Date: Sat, 30 Dec 1995 22:58:14 -0500 From: NBalog@aol.com Subject: Chapter 9, MKMGA's and Axle Mounting HELP! I'm being held prisoner in my basement by my hobby/passion/obsession. Anyone who has built through chapter 9 please reply. (I'll do my best to make this short-winded). 1. Sent my MKMGA's back to Brock Mfg. 'cause the ID of 3 of the bushing's was a few thousandths too narrow to allow the main ldg gear mounting studs to pass. Mike Jongblood at Brock said the ID of the OK bushing was .499" and the shaft (stud) Nat sent in originally was .498" The others reamed out to .499 I got the main gear up and the MKMGA's floxed in place no problem. I bought these last February and just now got around to that chapter. Anyone else who's buying things in advance may want to check clearances, tolerances, lengths (like I'm worrying about the canard elevator torque tubes' - also from Brock - length and whether this will match what Featherlite did to the elevator foam cores to meet Nat's 6" shorter specification but this is two chapters away so I have time to procrastinate). 2. WHAT IN THE HELL IS THE JIG BLOCK FOR IN CHAPTER 9, Page 7? Nat says "It is helpful to make up a couple of [these] to clamp on the gear legs which will support the axle flange in the right orientation while adjusting clamping pressure for toe-in." Figure 40 shows the outline of this, but figure 41 doesn't show it in the "clamped-up" axle arrangement nor does he mention of what material these should be, how thick, etc. Any ideas besides calling Nat? 3. When mounting up the landing leg heat shield (specifics given in a newsletter some years ago), how does one ensure the correct centering of the Axle on F.S. 110 when the shield covers up the orientation marks also done on Page 7? WAG? Thanks, this can wait another couple of days so take your time answering, and Happy New Year to all. -Norm Date: Mon, 1 Jan 1996 15:47:31 -0500 From: NBalog@aol.com Subject: Chpt. 9 First, Thanks to Eric Westland who (just) called to talk me through his method of mounting the axles on the main gear. Second, for anyone else working on (or just starting) chapter 9, I have two tips that might save some time and/or money. 1. 8-ply Leg Wraps: After my first marathon 7 hour layup session (the first 4 layers) I tried to figure out a way to cut this time down for the next four. What I did was lay out some polyethylene sheeting (from a weather proofing roll) on my table, then I wet out the UNI layers one at a time and laid them over the Leading Edge of the gear legs; this also took some time (what doesn't) but I found I could smooth them out with my hands, then run a squeegee over them. To check my work, I laid the third ply (actually the seventh) out "dry" and saw that very little epoxy was wicking through it. This ply I wet out with a 2" brush which is how I did the first four which is what took so damned much time. The fourth ply went on wet. This second set of 4-ply UND went on in about 5 hours and probably coud've taken four if I did the third layer wet too. Don't forget to peel ply the ends of the legs (for the axle and backup plate) and the area the mounting tabs will get built up. 2. Where do you get the Aluminum tape to build up the backing for the 2 inch (I made mine 2.5") trailing edge (before you do the second UND wrap)? Wicks carries this for about US $42 a roll, but the same roll, same material was found by accident at Home Depot (NONE of the four or so people I asked knew what I was talking about) in the heating and ductwork section. You'll need a large roll (I think I got about thirty yards for around $7) and to make the backup, cut it into LOTS of 4-8 inch pieces and make it about 8 layers thick, laying some strips up in a BID-like 45 degree pattern for overlap and stability. This really worked well and I have half the roll left to play with in the future. Oh, one other thing. I tried to use soda straws for the brake line channel but no matter how I roughed it up neither epoxy nor thick superglue would hold it in place. I have a LARGE can of 3M spray adhesive (probably invented by Nat when he worked for them ) for making sanding sticks (36 grit on firring strips and 2x4's) which I sprayed on one side of the straw, let dry 'til tacky and stuck it to the TL of the Gear Legs. Worked like a charm. Hope this will help someone. Happy New Year. -Norm Date: Mon, 1 Jan 1996 22:48:19 -0500 From: NBalog@aol.com Subject: Re: Chapter 9, Axle Mounting In a message dated 96-01-01 15:19:50 EST, you (mantares) wrote: >The jig block is to help hold the axle in the right position together with the backing plate while you >clamp it for curing. However I did it a different way--drilled a 1/16 hole through the backing plate and >into the axle and then pinned them together while they cured. It worked fine and saved me the time >building the jig. Perfect. I had exactly the same thought. This combined with Eric Westland's idea to do the end of the leg BID wraps, make a flat mouning pad for the axles with a dollop of thick flox which gets flattened by a chunk of 1" pine held down with C-clamps and aligned by Nat's method (using a MUCH longer tube to decrease parallax error) should make this setup much easier and straight forward. I'll let you know. -Norm From: Marc J. Zeitlin Subject: Chap. 9 - LG cover; Brock parts; strut Date: Tue, 2 Jan 96 14:55:25 EST People; 1) First, a question. The strut I have from Aerocad has the axle mounting point looking like this: ------- -- -- -- -- / \ | | \ / In other words, they tilt in a bit at the bottom (obviously this silly ASCII drawing is exaggerated). This is with NO load on them. Should they be vertical? Do the Featherlite struts look the same? We're talking maybe 3 - 5 degrees here. I assume that's alright, and that when the weight is on them, the axles would be horizontal, but the plans make no mention of it at all. 2) Next, a complaint and a warning. I just got through reaming out the MK-4 bushings for the Landing Gear attachment. I can't believe the poor Q.C. at Brock - out of 8 bushings, 3 fit the studs, and five were too tight. One was missing a chamfer. At least none of them were too large - I was able to ream them all out to .500" and now everything fits. If I didn't have access to a machine shop here at work, I'd be even more pissed off than I already am. I REALLY hope some alternative sources appear for the nose gear stuff in the near future....... 3) Lastly, after reading the plans and then reviewing Paul Stowitts' description of how he built his gear cover, I couldn't quite get comfortable with either of the proposed methods, so of course I had to invent something else. I decided to use urethane (carvable) foam. I used 1" and 2" thick slabs of this foam, built up to fit the cover recess area and hot-melt glued together. I built up "shelves" as the plans recommended to support the foam, and then sanded the outside of the foam to match the shape of the fuselage bottom and the NACA air scoop. I then used friction tape and duct tape to build up the joggles around the cover area, and microed and glassed the outside of the cover. After this cured, I flipped the cover over, and sanded away most of the Urethane foam, to leave aproximately 1/2" - 3/4" of foam with smooth corners. I then put the landing gear cover away for a while, since I didn't have the landing gear strut yet, and couldn't finish fitting it in order to glass the bottom surface, but the intent is clear. I was able to easily sand the shape of the fuselage bottom and the NACA scoop into the urethane, and didn't have to build any templates or try to bend any 3/8" foam to a specific radius. BTW, while I could intuit (somewhat) what Norm Balog and Eric Westland discussed by contemplating Norm's last posting on the axle mounting, I'd appreciate it if one of you guys could elaborate just a bit for the rest of us :-). Thanks. -- Marc J. Zeitlin Email: marcz@an.hp.com Date: Tue, 2 Jan 1996 14:38:51 -0800 From: brimmer@ix.netcom.com (Kenneth Brimmer ) Subject: Re: Chap. 9 - LG cover; Brock parts; strut You wrote: > >People; > >1) First, a question. The strut I have from Aerocad has the axle > mounting point looking like this: > > ------- > -- -- > -- -- > / \ > | | > \ / > > > In other words, they tilt in a bit at the bottom (obviously this > silly ASCII drawing is exaggerated). This is with NO load on them. > Should they be vertical? Do the Featherlite struts look the same? > We're talking maybe 3 - 5 degrees here. I assume that's alright, and > that when the weight is on them, the axles would be horizontal, but > the plans make no mention of it at all. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- This is probably right - they should toe in. > >2) Next, a complaint and a warning. I just got through reaming out the > MK-4 bushings for the Landing Gear attachment. I can't believe the > poor Q.C. at Brock - out of 8 bushings, 3 fit the studs, and five > were too tight. One was missing a chamfer. At least none of them > were too large - I was able to ream them all out to .500" and now > everything fits. If I didn't have access to a machine shop here at > work, I'd be even more pissed off than I already am. I REALLY hope > some alternative sources appear for the nose gear stuff in the near > future....... > ----------------------------------------------------------------- Nat has had complaints from builders ever since the early days of the Cozy III. I bet if a machinest went to Nat and offered to supply the parts for the Cozy IV he would be glad to make them an authorized supplier. I know that Burt even has had trouble with Brock ... but never changed to a new authorized supplier. I do know that you should call Brock and Nat and let them know of the problem. Nat has changed other suppliers in the past due to a lack of quality. Ken Brimmer Date: Tue, 2 Jan 1996 17:42:07 -0500 From: PBurkha238@aol.com Subject: Re: Chap. 9 - LG cover; Brock parts; strut Marc, I ordered my leg strut from Featherlite and yes it does have a slight inward curve to it, I have most of my structure done and it still has the wheels turned slightly inward, however when i sit on the wing spar and put some weight on it it looks normal. You can buy some of the parts for the MKIV from Jeff Russel for the Aerocanard, I bought my main gear bushings from Jeff and had no problem. He also sells canard parts (but not all of them) he at one time had a guy making the canard offset tubes out of stainless steel, but no longer has a supplier. A buddy of mine who is building a MKIV( and is not on line) made a nice gear cover. he made a flox corner in the naca scoop area, he also tapered the vertical walls of the scoop so that it wouldnt hang up while installing it. I wish I had made mine that way. I really have to push on it sometimes, I have since removed some of the glass in the area to make it install easier. Date: Wed, 3 Jan 1996 16:32:04 -0700 From: westland@premier1.net (Eric Westland) Subject: Re: Chap. 9 - LG cover; Brock parts; strut > >BTW, while I could intuit (somewhat) what Norm Balog and Eric Westland >discussed by contemplating Norm's last posting on the axle mounting, I'd >appreciate it if one of you guys could elaborate just a bit for the rest >of us :-). Thanks. > >-- >Marc J. Zeitlin Email: marcz@an.hp.com Here is what I did when mounting the axles. I'm sure this method could use some refinement and it has been a couple of years since I did it, but this is how it goes, as best as I can remember. 1) Get your gear installed in the fuselage upside down and everything level. 2) I made large targets for sighting in the toe-in, about 20' away. Bright light helps to see them. 3) I used the ~20" torque tube for the nose gear as my sight gauge. 3" just is not enough. I then covered the ends with electrical tape and cut narrow slits in the tape to make a "rifle scope" type arrangement. On top of this I taped my torpedo level. I have wondered if one of those $30 laser pointers would be the ticket? 4) After wrapping the gear leg ends with BID, I proceeded with making a flox pad that would be in the correct plane to give me the proper toe-in once the axles are mounted. I started by clamping a tape-covered 1x4 to the axle so I could practice positioning it. I used a couple of wood clamps with the parallel jaws so I could adjust it just right. I'm sure this is one area where a better way could be figured out, but this also worked just fine with enough hot glue! After practicing, I removed the board, applied a big gob of stiff flox and re-clamped. As always, clean up any excess. 5) After the flox pad cured, I re-marked the axle center and fine-tuned the angle of the pad with a hard sanding block. 6) Now that the toe-in is perfect, I drilled the holes for the axles. I had already drilled the same pattern in my 1/8" heat shields, so when it came time to permanently mount it, it was just a matter of bolting it all together with flox. Be sure that you grind away for your brake clearance prior to floxing all the axles parts together as you will need to remove them while grinding slowly away at the gear leg. BTW, a dremel sanding drum works like nothing else when doing this. One additional note - I changed internet providers, so my address is different. I still have the old account, but do not check it very often. Reply to this address if you have any questions. I hope this helps. Good luck, Eric M. Eric and Victoria Westland (206) 742-6798 10702 62nd Place West Mukilteo, WA 98275 westland@ premier1.net Date: Wed, 3 Jan 1996 23:12:51 -0500 (EST) From: Bill Walsh Subject: Re: Chap. 9 - LG cover; Brock parts; strut Marc, I identify on some of your concerns...The landing gear is as it should=20 be. When I helped Mike P. with his Cozy IV we had the same concerns about= =20 the "bowed" appearance. Nat assured us it was correct, and it was. I=20 have seen Jeffs landing gear and they are the same as featherlite. Next pet peave...Brock has a tendencey of having inconsistant quality,=20 most times his tolerances are too close. Of the 2 nosegear installations= =20 I have done one bushing needed to be bored out,the other was a perfect fit!= ! Ihave talked to him several times and he doesn't have much=F8=C4 in the w= ay=20 of customer service. These are my views I'msur there are others out there. Good night..................BW Date: Sun, 7 Jan 1996 13:41:44 -0500 From: NBalog@aol.com Subject: Re: Chap. 9 - strut toe-in In a message dated 96-01-02 14:58:51 EST, you wrote: [and I've omitted the ASCII rendering] > they [the landing gear] tilt in a bit at the bottom (obviously this silly ASCII drawing is exaggerated). This >is with NO load on them. Should they be vertical? Do the Featherlite struts look the same? Yeah, the featherlites look the same. I even asked Nat about this one and he gave me a straight answer. This is what they look like without any load on them. 1100 lbs of "empty" airplane spreads them a bit. As to getting the axles to line up with howeverthehellmany degrees of toe-in Nat specifies, Eric Westland and I had a conversation about the S-glass rovings and their torsional strain effects on this; that is, even though the no-load measurement is within tolerances, when the gearleg spreads under load, the ends, rather than spread an equal amount laterally may do so unequally due to various internal forces in the legs and the net outcome is that either or both leg ends may get "tweaked" a little and not line up as per plans. Ever watch a mechanic do a front-end alignment on a car? This is done under load to correct for small variances in the suspension. My question was why do we do toe-in and not compensate for camber and caster? Eric posited [paraphrased] that try as we might, the angle Nat recommends is a target number with little or no relevance to the actual outcome because of the aforementioned factors; we just do the best we can with the materials we've got and hope it all comes out okay. : - } [sardonic, wry, smile]. -Norm Date: Sun, 7 Jan 1996 13:41:59 -0500 From: NBalog@aol.com Subject: Re: Chap. 9 - LG cover; Brock parts; strut In a message dated 96-01-02 14:58:51 EST, you write: >BTW, while I could intuit (somewhat) what Norm Balog and Eric Westland discussed by contemplating >Norm's last posting on the axle mounting, I'd appreciate it if one of you guys could elaborate just a bit for >the rest of us :-). Thanks. Sorry. I took notes but hadn't worked out the details. I can see that Eric posted a fairly complete description of his method which sounds like it'll work better for me than Nat's. I had a friend here from out of town this week and he tried figuring out the plans too [he's a computer guy, reads a lot of techno- babble ; - ) ] and he thought it all made pretty good sense except for the jig block and suggested using a laser pointer too. Apropos my other e-mail, I don't know that this is necessary [might be a good case of overkill] but it makes more sense than the 3" tube or even a longer one as the accuracy of measuring distances against the far wall will be greatly enhanced. I'll take a look at radio shack this week, otherwise I found one in a Harbor Freight Tools catalog (3491 Mission Oaks Blvd., Camarillo, CA 93011, ph. 800.423.2567) for $29.95, PN 33641-3RMA. The case on this would have to be straight, not curved and I think the cheapest one I saw at Radio Shack was ~$45.00. This might prove to be a more useful gadget than one would think if you have cats (I do) as you can run them ragged making them chase the bright little spot of light on a far wall and not even break a sweat . -Norm From: Marc J. Zeitlin Subject: Chapter 9 - mounting tabs Date: Sun, 7 Jan 96 22:32:25 EST An airplane fairy tale: Once upon a time there was an oaf who lived in Acton, Massachusetts, and decided to build an airplane. To make a long story short, we'll pick up the story just as the oaf finishes the landing gear mounting tabs (or so he believes!). In our previous installment, the oaf informed all the inhabitants of virtual-land that there was NO WAY a 15" long strip of fiberglass would be long enough to make it around the landing gear strut for the mounting tab outside layup, and that he had to cut strips 18" long. Now, this had bothered the oaf, especially since he had spent a lot of time looking at the sorcerer's plans and at the drawings. He had thought that his layout and frame he had built for the tabs looked too large, but every time he measured everything he had done, the measurements came out right (or so he thought!). So, the oaf finished the tabs, drilled out the 1/4" holes, and was very pleased with himself that everthing had gone well, and the holes lined up perfectly. Then, being the big, strong, oaf that he is, he put his fuselage on sawhorses, leveled it, and dropped the landing gear into place in order to align it for mounting. But wait! It seemed as though the wicked witch of the west (or east, the oaf could never remember these things) had put a spell on him, which no amount of expensive schooling (paid for partially by the oaf himself, but mostly by his parents) could overcome! While the landing gear mounting tab holes lined up perfectly with the bulkhead holes, the landing gear did NOT fit down into the space provided for it, and when the oaf attempted to put the landing gear cover over it, he could not. It was apparent that the landing gear was sticking out of the fuselage about one inch too far. It was also apparent, after looking at the sorcerer's drawings, that the tabs were WAY too long. The oaf thou ght it strange that this did not strike the oaf as incorrect long before this. The oaf thought and though with his puny little brain (along with mouthing a few expletives heretofore unknown to the other inhabitants of his abode). After a couple of minutes, it became obvious to the oaf what he had done incorrectly, due to that witch's spell. The sorcerer had spelled out that the mounting holes (those 1/4" puppies) should be 0.75" above the highest point on the strut. The oaf had interpreted that to mean the highest point AT THE CENTERLINE OF THE STRUT. (This is why he is known as an oaf, and not as the "engineer/scientist" that the oaf's employer wants to call him). What the sorcerer had meant was "the highest point on the strut at the line 13" off center", where the mounting hole will be. This meaning now made itself clear to the oaf, as the witch had gone to Bermuda (and taken her spell with her) to escape the snow, laughing all the way. So, the oaf removed the strut from the fuselage, laid out the position of the new mounting holes (which turned out to be exactly 1-3/8" below [closer to the strut] than the original holes), drilled them out (once again, they lined up perfectly), and then cut and sanded about 1 - 2 pounds of fiberglass and epoxy off of the tabs. Lo and behold - the tabs were of such a length that 15" strips of glass would have been perfectly adequate to glass up the outside layup. Also, the mounting holes were now exactly 0.75" above the highest point of the strut closest to the mounting holes, and the strut fit into the fuselage in such a way that the landing gear cover could be installed without interference. Of course, the story has a happy ending, but if there is a moral here, the oaf does not see it. Why are we not surprised? -- Marc J. Zeitlin Email: marcz@an.hp.com From: TODDC@why.net (TODDC) Subject: holesaw vs spotface Date: Sun, 21 Jan 1996 11:45:13 -0600 Just had a thought in addition to grinding the "set" off of the hole saw, try removing the every other tooth, or every third or fourth tooth. This may give the "chips" a place to go. it probably not even worth $.02. Todd From: Marc J. Zeitlin Subject: holesaw vs spotface (fwd) Date: Sun, 21 Jan 96 23:27:15 EST Todd Carico wrote: >Just had a thought >in addition to grinding the "set" off of the hole saw, try removing the >every other tooth, or every third or fourth tooth. This may give the >"chips" a place to go. After the discussions we had about the spotface tool, I used both the 5/8" and the 3/4" tools to cut my holes for the landing gear mounts. The 3/4" spotface that I got was NOT hardened, but it had no problem cutting through the L.G. mounting tabs on the struts. It cut through all four without getting appreciably dull. The 5/8" spotface WAS hardened, and it was able to go through the glass AND aluminum on the bulkheads without getting dull. It did take a long time, however - at least an hour to drill all four holes in the bulkheads, and about a half hour for the tabs. The hole saw would be cheaper, and probably faster too, but it would be more work to prepare the saw. The MKMGA's and the bushings fit VERY snugly in the holes, and I needed to open the holes just a hair with a dremel fine sanding drum. This also let me adjust the positioning so that everything would line up perfectly. -- Marc J. Zeitlin Email: marcz@an.hp.com Date: 21 Jan 96 23:45:33 EST From: Rick Roberts <102503.1561@compuserve.com> Subject: holesaw vs spotface (fwd) Marc J. Zeitlin wrote: >After the discussions we had about the spotface tool, I used both the >5/8" and the 3/4" tools to cut my holes for the landing gear mounts. On my airplane, I have a lot of special material problems, I'm not using the the stock materials. After listening to Keith Spreuer complain about the abysmal spot facer he bought from Brock, I went to a specialty tool company and bought a carbine 5/8" spot face. It cost about $40 but cut beautifully and stayed sharp. Rick Roberts From: Marc J. Zeitlin Subject: holesaw vs spotface (fwd) Date: Mon, 22 Jan 96 0:01:25 EST Rick Roberts wrote: >Marc J. Zeitlin wrote: >>After the discussions we had about the spotface tool, I used both the >>5/8" and the 3/4" tools to cut my holes for the landing gear mounts. > >On my airplane, I have a lot of special material problems, I'm not using >the the stock materials. After listening to Keith Spreuer complain >about the abysmal spot facer he bought from Brock, I went to a specialty >tool company and bought a carbine 5/8" spot face. It cost about $40 but >cut beautifully and stayed sharp. Please ignore my last empty message about this - my fingers slipped :-). Rick, I assume you meant "carbide" here. That would certainly be as good (if not a lot better) even than a hardened tool. -- Marc J. Zeitlin Email: marcz@an.hp.com Date: Tue, 30 Jan 1996 07:38:51 -0600 From: Scott Mandel Subject: What Next? Hi Guys, I'm looking for a little advise. I finished chapter 8 last night. I have my landing gear and I'm about to start chapter 9 tonight. I've found it really handy to have the fuselage mounted on an A frame so it swivels, but I can see once I mount the gear those nice light easy to move fuselage days are over. I'm planning on doing all the reinforcements now, the speed brake, the gear cover and so on. Here's my questions: 1. Should I hold off on permanently mounting the gear now? 2. Would this be a time to start skipping around in the plans and maybe do the control surfaces, and other fuselage stuff? 3. Must I build and mount the canard prior to building the controls? 4. I haven't purchased my brakes and tires yet, but should I go ahead and run all the brake lines now? _________________ ______________________ / Scott L. Mandel \ /Email: mandel@esy.com \ \_________________/_________________________\______________________/ | \\|// Hydrographic Source Assessment System (HYSAS) \ | (o o) \_______ \_o00o~(_)~o00o______________ Email: scott_mandel@qmailgw.esy.com \ / E-System Garland Division \ | | 1200 S. Jupiter Road ||---(X)---| Voice: 1-214-205-8762 | | Garland, Tx. 75042 | o/o\o Chap 9 Fax: 1-214-205-6012 | \___________________________/______________________________________/ Make it idiot proof and someone will make a better idiot. From: Marc J. Zeitlin Subject: Re: What Next? Date: Tue, 30 Jan 96 9:11:07 EST Scott L. Mandel wrote: >1. Should I hold off on permanently mounting the gear now? I'm in about the same position. I'm going to mount the gear, do the axles etc., but when I install the brake lines, I'm going to put in two of those inline nylaflow connectors (don't remember the part # off the top of my head) on the BACK side of the front LG bulkhead. This will allow me to remove the gear easily by disconnecting the brake lines and then removing the two large studs. Poof, off comes the gear whenever I want. Don't know the answers to your other questions, other than that I've been able to get through Chapter 12 without doing the controls, but don't know if you could do it the other way around. -- Marc J. Zeitlin Email: marcz@an.hp.com Date: 30 Jan 96 10:41:07 EST From: Rick Roberts <102503.1561@compuserve.com> Subject: What Next? Here's my comments: for what it is worth. ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- 1. Should I hold off on permanently mounting the gear now? YES for a while! 2. Would this be a time to start skipping around in the plans and maybe do the control surfaces, and other fuselage stuff? YES!, the controls, armrests seats etc. 3. Must I build and mount the canard prior to building the controls? NO! 4. I haven't purchased my brakes and tires yet, but should I go ahead and run all the brake lines now? YES and use aluminum line don't use the plastic stuff. Hope this helps. Rick Roberts Date: Tue, 30 Jan 1996 10:48:00 -0500 From: Dick.Finn@FNB.sprint.com Subject: Re: What Next? The landing gear easily dismounts by pulling out the two studs. I've had my gear completed and leaning against the basement wall for about two years. You don't need to permanently mount it. I also built an A-frame of sorts to swivel the fuselage. I bought two pipes and installed a pipe flange on the end. I then bolted a short 2x4 top the pipe flanges and screwed one asembly to the firewall and the other to f22. I stuck the pipe through a hole in each A-frame and was able to quickly and easily rotate the fuselage. An added benefit was that I could stand behind the firewall and pretend to bank the plane :). I'm getting to the point where I will be working on the control linkages. I would suggest that you finish the Canard and elevators, wing spar, wings and ailerons before doing the controls. Everything connects together and you will need everything in place to complete the fitting of the control system. Obviously you could complete the control system up to the final link to the control surfaces. Unless there is some other issue relating to storage of completed parts or the like I would suggest you simply ocntinue according to the plans. If you can afford it buy the parts from Brock now however. I ran PVC tubing down the landing gear. It is easy to push the brake line down the tubing from the top center of the gear to the brakes. If the brake line deteriorates I can easily pull it out and replace it. Bottom line is that you don't need the brakes, axels, wheels to run the brake line. All you have to do is provide a method to get the brake line to the brakes. You do, however need those items to complete the main gear. Dick Finn Cozy Mark IV #46 From: Marc J. Zeitlin Subject: Chap_13 brake lines Date: Tue, 30 Jan 96 11:39:16 EST Rick Roberts writes in response to Scott Mandel's question: >>4. I haven't purchased my brakes and tires yet, but should I go ahead and >> run all the brake lines now? >YES and use aluminum line don't use the plastic stuff. Why do you recommend this? Is there something we should know about the lifetime of the nylaflow tubing? Assuming that I've already got the 1/4" I.D. straws in the gear legs, what aluminum tube would you recommend, and which fittings? Do I need a flaring tool? Thanks. -- Marc J. Zeitlin Email: marcz@an.hp.com From: Marc Zeitlin Date: Tue, 30 Jan 96 13:27:51 EST Subject: chapter 9!! brake lines I wrote: >Why do you recommend this? Is there something we should know about the >lifetime of the nylaflow tubing? > >Assuming that I've already got the 1/4" I.D. straws in the gear legs, >what aluminum tube would you recommend, and which fittings? Do I need a >flaring tool? Obviously, the title of this should have been "Chapter 9" not "Chapter 13". Duh. -- Marc J. Zeitlin Email: marcz@an.hp.com Date: 30 Jan 96 19:01:37 EST From: Rick Roberts <102503.1561@compuserve.com> Subject: Chap_13 brake lines Greetings, In response to Mark Zeitlin's question. I greatly prefer the use of aluminum for brake lines over the plastic since the plastic line has some give to it at pressure, thereby providing mushy brakes. I like firm brakes. I used aluminum swagelock fittings (and a couple of flares), If I did it again, I'd use no flares. I really didn't want plastic lines, based on the gumbling of several builders I met. The aluminum 5052-0 tube is easy to bend, pretty damage tolerant and I think overall a better I idea. Rick Roberts ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- Rick Roberts writes in response to Scott Mandel's question: >>4. I haven't purchased my brakes and tires yet, but should I go ahead and >> run all the brake lines now? >YES and use aluminum line don't use the plastic stuff. Why do you recommend this? Is there something we should know about the lifetime of the nylaflow tubing? Assuming that I've already got the 1/4" I.D. straws in the gear legs, what aluminum tube would you recommend, and which fittings? Do I need a flaring tool? Thanks. -- Marc J. Zeitlin Email: marcz@an.hp.com Date: Thu, 01 Feb 1996 10:11:17 -0500 From: Nigel.Field@HQPSB.SSC.ssc-asc.x400.gc.ca (Field, Nigel (1416)) Subject: Brake Lines Rick Roberts wrote: >I greatly prefer the use of aluminum for brake lines over the plastic since th e plastic line has some give to it at pressure, thereby providing mushy brakes. I like firm brakes. > I think we all prefer firm breasts, ah sorry I meant brakes, but slightly softer brakes ( thats arguable) are better than none at all. The use of aluminum tubing inside a gear leg that is constantly flexing will probably lead to a fatigue fracture of the line in short order. I think this is one of the main reasons Rutan called out Nylon (not plastic, copper, aluminum ) lines. They are dead easy to change if you use a PVC sleeve in your gear leg and a compression union joint just above where the line exits the top of the gear leg. You can change them every year for about $2. and 1/2 hours work. A brake failure for whatever reason, during landing or worse, an abort T/O can be very serious, just ask Kieth Spruer. Rick I recommend you re-think this one. Regards Nigel Date: Fri, 2 Feb 1996 09:03:01 -0600 From: Scott Mandel Subject: Chap 9 Gear Reinforcements Does anyone have a good idea on how to do the first gear reinforcement in chapter 9. From the forward landing gear bulkhead down onto the floor of the fuselage. I couldn't even get my newspaper template to fit. I was thinking about using several different pieces and overlaping, but I'm afraid I'll sacrifice strength. From: Marc J. Zeitlin Subject: Chap 9 Gear Reinforcements (fwd) Date: Fri, 2 Feb 96 11:13:52 EST Scott Mandel writes: >Does anyone have a good idea on how to do the first gear reinforcement >in chapter 9. From the forward landing gear bulkhead down onto the floor >of the fuselage. I couldn't even get my newspaper template to fit. I was >thinking about using several different pieces and overlaping, but I'm >afraid I'll sacrifice strength. If you're talking about the layup on the FRONT face of the front LGB, I was able to get the BID (remember, it will stretch and move a bit - newspaper won't :-) ) to conform almost completely to the shape, as long as I had rounded the longeron so that there were NO sharp edges. It would also be fine to have multiple overlapping pieces with a 1" overlap - you'll develop full strength. On the layup on the REAR face of the front LGB, I cut a dart into the BID (made a newspaper form first - all the surfaces are flat so the paper will conform) and had a 1" overlap on the edge in the corner. The overlap will weigh a bit more, but I didn't have to worry about trying to get the glass to conform and end up with a bunch of air pockets. You can see pictures of both of these layups at: http://www-msy-me.wal.hp.com/~marcz/cozy_mkIV/chapters/chap09_2.html -- Marc J. Zeitlin Email: marcz@an.hp.com Date: Fri, 2 Feb 1996 21:13:15 -0500 (EST) From: Bill Walsh Subject: Re: Chap 9 Gear Reinforcements On Fri, 2 Feb 1996, Scott Mandel wrote: Scott, I think I remember talking to you at some time. Whatcity do you live in?? Have you ever bought a Cozy shirt from me?? Oh well...your coming into a frustrating time I remember it well. When I did them I took a piece of paper and cut a slit to the center then i conformed the shapeand trimmed the correct out side dimensions. Just a point to mention. Nat suggests that you do the layups on a piece of saranwrap and then put it into place. It might work for you but it didn't for me. I put down one layer at a time precut to the shape of the paper. It wetted out great and it was less headache than doing it the other way. Bill W > Date: Fri, 2 Feb 1996 09:03:01 -0600 > From: Scott Mandel > To: cozy_builders@hpwarhw.an.hp.com > Subject: Chap 9 Gear Reinforcements > > Does anyone have a good idea on how to do the first gear reinforcement in chapter > 9. From the forward landing gear bulkhead down onto the floor of the fuselage. > I couldn't even get my newspaper template to fit. I was thinking about using > several different pieces and overlaping, but I'm afraid I'll sacrifice strength. > From: Lee Devlin Subject: Ch 9 landing gear tailing edge Date: Tue, 6 Feb 96 11:39:45 MST I just finished the second torsional layup on my main gear and found that the trailing edge behind the soda straws has excessive wiggliness. The problem stems from the aluminum tape which telegraphed its wiggliness to the 2 ply BID which in turn transmitted it to the 4 ply torsional layup. I trimmed it to .5" beyond the straw, but it still looks pretty bad. This is an area where I really didn't want to do a lot of filling, considering the bending and shock loads it's going to experience. Does anyone have any words of wisdom on how to fix this area? Also if you have any clever ideas about putting on the first 2-ply BID layup so it will have nice curvature without wiggles, it would probably be helpful to those who haven't gotten to this stage yet. Thanks, Lee Devlin From: Michael Antares Subject: RE: Ch 9 landing gear tailing edge Date: Tue, 6 Feb 1996 19:01:23 -0800 >I just finished the second torsional layup on my main gear and found >that the trailing edge behind the soda straws has excessive wiggliness. >..... I went through the same process of trying to get the aluminun tape straight. Fortunately I gave up on the tape before doing the glassing. What I finally ended up using was a strip of 1/4 inch foam which had been glassed on one side (left over from some previous work). I put packing tape on it for a mold release and then fastened it to the landing gear. It worked perfectly and left me with a completely straight trailing edge. Michael Date: Wed, 7 Feb 1996 14:34:55 -0600 From: Scott Mandel Subject: Chap 9 Speed Brake Hi Guys, Well I had my first introduction to Brock Mfg today. I called to try and find out what their cost is for the speed brake assembly. I bet some of you are already laughing. It ain't done that way around here boys. Part by Part and give me the numbers only. Well I guess I'll look up the part numbers tonight and try again tomorrow. Boy did Wicks ever spoil me. Just out of curiosity does anyone out there remember (a ball park figure) what they paid for these parts? I'm trying to justify buying the Lanza setup in cost and time. My wife never buys the really cool factor. ___________________________________________________________ / \\|// |---(X)---| \ | (o o) o/o\o Chap 9 | \_o00o~(_)~o00o_____________ | / Scott L. Mandel \ Email: mandel@esy.com | | 6813 Pendrige Drive | Voice: 1-214-205-8762 | | Plano, Tx. 75024 | Fax: 1-214-205-6012 | \___________________________/_______________________________/ Make it idiot proof and someone will make a better idiot. From: Marc J. Zeitlin Subject: Chap 9 Speed Brake (fwd) Date: Wed, 7 Feb 96 17:08:08 EST Scott Mandel writes: >...... Just out of >curiosity does anyone out there remember (a ball park figure) what they >paid for these parts? I'm trying to justify buying the Lanza setup in cost >and time. Don't have the numbers here, but from memory the Brock Landing Brake parts add up to ~$150 - $200. Not a lot less than Wayne Lanza's electric version, so it really boils down to whether you want manual or electric. -- Marc J. Zeitlin Email: marcz@an.hp.com Date: 07 Feb 96 18:52:57 EST From: Chuck Wolcott <75501.356@compuserve.com> Subject: Landing Brake / cost compare Scott Mandel asked about a cost comparison for the Landing Brake mechanisms. Plans from Brock vs Electric from Lanza. ........... I used the electric setup, and purchased the Lanza brackets. The brackets I have are the 'old' type. I think the new brackets are a little easier to initially adjust, than the ones I have, but otherwise the system has been flawless since new. I don't think there was more than a $50 difference between the two systems, but it has been 2 - 3 years since I purchased. Several points to consider - 1) The electric brake is a little more convenient for me due to a snug cockpit arrangement. Easier to deploy. and 2) the brake is not essential to landing, in the event of electrical or deployment failure. I haven't done it, but I have seen several different solutions (one in the EAA Sport Aviation mag. several years ago) on how to install a position indicator for the board. The only other way to 'estimate' the position of the board is to time the deployment cycle. Chuck Wolcott - N154CW Date: Wed, 07 Feb 1996 17:22:17 -0700 From: Eric Westland Subject: Re: Chap 9 Speed Brake Scott, for what it's worth, I made my own parts from the plans. Took a few evenings and about $50 if I remember right. Brake works as advertised (just fine). I did post my adventures making the parts last year, it may still be available. Once I decided to go with the manual brake (both ways are probably as good), making my own was not so much a choice to save money rather than not wanting to send another dime Brock's way for parts that don't fit right anyways. Later, eric Date: Wed, 7 Feb 1996 21:50:30 -0500 (EST) From: Bill Walsh Subject: Chap 9 Speed Brake (fwd) Besides being "cool"it gives the passenger more room (my first flight was in a cozyIII I thought the guy was getting fresh with me) It's a BIG handle. The cost is around $400.00 and take a look at the room the spring mech takes up in the BACK SEAT. Mike Pinnock has over 600 hrs on his and to my knowledge has never had an incident to date ( I have to clerify that Mike didn't get his from Wayne but uses the same actuator) If you only lower it when approaching to land .....What problems could you have?? It;s cheeper,better looking and easier to hook up. It's your choice (and your wife's) Sincerely, BW Scott Wrote: Hi Guys, Well I had my first introduction to Brock Mfg today. I called to try and find out what their cost is for the speed brake assembly............ Date: Mon, 12 Feb 1996 09:45:38 -0600 From: tims@enet.net (Tim Sullivan) Subject: CH9-Brock Part (Help) Called Brock this morning to order parts for Ch9 just to stay ahead of the lead times for prefab parts. I came across an unknown (or confusing) part number. I ordewred the (2)MKMGAA tubes w/bushings, (4) MKMG-4 304 SS bushings, (2) A484 0.25" spacers, however the AX5 axles the material list says to order from wick. Wicks has an AX5A in their catalog is this the same or just for the VE and LE only? Also the A484-4375 7/16" spacers were a mystery to me and the Brock folks. Where can those be purchased? Thanks for the help. Tim Sullivan (tims@enet.net) Phoenix, AZ | * | Cozy MK IV Builder #470 |-----(/)-----| The journey begins 8/10/95 / \ Current Status: Ch 8 o o From: Marc J. Zeitlin Subject: CH9-Brock Part Date: Mon, 12 Feb 96 13:32:38 EST Tim Sullivan asks: >........... however the AX5 axles the material list >says to order from wick. Wicks has an AX5A in their catalog is this the >same or just for the VE and LE only? Also the A484-4375 7/16" spacers were >a mystery to me and the Brock folks. Where can those be purchased? While I didn't get the Cleveland wheels and brakes from Wicks (I got the MATCO stuff through Infinity) I seem to remember that the 7/16" spacers were required for the Heavy Duty Clevelands. I also remember seeing all the part #'s for the axles, nuts, spacers, etc. in the Wicks catalog in the COZY MKIV chapter kit section up in the front. I'd check there for a listing of parts. -- Marc J. Zeitlin Email: marcz@an.hp.com Date: 12 Feb 96 21:03:05 EST From: Roger/Cindy Shell <103117.51@compuserve.com> Subject: Main wheel spacers Re: Tim Sullivan's question, You'll need the bolt on axles-- AX5 (Wicks) or P/N11701(ASS). Both suppliers also offer the I/4 and 7/16 inch spacers that you will need for each axle. I bought from ASS because they offered to pay the freight since it was a large order. I figured it was more convenient and about the same cost to buy all the wheel parts from ASS instead of paying separate freight for Brock and/or Wicks. Roger Shell N357CZ Chapter 13 From: Marc J. Zeitlin Subject: Re: Brakes Date: Fri, 16 Feb 96 10:52:20 EST Tim Sullivan asked me about the MATCO wheels, brakes, and master cylinders: > I talked to JD for about an hour last night. Interesting fellow >with lots to say. Yeah, no kidding. He likes to talk, and he knows a lot. >.......... Anyway, I asked about the Matco's and he gave me his >very convencing pitch. One question that did come up was why you are >installing (as well as another Marc) the horizontal master cylinder rather >then vertical. JD didn't know either but figured it was dictated by the >Cozy design in that area. Any comments you can provide would be greatly >appreciated. I'll be making the "brakes" decision by the end of next week. Two reasons. 1) First, one of the newsletters had a full page description of Vance Atkinson's modification to the brake/rudder pedal system that uses the laydown aerobatic cylinders, and that looked MUCH simpler than the Rube Goldberg nightmare in the plans. 2) Secondly, the AeroCanard Rudder pedals (which are adjustable on BOTH sides, unlike the Brock, cost $150 LESS than the Brock and use larger diameter tubing and bushings through the NG-30's so have much less flex) are set up specifically to use the laydown master cylinders, so everything works out nicely. >BTW did you go for the reservoir and parking break as well? Seems like the >whole package comes to $1028 which makes Ch 9 "OH that much more exspensive" >i.e. "Cha-Ching" but hopefully worth it. Yes, I got the remote reservoirs, parking brake, master cylinders, wheels, brakes, blah, blah, blah all at once. It does make Chapter 9 more expensive, but you need the stuff at some point and it saves money later in Chapter 13. Overall it's about a wash. -- Marc J. Zeitlin Email: marcz@an.hp.com From: Lee Devlin Subject: Ch. 9 tips Date: Sun, 25 Feb 96 21:03:00 MST Here are a few tips that may save you some money on chapter 9: Forget the expensive 3/4" spot facer for cutting the holes in the landing gear tabs. You can get a 3/4" Sears hole saw and #1 mandrel for less than $10. The mandrel can be disassembled and used on a long 1/4" shaft to cut through the tabs as shown in the plans. I got this tip from the archives but there was some concern about having to remove the 'set' on the teeth so that the hole saw didn't cut a hole bigger than 3/4" but I found that the hole was exactly 3/4" in diameter even with the 'set' (which are the teeth that are angled outward). A pair of long (>=12") 1/4" dia steel rods are pretty handy to have around when aligning the gear. They are also more expendable than using your 12" 1/4" dia. drill with the 5/8" spotfacer. The 10" extension that comes with the spotfacer is too short for the Cozy. Sears makes a right-angle head (p/n 26271) that costs $9.99 and works great for the holes you need to drill to mount MG-1 and MG-2 plates. The cheapest right angle drill I found was a battery-powered Makita for $110 without batteries or charger. Since you can mount the right angle head on any drill, you can choose to make it electric or battery powered. I found that the charge on a battery-powered drill is inadequate for doing virtually any of the drilling related to the main gear. If you have access to a lathe, the MKMG-4's and MKMGA's are pretty easy to make. After reading the horror stories about the Brock tolerances on these parts, I decided to make my own. It took about 2 hours to make 8 bushings and install four of them in the 4130 tubing. It saved me around $120. The clearance between my bushings and the studs is around .0005" which is pretty easy to hold by using a reamer on the final step. Hope this helps someone. Lee Devlin Date: Mon, 18 Mar 1996 18:11:09 From: JRaerocad@gnn.com (Jeff Russell) Subject: Re: Brakes and AeroCad's rudder pedals We have been asked: Question) How much resign is involved with changing from 500-5 to 15-600-6 wheels and brakes on my Cozy MkIV? This is a parts list of what you have used on the AeroCanard. The AeroCad rudder pedals will also need: Wicks P/N 4) FB1214-06 Flange bronze bushings. This will keep your pedals from wearing out your NG-30's You will still need the ajoining tube (4130 steel .058 x .625 x 24.00") cut in half for both sides. The Wicks P/N for the wheels/brakes (CWB199-133X) LESS master cylinders CWB10-34. The master cylinders that you want are, 2) CWB10-54 & 2) A-600 reservoirs The Axles are 2) AX6 & 2) MS21025-24, the axles need no spacers like the 500-5's. You will need larger bolts for the axles AN5 & AN6, use junk bolts untill you get the lenght right and then get the good ones. You will also need to move the axles up 1/2" higher for the use of the 15-600-6 tires. They are about 14.50" in diameter insted of 13.50". This keeps your tail the same height as per plans. I have seen no need to change the nyloflow tube to alum. These Brakes will stand the airplane on its end if you like. Hope this helps AeroCad Inc. Jeff Russell 1445 Crater Lane Yadkinville, NC. 27055 910-961-2238 E-mail: JRaerocad@gnn.com Date: Tue, 19 Mar 1996 10:45:37 -0400 From: janef@montcalm.cc.mi.us (Jane Faussett) Subject: pilot holes in gear tabs Right now I'm feeling quite stupid. I can't for the life of me determine where to drill the 1/4" pilot holes in the gear tabs. There seems to be a conflict between the details on page four of chapter nine and the drawing M-9. Should the holes be .75" from the strut at the bolt anchor point, or from the highest point of the gear leg? Nat says that the reference point should be approximately 4.25" from the top of the box, but I measure 1.8". The fiberglass strips, when cut to 15" long, work out perfectly. Did anyone else find this detail difficult to interpret? I'd like suggestions to get me out of this box. Thanks. From: Marc J. Zeitlin Subject: pilot holes in gear tabs (fwd) Date: Tue, 19 Mar 96 11:51:23 EST Jane Faucett wrote: > .............. I can't for the life of me >determine where to drill the 1/4" pilot holes in the gear tabs. There >seems to be a conflict between the details on page four of chapter nine and >the drawing M-9. Should the holes be .75" from the strut at the bolt >anchor point, or from the highest point of the gear leg? Nat says that the >reference point should be approximately 4.25" from the top of the box, but >I measure 1.8". The fiberglass strips, when cut to 15" long, work out >perfectly. Hey, welcome to the club. I did exactly the wrong thing when I went through this. I documented it in messages to the list a couple of months ago, and everything should be in the archives for chapter 9, this year. It's the message from me dated Sun, 7 Jan 96. If you can't access the archives, and didn't save a copy of the message entitled "Chapter 9 - mounting tabs", email me directly and I'll forward it to you. -- Marc J. Zeitlin Email: marcz@an.hp.com From: Michael Antares Subject: RE: pilot holes in gear tabs Date: Tue, 19 Mar 1996 09:05:19 -0800 ---------- From: Jane Faussett[SMTP:janef@montcalm.cc.mi.us] Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 1996 6:45 AM To: cozy_builders@hpwarhw.an.hp.com Subject: pilot holes in gear tabs Right now I'm feeling quite stupid. I can't for the life of me determine where to drill the 1/4" pilot holes in the gear tabs. There seems to be a conflict between the details on page four of chapter nine = and the drawing M-9. Should the holes be .75" from the strut at the bolt anchor point, or from the highest point of the gear leg? Nat says that = the reference point should be approximately 4.25" from the top of the box, = but I measure 1.8". The fiberglass strips, when cut to 15" long, work out perfectly. Did anyone else find this detail difficult to interpret? = I'd like suggestions to get me out of this box. Thanks. Referring to chap 9, page 3, paragraph 2, Nat says to make marks .75" = above the highest point on the strut which are the attach points and = then draw a line 5" above that to use as a reference line later. When = you build the box (A, B, C and E pieces) and then measure down 5" from = the reference line (to re-establish the attach points) Nat is saying = those marks should be approximately 4 1/4" below the top of the box. Of = course the critical dimension is the 5"--the 4 1/4" is just a check. = Are you by chance measuring the 1.8" at the center of the strut rather = than out at the 13" attach point positions? In any case you should get = the approximate 4 1/4" dimension. I wouldn't proceed until you find out = why. Regards, Michael Date: Mon, 8 Apr 1996 19:04:24 -0400 (EDT) From: Randy Crutfield Subject: Main landing gear Is it the general consensus that the main landing gear should be cut off at an 8 degree angle as mentioned in newslettter 41-5, or the 13 degree angle as originally specified in the plans? How about the Aerocad gear that comes cut to length and I assume proper angle? If you will indulge me on this one, I will go to read-only-mode and get busy in the garage. Thanks, Randy Date: Tue, 09 Apr 1996 08:22:14 From: JRaerocad@gnn.com (Jeff Russell) Subject: Re: Main landing gear Randy Crutfield writes, > Is it the general consensus that the main landing gear should be > cut off at an 8 degree angle as mentioned in newslettter 41-5, > or the 13 degree angle as originally specified in the plans? > How about the Aerocad gear that comes cut to length and I assume proper angle? > If you will indulge me on this one, AeroCad cuts the gear to 8 degrees at the noted length in the plans. Trying to make this job less trouble for the homebuilder AeroCad Inc. Jeff Russell 1445 Crater Lane Yadkinville, NC. 27055 910-961-2238 E-mail: JRaerocad@gnn.com From: Marc J. Zeitlin Subject: Re: Main landing gear (fwd) Date: Tue, 9 Apr 96 8:32:59 EDT Jeff Russell writes: >Randy Crutfield writes, > >> Is it the general consensus that the main landing gear should be >> cut off at an 8 degree angle as mentioned in newslettter 41-5, >> or the 13 degree angle as originally specified in the plans? >> How about the Aerocad gear that comes cut to length and I assume proper angle? >AeroCad cuts the gear to 8 degrees at the noted length in the plans. One of the newsletters mentioned that the 13 degrees was too much. Having purchased the Aerocad gear, I can vouch for the fact that I did not have to cut or trim the bottom at all. On the other hand, it's not clear what difference it makes, since you really don't have to use the bottom of the gear as reference for anything, so who cares? As long as the axles are in the right place..... -- Marc J. Zeitlin Email: marcz@an.hp.com Date: 10 Apr 96 01:05:40 EDT From: Roger/Cindy Shell <103117.51@compuserve.com> Subject: Main landing gear I too was confused about which angle to cut the strut core (got mine from F/L). I called Nat and he explained the angle is not as critical as the final Fuselage Station of the leading edge of the strut. Nat claimed one builder didn't get his strut jigged and installed at the correct F.S. and created a fulcrum that made the nose more difficult to lift when the aircraft was finished. So, if you receive an uncut strut core, assemble the jig and cut the core at an angle so the legs set flat on the (level) floor with the leading edge of the strut at the F.S. specified in the plans. I started out cutting my strut legs at 8 degrees and then made some adjustments with files and sandpaper so they would set flat on the floor and symetrical in the jig. Are you already loosing sleep worrying whether the tab holes will line up with the bulkhead holes? Check and re-check often. From: Lee Devlin Subject: Floxing axles Date: Sat, 13 Apr 96 22:06:27 MDT In reading the plans for Chapter 9, it states to flox the axles to the landing gear. I am concerned that if I need to adjust the toe-in at some time in the future with shims this will make it impossible. I feel that the bolts should provide sufficient clamping force and shear strength without the need for a flox joint. Also, if I ever needed to change an axle, it would be best if it were not floxed to landing gear. Did you guys attach your axles to the gear with flox? Lee Devlin From: Lee Devlin Subject: Heat shields Date: Sun, 14 Apr 96 19:00:36 MDT In Newsletter 37, there is a reprinted column from the Canard Pusher 70 about main gear melt downs and the need for a heat shield made from 1/8" aluminum sheet. The recommended installation is between the axle and the main gear. Jim White had a drawing published in Newsletter 41 in the 'Letters from Builders' section. I intend to make a pair of these and install them in between the axle and the main gear. I found it somewhat strange that Nat would go through the trouble of citing the CP and publishing Jim's drawing but never modified the plans to reference this shield. Does this mean that Nat considers the shields optional? I also have been warned by my Long EZ friend that I should install a section of braided stainless brake line from the brake up to the Nylaflow tubing at the location it exits the soda straw. He was adamant that the nylaflow tube not be continued down to the brake as shown in the plans. Keith Spruer also strongly recommends this 8" stainless braided line in Newsletter 36. I belive that I will have to make a custom fitting to adapt it to the nylaflow tube unless someone knows where I may find such an adapter. The on-line index works great for searching back issues of the newsletters. I realized that by saving my own copy of the index it makes searching back through my newsletters much easier. Prior to that, I had sometimes spent a long time trying to locate a reference to a subject that I knew I had read earlier. Thanks Marc! Lee Devlin Date: Sun, 14 Apr 1996 22:30:29 -0400 From: Jim Hocut Subject: RE: Heat Shields Lee Devlin mentioned a heat shield shown in newsletter 41. There is also a pretty good looking design which I first heard about on the FAA's safety data exchange bulletin board. It uses aluminum flashing and fiberfrax, and looks pretty good (I haven't looked at it in great detail yet though, cause I'm not that far along yet). Plans can be had for an SASE from Art Bianconi; 983 Madison Ave; Plainfield, NJ 07060. Jim Hocut jhocut@mindspring.com Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 01:12:50 -0400 From: CozyBldr@aol.com Subject: Re: Heat Shields I have made heat shields using 1/8" aluminum per Jim White's drawings (actually just a tad bigger). I have enough extra material to make 2 or 3 more sets. If anyone is interested, I'll make and sell the extra sets for $25 including postage. I will be on vacation until next Sunday evening so I won't be able to respond to anyone until then but it will be first come, first served. Paul Stowitts Cozy Mark IV #200 Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 10:11:00 -0400 From: Dick.Finn@FNB.sprint.com Subject: Re: Floxing axles I'm far from being an expert at this but I think the reason for the flox is to provide a flat base for the axel to be bolted to. The landing gear is curved and the base of the axle is flat. Obviously the flox only provides a little strength in this application. If you ever need to pull the axle off, all you will have to do is pull the bolts and give the axle a sharp rap with a hammer. When you flox the axle on it has to be "bore sighted" for correct toe in. If its done correctly you should have no need for shims. Dick Finn Cozy Mark IV #46 DICK.FINN@FNB.SPRINT.COM ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________ Subject: Floxing axles Author: owner-cozy_builders@hpwarhw.an.hp.com at INTERNET Date: 4/14/96 12:05 AM In reading the plans for Chapter 9, it states to flox the axles to the landing gear. I am concerned that if I need to adjust the toe-in at some time in the future with shims this will make it impossible. I feel that the bolts should provide sufficient clamping force and shear strength without the need for a flox joint. Also, if I ever needed to change an axle, it would be best if it were not floxed to landing gear. Did you guys attach your axles to the gear with flox? Lee Devlin From: Marc J. Zeitlin Subject: Re: Floxing axles (fwd) Date: Mon, 15 Apr 96 13:16:31 EDT Dick Finn wrote: > I'm far from being an expert at this but I think the reason for the > flox is to provide a flat base for the axel to be bolted to. The > landing gear is curved and the base of the axle is flat. I agree with Dick. I didn't want mine floxed on permanently (if for no other reason than to make storing everything easier). I did everything exactly as Nat said, but I put a layer of saran wrap between the flox and the axle, so I got a nice smooth base for it, but can take it on and off easily. -- Marc J. Zeitlin Email: marcz@an.hp.com Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 23:49:15 -0400 (EDT) From: Randy Crutfield Subject: Bushings from Brocks You guys must have gotten the message across. After reading about your woes with Brock's parts, I thought I better check mine that arrived this week. The landing gear attach bolts fit very snugly in the bushings that are pressed into the tubing (assembly MKMGA), in fact I had to use a twisting motion (by hand) to insert them. The four bushings were not as snug a fit, but measured in tolerance. I'm sure all eight parts were made the same and the four that were a press fit into the 4130 tube constricted some in the process. Price still seems a little high. I too purchased the 3/4" spot facer, hope I am not disappointed. On a related note, does anyone browse through Reid Tool Supply? Mainly machining related items, but things like drill rod, handles, spot facers, etc that apply to our endeavors are represented there. Randy Date: Tue, 16 Apr 1996 02:04:46 -0400 From: StetsonE@aol.com Subject: Re: Heat shields/stainless lines In a message dated 96-04-14 20:57:43 EDT, Lee Devlin writes: > >Keith Spruer also strongly recommends this 8" stainless >braided line in Newsletter 36. I believe that I will have to make a >custom fitting to adapt it to the nylaflow tube unless someone knows >where I may find such an adapter. I used the teflon Stratoflex lines from the brake to the hellhole area, then mated it to the Nylaflow tubes which goes to the master cylinders in the nose. The Canard Pusher newsletters have quite a bit to say about the advantages of doing this. The below article calls out the adapter fittings required. Its a little long - hope you feel the bandwidth is worth it. BRAKE LINES As mentioned in CP49, page 7, Mike and Sally installed Teflon hose assemblies (Stratoflex part #124001-3CR) in place of the Nylaflow nylon brake lines. These Teflon hoses are constructed with a seamless, smooth-bore, Teflon inner tube wrapped with braided stainless steel cover. These hoses come made to length with the ends swaged (not reusable ends) so must be ordered the correct length to suit your particular airplane. They are not cheap but should last the life of the airframe. Mike and Sally ordered theirs from Aircraft Spruce and the cost was approximately $42.00 per 40" length. These hoses come with a certification tag on them certifying that they are good to 1,500 psi. Mike installed them from the brake calipers to the master cylinders in one piece, mainly to avoid any more joints than necessary and to help eliminate any place for a leak to develop. The smallest hose available in Stratoflex is a -3, so you will have to use -3 elbows and nipples. For example, at the caliper, Mike used AN822-3D elbows and AN816-3D nipples on the master cylinders. The stainless wrapped Teflon hoses were inserted into a hardware store plastic tube (split the plastic tube lengthwise) then Hot Stuffed to the main gear strut trailing edge. One ply of BID was layed up over the plastic tube to permanently hold the new brake lines in place. With over 200 hours on their Long-EZ since installing these brake lines, Mike reports that he is one hundred percent satisfied with their performance, and it was well worth the higher cost. While he was at it, he disassembled his master cylinders and installed all new "O" rings, cleaning the parts in denatured alcohol. The calipers were cleaned up and new "O" rings installed. Dot 5 brake fluid, a 100 percent silicone brake fluid (a General Electric product purchased at a local hot rod auto parts store), was used and Mike does recommend it since it is completely inert and therefore non-flammable. It does not affect seals, "O" rings, paint, or hoses so there has been zero maintenance on their brake system and we are in the process of installing the same system on Burt's Defiant, N78RA. Be sure to measure your own airplane to get the Stratoflex the correct length for your aircraft. If you have brake master cylinders up front, as many builders do, you can either run the Stratoflex lines all the way (probably best, but expensive) or you can run the Stratoflex up each gear leg and then go with Nylaflow or Nyloseal from there. It will take an AN910-1D coupling (1/8" pipe thread) together with an AN816-3D nipple and a 268P male connector on each side. Hope this helps! Stet Elliott stetsone@aol.com Perpetual Long-EZ builder Date: Tue, 16 Apr 1996 02:04:58 -0400 From: StetsonE@aol.com Subject: Re: Floxing axles (fwd) In a message dated 96-04-15 13:18:28 EDT, Marc writes: >I agree with Dick. I didn't want mine floxed on permanently (if for no >other reason than to make storing everything easier). I did everything >exactly as Nat said, but I put a layer of saran wrap between the flox >and the axle, so I got a nice smooth base for it, but can take it on and >off easily. > Keep in mind that if you bolt on your axles to hold them in place while the flox cures, you may have a 'permanent' installation whether you want one or not. This is because your bolts may be more or less permanently glued into their holes. Getting the bolts back out are a real bear! You can break the bond at the bolt by heaving on it with a ratchet, but the cured flox provides zero clearance for the bolt and the result is an unbelievably tight fit. I floxed on my axles and 'temporarily' bolted them on for the cure. I didn't install the brake mounting plate at that time, so the bolts had to come back off. In the process of pounding them out I broke the axle to gear bond, so I can attest to the fact that that bond isn't very strong. Stet Elliott stetsone@aol.com Perpetual Long-EZ builder From: Marc J. Zeitlin Subject: Re: Floxing axles (fwd) Date: Tue, 16 Apr 96 9:31:52 EDT Stet Elliott writes: >Keep in mind that if you bolt on your axles to hold them in place while the >flox cures, you may have a 'permanent' installation whether you want one or >not. This is because your bolts may be more or less permanently glued into >their holes. In looking back at my logbook, I found that (in the words of our illustrious ex-vice president Danny Boy Quayle) "I mis-spoke". I actually created the flox pad NOT with the axle, but with a couple of wooden blocks and clamps, and I floxed the backing plate on at the same time. I drilled the holes AFTER making the flox pad in order to avoid exactly the problem Stet had. See: http://www.ultranet.com/~marcz/cozy_mkIV/chapters/chap09_6.html for a description and pictures. -- Marc J. Zeitlin Email: marcz@an.hp.com Date: Tue, 16 Apr 1996 21:16:35 -0400 From: StetsonE@aol.com Subject: Re: Heat shields/stainless lines In a private message dated 96-04-16 20:08:12 EDT, Paul Burkhardt writes: >Its been a while but I recall that Wicks advised me(after I bought the wrong type) that >you could only use nylaflow tubing , not nyloseal tubing for brake lines. Is there a >problem getting this tubing with the fittings connected down the existing brake >conduit? Answer posted to the list for everyone's benefit: The Long-EZ plans call out Nylaflow for the brake lines. However, the CP newsletters seem to treat Nylaflow and Nyloseal lines as interchangeable (as can be seen by the CP article I posted). I requested clarification 10 years ago from RAF, and Mike Melvill told me over the phone that either one could be used. I can't remember what I put in my plane, but I seem to remember one has slightly better physicals as given in the Spruce Catalog. Make your choice and take your chances... The Stratoflex lines will not go through your existing gear leg conduit - unless you used a garden hose for a conduit 8^) - because the lines will be made up to the length you specify with the fittings permanently attached. You'll have to split your conduit to get them in, provided your installed conduit is big enough to handle the new line. Otherwise, strip off the old conduit and install a bigger one. The diameter of my Stratoflex lines is approximately .260", and the biggest diameter of the fittings is approximately .570". For a conduit for the Stratoflex, I used clear plastic hardware store tubing approx .25" ID. The tubing had to be split to get the Stratoflex inside, and the split provided enough extra ID to accomodate the line. I tied the split tubing back together with thread every few inches to hold it together for glassing. Although I put my Stratoflex lines in a conduit, I don't think it serves any purpose. The covering glasswork would have to be split to replace a line whether you have the line in a conduit or not. Stet Elliott stetsone@aol.com Perpetual Long-EZ builder From: Lee Devlin Subject: Toe-in alignment method Date: Tue, 23 Apr 96 12:27:16 MDT After carefully reading though the archives looking for advice on setting toe-in, I decided to use an approach which combined a number of tips from postings to this group (as well as the plans :). Perhaps this will help to others who haven't reached this step. I reasoned a rifle scope would work since I have some experience staring down scopes and achieving fairly accurate placement of holes on paper. Although I already had a few scopes on rifles, I decided that the likelihood of damage and epoxy contamination was high so I purchased an inexpensive one specifically for this purpose. I found a 4X Tasco for $6.83 at Wal-Mart which is not much more than the cost of a piece of 2024 aluminum tubing (!) that some of us have used. The 4X magnification assists in helping to better see the target and also minimizes errors. I made an aluminum block approximately 4" x 4" x 1" and cut a dove-tail feature centered on top for mounting the scope. If you don't have access to milling equipment, I think an accurately cut hardwood block would work just as well. We had discussed laser pointers here previously but the alignment of the beam with the body of the pointer is not controlled. The beauty of a scope is that this alignment can easily be adjusted. To assure parallel alignment of the vertical crosshair with the block, I attached the scope to the block and laid it on its side on a level surface (the Cleveland wheel and disc, actually) and pointed it at a brick house about 150' away. Using the bricks as a guide, I adjusted the windage screw until the vertical crosshair (now laying horizontal) pointed at the same part of a brick when I flipped the block from its left to its right side. This guaranteed the vertical crosshair was set parallel to the block. The horizontal crosshair can be aligned with a string level but is not as critical. You must take into account that the scope is not at the location you're trying to align so you have to do some calculations based on ~ a 10 degree camber on the gear leg to project the correct target from the axle's center. If anyone wants clarification on this, please email me as this posting is getting too long already. The absolutely best tip I found in the archives was the process of drilling a small nail hole through the respective centers of the backing plate, heat shield, gear leg, and into the axle center to help pin things in place when clamping. Otherwise, the slippery flox and gravity will conspire against you. (I believe Michael Antares was the first to mention this.) I also made a similar hole in my alignment block. I marked the outline of the axle on the gear and applied flox to the area to make a pad on the gear leg. I covered the block with packaging tape and used those little one-hand-adjustable black Vice-Grip clamps with the yellow rubber pads (highly recommended, especially when working alone!) to set the pressure and keep the scope pointed at the target. Once the flox pad cured, I projected a new the target to match where the end of the 6" axle should have pointed. I laid the block up flat against the axle's end and was gratified to find it pointing at exactly that point. Incidentally, I've looked through a set of LongEZ plans and the method for setting toe-in is by using a pair of 24" carpenter's squares and laying them against the axles and measuring the distance between them near the axles and at a point 24" forward. You should measure between a .2" to .45" difference to give a toe-in between 1/4 to 1/2 degree. That sounds like it requires at least 8 steady hands and does not guarantee that wheels are pointing at the aircraft's center! :-) My sincere thanks to Marc Z., Michael Antares, Eric Westland, Norm Balog and all of you who posted previously about the toe-in adjustment procedure to this mailing list. Lee Devlin Date: Wed, 29 May 1996 09:48:50 -0500 From: Larry Jansch Subject: Lanza Speed Brake Nice product! Sketchy instructions, but a really nice product! I am in the process mounting it to the front seatback support. If anyone in the group has installed one of these, what size holes do I drill in the seat support to give a "snug fit" for the 1/4" I.D. compression tubes that the mounting bolts fit through? It looks close to 3/8", but I do not have a micrometer or caliper and I'd like to know for sure before any holes get punched. Also, does anyone know who the make and model of the electrical connector Wayne uses on the actuator? Never seen anything like it. I'd like to get another one to make an external power cable so I can impress friends, visitors, and family by waving the speed brake for them. As always, thanks in advance! -Larry -- _______________________________________________________________ |L. P. Jansch LAN Manager| |ljansch@ix.netcom.com A Major Airline| | | |All opinions expressed here are strictly my own and, however| |insightful and/or funny, are not those of my unnamed employer.| |______________________________________________________________| Date: 17 Jun 96 16:47:06 EDT From: "William E. Buckley" <74744.2301@compuserve.com> Subject: COZY: Main Landing Gear Strut Thought I'd pass along a few thoughts on the preparation of the main landing gear strut. I read in the chapter nine archives (Thanks Marc Z.), that several people dreaded/hated sanding the strut. I used a random orbit sander to do it. I know Nat says not to use power tools to sand layups because you might go too deep. However, the random orbit sander is not nearly as aggressive as a belt sander and the roughest paper that I've been able to find for it is 60 grit. I compared two different spots that I had sanded with the sander and by hand (with 40 grit). They were identical. I did get the 'scratchies' afterwards despite taking precautions (long sleaves & mask). Another point: I used my wife's seamtress measuring tape to confirm the trimming measurements I had made via the filament tape method. It was reassuring (although tedious) to put an actual tape measure on the strut to verify my cut marks and mark the center. Torsional layup #1 is tomorrow. Later dudes. William E. Buckley (Cozy Mk IV, #437, Chap. 9) 74744.2301@compuserve.com Date: 29 Jun 96 14:48:04 EDT From: "William E. Buckley" <74744.2301@compuserve.com> Subject: COZY: Main Landing Gear Alignment Hey Folks, I'm currently in the process of trying to get the main landing gear at the correct angle in the jig box before making the attachment tab layups. In the plans Nat says to drop a plum bob from the leading edge of the strut (upside down) to verify that they are at FS 108.25. However, in his picture his plum bob is hanging from slightly aft of the leading edge. What gives? Am I missing something here? I've done two complete jig box constructions and still haven't gotten correct alignment. For the life of me I can't figure out how 9.25 inches measured on the floor, doesn't equal 9.25 inches measured on the work bench. And yes, I have leveled the hell out of everything in sight. I was in such a leveling fervor trying to get this right, that when the cat accidently walked by, I eliminated that annoying .002 degree list it has always had. Even that didn't help. William E. Buckley (Cozy Mk IV, #437, Chap. 9) 74744.2301@compuserve.com Date: Sun, 30 Jun 1996 15:47:39 -0700 From: Michael Antares Subject: COZY: Main Landing Gear Alignment I'm a little confused...(I have the original plan set; is that the same as you have?)...but referring to page 3 of chap 9 (in my plans), the 9.25" translates to the bench top (FS117.5 - FS108.25), same as laid out on the floor. If you are referring to the photo at the end of the chap showing the plumb coming down from what looks like the center of the leveling board, I would ignore it. In any case when I laid my jig box on the bench the 9.25" held as it almost has to--as you have remarked--with the measurement being from the front edge of the strut as shown in figure 12 of page 3. If it isn't 9.25" it will be because the jig box has been incorrectly made or the floor measurement wasn't done correctly. Your cat must not be a mil spec standard cat. I would get him/her recalibrated. A mil-spec in-calibration cat will cause a list of precisely .00214" when walking precisely 6.000 feet from the jig table on a standard floor which has been properly leveled. This error may not be serious now but could be disasterous later during your final assembly. Michael 6077 Old Redwood Highway Penngrove, CA 94951 707.664.1171 Systems engineering hardware/software Date: Wed, 3 Jul 1996 11:39:34 -0400 From: CozyBldr@aol.com Subject: Re: COZY: Ch 7 & 9 - Landing Brake In a message dated 96-07-02 00:32:20 EDT, Jim Hocut writes: >While CAREFULLY prying the landing brake free from the fuselage bottom I >pretty much destroyed it (the landing brake, not the fuse bottom thank >goodness) because a good bit of epoxy had seeped underneath while doing the >bottom layup. It dawned on me that instead of gluing down the landing brake >with dabs of 5-minute, maybe we ought to be putting saran wrap or wax paper >under it instead, to ensure that it doesn't face the same fate that mine >did. The only thing we'd have to do when making the bottom layup would be >to put a piece of plywood over the landing brake and weight it down in order >to hold it in place while the layup cures (with proper provisions taken so >the plywood doesn't become a permanent part of the layup). I might be >missing something here, but from my experience it seems like this would be a >whole lot easier in the long run. > > I had a similar problem when I cut out my landing brake but the great thing about composites is the ability to repair them. I replaced the "bad" sections of foam by placing new foam over the spots to repair and cutting both pieces at the same time. This method gives you a perfect fit to replace the old foam. I then chisled out the bad foam and microed in the new. It worked great, saved me lots of time and the brake came out looking great. Hope this helps. Paul Stowitts Cozy Mark IV #200 Date: Sat, 6 Jul 1996 09:38:31 -0400 (EDT) From: Randy Crutfield Subject: Re: COZY: Matco Wheels & Brakes I do work for Michelin, but have never seen the aircraft tire made. If the work and quality that we put in and inspect out of our passenger car tires are an indication, these should be good. Of course they have the same problem that the rest of our tire line does and that is initial cost. Maybe someone that has flown them can post regarding the value long term. Randy Date: 06 Jul 96 23:28:25 EDT From: INFINITY Aerospace <72124.347@compuserve.com> Subject: COZY: Michelin Tires >Randy Crutfield writes:< >I do work for Michelin, but have never seen the aircraft tire made. If the work and quality that we put in and inspect out of our passenger car tires are an indication, these should be good. Of course they have the same problem that the rest of our tire line does and that is initial cost. Maybe someone that has flown them can post regarding the value long term.< When we first investigated selling Michelin Aircraft Tires, the company reps told us the tires will last 4 to 8 times longer than other tires, and that they are computer balanced. Four times longer seemed amazing, let alone 8 times, and computer balanced too?! We, and many of our customers, have been flying with these tires for several years now. Everyone reports they really do seem to be lasting much longer than any other tire used before, and the balancing really helps. As Randy says, and everyone concurs, Michelin does put out a very, very high quality product. We use Michelin tires exclusively on our 2 vehicles, also. Michelins strongly suggested Retail Price for the 5.00 x 5 tires is $120.83. We sell them for $81.74. If you compare prices like we do, we are within about $6 of the next highest quality tire. Add the fact that they do last much longer and track better, it's like buying 4+ tires in one. Besides our Main Retract customers, we have Long-EZ, Cosy, Cozy MK-IV, RV, Glasair, Bonanza and Cessna 320 Michelin customers, to name a few. Also, they are not flying yet, but Marc Zeitlan, Jim Marshall, Rick Roberts, Phil Johnson, Marc Parmelee, John Willis and Keith Spreuer have the Michelin 5.00 x 5 tires and tubes (sorry if I missed anyone). Maybe they will chime in about the tires. They also have the MATCO brake system . HTH. Infinity's Forever, JD INFINITY Aerospace P. O. Box 12275 El Cajon, CA 92022 (619) 448-5103 PH & FAX 72124.347@compuserve.com Home Page http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/INFINITY_Aerospace Date: Wed, 31 Jul 1996 22:29:04 GMT Subject: COZY: Electric Speed Brake From: bobsled@usa.pipeline.com (bobsled) I seriously considering purchasing Wayne Lanza's ESB in lieu of the Johnson Bar system. Any builders out in Cyberspace actually tried it? I so I'd like to hear some pro's and con's. bobsled@pipeline.com CHPT 9 Date: Thu, 01 Aug 96 08:21:00 PDT From: Brian DeFord Subject: Re: COZY: Electric Speed Brake Text item: Someone asked: >I seriously considering purchasing Wayne Lanza's ESB in lieu of the Johnson >Bar system. Any builders out in Cyberspace actually tried it? I so I'd like >to hear some pro's and con's. Yes, I have it installed on my Mark IV. The installation was clean and I've cycled it quite a few times. It fits nice and sure cut down on the amount of work that otherwise would have to have been done. Although I am not yet flying, there are others who will no doubt give their opinions that do have it flying. Cycling time is roughly 3 seconds (estimate, I've never actually timed it). One word of caution - the bracket that is attached to the brake itself as called out in the plans will have to be moved to allow for the wider actuator arm. The hole in the fuselage bottom will also have to be opened up more. If you plan to install the Lanza system, I would advise getting it prior to attaching the bracket. Otherwise you will have a few holes in your brake that you have to fill in where the old mounting bolts went through. I'll be adding some pictures of the Lanza system on my WEB site later today if you'd like to see the installation (chapter 9). My thoughts - Brian DeFord E-MAIL: brian_deford@ccm.ch.intel.com Cozy MK-IV #309 WEB SITE: http://www.paloverde.com/~bdeford Completed chapters 4-8, 10-12, 16-17 Partially completed chapters 9 and 24 Date: Thu, 01 Aug 1996 21:10:54 -0500 From: Larry Jansch Subject: Re: COZY: Electric Speed Brake >>I seriously considering purchasing Wayne Lanza's ESB in lieu of the Johnson >>Bar system. > >The installation was clean and I've cycled it quite a few times. It fits nice ... >I'll be adding some pictures of the Lanza system on my WEB site later today if >you'd like to see the installation (chapter 9). > Thanks, Brian. I have been struggling with installing this actuator for the last few weeks. Lanza's plans do NOT specify where to locate the LB-18s or the hole in the bottom of the tub. I placed the '18s and hole much further forward than you did and have been whittling away at the hole in the tub to get the proper clearance when the ram cycles. I have bondoed then removed the LB-18s more times than I care to recall. I'd appreciate it if you could post a few measurements, such as the distance from the center of the hinge to the middle of the #10 holes in the upright section of the '18s and the location and size of the hole in the bottom of the fuse. The speed actuator is indeed a beautiful product and is very well made and designed. It's just that the installation instructions could be a little more precise. -- Larry Jansch Cozy Mk.IV Plans #461 Still in Ch. 9 Date: Fri, 02 Aug 96 08:13:00 PDT From: Brian DeFord Subject: Re[2]: COZY: Electric Speed Brake >I'd appreciate it if you could post a few measurements, such as the >distance from the center of the hinge to the middle of the #10 holes in the >upright section of the '18s and the location and size of the hole in the >bottom of the fuse. >Larry Jansch Larry, I'll try to get some measurements today when I go home for lunch. However, as stated in Wayne's instructions, each installation is slightly different. I'll give you my measurements but realize that yours _may_ not be exactly the same. I would hope that ours are at least close though :-) I'll also try and get measurements for the actuator mounting bracket holes. Regards, Brian Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 15:06:15 -0400 From: "William E. Buckley" <74744.2301@compuserve.com> Subject: COZY: Main Landing Gear Attachment Dudes, Perhaps I'm being a little too anal-retentive but I have a question about mounting the main landing gear. I'm currently at the point where I'm ready to permanently install the MG-1 and MG-2 aluminum face plates on ither side of the landing gear bulkheads. Prior to doing it I compared the MKMGA bushing to the space between the bulkheads with the MG-2's (1/4 in) temporarily in place and found myself the lucky owner of 1/8 inch extra space. So, I then calculated what the entire space should be. I did my best to include all the additional layups between the two landing gear bulkheads and used Nat's numbers for UNI and BID ply thickness (.009 in. and .013 in. respectively). Here's what I came up with: 7.0625 (length of MKMGA) + .5000 (both 1/4 in. MG-2's) + .0540 (6 ply UNI layup on aft face of forward bulkhead) + .1300 (5 ply BID layup between bulkheads and counted double because in extends onto both) ___________________________________________________________________________ ___ =7.7465 The 8 ply UNI layup on the forward face of the aft bulkhead wasn't included because it was already in place when the 8 in. spacing was set. 8 inches minus 7.7465 = .2535. That's just a hair more than a quarter of an inch. Did I miss something in my addition that would bring the total component width closer to 8 inches? If not, then the plane must be designed to torque the mounting studs tight enough to squeeze out this space. If that's the case then I've only got half the distance to squeeze out. My first thought was to add an 8 ply BID pad to eliminate the space but with the calculated space I'm not sure if I should do that. What gives?!? William E. Buckley (Cozy Mk IV, #437, Chap 9) 74744.2301@compuserve.com From: Marc J. Zeitlin Subject: COZY: Main Landing Gear Attachment Date: Mon, 5 Aug 96 15:36:42 EDT William E. Buckley writes; >Perhaps I'm being a little too anal-retentive Yeah, I think so :-). >....... found myself the lucky owner of 1/8 inch extra space. >8 inches minus 7.7465 = .2535. That's just a hair more than a quarter of >an inch. Did I miss something in my addition that would bring the total >component width closer to 8 inches? Who knows. There are a lot of tolerances that build up - maybe your bulkheads weren't spaced exactly correctly, maybe the Brock parts were out of spec (no, couldn't be! :-) ), maybe the plies were a little thinner than calculated, maybe the moon was in the wrong phase or you sacrificed the wrong goat to the Landing Gear God. Hey, wait a minute - you didn't mention the bushings that get floxed into the MG's. I believe those have 1/16" flanges on them. Bingo - 1/8" space, and you're perfect. > If not, then the plane must be >designed to torque the mounting studs tight enough to squeeze out this >space. YOUCH!!! Definitely _do not_ do that! That's NOT the idea. The MKMGA should _just_ barely slide into place between the bushings, and you should have to jiggle the gear to get it to slide down. If you've got more room than that, you'd have to put a _lot_ of stress on the bulkheads to squeeze the MKMGA. >.... If that's the case then I've only got half the distance to squeeze >out. No, it should _just_ slide in. >.... My first thought was to add an 8 ply BID pad to eliminate the space >but with the calculated space I'm not sure if I should do that. What >gives?!? I think you forgot about the 1/16" flange on the bushings. I found I actually had to turn down the faces of the MKMGA bushings and the ones on the MG's about 0.005" to 0.010" to get everything to fit nicely. If that's NOT the problem, then you can always add washers between the MKMGA and the bushings to get everything to fit snugly. -- Marc J. Zeitlin Email: marcz@an.hp.com Date: Sun, 25 Aug 1996 21:14:04 -0400 From: DFinn7971@aol.com Subject: COZY: Tim Merrill's Cozy Another thought on Tim's Mark IV. I noticed that he did not include the removable access door for the main landing gear on the bottom of the fuselage. I questioned him on this and he indicated that he felt there would be no need to take the gear out under normal operation. Should the need occur he would cut it out and replace the access door after repairs have been completed. Based on my past experience with home improvement I've found that it is not a good idea to enclose anything without including an access door. After completing an additon to the house I had to go back and cut in a door to an existing peak. It would have been much easier to have done it in the beginning. So, that's my $.02. Consider that Tim is Grand Champion Plans Built with a plans number in the 300's while I'm still in construction with #46. I can still have an opinion though. Dick Finn Cozy Mark IV #46 DFINN7971@AOL.COM Date: Wed, 28 Aug 1996 08:48:57 -0400 From: william l kleb Organization: NASA Langley Research Center Subject: COZY: CHAP 9: landing brake hardpoints This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------1CFB3F54FF6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit this is one of those things that doesn't make much of a difference, but just to be pedantic*; chapter 9, page 9 (first edition of plans): figure 50 and paragraph 3 call-out different hardpoint sizes for use with lb-23. figure 50 has 5/8 in. square aluminum slugs; but paragraph 3 says, "now cut aluminum slugs 1/2 in. square...[.]" maybe i missed a newsletter correction or am interpreting the drawing and text incorrectly, but this doesn't seem to "jive"... *ped.ant n [MF, fr. It pedante] 1: a schoolmaster esp. in a petty school 2a: one who parades his learning 2b: one who is unimaginative or who unduly emphasizes minutiae in the presentation or use of knowledge 2c: a formalist or precisionist in teaching - pe.dan.tic aj --------------1CFB3F54FF6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename=".sigeaa" --- bill kleb (w.l.kleb@larc.nasa.gov) 72 bellanca 7gcbc 9! cz4 -> aerocanard --------------1CFB3F54FF6-- Date: Wed, 28 Aug 1996 21:42:42 -0700 From: "Steven D. Sharp" Subject: Re: COZY: CHAP 9: landing brake hardpoints For what it is worth, I had the same problem on my 3 place. Piss poor design. I used a bar of 6061-T6 1" x 1/4" thick x how ever long to match the hinge (been so long I forgot the length). I drilled & tapped the bar to match the hinge, cut away the foam to accept the bar, floxed the bar in place & then glassed accordingly. After the glass cured I redrilled the holes - oh yea, put some grease or wax in the holes before glassing. I went a step further by drilling the holes out even further & installing 10-32 HELI-COILS. The aluminum I used was scrap from the 2X2X1/4 extrusions I purchased for making the engine mounts. Another idea for engine mounts. If you want to use 1/4" 2024-T3 angle but cannot find it, get some 1" 2024-T3 square stock & have the angle milled out of it. Make sure a 1/4" ball end mill MINIMUM is used in the corner (no sharp corners). Polish after milling. Works great!!! It's also a lot stronger than the 6061-T6 (2024-T3 approaches mild steel at about 1/2 the weight). Just some ideas Steve Sharp Perpetual 3 place builder cozyiii@earthlink.net Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 11:26:07 -0400 From: "William B." <74744.2301@compuserve.com> Subject: COZY: Landing Gr Heat Shield I have question about mounting the aluminum heat shield on the main landing gear. I haven't been able to figure out from the plans or from newsletter #41 (this one has a diagram of the heat shield) where to mount it. My best guess is that is goes between the axle and the strut. If that's true then I'll have to figure a way to hold both the shield and the axle in perfect position when I flox them in place. What's the deal here? William E. Buckley (Cozy Mk IV, #437, Chap 9) 74744.2301@compuserve.com From: Marc J. Zeitlin Subject: COZY: Landing Gr Heat Shield (fwd) Date: Mon, 9 Sep 96 11:39:01 EDT William E. Buckley wrote (in reference to the heat shield): >... My best guess is that it goes between the axle and the strut. I believe this is true. >I'll have to figure a way to hold both the shield and the axle in perfect >position when I flox them in place. What's the deal here? When I floxed the axle mount, I did so with a piece of saran wrap between the axle and the strut. After cure, I drilled the bolt holes. Perfect alignment, and removable axles. I can now experiment with different strut heat shield, or just have a removable axle (just in case! :-) ). -- Marc J. Zeitlin Email: marcz@an.hp.com From: Paul.Krasa-1@pp.ksc.nasa.gov (Krasa, Paul) Organization: Kennedy Space Center, FL Date: Mon, 09 Sep 1996 12:39:53 -0400 Subject: RE: COZY: Landing Gr Heat Shield (fwd) My friend attached the heat shield on his Cozy III using the bolts that mount the brake slave cylinder. This seems to work very well and is removable. From: Lee Devlin Subject: Re: COZY: Landing Gr Heat Shield Date: Mon, 09 Sep 1996 14:45:33 MDT > I have question about mounting the aluminum heat shield on the main landing > gear. I haven't been able to figure out from the plans or from newsletter > #41 (this one has a diagram of the heat shield) where to mount it. My best > guess is that is goes between the axle and the strut. If that's true then > I'll have to figure a way to hold both the shield and the axle in perfect > position when I flox them in place. What's the deal here? There is a lot of advice in this year's archives about Chapter 9. You are correct in the position of the heatshield. One of the best tips I found on the clamping of the plate/heatshield/axle during alignment was to drill a small hole through everything to pin it in place lest it slip away from gravitational pull. Wet flox is an excellent lubricant. Lee Devlin Date: Wed, 02 Oct 96 09:05:34 EST From: "KEN SARGENT" Subject: COZY: Landing Gear Strut Dimensions I would appreciate if some fellow builder could give me some dimensions on the main and nosegear struts. I am running some computor models using NEPTCO carbon fiber rods as an alternate construction (for kicks, plus I'm using them at work and they are incredible). Main Gear: thickness at end width at wheel attach end gear hoop radius gear stance width +/- 1/8" fine The rest I have figured from my plans. Thanks Ken Sargent Plans #555 ken_sargent@wda.disney.com From: Epplin_John_A@hpmail1.90.deere.com Date: Mon, 11 Nov 96 15:24:07 -0600 Subject: COZY: Gear fairings and access > H rogers wrote: > The slickest method of forming nice fairings around the gear-leg to > fuselage junction that I have ever seen works like this: Just pile on > chunks of urethane foam and grow-foam around the junction. Make a big > glob. Sculpt it to a large-radius graceful faring shape, holding to the > slipstream direction as closely as possible. Glass over the whole thing > (about 4 plies BID), and right up onto the fuse and gear leg. When this > cures, of course, you have made a rigid thing out of a joint that must > flex. Now, tape about 4 or six hacksaw blades together and make a > continuous cut, just through the glass, all the way around your new > fairing, just about midway between gear leg and fuse. Make the cut > carefully, and parallel to the slipstream. You have now separated the > whole shell into two pieces. The wide cut will allow them to move without > catching on each other. The urethane foam will crunch around a bit, > inside, but who cares? The glass shells will hold their shapes. The only > decision that must be made is: Would you rather that this look perfect > while the airplane is parked on the ground, or would you rather that it > faired perfectly, while in flight? I plan to compromise. When I park, I > will always lift up on a wing to "unspring" the gear, anyway. I will glass > it up in that postition, which isn't far from its "in-flight" position. I > did this exact setup for a friend on his formula 1 racer a few years ago, > and it worked out beautifully. I didn't invent this, but I sure like it. > > I like this idea. Another subject. I am about to mount my landing gear and am wondering about the bottom access panel. I noticed at least one a OSH this year that was completely glassed over, no removable panel. Talking to the builder, he mentioned that for inspection purposes one can see all the bolts etc. from the top. In the unlikely event you should have to remove the gear strut, cut it out. You may be able to salvage the cutout and fit it back in again or the worst case is making it over again. I am about to go this route, one thing that has me somewhat concerned is the screws holding in the panel coming loose and going though the prop. I mentioned this to Nat, he says he never heard of it happening. Any body got any real strong feelings about this? John epplin Cozy MK4 #467 Date: Mon, 11 Nov 1996 19:33:40 -0500 From: Fritzx2@aol.com Subject: Re: COZY: Gear fairings and access In a message dated 96-11-11 16:50:54 EST, Epplin_John_A@hpmail1.90.deere.com writes: << one thing that has me somewhat concerned is the screws holding in the panel coming loose and going though the prop. I mentioned this to Nat, he says he never heard of it happening. Any body got any real strong feelings about this? >> I think this subject came up before. I can't remember the concensus of the group. I plan on using a light form of Loctite brand thread locking fluid on the gear cover screws. With not that much more work to make a cover and all the different grades of thread locking compounds available, my vote is for the gear cover. John Fritz Fritzx2@aol.com From: Lee Devlin Subject: Re: COZY: Gear fairings and access Date: Mon, 11 Nov 1996 18:09:44 MST > I think this subject came up before. I can't remember the concensus > of the group. I plan on using a light form of Loctite brand thread locking > fluid on the gear cover screws. With not that much more work to > make a cover and all the different grades of thread locking compounds > available, my vote is for the gear cover. I think that Loctite will be more than adequate to prevent the screws from coming out of the landing gear cover. It seems odd that one would worry about these screws which rarely need to be removed and not consider the 2 dozen or so cowling screws as a much more serious threat. I've already had one come off my LongEZ and go through the prop in the 50 hours I've flown it and judging by the marks on the prop, quite a few have made the trip in the plane's 850+ hours. Fortunately, most of them have hit close to the hub where the prop is spinning slower and is much stronger. I had been relying on the built-in clutch on my power screw driver to provide consistent torque but have since gone to double-checking the torque on all of these screws by hand as a precaution. Lee Devlin | HP Greeley Division | Long EZ N36MX Piper Colt N4986Z | 700 71st Ave. | Cozy MK IV under const. 'Spirit of rec.aviation'| Greeley, CO 80634 | (Chapter 10) Date: Tue, 12 Nov 1996 02:35:40 -0800 From: Chris van Hoof Organization: C van Hoof - Architect Subject: Re: COZY: Gear fairings and access Hi there, reagading your concerns: one thing that has me somewhat > concerned is the screws holding in the panel coming loose and going though the > prop. I mentioned this to Nat, he says he never heard of it happening. Any > body got any real strong feelings about this? > > John epplin Cozy MK4 #467 DEAR FRIENDS LET ME _TELL_ YOU ABOUT MY FRIEND GERRIT GAST AND HIS LONG/VARI-EZE. He had exactly that...a cowl screw came loose during an airshow display , overhead the crowd, took a large chunk off the wood prop, shook the engine nearly off its mounting, cowls and parts raining on the crowd, he shut off immediately and did the best forced lob ever witnessed by so many....wrote the A/C off but had minor scrapes himself. Had it not been for his superior flying skills, and the Divine hand in this, this little party would have landed in the +-7000 strong concentrated crowd. - This was at our 1990 EAA Margate Convention ( Something like Oshkosh but in a lilliputian way). However he got himself another EZE (built by someone else) and sadly died in this craft some 2 months ago.(Suspect that the prop may have come off on finals). That was a sad weekend for the EAA in South Africa - we lost another 3 friends - all part of the local chapter 322 including our president Martin Clarke.(different accident) Sorry I digressed - I still miss them all. THEN THERE IS another friend - on take off +- 250 feet up, His canopy opened ( safety catch bent open by MPI organisation) it sucked his headset off which went thru' the prop - or should I say took out the prop - emergency landing into Electrical pole - he says the strakes stand up real well....so he came to see if the Cozy is that much bigger, he says he's fixing the EZE. KNOW that i'm stocking up on LOCKTITE and you'll have to break/prise items off my Cozy - IF IT CAN COME LOOSE - IT WILL GO THRU THE PROP....(THRU?) Chris with #219 in chapter 8 Date: Thu, 28 Nov 1996 18:58:46 -0500 (EST) From: "'Rick - Tech Support'" Subject: Re: COZY: Main Gear - Dumb Hypothetical ??? Actually they would be heavier. A friend of mine wanted to do this on a long EZ and found it weigh about 10 to 30 more pounds to come up with a gear that would do the same job. Rick On Thu, 28 Nov 1996, Jim Hocut wrote: > > While hangar flying and admiring our projects a while back, someone picked > up a main gear and commented that that darned thing sure was heavy. The > discussion then got around to asking if metal main gear legs (Say similar to > a Cessna) wouldn't be lighter and work just as well. Nobody had actually > thought about that possibility, so nobody really had an answer. > > SO, just for the sake of discussion, would metal gear legs which were > appropriately sized to support a Cozy be lighter or heavier than our > fiberglass gear legs? > > Jim Hocut > jhocut@mindspring.com > > Date: 02 Dec 96 17:09:55 EST From: INFINITY Aerospace <72124.347@compuserve.com> Subject: COZY: Aluminum Fixed Gear Hi to All, >While hangar flying and admiring our projects a while back, someone picked up a main gear and commented that that darned thing sure was heavy. The discussion then got around to asking if metal main gear legs (Say similar to a Cessna) wouldn't be lighter and work just as well. Nobody had actually thought about that possibility, so nobody really had an answer. SO, just for the sake of discussion, would metal gear legs which were appropriately sized to support a Cozy be lighter or heavier than our fiberglass gear legs?< If made by Grove Aircraft, the aluminum fixed main gear will be lighter, stronger and thinner (1" thick, more aerodynamic) than the present fiberglass fixed gear. They make aluminum fixed gear for Kitfox, Pitts, and many other aircraft. The steel gear used in Cessna's would be too heavy. Grove Aircraft has an aluminum main gear they made for the Whisper II, for example, that is only 1" thick and weighs 32 lbs. for a 2000 lb. gross weight aircraft. The gear is gun drilled for the internal brake line before bending, and can be made into an airfoil shape and polished if you desire. Gear made one at a time will cost about $1400. In quantity, about $1000 each. Grove Aircraft Company can be reached at: 1860 Joe Crosson Drive El Cajon, CA 92020 (619) 562-1268 FAX-3274 Robert (Robbie) P. Grove, Pres./Owner HTH. Infinity's Forever, JD From: Marc J. Zeitlin Subject: COZY: Aluminum Fixed Gear (fwd) Date: Tue, 3 Dec 96 9:42:36 EST Jim Newman wrote: > If made by Grove Aircraft, the aluminum fixed main gear will be lighter, >stronger and thinner (1" thick, more aerodynamic) than the present fiberglass >fixed gear. Evidence for any of these claims? See below. > The steel gear used in Cessna's would be too heavy. Certainly no argument here :-). >........ Grove Aircraft has an aluminum main gear they made for the >Whisper II, for example, that is only 1" thick and weighs 32 lbs. for a >2000 lb. gross weight aircraft. Since the COZY is a 2050 GVW aircraft, let's use this as an example. This is ~2 lbs more than the gear I got from AeroCad weighs. The same weight, maybe, but lighter? As far as strength goes, COZY main gear doesn't break in anything resembling normal use, so stronger (even if true) is unnecessary. >................ and can be made into an >airfoil shape and polished if you desire. As far as aerodynamics goes, a long, thin, flat shape has more drag than a teardrop shape. In the case of the gear strut, my guess is that neither the aluminum 1" thick gear nor the stock COZY gear is particularly efficient (witness the changes that Klaus Savier et. al. have made to their gear struts to reduce drag). > Gear made one at a time will cost about $1400. In quantity, >about $1000 each. Gear from Featherlite or AeroCad runs $560 - $650, depending upon configuration. I don't doubt that Grove can make a wonderful aluminum gear strut for certain aircraft, but given the cost differential, the lack of advantages, and the modifications required to mount the aluminum gear, I fail to see any advantage in using it on a COZY. My $0.02 -- Marc J. Zeitlin Email: marcz@an.hp.com Date: 03 Dec 96 22:17:21 EST From: INFINITY Aerospace <72124.347@compuserve.com> Subject: COZY: Aluminum Fixed Main Gear Hi Marc and to All, >Marc Zeitlin wrote:< >>JD's previous post:<< >>If made by Grove Aircraft, the aluminum fixed main gear will be lighter, stronger and thinner (1" thick, more aerodynamic) than the present fiberglass fixed gear.<< >Evidence for any of these claims? See below.< You will have to call them. I was just relaying what Grove Aircraft stated to me. My post was just pointing out that there is an alternative fixed gear for canards. >>........ Grove Aircraft has an aluminum main gear they made for the Whisper II, for example, that is only 1" thick and weighs 32 lbs. for a 2000 lb. gross weight aircraft.<< >Since the COZY is a 2050 GVW aircraft, let's use this as an example. This is ~2 lbs more than the gear I got from AeroCad weighs. The same weight, maybe, but lighter?< Is this weight after the wraps, the build up of tabs and 40+ man-hours (a totally completed strut, ready to install, with brake lines)? The Grove gear has internal brake lines (a really nice safety feature), the mounting tabs are part of the weight and is ready to install. >As far as strength goes, COZY main gear doesn't break in anything resembling normal use, so stronger (even if true) is unnecessary.< But you wouldn't have to pick the wing up to unload the gear after each flight as is done with the fiberglass gear. >>................ and can be made into an airfoil shape and polished if you desire.<< >As far as aerodynamics goes, a long, thin, flat shape has more drag than a teardrop shape.< The airfoil shaped struts are thicker. >In the case of the gear strut, my guess is that neither the aluminum 1" thick gear nor the stock COZY gear is particularly efficient (witness the changes that Klaus Savier et. al. have made to their gear struts to reduce drag).< Yes, probably true - splitting frog hairs - but the aluminum should be a little better because of less wetted area, Grove says. Retracting the mains would give you about a 12% increase in cruise, though. >>Gear made one at a time will cost about $1400. In quantity, about $1000 each.<< >Gear from Featherlite or AeroCad runs $560 - $650, depending upon configuration.< Granted. Grove Aircraft said this would be a factor. But you still have a LOT of work to do to the fiberglass gear, NONE to the Grove gear. >I don't doubt that Grove can make a wonderful aluminum gear strut for certain aircraft, but given the cost differential, the lack of advantages, and the modifications required to mount the aluminum gear, I fail to see any advantage in using it on a COZY.< Advantages: internal brake lines (safety); stronger; don't have to unload the gear; don't have to camber / toe-in/toe-out the axles; can be custom made to width, height (more prop clearance) and aircraft GW; axle holes are pre-drilled; the gear is not temperature sensitive (melt at 200 degress F); no more melted struts from hot brakes from not using Matco brakes; maybe a little less drag; can be polished; ready to install; does not take 40 man-hours to glass and build; no modifications to mount the gear; narrower wheel pants since the strut is only 1" thick at the axle; and don't have to make a notch in the bottom of the strut if, for some reason, one is still using the Cleveland brakes. Disadvantage(s): Cost, as you pointed out, but remember the Grove gear is already complete with all the advantages listed above. If you pay yourself even $10 per hour, the $400+ labor puts the fiberglass gear over the top. If ones time means nothing, then maybe stay with the fiberglass strut. HTH. Infinity's Forever, JD Date: Wed, 04 Dec 1996 07:50:26 -0500 From: william l kleb Organization: NASA Langley Research Center Subject: Re: COZY: Aluminum Fixed Main Gear marc z wrote: > > As far as aerodynamics goes, a long, thin, flat shape > has more drag than a teardrop shape. INFINITY Aerospace wrote: > > the airfoil shaped struts are thicker. i don't understand what you mean by this reply. aerodynamics is all about making a shape that is structurally useful, but with the drag of, say, a wire with 1/1000th of the cross-sectional area. what does "thicker" have to do with anything? it is the overall shape that matters... --- bil kleb (w.l.kleb@larc.nasa.gov) 72 bellanca 7gcbc 9? cz4 -> aerocanard Date: 04 Dec 96 12:49:01 EST From: INFINITY Aerospace <72124.347@compuserve.com> Subject: COZY: RE: Aluminum Fixed Main Gear Hi Bill and to All, marc z wrote: > > As far as aerodynamics goes, a long, thin, flat shape has more drag than a teardrop shape. INFINITY Aerospace wrote: > > the airfoil shaped struts are thicker. Bill Kelb wrote: >i don't understand what you mean by this reply. aerodynamics is all about making a shape that is structurally useful, but with the drag of, say, a wire with 1/1000th of the cross-sectional area. what does "thicker" have to do with anything? it is the overall shape that matters...< True, and sorry for any confusion. Grove makes 2 shapes of gear: flat with a rounded front and rear, and a airfoil shaped strut. I was just relaying what they said - to get the airfoil shape the strut is thicker, made from thicker material. I hope this un-confuses all. Infinity's Forever, JD