need to slot together. Like an IKEA flat pack kit plane.
@Alex Taylor Your wrong very about knockoffs and fast build kits. Nothing is wrong with fast build kit, a very good thing for this design, aviation, builders and pilots.
I was in high school when I first saw this airplane, I'd love to see this kit brought back to market. Or at the least the plans be made available. Beautiful airplane!
🎵🎵 Papa don't preach ...I'm in trouble deep...Papa don't preach ..I'm in trouble deep...I made up my mind....I'm keepin' my baaabbyy...Gonna keep ma baabbyy...Keep da bbaabbyy...!!!!...🎵🎵🎵!!!
It's tragic that the featured test pilot in this video, Rick Fessenden, perished a couple of years later in this same prototype at an airshow in California in August 1995.
@@johnfisher747 I understand that he also flew jets, as a commercial airline pilot, and, before that, as a US Navy pilot. But no mention of his Berkut having a turbine engine. It was said to be "factory built." Where did you see that? www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/1995/november/01/pilot-briefing-(4) www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1995-08-13-me-34787-story.html
No. I was at the air show it crashed. Hot day. They speculated the pilot blacked out in high g maneuver. Flew it into the ground. Unfortunately that killed the kit company. I came very close to buying one.
Very nice video, thank you. Actual cockpit sounds and radio traffic would have been better than the music. It would have shown off quietness of the design. Good job none-the-less.
3:05 "2 -3 short years" Should have made a "fast-build" kit with more completed parts (like the Velocity), Great Airplane, but no wonder why the company was an economic disaster.. P.S. With the speed range of this aircraft, it would be more efficient with a variable pitch prop...
The pilot was performing low-altitude aerobatics in an airshow. There's speculation that he blacked out during the 8g+ maneuver. Several other Berkuts have crashed, but none due to any fundamental issue with the design of the airplane.
@@ZakWilson try pushing while inverted and see how well an upside-down high lift canard Airfoil works to get your nose up... Good design for what it is but hardly ideal for aerobatics or anything resembling them.
@@bryanhauschild4376 if it had a clamshell construction with joggles, so in answer to your question yes that type could. just buy an rv 8 with a short build kit and be done with it.
@@daveriley6310 you mean 5240 right? cause what you said is off..... hey wait, that also means that you cant join the mile high club at 35000 feet, cause that'd be the five mile club... you guys are making all of this up! knots, fiddle faddle. next thing your going to tell me is that australia is real.
what blows me away is sooooo many kit planes today use the same booooring piper super cub design, why don't more kits today look like a Go 229 an SR-71 or the flying pancake?? I would LUV a dual rotax, dual person ultralight kit designed after polands PZL-230F Skorpion.
I respect the old classic designs because they are well proven, and so many love them, but if I ever were to buy an ultralight or kit built, for me it would be slick and sporty looking, like This Craft. I use to always want a Mitchell A-10 Silver Eagle, but I suppose they disappeared with the rest of the original ultralights.
Different airplanes have different missions. A canard design like this would not be able to get out of the tight spots that a Super Cub, Zenith CH-801, Feisler Storch, or DH-2 can.
if fuselarge or only aircraft body must more sits like 4 or 6 man capacity of siting then aircraft makes greater efficient or valuable for its commercial usage... So plz making design for commercial purpose of this aircraft....
These planes were never meant for commercial purpose. They are for private use and are considered experimental so cannot be used for commercial purposes.
@@elmobrandao9849 If you did make a swept canard, you would have to shift the root of the canard forward to keep the came Center of Effort for the lifting surface.
@@cluelessbeekeeping1322 ... maybe they can call Beechcraft and ask them how they did it for the "Starship Carnard"...What do they got to lose...???... It's a "Experimental ", you can do what you want to do to make your own life easier and more importantly dangerous...😜😜😜😂😂😂😆😆😳😳🇺🇸🇺🇸!!!..
@@elmobrandao9849 ...maybe you can call Beechcraft and ask them how they did it for the "Starship Carnard"...What do they got to lose...???... It's a "Experimental ", you can do what you want to do to make your own life easier and more importantly dangerous...😜😜😜😂😂😂😆😆😳😳🇺🇸🇺🇸!!!.
I can use my arm , but I can not lift with my right shoulder. I should have been more explicit. I could not build one. But I am looking at the factory built highlander stol.
There is a list of 8 features a plane must meet to be LSA. The berkut covrs 3 (single engine, 2 seat, unpressurized). However it is too heavy, much too fast in cruise, too fast in stall, has a CS prop and...as you said...retracts.
There are no blue prints for this specific aircraft. This was a molded composite design that arrived in large sections. The original Long-EZ canard is available as an open source effort. See: "Open-EZ plans".
I am not trying to cause trouble ,this is not the model type that John Denver died in is it ?..he was an experienced pilot and things just went wrong., I guess I still don't know what really caused the crash .? can anyone answer ..?...This talks about the changes made to this design just what are they if any one knows ..? that made for Big Improvements..?
John had a long ez there is a video on RU-vid... search it up. The long ez was built by a guy who did things a little different, John was on one of his first flights and didn’t know where the fuel switch was... a variety of errors, nothing to do with the original design of the plane
John was drunk, flying a plane he had no experience with. The plane didn't kill John Denver, he killed the plane and died in the process. The Berkut is longer, wider, and takes a larger engine and has retractable landing gears. and built better. This video claims a 10 +/- g load. I don't believe that was ever tested, If you have a test wing load of 10 g then the -g load is going to be around -8g to -8.5g. they will never match.
@@kvnkaveman ... That's like saying a Lambo can go 220 mph...Sure, but how long...???.. Just a matter of time before the engine gets hot and blows...Maybe a few seconds, but, not continuously and not too many times...Cheers 🍻!!!!
I don't understand how on a 55 gallon fuel tank and burning 10.3 gallons per hour that you can fly non-stop from LA to Houston, Texas which is about 1379 miles. There is no way the Berkut can make a non-stop flight of 1379 miles on one 55 gallon tank.
With "aux tanks" it holds 74 gallons, so 6.7 hours plus reserves. Cruise at 200kn, which is 230mph gives 1537 sm range,. not including ascent. 6.7hours is longer than my bladder can hold out, so it's long enough!
The plane CAN cruise at 200 Kts, but it doesn't HAVE to. Slower speeds are more fuel-efficient. Of course it would take longer, but avoiding a fuel stop saves a lot of time. Also you commonly have favorable tailwinds from west to east which helps range.
To obtain maximum range, one has to fly at maximum L/D speed. Which is usually near Vy. The Long EZ this best-range speed is 100kts. Where it's fuel burn is far less than 10gph, like, under 5gph.
The golden eagle comes from the Polovtsian word "burkit, berkut" (eagle). Polovtsy are ancient nomadic tribes living on the territory of Ukraine. Russians simply borrowed the word golden eagle from Ukrainians.)
Prince of Kiev, Yuri Dolgoruky founded Moscow. ))) There's nothing to add! Yuri I Vladimirovich (Russian: Юрий Владимирович), known under his soubriquet Yuri Dolgorukiy (Russian: Юрий Долгорукий, literally "Yuri the Long-Armed"; also known in various accounts as Gyurgi, Dyurgi, or George I of Rus), (c. 1099 - 15 May 1157) was a Rurikid prince and founder of the city of Moscow. He reigned as Velikiy Kniaz (Grand Prince) of Kiev from September 1149 to April 1151 and then again from March 1155 to May 1157. Yuri played a key role in the transition of political power from Kiev to Suzdal following the death of his elder brother Mstislav the Great in 1132.
@@g.zoltan The Raptor is flying, nowhere near what was promised but it is flying. How long do you think it takes to develop and build an airplane from scratch, a month or Two? Synergy has been working on the box tail for over 10 maybe 12 years now and it still hasn't flown.
From my understanding is this aircraft is noticeable “stiffer” than a standard long-ez. This is due to the carbon fiber cloth vs e-glass fiberglass used in the spars/wings, Think stiff suspension in sport cars, you feel every bump.
The "Berkut" name is due to it being agile and large like the Berkut Eagle of Russia. :) Its based on the Rutan designed Long EZ a totally 'merican design. :)
I guess, Its biggest cons is instability in stall since weight of balance is at backside of the aircraft. This mean; aircraft won't pitch itself nosedown during stall.
The idea with canards is that the small front wing stalls before the big rear wing. When that happens, the front wing loses lift and ‘falls’ downwards like you expect a ‘normal’ wing would. This reduces the angle of attack of the rear wing, ensuring the larger ‘main’ wing never stalls. When the small front wing stalls and drops, normal airflow is quickly restored over that smaller wing, and normal flight resumes.
In addition to Matthew Hyde's comment - the idea with canards is the efficiency gained from the fact that both wings' lift vectors point in the same direction. On a "conventional" airplane, the tail is generating lift "down" - wasting energy.
What? You "build" the wings, they don't come ready to bolt on? So it's basically just blueprints and the materials to manufacture all the parts in the "kit." Just 2-3 years to build. Ridiculous. Hope nobody bought this.
experimental airplanes have to be built. When you buy a kit you get parts, you have to assemble those parts. Look at the Sling kits, same thing you get all the aluminum pieces you have to put them all together to make a plane.
Arm chair , you a idiot!!! Stick with what you know...Rocking arm chairs...All "Experimental planes" have to be built as per the "51% rule"...Some manufacturers will build the most difficult and tedious parts for you...But, you need to build the rest...or buy a million dollars Certified airplane... en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_canard_aircraft
It should be evident to anyone with some intelligence that the music is original to this 1993 video. I doubt anyone has any of the original recording masters to be able to demux the music from the video without losing all the audio altogether. The mute button is on the bottom left - just a suggestion!
