8GCBC wrote:It's sad that the Internet ghetto is encroaching here (possibly to stay) on this website. People taking pleasure in "hurting" others is really bizarre for a recreational forum.

I don't see that. I do see a basic business premise being reinforced: No one ever won an argument with a customer.

I would like to add that I've enjoyed meeting Bill in person, and I sure appreciate many of his contributions on BCP.

denalipilot wrote:

8GCBC wrote:It's sad that the Internet ghetto is encroaching here (possibly to stay) on this website. People taking pleasure in "hurting" others is really bizarre for a recreational forum.

I don't see that. I do see a basic business premise being reinforced: No one ever won an argument with a customer.

I would like to add that I've enjoyed meeting Bill in person, and I sure appreciate many of his contributions on BCP.

I may be mistaken. Thanks Simon.

Do you guys need to get laid or what?
Timeouts are in order

akgreg wrote:Timeouts are in order

True that!

No but really... whats the latest on the tailwheel conversion..

denalipilot wrote:I do see a basic business premise being reinforced: No one ever won an argument with a customer.

This is good advice for anyone. It can be hard to weather criticism but sometimes opening your mouth/touching keyboard can simply do no good. I have been humbled many times on this website to learn that more words can't dig me out of a hole. Just listen to the silence mending the cracks. And there is no such thing as bad publicity. Did I already say that?

corefile wrote:No but really... whats the latest on the tailwheel conversion..

Postponed due to the financial crisis... mine.

Much progress completed, most all of it is saved and usable when the project continues. But it cannot and will not continue until I have saved up the money to finish it correctly. It's all been done pretty much first class to this point. It was almost ready for the first drop test, but the costs of FAA DER/DAR to start that phase of the project was prohibitive.

Meantime, while sitting on the train, I realized that one of the large parts would greatly benefit from a re-design if and when I do re-start the project.

EZFlap wrote:
Meantime, while sitting on the train, I realized that one of the large parts would greatly benefit from a re-design if and when I do re-start the project.

Larger than.......the flap handle?

EZFlap wrote:

corefile wrote:No but really... whats the latest on the tailwheel conversion..

Postponed due to the financial crisis... mine.

Much progress completed, most all of it is saved and usable when the project continues. But it cannot and will not continue until I have saved up the money to finish it correctly. It's all been done pretty much first class to this point. It was almost ready for the first drop test, but the costs of FAA DER/DAR to start that phase of the project was prohibitive.

Meantime, while sitting on the train, I realized that one of the large parts would greatly benefit from a re-design if and when I do re-start the project.

Time for reflection usually results in epiphanies. Good to hear it's still on your mind.

pilot wrote:Larger than.......the flap handle?

Main landing gear "gear box" fittings and associated doublers. I think I figured out a way to simplify the installation and alignment procedure.

blackrock wrote:An EZFlap arrived at the house today so it went into the Bearhawk. Pretty easy install for the most part, except for having to make two trips back to the house to get tools that weren't at the hangar.. I haven't flown with it yet, but it sure is nice not to have to bend over to grab the flap handle! Here are some photos with it installed:

I'll report back after a few weeks of trying it out.

As y'all might remember, awhile back, Bill Berle, designer of the EZFlap sent me a model designed for Pacer’s to try on the Bearhawk. I was pretty happy to give it a try since reaching the flap handle in my Bearhawk means bending over enough that the sight picture is lost. Also, getting the flaps into the fourth position requires a fair amount of effort to pull the handle to that position when in flight. I had been searching for a solution to this for some time, since I do a lot of short-field and maximum performance flying.

The EZFlap installation was straight forward. My Bearhawk flap handle had a very stiff spring in it, so after reading the directions, I decided to also change that out with a lighter compression spring. That meant removing portions of my floor board and unbolting the flap handle quadrant. My total time to do that, and complete the initial installation was about 2 hours. The instructions are easy to follow. To just install the EZFlap (without changing the spring) would have only taken 30 to 45 minutes. Before (Photo 1) and after (Photo 2) are shown for reference.




Since this this version of the EZFlap was made for Pacers, I quickly found it needed some fine tuning to better fit the Bearhawk. Just to be sure, Kevin Cox also flew with the Pacer EZFlap in his Bearhawk and reached the same conclusion as I did. We also eyeballed it in the Boyd’s Bearhawk, and we unanimously concluded the geometry of the EZFlap would work better if the main riser was 2-inches shorter. This prevents the pilot’s elbow from hitting the seatback during flap deployment. A quick email to Bill had a new prototype version on the way in record time.

While discussing the geometry change, it was also recognized by the Elko Bearhawk pilots that the OEM flap handle would benefit from having additional leverage. I ran our ideas by Bill for his input and together we came up with an extension of the flap handle, which would provide additional leverage when positioning the flap handle into the 4th notch. Of course, we had thought of something similar before, but knew we couldn’t reach the thumb release from the floor if the handle was extended. The EZFlap now allowed us to do that. So with the extension and the customized EZFlap, we now had the perfect combination.

We have flown this system in all 3 Elko Bearhawks and note several significant improvements:

• The flap handle can be raised from and lowered to the floor position without losing visibility over the glare shield,
• The third and fourth notch positions are much easier to obtain with the added leverage.

Photo 3 shows the shorter prototype version with the flap handle extension.



With this configuration, the EZFlap makes obtaining the first 2 notches of flap much easier and allows the pilot to maintain forward visibility. From the 2nd notch position, the third and fourth notch positions are more easily obtained using the extended handle, but can also be realized using the EZFlap handle, too.

Some might ask if they can just use the Bearhawk EZFlap without the extension tube, or vice-versa. My observations are that this works best as a system, and removing one component reduces the effectiveness of the other. We have tested this system on 3 planes and found it to be a great enhancement to the OEM handle.

We also modified the flap handle quadrant to make pulling-on and releasing the flaps easier. The OEM quadrant comes with the first two positions tapered so that the thumb release does not have to be depressed to pull the flaps into the first two positions. We modified ours so that all positions are now tapered, including the 4th (Photo 4). This makes releasing, especially from the 4th position much easier.



As a result of the successful testing of this system in the three Elko Bearhawks, I understand Bill will be offering a new EZFlap version for the Bearhawks that includes the additional extension to the stock flap handle.

In closing, I must say that it is great to have found a way that enhances and improves the stock Bearhawk flap system, making it even better and easier to use through the full range of flap settings. Also, I would like to thank Bill for working with us to come up with this system and for offering ideas and making a prototype for us to test. In the end, this turned out to be a great example of a successful team effort and a win-win situation. I think a lot of other Bearhawk pilots may find the EZFlap a welcome addition to their planes, as we have.

Blackrock

Like.

I spoke with a 170B pilot over the weekend.. Upon reviewing that he had the 'old style' shoulder harness (no inertia reels), I asked if the flap lever was ever a hassle..

He showed me how he has to flip off his shoulder harness, to reach the first pull. Upon asking if he had seen the EZFlap, he mentioned that it was just 'too cumbersome', but admitted that he hadn't tried it.

Interesting ..

- Joseph

"Old style" harnesses are called "lap belts."

Thank you Blackrock for actually flight testing and suggesting the specific changes for the BH. And thank you for posting such a detailed product review. It was a pleasure to work with you on this. I'm really happy that it makes as much of a difference on the Bearhawk as I had imagined.

VFRsim, thank you for suggesting this to your friend. Even if he does not want to try the EZ Flap upgrade, please tell him to not slip out of his harness while flying for any reason. An inertia reel may not be quite as fail-safe and fool-proof as a fixed harness, but if it stops him from removing his harness then it's safer than what he's doing now. People have been killed because of this issue; flight safety is 100X more important than squabbling over inertia reels and flap extensions. Keep your friend alive any way you can.

Any experienced BCP member with an experimental Maule or experimental Pacer, who wants to do a similar flight test/review for the benefit of the BCP community, feel free to contact me. I'd be glad to offer the experimental Pacer unit (that Blacrock's Elko group tested) for a public test.

The offer still stands for BCP members to select an experienced Skywagon driver to meet me in SoCal, do a performance/safety benefit test and product review, and post the video on the forum.

EZFlap wrote:flight safety is 100X more important than squabbling over inertia reels and flap extensions. .

Agreed, which is why I'd recommend the BAS inertial reels as a priority purchase before spending money on anything else. They have great value even if not using the flaps. To recommend against inertial reel harnesses would be silly.

The context was that if VFRsim's friend was wiggling out of his !(#$* shoulder harness simply because he didn't like my product, then I'd rather see him use a BAS unit than wiggle out of a fixed harness to be safer than he was. His safety should be above squabbling and money and ego jousting on the internet.

The fact that a fixed harness has none of the failure modes of an inertia reel, fewer moving parts, and that you can combine the safest harness with the safety and performance benefit of the control system upgrade... for less money than the inertia reels alone... that's probably for the inertia reel thread.

As I've said a hundred times, the BAS harness is a great product, a great company, most of the people who have it in their airplanes love it, and I hope they become millionaires selling them.