This is a really interesting article on the “handling qualities” – especially in the early days. Local copy. I wonder if that is still current?
Canard aircraft must be designed so that they don’t deep stall. It is also dependent on construction quality, relative incidence of the two wings etc. When they are designed and built correctly they can be incredibly safe in what would otherwise be stall spin situations – my father is alive today because he was able execute a power off turn back from 500 ft over a populated area, in an aircraft that did not climb steeply. This involved a roughly 60 degree bank while simply pulling until the typical canard bucking phenomenon occurred, with the canard repetitively and gently stalling and unstalling.
In the 80s era when canards were all the rage, a friend who competes in unlimited aerobatics, has low level display authorization etc, tried really hard to make a Vari-Eze misbehave. He says by doing very unconventional aerobatics he could provoke unusual stall behavior, but that it was recoverable. This has obviously not proven to be a problem over 40 years of more conventional service.
That particular design looks very ‘sexy’.
Most of those types are claimed to have fighter-aircraft like handling. I’d like to try one, one day, but despite all the general claims, I will admit to falling foul of an underlying feeling that it’s ‘not a proper plane’. Kinda silly I know.
I won’t fly a pusher. I hit a fence, and there was very little damage to the aircraft. The heaviest bit hit the fencepost first. I don’t want to be the shock absorber for an aeroengine.
A good friend is building this Velocity with a centrifugal RR turbine and modest pressurisation – not sure expected spec, but possibly M0.5 at FL200.
They are quite hungry in the TODR department, 1,000 metres plus?
RobertL18C wrote:
They are quite hungry in the TODR department, 1,000 metres plus?
Yes, the main wing cannot be rotated to T/O AoA until the front wing has made enough lift to raise the nose, operating at its ground attitude AoA and rotating/lifting the aircraft around the aft located main gear. The desperate workaround 
is to bounce the nose into the air during the takeoff roll using the elevator and nosewheel spring.
The velocity aircraft are very successful, with many hundreds completed and flying (i read recently 700-800) – not that i have any interest or desire to do anything with a canard.
If you really want to see something else, look at the “raptor aircraft” canard. Well documented on you tube, as well as an exceedlingly long discussion on homebuiltaircraft.com.
I wont make any comments here – start looking and formulate your own opinions. This could be the start of a long and entertaining thread here on euroga
