Sorry about your attention span Tim, I believe they have pills for that these days I like writing, it's what I do for a living, and traditional written communications are apparently becoming a rare skill in the age of texting, tweeting, twerking and whatever else kids do today on their phones.

Blackrock, when we met in Austin I may not have certified the second design yet. If I recall, we were trying to figure out how to make the original Cessna unit work in your airplane. It won't, it's the wrong size and shape, and it will drag on your seat upholstery The new style will work, I'm fairly confident. I test-mounted it in Russ Erb's airplane and it worked, and I test mounted it in the factory demo airplane at Copperstate, and it worked. They factory rep guy there was trying to make a deal with me to manufacture experimental units as a factory option for the Bearhawk.

Cam Tom, the Pacers often have that little kink in the flap handle, but it's not enough. The Maule factory eventually put a kink in the later Maules too... and it's not enough. If your airplane is anywhere near an original Pacer flap system we can make it work.

But again, on an experimental I can make a custom length with no problem... I have a friend with a '54 C-180 who wanted an experimental version a different height than what is certified. He has to throw his sectional chart over it whenever he parks outside his hangar

If either of you guys are going to be anywhere near KWHP on a weekend I can get you all set up in an hour or two.
.

EZ, no plans to be near KWHP in the near future. I may just order one and try it out though.

Will you be at Austin or HSFI this year?

Same as blackrock, I won't be your way any time soon. When I get back to the plane I'll shoot you some pics and give you some height ideas that we can start from.

Same here, would like to try one in my Bearhawk - if it fits.

An EZFlap would be nice in the BH. The other BH I flew had a grab handle which made reaching for that first notch of flaps easy. My factory flap handle doesn't have that handle so I've been thinking about adding it. Maybe a EZFlap would be a better answer.

The little welded handle in Whee's photo will solve one problem just a little bit, and not solve any of the other problems. Of course I'm very biased, but you really do need the new grip to be more than just one or two diameters above the original handle.

From the photos, the Bearhawk looks to be nearly identical to the Maule system. So I believe it is fair to say that the portion of my video that shows the Maule (BCP member M7Flyer, thanks again!) is a very close representation of how this would work in a Bearhawk.

If you Bearhawk guys can get Russ Erb to agree to do a full formal flight test with his credentials as a qualified USAF FTE, then I will go up to Rosamond and install one in his airplane. If his flight test shows it to be a highly worthwhile upgrade like the other AF engineers and test pilots did, then you bums better buy a few of them

Does anyone know of a Bearhawk closer to LA than Russ?

Bearhawk Builder wrote:Same here, would like to try one in my Bearhawk - if it fits.

I'm fairly sure it will if your Bearhawk is built per plans. If it doesn't fit, or if it doesn't make a huge difference, send it back.

blackrock wrote:EZ, no plans to be near KWHP in the near future. I may just order one and try it out though.

Will you be at Austin or HSFI this year?

I don't think I'll be at either of those events, just started a new day job and don't have any time off accrued yet.

whee wrote:An EZFlap would be nice in the BH. The other BH I flew had a grab handle which made reaching for that first notch of flaps easy. My factory flap handle doesn't have that handle so I've been thinking about adding it. Maybe a EZFlap would be a better answer.

I think it would Whee, especially with regard to bleeding off the flaps after take off or dumping them on landing.

I flew into Santa Paula airport KSZP Saturday for gas and a hamburger, and saw a Bearhawk parked there. So I walked over to look at it, and it turned out to be a Bearkawl Patrol.

Looking in through the window, the flap system seemed to be similar to the PA-18 and PA-20/22 series. I thought perhaps the Patrol uses a standard 4 seat Bearhawk system just mounted over on the left side of the (tandem) fuselage??

Can anyone tell me whether the 4 seat and 2 seat Bearhawk flap system is similar, identical, or completely different to each other?

This is one that I just dont get. Not to knock the product, but it seems to me this is adding a "solution" where there is no problem. I reach down, pull the flaps and that's all there is to it. Moreover, Im not particularly tall, have my seat cranked to the lowest setting, am on 29's, and can see the entire time in the 180/185. With the 170's low dash and sloping nose, the viz is even more a non-issue.

Seems to me that with this device when you want to dump the flaps quick, you have to now do two movements rather than just the one that Cessna designed. 40-20, switch, than 20-0. Seems antithetical to what is claimed as the safety advantage. Looks more dangerous and just extra clutter to get in the way... Am I missing something???

I'm short statured and short-armed, but I have to agree-- this seems like a solution in search of a problem, at least for me. Pulling that first 10 degree notch of flaps in my 180 is a bit of a stretch, but no big deal. Even less of a big deal if I use my forefinger to hit the button instead of the more natural thumb. For a jump takeoff, just set it at 10 before starting to roll, then jerk to 30 or whatever. Once the flaps are pulled, seems like that helper handle would be in the way-- again, at least for me. Think I'll stay with the stock Cessna arrangement. I've got some Pacer time too, and reaching the flaps was no problem in that either- or in my C150TD.

Don't feel bad you guys, I've learned that at least 50% of the people who see this don't get it immediately. Most of that half has a visceral negative reaction, because when they first see it they see a walking stick for a disabled old geezer instead of a ski pole for an Olympic athlete.

Bigrenna, to address the technical or operational questions you raised:

1) On the Cessna version (not the Piper, Bearhawk, Maule, Stinson version) yes you do switch between two flap controls. We measured it, and it adds less than half a second to the time it takes to go from 40 to zero. On any aircraft other than the Cessna, you usually do not switch between flap controls, and use the EZ Flap for all positions.

2) Yes it does add another physical object into a space where there was not previously an object.

In return for these two minor inconveniences, you significantly improve the control you have over your flap system, and you are able to (safely) use better control techniques to get a little more STOL performance out of the airplane. You also get a measurable safety improvement in situational awareness and visibility during the time you are using the flaps.

I'm very proud that my invention eventually prevailed in the controversy that it created. But it did prevail, and the actual real-world data from almost 300 units in the field, from Alaska to Australia to Saskatchewan to Texas to England to Maine, fully supports all of the claims that were made.

I don't have any problems dumping the flaps from full to zero using the EZ-flap. I do keep my seat in the full aft position, which is 2 inches further back than stock due to the extra holes on the McFarlane rails. This might make it easier for me. I didn't really have a problem using the stock flap handle, I'm 6'3" with long arms. I do find it easier and safer to get the most out of the flaps with the ez flap though. Taking off from a rocky gravel bar or ridge top trying to dodge obstacles with your rudder pedals isn't really the time you want to be bending forward to yank in full flaps... Even with long arms. The ez flap comes in handy in situations like this. One added benifit is that the handle makes a great rest for my right knee while flying around in cruise flight.

I'm going to have to put my $0.0000002 into this again. From what I am guessing, all the guys with questions, are the pilots that are the perfect specimens of human flexibility. I am truly glad that you are and hope you can stay that way, Unfortunately lots of us don't fit that catagory. Granted, I may be in the extreme minority here, but the first time Bill proposed his Ez-Flap device, I was surprised I (or someone else) hadn't thought of something so simple yet practicle. I deal with a bad flexibility issue due to a portion of my back fused, along with nearly 3 feet of titanium inside me, 2/3rds of that is one each side of my spine. Needless to say, bending over to reach the flap handle on my Cessna has always been very difficult. After that first 10-20 degrees the handle is up where I have less struggle, but that first tug is the hard part and once I installed the Ez-Flap, well, let's just say I was a happy camper!!! No more do I struggle trying to reach it. Another issue I see is a lot of older guys appear to have led a good life, they eat well or drink lots of beer and....well, lets just say most can't look straight down and see the tips of their shoes. Who am I to say that they shouldn't be flying because of a rotunda styled midsection.
As was mentioned, it does add another protrusion that might 'get in the way' but it soon seems to be part of the plane and hardly noticed.

Thank you for the kind words WWHunter.

Seems to me this is kinda like flying one plane and talking trash about another you have never flown!!
Why would you pitch manure on something you have never tried??

I have to say that this is better than it looks. I put one in my 170 for my wife who physically cannot reach the handle at 0 degrees when her shoulder harness is anything like snug.

I did not like the extra clutter, and could not see what I needed it for initially, but now I like it. It is just so much fun to pop flaps in without any effort on the roll, and very quick to dump them. I have always had a problem dumping flaps on touchdown and this makes it faster. I think it has consistently shortened my takeoffs.

You have to get used to only putting in 10 or 20 with the EZ Flap and then switching to the bar to put in 30 or 40. You can dump from 40 with the EZ Flap comfortably.

I think for the 170 and me it might be better if the EZ Flap handle was a little shorter - maybe 2".

I also met a guy who had shortened his original 170 Johnson bar about 3", and that looked interesting too.

I like my EZFlap handle. Once you are accustomed to using it, you do not even think about it. It is very helpful and I, unlike some others, will take all the help that I can get.

flyer

daedaluscan wrote:<snip>

I also met a guy who had shortened his original 170 Johnson bar about 3", and that looked interesting too.

I've thought about that a few times. I usually slow the airplane so much before adding flaps that I really don't need the leverage that long handle provides--and I'm not any kind of superman. But I suspect that shortening the handle and getting that approved would be less than easy.

Cary