Date: Thu, 25 Jan 96 17:06:33 From: jvasher@ic.net I'm curious if there are any other builders who figure they will be flying the cozy with close to 400 lbs in the front seat. I way about 260 and was kinda figuring on having my wife fly beside me in the front seat and my kids in the back seat. But after talking with nat today he told me to forget that idea. That the Cozy Mark IV was not for me.. (Geezh talk about being disappointed.) Now I figure I would loose some weight but I know I won't get down to no 150 lbs (He states 300 lbs in the front seat for comfortable flight. 400 lbs max in front seat.) Anyone have any suggestions on good kit plane for me! I supose I could work it so my wife sits in the back seat but that seems real rough not to beable to fly with more then 300 in the front seat... (Geezh I sure didn't feel big until now!) --- jvasher@ic.net Cozy_Builder wanna b' Date: Fri, 26 Jan 96 10:01:03 EST From: "Wilhelmson, Jack" Subject: Re: COMMENTS on front seat weight of 400 lbs: I fly a Cozy (not MKIV) and I have flown it with 375 lbs in the front seat. It is set up for 300 lbs. The extra 75 lbs requires all the up trim and the stick forces required at low speed on landing are high. The Cozy design has the disadvantage of not having the front seat load near the center of lift, therefore it is much more sensitive to front seat weight changes than other designs. It is my opinion that it is quite possible to build a Cozy that will fly in the center of it's trim range with 400 lbs in the front seat. The extra 100 lbs could be balanced by moving the engine aft a few inches. This would mean a new engine mount and a new cowling design. The bad part of this is that the airplane would require ballast in the nose to be flown safely with a pilot weight of less than 250 (this is a guess because I have not done the actual calculations). I am not suggesting that you do this because it would involve a lot of engineering to do it properly (unless you are a experienced engineer). Their does seem to be a number of builders and prospective builders who are interested in this type of modification. Their are also innovative ways to overcome the safety issues mentioned above if the market for tested mods of this type could be established. A discussion on the net about the nature of the plans built experimental aircraft market and how it can be supported AND HELPED TO SURVIVE would be of great interest to me, as it should be to all in this group. At the present time it survives only as a labor of love for the innovators and engineers (it appears that some of the suppliers are also not making it) involved in it. Date: Fri, 26 Jan 1996 12:47:12 -0500 From: Phillip.Johnson@Lockheed.on.ca (Phillip Johnson) Subject: Front Seat Load If you look back at the old news letters, #44 I think, Nat gives an account of his C of G flight testing. In this news letter, with a bit of searching, he tells you the full flight tested C of G window for the original length canard. As I recall with this long canard the max front seat load can go out to 455 lbs. Nat did not want this because he wanted the C of G range shown in the POH probably because this suited him. So the canard length was reduced by 6 inches. With a Nat sized pilot and the long canard considerable ballast is necessary to fly solo which is probably why he prefers that C of G range. However with a heavy weight pilot say 230 lbs only a small amount of ballast is necessary to fly safely. The problems start to creep in when a light weight pilot gets to fly the plane solo, because the ballast is probably insufficient to maintain adequate forward C of G. Many of the builders that I know are building with the long canard and many are flying that way. Nat does not approve it so you do it on your own head. There is considerable documentation on this in our archives so anyone interested in high front seat loads should look there. Phillip Johnson Date: Fri, 26 Jan 96 13:45:59 EST From: "Wilhelmson, Jack" Subject: Re: Front Seat Load Phillip: In my earlier EMAIL about flying my Cozy with 375 lbs. Front seat load. I forgot to mention that I have a RONZ Canard and it is not shortened. To fly my airplane safely with 400 lbs front seat weight I would have to make some changes. This is not theoretical, it is actual experience with a flying airplane. Test flights with the CG in the small box and gradually expanding the envelope to the large box will allow a safe approach to the limits each test pilot is comfortable with. One point is that the airplane has a very pleasant response and overall feel when the CG is in the small box. When the CG gets out to the limits of the large box, it looses a lot of its good attributes (especially at slow airspeed). This is the reason that most pilots prefer to add and remove ballast if they are going to fly for very long, even though they don't need to to stay within the CG range. Date: Fri, 26 Jan 1996 18:59:52 -0600 From: Tom Barclay Subject: cg envelope Thanks to Phillip and Jack for their postings on this subject today.It's been on my mind this week, because I am about as far from a Puffer/FAA standard human as one could be; Tall, Large, Wide and Heavy, former football player and present day opera singer (don't laugh, it's a living). I expect to buy Mark IV plans this year. My one-and-only conversation with Mr. Puffer dwelt mostly on the subjects of useful load, load distribution and the notion of a One In The Front, Two In The Back layout for my Mark IV. I have also referred to some of Burt Rutan's thoughts on tandem/staggered configurations. Needful to say, the thought of screwing around with Nat's or Burt's engineering in any significant way gives me some mortal concerns. The notion of a "King Cozy" is intriguing in some ways,but literally beyond my ken in others. Using the weight of the 6-cylinder engine for rebalancing solves some problems, while making the engine an $11,000 line item. Stretching the engine mount and tail assembly while sticking with the four-cylinder gives me concerns about maybe needing to stretch the wingroot chord as well. I wonder what Barnaby Wainfan charges per-hour? I suppose I could build it like a Stearman or a Waco, so that Mary Lynn sits in the front with our grandson, and I fly from the back. . . . ;-> The search for the perfect plans-built goes on, and the Cozy still looks best to me. Date: Sat, 27 Jan 1996 07:13:12 +0200 From: jversfel@mall.co.za (Jannie Versfeld) Subject: CG Range - Cozy MKIV I have been reading this groups posting with great interest for the past 3 weeks. I have also done some calculations on trying to figure out how to resolve the 300 lbs front seat loading and the problem with ballast when flying solo. My opinion is that by beefing up the main wing spar and moving the engine further back is too much of a redesign and will change Nat's design in a way he would not feel comfortable with. (we must respect someones design efforts - or call it someting else) The following is only my opinion and thoughts that I share. Side by side seating will allways bee a problem in canards where emty weight and payload weight do not differ considerably. What I plan to do when I start building my cozy is to install 2 ballast (baffled) tanks for ballast. One one in the nose and onother in the rear. A two way liquid pump to displace the ballast from the rear to front when flying single. (almost perfect trim can be achieved) I would use a high density liquid (carbon tetra chloride). This will allow me to use smaller ballast tanks as the weight of this liquid is almost double that of water. It also acts as a fire extiguisher in the result of an accident (should the tanks burst). Beefing up the canard spar and increasing the chord by 1.5 " would then allow a front seat load of 400 lbs. I will still do proper calculations on the canard structure and the weight analysis. The increase of canard area may only slightly increase drag? I gues that this will closely stick to the original design, but with increased front seat payload. Best regards to all, Jannie Versfeld. PS: has anyone got the co-ords for the main wing? Date: Mon, 29 Jan 1996 00:28:38 -0500 (EST) From: Bill Walsh Subject: Re: Front Seat Weight On Thu, 25 Jan 1996 jvasher@ic.net wrote: > I'm curious if there are any other builders who figure they will be > flying the cozy with close to 400 lbs in the front seat. Just look at the wealth of information here. Your cause is not lost. You have the Aerocad option, re doing the original MKIV a bit. Or as was stated to me either by Nat or in his test flights info. You will be able to get off the ground with 400# in the front seat. I know it is possible as myself and Mike Pinnock have both flown in his plane (I'm about 225 and Mike is bigger than I) Now if you live or commute to Denver in the summertime on a continual basis that may be another matter. It's your decision....but the options are many, just ask..... anyone else??? BW Date: Fri, 29 Mar 1996 20:42:00 From: JRaerocad@gnn.com (Jeff Russell) Subject: The right weight and CG on the AeroCanard see new File: << weight.txt >> AeroCad Inc. Jeff Russell 1445 Crater Lane Yadkinville, NC. 27055 910-961-2238 E-mail: JRaerocad@gnn.com This is my real Weight and CG on the AeroCanard. Sorry, I can not add today. I new my nose weight +4, and total weight 1252 lbs, but the rest went to hell. EMPTY WEIGHT & CG LOCATION FOR SER# 001 AEROCANARD R. MAIN +624 L. MAIN +624 NOSE WHEEL +4 BALLAST 0 TOTAL: 1252 EMPTY CG: 109.75 137410.2 THIS EMPTY WEIGHT INCORPORATES 4 PLACE OXYGEN SYSTEMS (15 LBS) SEAT CUSHIONS WITH SHEEP SKINS (45 LBS) 4 HEAD SETS (4 LBS) MAPS & LAP BOARD (1 LB) AIRPLANE COVER WITH TIE DOWNS (6 LBS) WHEEL PANTS WERE SIMULATED AT (6 LBS EACH) The fuselage stations were the same as Nat locations. Date: Mon, 01 Apr 1996 19:18:50 From: JRaerocad@gnn.com (Jeff Russell) Subject: Canard limits or CG Phillip writes: >Of you guys out there flying, do you find that you are elevator >limited on landing? Only when you reach extreme forward CG you might see limited elevators. On the GU canard in rain at FWD CG !!!!! This was a problem for sure with running out of elevator. I use to load my Cozy 3 when (rain and FWG CG was a issue, short runways, climbing over mountains etc.) with my co-pilot in the back seat. This gave me the best advantage in bad conditions. The Ronce canard fixed this problem at the 150" length. My Cozy was very nose heavy at empty!!! The name Cozy was giving for the side by side tightness. I was glad to be able to use it that way for co-pilot help again. I never plan on EVER flying light in the front seat (past 102.00) so I should not be disappointed on what my front seat loading can obtain. AeroCad Inc. Jeff Russell 1445 Crater Lane Yadkinville, NC. 27055 910-961-2238 E-mail: JRaerocad@gnn.com Date: Thu, 15 Aug 1996 15:18:37 -0400 From: AlanLay@aol.com Subject: COZY: Front seat weight Hello everyone, A post by jvasher@mail.ic.net (test) on 96-08-06 21:57:41 EDT has left me confused. How much weight is allowed in the front seat of the Cozy? Could anyone help me with a weight & balance problem that will be more or less typical for me? I expect that I will usually fly with 380-400 lbs in the front seat and mostly full fuel tanks. What if I want to fly solo? Also, it appears that the rear seats are nearly over the C.G. range, so I assume that loading back there affects the C.G. very little (but of course affects gross weight). What is a typical empty weight we are seeing on the Cozy Mk IV? Thanks Alan Lay lurking, but growing more interested Date: Thu, 15 Aug 1996 16:49:24 -0400 From: Nigel Field Subject: Re: COZY: Front seat weight At 03:18 PM 8/15/96 -0400, Alan wrote: >Hello everyone, >What if I want to fly solo? Also, it >appears that the rear seats are nearly over the C.G. range, so I assume that >loading back there affects the C.G. very little (but of course affects gross >weight). > >What is a typical empty weight we are seeing on the Cozy Mk IV? > Hi Alan, I think there is a Cozy IV WB Lotus spread sheet in the archives that you can download and play "what if" to your heart's content. It contains someone elses weights and moments but should give you a good idea of what to expect. Nigel Field