From: WAV4176 Date: Thu, 1 Jan 1998 22:17:09 EST Subject: COZY: brakes I purchased a cozy mkIV project. It has Cleveland brake caliper #3V(?)133 and wheel #40-151. Wicks catalog calls this the heavy duty brakes. Is this what i really need for the Cozy. (Wicks shows the caliper # to be 30-133). What is the size for the large nose wheel on the Cozy MKIV? What all is involved in retrofitting? From: Marc J. Zeitlin Subject: COZY: brakes (fwd) Date: Fri, 2 Jan 98 0:02:35 EST J. Wendell Voto (who did not sign his message in any way :-) ) wrote: >I purchased a cozy mkIV project. It has Cleveland brake caliper #3V(?)133 and >wheel #40-151. Wicks catalog calls this the heavy duty brakes. Is this what i >really need for the Cozy. (Wicks shows the caliper # to be 30-133). Without rehashing this issue one more time, I'd suggest that anyone interested in information regarding the brakes on COZY's read the archives for chapter 9 from 1995, 1996, and 1997, as well as any topics with the word "brakes" in them (if any). Check the FAQ also - there may be something there. This topic has been discussed over and over, so if there's no new information to be presented, the archives is the place to look (1997's discussion was the most complete, I believe). >What is the size for the large nose wheel on the Cozy MKIV? What all is >involved in retrofitting? According to the "Wicks" catalog, it's a 4" wheel with a 10x3.5x4 tire and tube. Retrofitting from what? -- Marc J. Zeitlin Email: marcz@an.hp.com Date: Sat, 31 Jan 1998 09:48:56 -0500 (EST) From: DL Davis Subject: COZY: Tire and Tube installation Hey guys, I'm about to change tubes and tires again, and I have forgotten the rule about the red dots. Do they line up with the valve stem? Opposite the valve stem? each other? The first set of tires I installed, I just put it all together with no concern for tube and tire alignment, and everything worked out fine. No balance problems. Maybe I was lucky. A couple of years later, there happened to be an A&P in the hangar nearby when I was installing my second set, and he showed me how they should align. Now I need to install my third set and I don't remember the significance of the various painted dots on the tube and the tire. Hopefully somebody out there has the answer. Thanks, Dewey Davis Date: Sat, 31 Jan 1998 17:17:15 +0100 From: "LCDR James D. Newman" Subject: COZY: Re: Tire and Tube installation Hi Dewey and All, >Dl Davis wrote: >I'm about to change tubes and tires again, and I have forgotten the rule about the red dots. Do they line up with the valve stem? Opposite the valve stem? each other?< The tube stem lines up next to the red dot or triangle on the same side. Helps to keep the tire and tube installation balanced. Infinity's Forever, JD From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Sat, 31 Jan 1998 20:24:35 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: COZY: Re: Tire and Tube installation I always balance them (including the nose wheel) using stick-on mag wheel weights. Date: Fri, 06 Feb 1998 18:14:28 -0500 From: Neil Clayton Subject: COZY: Landing Brake question Help, Pls... Chap 9, Page 9, Para 4 says; " ...cut three 1" sq shims..etc. Now tack them to the aft face of LB-23. Now tack the hinge to the shims....etc" What's the spacing of the three shims??? Should it be 4 shims laying above 4 alum slugs??? Thx Neil Date: Sat, 07 Feb 1998 10:53:50 +0000 From: David Domeier Subject: Re: COZY: Landing Brake question Neil, It's been a while since I completed chapter 9, but in rereading it, I think the spacing of the shims is not critical. Put one in the center and the other 2 on either side LB 23. Their only purpose is to provide space for the bid glass that will go over LB 23 when it is installed in the fuselage. You must remove them after LB 23 is installed with flox and before the BID glass lay up over it. Your hinge will then be about the same distance from LB 23 as before the glass lay up with shims. dd From: Cozy7971@aol.com Date: Thu, 12 Feb 1998 21:04:38 EST Subject: COZY: Re: [canard-aviators] Long Ez main gear repair In a message dated 98-02-11 16:49:32 EST, Lee810@aol.com writes: << << My solution was to simply cut the gear leg off at the crack and mount the axles higher on the gear leg. This squats the back end of the Long-Ez and your Long take off rolls are gone forever. >> >> Hello everyone: I am nearing completion of my airframe and have a similar situation as to that noted above. Similar but opposite that is. I'm building a Cozy Mark IV and got a deal on the main gear. I purchased it from a fellow who had elected to go with the retractable gear on his Velocity. I did some comparisons and the gear was remarkably similar to the Cozy gear. The curve was slightly different and the center section was not tapered. I was unable to follow the directions in the plans as they call for marking the center and measuring the length of each leg for trimming to length. My different curve made this impossible. Instead I searched the plans for water lines, did a lot of calculations and then using a jig, cut the gear so that it would stand at the right height. At least that was the intent. With the gear on and the nose gear extended it appears that the plane is sitting nose low by an inch or so. The quesiton is, is this correct and will the weight of the engine cause the gear to spread so that the plane will sit level. Does anyone have any experience with trhis? It could be worse, I could have cut the gear too short. Dick Finn Date: Fri, 13 Feb 1998 16:15:18 -0600 (CST) From: "Tom G. Brusehaver" Subject: Re: COZY: Re: [canard-aviators] Long Ez main gear repair >With the gear on and the nose gear extended it appears that the plane is >sitting nose low by an inch or so. The quesiton is, is this correct and will >the weight of the engine cause the gear to spread so that the plane will sit >level. Does anyone have any experience with trhis? The only worry I would have about this would be the negative AOA during takeoff roll, making the take-off longer. I believe Nat might have attributed one part of a Cozy accident to a plane with a negative AOA. Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 14:11:36 -0500 From: bil kleb Subject: COZY: chap 9 re: installing the landing gear mkmga assemblies when you drilled the 3/4" holes in the landing gear tabs (with either a 3/4" spot facer or whatever). how what kind of a fit did you end-up with? a) no go b) very snug c) "slightly" snug d) easy fit e) sloppy fit -- bil From: Marc J. Zeitlin Subject: COZY: chap 9 Date: Fri, 27 Feb 98 14:41:17 EST bil kleb wrote; >when you drilled the 3/4" holes in the landing gear tabs >(with either a 3/4" spot facer or whatever). how what kind >of a fit did you end-up with? > > a) no go > b) very snug > c) "slightly" snug > d) easy fit > e) sloppy fit With the 3/4" spot facer I first got an (a) to (b) fit - I then used some 100 grit paper to open the holes up slightly to get a (c) to (d) fit. (Don't use this tool - it's interminably slow both for this job and especially for the wing mount holes in the wing and the spar - use a 3/4" bimetal hole saw adjusted and calibrated to give an exact 3/4" hole). Once the bushings are floxed in place while jigged in the fuselage, they don't go anywhere, and everything lines up perfectly. -- Marc J. Zeitlin Email: marcz@an.hp.com Date: Fri, 06 Mar 1998 08:15:41 -0500 From: bil kleb Subject: COZY: Re: chap 9 bil kleb wrote: > > when you drilled the 3/4" holes in the landing gear tabs > [for the mkmga assemblies] what kind of a fit did you end-up with? > > a) no go d) easy fit > b) very snug e) sloppy fit > c) "slightly" snug off-line replies (three): 1) (c) 2) some of each 3) (c) to (e) question for those who replied offline: why didn't you reply to the group so others in the future might benefit? -- bil Date: Fri, 06 Mar 1998 09:00:26 -0500 From: bil kleb Subject: COZY: chap 9: landing gear mg-2s the juncture between the upper and lower portion of my forward landing gear bulkhead is apparently too low. in order to have the MG-2s lay flat against the lower portion of the bulkhead, i have concluded that i either have to: 1) move the gear mounting holes down 1/4" to 3/8" and trim lg strut ends accordingly 2) trim a 1/4" to 3/8" off of the MG-2s and move the upper set of machine screws down accordingly (don't really like this one since it puts all holes too close to one another.) anyone have any suggestions or comments? i believe that this problem was caused by positioning the lwx's too far forward in chapter 5. so, when i went to align the upper part of the forward landing gear bulkhead with the lower part, i had to trim the lower bulkhead to obtain a good fit between the two and align with the lwx's. -- bil Date: Fri, 06 Mar 1998 10:57:22 -0500 From: bil kleb Subject: Re: COZY: chap 9: landing gear mg-2s bil kleb wrote: > 1) move the gear mounting holes down 1/4" to 3/8" > and trim lg strut ends accordingly i forgot to say that i don't have a naca scoop, so i don't have an interference problem in that respect. -- bil From: Fritzx2 Date: Fri, 6 Mar 1998 17:34:33 EST Subject: Re: COZY: chap 9: landing gear mg-2s Bil Kleb wrote: > the juncture between the upper and lower portion of > my forward landing gear bulkhead is apparently too low. Bil, did you move the gear mounting holes up the .2 (?) that one of the newsletters said to in order to make sure there was adequate clearance between the gear and the gear cover. If so, then moving it back down shouldn't matter. If, since you said in your next message that you weren't installing the bottom NACA scoop, you didn't move the the gear mounting holes up per the newsletter, then maybe you could _split_ the distance needed by moving the gear mounting holes down on the LGBH and by moving the two top MG-2 holes down the other half of the distance needed. I had the same thing happen to me. For others who haven't gotten that far yet, pay carefull attention to how much trimming you do to the aft of the fuse sides and how you locate the 45 deg, angled spruce LWY [I think it is called LWY but I don't have my plans here] because in a long and round-about way (not so apparent when you trim the back of the fuse side to mate to the firewall) the distance between the part of the bottom front Landing Gear BulkHead, LGBH, that hangs over the bottom longeron and the top of that LGBH is ultimately related in part to how much is trimmed off the back of the fuse sides. I'll explain. First you trim the aft end of the sides to mate to the firewall. Then you measure up 5" (distance ?) to locate the aft LGBH. Then you measure up 8" more to locate the front LGBH. Trimming off more of the back but still maintaining the 101.75 total length is OK according to the plans but trimming off too much of the back results in the front bottom LGBH being positioned too far forward resulting in the need to trim the top of the front bottom LGBH in order mount the top front LGBH flush with LWY. The plans then say, as if this is to be expected, that trimming a little off the top of the front bottom LGBH is OK but that has its drawbacks too as I, Bil, and others I'm sure have discovered since the MG-2 won't fit then. The second time around I knew about this and it all worked out perfectly. John Fritz fritzx2@aol.com Date: Mon, 09 Mar 1998 10:33:42 +0200 From: Rego Burger Subject: COZY: Main Gear Meltdown/Cooling Hello all, Heavy breaking, should the need arise will generate heat on the main gear as have been reports on the subject. Once airborne the airflow helps to cool it off but when on the ground this temp. is a problem especially when doing taxi tests.. or one day when the mesh in that fence at the end of the runway starts looking rather large and detailed. So here is my idea for a static cooling system after a full-stop landing. Water! How ? simple! Mount a windscreen washer bottle and pump behind the rear seats....a T piece to connect left and right side and have the nozzles mounted in the sides of the fuselage pointing onto the main gear. Make the switch a locking one so you can leave it on after "hot" landing. The water spraying onto the surface will eventually all run down the gear due to surface tension etc.. and you will bring the strut temp. down far faster than standing there watching it melt. This is an interim emergency measure and not a cure... the idea is to avoid heavy breaking! Regards Rego Burger, web site: http://home.intekom.com/glen/rnb.htm (home e-mail) mailto:rnb@intekom.co.za RSA Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 11:51:29 -0500 From: bil kleb Subject: COZY: chap 9 - landing brake i recently had my first inspection by an eaa tech counselor. during the inspection, he suggested that i add some additional bracing to the landing brake door to distribute the load exerted through lb-19 (the piece of plywood). he said that his (long-eze) brake door developed a crease parallel to the hinge after several years of use. has anyone else encountered this failure mode? -- bil From: "Nat Puffer" Subject: Re: COZY: chap 9 - landing brake Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 10:01:41 -0600 Dear Bil, Never heard of Cozy having trouble with the landing brake as you describe. Maybe the Cozy brake is built stronger than the Long EZ, or it is possible that the Long EZ builder who had the problem exceeded the speed limitation for deploying the brake. I would say not to worry if you follow the instructions for building and operating. Regards, Nat ---------- > From: bil kleb > To: cozy_builders mailing list > Subject: COZY: chap 9 - landing brake > Date: Tuesday, March 17, 1998 10:51 AM > > i recently had my first inspection by an eaa tech counselor. > during the inspection, he suggested that i add some additional > bracing to the landing brake door to distribute the load exerted > through lb-19 (the piece of plywood). he said that his (long-eze) > brake door developed a crease parallel to the hinge after several > years of use. > > has anyone else encountered this failure mode? > > -- > bil From: "astrong" Subject: Re: COZY: chap 9 - landing brake Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 11:13:19 -0800 Bill, I am doing the annual on my Cozy II prior to Sun-n-Fun. When I saw your note on the landing brake "crease" I checked mine, no sign. I have 400 hours. I have added this item to my annual check list. Alex ---------- > From: bil kleb > To: cozy_builders mailing list > Subject: COZY: chap 9 - landing brake > Date: Tuesday, March 17, 1998 8:51 AM > > i recently had my first inspection by an eaa tech counselor. > during the inspection, he suggested that i add some additional > bracing to the landing brake door to distribute the load exerted > through lb-19 (the piece of plywood). he said that his (long-eze) > brake door developed a crease parallel to the hinge after several > years of use. > > has anyone else encountered this failure mode? > > -- > bil From: "Vance, John M." Subject: RE: COZY: chap 9 - landing brake Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 15:47:56 -0500 A Long-EZ friend had the same problem, so I added some left over spar cap material on the underside in hopes it would 'fan out' the load. I am a long way from flying so don't have a clue as to whether it is really needed or will be effective. BTW, I highly doubt my friend extended his landing brake over design speed. John Vance - Cozy 3, chapter 13 an EE doing computer work, not a ME and not qualified to make structural judgements -----Original Message----- From: bil kleb [SMTP:w.l.kleb@larc.nasa.gov] has anyone else encountered this failure mode? Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 14:56:06 -0600 From: Robert and Carla Kittler Subject: COZY: Landing brake I've a question for those who have installed an electric actuator for the landing brake, either as a retrofit but particularly as an original installation. Ch 9, pg 10 of the plans desribes the slot to be cut in the fuselage bottom to accomodate the mechanical system. What size hole have you found to be adaquate for the elect system. Seems to me that it can be much smaller, say the size and location of the 3/4 inch wide portion of the slot. My intent would be to cut it out at a later time, when fitting the actuator itself, rather than now, and finishing off the required slot in the fuselage at that time. A little input would be appreciated. Thanks Robert Kittler sn 589 From: Epplin John A Subject: RE: COZY: Landing brake Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 14:50:39 -0600 Robert: You will need a slot about 3/4 in wide and almost as long as the plans slot. It probably would be wise to remove the foam and glass everything such that you could make a slot 3/4 x the original width. Also it would be advisable to widen the plywood insert in the brake itself by about .5 in each side. I used 4130 steel for the tabs as I did a sort of retrofit, had the brake and slot finished when I decided to go to the electric actuator. The reason for the steel tabs is I was able to tighten up the bend radius and use the original screw holes through the brake. John epplin Mk4 #467 > -----Original Message----- > From: Robert and Carla Kittler [SMTP:rkck@mindspring.com] > Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 1998 2:56 PM > To: cozy_builders@hpwarhw.an.hp.com > Subject: COZY: Landing brake > > I've a question for those who have installed an electric actuator for the > landing brake, either as a retrofit but particularly as an original > installation. Ch 9, pg 10 of the plans desribes the slot to be cut in the > fuselage bottom to accomodate the mechanical system. What size hole have > you found to be adaquate for the elect system. Seems to me that it can be > much smaller, say the size and location of the 3/4 inch wide portion of > the > slot. > My intent would be to cut it out at a later time, when fitting the > actuator > itself, rather than now, and finishing off the required slot in the > fuselage at that time. > > A little input would be appreciated. > > Thanks > Robert Kittler > sn 589 Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 15:50:16 -0500 From: bil kleb Subject: Re: COZY: Landing brake Robert and Carla Kittler wrote: > > Ch 9, pg 10 of the plans desribes the slot to be cut in the fuselage > bottom to accomodate the mechanical system ... Seems to me that > [the slot when using the electric actuator] can be much smaller ... i found just the opposite, since in order to get the brake to open a decent amount, it was necessary to clear lb-18 brackets on closing and have part of the actuator body clear at full open position. i have some photos of the slot on our web page at: http://www.geocities.com/~kleb/ac_ours.html i also submitted my slot dimensions to the group last year -- see the archives. also, don't miss out on the wealth of electric landing brake mounting discussion in there as well. simply mailto:majordomo@hpwarhw.an.hp.com with get cozy_builders topics97/chap_09.txt end in the body of the message and you're on your way... hey, while you're at it get the other years also and write a short summary on electric landing brake installation for the FAQ... ;) -- bil From: SBLANKDDS Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 19:44:08 EST Subject: Re: COZY: Landing brake Robert Kittler asks: <>. I added the electric speed brake as a first time installation after hinging the speed brake. The opening is 1.25" wide and 4.5" front to back. The back edge of the opening is 11.8" from the aft edge of the vertical edge of the seat back support. and the front edge is appx 3.75" from the point where the seat back meets the floor. The entire opening begins 0.2" to the right of the center support, with the fuse right side up. I have not glassed the bare foam yet, I may have to expand the hole slightly. HINT: Do not finish the edge of the fuselage /speed brake joint until it is closed by the electrical mechanism. It closes just slightly different and needed to be reworked. In my case, it pulled the brake aft just slightly on the right (hinge play). It is fun to actuate my first electrical part. My wife was trying to figure out why there was a wire from the lighter in her van to my cozy....... Steve Blank Cozy Mark IV #36 Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 13:37:00 +0000 From: atlasyts@idt.net Subject: COZY: Main gear I am ready to trim the main gear leg ends and want to make sure the angle is right. The latest info I have is: 13 degree angle from the leading edge. Can anyone confirm that please. Thank you. Regards; Bulent CZ MK-IV Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 20:56:56 +0100 From: Paul Kuntz Subject: COZY: Trimming main gear legs atlasyts@idt.net wrote: > > I am ready to trim the main gear leg ends and want to make sure the > angle is right. The latest info I have is: 13 degree angle from the > leading edge. Can anyone confirm that please. Thank you. > Regards; > Bulent CZ MK-IV There is a plans correction that changes the angle to 8 degrees. I just cut my strut to length at the 8 degree angle a couple of days ago. The technique I used was to mark the angle on both sides of the strut, score on that line to a depth of 1/8" or so using a cutoff wheel in my ryobi rotary tool (like dremel but far superior), then use a japanese saw to cut through the strut using the shallow cuts as a guide. Those Japanese saws, which cut on the pull, are amazing. The fine teeth look like they would break off at the slightest obstruction, but they are tough! I probably dulled the blade a bit, but nothing lasts long cutting through solid s-glass fiber. Paul Kuntz Cozy MKIV Serial 003 England From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 15:41:56 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: COZY: Trimming main gear legs Remember when fairing the trailing edge, the airflow is parallel to the movement direction, and not the leg crossection, in particular at the top quarters. There was an article in CSA newsletter with photos about 4 years ago. Date: Fri, 01 May 1998 10:04:57 +0000 From: atlasyts@idt.net Subject: Re: COZY: Protecting Foam About cutting fiberglass with a saber saw: After reading about all the problems with trimming the attach tabs on the landing gear and people wasting many blades for the task I did trim all four tabs with one B&D saw blade. My method was that I rigged the garden hose to trickle water on the blade. There was no dust, the resin did not heat up and did not gum up the saw blade and the blade stayed sharp.Just another way to skin a cat? Bulent CZ MK-IV Date: Fri, 01 May 1998 08:16:38 -0800 From: hrogers@slac.stanford.edu (Howard Rogers) Subject: Re: COZY: Protecting Foam >About cutting fiberglass with a saber saw: After reading about all the >problems with trimming the attach tabs on the landing gear and people >wasting many blades for the task I did trim all four tabs with one B&D >saw blade. My method was that I rigged the garden hose to trickle water >on the blade. There was no dust, the resin did not heat up and did not >gum up the saw blade and the blade stayed sharp.Just another way to skin >a cat? >Bulent >CZ MK-IV Bulent's solution prompts me to make two comments. First, though water cooling is an excellent solution, be aware that there is considerable risk of electrocution associated with this. If you are going to try it, be sure that someone else (preferably with current CPR training) is present, and knows to yank the plug if your teeth should suddenly illuminate and start chattering. Second, I am reminded of the solution I tried with trimming these mega-layups. Some contractors at work had been using the coarsest sandpaper I have ever seen to clean up a concrete floor in preperation for redoing the vynyl tile. I don't even know where this stuff could be located on the "grit" scale, as it looked more like big, craggy ROCKS glued to the heavy paper backing. I took some scraps of it home, glued up a nice "sanding" block, and attacked those layups with it. It worked like a charm! I could remove material so fast it was scary. I am usually not too sensitive to the glass dust from sanding, but this was making more SHARDS than dust. Later that evening, and for the next 48 hours or so, I suffered terribly. I hadn't done anything special to cover exposed skin, and the slivers and shards I had made just about drove me crazy! I chucked that sanding block, and was never tempted to try it again. --Howard Rogers, 415-926-4052 hrogers@slac.stanford.edu From: Don Bowen Subject: COZY: Chapter 9 - Landing Gear Cover Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 14:46:58 -0700 I recently completed the landing gear cover and would like to pass on a building tip. I was not able to perfectly match the location of the holes in the cover with the holes in the aluminum inserts in the bulkheads. When we use flush head screws, the countersinks must be concentric with the threaded holes. Despite my efforts to follow the plans, I was not able to get this right. For what it is worth, here is how I tackled the problem: I covered the bulkheads with 2 inch box sealing tape. I drilled the pilot holes on the cover to an oversize condition (approx. two times larger than the diameter of the screws). I rounded up 16 screws with the same number of threads as the plans screws, but with a shank area of approximately 1 inch. I put the cover in place and held it down with weights. I coated the screws with 3 in 1 oil and threaded them in all the way. I mixed up some flox and packed it around the shanks of the screws. When the flox cured I removed the screws and sanded the surface smooth. The resulting pilot holes were located in the exact position for countersinking. I used a countersink cutter with the same diameter pilot as the diameter of the screws. Everthing worked great, and I am a happy builder. I may be the only one who had a problem with this operation. I think I spent more time on the fastener installation than I did fabricating the cover!! By the way, I used Marc Z's suggestion of using urethane foam instead of the PVC to make this cover. I hate to second guess the plans, but for a non-structural access cover I do not think this is a problem. The urethane was a lot easier to shape than PVC. Happy Building, Don Bowen Cozy MKIV s/n 440 From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 17:10:00 -0500 (CDT) Subject: COZY: Corrosion and brakes With the Cleveland brakes, I have had the discs hard chromed at a cost of around $40. At 600 hours and 4.5 years including numerous visits to Florida, they are in excellent shape. Date: Sun, 12 Jul 1998 06:46:26 +0200 From: Jean-Jacques CLAUS Subject: COZY: MK100 - 4140 STEEL STUD Hello from France, Where can i buy the "MK100 - 4140 STEEL STUD" for the fuselage assembly of the main gear leg ? I didn't find it in the SPRUCE's and WICKS's catalog. Can anyone help me ? Thank you, Jean-Jacques CLAUS Cosy Classic ( F-PJJC ) From: "Brian & Susan DeFord" Subject: Re: COZY: MK100 - 4140 STEEL STUD Date: Thu, 16 Jul 1998 10:46:45 -0700 Jean-Jacques Claus asks: >Where can i buy the "MK100 - 4140 STEEL STUD" for the fuselage assembly >of the main gear leg ? >I didn't find it in the SPRUCE's and WICKS's catalog. It is in Wick's catalog under the chapter 9 material list for the Mark IV. Specifically, the part number is MK100-4140. They are a total of $41.54 (US) for the pair. Don't know about ACS. Brian DeFord From: "Michael Anderson" Subject: COZY: Chapter 9, LB Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 09:55:18 -0400 On the landing brake, what size drill bit and tap does one use for a #10 screw? Michael Anderson Cozy #484, chap 9 (972)684-1409 From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 16:49:21 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Re: COZY: Chapter 9, LB On 07/27/98 09:55:18 you wrote: > >On the landing brake, what size drill bit and tap does one use for a #10 >screw? > >Michael Anderson >Cozy #484, chap 9 >(972)684-1409 > > > Most numbers from my general hardware drill gage: A #10 threaded material(I'm being generic)(could be an AN3-? bolt) on an airframe is national fine thread type (there may be slight differences in the actual specification, but consider the same) with 32 threads per inch. The clearance hole is #11 ( I have always used #12) or 3/16", and the tap drill is #21. On engines generally the screws are national course with 24 threads per inch. The clearance hole is #11, and the tap drill #25. Remember all aircraft threads are rolled (squeezed, not cut - curly chips) The taps are 10-32 first and 10-24 second. From: John Ellor Subject: COZY: COZY Ch9 Landing Brake installation Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1998 15:12:15 -0400 Hello all, As a follow up to Michael Anderson's question, does anyone know why the plans call for the use of drilled and tapped aluminum slugs for the hinge attachments rather than using say a #10 nut and wide washer(s). (I'd rather avoid any chance of defective or stripped threads, given the option.) John Ellor Cozy III #283 From ???@??? Thu Jul 30 19:42:39 1998 Received: from twc2.betaweb.com ([206.43.209.18]) by antiochus-fe0.ultra.net (8.8.8/ult.n14767) with ESMTP id RAA28435 for ; Thu, 30 Jul 1998 17:41:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by twc2.betaweb.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id RAA20978 for cozy_builders-list; Thu, 30 Jul 1998 17:33:02 -0400 X-Authentication-Warning: twc2.betaweb.com: majordomo set sender to owner-cozy_builders@betaweb.com using -f Received: from jetson.tus.symix.as (insomnia.ext.symix.com [206.152.254.2]) by twc2.betaweb.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id RAA20968 for ; Thu, 30 Jul 1998 17:32:56 -0400 Received: by jetson.tus.symix.as with Internet Mail Service (5.5.1960.3) id ; Thu, 30 Jul 1998 14:31:52 -0700 Message-ID: <55EF06BD44AED1118A5A0060B05771A9013667@jetson.tus.symix.as> From: Don Bowen To: "'cozy_builders@canard.com'" Subject: COZY: RE: COZY Ch9 Landing Brake installation Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1998 14:31:50 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.1960.3) Content-Type: text/plain Sender: owner-cozy_builders@betaweb.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Don Bowen X-UIDL: 56c8e48801f4f93a2cf1b6e889daf580 John Ellor wrote: ...does anyone know why the plans call for the use of drilled and tapped aluminum slugs for the hinge attachments rather than using say a #10 nut and wide washer(s). (I'd rather avoid any chance of defective or stripped threads, given the option.) Well, I am working on a Mk IV, so I can't say if the installation is identical to that of your Cozy III. Here are my 2 cents worth, as I am in the process of installing the landing brake hinge: I think the larger base surface of the aluminum slugs provide a larger contact surface for bonding. I suspect it would be more difficult to bond the washer and nut in place on the wood. You might have a problem with epoxy getting into the inside of the washer and/or the internal threads of the nut. Also, I think it would be more difficult to drill the holes in the hinge to exactly match up with the locations of the (buried under fiberglass and wood) washer and nut. With the aluminum slugs you have a much larger target to "hit", and the threads are created after the drilling operation. I think this is the real advantage to using the aluminum slugs. For me at least, the drilling and tapping of aluminum inserts is not that difficult of an operation. My only advice would be to take your time and strive for accuracy. Good results can easily be achieved here. While I agree the threads provided by a nut could be stronger and more precise than those you make with your drill and tap, I do not think there will be a big issue of defective or stripped threads. Unless you have some really unusual maintenance practices, I cannot believe that the landing brake will be removed once it has been installed. I plan to install the screws with "loctite" and leave it at that. Good luck with your project! Don Bowen Cozy Mk IV s/n 440 Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1998 09:14:56 +0200 From: Rego Burger Subject: COZY: Ch9 Landing Brake installation I was "naughty" and did something different. I made nutplate fittings for the back instead of drilling and tapping the alumium. Only problem with this change is it will be impossible to replace the nutplates should they eventually rust. To protect the threads from rust sieze I will use a light lubricant. Rego Burger, web site: http://home.intekom.com/glen/rnb.htm (home e-mail) mailto:rnb@intekom.co.za RSA Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1998 14:30:24 -0400 From: Neil Clayton Subject: COZY: 4140 rod source Anyone know where I can buy raw 4140 1/2" stock rod for the MK100 undercarriage bars? Then I'll thread the ends myself instead of paying $50 per to the supplier Wicks said no and A/S said they'll check. Thx Neil Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1998 15:01:39 -0500 From: Chris Anderson Subject: Re: COZY: 4140 rod source For those who aren't already aware of it, there are several general mail-order sources for raw materials and hardware. McMaster Carr regional locations MSC 800-645-7270 Grainger many local locations McMaster would have the raw metal stock you want. (I've been using 7075 aircraft Al on some projects lately...) the others might have it as well... NOTE: when buying stuff from these folks make sure you understand exactly what your buying. If you say 4140 0.5" rod they will give you exactly that. (note that they publish the tolerances of the rod in the catalog and will quote them to you on request...) Just don't anyone use lawn-mower parts from Grainger to build they're plain ok? 8) At 02:30 PM 8/26/98 -0400, you wrote: >Anyone know where I can buy raw 4140 1/2" stock rod for the MK100 >undercarriage bars? >Then I'll thread the ends myself instead of paying $50 per to the supplier >Wicks said no and A/S said they'll check. >Thx >Neil > =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Chris Anderson andersoc@idcnet.com You can't save everyone folks, just try not to be living next door when they go off... Dennis Miller From: "Nat Puffer" Subject: Re: COZY: 4140 rod source Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1998 13:46:05 -0500 Neil and Cozy builders, The MK100 studs are special made AN studs (by the manufacturer of AN bolts), close tolerance, precision ground, with rolled threads (to eliminate stress cracks) to insure that the Cozy Mark IV landing gear will not wobble (due to loose fit, as is sometimes the case with the Long EZ) or fail by stress concentration at the threads. We believed that it would be foolish to substitute anything less. Regards, Nat ---------- > From: Neil Clayton > To: cozy_builders@canard.com > Subject: COZY: 4140 rod source > Date: Wednesday, August 26, 1998 1:30 PM > > Anyone know where I can buy raw 4140 1/2" stock rod for the MK100 > undercarriage bars? > Then I'll thread the ends myself instead of paying $50 per to the supplier > Wicks said no and A/S said they'll check. > Thx > Neil From: Jim Hocut Subject: RE: COZY: 4140 rod source Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1998 19:28:44 -0400 > Then I'll thread the ends myself instead of paying $50 per to the > supplier I got my 4140 studs from Wicks a little while ago and I'm nearly positive they were only about $21 or so each. By the way, on the subject of these, I've been mounting and dismounting my gear a lot working on my clearance problem (I'm going to bite the bullet and repair it). In order to save some wear and tear on the threads of those expensive studs I took some spare 1/2" aluminum rod, cut 4 pieces to about 3", machined it down (by rotating against my belt sander) to where it was an easy slip fit into the gear bushing, then ground an angle on the end to help it go into the bushings. Now I can check clearances, etc. just by getting the gear roughly lined up and tapping the Al pins pieces into place. Jim Hocut jhocut@mindspring.com From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1998 20:44:12 -0500 (CDT) Subject: RE: COZY: 4140 rod source Remember most, if not all aviation male threads are rolled, not cut. Do not cut threads when they should be rolled. Rolled threads should be used in particular applications where the threads are in tension, either where actually tension is transmitted between the underside of the bolt head and nut, and when the connection is actually in shear, and the bolt tension is generating compression between the pieces resulting in friction. From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1998 20:47:13 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Re: COZY: 4140 rod source On 08/26/98 14:30:24 you wrote: > >Anyone know where I can buy raw 4140 1/2" stock rod for the MK100 >undercarriage bars? >Then I'll thread the ends myself instead of paying $50 per to the supplier >Wicks said no and A/S said they'll check. >Thx >Neil > > Try Shapiro Supply, St. Louis 1-800-833-1259 Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1998 13:11:51 -0400 From: Neil Clayton Subject: Re: COZY: 4140 rod source Thanks Nat. I didn't realise there was so much to these items. I'll buy 'em and cut costs somewhere else. Neil Nat Puffer wrote... >Neil and Cozy builders, >The MK100 studs are special made AN studs (by the manufacturer of AN >bolts), close tolerance, precision ground, with rolled threads (to >eliminate stress cracks) to insure that the Cozy Mark IV landing gear will >not wobble (due to loose fit, as is sometimes the case with the Long EZ) or >fail by stress concentration at the threads. We believed that it would be >foolish to substitute anything less. >Regards, >Nat > >---------- >> From: Neil Clayton >> To: cozy_builders@canard.com >> Subject: COZY: 4140 rod source >> Date: Wednesday, August 26, 1998 1:30 PM >> >> Anyone know where I can buy raw 4140 1/2" stock rod for the MK100 >> undercarriage bars? >> Then I'll thread the ends myself instead of paying $50 per to the >supplier >> Wicks said no and A/S said they'll check. >> Thx >> Neil > > From: Jim Hocut Subject: COZY: Ch 9 - Another oaf's blunder Date: Mon, 24 Aug 1998 19:18:50 -0400 My gear legs had been sitting in the workshop staring at me for quite some time, so I finally decided to take three giant steps backwards in the plans and get them installed. I had managed to finish the task (or so I thought), when I discovered that the gear cover and the gear would not both fit at the same time. Either one seperately fit perfectly, but neither one wanted to share space with the other. Obviously something was wrong, and after some measuring I decided that I had somehow drilled the holes in the gear bulkheads about 3/4 to 7/8 too low. I suspect I may have been looking at the dimensions for the rear bulkhead when drilling the holes for the front, but don't really remember those little details from over two years ago. Anyway, the options I can think of are: 1. Leave the gear mounted as is, adjust the position of my axles appropriately when I mount them, and redefine the shape of the gear cover just enough so that it will fit. This will change the shape of the NACA inlet's floor slightly (and the aerodynamics), but from what I've read about the reasearch done on NACA inlets it appears that they are somewhat forgiving as far as the shape of the floor. This option also appears to involve the least amount of work. 2. Remove the MG-1's, MG-2's, MKMG-4 bushings, repair the bulkheads and start over from there. Somehow this sounds like a real pain. 3. Cut out the bulkheads, make new ones, re-install, and drill the holes in the correct location this time. This option sounds like a lot of work also. Any comments? Jim Hocut (who is not going to make another silly mistake on his Cozy IV ever again!) jhocut@mindspring.com From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Mon, 24 Aug 1998 19:05:46 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Re: COZY: Ch 9 - Another oaf's blunder Shortening the gear leg will increase the stiffness, and possibly make wheel alignment (camber) more difficult. It appears at this time the differences might be minor, but when one deviates from the plans, other issues seem to appear, Fix it correctly is my advice. Several days work now, but then I don't know what other things might not fit. From: Jim Hocut Subject: RE: COZY: Ch 9 - Another oaf's blunder Date: Mon, 24 Aug 1998 21:22:19 -0400 On Monday, August 24, 1998 8:06 PM, cdenk@ix.netcom.com [SMTP:cdenk@ix.netcom.com] wrote: > Shortening the gear leg will increase the stiffness, and possibly > make wheel alignment (camber) more > difficult. ... We're only talking about moving the axle (i.e. shortening the gear) by about 3/4 inch. That's in the ballpark of how much the folks have to shorten it who go with the 6" wheels. I personally don't see much problem with that, but then again I don't pretend to know all answers to things structural. Jim Hocut jhocut@mindspring.com From: ponciroli@postoffice.worldnet.att.net Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1998 12:18:01 -0500 Subject: Re: COZY: Ch 9 - Another oaf's blunder Jim Hocut wrote that he had miscalculated the mounting holes for him main gear, and offered three options. #1 one was to essentially, do nothing, and correct to best degree possible with relocating the axels, The other two are: 2. Remove the MG-1's, MG-2's, MKMG-4 bushings, repair the bulkheads and start over from there. Somehow this sounds like a real pain. 3. Cut out the bulkheads, make new ones, re-install, and drill the holes in the correct location this time. This option sounds like a lot of work also. Jim - I think that Carl Denk is right. do it over. These things have a way of multiplying problems down the line. I had to make two passes at installing the landing gear bulkheads, but bit the bullet and got it right the last time. I recommend option #2 at the least. Don Ponciroli ponciroli@att.net Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 09:42:15 +0200 From: Jannie Versfeld Subject: Re: COZY: Ch 9 - Another oaf's blunder Jim Hocut wrote: > > My gear legs had been sitting in the workshop staring at me for quite > some time, so I finally decided to take three giant steps backwards > in the plans and get them installed. I had managed to finish the > task (or so I thought), when I discovered that the gear cover and the > gear would not both fit at the same time. Either one seperately fit > perfectly, but neither one wanted to share space with the other. > Obviously something was wrong, and after some measuring I decided > that I had somehow drilled the holes in the gear bulkheads about 3/4 > to 7/8 too low. I suspect I may have been looking at the dimensions > for the rear bulkhead when drilling the holes for the front, but > don't really remember those little details from over two years ago. > > Anyway, the options I can think of are: > > 1. Leave the gear mounted as is, adjust the position of my axles > appropriately when I mount them, and redefine the shape of the gear > cover just enough so that it will fit. This will change the shape of > the NACA inlet's floor slightly (and the aerodynamics), but from what > I've read about the reasearch done on NACA inlets it appears that > they are somewhat forgiving as far as the shape of the floor. This > option also appears to involve the least amount of work. > > 2. Remove the MG-1's, MG-2's, MKMG-4 bushings, repair the bulkheads > and start over from there. Somehow this sounds like a real pain. > > 3. Cut out the bulkheads, make new ones, re-install, and drill the > holes in the correct location this time. This option sounds like a > lot of work also. > > Any comments? > > Jim Hocut (who is not going to make another silly mistake on his Cozy > IV ever again!) > jhocut@mindspring.com If you are sure that the tabs on the gear legs are correct dimensions I would rather re-drill the holes for mounting mg-1 & mg-2 and redo the bushing. There will be more than enough material to compensate for the 4 3/16 holes. You can fill them up with flox and sand them flush after cure. I would suggest to get some input from Nat on this. -- Maybe adding two or three extra layers of glass on each side of the fron and rear LG bulkheads? Any other suggestions? Jannie Versfeld #673 From: aircraft Subject: COZY: Landing Gear Bow Length Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1998 09:47:37 -0400 To All, I am putting Cleveland 6x6 wheels with 2 puck breaks on my plane. The questions I have are: 1. What tires can I get Low profile and Width and where can I get them? 2. Based on the Tire/wheel combination total height compared to the 5x5 Tire/wheel height called out in the plans. What is the difference in height. 3. Is there any special considerations besides cutting the bow shorter to compensate for the added wheel height? Any comments or info would be nice and appreciated. Dave West TELFORD/ACCI Dave West (502) 624-2746 DSN 464-2746 Fort Knox, KY 40121-5000 FAX (502) 942-3525 EMail Address: Aircraft@ftknoxdol-emh10.army.mil From: Fritzx2@aol.com Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 23:29:23 EDT Subject: COZY: Cozy MK IV Ch 9 Main Gear Hi All, After comparing the WL heights of the axle for the front and rear wheels to the measured diameter of both the front and rear tires, something seems wrong. The front wheel axle is WL (-)23 and the rear wheel axle is WL (-)22 according to the back cover of the plans. For these two waterline measurements to make the top longeron level, the front tire radius would have to be exactly 1" less than the main gear or 2" in diameter (note that the WL references are both negative). I measured the diameter of both tires in the uninflated state. I didn't think the diameter would change much when inflated. The front tire was 9.8" diameter measured and the back tire was 13.5" diameter measeasured for a difference of 3.7" when it should be 2". For those of you that have passed this point, what's not right: 1) the waterline references on the back cover for the front and rear axle 2) the difference in tire diameter when fully inflated and loaded with the weight of the plane is closer to the required 2" than is the condition of the difference in the tire diameters in the uninflated state. When trimming the main gear length, the plans say to trim the Featherlite supplied gear of 99" inside length to 95" and then trim the end at an angle of 8 degrees. So, is the 95" trim done concurently with the 8 degree angle cut such that gear inside length is 95" and the portion forward of the center is at a 8 degree angle longer than the 95" center dimension and the portion of the gear leg aft of the center is at an 8 degree angle shorter than the 95" center? Or, do you cut the gear off both sides to the 95" and then cut the gear off at a 8 degree angle in which case the inside gear length would be slightly shorter than 95"? I know it's splitting hairs but it's better to know than to cut twice and darn if it's still too short :) One other point if I may. It's clear that the first 4 UND torsional plies are done to the entire length of the main gear. But, I'm not sure if I sould do the second 4 UND plies the entire length (some over the brake straw conduit and some over the gear without the straws) or does the second set of 4 plies only go over the brake staw conduits? Thanks, John Fritz fritzx2@aol.com Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 21:41:25 -0700 From: Tim Hustad Subject: Re: COZY: Cozy MK IV Ch 9 Main Gear Fritzx2@aol.com wrote: > > When trimming the main gear length, the plans say to > trim the Featherlite supplied gear of 99" inside length > to 95" and then trim the end at an angle of 8 degrees. > So, is the 95" trim done concurently with the 8 > degree angle cut such that gear inside length is 95" > and the portion forward of the center is at a 8 degree > angle longer than the 95" center dimension and the > portion of the gear leg aft of the center is at an 8 degree > angle shorter than the 95" center? Or, do you cut > the gear off both sides to the 95" and then cut the gear > off at a 8 degree angle in which case the inside gear > length would be slightly shorter than 95"? I know it's > splitting hairs but it's better to know than to cut twice > and darn if it's still too short :) > Check the plans again. I just did this and Nat explained what to do. After measuring the 95" he says to transpose it to the leading edge and trim 8 degree from there. He says the leading edge is to be longer. Tim Hustad Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 17:17:10 -0700 From: "LCDR James D. Newman" Subject: COZY: Re: Cozy MK IV Ch 9 Main Gear Hi John and All, > John Fritz wrote: > After comparing the WL heights of the axle for the front and rear wheels to the measured diameter of both the front and rear tires, something seems wrong. The front wheel axle is WL (-)23 and the rear wheel axle is WL (-)22 according to the back cover of the plans. For these two waterline measurements to make the top longeron level, the front tire radius would have to be exactly 1" less than the main gear or 2" in diameter (note that the WL references are both negative). I measured the diameter of both tires in the uninflated state. I didn't think the diameter would change much when inflated. The front tire was 9.8" diameter measured and the back tire was 13.5" diameter measured for a difference of 3.7" when it should be 2". For those of you that have passed this point, what's not right: 1) the waterline references on the back cover for the front and rear axle 2) the difference in tire diameter when fully inflated and loaded with the weight of the plane is closer to the required 2" than is the condition of the difference in the tire diameters in the uninflated state. The back of the Long-EZ plans shows the nose tire axle WL to be WL (-)23, and the mains to be WL (-)22 also (both dimensions seem incorrect to me too). If memory serves, the ground reference WL is [was?] WL (-)26. It seems to me that 1" was cut off the Long-EZ fixed gear main strut to lower the aircraft rear end slightly to accommodate the nose strut compressing from various weights, and to _*ensure*_ the plane would sit level to +1(?) degree nose up (or take-off roll increases a little). Also, the nose strut spring was stiffened to help stop the spongy bouncy nose strut problem many were having, and also to ensure the plane remained level to nose up as stated earlier. (Long-EZ guys jump in here if this is not quite accurate.) The inflated Long-EZ nose tire is 8"(*) in diameter, the Cozy MK-IV nose tire is 10"(*), and a 5.00 x 5 main tire is 14"(*) in diameter. Therefore, assuming the Long-EZ ground reference WL is WL (-)26, the nose tire axle WL for the Long-EZ would be (-)22, and the 5.00 x 5 mains would be WL (-)19. Assuming the Cozy MK-IV ground reference WL is also WL (-)26, the nose axle WL would be (-)21, and the 5.00 X 5 mains axle would still be WL (-)19 (here's your 2" you were looking for John in #2 above). If in fact the ground reference WL has been changed to WL (-)25, just adjust your axle WL numbers by 1"; i.e. - Long-EZ nose axle to WL (-)21, and mains axle WL (-)18, and Cozy MK-IV nose axle to WL (-)20, and mains axle WL (-)18 respectively. (*) If one is into splitting frog hairs, the Tire and Rim Assoc. list the standard 5.00 X 5 tire as min. diameter as 13.65", max. diameter as 14.2", and nominal diameter is 13.95". The nose tires in the reference book I'm looking at just shows the diameters as 8" and 10" respectively. Obviously, with weight on wheels, axle WL height will vary a little depending on weight and tire pressure because the tire compresses a little. I just use 8", 10", and 14". HTH. Infinity's Forever, JD Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 13:11:27 -0700 From: "LCDR James D. Newman" Subject: COZY: Re: Cozy MK IV Ch 9 Main Gear Hi Dave and All, > I measured the center of the axle to concrete on my MKIV this morning and these are the numbers: > NG = 4.89" That's 'bout right with a loaded plane and weight ON wheels. Did you try 70 PSI in the nose tire yet? > Both left and right MG = 6.06" > Difference = 1.17" (NG axle closer to concrete) Hhmmm - close. Was the axle parallel to the ground? I assume you measured at the axle center and end of the axle by the axle nut? The canard fixed gear axles are usually not quite horizontal to the ground because of the nature of the fixed gear hoop design. They are cocked and toed inboard a little, which puts more weight on the outside of the tire. Both these angles cause extra tire wear and increase take-off roll a little. Ideally, the axle would straighten out to horizontal and the toe in would straighten so the tire tracks pretty much straight ahead with the perfect situation and weight ON wheels - ideally. > The longeron angle measures 1.4° nose up. Excellent. > This is with 50 psi in each tire and the airplane ballasted to be at aft CG with me flying solo. Not exactly what it should be....but then, what is perfect in the world these days? Sounds very nominal :-). > Incidently, the day before I blasted off for OSH I checked and inflated each tire to 50psi. Two days ago (some 60 days after OSH) I checked the pressure and found each tire at about 35 psi....JD is right, they do leak right through the rubber and quite uniformally. Oohh, I'm not clairvoyant. I was just relaying what Michelin told me. It's just an unfortunate necessity compared to car tires. Infinity's Forever, JD From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 19:30:41 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Re: COZY: Re: Cozy MK IV Ch 9 Main Gear Jd says My Log book says 7/1/98 the main tires were inflated to 50 PSI. 9/25/98 I added air, they were down to 30 PSI. The ambient temperatures were probably 10F lower the later. Thats 3 months and 20 PSI, not including temperature effects. Shame on me, 3 months is too long, should be 6 weeks, not to execeed 2 months, and any time there is a major change in temperature expected. My wheel pants have small round spring loaded doors, but I haven't been able to find a valve extension about 3" long that will work. Planning to make a new set of pants shortly. Will make a larger hinged door with camlocs to make it easy to check the pressure. Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 14:15:14 -0400 From: David Domeier Subject: Re: COZY: Re: Cozy MK IV Ch 9 Main Gear JD, John Fritz, and anyone else interested... I measured the center of the axle to concrete on my MKIV this morning and these are the numbers: NG = 4.89" Both left and right MG = 6.06" Difference = 1.17" (NG axle closer to concrete) The longeron angle measures 1.4° nose up. This is with 50 psi in each tire and the airplane ballasted to be at aft CG with me flying solo. Not exactly what it should be....but then, what is perfect in the world these days? Incidently, the day before I blasted off for OSH I checked and inflated each tire to 50psi. Two days ago (some 60 days after OSH) I checked the pressure and found each tire at about 35 psi....JD is right, they do leak right through the rubber and quite uniformally. dd From: Fritzx2@aol.com Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 00:02:38 EDT Subject: COZY: Re: Cozy MK IV Ch 9 Main Gear Gear waterline progress: Thanks JD Newman for reporting the nominal inflated tire diameters and for David Domeier providing his measured tire radius when the plane weight is on the wheels. I remember some discussions in the past about what angle you would want the longeron to be relative to the ground with the plane empty. That aside, I am interested in determining what the plans information says the angle the longerons should be when the plane is finished (I'll ignore the compression of the inflated tires). From the owners manual in the section where you calculate your weight and balance when the plane is finished and empty, page 38: "If you have only one scale and plan to measure just one gear at a time, the other gear(s) must be rolled up onto the ramps of the same height so the aircraft will be dead level fore and aft, and side to side using the top longerons as reference." I take this to mean that when weighing one of the three wheels, the other two wheels should be rolled up ramps that are the exact same height as the scale. So, sans scale and ramps, the plans goal is to have the top longerons level fore and aft, and side to side using the top longeron as the reference. However, using 5.00 x 5 plans rear tire diameter = 14, 10 x 3.5 plans front tire diameter = 10, WL of the top of the top longeron = 23, WL of rear axle = -22, WL of front axle = -23, you get a rear gear ground to top of top longeron of 14/2 + 22 + 23 = 52". At the front tire ground to top of top longeron you get 10/2 + 23 + 23 = 51". This results in the longeron being 1" _lower_ at the front gear than at the rear gear which doesn't jive with what the owner's manual says that the top longeron should be level fore and aft. Nat, am I misinterpreting something here or should the plans change, maybe as the result of different wheel/tire selection since the axle WL's were determined? If so, what should be changed? Should the top of the top longerons be level fore and aft when the plane is finished and empty? John Fritz fritzx2@aol.com From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 07:08:52 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Re: COZY: Re: Cozy MK IV Ch 9 Main Gear In weighing any aircraft, the airframe should be level in both directions. On many airframes, there are protrudung rivet heads to set a level on. On the Cos(Z)y, the reference points are conviently located at the top longerons. When weighing my COSY, I needed 1.5" blocking under the main tires. It was weighed on certified aircraft scales, exactly the same thickness of each. The floor was near level, possibly a 1/4" out of level in the distance. Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 09:44:47 -0400 From: David Domeier Subject: Re: COZY: Re: Cozy MK IV Ch 9 Main Gear John, re Carl "When weighing my COSY, I needed 1.5" blocking under the main tires." To level my airplane I retracted the nose gear so as to lower the longeron about 1°. When I performed the critical measurements, I found the NG axle center at 20.9", and was somewhat consternated. It should have been at 17.6" (plan measurment) After extending the NG fully, I found the axle at 17.9", but the longerons were not level. The conclusion is this. If the airplane is built reasonably close to plan, the longeron will be about 1° (mine is 1.4°) nose up with the the NG fully extended. So when you weigh it, you have a choice of raising the MG about 1.5" as Carl did, or retracting the NG slightly as I did, to level the longeron and get a proper NG/MG weight distribution to find the center of gravity. dd Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 10:05:58 -0500 From: Tom Brusehaver Subject: Re: COZY: Re: Cozy MK IV Ch 9 Main Gear >the NG fully extended. So when you weigh it, you have a choice of >raising the MG about 1.5" as Carl did, or retracting the NG slightly as >I did, to level the longeron and get a proper NG/MG weight distribution >to find the center of gravity. If you lower the NG, don't you run the risk of moving the weight of the NG back, i.e. taking weight off the mains? Maybe it is insignificant? From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 10:43:02 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Re: COZY: Re: Cozy MK IV Ch 9 Main Gear Domeier writes Several issues: 1: By relocating the weight of the nose wheel (the wheel moves back several inches initally for small vertical movement) the balance will not be true, but probably the effect is negligible. 2: While the aircraft is on the scales, all key dimensions should be transfered to the floor and accurately measured. The transfer should be with a plumb bob, and I had 2" masking tape on the floor to ensure finding the same points. Points that should be included are axle centers, instrument panel and firewall locations, leading edges of canard, strakes, and wings (both inboard and outboard), propeller flange. Select a centerline from the crankshaft to the nose (pitot tube if you have one). Establish a perpendicular line with a multiple of 3, 4, 5 triangle. 3: From the floor dimensions, select a location for F.S. = 0.0". This should be based on a location giving more weight to the lifting surfaces location. Hopefully this will be very close to the drawings and you can use the instrument panel as a reference in the future. 4:Now you can assess the real shape of your aircraft, and calculate the location of the C.G. The drawing dimensions are a goal to aim at, but the final result is the bottom line when determining the actual C.G. location. From: EJCV@aol.com Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 02:36:52 EDT Subject: COZY: Weighing a Rutan canard It seems to me that the flexibility of the nose wheel leg and tyre makes it impossible to fix a longitudinal position for the weight on the nose wheel and therefore impossible to accurately find the centre of gravity. Therefore I wieighed my Long Ez with the nose wheel retracted (that's how we fly, isn't it?) and placed a foam support under the rubber nose button to hold the longerons horizontal. Thus the attitude and point of contact remained stable for the range of weights weighed and I was able to accurately locate the moment arms of the pilot, passenger and fuel as well as the overall C.G. For the unloaded weight, I weighed the aricraft nose-down. Should you decide to do it this way, remember to deduct the weight of the foam support. Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 10:15:00 -0500 From: Tom Brusehaver Subject: COZY: Cozy MK IV Ch 9 Brakes I know the subject of brakes is loathed by all, but I worry. Most everyone agrees that going to Cleavland or Matco super heavy duty brakes is a good idea, over the plans suggested Cleavland heavy duty ones. I think I agree, but I wonder if anyone is actually using those, and is flying. This is my thinking. Brakes turn motion into heat. Better brakes only mean more heat. Maybe the Cozy gear can only tolerate the heat generated by the heavy duty brakes, and will fail if given more heat offered by better brakes. I know about insulating the legs, and venting the pants, but not all the heat will just dissapate off of the disks. Or is the trouble, that after the heavy duty ones have been used so long they fade, and have generated as much heat as the super heavy duty ones will to actually stop the plane. I guess my thinking us more area generating heat (triple pucks vs. double pucks) will equal less area dissapating the heat. I still remember Audi on the 4000, I think, where they put the calipers inside, toward the hub, so they could have larger rotors. From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 11:01:26 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Re: COZY: Cozy MK IV Ch 9 Brakes Brushaver writes I have the Cleveland super duty, commonly run a takeoff weight up to 1900 lbs, and stop within 2000' of our home airport to the taxiway, eliminating the 3000' taxi back. Also have taxied many times with stiff crosswind at least a mile. Have not noticed any fade. Touching wheel pants and gear leg as soon as stopping have only been slightly warm. Probably my preference for short stops contributes to replacing the tires and brake linings at annual at 150 hours, even though they probably would go half way to next annual. Since I have the wheels off to clean and repack the bearings, its easy to replace at that time, and not that expensive. All in all I have no negative comments on the Clevelands and would do it again. From: "Eric Holmberg" Subject: RE: COZY: Cozy MK IV Ch 9 Brakes Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 12:12:36 -0400 > This is my thinking. Brakes turn motion into heat. Better brakes only > mean more heat. True, although given the same operating conditions (i.e. the same braking), they will dissapate the exact same amount of energy / heat. So, if the rotors have a larger surface area, they will run cooler due to more airflow and the radiated heat that can melt the legs will be less. Likewise, if the brakes have more mass, then they will absorb more energy to raise the same temperature, so the end temperature of the rotors will be a lot less than the lower-grade brakes . . . which also means less heating of the legs. > Maybe the Cozy gear can only tolerate the heat > generated by the heavy duty brakes, and will fail if given more heat > offered by better brakes. I know about insulating the legs, and > venting the pants, but not all the heat will just dissapate off of the > disks. True, better brakes will mean that you can stop faster, but the original brakes should be enough to lock up the wheels, so I think the tires are the main limiting factor (until brake fade sets in). > Or is the trouble, that after the heavy duty ones have been used so > long they fade, and have generated as much heat as the super heavy > duty ones will to actually stop the plane. BOINK. Sounds good to me :) 5000' to stop a Cozy would be a shame, so we'll have to avoid the lawnmower band brakes... > I still remember Audi on the 4000, I think, where they put the > calipers inside, toward the hub, so they could have larger rotors. Audi . . . glad they don't make planes, or every one of us would go down in flames :) Those rotors were pretty cool, though! Of course, I'd hate to have to pay for a new set. From: "Nat Puffer" Subject: Re: COZY: Cozy MK IV Ch 9 Brakes Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 11:41:29 -0500 People, It's not a question of what brakes you install. It's a question of how hard you use them. It is good practice to let the airplane slow down aerodynamically as much as possible to minimize the heat generated, the wear on the pucks, and the wear on the tires. Ken Murphy, who has our prototype, flys 737s for a living. He never melted the gear legs, but he did wear out pucks and tires trying to turn off at the first taxiway after touchdown. He decided it was less expensive to go a little farther down the runway and use less brakes. BTW if you have dragging brakes, you could generate more heat than you realize. Regards, Nat ---------- > From: Tom Brusehaver > To: cozy_builders@canard.com > Subject: COZY: Cozy MK IV Ch 9 Brakes > Date: Friday, October 02, 1998 10:15 AM > > > I know the subject of brakes is loathed by all, but I worry. Most > everyone agrees that going to Cleavland or Matco super heavy duty > brakes is a good idea, over the plans suggested Cleavland heavy duty > ones. I think I agree, but I wonder if anyone is actually using those, > and is flying. > > This is my thinking. Brakes turn motion into heat. Better brakes only > mean more heat. Maybe the Cozy gear can only tolerate the heat > generated by the heavy duty brakes, and will fail if given more heat > offered by better brakes. I know about insulating the legs, and > venting the pants, but not all the heat will just dissapate off of the > disks. > > Or is the trouble, that after the heavy duty ones have been used so > long they fade, and have generated as much heat as the super heavy > duty ones will to actually stop the plane. > > I guess my thinking us more area generating heat (triple pucks > vs. double pucks) will equal less area dissapating the heat. > > I still remember Audi on the 4000, I think, where they put the > calipers inside, toward the hub, so they could have larger rotors. Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 09:48:17 -0700 From: "LCDR James D. Newman" Subject: COZY: Re: Cozy MK IV Ch 9 Brakes Hi Tom and All, > I know the subject of brakes is loathed by all, but I worry. It's quite simple actually. Just run the numbers and use the logical system - your life will depend on this decision. > Most everyone agrees that going to Cleveland or MATCO super heavy duty brakes is a good idea, over the plans suggested Cleveland heavy duty ones. I think I agree, but I wonder if anyone is actually using those, and is flying. ~60% of all home builts are using and flying with MATCO brakes, including Mike Melville. There are several dozen builders just in this group using and some flying with the MATCO 3 puck brake system. Infinity's Forever, JD From: Epplin John A Subject: RE: COZY: Cozy MK IV Ch 9 Brakes Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 11:59:25 -0500 > -----Original Message----- > From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com [SMTP:cdenk@ix.netcom.com] [Epplin John A] > All in all I have no negative comments on the Clevelands and would do it > again. [Epplin John A] Carl; Are you using the 190,000 Ft/LB Cleveland or the 260,000 Ft/LB? I don't remember the part numbers etc. John Epplin Mk4 #467 From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 12:58:15 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Re: COZY: Re: Cozy MK IV Ch 9 Brakes Jd writes My Clevelands have 650 hours on them, a large percentage of the hobbs time spent in the air, but lots of landings. From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 17:58:50 -0500 (CDT) Subject: RE: COZY: Cozy MK IV Ch 9 Brakes Epplin writes I have the Cleveland 5.00 x5 wheel, super duty, Cleveland Part Number CWB199- 152, static capacity 1260 lbs., Kinetic Energy 192,000 ft. - lbs. From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 08:30:22 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Re: COZY: Weighing a Rutan canard EJCV writes This probably the correct way to do it, BUT!!! this is NOT the way to do it!!! Everything is relative. In this case, the datum setup on which Rutan and others have based limits is with the nose wheel DOWN, and we must follow. The difference is moving probably at least 7 lbs. by 18". This calculates to roughly a 0.10" change in the C.G. not much, but these numbers should be one consistent system. A better way to do it would be on the main gear, and a knife edge (a small diameter rod will do) at some forward point. The exact location doesn't matter as long as the contact point is parallel to the longerons (level). BUT to do this a new set of C.G. limits must established. I found my nose wheel location extended to be about 1.2" aft from the drawings. Someone correctly pointed out that it can vary greatly. Its mainly a function of the up position of the strut (if it gets high enough to have flush gear doors), the length of spring strut needed for the up location, and the radius of the arm on the actuating gear. I have thought about fabricating a longer crank, which would give me a nose higher angle, which would make it easier to get the nose wheel off the ground when forward C.G. Also from my yesterday's post, include trailing edges in dimensions determined. From: "Nat Puffer" Subject: Re: COZY: Weighing a Rutan canard Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 09:07:05 -0500 People, The approved c.g. range of the Cozy Mark IV only applies if you do the weight and balance as instructed in our Owners Manual (nose gear extended and longerons level). If you do it any other way, the approved c.g. range does not apply. This has nothing to do with the way you fly the airplane (nose gear retracted). Regards, Nat ---------- > From: EJCV@aol.com > To: cozy_builders@canard.com > Subject: COZY: Weighing a Rutan canard > Date: Saturday, October 03, 1998 1:36 AM > > It seems to me that the flexibility of the nose wheel leg and tyre makes it > impossible to fix a longitudinal position for the weight on the nose wheel and > therefore impossible to accurately find the centre of gravity. Therefore I > wieighed my Long Ez with the nose wheel retracted (that's how we fly, isn't > it?) and placed a foam support under the rubber nose button to hold the > longerons horizontal. Thus the attitude and point of contact remained stable > for the range of weights weighed and I was able to accurately locate the > moment arms of the pilot, passenger and fuel as well as the overall C.G. For > the unloaded weight, I weighed the aricraft nose-down. > > Should you decide to do it this way, remember to deduct the weight of the foam > support. Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 13:31:06 +0200 From: Rego Burger Subject: COZY: Wheel Brakes Clevelands Please this is NOT to debate what to use. Check your orders when received... according to NAT the brakes (disks) should be 3/8" thick and NOT 3/16" I ordered mine 5 yrs ago as per part number in the plans and certain suppliers catalogue. What I received has got the 3/16" disks... New Builders who have not ordered yet...make a note in your plans to include the words 3/8" disks when ordering! sigh. Rego Burger Web site: http://home.intekom.com/glen/rnb.htm e-mail home- mailto:rnb@intekom.co.za RSA...... From: "L. Wayne Hicks" Subject: COZY: Landing gear -- lead time? Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 16:35:43 -0400 A couple of questions: 1. Anyone know the current lead times on getting a landing gear from Featherlite or AeroCad? 2. Differences between Featherlite and AeroCad? (Is one better than the other) Had fun at the Canard.Com fly-in. A perfect day in Maryland. Wayne Wright and his gang did a super bang-up job, and the wonderful chow line made us all dig out the POH's and check max gross weight before leaving. There were no Cozy IV's, but several III's showed up along with many EZ's and VEZ's. __________________________________________ L. Wayne Hicks SpaceTec, Inc. Sr. Engineer 3221 North Armistead Ave 757-865-0900 phone Hampton, VA 23666 757-865-8960 fax http://www.spacetec-inc.com Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 08:24 -0500 (CDT) From: Michael Pollock Subject: Re: COZY: Landing gear -- lead time? L. Wayne Hicks writes: >1. Anyone know the current lead times on getting a landing gear from >Featherlite or AeroCad? It took featherlite 45 days to deliver my main gear leg and nose strut from when I ordered it. It is exactly what they told me.\ >2. Differences between Featherlite and AeroCad? (Is one better than the >other) Price and options. From: "Hunter Welch" Subject: Re: COZY: Landing gear -- lead time? Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 23:22:16 -0700 I have Jeffs on my plane and I would advise getting the whole thing done with tabs. Shipping costs will be a primary point to consider when deciding on AerCad or Featherlite Jeff how has the move gone?? Drop a line Bill Walsh -----Original Message----- From: Jeff S. Russell (http://www.AeroCad.com) To: Cozybuilders Date: Tuesday, October 20, 1998 6:24 PM Subject: Re: COZY: Landing gear -- lead time? >Michael Pollock wrote: > >> L. Wayne Hicks writes: >> >> >1. Anyone know the current lead times on getting a landing gear from >> >Featherlite or AeroCad? > >We have one in stock. 2 weeks at the longest if we have to make > >> It took featherlite 45 days to deliver my main gear leg and nose strut >> from when I ordered it. It is exactly what they told me.\ >> >2. Differences between Featherlite and AeroCad? (Is one better than the >> >other) >> Price and options. >We have only made them using S-2 glass and post curing them to 200 degrees. >We make them 3 different ways. >straight out of the mold and cut off at the right angle. $585.00 >sanded and the first 4 plies of UNI installed $680.00 >conduits installed, trailing edge built up, 4 plies UNI raps >and gear tabs made. $985.00 > >I think Featherlite is a litter cheaper straight out of the mold. >But the greyhound shipping cost me $76.00 to their terminal that >I had to go 40 miles to pick up. > >We ship UPS insured cross country for about $23.00 >Just facts not a sales pitch. > >-- >Jeff Russell/AeroCad Inc. E-mail: Jeff@aerocad.com >2954 Curtis King Blvd. Ft. Pierce, FL. 34946 >Shop# 561-460-8020 7:00am to 3:30pm Home# 561-334-6200 >Website: http://www.Aerocad.com >Composite workshop info: http://www.Sportair.com > Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 11:49:04 +0200 From: Jannie Versfeld Subject: COZY: Gear Design Stress Does any body know what the maximum wheel spin up drag is at gross and V/Landing. What is the design figures for both veritcal forces and drag forces on the main gear? Thanks, Jannie Versfeld Date: Wed, 04 Nov 1998 21:48:00 -0600 From: vance atkinson Subject: COZY: brakes, the rest of the story After I stopped my Vari EZE with the failed left brake I was then faced with a long trek back to the tool shed. My home base, at the time, was Camarillo airport in California. I used all the available runway stopping. Yes, I was probably 100 feet from the edge when the plane came to rest. This was in 1980 and the plane was in its test period with about 12 hours on it. I believe the runway had about 6500' that was usable. One of the things I did to help stop, was to cut the mixture. At the time I didn't even think about retracting the nose gear, which certainly would of stopped me in short order. I think, I was busy trying to save my new creation. All I could see at the end of that barn wide concrete was flipping upside-down and wrecking my 3 years of blood sweat and tears. Which I think most builders tend to do in a situation like this. After stopping I had a mile and a half to push it back to the hangar. I was in pretty good shape then but I was struggling the last 100 yards when I got to that beautiful oasis, the hangar. About 10 years ago, I related this story to a good friend of mine Herb Sanders, He just looked at me and said, "why didn't you let the idling engine push it back with you walking alongside of it, and save yourself from a possible heart attack ? I was dumbfounded. Why, "I never thought about it." That's usually how it goes in this business, its simple once you figure it out. this technique works good for flat tires also. Also works good at Oshkosh when the line people direct you to taxi on the dirt that's full of hidden holes and ruts. A person can't learn to much about aviation, 'cuz every day is a new chapter. Vance Atkinson Cozy N43CZ From: "Nat Puffer" Subject: Re: COZY: Cozy: Gear Date: Sat, 14 Nov 1998 09:17:50 -0600 Marc, I answered Jannie privately, but you have published your answer to the entire group, which is the reason for this posting. You could be supplying some bad advice. I have never seen a Featherlite main gear break in half in a hard landing (including my own) and there are an awful lot out there that have been put to the test. I did, however see an AC gear that broke in half. If a main landing gear breaks, you are going to do some serious and expensive damage. You should be aware that Featherlite makes their gear with S-glass. S-glass is about 25% stronger than E-glass, but 10 times more expensive, and you can't tell the difference in a layup. There would be a powerful incentive to reduce cost by using E-glass, so it gets down to the reputation of the supplier for honesty. But there is a little more involved than whether they are equivalent (which I am not convinced they are). I understand you can buy Windows 98 more cheaply from the Chinese (and Iraqies) than you can from Microsoft. It is known as a "Chinese copy". You should be able to buy anything more cheaply from someone who only copies, rather than creates. But can you be sure they are equivalent? Nat ---------- > From: Marc J. Zeitlin > To: Cozy Builders Mailing List > Subject: COZY: Cozy: Canopy > Date: Friday, November 13, 1998 10:50 PM > > Jannie Versfeld wrote: > > >What is the difference between the canopy for a MKIV supplied by Arcraft > >Plastics and Aircraft Spruce? > > I believe they're identical, and that A.C.S. gets their canopy from > Aircraft Plastics. Check to be sure, though. > > >Wht is the difference between the Landing struts supplied by Jeff Russel > >and Feather Lite? > > Other than the obvious difference that one is approved by Nat and the other > isn't? Nothing that I can tell. > > I bought the NOSE strut from both Aerocad and FL, and sold one of them to > another builder (don't remember which off the top of my head). As far as I > could tell (weight, density, type of glass, dimensions) they were > functionally equivalent. I bought the main gear from Aerocad after waiting > 6 weeks for the FL version and being told that it would be another 6 weeks > before I'd actually see it. The AC version looked well made, was the right > shape and density, had the right dimensions, was made from the correct > glass, and seems to work just fine (so far - plane's on gear with wheels > and brakes). From all reports, the FL version is well made and a quality > product as well - if they had delivered in 6 weeks, I would have happily > taken it. > > I'd take whichever one could give you the best price and delivery - if it's > not important to you to get it soon, flip a coin. > > > -- > Marc J. Zeitlin marcz@ultranet.com > http://www.ultranet.com/~marcz/ Date: Sat, 14 Nov 1998 17:11:43 -0500 From: David Domeier Subject: Re: COZY: Cozy: Gear Nat, re " You should be aware that Featherlite makes their gear with S-glass. S-glass is about 25% stronger than E-glass, but 10 times more expensive, and you can't tell the difference in a layup." When flying off the first phase restriction I wore out a set of tires due to too much toe in and the tires running on the outside shoulder of the tread pattern. Now, some 5 months later, I notice the main gear strut has spread to the point that the tires are running straight up to bottom tilted slightly outward. Has anyone else had their strut spread, and how much? I think the strut spread may be normal but I don't know for sure. I have an AC strut. dd MKIV N10CZ From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1998 13:36:26 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: COZY: Two Fuselage Assembly Questions Was Said Although I do frequently reply privately, many times I respond to the group for 2 reasons: 1: Probably there are others that can benefit. 2: My thinking may be flawed, since many of the issues are in a gray area,[there are TWO ways to walk around the town square, one with the wind behind you and the other the sun in your eyes; Both end in the same result - the other corner] and I appreciate the replys (possibly private, if I have hit a sore spot, or public to enlighten everone.) and I will correct my earlier comments. If it is a safety issue, I will certainly comment. One think I learned in a teamwork class, discuss the issue, not the persons. i.e. The afternoon shift crankshafts are out of tolerance; NOT Joe's crew messed up the crankshafts. I would be curious to know how it was determined not all of the main gear struts used are not the same quality materials?? Did someone send a sample to a testing laboratory. When making statements make sure you can prove the statements are accurate, otherwise if necessary to bring the subject up, qualify with you confidence level, as a question, etc. Hopefully someone with accurate data will clear the issue, or as a minimum put an alert out. From: "Nat Puffer" Subject: COZY: Landing gear specs. Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 13:50:38 -0600 Dear Cozy Builders, We use the same specifications and same supplier for our landing gear as Burt Rutan used for the Long EZ. We specify S-glass, because of its high strength and inspite of its high cost, pressure molding to eliminate any voids and to eliminate excess epoxy, and elevated temperature cure. All of these specs are intended to maximize strength against high impact shock loads, and to prevent deformation, like spreading over time. Featherlite is the only supplier we have provided these specs to, the only supplier committed to following them, the only supplier we have tested, and the only supplier we have authorized. There has been some discussion as to whether the gear from unauthorized suppliers is equivalent. We can tell you this. 1) We have personally used 4 main gear struts from Featherlite, and seen many others in use in the projects we have visited, and they were all of consistently top quality. 2) We have seen one "look alike" unauthorized gear which broke in half when subjected to a high impact load. 3) We have seen one "look alike" unauthorized gear which was wrapped with tri-ax and looked very bad. 4) The most shocking thing we have just learned, one of our builders just told us his "look alike" unauthorized gear has spread in 5 months so the wheels are no longer canted in, but the bottom tilted slightly outward, inspite of toe-in, which tends to counteract spread. Our Featherlite gear on our Mark IV prototype hasn't spread that we can measure in 10 years, and our Featherlite gear on our Mark IV plans model hasn't spread that we can measure in almost 7 years. I called the Higgins, Wolcotts, Sligars, and Bibbees, all flying Mark IVs for 1 to 4 years, all with Featherlite main gear struts, and none have had this problem. 5) Another thing we just learned, one of our builders, who does not wish to be quoted by name, has written to us privately that several years ago when he investigated, "look alike" unauthorized gear were being made from E-glass and may still be, for all he knows. He goes on to say, "I think that anyone who purchases unapproved parts just doesn't want to hear that there may be problems with them, and that's why they become defensive." Although we do not recommend that you purchase gear struts from an unauthorized supplier, if you do, to avoid any doubt as to what you are buying, we suggest that you get a warrantee that 100% S-glass was used, that it was pressure molded, and cured at an elevated temperature, and ask for a copy of the invoice proving that S-glass was, in fact, purchased for its manufacture. At 3M, where I worked for 30 years, it was impressed on us many times that the least expensive way to do any job was "right the first time". We are trying to help our builders do this by arranging suppliers that follow our specifications. We hope you appreciate it. Best regards, Nat Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1998 09:36:22 -0500 From: David Domeier Subject: Re: COZY: Landing gear, pedals and other misinformation re “THE TRUTH IS: Our AeroCanard gear legs are and always have been made of S-glass. If we advertise that we use S2 in the gear, then that's what we sell.I will be happy to provide copies of the invoices for the S-glass. We havenever used E-glass in them. The gear is laid up in a 2 part mold then pressurized. After a 24 hour cure, an 8 hour ramp post cure is applied in our oven. With the epoxy used, this should give more heat resistance than with other gear. Only Velocity uses E-glass in their gear that I know of.” Jeff, I bought a main gear strut complete from your company on June 3, 1994. It would appear in comparing notes with other Cozy drivers that my gear strut is somewhat more “flexible” than the FL unit, for whatever reason. I do not think this is problem per se, but considering that I have not flown the airplane over 1800 pounds gross, I am somewhat concerned and hope it does not get worse. If my memory serves my correct, when I received the shipment from you, I thought “this strut is not wrapped with RAF UNI” but rather a bi or tri direction glass, type unknown. Do you have records that would confirm what glass you were using at that time? Also, you’ve built a number of airplanes over the years and I assume you’ve used your gear system, what experience are you having with main gear spread? dd Cozy MKIV N10CZ From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1998 10:21:09 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: COZY: Landing gear, pedals and other misinformation David Domeier writes A relatively easy test would be: Jack the airplane until the wheels are well clear of the floor, measure the distance between 2 points near the ends of the strut, take a fish scale tied to the 2 ends of the strut and apply a known force, and remeasure. If this is done to struts in the same condition (same numbers of layups, support conditions, etc), the results should be the same, within tolerance limits. Yes, this means having available 2 or more struts, installed, or not. The results could be reported as force necessary to deflect the same distance, or distance necessary to generate the same force. From: N11TE@aol.com Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1998 16:08:17 EST Subject: Re: COZY: Landing gear, pedals and other misinformation In a message dated 11/19/98 10:29:22 AM CST, cdenk@ix.netcom.com writes: > David Domeier writes > A relatively easy test would be: Jack the airplane until the wheels are > well clear of the floor, measure the distance between 2 points near the > ends of the strut, take a fish scale tied to the 2 ends of the strut and > apply a known force, and remeasure. > > If this is done to struts in the same condition (same numbers of layups, > support conditions, etc), the results should be the same, within tolerance > limits. > > Yes, this means having available 2 or more struts, installed, or not. The > results could be reported as force necessary to deflect the same distance, > or distance necessary to generate the same force. > David: I purchased my AeroCanard maingear at about the same period of time that you did. My plane is not flying yet but my gear was mounted quite a while ago. (The plane has been sitting on and off gear for years -- not at full weight, though.) The quality of this AeroCanard gear appeared quite high when received and I have not noticed any problems at all. I have also flown in Jeff's plane several times (once at MAX gross AND EMERGENCY LANDING) and know that his gear works properly on his plane. There are several things that come to mind that might play a part in your results. I guess my first question would be to ask if you have discussed the situation directly with the manufacturer? If so, what was the result? I would like to suggest that we all take this step before making any disparaging reports about any product on this forum. Then, if not satisfied, as a builder I would certainly like to be made aware of any such situation. If it makes sense to test in the manner Carl Denk proposes, (I'd be surprised if it has not already been done) I would be happy to volunteer my gear as one of the struts to test. After all, it appears I now have a vested interest in your question. Tom Ellis Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1998 20:39:31 -0500 From: "Jeff S. Russell (http://www.AeroCad.com)" Subject: Re: COZY: Landing gear cdenk@ix.netcom.com wrote: > > David Domeier writes > A relatively easy test would be: Jack the airplane until the wheels are > well clear of the floor, measure the distance between 2 points near the > ends of the strut, take a fish scale tied to the 2 ends of the strut and > apply a known force, and remeasure. > > If this is done to struts in the same condition (same numbers of layups, > support conditions, etc), the results should be the same, within tolerance > limits. > > Yes, this means having available 2 or more struts, installed, or not. The > results could be reported as force necessary to deflect the same distance, > or distance necessary to generate the same force. This is what we did on the 1st gear that we made. We check the deflection and weight against the FL gear. A T/G check was made after a 8 hour post cure. We also tried 3 different epoxy systems and found that EZ poxy with 87 hardener was the best. The AeroPoxy had the worst T/G test of 160 degrees. The EZ poxy went as high as 240. We sell our gear 3 different ways. With no raps, with the first raps and all the way to the gear tabs. We have NEVER used triaxial cloth to rap the gear. Only Biaxial or UNI or both. The only thing that comes to mind is that high heat, not setting The gear after flight, or after backing up could have caused the Gear to take a different set. Our gear is over 4 years old with Out this problem. We still have a FL gear without raps. I will make another AC gear without raps and test with the strain gauge again to see if there is any difference. Gear creep is covered in the Long-EZ and Cozy plans. Why do customers that think there is a problem do not approach the manufacture. We have nothing to hide. The gears have been made several times at Oshkosh and Sun-N-fun workshops. -- Jeff Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1998 22:19:49 -0500 From: David Domeier Subject: Re: COZY: Landing gear, pedals and other misinformation Tom, re "I guess my first question would be to ask if you have discussed the situation directly with the manufacturer? If so, what was the result? I would like to suggest that we all take this step before making any disparaging reports about any product on this forum." I'm not disparaging Jeff's gear system nor do I ignore AC - I am merely stating that my gear strut has spread somewhat (something other builders are bound to be interested in) and would like to know if this is a common anomaly with the MKIV? That information is not available from any source but Cozy pilots and the only place for me to get it is on this forum. I know with some LEZ's it is a problem and we know the fix for it (unload the gear to prevent an out camber set) but I had not heard of the phenomena on the Cozy MKIV. I made the decision to use AC some time ago and will stay with it. I’ve made several less than pleasant landings and must report the strut has not malfunctioned or failed. In one instance, I was trying to align the airplane with the runway in a cross wind and touched down with one brake locked due to too much rudder pressure. The wheel and strut took quite a shock and I was very concerned about the tabs coming loose or the bulkheads giving way, but an inspection revealed everything quite secure. There are no cracks where the axle bolts to the strut. I feel the AC strut is “flexible” because it has sprung me back into the air a couple times after a hard landing. It also has provided for a number of very pleasant soft grease jobs. As designer of the MKIV, Nat takes a different cut on this as he must. He has not tested the AC unit and therefore can not sign off on it. This is something the individual builder has to do. (along with accepting the word of the company making the product that it has been tested and built to reasonable standards) At this point in time I do not consider the spread to be a major problem if it doesn’t get worse. If it does, I will report it to the forum and Aerocad. dd p.s. (Nat, my employer is TWA not UAL. If it were UAL, I’d be walking on water and flying a Lancair IV) From: "Nat Puffer" Subject: COZY: Good news/Bad news Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1998 15:39:06 -0600 Dear Cozy Builders, As the designer of the Cozy, and co-designer of the landing gear, and the chooser of the authorized supplier, you could say that I have a proprietary interest in whether there are any complaints about the Cozy landing gear. There was a complaint by a close friend, David Domeier, ex military pilot, ex Varieze builder, United Airlines Captain, and Mark IV builder/pilot. He posted on the internet that after 5 months of flying, he thought his landing gear had spread so that there was no longer any camber in the wheels. He had purchased this gear from and unauthorized supplier. I talked to him and asked him to get some measurements for me which I could compare with own plans built Mark IV. He did and he was right. The camber is no longer there, which indicated his gear had spread. This is what prompted our continuing investigation. So far, there is some good news, and some bad news. The good news is that Featherlite has never had any complaint about their Long EZ, Cozy III, or Mark IV gear spreading. There hasn't been any spreading on my plans model Mark IV or prototype going back to 1988, as far as we can determine. The camber is still there. I started calling Mark IV builders who were already flying. I could not find any Mark IV builder/flyer with a Featherlite gear that detected any problem with the gear spreading. The bad news is that I found THREE (3) builders who purchased "look alike" unauthorized gear and ALL THREE believed they had a problem with their gear spreading (names available on request). We could not find any Mark IV builders already flying with unauthorized gear who did not have a problem. If there is a problem with the gear spreading, it means that the gear is not as strong as it should be. This could affect ability of the gear to absorb energy and the breaking strength. I do not wish to speculate on the possible safety implications. When I consider what would be involved in replacing a defective landing gear after a plane is flying, there is no way I would want to take that risk myself, or let any of my builders take that risk without the full knowlege of what might happen. I don't think a "money-back guarantee" would be enough. I am doing a little soul-searching myself, because I helped the widow of a builder-friend sell a project that included an "unauthorized landing gear strut". I am wondering if I should offer to replace it at my cost with a Featherlite strut. It would help if we knew whether there was some change in manufacture, or whether all gear produced by this supplier were made the same way. Whether a landing gear is made of S-glass or something else is really not the question. The question is whether it meets the designer's requirements. Featherlite's is the only one which does, backed by some rather convincing evidence. Until I am assured that this problem has been corrected, we will make it MANDATORY that builders use only authorized Featherlite gear. If builders do otherwise, at least they should know the possible consequences. We will continue this investigation, update our builders on any new developments, and cover it in the next newsletter. Best regards, Nat Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1998 05:59:38 -0500 From: "Jeff S. Russell (http://www.AeroCad.com)" Subject: Re: COZY: Landing gear Carl, as a respected builder/owner. I would ask if he would be willing to do a test comparison of an AC gear against a FL gear. I am willing to send a gear to him if Nat would be also willing to send a FL gear to him. Unrapped and posted cured. This would generate a report on / if there are differences from a non biased already flying builder. Just a suggestion, what do you think. Carl and Nat? I am willing to work together on this to get to a quick solution. Thanks for letting me know. -- Jeff From: "Nat Puffer" Subject: COZY: Landing gear spread Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1998 09:52:36 -0600 Cozy builders, Most engineers are trained to make sure they define the problem before they rush out with solutions. The problem of landing gear spread needs to be defined, and we need some accurate data. As far as we know, this problem, if it is going to occur, only occurs with flying airplanes over a period of time. It so happens that most people flying Cozy Mark IVs do not participate in the builders chat group. So the best way to contact builders who are flying Mark IVs is through the newsletters. When the gear spreads over time, it changes the camber of the wheels. Measuring camber is the easiest non-destructive test. I plan to ask each builder/flyer to measure camber (each in the same way), after moving the airplane forward and then backward, to remove the influence of toe-in., report the data back to me and I will publish it in the newsletter. The data is easy to measure. I have already done it on my Mark IV, and on a brand-new 3-place which hasn't flown yet. Dave Domeier has already done it on his landing gear, and Gene Davis will measure it shortly, and I hope to get a few more to do it soon. This would be important information for each builder to record in his aircraft log book at every annual, so he can follow the change, if there is any. I don't have a record of who has unauthorized landing gear, I have only stumbled onto 3 so far, but this is one question we will ask. The 3-place uses the same gear as the Long EZ, so "setting" the gear may be a factor. The Mark IV gear is substantially stronger. I very seldom "set" the gear because it didn't seem to make any obvious difference. Our Mark IV will soon be 7 years old, approaching 500 hours, several hundred landings (a few pretty bad), and stored in a hangar which sometimes reaches 120 deg. F. In the meantime, lets not all rush out to make tests which might have no bearing on matter being investigated, namely, spread over time with flying airplanes. Best regards, Nat From: "Nat Puffer" Subject: Re: COZY: landing gear spread Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1998 09:23:59 -0600 Vance, I believe that Burt Rutan purposely designed the Long EZ strut so the wheels would have the camber they do. The landing gear is a spring, and I think the camber is intentional to direct the landing shock loads perpendicular to the direction the spring will move (up and out). I will try to confirm this. At any rate the Mark IV gear was designed so the camber would be very close to that on the Long EZ. The Mark IV gear is also substantially stronger. I very seldom "set" the gear, and I haven't detected any change in camber after 7 years, 450 hours, parking in a sometimes 120 deg. hangar, and landings which aren't quite as smoothe as yours. Before advising builders to purposely change the camber, I think we ought to confirm the purpose. Regards, Nat ---------- > From: vance atkinson > To: cozy_builders@canard.com > Cc: canard-aviators@canard.com > Subject: COZY: landing gear spread > Date: Friday, November 20, 1998 9:16 AM > > I now have about 1300 hours on my COZY 3 with the original featherlite > landing gear. Most of my landings are smooth but, in checking out a > few individuals, and a few lapses of landing memory, there have been a > few clunkers. The gear is normal in all respects as far as I can tell. > > Several years ago (about 10 I believe) I had a trip in the jet to San > Diego and stayed several days. Al Coha lived there then and showed me > around the local EZ chapter. I saw lots of EZ's and one of the things > I noticed was these funny looking wedges between the axial and the > fiber glass strut. So I asked, "What's that?" I was told that Burt had > designed too much camber in the gear and this little wedge allowed the > tires to wear normally. That is, you don't have to reverse the tire > on the rim to get max life from the tire. I always thought the gear > on the EZ family (including the COZYs) looked a little "Bowlegged", > especially in flight. I thought about that for a little while and > decided to let my gear "spread" until the tire tread was perpendicular > to the runway. This amounted to about a year of "no lifting and > relieving the gear after landing." At that time I started relieving > the gear in the normal manor. I am on my 3rd set of tires at this > time and they are only 30 to 50% worn. > > I recommend this procedure to set the gear correctly. Vance Atkinson > COZY N43CZ From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1998 07:49:42 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: COZY: Good news/Bad news On 11/19/98 22:56:18 you wrote: > > > >Nat Puffer wrote: > >> Until I am assured that this problem has been corrected, we will >> make it MANDATORY that builders use only authorized Featherlite gear. > >I expect that there is a good reason but I don't know what it is: Why isn't >the LG strut an appropriate candidate for being homebuilt? This is a >PLANS-built airplane. What is unique about this particular part such that I >can't build it myself? I don't really want to, but the Featherlite (and >Aerocad, for that matter) stut seems expensive, especially when one considers >that overall price of the plane. If you compares the cost of a pre-cut core >from Featherlite for, say, a canard core with the cost of the raw foam, you can >exprapolate that a plans-built strut (if possible) might be a fraction of the >cost of the Featherlite strut. > >-- >Jody Hart >New Orleans, LA > >Cozy Mark IV plans no. 648 >Chapter 5, see latest progress at: >home.gs.verio.net/~jodyhart/home.html >N359JH (reserved) > > > > Tooling is the big issue, the mold in which the strut is laid up, oven, curing temperatures; second but very important is the construction technique (partly workmanship) including what works and doesn't. Undoubtly there are methods that are propriety, and result in the a quality product. There is much talk of doing ones self, but there are items not taking advantage of, i.e. wheel pants molds are available through CSA. From: JHTanstaaf@aol.com Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1998 23:04:14 EST Subject: Fwd: COZY: Landing gear In a message dated 11/19/98 8:44:15 PM Eastern Standard Time, jraero@gte.net writes: << Why do customers that think there is a problem do not approach the manufacture. >> He's got a point here. A good rule of thumb should be if you haven't tried to deal with the source, you can't complain about the product. On the other hand, if after you've tried to get the manufacturer to solve your problem to no avail, we'd all be better off if you let everyone here know of the problem. That should help keep vendors appraised of their product's real performance, or keep them honest if they think they can slide something past an uniformed public. From ???@??? Fri Nov 20 23:05:01 1998 Return-Path: owner-cozy_builders@betaweb.com Received: from twc2.betaweb.com (majordomo@betaweb.com [206.43.209.18]) by acestes-fe0.ultra.net (8.8.8/ult/n20340/mtc.v2) with ESMTP id UAA05221 for ; Fri, 20 Nov 1998 20:27:15 -0500 (EST) Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by twc2.betaweb.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id UAA06070 for cozy_builders-list; Fri, 20 Nov 1998 20:20:18 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: twc2.betaweb.com: majordomo set sender to owner-cozy_builders@betaweb.com using -f Received: from smtp2.mailsrvcs.net (smtp2.gte.net [207.115.153.31]) by twc2.betaweb.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id UAA06062 for ; Fri, 20 Nov 1998 20:20:08 -0500 Received: from jraero (1Cust217.tnt1.mia1.da.uu.net [153.35.28.217]) by smtp2.mailsrvcs.net with SMTP id TAA20811 for ; Fri, 20 Nov 1998 19:18:07 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: <365615D1.4CD8@gte.net> Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1998 20:22:25 -0500 From: "Jeff S. Russell (http://www.AeroCad.com)" Organization: AeroCad Inc. X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E-KIT (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Cozybuilders Subject: Re: COZY: homemade gear References: <199811192350.QAA05784@enterprise.extremezone.com> <3654F66E.9D3F3B8B@communique.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-cozy_builders@betaweb.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: "Jeff S. Russell (http://www.AeroCad.com)" X-UIDL: 62d41ebdce3b4c1224b50ce2c0fa8536 Joseph H. Hart IV wrote: > > Nat Puffer wrote: > > > Until I am assured that this problem has been corrected, we will > > make it MANDATORY that builders use only authorized Featherlite gear. > > I expect that there is a good reason but I don't know what it is: Why isn't > the LG strut an appropriate candidate for being homebuilt? This is a > PLANS-built airplane. What is unique about this particular part such that I > can't build it myself? I don't really want to, but the Featherlite (and > Aerocad, for that matter) stut seems expensive, especially when one considers > that overall price of the plane. If you compares the cost of a pre-cut core > from Featherlite for, say, a canard core with the cost of the raw foam, you can > exprapolate that a plans-built strut (if possible) might be a fraction of the > cost of the Featherlite strut. Jody, it will take you 15 lbs of S-glass @ $190.00 and about 17 lbs of epoxy resin @ $120.00 and a mold. It take us 7 man hours to pull from 10 rolls through a machine to pack the mold full. Then you MUST have a resin system that will not exotherm as it jells. Pressure is then applied until cured. Then you MUST ramp post cure to get max T/G. Our first nose strut was made using a single roll of S-glass. It took 2 people 3 hours to wet out enought glass to fill up the mold. Using the machine and (10) $190.00 rolls it takes 2 guys 15 min. to do the same thing. you could try to un-roll one spool of S-glass to make 10 rolls but the glass could have a better chance of snags when pulling it through a machine. Price of S-glass just went up to $190.00 from $150.00 from ACS ans Wicks. I have seen a few builders make their own with good results. Hope that helps -- Jeff Russell/AeroCad Inc. E-mail: Jeff@aerocad.com 2954 Curtis King Blvd. Ft. Pierce, FL. 34946 Shop# 561-460-8020 7:00am to 3:30pm Home# 561-334-6200 Website: http://www.Aerocad.coFrom ???@??? Fri Nov 20 23:05:01 1998 Return-Path: owner-cozy_builders@betaweb.com Received: from twc2.betaweb.com (majordomo@betaweb.com [206.43.209.18]) by acestes-fe0.ultra.net (8.8.8/ult/n20340/mtc.v2) with ESMTP id UAA05221 for ; Fri, 20 Nov 1998 20:27:15 -0500 (EST) Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by twc2.betaweb.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id UAA06070 for cozy_builders-list; Fri, 20 Nov 1998 20:20:18 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: twc2.betaweb.com: majordomo set sender to owner-cozy_builders@betaweb.com using -f Received: from smtp2.mailsrvcs.net (smtp2.gte.net [207.115.153.31]) by twc2.betaweb.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id UAA06062 for ; Fri, 20 Nov 1998 20:20:08 -0500 Received: from jraero (1Cust217.tnt1.mia1.da.uu.net [153.35.28.217]) by smtp2.mailsrvcs.net with SMTP id TAA20811 for ; Fri, 20 Nov 1998 19:18:07 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: <365615D1.4CD8@gte.net> Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1998 20:22:25 -0500 From: "Jeff S. Russell (http://www.AeroCad.com)" Organization: AeroCad Inc. X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E-KIT (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Cozybuilders Subject: Re: COZY: homemade gear References: <199811192350.QAA05784@enterprise.extremezone.com> <3654F66E.9D3F3B8B@communique.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-cozy_builders@betaweb.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: "Jeff S. Russell (http://www.AeroCad.com)" X-UIDL: 62d41ebdce3b4c1224b50ce2c0fa8536 Joseph H. Hart IV wrote: > > Nat Puffer wrote: > > > Until I am assured that this problem has been corrected, we will > > make it MANDATORY that builders use only authorized Featherlite gear. > > I expect that there is a good reason but I don't know what it is: Why isn't > the LG strut an appropriate candidate for being homebuilt? This is a > PLANS-built airplane. What is unique about this particular part such that I > can't build it myself? I don't really want to, but the Featherlite (and > Aerocad, for that matter) stut seems expensive, especially when one considers > that overall price of the plane. If you compares the cost of a pre-cut core > from Featherlite for, say, a canard core with the cost of the raw foam, you can > exprapolate that a plans-built strut (if possible) might be a fraction of the > cost of the Featherlite strut. Jody, it will take you 15 lbs of S-glass @ $190.00 and about 17 lbs of epoxy resin @ $120.00 and a mold. It take us 7 man hours to pull from 10 rolls through a machine to pack the mold full. Then you MUST have a resin system that will not exotherm as it jells. Pressure is then applied until cured. Then you MUST ramp post cure to get max T/G. Our first nose strut was made using a single roll of S-glass. It took 2 people 3 hours to wet out enought glass to fill up the mold. Using the machine and (10) $190.00 rolls it takes 2 guys 15 min. to do the same thing. you could try to un-roll one spool of S-glass to make 10 rolls but the glass could have a better chance of snags when pulling it through a machine. Price of S-glass just went up to $190.00 from $150.00 from ACS ans Wicks. I have seen a few builders make their own with good results. Hope that helps -- Jeff Russell/AeroCad Inc. E-mail: Jeff@aerocad.com 2954 Curtis King Blvd. Ft. Pierce, FL. 34946 Shop# 561-460-8020 7:00am to 3:30pm Home# 561-334-6200 Website: http://www.Aerocad.com Composite workshop info: http://www.Sportair.com From: "L. Wayne Hicks" Subject: RE: COZY: Mandatory Featherlite Gear Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1998 09:32:12 -0500 -----Original Message----- From: Nat Puffer [SMTP:cozy@extremezone.com] Sent: Thursday, November 19, 1998 4:39 PM To: Cozy_builders@canard.com Subject: COZY: Good news/Bad news Dear Cozy Builders, Until I am assured that this problem has been corrected, we will make it MANDATORY that builders use only authorized Featherlite gear. Nat [L. Wayne Hicks] As an authorized supplier and given the popularity of the IV, you'd think that Featherlite would now be required to keep a small inventory on hand. Having to wait 45-60 days for parts and materials can put a big kink in schedules and budgets. Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1998 09:01:41 -0600 From: Tom Brusehaver Subject: Re: COZY: Mandatory Featherlite Gear >As an authorized supplier and given the popularity of the IV, you'd think >that Featherlite would now be required to keep a small inventory on hand. > Having to wait 45-60 days for parts and materials can put a big kink in >schedules and budgets. I have to agree here. I adjusted my schedule last summer to not do the gear, since it was going to take 30 days to get the gear, and then put my money into other parts of the plane. It didn't affect anything at the time, but if I would have been able to get the gear, I could have stayed in the order the plans suggested. If a vendor knows how many plans are sold, they ought to be able to guess that 1 in 4 or so will be built (I hope it is higher :-). If they are getting orders for 3-4 gear sets a month, they ought ot be in continuous production. I realize that they may have a set or two sitting around for a week (maybe), but it'd make people happier. I do understand that Featherlite is a small shop, I am not sure how much business they get outside of us homebuilders (unlike Brock). They probably don't quite have the resources to keep an inventory of a relativly expensive bit of glass. From: "L. Wayne Hicks" Subject: COZY: Tips for fairing Landing Gear Trailing Edge? Date: Mon, 30 Nov 1998 08:18:48 -0500 Hi Ya'll: I'm ready to attach the big soda straws (vinyl tubing actually) and feather in the trailing edge of the landing gear: 1. Anyone have a good builder's tip for feathering the trailing edge's that's better than using the aluminum tape? 2. In normal cruise flight, I know the Cozy is supposed to fly a few degrees nose up. Taking this into account, how should one build up the trailing edge? Is the gear cross-section at the correct angle to flight? Do I need to feather up, straight back, or downward to achieve this level flight profile? I've not been able to make it through the Chapter 9 archives yet, so I apologize if the answer's there. __________________________________________ L. Wayne Hicks SpaceTec, Inc. Sr. Engineer 3221 North Armistead Ave 757-865-0900 phone Hampton, VA 23666 757-865-8960 fax http://www.spacetec-inc.com From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Mon, 30 Nov 1998 08:56:50 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: COZY: Tips for fairing Landing Gear Trailing Edge? Check the CSA newsletters about 7 years ago. If don't have, ask, I'll have to scan and attach. Terry took pictures and wrote up how to. Basically put the strut forward edge down on the workbench, but the top shimmed up as if the bench is vertical. Then with cardboard make a mold or jig. From: SWrightFLY@aol.com Date: Mon, 30 Nov 1998 10:11:37 EST Subject: Re: COZY: Tips for fairing Landing Gear Trailing Edge? In a message dated 11/30/98 8:59:07 AM Central Standard Time, cdenk@ix.netcom.com writes: << Basically put the strut forward edge down on the workbench, but the top shimmed up as if the bench is vertical. Then with cardboard make a mold or jig. >> I am getting ready to build farings on my main gear and flow the shape into the top of the wheel pants all of which is mounted on the plane. Any suggestions for the correct airfoil shape and how to transfer the correct shape with pour in place foam on to the gear legs would be appreciated. Steve Wright Stagger EZ N9-700EZ Date: Mon, 30 Nov 1998 10:43:28 -0500 From: Bulent Aliev Subject: Re: COZY: Tips for fairing Landing Gear Trailing Edge? Hi Wayne and all, I did my trailing edge on the landing gear a bit different, taking in to account the high angle of attack of the strut in flight. My TE is longer and feathered up as you go closer to the fuselage. Instead of the al. foil I used 5" wide sheet metal fence covered in duct tape, attached do the strut with small screws. This way you can adjust the angle and taper of the fence to your liking and use the edge for your cut off point of the t. edge. On the other side you can install the straws along the strut. I am very pleased with the results and I ended up with perfect curve of the t.e. I have a photo that can be e mailed to people interested to see or you can call me with questions. Regards Bulent (954) 524-3284 Date: Mon, 30 Nov 1998 08:41:01 -0700 Subject: COZY: Re: Tips for fairing Landing Gear Trailing Edge? From: "Thomas Kennedy" Re: Tips for fairing Landing Gear Trailing Edge? L. Wayne Hicks  SpaceTec, Inc. writes:

1. Anyone have a good builder's tip for feathering the trailing edge's
that's better than using the aluminum tape?

I used a 2" piece of vinyl 'T' shaped threshold strip that I purchased from the local Home Depot. Cutting the 'T' off the back of vinyl strip leaves you with a reasonably rigid, 1/16" vinyl strip that will bend nicely around the strut. Use box sealing tape over the vinyl strip for release and then use wide masking tape on the back side to hold the strip in place against the strut.

Using this method, I had good results and obtained a clean, ripple-free, trailing strut edge.

Thomas Kennedy
#248
p.s. Ch. 14, the spar is looking good.
 From ???@??? Mon Nov 30 22:07:50 1998 Return-Path: owner-cozy_builders@betaweb.com Received: from twc2.betaweb.com (majordomo@betaweb.com [206.43.209.18]) by acestes-fe0.ultra.net (8.8.8/ult/n20340/mtc.v2) with ESMTP id MAA23831 for ; Mon, 30 Nov 1998 12:03:55 -0500 (EST) Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by twc2.betaweb.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id MAA29500 for cozy_builders-list; Mon, 30 Nov 1998 12:04:25 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: twc2.betaweb.com: majordomo set sender to owner-cozy_builders@betaweb.com using -f Received: from pop02.globecomm.net (pop02.globecomm.net [206.253.129.186]) by twc2.betaweb.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id MAA29494 for ; Mon, 30 Nov 1998 12:04:23 -0500 Received: from altavista.net ([169.204.41.233]) by pop02.globecomm.net (8.9.0/8.8.0) with ESMTP id MAA16412 for ; Mon, 30 Nov 1998 12:01:30 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3662CF5F.32818416@altavista.net> Date: Mon, 30 Nov 1998 09:01:20 -0800 From: Eric Westland X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.06 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "'Cozy Builders'" Subject: Re: COZY: Tips for fairing Landing Gear Trailing Edge? References: <01BE1C3A.0EF87F40@hicks@spacetec-inc.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-cozy_builders@betaweb.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Eric Westland X-UIDL: b3cdcec9397ec5fffe741c5ea0c91634 L. Wayne Hicks wrote: > Hi Ya'll: > > I'm ready to attach the big soda straws (vinyl tubing actually) and feather > in the trailing edge of the landing gear: I can't remember exactly how I supported the edge, but I've already seen some pretty good ideas posted. What I would do if I was to do it over again is find the biggest diameter straws I could find. I don't think the thickness of the wall maters any since it's just a conduit, but you may decide later to use teflon brake lines in the strut and you will want to have enough room to thread it through. Eric Westland From: Epplin John A Subject: RE: COZY: Tips for fairing Landing Gear Trailing Edge? Date: Mon, 30 Nov 1998 10:59:05 -0600 > -----Original Message----- > From: SWrightFLY@aol.com [SMTP:SWrightFLY@aol.com] > >> > I am getting ready to build farings on my main gear and flow the shape > into > the top of the wheel pants all of which is mounted on the plane. Any > suggestions for the correct airfoil shape and how to transfer the correct > shape with pour in place foam on to the gear legs would be appreciated. > Steve Wright > Stagger EZ > N9-700EZ [Epplin John A] I used some poster board taped to the gear strut and fuselage under the strut. Make sure the bottom joint is well taped, if it leaks you will have a mess! Tape between the gear strut and bulkheads etc at the mounting tab edges. There will be gaps at the forward and aft edges that you can pour foam into. I made 2 or 3 pours, don't try to fill it at once. This got the bottom side almost to shape, minimal carving required. The poster board came free from the foam quite easy. The top, remember I turned the A/C upside down, can be poured up fairly well in 2 or three pours but will require more shaping. I then glassed with 2 bid. From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Mon, 30 Nov 1998 19:30:46 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: COZY: Tips for fairing Landing Gear Trailing Edge? On 11/30/98 17:02:42 you wrote: > >Carl, you don't miss a beat! The small screws are on the compression side and very short. >The cut in to the strut above the axle to accommodate the brake caliper is at a much more stressful >point and the strut is the thinnest. So Carl, I don't think there is a danger there, but still you >have more experience and knowledge and may be right? > >cdenk@ix.netcom.com wrote: > >> Was said > breaking strands, but causing stress risers. Hot glue, clamps, and other no destructive methods are >> available. > > > The holes may be on what is normally the compression side when on the ground, but that becomes tension in the air (and lower magnitude), but side loads (crosswind landings) and vibration will cause stress reversal. Probably not an issue, since loads are lower, but generally don't like interupting the line of stress on important members. From: "L. Wayne Hicks" Subject: COZY: Results (?) of Landing Gear Trailing Edge Method Date: Tue, 1 Dec 1998 08:05:29 -0500 Cozyites: Thanks to those who responded so quickly with suggestions on how to feather in the trailing edge on my landing gear. I used thick poster board: 1. Cut two patterns to match the gear legs and used these as the "fences". 2. Applied duct tape onto the leg side of the patterns for mold release and drew reference lines. 3. Wetted out the 2-BID layups and stuck them onto the patterns. 4. After micro'ing, it was a simple matter of positioning the templates into the right locations per the reference lines. If others want to use this method, I suggest pulling really hard from the ends of the template. Otherwise the center section of the template (and 2-BID tapes) elevate too far off the surface and won't match the compound curvature you're looking for. PS--> There's absolutely nothing wrong with using the aluminum tape. I purposely wanted to locate the trailing edge a little higher and I found the tape a little too flimsy. __________________________________________ L. Wayne Hicks SpaceTec, Inc. Sr. Engineer 3221 North Armistead Ave 757-865-0900 phone Hampton, VA 23666 757-865-8960 fax http://www.spacetec-inc.com From: "L. Wayne Hicks" Subject: COZY: 13 UND strips for 2nd Torsional Wraps? Date: Thu, 3 Dec 1998 09:12:12 -0500 Cozyites: Just need a little reassurance... Do you really need all 13 strips of UND for the 2nd torsional wraps for the main landing gear strut? I started cutting the cloth last night and wow, it looks like an awful lot of cloth to cover one simple landing gear strut. With a 38-inch wide UND cut on a 30-degree bias, I get 76-inch strips. The landing gear is 95 inches total. I stopped cutting at strip #9. Should I continue to strip #13, or is my logic flawed and I don't understand homebuilding? :-) __________________________________________ L. Wayne Hicks SpaceTec, Inc. Sr. Engineer 3221 North Armistead Ave 757-865-0900 phone Hampton, VA 23666 757-865-8960 fax http://www.spacetec-inc.com From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Thu, 3 Dec 1998 10:05:10 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: COZY: 13 UND strips for 2nd Torsional Wraps? I forgot how many the Cosy Classic required, but with Terry Schubert's suggestion, I added 2 more. The strut is made of straight fibers running lengthwise. Compare this to a bundle (6 or 10 pieces) of soda straws, twist the ends. You will easily be able to rotate one end relative to the other. Now take and wrap scotch tape spiral wise in one direction. Notice now how much stiffer it got when twisting in the direction to tighten the tape. The torsion (diagonal tension) reinforcement is needed for this action. The torsion comes from the loads (braking and wheel spinup) not being axial (applied on the center of gravity of the crossection). Since the center of gravity of the section does not follow a straight line, torsion results in addition to the center of wheel contact being offset. Don't do less than the instructions, maybe more. There have been EZ's that have had torsion failures blamed on heat from the brakes. It could be contributed by improper layups of th torsion. i.e. fibers not straight or correct angle, or epoxy not coming to strength. P.s. I didn't do the soda straws myself, but it should be an inexpensive, quick demo. Date: Thu, 03 Dec 1998 23:54:56 -0500 From: "Marc J. Zeitlin" Subject: Fwd: COZY: 13 UND strips for 2nd Torsional Wraps? Wayne Hicks asks; >Do you really need all 13 strips of UND for the 2nd torsional wraps for the >main landing gear strut? > >I started cutting the cloth last night and wow, it looks like an awful lot >of cloth to cover one simple landing gear strut. With a 38-inch wide UND >cut on a 30-degree bias, I get 76-inch strips. The landing gear is 95 >inches total. I stopped cutting at strip #9. Should I continue to strip >#13, or is my logic flawed and I don't understand homebuilding? :-) I did this a long time ago, but my reading of the plans indicates that you'll need 16 strips total, called out as 11" wide and whatever long. You'll use 8 strips for the first torsional layup, and 8 for the second. Remember, it's four layers each. I cut my strips a bit wider just to make sure. -- Marc J. Zeitlin marcz@ultranet.com http://www.ultranet.com/~marcz/ Date: Fri, 04 Dec 1998 08:05:02 -0500 From: bil kleb Subject: Re: Fwd: COZY: 13 UND strips for 2nd Torsional Wraps? "Marc J. Zeitlin" wrote: > > ... reading of the plans indicates that you'll need 16 strips total. newsletter 36, page 4 corrected this to 13 strips total; "Chap. 9, p. 2, Step 2, and Fig. 7: Keith Spreuer suggests that that 13 strips of UND should be sufficient." -- bil Date: Sat, 05 Dec 1998 10:06:58 -0500 From: "L. Wayne Hicks" Subject: COZY: Torsional Wraps Cozyites: my e-mail server at work is down for a few days, but to those who tried to respond, just wanted to let you know that I used only 8 strips of UND for the torsional wraps. Glad I stopped cutting cloth on the 9th strip. I'm sure I can salvage it for something later. Wayne Hicks Cozy IV #678 Chapter 9 Date: Sun, 06 Dec 1998 08:47:44 -0500 From: "L. Wayne Hicks" Subject: COZY: Torsional Wraps Let me clarify my previous post about the torsional layups, lest I lead anyone else astray. I mis-read the intent of the plans. I thought the plans indicated 13 strips for the first torsional wraps, then 13 more for the second wraps. Not THAT would be WAY too much glass of course :-). No, Nat e-mailed me last night, concerned that I didn't use enough glass. He assured me that he intended the "13 strips of UND" to be inclusive of the 1st AND 2nd wraps. He says "the important thing is to have a total of 4 layers folded over the trailing edge and 4 layers folded over the forward edge. That requires 13 strips. Some builders use more." Thanks for watching out for me, Nat, on a Saturday evening no less in the middle of two exciting football games. I wouldn't know about the games because I'm in the garage working on the jigs right about now (right?). But I did appreciate the help. Wayne Hicks Cozy IV #678 Chapter 9 Date: Mon, 07 Dec 1998 08:33 -0600 (CST) From: Michael Pollock Subject: COZY: Cozy MKIV Chapter 9 mis-screw length Last night, while working on my aluminum plates MK1&MK2 that attach to the forward and rear of the landing gear bulkheads, I noticed that the plans say to use MS24694-S60 screws and MS21042 nuts to secure the floxed plates to the bulkheads. However, my Wicks Chapter 9 kit contains MS24694-S58 screws, but after countersinking the screws in MK2 as the plans show, I find out that the screws are not long enough to pass through MK2, the bulkhead, and MK1 and attach a screw to the end. In fact, I could only get about 1/2 thread into the nut. Everything about the bulkheads, layups required, etc. was performed per the plans. Therefore, if you have not purchased chapter 9 parts from "Wicks", you might want to use MS24694-S62 screws instead of the MS24694-S58 screws shown in the chapter 9 parts list. Date: Mon, 07 Dec 1998 11:26:31 -0500 From: bil kleb Subject: Re: COZY: Chapter 9 mis-screw length Michael Pollock wrote: > > [...] you might want to use MS24694-S62 screws instead of the > MS24694-S58 screws shown in the chapter 9 parts list. it seems to be common practice to either buy (a) a huge assortment of bolts right upfront, or (b) acquire (a) slowly by buying all surrounding sizes of bolts during each piecemeal order of supplies... -- bil Date: Mon, 7 Dec 1998 22:38:26 -0500 From: "Edmond A. Richards" Subject: COZY: Cozy MKIV Chapter 9 mis-screw length Michael Pollock wrote: I have found problems with the length (too long or too short) of almost every bolt called out in the plans. Unless the bolt goes through a known commercial part like a piece of 3/4" tubing you better check or buy extra, one on either side for that length. Ed Richards Cozy #88 Hoping to fly in '99 From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Tue, 8 Dec 1998 08:17:42 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: COZY: Cozy MKIV Chapter 9 mis-screw length When I got started, I bought a prepackaged selection of AN3 & 4 bolts, nots, washers, etc. Sometimes I would buy from the bill of materials, and other times dig into thestock and replace. Today, I maintain at the airport a supply of various sizes plus some oddballs that are needed occasionly. As the mechanic of your airframe, you need to replace the supply cabinet of the maintenance hanger next door. From: "Nat Puffer" Subject: COZY: Strut spread Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 14:48:43 -0600 Dear Cozy Builders, We are concerned that Cozy builders have available and use the best quality parts in building their airplanes. That is why we "authorize" suppliers. There is evidence from 3 builder/fliers that landing gear struts sold by an unauthorized supplier do not have as good mechanical properties as those sold by Featherlite, because they have spread, as reported in the newsletter. Since we do not have a working relationship with this supplier, all we can do is determine the facts and present them to our builders. We thought at first that maybe the wrong type of glass had been used, but when assured that was not the case, we wondered whether there might be some other cause. We were referred to an independent analytical laboratory which specializes in testing and evaluating composite materials. They told us that if we could supply them with a representative sample of the strut in question, for a price, they could evaluate it for us. One of the builders, whose strut was spreading, supplied us with a sample of his strut. We sent this to the laboratory, and after the first level of analysis, they reported they found "substantial" internal defects, which probably account for lack of expected strength. We will authorize additional work, but we believe we have now proven both cause and effect. We recommend using only Featherlite struts and authorized suppliers. Regards, Nat From: mikefly@juno.com Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1998 10:25:38 -0600 Subject: Re: COZY: Tips for fairing Landing Gear Trailing Edge? I simply glued a piece of left over Klegecell foam over the conduits. Cut into a narrow strip and bent it along the trailing edge using masking tape to hold in place. Glued with five minute micro. Carved one side to shape, glassed with two plies UNI, then did the other side. MBB Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1998 13:16:36 -0500 From: Bulent Aliev Subject: COZY: Aerocad Hi All, yesterday morning (Sat) me and Todd Silver - also a Cozy Mk IV builder visited Jeff Russel in St Lucie Airport. We had two reasons for that: Todd had purchased the main landing gear strut from Jeff and with Nat's article in the last Cozy news letter, he understandably had some questions about the quality of the strut. I just wanted to buy some resin. Jeff was waiting for us and did take about 2 hrs of his time to show us around and discuss different points of his manufacturing. We did see his stock of about 50 to 75 spools of S-Glass and also the curing oven for the struts. During our visit he never bad mouthed Nat, or his competitors. BTW a year ago when I was ready to buy my strut, Jeff had just moved to FL and I called him about selling me one. He explained to me that the oven is not installed and will take few weeks to be ready. So he suggested that I buy from Feather Ligte. I am sure he needed the money but did not accept the order unless he was ready to produce the strut per specifications. On the other hand, F. L. told me that they must have the money first so they can buy the materials and then will take couple weeks. Well, it took about two months. I want to make it clear that I am not holding any one's side: just the facts. All of my components are from F.L. Bulent From: "Nat Puffer" Subject: Re: COZY: Aerocad Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 09:54:25 -0600 Dear Bulent and Cozy Builders, This whole flap about landing gear struts started when Jannie Versfeld asked if there was any difference between a Featherlite strut and an AeroCad strut. Marc Zeitlin said he didn't think so, because they look alike on the outside, and then David Domeier posted that he had an AeroCad strut and he thought his wheel camber had changed after 5 months of flying. I checked my Cozy Mark IV (see picture in the newsletter), and my camber hadn't changed in 6 years and hundreds of landings. Since most builder/fliers don't participate in the news group, I got on the phone and started calling. Dennis Oelmann told me Tim Merrill's (AeroCad strut) camber had changed significantly, which Tim confirmed, and Vance Atkinson told me Frank Bibbee's (AeroCad strut) camber had changed significantly, which Frank confirmed. I had them make measurements which I published in the newsletter. I called Chuck Wolcott, Larry Sligar, and David Higgins, all with Featherlite struts, and they said the camber hadn't changed nor had their struts spread. Now a change in camber indicates the strut has spread, and that indicates that the strut is weak, and that seemed to be the rule with AeroCad struts, so the question was WHY? After all, they look alike! There was only one way to find out for sure, and that was to have a piece of AeroCad strut analyzed by Owens Cornings analytical lab. David Domeier volunteered a piece of his strut. We made a list of everything we could think of which might account for the AeroCad strut being weak. After seeing the list, the lab said they would have to use an electron microscope, and x-ray analysis, which would be expensive. David Domeier volunteered to share the cost. At the first magnification, the lab reported that the glass was S-Glass, but they told me verbally that "this was the ugliest composite sample that they had seen in the lab in 18 years", but they said they didn't want to put that in writing. They said that the sample had a significant number of voids, which would account for the strut being weaker than it could be (in other words, poor workmanship). The significance of voids is that the strut is subject to bending stresses when you land, and if there are empty spaces or the yarns aren't thoroughly enclosed in resin, the layup will bend, spread, and maybe buckle and break. This is easy enough to check out; we ran those tests in 1980. This finding could explain why the builders who had flown the longest had the greatest spread. It seems to increase with the number of landings and doesn't recover. Who knows how far this will continue and what the ultimate result might be? This could also explain why Pat Young's AeroCad strut broke in half. Granted that he crashed, but as near as I can find out, in a crash, the strut usually is pulled out of the fuselage, but doesn't break in half. Now Jeff may indeed be a fine fellow, but we are concerned about our builders. We think there might be quite a few AeroCad struts out there which aren't flying yet. There is something wrong with them! This could turn out to be a dissaster of huge proportions. If AeroCad really has builders' interests at heart, they would put out a recall, and not sell any more struts, at least until they learn how to make them. A main landing gear is a most important part of your airplane. It takes more than just outside appearance. It needs to have the right properties! We expect to learn more about the AeroCad strut problem in the next few weeks, after we get the electron microscope photos and other results from the lab. We realize this won't be good news to some builders, but it's better to find out now than after your airplane is at the airport and you are flying. The only "side" we are on is the side of builders. We are spending quite a bit of money to get information to help builders make a good decision. Best regards, Nat From: JHTanstaaf@aol.com Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 12:36:38 EST Subject: Re: COZY: Aerocad In a message dated 12/13/98 1:17:25 PM Eastern Standard Time, atlasyts@bellsouth.net writes: > Jeff was waiting for us and did take about 2 hrs of his time to show us > around and discuss different points of his manufacturing. We did see his > stock of about 50 to 75 spools of S-Glass and also the curing oven for > the struts. During our visit he never bad mouthed Nat, or his > competitors. I have to second this experience. I had some questions I wanted to ask Jeff & he took a lot of time (over an hour) out of his schedule one morning. He also gave me his home phone if I needed anything after his normal work hours. Beats the heck out of the service I've gotten from Aircraft Spruce :-) From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 12:37:26 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: COZY: Aerocad Since the process for fabricating a gear strut, should be similar, it would be excellent to subject a random featherlite sample to the same testing, as the "control". Various manufacturing processes at times are subject to various inherent deviations, that are accounted for in the design. For example the allowable in concrete design are reduced by 0.9 for bending, and 0.7 for shear. It may be that there are some deviations that are inherent. Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 19:09:03 -0500 From: Gary Dwinal Subject: Re: COZY: Aerocad The problem I have with this whole landing gear strut issue is this. Nat says his "number one" concern is his builders. I would like to believe that because in some ways I am sure there is some truth to it. However, Nat has seriously damaged his credibility over the past few weeks on any issues dealing with Jeff Russell and Aerocad with his non-stop personal attacks of everything they do. Most people are aware of the legal battles going on between Nat and Jeff. It is obvious that Nat is doing everything within his powers to make Jeff and his company look bad in everyone's eyes. I have stayed out of this until now, but now I realize that I haven't been the only one that Jeff and his Dad have really gone far above the call of duty to help out. Jeff and Aerocad are a first class operation and have built many, many more airplanes than Nat will ever build and they are more than willing to share their valuable knowledge with most anyone, just for the asking. I am currently building a Cozy MKIV with many prefabbed parts I have purchased from Jeff to save years in building time. All of the parts I have purchased, canopy top, fuel strakes, main wing spars, nose cone, canard, and engine cowling are an excellent fit and appear to be of excellent quality. Thank You Gary Dwinal Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 17:50:35 -0500 From: bil kleb Subject: Re: COZY: Web pages for Cleveland and Matco? "L. Wayne Hicks" wrote: > > Anyone know the web page addresses for Cleveland and Matco? marc has matco on the un-official cozy site as: http://www.matcomfg.com/ and cleveland is at: http://www.parker.com/cleveland/index.html -- bil Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 23:29:43 -0500 From: Bulent Aliev Subject: COZY: voids.... "The surface voids i had in my nose strut were not microscopic or even as Small as the ones we work hard to get out in our own hand lay-ups. These Were about the width of a pencil, almost as deep, and over an inch long!!!" Both of my struts came from the "approved" manufacturer and both had the same type of voids.(and Carl is concerned about tiny screw holes?) From my experience with all the spar lay-ups I know that laying and wetting the rowings by hand is a nightmare and labor intensive. All my spar lay-ups are so compacted and clear of voids that you can read news print through them. Looks like the "approved" manufacturer does not have the luxury of taking all the time to wet and compact every strand as we do at home. Like you I filled them with flox and life goes on. "Don't wary, be happy" BTW My friend did buy from "the other manufacturer" and his main strut was void free? Bulent Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 08:41 -0600 (CST) From: Michael Pollock Subject: Re: COZY: voids.... Bulent Aliev wrote: >Both of my struts came from the "approved" manufacturer and both had the >same type of voids. My main gear and nose strut came from the "approved" manufacturer and both were basically free from any visible defects - very good looking. Perhaps a little quality control is in order from our "approved" manufacturer. Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 20:22:18 -0500 From: "Marc J. Zeitlin" Subject: Fwd: COZY: Chapter 9: MKMG-4 Questions L. Wayne Hicks asked: >1. From Drawing M9, it appears that the MG4 bushings go into the >bulkheads with the shoulders facing each other, i.e., the bushings that >go into the forward landing gear bulkhead have the shoulders facing >aft. The bushing in the aft LG bulkhead have the shoulders facing >forward. Is this correct? That's how I did it. The idea is to get a bearing face on the side of the bulkhead that will be pressing against the MKMGA's. >2. What do I do if the bushing sticks out a bit past the MG1's (i.e. >sticks out forward of the forward bulkhead and aft of the aft >bulkhead... Do you mean before or after the panic and running in circles? >(a) Do I grind off the end (opposite the shoulder) to get a flush fit to MG1? Yes. >(b) Or do I use a washer under the nuts? How would that help? Unless the washer had a large enough inside diameter to fit over the bushing and was thick enough to protrude beyond the bushing. The washers that I have just clear the studs..... >3. M9 Drawing doesn't show a washer between the 820 nuts and the >MG1's. Should I put one there? (See Qustion 2b?) You should always use a washer under a nut so that when you tighten the nut you don't damage the bearing surface under it, as well as to spread out the bearing load. So, yes, on both ends. >4. I'm also assuming that you use whatever washers it'll take between >the bushings and the tubes through the landing gear tabs if >there's a slight gap? Mine should be a tight fit, but I can see that I >may need to grind a washer to custom fit and take out any slop. This should be a slip fit - no slop at all (although not a press fit - it would be hell to take apart). My MKMGA's were a bit on the long side (or my bushings had a thick flange - one or the other), so I had to remove a bit of material on both sides to get the MKMGA's into the fuselage. Little bit of filing and bingo. If you have space, use washers. -- Marc J. Zeitlin marcz@ultranet.com http://www.ultranet.com/~marcz/ From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 20:45:32 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: Fwd: COZY: Chapter 9: MKMG-4 Questions Was said Officially unless some other good reason, washers always required to aluminum, not required where bolt head or nut bears on steel. Double washers OK due to bolt length and threads too short. More from "Accepted Practices..." Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 14:26:46 -0600 From: Tom Brusehaver Subject: COZY: Axles (and bolts) I just ordered the Chapter 9 kit from Wicks, had her leave off the Wheels and brakes. She asked me if I wanted the Axle, and I said yes, since it was an axle for 5" wheels. Did I do the right thing? Is there a different axle for different wheel and brake sets? I am seriously considering switching to the Matco's, or at lease the super heavy duty Clevland's, but am too wishy washy now. I am only asking about the axles, now, not for the excitement about brakes. I have read the arguments both for and against whichever. Wicks also says no one makes the AN525-416R16 or AN525-416R18 anymore. Well, she said not available, and I asked if they weren't in stock, and she said they are not available anymore. These were seatbelt attatch bolts, I guess AN3's would be fine, except on the step, whadaya think? Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 07:20:07 -0500 From: "L. Wayne Hicks" Subject: Re: COZY: Axles (and bolts) Tom Brusehaver wrote: > > Wicks also says no one makes the AN525-416R16 or AN525-416R18 > anymore. Well, she said not available, and I asked if they weren't in > stock, and she said they are not available anymore. These were > seatbelt attatch bolts, I guess AN3's would be fine, except on the > step, whadaya think? Wayne Hicks responds: The same thing happened to me. I called a nuts and bolts place and they carry them. I think whats happened is that the numbering system has changed. I'll go back and look through their catalog, but I believe the "AN525" is still correct, but that the "416RXX" has been changed to a 100-series numbering system. Anyone else know of this? Wayne Hicks Cozy IV #678 Chapter 9 Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 13:30:35 -0500 From: bil kleb Subject: Re: COZY: Axles (and bolts) Tom Brusehaver wrote: > > I just ordered the Chapter 9 kit from Wicks, had her leave off the > Wheels and brakes. She asked me if I wanted the Axle, and I said yes, > since it was an axle for 5" wheels. > > Did I do the right thing? Is there a different axle for different > wheel and brake sets? not sure, but when i ordered the wheel/brake matco outfit from jd, axles were part of the package... -- bil From: Ajellor@aol.com Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 22:09:04 EST Subject: Re: COZY: Axles (and bolts) In a message dated 12/28/98 3:33:54 PM Eastern Standard Time, Tom Brusehaver writes: > Wicks also says no one makes the AN525-416R16 or AN525-416R18 > anymore. Well, she said not available, and I asked if they weren't in > stock, and she said they are not available anymore. These were > seatbelt attatch bolts, I guess AN3's would be fine, except on the > step, whadaya think? Hi Tom, You could also try AS&S for your AN525-416R16 bolts, my records indicate that's where I got mine and they are in the '98 catalog (pg 87), ditto the AN 509 series -18's. I ran into the same hassle about "unavailable" Gotta dash, John Ellor Cozy III #283 From: mikefly@juno.com Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 21:35:51 -0600 Subject: Re: COZY: Axles (and bolts) > >Wicks also says no one makes the AN525-416R16 or AN525-416R18 >anymore. Well, she said not available, and I asked if they weren't >in >stock, and she said they are not available anymore. These were >seatbelt attach bolts, I guess AN3's would be fine, except on the >step, whadaya think? Could these have been changed to an MS # ? Mike Bowden From: "L. Wayne Hicks" Subject: COZY: Whoops--Wrong Bolt Series Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 08:17:36 -0500 Tom: I goofed about saying the AN525 series is renamed to a 100 series...that was for something else. But I can tell you that Genuine Aircraft Hardware Company has plenty of the bolt sizes you need, especially the AN525-416R16's. Unfortunately you have to order everything by the package. They won't break 'em up. I went ahead and ordered a package of the 416R16's, I think 25 to a package. I'd be more than happy to share a few with you. What we should do is have Wicks call this company, right? Genuine Aircraft Hardware Company 1-888-247-2738 toll free http://www.gen-aircraft-hardware.com __________________________________________ L. Wayne Hicks SpaceTec, Inc. Sr. Engineer 3221 North Armistead Ave 757-865-0900 phone Hampton, VA 23666 757-865-8960 fax http://www.spacetec-inc.com