Subject: COZY: Re: Your Cozy MkIV From: mbeduhn@juno.com (Mark W Beduhn) Date: Fri, 02 Jan 1998 19:15:43 EST On Tue, 30 Dec 1997 19:59:02 -0700 Michael Kraus writes: >Mark, > I'm shopping for my next project. I've narrowed it down to the Cozy >MkIV and the AeroCanard, (probably RG.) If you have time, I'd like to ask >you a couple questions. > >- What is the empty weight of your aircraft? >- Knowing what you know now, which would you choose and why? > >Much appreciated, >Michael > Michael, In my case, I wouldn't change a thing. I have a small wife, 2 small girls, and I expect that we will fit in my Cozy MK IV for a long time. However, if you want to carry larger passengers in the back, an extra 2 inches in width would be a good idea. I hear that the aerocanard is wider already. I don't think that making a MK IV wider would be very difficult (would require cowl mods though). Personally, I got more satisfaction building from plans than I would have gotten from building a kit. Since I have done it now (built from plans) I may consider a kit for my next project. My plane weighs 1135 and and high speed cruise is 180 kts (207 mph). It's really fun beating the local Bonanza guys to the airport! Mark Beduhn Cozy IV N494CZ (65 hrs and climbing) Date: Sat, 03 Jan 1998 15:15:14 -0600 From: "Joseph H. Hart IV" Subject: Re: COZY: Re: Your Cozy MkIV Mark W Beduhn wrote: > My plane weighs 1135 and and high speed cruise is 180 kts (207 mph). > It's really fun beating the local Bonanza guys to the airport! > > Mark Beduhn > Cozy IV N494CZ (65 hrs and climbing) Mark: Could you tell us what your 1135 lb. weight includes/excludes? Also, how is your plane equipped? Is the interior as nice as the exterior appears to be from the photos? Thanks in advance. Jody Hart jodyhart@communique.net MK-648 N359JH prebuild, starting Chap. 4 this month Date: Mon, 05 Jan 1998 12:57:44 From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: COZY: re: FAA requirments and "assistance" >I'm really not interested in flouting the law. I'm interested in learning >what I can about the airplane as I'm building it or actively helping an >experienced man build it. I'd like a repairman's certificate but only if >the FAA approves it knowing all the facts. Sadly, if the FAA "requirements" were clearly documented in words uniformly interpreted by all regulators and the regulated, it would be a wonderous milestone in history . . . I sat in on several discussions at OSH last year where experienced, if not learned representitives from both the regulating and regulated side of the fence were present. At that time, the "spirit and intent" was deduced to mean that a "builder" should be capable of accomplishing any and all operations involving future repairs or modifications to the airplane for which he/she seeks a repairman's certificate. The watchword was "education". It was agreed that the "spirit and intent" was satisfied if the builder was intimately involved in all phases of the construction, received instruction in the necessary skills and demonstrated some benefits of that instruction. The 51% rule was considered essentially useless without the foregoing clarification . . . one could put in 51% of total hours just sanding and painting an airplane and learn virtually NOTHING about how to maintain it. On the other hand, a builder might personally accomplish less than 25% of total hours of labor on an airplane while receiving what amounts to more hands-on training than a graduate A/P mechanic. This reasoning supports the concept of builder assistance centers. Consider if you will the possibility of driving up to the door of a BAC with kit crated in the back of your truck. For the next 30 days, you're humping 10-16 hours a day with the assitance of lots of folk with experience, tools, materials and skills to do a really whippy job of putting your airplane together. The goal of this activity is two-fold . . . put the airplane together in timely fashion and provide the "builder" with intensive, hands-on training. Everyone agreed the foregoing concept should produce high quality airplanes and persons educated in their maintenance. Given the latitude with which the rules may be interpreted, working closely with the bureaucrat who will ultimately sign your certificate is a good move. When documenting your construction, make sure you're a star performer and not a director. No matter how many hands work on your airplane, convincing your bureaucrat that you can "do it all" is more important than keeping a personal time sheet on the project. Bob . . . AeroElectric Connection //// (o o) ===========o00o=(_)=o00o========= < Go ahead, make my day . . . . > < Show me where I'm wrong. > ================================= Subject: COZY: Re: Your Cozy MkIV From: mbeduhn@juno.com (Mark W Beduhn) Date: Mon, 05 Jan 1998 17:23:25 EST On Sat, 03 Jan 1998 15:15:14 -0600 "Joseph H. Hart IV" writes: > >Mark: > > Could you tell us what your 1135 lb. weight includes/excludes? >Also, how is your plane equipped? Is the interior as nice as the exterior >appears to be from the photos? > >Thanks in advance. > >Jody Hart >jodyhart@communique.net >MK-648 >N359JH >prebuild, starting Chap. 4 this month > Jody, The 1135 lb is the complete empty weight (oil, but no gas). It includes the following: 180 hp Lycoming IO-360 1 mag, 1 electronic ignition Vacuum pump Lightweight starter Lightweight alternator Kevlar Spinner 3 Blade Performance Propeller 8" prop extension 32 amp/hr RG starter battery Electric speed brake VFR panel Manual nose gear (with doors) Completely upholstered interior over 1/4" thick automotive headliner foam Wheelpants That's about all. I build it according to the plans except for some modifications to the front hatches and the instrument cover. It never fails to get lots of attention when I land at a new airport. I just sent my prop back to the manufacturer to get its leading edge and final finish ( I'm getting withdrawal already). Mark Beduhn Cozy IV N494CZ Date: Wed, 07 Jan 1998 08:11:05 From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: COZY: re: FAA requirements versus assistance >Thanks for the clarification. I've been offered a "builder assistance slot" >where I go to an experienced Glastar builder's workshop. He's set himself >up with precision jigs and fixtures for the purpose of speeding other >builders' Glastar construction. I would be getting a thorough education in >all aspects of the contruction while participating in the manual work to >FAA requirements. This kind of build apparently meets the spirit and letter >of the law per OSH discussions, and ought to be encouraged it seems to me. I should clarify that the discussions I mentioned were simply that . . . a gathering of interested, critical thinkers who were trying to balance the public good with the builder's needs. How your favorite bureaucrat chooses to interpret and apply the FARs is entirely another matter. This is why getting your man on board early is important. An equally important aspect of dealing with regulators is to exude confidence in what you're doing . . . it's an extension of the old saw, "never ask a bureaucrat a question until you already know the answer." The first and only time I walked into an FAA office asking what was necessary to satisfy a "requirement" I got the book thrown at me. The next time I went in with a plan and good engineering rational for the proposal. My workload to complete the task was probably half of the first. However you choose to get your airplane put together, the goal is not to add up a bunch of logged hours and claim compliance to the 51% rule. Rather to have enough documentation and display of personal confidence that the regulator is convinced you know what you're doing. They say dogs smell fear. Well, regulators smell ignorance and uncertainty . . . too much suggestion of either can trigger an inquisition. >I'll be signing up for your electronics course in Northern California. I've >been reading your articles. You issued a challenge to find errors in your >statements. I've been looking hard but haven't found any errors yet. (A >couple of "matters of opinion," maybe). Thank you . . . but keep a sharp lookout. Many folk perceive my signature banner to be a bit pompous. I have to acknowlege that I am the originator of very little what I've learned over the years. If I take on the task of sharing that knowledge, I have an obligation to be ready to question everything, no matter how long it's been "acceptable" as fact. Folks on these list servers are very important to the critical review effort. > . . . . . You do a good job of refuting a lot >of mythology that's grown up around electronics design and construction. (I >do in general electronics what you do in aviation electronics). It's sad to realize how many of the laws of physics get rewritten to accomodate some theory. Worse yet to observe how may effects are erroneously or weakly linked to some causation. My years of work with Ken Razak in the accident analysis business has been a real asset; one of our most important tasks was to analyze and debunk bad science in the other side's "experts" . . . a very useful skill indeed. Bob . . . AeroElectric Connection //// (o o) ===========o00o=(_)=o00o========= < Go ahead, make my day . . . . > < Show me where I'm wrong. > ================================= From: "L. Wayne Hicks" Subject: COZY: EZ-Taxi: Have Cozys organized such a thing? Date: Mon, 26 Jan 1998 16:51:55 -0500 Hello, everyone. I'm one of those "pre-builders" with a million questions. I was reading January's CSA newsletter. I'm intrigued about the EZ-taxi service whereby EZ drivers will volunteer to give pilots a ride back to their planes. Have the Cozys organized such a thing, or are Cozys included as part of the EZ-taxi concept because canards share and share alike? Really, it would be just another plus for choosing to build a Cozy. So far, all of you seem like a friendly lot, more than willing to share ideas, opinions, and good times. The Lancair drivers seem a bit stuffy... L. Wayne Hicks SpaceTec, Inc. 3221 North Armistead Ave. Hampton, VA 23666 757-865-0900 voice 757-865-8960 fax http://www.spacetec-inc.com From: "Steve Campbell" Subject: RE: COZY: EZ-Taxi: Have Cozys organized such a thing? Date: Mon, 26 Jan 1998 16:18:01 Central States is not directed toward Longs and VEs exclusively. It includes anyone with a canard type aircraft. A number of the people involved in this program fly Cozys. I'm sure that even Velocity builders (tongue firmly in cheek here) would be welcome to use this service. You are quite correct about canard builders though. There are a very friendly and open group of people. Regards Steve Getting close to the halfway point. It moves out of the basement in 75 days. On Mon, 26 Jan 1998 16:51:55 -0500, hicks@indy.spacetec-inc.com wrote... > >Hello, everyone. I'm one of those "pre-builders" with a million questions. > I was reading January's CSA newsletter. I'm intrigued about the EZ-taxi >service whereby EZ drivers will volunteer to give pilots a ride back to >their planes. Have the Cozys organized such a thing, or are Cozys included >as part of the EZ-taxi concept because canards share and share alike? > >Really, it would be just another plus for choosing to build a Cozy. So >far, all of you seem like a friendly lot, more than willing to share ideas, >opinions, and good times. The Lancair drivers seem a bit stuffy... > >L. Wayne Hicks >SpaceTec, Inc. >3221 North Armistead Ave. >Hampton, VA 23666 >757-865-0900 voice >757-865-8960 fax >http://www.spacetec-inc.com > > > ************************************************ Stephen A. Campbell, Associate Professor, ECE University of Minnesota 200 Union Street Minneapolis 55455 (612) 625-5876 phone / (612) 625-4583 fax Campbell@ee.umn.edu ************************************************* From: kj5me@ix.netcom.com Date: Thu, 29 Jan 1998 15:44:39 -0600 (CST) Subject: COZY: Seeking Advice Hello Everyone, I believe I am the newest member of your organization as I have sent for plans to build a Cozy MK IV. I am actively seeking advice from all of you who are much more experienced at this than I am. My first question would be tools; what is recommended? Next, does anyone have an epoxy pump for sale? (CHEAP :)) I just received my Aircraft-Spruce catalog and they advertise a part one and a part two kit. Should I order these or should I waitfor the plans to get here? Am I asking too many questions for a beginner? Thanking you all in advance, Scott Cashel Arlington, TX Date: Thu, 29 Jan 1998 16:16:11 -0600 (CST) From: "Tom G. Brusehaver" Subject: Re: COZY: Seeking Advice >My first question would be tools; what is recommended? I am not very far into mine, I have only had the plans since October, but I strongly recommend a band saw! I was really surprised how useful one really is. I had used 'em before, but always got by with a sabre saw or scroll saw (my dad gave me a sabre saw for christmas, since I had borrowed his three years ago, but I bought the band saw last summer and the new saw is still in the box!). The Dremel motor tool is another mandatory tool as far as I am concerned, although people are recomending the Ryobi motor, because it seems more heavy duty. Having a drill press seems like a good idea, along with a cordless drill. Otherwise mostly basic hand tools (utility knife, scissors, pencils, etc) seem satisfactory. I have one of the pizza cutters for cutting glass and I love it. So much easier than a scissors for most cuts, but you still end up needing the scissors sometimes. >Next, does anyone have an epoxy pump for sale? (CHEAP :)) Go to your local EAA chapter and ask around. Possibly someone will have one, or know someone who knows someone who's brother-in-law had one for something. >I just received my Aircraft-Spruce catalog and they advertise >a part one and a part two kit. Should I order these or should >I waitfor the plans to get here? I havn't ordered from AS&S, I order from Wicks (they are closer to me, so I think I get stuff quicker), and they have chapter kits. A couple things to consider, is space. During construction you almost need twice the space as when the airplane is done :-). You will need to store the stuff that you will be working on while you are working on other stuff. I might be unusual, in that I am trying to build lots of the airplane in a small area in my basement, but it seems that space is at a premium. >Am I asking too many questions for a beginner? Nope, check the archives (mark z will probably beat me to saying that). Read the FAQ, there is a ton of information in just a few pages. From: Jim Hocut Subject: RE: COZY: Seeking Advice Date: Thu, 29 Jan 1998 19:34:14 -0500 My first question would be tools; what is recommended? Not often mentioned is a good shop vac. Someone asked me which tool I use most, and I answered in all honesty that it had to be my shop vac. An idea I stole from a Velocity builder was to set up a nice cutting table with racks to hold your rolls of glass cloth. I don't know how others do it but seem like it would be a pain without the cutting table. Next, does anyone have an epoxy pump for sale? (CHEAP :)) You don't necessarily need an epoxy pump. I've survived just fine for two years without one, I use the postal balance advertised by Wicks and AS&S and keep the epoxy in bicycle style water bottles. Works just fine. Jim Hocut jhocut@mindspring.com From: Cozy7971@aol.com Date: Thu, 29 Jan 1998 20:32:00 EST Subject: Re: COZY: Seeking Advice In a message dated 98-01-29 17:56:11 EST, kj5me@ix.netcom.com writes: << I just received my Aircraft-Spruce catalog and they advertise a part one and a part two kit. Should I order these or should I waitfor the plans to get here? >> Welcome to the club Scott. I'm not sure there is aright answer to your question. Some things to consider are: 1. Not to throw a damper on things but the majority of planes started are not finished by the original builder. There is something to say for starting slowly. 2. Prices go up at an unbelievable rate. You cna limit your cost by buying early in the game. 3. Wicks offers a 10% discount for orders placed at Oshkosh. If your going to the show you might be able to save a bundle. 4. Wicks and AS&S prices go up fast but at no where near the rate of Brock. I suggest you investigate other sources and then buy whatever you can't get elsewhere right away. 5. Regardless, don't buy all the epoxy right away. There is a shelf life. 6. Hardware (nuts, bolts, screws, etc) should be bought in greater numbers then specified in the plans. The plans specify the exact number and sizes required. In a perfect worlthis would be enough-----but! 7. Buy extra cloth. I started out being real careful to cut off only what I needed. I found this was a false economy in that cutting larger pieces allowed me to align the cloth easier. 8. Buy peel ply from Northern Fiberglass or use cut offs from the local fabric store. 9. Check out the prices at Wicxks and AS&S. There are often large differences and you can end up saving a bit. Check out the archives. I think there are some good suggesitons as to tools. You can start out with very little and buy as you discover the need. Enjoy, Dick Finn Date: Wed, 11 Feb 1998 09:49:19 -0600 From: tpierce@ghg.net (Terence J. Pierce) Subject: Re: COZY: Alexander Sportair Workshops Ed, I took the Alexander workshop composite course. I thought it was done very well. We learned everything from foams, to different types of glass (and carbon and kevlar), to epoxies. We also hot wired out a section of a canard, then laid up the sheer web, spar cap and bottom skin. Plus we went over finishing, post cure, fillers, primers, paints. And a lot more. And best of all the class is tought by Jeff Russell of AeroCad. I got to pick his brain for hours on different question I had. I brought a list of questions with me and he answered them all. I would say that it was one of the best spent $199.00 I put into my Cozy. I am sure it will more than pay for itself in time saved, safety and peace of mind. -- Terry Pierce <>< mailto:tpierce@ghg.net Cozy Mark IV #600 Boykin, Ed (C) wrote: > Has any taken Alexander's componsite workshop? I have been wanting to > take it but would > like to know if it worth it. Does it cover the same stuff as the > education chapter > in the Cozy plans? Should I still go through the education chapter if I > take this workshop? > > Except for actually ordering a few tools, the building materials, and > building my small > construction table, the education stuff is all i have left before I > actually construction on some of the smaller foam/glass parts. > > Ed Boykin From: "Boykin, Ed (C)" Subject: COZY: Thanks Date: Wed, 11 Feb 1998 15:26:07 -0500 Thanks to everyone who replied to me about the Sportair Componsite Workshop. I am definately going to take it. Nice thing about living in Atlanta is that the workshop is held in Griffin, GA and there is even one later this summer here in Atlanta.. Ed Boykin From: Guy TERREN Subject: COZY: Why a canard is a canard ? Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 07:37:21 +-100 It is not completely a stupid question. When i import (very recently) some pieces of a plane, (i'll perhaps told = you all the story, depending on the end), i was asked by french costums = to translate the invoice!. I sudendly realized the were suspecting me to import died animals: A turtle back......, for a men working for customs is illegal (violating = law against protections of animals) A straight canard...., is also surprizing for those men. A canard in = french is a duck. A straight duck reinforce their suspicions. I tried to explain and i think that i succeed in because they didn't = open the crate ( hey Jeff !). BUT I WANT TO KNOW WHY YOU DO CALL IT A = CANARD. For french readers:" putain de Murphy, il m'auront tout fait. Et je n'ai = pas encore vu l'=E9tat de ma caisse !!!!" From: Marc J. Zeitlin Subject: COZY: Why a canard is a canard ? (fwd) Date: Thu, 19 Feb 98 14:32:35 EST Guy Terren wrote: >It is not completely a stupid question. No questions are stupid. There are lots of stupid answers, though :-). >A straight canard...., is also surprizing for those men. A canard in >french is a duck. A straight duck reinforce their suspicions. >I tried to explain and i think that i succeed in because they didn't >open the crate ( hey Jeff !). BUT I WANT TO KNOW WHY YOU DO CALL IT A >CANARD. You've basically answered the question with your description above. A canard aircraft resembles (slightly, anyway) a duck in flight - the nose sticks way out in front of the large wing, which is toward the rear. For some reason the french word for "duck" was used - maybe it just sounded better than calling them "ducks". That's about all there is to it, I think. -- Marc J. Zeitlin Email: marcz@an.hp.com Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 15:52:23 -0500 From: bil kleb Subject: Re: COZY: Why a canard is a canard ? Guy TERREN wrote: > = > BUT I WANT TO KNOW WHY YOU DO CALL IT A CANARD[?] marc z offers one view: resemblance to a duck in flight. my recollection is that it has to do with the origins of powered flight and the fact that most people could not believe motorized, heavier- than-air, sustained flight was a possibility (see meaning #1 below). it also could have been coined by those on the side of tailed aircraft as opposed to the "shifty", even preposterous, idea of sticking a control= surface in front (again, see meaning #1). the canard vs tailed debate still continues today. webster (http://www.m-w.com/netdict.htm) sheds the following light: (ignore the second definition ;) ) Main Entry: ca=B7nard Pronunciation: k&-'n=E4rd also -'n=E4r <-note the silent "d" option Function: noun Etymology: French, literally, duck; in sense 1, from Middle French vendre des canards =E0 moiti=E9 to cheat, literally, to half-sell ducks Date: circa 1859 1 : a false or unfounded report or story; especially : a fabricated report 2 : an airplane with horizontal stabilizing and control surfaces in front of supporting surfaces; also : a small airfoil in front of the wing of an aircraft that increases the aircraft's stability = -- = bil Date: Fri, 20 Feb 1998 08:19:41 -0500 From: "Johnson, Phillip" Subject: COZY: RE: Why a Canard is a Canard > > >I tried to explain and i think that i succeed in because they didn't > >open the crate ( hey Jeff !). BUT I WANT TO KNOW WHY YOU DO CALL IT A > >CANARD. It was my understanding that the canard was called a canard because the canard duck always flies with the leader out in front and the remainder of the flock follow this leader. The canard aircraft is likened to this because the aircraft is controlled by the little wing which is out in front. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Phillip Johnson Tel (613) 253 2229 (H) Ottawa, (613) 599 3289 ext. 441 or 232 Ontario, Cozy MKIV RG #30 Canada. Subaru EG33 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Marc J. Zeitlin Subject: Re: COZY: Why a canard is a canard ? Date: Thu, 19 Feb 98 18:14:26 EST Lee Devlin wrote: >Benjamin Franklin very much wanted the turkey to be the American >National Symbol..... Bird, but OK. >......... since it was more akin to your average American, i.e. >friendly, useful, and not too bright. Well, I'll agree with your description of the average American as far as intelligence goes, anyway. The rest is manifestly incorrect (both with respect to people and the bird. In Ben Franklin's time, there were no domesticated turkeys (the stupid [unbelievably so] creatures we eat on Thanksgiving). The wild turkeys were wily, intelligent, and fast - a bird to be admired. They still are - I just saw a few the other day on the way to work. Try hunting them sometime - good luck. Ben Franklin recognized the admirable nature of these birds. >........ Alas, the others didn't like the >image the turkey portrayed and we ended up with an aloof and unfriendly >bird like the eagle. This is correct, but not because of the image you portrayed. >When I feel embarrassed about my plane being a duck, I just feel thankful >that at least the name doesn't translate to 'turkey'. If canard meant a wild turkey, I'd be proud to have that name on my airplane. I think we've beat this subject (off topic, no less) to death - let's let it die peacefully :-). -- Marc J. Zeitlin Email: marcz@an.hp.com Date: Fri, 20 Feb 1998 09:28:12 -0500 From: bil kleb Subject: Re: COZY: Why a canard is a canard ? Marc J. Zeitlin wrote: > > I think we've beat this subject (off topic, no less) to death - let's > let it die peacefully :-). back on topic? or do you mean to kill the whole canard word discussion? from burt's recommended reading list, "contact!: the story of the early birds" by henry serrano villard, smithsonian institute press, 1987: [santos-dumont's] model xiv [1906] ... was colloquially called the bird of prey. but it looked more like a duck with outstretched neck[.] ... this unconventional affair, which appeared to fly backward, gave the nickname canard ("duck") to machines of similar type. -- bil Date: Tue, 24 Nov 1998 09:30:46 +0100 From: blecoq Subject: COZY: Various questions A quick message to say hello,give news and ask 2 questions. I will be painting my airplane next month as the contouring is now finished ( A very hard work indeed ).I think I did it the hard way using Epoxy resin and microballoons. Does anybody knows the European equivalent for what Nat is calling in its plans for priming (UV barrier and standard priming) and painting? I am also invetigating for my intercom system and am not very familiar with what is on the market. What about the ANC headsets? Which one would have a reasonable performance to cost ratio? Wishing everybody happy building time. Beno=EEt LECOQ From: Jim Hocut Subject: COZY: Financing Engine & Avionics Date: Wed, 25 Feb 1998 06:21:27 -0800 Hopefully a few folks will find this idea useful, and no this isn't like a "financing your airplane" forum I saw at OSH a few years back where the guy was actually just peddling his product. The biggest financial bite for most of us will come near the end of our project when we have to spring for the engine and avionics. To alleviate the pain of this I have been making monthly "airplane payments" to my mutual fund so that I will have (hopefully) enough cash to pay for my engine and avionics. I will end up putting in around 1/4 to 1/3 the total amount I'd end up paying if I had to take a loan out to pay for these items when I need them. Here are some numbers: $70 per week 15 % interest (APR) (so far I've been lucky and earned 19%, but I'll stick with the original assumption to be conservative). Plus, these numbers are on the low side since they're just from a quick and dirty spreadsheet and don't take into account compounding. Years Total "Paid" Balance 1 3640 $3640 2 7280 7825 3 10920 12693 4 14560 18175 5 18200 24542 6 21840 31863 7 25480 40282 I'm guessing it will take me around 5 years to finish (2 down 3 (?) to go) so I should have somewhere around $24K accumulated. Might not totally pay for the engine and avionics, but sure will make it less painful when the time comes. Jim Hocut jhocut@mindspring.com From: "Boykin, Ed (C)" Subject: COZY: Alexander Sportair Workshops Date: Wed, 11 Feb 1998 09:14:16 -0500 Has any taken Alexander's componsite workshop? I have been wanting to take it but would like to know if it worth it. Does it cover the same stuff as the education chapter in the Cozy plans? Should I still go through the education chapter if I take this workshop? Except for actually ordering a few tools, the building materials, and building my small construction table, the education stuff is all i have left before I actually construction on some of the smaller foam/glass parts. Ed Boykin From: "Nat Puffer" Subject: Re: COZY: Coolings Date: Sun, 15 Mar 1998 18:06:03 -0600 Dear Guy, Guess my reply didn't go out, so will retype. We prefer the flush NACA scoop shown in the plans because it is low drag and gives very adequate cooling. We hate to see those unsightly armpit scoops, and everything else that sticks out of an airplane because it makes it look dirty. The flush scoops cause natural convection for taxiing and cooling the engine after parking. The cold air enters at the bottom, passes through the cylinders where it gets heated and exits at the prop. We have better ground cooling than other airplanes. Also, it provides ram air into the carburetor (throttle body), which is said to give you 100 more rpm. If you think some other system is better, be free to try it. Regards, Nat ---------- > From: Guy TERREN > To: 'liste cozy' > Subject: COZY: Coolings > Date: Wednesday, January 10, 1996 11:57 PM > > Hi all > I was wandering about coolings. > did some someone study about the advantages and inconvenient of the two solutions i know: > -standard NACA scoop > -arm pit coolings > > One more perhaps ? > > thanks for an advice > Subject: COZY: Re: Your Cozy Mk 4 From: mbeduhn@juno.com (Mark W Beduhn) Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 20:15:09 EST On Sun, 15 Mar 1998 20:30:30 -0800 denjacol@juno.com writes: > >Well I was hoping that you would share your observations of the >building process and your early flights. Also any long trips that you >have taken and how things went. How would you describe the skill >level needed to fly the airplane. > >Thanks so much for your help and wish you the best. > >Dennis Colomb Dennis, Thanks for the note about my plane. Even though I had virtually no fiberglassing experience, Nat Puffer's plans were so complete (even included detailed fiberglassing technique instructions) that I had no problems with the structure. Many people have asked me how I completed the project so quickly, and there are two primary answers: 1) I am a project engineer, and am used to scheduling work and anticipating problems. Before I entered the shop each day, I had the work planned out and knew exactly what I wanted to do. I never got to the shop and had to think about what to do next. When I got to a stopping point on one part, I moved to the next one - no wasted time. 2) I got up early every morning to work on the plane at around 3:30 am. I have been called nuts, crazy, workaholic etc, ... but I just consider myself to be dedicated and focused. The reason I got up early was to get the work done, and still have quality time in the evening with my family. Having a wife mad at you for being in the shop every night is not a good thing. I have also been asked about the hardest part of the job. There were two. The worst was finishing (filling, sanding, priming, painting etc). And the other was planning out the electrical system. Once I had a system planned out it wasn't so bad, but you would be surprised how difficult this part is. I ended up using lots of terminal strips, numbered wires and documented everything on CAD. Now when I have an electrical problem (and they are rare), it is very easy to find the source and fix it. Early flights were great! Vance Atkinson (an experienced Cozy pilot) checked me out in his plane, and then I flew the first flight in mine. I had to fix the usual oil temp problems and balance the cylinder head temps, but overall it went quite well. To date the longest trip I have make was 300nm (took around 2 hours). I have 90 hours on the plane now, and wouldn't hesitate to fly it 1000 miles (in good weather). As far as skill required to fly the plane, I don't think it requires anything special, but it is different. Speed control in the pattern is very important. It takes planning to get the plane slow enough to land. Normal flying is very fun because the plane is fast and responsive. Well...I've rambled on long enough. I hope that answers your questions. Mark Beduhn N494CZ _____________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 08:56:26 -0500 From: Tom Brusehaver Subject: COZY: Archives I don't know what it is, the plans seem like they are pretty clear, until you start doing the work. About every chapter I have had questions, and so I look at Marc Z's web page, sometimes seeing the pictures work, sometimes reading the text helps. I still get frustrated though. The last couple days (since Saturday I think?), I have been contouring the bottom of the fuselage. Right away on Saturday I hit the electrical duct on the left side, so I used that as the limit, and faired around it. Last night I hit the right side duct. I thought I musta been doing something wrong, maybe they shape was wrong, maybe I am doing something completely wrong. I fetched the mailing list archives about chapter 7 from 95 and 96, and you know what, lots of people have questions, most of the same ones I do, and some people sanded into the electrical ducts too. Wow, I am at least as good (bad?) as them. There were also ideas to make the process easier, things I hadn't even thought of (using a belt like a shoe-shine-boy, sounds good anyway). Questions that I hadn't even thought of asking, and answers to problems I havn't encountered yet. Building an airplane causes many emotions. Everything from sheer joy to grief stricken panic! To minimize the panic ones, I hope in the future I'll look at the archives BEFORE I start a new challenge. Thanks everyone for you help Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 10:17:35 -0400 From: bil kleb Subject: Re: COZY: Archives Tom Brusehaver wrote: > > To minimize the panic ones, I hope in the > future I'll look at the archives BEFORE I start a new challenge. also, don't forget the FAQ (frequently answered/asked questions) that is available from majordomo or marc's web page. it is supposed to be a distillation of topics contained in the archives. terry p volunteered to contribute a summary for chapter 7 back in october, but i still haven't seen it... if you'd like to contribute, see the instructions included in the FAQ itself. -- bil Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 10:26:35 -0500 From: Mike Davis Subject: Re: COZY: Carlos's cozy twin-Sport Aviation cdenk@ix.netcom.com wrote: > > On 05/15/98 23:27:18 you wrote: > > > >>Paul Comte wrote: > >>Who do ya know wants to fly with their right hand? ;-) > > > >Actually, I do..... I have set up my Cozy III to fly from the right seat. > >(it has not flown yet but is getting close). My non-standard setup is > >because I flew F-16s in the Air Force and it seems like the natural thing > >for a sidestick to be in ones right hand and the throttle in the left. I > >suppose people will think that my wife is in control since she will occupy > >the left seat but why not confirm what already occurs on the ground! :^) > > > >Dave > > > > > > > > > > > >Dave Chapman (Pilot@xmission.com) "This is > >USHGA #5742 a spiritual calling to > >Park City, Utah set one's soul free by flight...." > >http://www.xmission.com/~pilot > >Cozy 3 on gear, with the engine on, in other words, 80% done and 80% to go... > >***************************************************************************** > >The box said 'Requires Windows 95, or better.' So I bought a Macintosh. > >***************************************************************************** > > > > > > > > > > I am left handed, and fly the Cosy from the left seat. The only issue I have > is trying to copy a clearance while in turbulent air trying to write with the > the same hand, or trying to control with left and crossed wrists. I have flown > Cubs and Super cubs, in addition to many Spam Cans with control wheels, and > used either hand and once in a while both hands. Unless physically diasabled, > I would think it would be easy to adapt to either hand, since a Cosy isn't > that hard to fly. I think that a major disadvantage of a non-standard > configuration would be during flight instruction, and when selling it would > drive the selling price down.This is one of the top ten most asked questions from people who haven't flown left seat in an EZ. I agree straight down the line with Carl on this one. I'm right handed, fly the Cozy in the left seat and have absolutely no trouble putting the Cozy on the dotted line. Even at approach speed, it takes very little stick force. From: Cozy7971@aol.com Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 20:24:37 EDT Subject: Re: COZY: ride at Oshkosh? In a message dated 6/23/98 1:14:28 PM Central Daylight Time, andersoc@idcnet.com writes: << I intend to buy the plans shortly after the show, and I'm only really waiting to sit in one and make sure I'm not too big. (6' w/shoes, about 180lbs) >> I'm 6' 3" and about 250 lbs and its a tight squeeze. I plan to loose weight to get more comfortable in the plane (I fit comfortably 30 lbs ago). Even so, I do fit even with the armrests and center console installed. I moved (at Nat's suggestion) the rudder pedals one inch forward. The foot pegs are adjustable so I'm A-ok. Big Dick Finn From: lschuler@cellular.uscc.com Date: Tue, 23 Jun 98 18:15:02 -0600 Subject: Re: COZY: ride at Oshkosh? Chris Anderson wrote: >snip >...I'm only really waiting to sit in one and make sure I'm not too big. >(6' w/shoes, about 180lbs) Just a thought for you. I am 6'3" and sat in Nat's before buying the plans. Just make sure it didn't rain the night before and the canopy latch is down. I got my socks wet (took shoes off due to mud at Oshkosh) and ripped my jeens on the latch getting out (great epoxy pants now). Nat will probably chuckle.... Still bought the plans. :-) :-) :-) Larry Schuler MK-IV plans #500 lschuler@cellular.uscc.com Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 16:04:35 -0500 From: Ken Reiter Subject: Re: COZY: Fuel caps Hello Guys, Having spent 10 years building my CozyIII and in that time period thought of several design changes (DID ONLY ONE MOD. AND MIGHT NOT DO IT AGAIN) - The only thing that I can say: IS THAT THE COZY IS A FANTASTIC PLANE TO FLY - MY ONLY REGRET IS THAT I DID NOT BUILD IT FASTER!! I SUGGEST BUILD THE PLANE THEN MODIFY TO YOUR HEARTS CONTENT; THIS WAY YOU WILL HAVE A BASE LINE. IT IS GREAT TO GET UP, JUMP IN THE PLANE AND FLY - LOOKING BACK SOME OF MY BUILDING IDEAS WERE AND SHOULD STAY JUST IDEAS - THESE PLANES AND SYSTEMS WORK AND PERFORM VERY WELL. YES, THERE MAY BE BETTER WAYS BUT TRY IT THE PLANS WAY FIRST, THAT WAY YOU WILL KNOW. GOOD LUCK IN BUILDING AND GET IT DONE - YOU WILL LIKE IT. Ken Reiter Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 21:18:07 -0500 From: Mike Davis Subject: COZY: STRONG electric pitch trim Today I received a FREE electric pitch trim from Nat and Alex. I can't wait to install it. All it took was a few minutes of my time to send in a picture and caption to Sport Aviation. It's pretty cool to see your airplane in an internationally circulated magazine. Mike Cozy N141MD Date: Mon, 06 Jul 1998 08:43 -0500 (CDT) From: Michael Pollock Subject: COZY: Re: [canard-aviators] Winglet Antennas NICEEZ wrote: >May I ask why are you building a Cozy MKIV, if you have a Velocity? I built the Velocity with a group of 3 other people. The Velocity will be sold in the year 2001, or we will all sign a new contract for 1 year if all agree to continue the flying group. We all wanted to build an airplane but did not know if any of us was allergic to epoxy or fiberglass. I will want my own plane in the near future and the Cozy was the best bang for the buck. It also has been very thoroughly tested. --- Michael.Pollock@mci.com Flying Velocity N173DT Building Cozy MKIV #643 From: "Paul Stowitts" Subject: COZY: Use of grommets Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 08:16:15 -0700 What is anyone doing in the way of using grommets through fiberglass/foam? I haven't found any that are thick enough for the foam cores. I'm considering buying regular grommets, slicing them in half and siliconing them on to each side of the bulkhead. Any other ideas or suggestions? Paul Stowitts Cozy Mark IV #200 Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 22:03:50 -0400 From: "Marc J. Zeitlin" Subject: Fwd: COZY: Use of grommets Paul Stowitts wrote: >What is anyone doing in the way of using grommets through >fiberglass/foam? Anyplace where I've got a wire bundle or plastic tubing going through sharp fiberglass edges, I'm wrapping it with a small length of the wire protection nylon spiral wrap. It goes on easily, weighs very little, and is removable. It should protect the wires/cables/tubes. In a few spots where this wasn't possible (coax cable near the vacuum regulator just behind F28) I used a couple of layers of shrink tubing on the coax. Another idea that just struck me is to remove a bit of the foam just behind the hole, and then use a grommet on one or both sides just on the fiberglass. Haven't tried that, though. -- Marc J. Zeitlin                     marcz@burnside.ma.ultranet.com 3 Sweetbriar Way                  http://www.ultranet.com/~marcz Acton, MA  01720                 http://cozy.canard.com/ Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1998 08:23:54 -0800 From: hrogers@slac.stanford.edu (Howard Rogers) Subject: Re: Fwd: COZY: Use of grommets >Anyplace where I've got a wire bundle or plastic tubing going through sharp >fiberglass edges, I'm wrapping it with a small length of the wire >protection nylon spiral wrap. It goes on easily, weighs very little, and >is removable. It should protect the wires/cables/tubes. In a few spots >where this wasn't possible (coax cable near the vacuum regulator just >behind F28) I used a couple of layers of shrink tubing on the coax. > >Another idea that just struck me is to remove a bit of the foam just behind >the hole, and then use a grommet on one or both sides just on the >fiberglass. Haven't tried that, though. Marc, this is the first time I have wanted to "argue" with you. I do not think that the spiral wrap or heat shrink is adequate. When you have been poking through older airplanes for as long as I have, you will discover the awesome power of seemingly innocous stuff to chafe and gnaw its way through wires! Even perfectly smooth, flat aluminum can do it, in time. A raw, unprotected edge of fiberglass could act just like a saw, with a little vibration and a little time. Take a look in the "mechanic's bible", AC 4313, and see how they reccommend taking wires through a bulkhead. They picture an adel clamp supporting the wires, so they cannot move around. I think this is very important. I also believe in heat-shrink, spiral wrap, and grommets, but mostly as backups to good support, not as the primary means of preventing damage to the wires as they pass through a bulkhead. --Howard Rogers, A&P 2005148 Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1998 23:14:47 -0400 From: "Marc J. Zeitlin" Subject: Fwd: Re: Fwd: COZY: Use of grommets Howard Rogers wrote; >Marc, this is the first time I have wanted to "argue" with you. I'm amazed that a real A&P hasn't thought I was an idiot before :-). >... I do not >think that the spiral wrap or heat shrink is adequate. When you have been >poking through older airplanes for as long as I have, you will discover the >awesome power of seemingly innocous stuff to chafe and gnaw its way through >wires! I'll certainly take this into account. I've been using the "Adel" clamps (cushioned version) all over the place - maybe I'll put a few more in here and there if I can fit them. Thanks for the info, and feel free to argue with anything I say anytime you want. I have no problem admitting when I say something stupid :-). -- Marc J. Zeitlin                     marcz@burnside.ma.ultranet.com 3 Sweetbriar Way                  http://www.ultranet.com/~marcz Acton, MA  01720                 http://cozy.canard.com/ From: "L. Wayne Hicks" Subject: COZY: RE: Fwd: Marc's no idiot Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1998 18:06:11 -0400 -----Original Message----- From: Howard Rogers [SMTP:hrogers@slac.stanford.edu] Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 1998 5:00 PM To: cozy_builders@canard.com Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: Fwd: COZY: Use of grommets >I'm amazed that a real A&P hasn't thought I was an idiot before :-). > Marc, I certainly do not think you are an idiot. It is obvious that you possess a great DEAL of common sense, as well as an open mind, Marc. I think it would be safe to say that we all appreciate these qualities. Keep up the good work. Howard Rogers [L. Wayne Hicks] Hey, Marc, are you blushing yet? Some of us were talking the other day and we're intensely curious...how's the new job? What does the next generation Bose stuff look like? Please, spare no details. :-) Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1998 12:02:09 -0700 (PDT) From: Mark Loy Subject: COZY: Pilot Size and the Mk IV How does a large pilot fit in the Mk IV? I am 6'3" and 250lbs. If anyone out there can tell me, I would be grateful. (I know the cockpit dimensions, but a personal observation would be nice.) Thanks, Mark Loy _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1998 15:46:29 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Re: COZY: Pilot Size and the Mk IV I am 72", average leg length for height, 190 lbs. The Cosy Classic is the same width in the front seat area as the MkIV, but the canopy top corners are a tighter radius, giving more room for headsets. I am comfortable. Weight wise, my front seat limit is 400 lbs, I have tested it at 440 lbs the plane gets sluggish with runway lengths getting much longer, and rate of climb down. The cruise speed is only a little effected. When light fuel and temps near freezing the R.O.C. is 1800 F.P.M., at max. gross 1200 F.P.M. Without modifications, I would think twice, and sit or fly in one before commiting. There are heavier and taller pilots, but its getting very marginal. Your wife or other better half, what is her size. If both are on the large size, forget it. Modifications possible include a wider and taller fuselage, but this requires expertice that is beyond the ability of the average builder. Its easy enough to add the added material, but the details that are effected are never ending, and you miss one, and much scrap. From: "William Hart" Subject: COZY: New Builder Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 17:45:46 -0700 Hello everyone, I am the proud owner of plans set 697. I have been feverishly studying the drawings and plans and plan to continue for about a month or so till I begin construction. I welcome any and all suggestions on how to begin and was wondering if anyone had done anything in the way of substituting carbon fiber for some of the glass in order to increase strength and reduce weight a little? Look forward to exchanging ideas and information with you all. Bill Hart - Oceanside CA Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 08:22:42 +0200 From: Rego Burger Subject: COZY: New Builder William Hart, Welcome from South Africa, No need to substitute anything, six years ago when I started I went through the same modernising thoughts to be up with technology.... bottom line is the craft was designed adequately with the materials already proven. Remember stiffer is NOT always stronger, it may allow you to increase your yield point but then snap, crackle-pop and BANG! If you choose to make changes in structural parts then change the name of the craft and developments are your experiment at your own risk. ( read your agreement you signed ) While building it as per plans you are obliged to follow it to the T. If you are a dudding designer build something from scratch and test fly it yourself. You are going to have enough on your hands just building to plans, enjoy it and you will have a piece of mind product. How to begin: If you have had a fair amount of composite experience start cutting foam an glass for the bulkhead chapter, if not go through the educational chapters first, in fact even if you are experienced the refresher won't do any harm. I often read over it again even 6 yrs into the project. Also find out from Marc how to get into the archives on builder tips, you will save lots of money on tools and gadgets you may think you must buy. Happy building. Some picture of my progress on my web site. Rego Burger, web site: http://home.intekom.com/glen/rnb.htm (home e-mail) mailto:rnb@intekom.co.za RSA Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1998 21:19:35 -0400 From: "Jeff S. Russell (http://www.AeroCad.com)" Subject: Re: COZY: New Builder William Hart wrote: > > Hello everyone, I am the proud owner of plans set 697. I have been > feverishly studying the drawings and plans and plan to continue for about a > month or so till I begin construction. I welcome any and all suggestions on > how to begin and was wondering if anyone had done anything in the way of > substituting carbon fiber for some of the glass in order to increase > strength and reduce weight a little? > Look forward to exchanging ideas and information with you all. Bill, Berkut people did this replacing the spar caps with UNI carbon on both the wings and canard and main spar. The only skin change using UNI carbon was on the wings. This made the Berkut much stiffer than the Long-EZ. The Cowling only weigh about 5 lbs also made out of carbon. Most cowling out of glass are 3-5 times heaver. The price will be the biggest setback. -- Jeff Russell/AeroCad Inc. E-mail: Jeff@aerocad.com P.O. Box 7307 Port St. Lucie FL. 34985 2954 Aviation Way Ft. Pierce, FL. 34946 Shop# 561-460-8020 7:00am to 3:30pm Home# 561-337-1579 Composite workshop info: http://www.Sportair.com From: K_N_Sargent@webtv.net (Ken Sargent) Date: Sat, 1 Aug 1998 22:12:45 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: COZY: New Builder Being both a builder and a composite engineer, please don't indescrminantly substitute carbon into your plane. Carbon is strong and can yield some very good structures, but will change the load sharing characteristics of the Cozy's other structures that are not carbon. Carbon is two to three time stiffer than e-glass, and if placed in wrong will throw all the stress onto itself, like a steel cable next to a rubber band. The rubber band is just along for the ride. Don't do this to your plane, there are enough challanges working with the thing as designed and get flying. Burt and Nat have done the hard work for you here. In my job I have taken designs that were carbon, and with good workmanship had just as good performance using glass. Glass is a lot tougher than carbon, which is important in wierd load cases like the way I land sometimes. Ken Sargent Cozy #555 k_n_sargent@webtv.net From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Sun, 2 Aug 1998 04:40:51 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Re: COZY: New Builder Ken Sargent writes As a registered structural engineer (and I don't very often say that) I concur, words are well put. From: lschuler@cellular.uscc.com Date: Thu, 06 Aug 98 01:19:45 -0600 Subject: Re: COZY: New Builder William Hart wrote: >... was wondering if anyone had done anything in the way of substituting carbon fiber for some of the glass in order to increase strength and reduce weight a little? In general, I think this is a bad idea; unless you intend to do a complete structural analysis such as was done on the Berkut (essentially a carbon copy [pun intended] of the Long EZ). Believe it or not, it's easy to make something TOO stiff; especially something that was originally desingned with flexing as an intended feature... think of the wings. Other things not as big can be just as, or even MORE significant. The trouble is, that when you make something stiffer, you could be making other parts carry more load than intended etc etc. Gets into a real ball of twine. Larry Schuler MK-IV Plans #500 From: SBLANKDDS@aol.com Date: Sun, 9 Aug 1998 09:25:43 EDT Subject: COZY: Re: Emergency tool mah@odin. << When we lost an engine in the Long-EZ, my son asked, "Dad, how do I get out of this thing if you crash?" I answered, "You don't!">> A loocal pilot on cross country did an off field landing in his Velocity, and it was soft.....nose stuck, aircraft flipped, and there he sat upside, down resting on the canopy, and winglets!!! A canopy hinge pin release would NOT have helped. He could not get his feet out to kick the thin canopy, and waited.......waited....until help arrived, strapped in upside down. A tool to break the canopy should be considered standard equipment on an Canard. It should be well secured to not cause injury whent the loop occurs at 5 feet agl, but still reachable by the pilot or passenger. That is why they call them accidents, you don't plan to wreck upside down! Steve From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1998 12:12:23 -0500 (CDT) Subject: COZY: Builder's reference books Here is a list of my favorite references while building and flying. The sources are only suggestions, and I had at times finding a source from my catalog file. Building: This basic library defines everything from F.A.A. accepted repair practices to usual bolt torque values. When embarking on a building project, one should review these to see what information is available, and during the various construction phases use these a bibles. "Acceptable Methods, Techniques And Practices", AC 43.13-1A, Aircraft Alterations, AC 43.12-2A, International Standard book 0-89100-306-1, Buy from IAP, Inc, 1-800-443-9250., or Aviation Book Company , $14.95, 1- 800-423-2708, "Airframe & Powerplant Mechanics General Handbook" AC-65-9, FAA, buy from Aviation Book Company, $18.95, 1-800-423-2708. "Sportplane Construction Techiniques", by Tony Bingelis ,Aviation Book Company , $19.95, 1-800-423-2708, "Firewall Forward" by Tony Bingelis ,Aviation Book Company , $19.95, 1- 800-423-2708 "Amateur Built Aircraft Reference Material" FAA Regulatory Support Division, AFS-600. I got mine at Sun'N Fun Flyin. It is the most encompassing variety of Advisory Circulars, defining the steps to the airworthiness certificate including sample filled in forms. A MUST TO HAVE. "Maintenance Aspects of Owning Your Own Plane" FAA-P-8740-15A; AFO-800-0783. "Amateur-Built Aircraft Service and Maintenance Manual, EAA. "Amateur-Built Aircraft Flight Testing Handbook" FAA Advisory Circular AC- 90-89. "FARAIM" (A selection of current regulations) published by Aviation Supplies & Academics Inc., Available at most FBO's. I buy one everyother year. This is where you will find the actual wording of the regulations. This is more useful while flying, but when wanting to deviate from standard equipment (Strobes) probably here you can find the real regulation. While Flying: Remember cockpit space is limited. "Flight Guide", From Airguide Publications, phone 562-437-3210. I have cutouts in the headrests that the store nicely, but readily available. Info includes airport diagram with runway and taxiway numbers, runway length, width, surface, slope; services, restaurant, motels, frequencies, and much more. Small size but quite readable even with my bifocals. "Air Charts System" 1-800-338-7221. These are mainly IFR charts. All cross country charts are spiral bound making them easy to use in a tight cockpit. The visual charts are "WACS" at roughly half the scale of sectionals, but also are missing other info including airport identifier code. I still use the sectionals for VFR and always have them open even if IFR. There is a GPS chart showing all airports with identifiers, but no topographic info. The IFR (enroute) charts are excellent with the spiral bound easy to use. The captains guide is an airport directory, code/decode for intersections, airports, VOR, NDB, etc. Most handy when trying to locate boundaries of weather warnings. All charts are issued May 1, and updates are every 28/56 days Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1998 21:55:21 -0600 From: Carlos Leon Subject: COZY: facts and figures Anyone who has flying Cozys or Long-ezs I would love them to answer the following questions: When you travel in your aircraft, what is your average cruise speed ? (could be an average Loran or GPS true) For this speed, what is your average fuel consumption ? What is your usual cruise altitude (and temperature) ? What is your engine and aircraft type ? At what IAS do you pass the fence of the airport ? What is your normal climing IAS ? I just want to compare all this with our twin cozy. Best regards Carlos León Twin Cozy MKIV YV-22X From: mbeduhn@juno.com Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1998 18:40:59 -0500 Subject: Re: COZY: facts and figures On Mon, 31 Aug 1998 21:55:21 -0600 Carlos Leon writes: >Anyone who has flying Cozys or Long-ezs I would >love them to answer the following questions: > >When you travel in your aircraft, what is your >average cruise speed ? (could be an average >Loran or GPS true) Typical cruise is 175KTS true. >For this speed, what is your average fuel >consumption ? > 10 GPH >What is your usual cruise altitude (and >temperature) ? > 7000-8000 feet 60-70 degrees this time of year >What is your engine and aircraft type ? Cozy MK IV >At what IAS do you pass the fence of the airport 80KTS >? What is your normal climing IAS ? 110 - 130kts >I just want to compare all this with our twin >cozy. > >Best regards >Carlos León >Twin Cozy MKIV YV-22X > > The EAA's CAFE foundation will be giving my plane a thorough flight test in mid October. If you are interested, I can send you a copy of the results they obtain. Sincerely, Mark Beduhn Cozy IV N494CZ _____________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Date: Wed, 09 Sep 1998 08:43:48 -0400 From: bil kleb Subject: Re: Fwd: COZY: How Good is Good? Marc J. Zeitlin wrote: > > This is one of the few things that bugs the heck out of me as an engineer [...] > [t]here are very few places where tolerances are called out. ah, but as a machinist, you would know that there are assumed bilateral tolerances when none are given: dimensions tolerance fractional +/- 1/64" .x +/- .1" .xx +/- .01" .xxx +/- .005" these are from my machine shop II class notes. furthermore, my textbook `machine tool technology' by repp and mccarthy, states, whenever specific tolerances are not indicated on the drawing, general tolerances apply. when no tolerance is specified, the tolerance generally is assumed to be +/- 1/64" for fractional dimensions and +/- 1/2 deg for angular dimensions. when no tolerance is specified for decimal dimensions, the tolerance generally is assumed to be +/- one figure, to the nearest significant figure. note that the last sentence contradicts my class notes for the final case (.xxx+/-.005). to further cloud the waters, my "machinists' ready reference" handbook by weingartner makes no mention of assumed tolerances. whether or not the engineer in question subscribed to this system of assumed tolerances when s/he drew the plans is another story only s/he can answer... -- bil From: "L. Wayne Hicks" Subject: RE: Fwd: COZY: How Good is Good? Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1998 09:48:48 -0400 -----Original Message----- From: bil kleb [SMTP:w.l.kleb@larc.nasa.gov] Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 1998 8:44 AM To: cozy_builders mailing list Subject: Re: Fwd: COZY: How Good is Good? Marc J. Zeitlin wrote: > > This is one of the few things that bugs the heck out of me as an engineer [...] > [t]here are very few places where tolerances are called out. ah, but as a machinist, you would know that there are assumed bilateral tolerances when none are given: dimensions tolerance fractional +/- 1/64" .x +/- .1" .xx +/- .01" .xxx +/- .005" bil [L. Wayne Hicks] I'll add to this... assumed tolerances are usually one more decimal place or next highest fraction than the finest level of measure on the measuring apparatus you're using. If you're measuring tape can only measure in 1/8th-inch increments, then the best assume accuracy is to the nearest half-eight, a.k.a. 1/16-th inch. Are we all in a weird mood today? Do we all secretly wish we could hit 63 home runs a year? Date: Wed, 09 Sep 1998 22:53:07 -0400 From: "Marc J. Zeitlin" Subject: Fwd: Re: Fwd: COZY: How Good is Good? bil kleb wrote (only partially yanking my chain, I assume :-) ); >ah, but as a machinist, you would know that there are assumed bilateral >tolerances when none are given: Ahem. And as a designer of injection molded plastic parts, sheet metal parts, and machined parts, as well as castings and other technologies, I also know that anytime I ASSUME what tolerances are used I might as well be sticking a red hot poker you know where, since every technology uses a different set of standard tolerances and has a different reference frame for them. If I tried to use +/- 0.5 degrees for a bending brake part, my parts would cost a fortune - if I used this tolerance for my canard/wing/fuselage leveling, I'd be the laughing stock of canard-dom. So, I don't think I'll be assuming anything about tolerances, just because I happen to know what job-shops would use if the plane was machined from billet of aluminum :-). -- Marc J. Zeitlin                     marcz@burnside.ma.ultranet.com 3 Sweetbriar Way                  http://www.ultranet.com/~marcz Acton, MA  01720                 http://cozy.canard.com/ From: "Nat Puffer" Subject: Re: COZY: plans: copyright vs patent Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1998 11:04:55 -0500 Dear Bill, We have learned quite a bit about the Federal Copyright Law. My niece is a very well respected intellectual property lawyer, and we have spent many hours with her preparing to defend our copyrights in Federal Court. Also, Shirley is an artist, and every month in the Artist Magazine there is an article, which we read, discussing how the Copyright Law protects creative works. Books, paintings, drawings, videos, computer programs, CD discs, etc. are all classified as "intellectual property" which is protected by the Copyright Laws. Using these in any form without permission is infringement. Infringement can occur in many ways, such as complete, direct copying, copying only portions, converting to another media, like book to video, or drawing to computer file, or rewording, like saying the same thing using different words, or a different language. Most people don't realize that intellectual property is protected, even if no copyright statement appears. Also, it is protected even if a copyright has not been registered in the copyright office. Penalties for infringement can be substantial, and ignorance of the law is no defense. If Harry says something he has published is copyrighted and hasn't given you permission to convert it to computer files, we suggest you don't. The same applies to Cozy drawings and text. Regards, Nat ---------- > From: bil kleb > To: cozy_builders mailing list > Subject: COZY: plans: copyright vs patent > Date: Thursday, September 10, 1998 7:11 AM > > david lednicer posted some intriguing words to the rec.aviation.homebuilt > newsgroup the other day regarding copyrighted material (specifically, > regarding harry riblett's airfoil book): > > I don't have copies of the coordinates of Harry's airfoils as computer > files. I would like to get them to add to the UIUC website. I have > asked Harry for the coordinates, and his response is that they are > protected by copyright, which is nonsense. Once coordinates are > published, the numbers themselves can be reproduced at will. If the > airfoils were patented, usage is restricted. However, Harry's are not > patented, only published in a copyrighted book. Only the book is > copyrighted - the coordinates are public domain. If anyone is up to > scanning or typing them in, I would be interested in getting a copy of > them. > > does this have any bearing on the availability of beautiful, convenient, > cad drawings of the fuselage bulkheads that lee d and others so graciously > made available in the past [and that are now no longer available due to > copyright concerns]? > > -- > bil Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1998 23:35:26 +0200 From: Rego and Noleen Burger Subject: COZY: Copyright Sadly NAT is right on this subject.... People wishing to share info. are obligated to make a ref. to it being "sharware" or "free". Many are in it for the money which is their right, but some are in it for the hobby so sharing becomes partly an extension of themselves. If nothing is said assume it is protected.... Take for example I leave my car outside, even open with the keys in it. If you come along and take it without asking me that is theft. We may be friends, I'll more than likely hit you over the head with a pillow if I found out, but if I reported my car stollen the police may shoot you trying to recover it. Now if you phoned me and asked if you could use my car for the day, I'd say "sure, the keys are in it outside just toot three time as you leave." A bit ridiculous but basic respect for one anothers property. :-) Simply ask.... many folks have told me sure go ahead...just don't profit without cutting me (the owner) in. :-) Happy building. -- Rego Burger CZ4#139 South Africa Web:http://home.intekom.com/glen/rnb.htm Work e-mail, mailto:burgerr@telkom.co.za From: "Nat Puffer" Subject: Re: COZY: Prop Failures Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1998 08:24:42 -0500 Dear Marv, We don't know of any instance with a Varieze, Long EZ, Cozy, or Velocity where anyone has ever lost an engine from the airplane. I believe the cowling structure is probably strong enough to hold the engine if it came loose from the firewall. It is quite common for aerobatic pilots and race pilots to attach the engine to the airframe with a cable in addition to the conventional mound. Nat ---------- > From: sdbish@juno.com > To: cozy_builders@canard.com > Subject: COZY: Prop Failures > Date: Wednesday, September 09, 1998 7:45 PM > > Regarding the recent conversation of splitting of wooden props, and the > ever concern of loss of a blade, and bad vibration which could result in > physical loss of an engine. Any reports or analysis of how a canard type > acts after loss of an engine, which equates to an extremely forward C.G.? > Is it totally uncontrollable? > > Just for what it's worth, if any of you happen to see the USAF > Thunderbirds perform this or next year, that is my son flying the lead > plane. Spoken by a somewhat proud father. > > Marv Bishop > Hemros, SD > sdbish@juno.com > > _____________________________________________________________________ > You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. > Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com > Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] From: GunMechInc@aol.com Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1998 16:41:02 EDT Subject: Re: COZY: Prop Failures Just breezing through here and saw the bit about the bird being uncontroable if you loose the engine. I don't recall which it was but in the last 18 months either in the canard pusher or CSA neswsletter there was a short article by the pilot of a vari-eze that had the engine come off and depart the airplane and the pilot managed to land the plane straight ahead on a runway. We are leaving for vacation tomorrow so I don't have time to look it up but will commit as much from memory and hope that I'm accurate. The pilot was making a low pass at a military base on a weekend , fast and thinks that what happen after tallking to the tower personnel and taking into consideration where the engine and cowling landed . This is what the pilot thinks happen. The intake part of the cowling failed bending or breaking backward and went through the prop breaking it and the subsquent viberation pulled the engine loose from the mounts and departed the plane. With the cowling damaged it may have not been strong enough to hold theengine.. Pilot landed straight ahead and did state that the plane was controllable. But he may have had enough airspeed to compensate for the forward CG. Being close to the ground may have helped also. Jack F. Walker Vari-EZE N52EZ Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1998 10:16:16 -0400 From: David Domeier Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: Fwd: COZY: How Good is Good? Mark, re "If I tried to use +/- 0.5 degrees for a bending brake part, my parts would cost a fortune - if I used this tolerance for my canard/wing/fuselage leveling, I'd be the laughing stock of canard-dom." I had an interesting conversation with the guy parked next to me at OSH. The subject was the GU canard and rain. As we all know the GU canard has tendance to pitch down when wet. I said my GU canard on a LEZ pitched down very little - like maybe 300 fpm, which easily trimmed out. He said he knew of a guy who bought a LEZ that had a GU canard which handled quite well in rain, but decided to build a new canard because it's measurements were not very close to plan. (probably the case with my canard since I am not an engineer, just a lucky Minnesota farm kid who made it in the pilot world) Anyway, when the new, perfect GU canard was installed on the LEZ, guess what? It pitched down in rain much worse than the original one. I suppose stuff like this drives guys like you nuts, but I think it indicates we don't always know as much as we would like to about this business. The specs of building airplanes are important, but not obsessively so. There are many carards out there flying quite well and I would guess no 2 of them are exactly alike. Notwithstanding all that, I believe most of our airplanes are closer to specs than Cessna's and Piper's. I've mentioned this on the forum before, when I had my LEZ certified I commented to the inspector that the wing LE edge was off by 3/8". He said, don't sweat it, I've seen Cessna'a off by more than an inch.... dd From: "Glen Whittaker" Subject: COZY: Build Times Date: Fri, 18 Sep 1998 23:21:03 -0500 Does the FAA really require that we record our construction times in the builders log? I have been recording them anyway but I can't remember reading that this was actually required. Glen Whittaker Cozy Mk IV 0563 From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Sat, 19 Sep 1998 08:08:01 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Re: COZY: Build Times The only requirement, is that you be able to prove compliance with the 51% rule. I kept a detailed log on the computer with an entry (usually a short paragraph) for every day I worked with sometimes part numbers, serial numbers, things gone right and wrong, along with the time spent. At the end I added up 4700 hours. Since I have many times used "Find" to locate information on details and how something was done, or what went wrong in helping others. Early on one should contact their F.A.A. inspector and become familiar, and determine what will be expected. Here in Cleveland, Ohio, they have a nice packet that includes a detailed checklist of all items. During the certification, I had paperwork arranged in the order of the checklist, the inspector was organized in the same order, and things went very quickly. Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 14:27:32 -0400 From: bil kleb Subject: COZY: voyager props (was: naca/nasa legacy cd-rom) I had written (a long time ago now): > > i have a un-opened copy of the legacy cd-rom: general aviation > highlights from eight decades of naca/nasa research. it contains > 179 "landmark" reports as determined from a survey of industry and > academia. it is a little old (1995), but is supposed to run on > a mac or pc. for more info see, > > http://library-www.larc.nasa.gov/legacy.html > > it goes to the first person to send their address and the name > of the person that designed voyager's propellers. i am still getting answers, so i thought i'd post another "it's gone" message with a summary of the results: + steve eberhart was first; he should definitely have the cd by now. + 35 responses so far (27 remembered to include their address) + john roncz's name was spelled many ways: rontz, ronze, ronz; even dick rutan uses "jon". + several people offered that eugene larrabee (of mit) is the best prop designer. some cited his july 1980 scientific american article, "the screw propeller", and others had taken college courses from him. it turns out that john used portions of larrabee's propeller theory formulations for his propeller design code written in basic. + according to dick r, bruce tifft made the first flight wood propellers. john agrees. next, wooden electro-mechanical propellers were designed and manufactured in germany by mt's gerd muhlbauer. two more sets of "optimized" wood propellers were designed by john and made by mt. however, after the fourth blade failure, they switched to metal, constant speed propellers from hartzel (also designed by john). + a detailed account of voyager's propellers is available in john's sae paper 891034, "propeller development for the rutan voyager". (copies are available from the society of automotive engineers [http://www.sae.org/, mailto:custsvc@sae.org, or (724) 776-4970] for $12.) (sorry for the delay posting this, i was verifying the facts with dick, john, and others.) -- bil From: SWrightFLY@aol.com Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 09:47:43 EDT Subject: Re: COZY: Reserving an N-Number Can we get this (Reserving an N-number) done by email? Does anyone have the address and procedures? Thanks Steve Wright From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 11:10:54 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Re: COZY: Reserving an N-Number On 10/07/98 09:47:43 you wrote: > >Can we get this (Reserving an N-number) done by email? Does anyone have >the address and procedures? > >Thanks >Steve Wright > > If you are having difficulty getting the number you want, or tight for time, and a memeber of the AOPA: Call the AOPA records office (in Oklahoma?). The charge might be $50 on your credit card, but give them an idea as to what type number you would like, they will research, get back to you with what is available, and reserve the number all within less than half a day. Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 18:13:49 +0200 From: Jannie Versfeld Subject: COZY: VNE ?? Cozy Hi all, What is the VNE on the Cozy MKIV? What is the main cause of this limit and what can be done to increase it? What is the design G factor? Kind regards, Jannie Versfeld, #673 From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 07:47:13 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Re: COZY: Lexan On 10/14/98 07:32:30 you wrote: > >Hi All, >I'd like to bend lexan. Is there anyone who knows the temperature required >for this > >Thanks > >Guy > > > Lexan has water within, when heated enough to bend, the water boils, making a bunch of bubbles. Have heard its possible to slowly heat lexan, drive the water out, and then heat to bending temp. Plexiglass (acrylic) needs 325F temperature, line your molds with white cotton flannel fabric. Put your acrylic on the flannel on a cookie sheet in the kitchen oven at 325F. About 5 or 10 minutes, it will be floppy, lay it on your lined female mold, then flannel, the male mold and push all this quickly. From: Epplin John A Subject: RE: COZY: Lexan Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 08:22:55 -0500 If you mean bending as in straight line such as a bending brake, just do it. Lexan is really tough, it will bend over a fairly sharp radius without cracking. If you use a radius similar to what you would use for 2024T3 aluminum you should get by OK. Only problem is that it is not very hard. Difficult to keep from scratching it with the brake. Don't try this with acrylic, will break immediately. John Epplin Mk4 #467 > -----Original Message----- > From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com [SMTP:cdenk@ix.netcom.com] > Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 1998 7:47 AM > To: guy.terren@wanadoo.fr; cozy_builders@canard.com > Subject: Re: COZY: Lexan > > On 10/14/98 07:32:30 you wrote: > > > >Hi All, > >I'd like to bend lexan. Is there anyone who knows the temperature > required > >for this > > > >Thanks > > > >Guy > > > > > > > > Lexan has water within, when heated enough to bend, the water boils, > making a bunch of bubbles. Have > heard its possible to slowly heat lexan, drive the water out, and then > heat to bending temp. > > Plexiglass (acrylic) needs 325F temperature, line your molds with white > cotton flannel fabric. Put > your acrylic on the flannel on a cookie sheet in the kitchen oven at 325F. > About 5 or 10 minutes, it > will be floppy, lay it on your lined female mold, then flannel, the male > mold and push all this > quickly. From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 11:22:49 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Re: COZY: Another Building Progress Website Some thoughts as I was reading progress: 1: Get a pizza cutter and plastic cutting pad (biggest available)at local fabric store for cutting fabric. Much easier and get more accurate and less fraying cuts. 2: Install electric outlets (2 on ea. side and 1 on ea. end). Drywall screw top down (after wearing one side turn it over). Install adjustable glides under all legs, level, as accurately as you can in all directions. 3: For butt joints on foam use dremel with router base and flat stone set flush with bottom of base to grind flush quickly. Also use to machine depressions where fiberglass laps, to minimize filling each side of lap. From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 11:08:25 -0500 (CDT) Subject: COZY: Construction Log On 10/15/98 23:48:01 you wrote: > >Ok, the epoxy fumes must be getting to me again! I forgot to post the >URL, which is: > > home.gs.verio.net/~jodyhart/home.html > >Jody >jodyhart@communique.net > > > I used Wordstar for my documentation since it would sum columns of numbers, and then dedicated a tab stop to the hours spent that day. Total time was just a couple of keystokes away. I don't think any Microsoft word processor will do that useful feature. But I think Excel will do with textboxes. Also its neat to search (find) various topics after the fact. Although I had extensive photos and log available, they weren't ask for by the FAA. At Salisbury yesterday, someone commented their approve propeller was "handmade wood". This is neat, since when putting a new prop, there is no paperwork, other than a logbook entry (I think). Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 10:02:14 -0400 From: Paul Krasa Subject: Re: COZY: Cost at Completion this is reasonable. I did an acutal cost estimate a few years ago and came up with $50,000 for an IFR Cozy MK IV with a full IFR package with two axis autopilot and HSI. Your probably alittle low on your prop, but overall in the ball park. Paul Krasa At 15:35 10/19/98 +0200, ONG_TJO@cft.philips.nl wrote: > Hello All, > > I am trying to figure out what the total budget required is for a > finished cozy airplane. > > I see that the airframe costs about $14K-16K, but what does the total > aircraft cost? Anybody who doesn't mind showing the numbers of their > airplane or has better estimates, I would really appreciate it. > Please break the cost down for the total aircraft by the following: > > propeller (what type-fixed, vp, cp), engine-(IO360, etc.),avionics, > and airframe. > > Fill free to add additional breakdowns. > My estimates are as follows, but could be way off base. > > propeller: fixed $650, vp $2000, cs $8000 > engine: $8000-$12000 for 0 time rebuilt > avionics: $6000 vfr $10000 ifr > airframe: $15000 > > grand total: $30000-$45000. > > Does this seem reasonable or am I in for a shock? > > > thanks, > > Timothy Ong > > > > Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 09:13:29 -0500 From: Tom Brusehaver Subject: Re: COZY: Cost at Completion > engine: $8000-$12000 for 0 time rebuilt I think this is really low. Even the Superior XP-360 was supposed to be $18K. Maybe a used engine 700-1500hours for $8-12K. > grand total: $30000-$45000. > > Does this seem reasonable or am I in for a shock? Reasonable. It is roughly what I am expecting to spend when everything is finished. Date: Mon, 19 Oct 98 10:06:59 EDT From: "Nick J Ugolini" Subject: re: COZY: Cost at Completion Price depends on what you can scrounge up.....and mainly what you want to do with the plane. There is no one answer.. For my Cozy 3 place... I figure structure @$14,000. I found a $2000 0-320, I am building my own prop for $100, with no strobes, minimal instruments (I found most for $100-300) I would probable have less than $17k in a VFR plane with a hand held radio, hand held gps (if I went that way.) Of course I am building a Highly decked out IFR plane with EVERYTHING. I will most likely have $20k in just the panel.....Men and boys and the price..... For you take cost of the airframe (the only REAL fixed cost at about $15k) add in a engine (highly veriable), figure in a VFR package (your choice on radios and/or not a Transponder). Add in your IFR stuff as desired. The sky is the limit. Your options is what will give you the actual cost. ------------- Original Text From: , on 10/19/98 9:35 AM: Hello All, I am trying to figure out what the total budget required is for a finished cozy airplane. I see that the airframe costs about $14K-16K, but what does the total aircraft cost? Anybody who doesn't mind showing the numbers of their airplane or has better estimates, I would really appreciate it. Please break the cost down for the total aircraft by the following: propeller (what type-fixed, vp, cp), engine-(IO360, etc.),avionics, and airframe. Fill free to add additional breakdowns. My estimates are as follows, but could be way off base. propeller: fixed $650, vp $2000, cs $8000 engine: $8000-$12000 for 0 time rebuilt avionics: $6000 vfr $10000 ifr airframe: $15000 grand total: $30000-$45000. Does this seem reasonable or am I in for a shock? thanks, Timothy Ong From: Cozy7971@aol.com Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 11:36:02 EDT Subject: Re: COZY: Cost at Completion While I'm still a couple years from complete I can see that the cost of $30,000 to $45,000 is probably pretty close. I have been involved in a few conversations with other builders and feel the following is worth pointing out: 1. Some amount of money will be spent on tools. How much depends on the builder. I'm a tool guy and have not hesitated to purchase high quality tools. Money can be saved by looking at the want ads in the paper. This weekend I saw a Sears 10" table saw in the local Suburban Life for $50. 2. I am currently stalled on construction as I have gone as far as I can in the basement. I am insulating, wiring, paneling and heating the garage. Do it yourself cost will be between $1,000 and $1,500. 3. A buddy building a three place Cozy (Jim Rios) bought an O320 dirt cheap by shopping around. He is rebuilding it himself with coaching from a fellow in our EAA chapter. I don't have the actual cost but do know he is saving a bundle. Moral is to shop around. 4. I'm no expert on this but I believe I can be flying for less than the suggested instrument cost. I plan to get real basic to get off the ground and add on over time. I'll use my hand held Comm and GPS. We'll have to see how it goes as I get closer to completion. Who knows, I may win the Illinois Lottery and have the most unbelievably wonderful panel known to man. 5. The more you build yourself, the more you will save. Virtually everything is available prefab but it is expensive. This takes more time but I get a lot of pleasure out of the building process. Building parts yourself can be simplified by sharing of jigs, molds, etc. Unfortunately I was hte first Mark IV builder in the area so I have been making my own jigs. Several people are getting under way around Chicago now and have expressed interest in borrowing them. As long as they return them so I can pass them on to others they are welcome. Dick Finn Cozy Mark IV #46 Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 21:49:29 -0400 From: David Domeier Subject: Re: COZY: Radar Signature for Cozy Romulo, re "(Can the ATC radar scan Cozy w/o tranponder active?) Yes. I've been tracked with transponder off. dd Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 07:20:56 -0500 From: Vance Atkinson Subject: Re: COZY: Radar Signature for Cozy Yes radar can see you but not all the time. Vance Atkinson Romulo Augusto wrote: > > Dear Nick and all, > you said in the subject : cost at Completion+ACI- about the transponder: > I am curious, without tranponder, have a Cozy radar signature? (Can the ATC > radar scan Cozy w/o tranponder active?) > Thanks in advance. > > Romulo Augusto da Cruz, Jr., Lt, MD, Cozy Plans SN +ACM-730 > Office: Rua da Bahia 1345/1103 Lourdes, Status: Pre-building > Belo Horizonte, MG , Brasil > Phones: 55-31-274-5667, 55-31-497-2080 , 55-31-954-9478 > > Romulojr+AEA-brhs.com.br , Cozybuilder+AEA-yahoo.com > > -----Mensagem original----- > De: Nick J Ugolini +ADw-njugolini+AEA-efdsouth.navfac.navy.mil+AD4- > Para: ONG+AF8-TJO+AEA-cft.philips.nl +ADw-ONG+AF8-TJO+AEA-cft.philips.nl+AD4- > Cc: cozy+AF8-builders+AEA-canard.com +ADw-cozy+AF8-builders+AEA-canard.com+AD4- > Data: Segunda-feira, 19 de Outubro de 1998 13:15 > Assunto: re: COZY: Cost at Completion > > +AD4-For my Cozy 3 place... > +ACI-figure in a VFR package (your choice on > +AD4-radios and/or not a Transponder).+ACI- From: "Enter your name here" Subject: Re: COZY: Radar Signature for Cozy Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 11:27:40 -0400 Do not save money by scimping on the transponder! I am an air traffic controller at Cleveland Center, and agree that the Cozy will show up as a primary return. However, even all-metal aircraft will be blanked out in a turn or at certain locations/elevations. In our dense air traffic environment a transponder with mode C is good insurance. Even if the controller doesn't see you to call traffic to IFR aircraft and other VFR traffic receiving advisories, the TCAS systems in passenger aircraft will pick you up. Bill Kastenholz wkasty@ix.netcom.com Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 15:24:25 -0400 From: bil kleb Subject: COZY: cozy iii cruise power chart would someone be kind enough to fax me a copy of the cruise power chart (percent power vs rpm) for the cozy iii (o-320)? thanks, -- bil fax: (757) 864-8670 From: mbeduhn@juno.com Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 20:51:15 -0500 Subject: COZY: CAFE flight testing of N494CZ I just returned from Santa Rosa California where the CAFE foundation conducted a series of flight tests of my Cozy MK IV. They are still analyzing the data, so I don't have the results yet, but they will be published in sport aviation in a couple of months. Overall the experience was fanstatic! I met some very dedicated, talented and professional aviation enthusiasts who were a pleasure to work with. I feel very fortunate to have had to opportunity to get my plane analyzed in such detail. C.J. Stephens (the test pilot) did share some comments with me. Overall he liked the plane and said that it performed very closely to the numbers published in the owners manual. He said that matching the numbers in the manual is very unusual, and is a real credit to the designer (Nat Puffer). He (the test pilot) built and owned a vari-ez, and he said my plane flew very much like his except mine has more power and is harder to slow down for landing (probably due to its increased mass). Again, it was a great experience and we are fortunate to have an organization (the EAA) that has the vision to sponsor the CAFE foundation. Mark Beduhn Cozy IV N494CZ PS We (my wife and two girls) stayed at Nat and Shirley Puffer's house for a couple of days on the way to Santa Rosa, and their hospitality was second to none. ___________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] From: mbeduhn@juno.com Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 20:17:46 -0500 Subject: Re: COZY: Cost at Completion On Mon, 19 Oct 1998 15:35:50 +0200 ONG_TJO@cft.philips.nl writes: > Hello All, > > I am trying to figure out what the total budget required is for a > finished cozy airplane. I see that the airframe costs about $14K-16K, but what > does the total aircraft cost? Anybody who doesn't mind showing the numbers of > their airplane or has better estimates, I would really appreciate it. > Please break the cost down for the total aircraft by the following: > propeller (what type-fixed, vp, cp), engine-(IO360, etc.),avionics, > and airframe. > > Fill free to add additional breakdowns. > My estimates are as follows, but could be way off base. > > propeller: fixed $650, vp $2000, cs $8000 > engine: $8000-$12000 for 0 time rebuilt > avionics: $6000 vfr $10000 ifr > airframe: $15000 > > grand total: $30000-$45000. > > Does this seem reasonable or am I in for a shock? > > I spent around $43,000. $21,000 for the airframe, $12,000 for a used engine, prop and accessories (3 blade wood prop $1800), $10,000 for the panel. Mark Beduhn Cozy IV N494CZ ___________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 09:39:16 -0500 From: Terry Pierce Subject: Re: Fwd: COZY: Plans corrections archived?? Marc, I thought I remember seeing a summary of plan corrections and changes by chapter rather than by newsletter. Does this exist or was I just wishing it existed. If not maybe someone would volunter to compile such a list. It sure would save a lot of time and make sure you didn't miss anything. -- Terry Pierce <>< mailto:tpierce@ghg.net Cozy Mark IV #600 Marc J. Zeitlin wrote: > Sure is. See: > > http://cozy.canard.com > > go to the "Newsletters" page, and then click on one of the newsletters. In > the Table of Contents, there will be a link to the "MKIV > Changes/Corrections", which has all the stuff from Newsletter 34 onward, up > to date (at least to #62). > > YaOdUvRa WnEcLeCOME :-). > > -- > Marc J. Zeitlin marcz@ultranet.com > http://www.ultranet.com/~marcz/ From: ponciroli@postoffice.worldnet.att.net Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 08:52:44 -0500 Subject: Re: COZY: related matters Dear John - Regarding your last paragraph about your wife's apparent ambivilance to your Cozy project. I too have a wife who tolerated the guy who was building who knows what in the basement, untill I purchased two airline tickets to spend a few days at Oshkosh. After she got nose to nose with Nat's Cozy MK IV, and saw other aircraft that were built by doctors, lawyers and other professional people, she began to realize that what was happening back home was magic. She has been a staunch advocate ever since. You have to do some marketing. Don Ponciroli ponciroli@att.net John wrote: >(my wife of 2+ years has always been rather un-supportive of the >project, but I just found out she is bragging about it to close friends. >Time to smell the epoxy again .-) From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 10:17:04 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: COZY: related matters My wife was a supporter during the construction phase, bringing iced tea, waiting for UPS, run to the hardware store, remembering 30 years ago, our travels in a Navion. The main actual work she helped with was hot wiring the canard. I did not push her to help. Today, she is a supporter, enjoying a Sunday trip to Phillipsburg, Pa. for a hike with lovely fall colors, Salisbury, MD. for a fly-in and camping on the beach of Assateague Island, and a 4 day trip to Atlanta (the round trip was $130 in fuel) to visit Daughter and friends, all from Cleveland, Ohio within the last month. From: "Nat Puffer" Subject: Re: Wives and airplane building was Re: COZY: related matters Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 11:45:28 -0600 Dear Paul, You are very wise. It is very important for a builder to have the support of his/her spouse. When I became heavily involved in the hobby of airplane building about 20 years ago, Shirley asked, "What am I supposed to do while you are building airplanes?" I replied, "You used to be very good at water colors. Why don't you get back into it again?" Well, she did in a big way. She started going to painting seminars, she joined the "Old Town Artists" and the North Star Water Color Association in St. Paul, and started painting in earnest. When we moved to Mesa, she joined the Arizona Water Color Association. When I said I wanted to add a shop, she said she wanted just as much room for her art studio. We added 800 square ft. to our house and divided it in half with folding doors in the middle. When I build, she paints. She has entered numerous art shows and received awards. We have a lot of visitors from all over the world. They stop to talk airplanes, and often end up buying Shirley's paintings. She now has paintings in almost half of the states in the US, and in Canada, Italy, England, and Australia. Her services are much in demand for figure and portrait painting. After we moved to Mesa, the Mesa Tribune did an article entitled, "Mesa couple finds that 'Cozy' retirement paints a pretty picture." Shirley not only enjoys flying and meeting and talking to builders, but in a small way, Shirley 's success in watercolors is due to our involvement in airplane building. For us, at least, our involvement has added a new dimension to our lives. We hope you will have a similarly rewarding experience. Regards, Nat ---------- > From: Paul Krasa > To: Cozy Builders > Subject: Wives and airplane building was Re: COZY: related matters > Date: Thursday, October 29, 1998 12:05 PM > > The way I have kept peace in my family is two fold. First, I spoil my wife > until she feels guilty if she says anything against building the airplane. > This means I give her what ever her little heart disires of my time, love > and money. Secondly, I get her involved in the project, sort of. While I > am working on the airplane, she has a table and very confortable chair at > the hanger where she can do her cross stiching. In this way we get to > spend time together talking while we both work on our respective projects. > > I won't say this strategy will work for every couple or any couple besides > my wife and I just that it works for us. Every relationship is different > and each couple/family must work out the balance between individual > hobbies, and the rest of life. > > Paul Krasa > Long EZ 214LP > > Happy building :') > > > snip Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 23:29:55 -0800 From: Frank Johanson Subject: COZY: Related Matters All of you are giving your wives a bad name. Try Frank's approach. Frank is a big Swede, weighing about 250. We had been to Oshkosh a couple of times and he really liked the Lancair 4. Money was an issue and it kept going up in price, but boy he did like that test ride! The price kept eating at him and the next year at Oshkosh, he decided what he was going to build for an airplane. He excitedly brought me over to see this canard down with the showplanes and said "This is the plane I want to build!" I slowly walked around the plane and looked at the inside from several angles. Then I looked at Frank, then at the inside of the plane. My comment? "There is the hole for the right leg, there is the hole for the left leg, but that thing in the middle is going to to be awfully uncomfortable to sit on!" Frank had brought me to see a Cozy III. Frank bought Nat's plan, and the living room became his work area. With -30 degree temps at night in the winter, the coal stove gives off lots of good heat to keep everything warm. When parts became too large for the living room and the young children were becoming a hazard to the templates, Frank had to strip out the inside of the barn, put in a heater, new electricity, insulation, floor, etc. and move the parts to the barn. Next, Frank went to Jeff's and helped with making his fuselage, spars, etc. The big day came with the tractor trailer truck pulling into the driveway and unloading the crate with Frank's plane parts he made. We got everything set up. Guess what, the barn is too small! We put the spars on the wall, the foam upstairs, the nose & cowlings on l-brackets. With the work benches on each side and the fuselage on the sawhorses, there isn't much room to work! (The strakes are now hanging from the ceiling.) But the best part is that he then took the buzz saw and cut the plane in HALF. (To be continued......) Debbie Johanson Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 10:22:21 -0600 From: Vance Atkinson Subject: COZY: [Fwd: [canard-aviators] IFR] X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 Message-ID: <36374467.8E408F66@flash.net> Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 10:20:55 -0600 From: Vance Atkinson Reply-To: vaatk@flash.net X-Sender: "Vance Atkinson" <@mail.flash.net> (Unverified) X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5b2 [en]C-FLASHNET (Win95; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Pinkav8or@aol.com Subject: Re: [canard-aviators] IFR References: <47a19d44.36373d38@aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Its not the aircraft platform that's the problem, It is a single engine it is a single vacuum pump or generator, it is NO heated fuel vents, no boots on the prop blades and wings a single set of instruments and the list goes on. I have to take a 6 month check ride in a simulator and believe me, you need more equipment than these aircraft have to fly with piece of mind. Letdowns and climb outs are about all I do in my plane. Incidentally, I have about 18000 hours flying and about 3000 hours actual and I've been very lucky early in my career when it comes to bad weather incidents. Vance Atkinson Pinkav8or@aol.com wrote: > > Just a note about IFR flying and canards. I have a little over 900 hours on > my Velocity. We fly it cross-country all the time in most all kinds of > weather. We have extensive avionics and equipment, including weather > avoidance, and we do fly in low IFR quite commonly on the east coast. We have > found the Velocity to be as stable as any factory built airplane and in many > ways more stable and a better IFR platform. So if you are interested in a lot > of IFR flying, you might want to consider a Velocity. > > Ray Watkins > Velocity > N222RW From ???@??? Fri Oct 30 11:07:45 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) with ESMTP id QAA25822 for ; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 16:20:11 -0500 (EST) Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by twc2.betaweb.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id QAA17316 for cozy_builders-list; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 16:09:11 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: twc2.betaweb.com: majordomo set sender to owner-cozy_builders@betaweb.com using -f Received: from dfw-ix7.ix.netcom.com (dfw-ix7.ix.netcom.com [206.214.98.7]) by twc2.betaweb.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id QAA17310 for ; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 16:09:08 -0500 From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Received: (from smap@localhost) by dfw-ix7.ix.netcom.com (8.8.4/8.8.4) id PAA26884; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 15:09:46 -0600 (CST) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 15:09:46 -0600 (CST) Received: from ely-oh3-35.ix.netcom.com(206.216.59.99) by dfw-ix7.ix.netcom.com via smap (V1.3) id rma026835; Wed Oct 28 15:09:17 1998 To: vaatk@flash.net To: cozy_builders@canard.com Message-Id: <1998102816450441@ix.netcom.com> Subject: Re: COZY: [Fwd: [canard-aviators] IFR] X-Mailer: Netcomplete v4.0, from NETCOM On-Line Communications, Inc. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-cozy_builders@betaweb.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: cdenk@ix.netcom.com X-UIDL: b81a6a55a3fe75f75fcb23db08554a59 Was wrote I doubt that, an 1/8" of ice on the Canard acumulated on a fast decent through 800' of clouds, no preciptation, just below freezing drove up across the fence speed by better than 5 knots. Incidently we landed with 3 hours fuel on board, plenty of options with CAVU above 5000' MSL. the whole trip from Atlanta to Cleveland. I agree 100% with Vance's comments. From: "Nat Puffer" Subject: COZY: Oaf on brakes Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1998 14:57:11 -0600 A couple of years ago I decided to scrap my homemade cover and have a professional one made at the aircraft upholstery shop on our field. The man said to taxi my Mark IV over to his hangar. When I fly solo, I always add ballast, but I wasn't going to fly to his hangar, just taxi, so I didn't need to put in the ballast, right? Well the hangar had a ramp which was slightly inclined. I shut off the engine and started to get out, but the airplane started to coast backwards. So I sat back down and put on the brakes. Guess what happened. The Mark IV with me in it went up like an elevator. The dumb oaf had to sit there til someone came and brought him back to earth. Nat From: "Nat Puffer" Subject: COZY: wheel up landing Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1998 15:07:18 -0600 Cozy builders, The FAA publishes accidents and incidents. The FAA normally considers a wheels up landing to be an accident, but they aren't sure what to call a wheel up landing in a Cozy. Everyone will land that way someday. When it happens to you, just tell the FAA that the designer of the Cozy has advised you that the Cozy was designed to land with the nose wheel up as a safety feature, in case the brakes fail. It isn't an accident, it isn't an incident, at the worst it is an "occurence". This way, you won't have to fill out an accident report. You can tell them the precedent has been set. Regards, Nat Date: Wed, 04 Nov 1998 21:24:28 -0500 From: David Domeier Subject: Re: COZY: [Fwd: [canard-aviators] IFR] Carl, Re Vance Atkinsons's post of single engine IFR and your "I agree 100% with Vance's comments.".... Ditto, without being a ditto head per se. One engine, one electric system, and one vacuum system isn't enough for this pilot in hard IFR conditions. One needs to be relaxed, calm, and organized to keep ahead of things in that world, and sitting there with just one of each is not conducive to stress free flight. A good auto pilot or copilot is also very helpful, as is a decent radar system. My definition of single engine "soft IFR" is 1000-3, no ice, no precip, no CB's, and no night. If conditions aren’t right, I’d rather kick back and have a beer than get all stressed out doing something reserved for the big guys in the heavy iron. To the guy who flies his Velocity in “all kinds of weather”, I say do it very carefully, you know, like porcupines making love. Your airplane is not designed or suited for flying in “all kinds of weather”. It’s a canard sport machine designed for fun in the sun, not an all weather fighter interceptor. dd Date: Wed, 04 Nov 1998 22:07:33 -0600 From: vance atkinson Subject: Re: COZY: brakes, the rest of the story TIE YOUR WRIST TO THE CANARD, THAT WAY, ONLY YOUR FEET GET CHOPPED UP !!! Just kidding. With this technique, you are at a slow walk, and HOLDING onto the canard.............Vance Atkinson C. W. Wright wrote: > > > 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." > > Being outside the cockpit and up on the gear with the engine running > "could" spell trouble should the unthinkable happen and for some reason > the throttle get opened up. What if you tripped? You could get chopped up > as the prop passes over you, or the plane could tim back on it's tail ( LE > and VE anyway). > > I've had two nose gear collapes, and one flat nose tire on rollout. *Not > fun*. I hold my breath each time I lower the nose gear to the runway. > > :-) Wayne From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1998 08:15:27 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: COZY: Brake Fluid Reserviour All the comments on brakes lately I have to relate the end of my first flying lesson, first time in an airplane, 30 years ago. The aircraft was a Piper J-3 Cub at Chagrin Falls, Ohio Airport (no longer there). The taxi way was down hill, a 180 degree turn into a good sized hanger. And I found out sometime later about this. The cub lost brakes while taxiing in, with normal parking on the grass near the hanger. The ramp was crowded more than usual. The only clear area took us into the hanger, the instructor steering with the rudder/tailwheel. As we rolled at a walking pace into the hanger, the instructor go a lineboy's attention, who grabbed the caban strut and stopped us several feet short of the wall. From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1998 13:52:07 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: COZY: brakes, the rest of the story On 11/05/98 11:10:05 you wrote: > >Hey, you' all on brake failure, > > I suppose as a last resort we could carry an old fashioned boat >anchor stowed up front somewhere inside a compartment with a trip >door.... > >dd > > > I suppose that the anchor could double as front ballast weight for those that need it! From: mbeduhn@juno.com Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1998 19:05:12 -0600 Subject: COZY: Re: CAFE flight testing of N494CZ > I just returned from Santa Rosa California where the CAFE foundation >conducted a series of flight tests of my Cozy MK IV. They are still analyzing the data, >so I don't have the results yet, but >they will be published in Sport Aviation in a couple of months. >>Hi Mark, >>Unless the article will explain what was involved to add the CAFE >>probe, I think the group would love to hear all about what you had to do to get the >>plane ready for evaluation. >> >>The pics of your plane look real nice. Looking forward to seeing >>it in person some day. > > >Infinity's Forever, >James D. Newman > My Experiences with CAFÉ I was sitting under the wing of my plane at AirVenture ‘98 when Brien Seeley came by and introduced himself as a member of the CAFE foundation. He said they were interested in testing a Cozy Mark IV, and he asked me to consider allowing them to use my plane. Brien explained that they would do a weight and balance on electronic scales, have a professional test pilot explore the flight envelope of the plane, and then publish the results in Sport Aviation. He then gave me a packet of information, and asked me to think about it. It didn't take me long to conclude that this was a unique opportunity that I should take advantage of. The information that Brien gave me included instructions on building the wing cuffs that hold some sophisticated instruments to the wing of the plane. Although they didn't look too difficult to make, I decided to allow myself a couple of months, to make sure that I had enough time. I confirmed a test date with Brien, and then ordered the materials that I needed. It took me about 3 weeks to build the wing cuffs which I mailed to CAFE foundation. I then got ready for the 1600 NM trip from Conway Arkansas to Santa Rosa California. The weather for the trip was perfect, and I arrived on Friday afternoon at around 3:00pm. The first thing that had to be done was to determine the empty weight of the plane. My Cozy was emptied, the fuel was drained, and we then rolled it on to the electronic scales which were built into the floor of the hangar. The scales are so sensitive that we had to close all of the doors and practically stop breathing while the measurements were taken. A laptop computer attached to the scales so that the CG of the plane could be instantly calculated whenever the plane was being weighed. After the initial weight and center of gravity were measured, the fuel truck came and topped off the tanks. After filling the tanks C.J. Stevens (the CAFE test pilot) and I went for a familiarization flight. Since C.J. has flown practically every thing with wings, and also owned a Vari-eze for 10 years, I didn't expect it to take long for him to get used to my plane. I was correct. He seemed very comfortable with the plane after only a few minutes. We flew for a half hour or so, landed the plane, and rolled it back into the hanger. Several more CAFE volunteers had arrived while we were flying and immediately started working on the plane after we climbed out. Everyone had their assigned task. It was like watching a racing pit crew in action. The cowling was removed and numerous instruments were installed. A video camera and laptop computer were mounted in the cockpit for gathering data. The wing cuffs that I had built in preparation for this testing were attached to each wing, and the sensors were installed in them. At about 7:00pm I went to the hotel exhausted, but the CAFE people continued to work on the plane until around midnight. When I arrived back at the hangar on Saturday morning, CJ was already on the third test flight. Every time he landed a flight parameter was changed. They changed either the weight, the CG or both. The intent was to test as much of the flight envelope as possible. Having the scale hooked up to a computer made these changes very quick and efficient. C.J. continued flying all day, and finished just after dark. On Sunday he flew 2 more times for his subjective flight analysis, and was done around 10:00am. When the last flight was completed, the plane was swarmed by CAFE volunteers removing all of the instruments they had previously installed. By 2:00 pm the plane was back in it's original flying condition and ready to go. Whew! A lot was accomplished in only a couple of days! My experience with the CAFE foundation was very positive. I met some very nice people and learned a lot about my plane. I consider myself very fortunate to have had my plane tested by this very professional group of volunteers. I would highly recommend that if you are ever offered this same opportunity, don't pass it up! Mark Beduhn ___________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 18:17:34 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: COZY: Re: CAFE flight testing of N494CZ Mark Beduhn writes YES!!, the slightest airflow over the lifting surfaces makes a difference. While weighing mine with the hanger door partially open (the airframe was behind a closed portion of a large hanger) and just light surface wings, we couldn't get repeat readings with the electronic scales. Closing the doors, and repeatability was not an issue. From: Burton.Donald@orbital.com Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1998 08:05:57 -0500 Subject: Re: [canard-aviators] Re: COZY: Re: CAFE flight testing of N494CZ This is absolutely true. The weight and CG of the airplane are two the most important parameters in performance testing. If you don't know the weight and CG (with everybody sitting with all their flight gear) you can't make any performance calculations. For example, induced drag goes up at the square of lift and lift equals weight. A 1% weight error (10 - 14 lb to you and me) gets a 1% error in induced drag. A 2% error in weight, a 4% error in induced drag, etc. This is why the current method of testing drag modifications on airliners is to fly constant weight / delta sweeps (where delta is the Greek symbol for the pressure ratio, i.e. Ambient static pressure/ 29.92). For the MD11 this means 10 hours of flying in straight lines to burn off 200,000 lb of fuel (about 150 data points). Then do your drag mods and repeat. The two lines will show if there is a drag difference and at what weight / altitude combination. Drag mods are not necessarily beneficial at all altitudes and weights. The baseline flights should be repeated for several of centers of gravity in order to correct your data for off condition flying. This is to correct your trim drag. The largest correction will be due to excess thrust. This will manifest itself as climb or descent if you don't hold constant altitude. In this case make the correction using ROC=TAS*(T-D)/W. If you do hold constant altitude then you will see a change in ground speed. This you can correct using F=ma ( a is your rate of change in ground speed and F will be your change in thrust). If the plane is accelerating, then it will appear that you have too much thrust and the correction will reduce the magnitude of the drag and vice versa. Performance testing of aircraft is not easy. I don't immediately trust most speed claims until I find out how the tests were performed (claims for prop dimpling and wheel pants are prime examples). The CAFE folks are one group which seem to know their stuff. db cdenk@ix.netcom.com on 11/06/98 11:23:51 PM To: mbeduhn@juno.com, infaero@flash.net, cozy_builders@canard.com, canard-aviators@canard.com cc: (bcc: Donald Burton/ORBVA) Subject: [canard-aviators] Re: COZY: Re: CAFE flight testing of N494CZ [The Canard Aviators's Mailing list] Mark Beduhn writes YES!!, the slightest airflow over the lifting surfaces makes a difference. While weighing mine with the hanger door partially open (the airframe was behind a closed portion of a large hanger) and just light surface wings, we couldn't get repeat readings with the electronic scales. Closing the doors, and repeatability was not an issue. \ ->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>-|- / For details on sponsors of this list, copyrights, and how to remove yourself from this list, please visit: http://www.canard.com/ca-ending.html (c) 1997,1998 Canard Aviators. support@canard.com / -|-<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< \ Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1998 20:34:56 -0600 From: Carlos Leon Subject: COZY: max. gross What is the maximun pratical overgross weight that one might consider on a 200 HP cozy MKIV. Our airplane has an empty weight of 1300 lbs, that does not leave much for payload. Regards Carlos V. León Twin COZY MK IV. YV 22X From: Paul Krasa Subject: RE: COZY: Don't laugh,Direct Panaspermia,Vacuum Genesis Berkut: Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1998 11:13:51 -0500 There was a large series of test done on a Vari EZ at NASA Langely Research Center during the 80's. The results may be on the Legacy CD which is available from NASA. Paul Long EZ 214LP ---------- From: Wayne Walter Peterson[SMTP:berkut34@wi.net] Reply To: Wayne Walter Peterson Sent: Sunday, November 08, 1998 7:33 PM To: rpstjohn@dnai.com Cc: berkut@loop.com; cozy_builders@canard.com; canard-aviation@canard.com; Berkut@home.com Subject: COZY: Don't laugh,Direct Panaspermia,Vacuum Genesis Berkut: "I can see farther,because I stand on the shoulders of more knowledgable individuals." "The mind is not a vessel to be filled, but a fire that is to be lit." Don't laugh. I would like to know if anyone has done computer modeling or wing tunnel testing of the Rutan Long-Ez wing.The area that I am interested in is the winglet-wing at the inboard aspect.I have heard that this area may be improved by making the radius larger and possibly to add an area of wing that will go back to the aft end of the rudder. I feel that maybe one of the builders out there may know the answer, or someone may have the resources to find the answer. Could this be a thesis for someone in school? I know that there has been much discussion and debate on the lower winglet and I am not addressing this issue at the time. But, I feel the modeling could answer some heartful ideas. The Rutan Long-Ez canard and it's spin-off are evolving,the wing needs to also evolve. I don't have the answer,I look to the other builders for guidance.Now,Burt, Dave, Nat and others would say, I think "Don't change a thing". But the plane has changed, for the better. We all want to do the right thing,but we all need help.Bob St.John(a fellow Berkut builder) was the first to express to me the need to clean up this area. Any ideas? Leads? Links? I and the others who keep an eye on the net will look forward to any info. Wayne From: mbeduhn@juno.com Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1998 16:27:49 -0600 Subject: COZY: Re: CAFE flight testing of N494CZ On Sat, 07 Nov 1998 17:31:29 -0800 "LCDR James D. Newman" writes: >Hi Mark, > > Excellent brief! Thanks loads!! > > Isn't there a long probe they attach to the plane some how? If >so, can you expound about this: how they attached it (did you have to repair the >plane?), it's purpose, etc.? > > Would you mind expounding about the cuffs: size, shape, purpose, >type sensors installed, effect >on planes flight characteristics, etc.? TIA. > >Infinity's Forever, > > JD > JD, CAFE sent me two 3" diameter fiberglass tubes that were 24" long. These are mounted under each wing with a home-made wing cuff. The cuff consists of 4 layers of fiberglass 8" wide wrapped chordwise around the wing (over plastic tape for release) and allowed to cure. Then a foam spacer running from the leading edge of the wing to the trailing edge is mounted to the bottom of the cuff , and the tube is glued to the bottom of the spacer. Then additional glass is used to bond the bottom the the cuff to the spacer to the tube. When is is done the cuff is attached to the wing with duct tape, and the instruments are mounted inside the tube. The wing tip strobe wires were used to connect the instruments to an onboard computer. If you look closely at some pictures in previous CAFE articles you will see the wing cuffs mounted near the tip of each wing. It looks like a missile mounted under each wing. The instrument they use is called a barograph. It is really quite sophisticated and was designed by an electrical engineer for the Voyager airplane. Although it neverflew around the world on the voyager, Brein Seeley (CAFE president) heard about it and talked Stephen Williams (the designer) into adapting it for aircraft testing. The barograph measures airspeed (via pivoting arrow shaped probe), temperature, and pressure. The data is continuously fed into a lap top computer along with engine RPM, manifold pressure, oil temp, oil pressure, cooling air inlet and exhaust temp, and cylinder head temp. This data is all collected simultaneously and downloaded into a different computer after each flight. In addition, a video camera is mounted in the plane to view the instruments that are temporarily mounted to the panel (I think as a backup). The pilot's voice is also connected to the video camera through the intercom to record the pilots comments and observations. Hope this helps answer your questions, Mark Beduhn Cozy IV N494CZ ___________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] From: "L. Wayne Hicks" Subject: COZY: FW: Aerobatics in Canard Aircraft - Why or Why Not? Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 13:30:41 -0500 -----Original Message----- From: TEAMEZ@aol.com [SMTP:TEAMEZ@aol.com] Sent: Saturday, November 14, 1998 12:30 AM To: canard-aviators@canard.com Subject: [canard-aviators] Aerobatics in Canard Aircraft - Why or Why Not? [L. Wayne Hicks] Cozyites: Tom Staggs is a professional aerobatics pilot who does his routines in a Long EZ. I am only forwarding his comments because he gives good rationale for the do's and don'ts for canard aerobatics. Wayne Hicks Cozy IV #678 Chapter 8 >From Tom Staggs: To facilitate follow-on conversations on the individual topics, I'm a professional airshow performer who flies low-altitude aerobatics in my Long-EZ . I hold an unrestricted low-altitude waiver. I've flown at 56 show sites in 17 American states and 5 Canadian Provinces. I've logged over 1,000 hours in my EZ, including over 300 either practicing or performing aerobatics. My Long-EZ is basically a per-plans plane, with a few notable exceptions: I have an 160-HP O-320-E2D, beefed up the engine mount extrusions for the torque imposed by aerobatics, a NACA inlet on the belly, and extended my aileron span (absolutely no effect on roll rate, by the way!!!!). There is a big difference between "capable" and "suited" when it comes to aerobatics. Someone pointed out in an earlier posting that Tex Johnston managed to roll the prototype 707 in front of a crowd, but that didn't mean that all 707's should be rolled, or that it was a bright idea. The Long-EZ and Veri-EZE are both capable of simple aerobatics, but neither is well-suited to aerobatics. Why? Their roll rates are slow (approximately 50-degrees for a Long-EZ using coordinated controls compared to 180+ degrees per second in most aerobatic planes), they lack the ability to hold the nose up during knife-edge flight, they lack the ability to use prop blast over the tail to provide control authority at low speeds, and the planes' stability in true out-of-control flight is not predictable. The bottom line: if you want to fly aerobatics, you should have built an RV or Pitts. Our planes are great for cross-country, but they just aren't good aerobatic planes. Another thing to consider is how the planes' efficiency is a detriment to its ability to fly aerobatics. Given the clean lines, an EZ will easily out- accelerate most any other prop plane in their horsepower class, assuming the planes aren't climbing. When maneuvering with RV-4's with constant-speed props and 20 more horsepower, I can easily pull well out in front, all because of our wonderful aerodynamic efficiency. When flying aerobatics, should you accidentally allow the nose to get too low or stay down for too long, you can find yourself shooting through red line faster than you could ever imagine. The elasticity of our fiberglass wings makes them poorly suited to safely flying aerobatics. When flying at maneuvering speed, if you rapidly apply full stick, your ailerons function more like large trim tabs, twisting the wing opposite the deflection of the control surface. I have been able to document this through videotape by recording the fore & aft motion of the winglet during aileron inputs. This twisting of the wing result in decreased roll authority during the first 30-degrees of a roll, a fact that is evident when reviewing my boresight videotape shot with "schnoz cam", a video camera mounted in the nose of my EZ. It's worth noting that when Rick Fessenden was flying the Berkut in airshows, the stiffer Berkut wings with its Kevlar and Carbon fiber construction allowed him to achieve a faster and more responsive roll rate and a stronger ultimate load. In swept wing airplanes, applying full rudder into the direction of roll increases the roll rate. The advancing wing's centroid of lift swings farther outboard from the center of mass, providing it with an increased moment arm, while the retarded wing has its centroid move inboard. This lift asymmetry results in a rolling moment around the center of mass. What it means to you is that your roll rate increases by using excessive rudder when compared to conventional "balanced" flight. Just because a maneuver can be flown in an EZ, is it safe to fly it in an EZ? If you haven't been trained to fly aerobatics in a conventional aircraft designed for acro, then I'd recommend you not fly them in your EZ. Even with the training, beware of our planes' weaknesses. Remember, the nose of canard planes "fall through" most maneuvers, and once pointed down, speed will build up faster than you could ever imagine. I would recommend that you limit yourself to steep turns or wingovers. If you have to try something inverted, do so knowing that the plane might not forgive you your mistakes. So what maneuvers can be flown in an EZ? Loops and rolls, as well as variations on the theme such as barrel rolls, wingovers, half-cubans. Which can't be flown: spins, snaps, hammerheads, and tail slides. The first two can't be accomplished because of the inability to stall the main wing while simultaneously yawing the plane, the third because we lack air flow over the rudders as we approach zero airspeed, and the last because of the terrible post-stall gyrations encountered as the plane weathervanes after swapping ends (see the article in the CSA Newsletter last year). As for the wide-body family of canard planes (Cozy, Velocity, AeroCanard, etc.), I would not recommend any types of aerobatics in these aircraft. Their widened fuselages result in more lifting area forward of the center of mass, decreasing the dynamic and static stability of the canard design. In cruising flight, they're very safe, but they should not be used for aerobatics. While flight testing one of these designs, I found out that rapid application of aft stick could actually result in an uncommanded increase in angle of attack, despite being countered by full forward stick. This was likely the result of the increased lifting area incorporated in these designs. Such a phenomena could easily result in overstressing the wings to the point of failure. For those of you who have read this far, yes, I have scared the daylights out of myself flying aerobatics in the EZ. When I perform in a show, it's a routine that I have flown literally hundreds of times, always developing maneuvers above 5,000' AGL before moving them slowly downward. There are some maneuvers that although I can do, I have chosen not to include in my routine because they lack enough margin for error or ability to be reproduced consistently. If you're still insistent on flying aerobatics in your EZ, please get together with a local pilot who has already mastered the maneuvers. Make sure that they really know what they're talking about; don't fly with someone who accomplish the maneuver by luck instead of skill. Above all, don't try to perform a maneuver based on advice or technique you read about on the internet.... ( And please remember, You got this from the internet...... -Moderator) Fly Safely, Tom Staggs Long-EZ N13YV Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1998 08:18:40 -0500 From: bil kleb Subject: COZY: cozy FAQ update - chapter 4 i am glad to announce that yet another builder contributed to our Frequently Asked/Answered Questions (FAQ) document. the FAQ serves to distill the archived emails (thanks marc!) for a given chapter or topic. the intent of a FAQ is to provide a quick reference for those who do not have the time or energy to wade through years of archived emails and to reduce the quantity of commonly asked questions in the mailing list itself. wayne hicks choose the chapter with many questions: chapter 4. thanks wayne, i am sure many first-time builders to come will hail your name. directions on how _you_ can contribute are in the FAQ itself (see section 1). marc has put the new and improved FAQ on the website, http://cozy.canard.com/mail_list/cozy-faq.html or you can receive one via email. simply mailto:majordomo@canard.com with get cozy_builders cozy-faq.txt end in the "body" of the message. again, anyone else interested in contributing (or merely updating info for a given chapter or topic), please let me know. -- bil From: "L. Wayne Hicks" Subject: RE: COZY: cozy FAQ update - chapter 4 Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1998 08:44:55 -0500 -----Original Message----- From: bil kleb [SMTP:w.l.kleb@larc.nasa.gov] Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 1998 8:19 AM To: cozy_builders mailing list Subject: COZY: cozy FAQ update - chapter 4 i am glad to announce that yet another builder contributed to our FAQ. wayne hicks chose the chapter with many questions: chapter 4. thanks wayne, i am sure many first-time builders to come will hail your name. [L. Wayne Hicks] My pleasure. I only documented the answers of those that came before me. Besides Nat's ever-ready advise, the FAQ and archives is a BONUS for all of us building this plane. The wealth of information available is the second biggest reason for why I'm building this plane. The first? It's one of the few 200 MPH, four-place planes I could buy for 500 bucks. So don't thank me, thank Nat, Marc, bil, and your fellow builders. Wayne Hicks Cozy IV #678 Chapter 9 Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1998 08:05:35 -0800 From: Eric Westland Subject: COZY: Fire Extinguisher? It's time to purchase a fire extinguisher for the plane, something I know little about. I have seen the small halon ones in planes that are flying now, but I believe they are no longer made. Any recommendations? Thanks, Eric Westland From: "Eddie Bryant" Subject: Re: COZY: Fire Extinguisher? Don't think Halon is available... Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1998 16:59:45 -0600 -----Original Message----- From: Eric Westland To: Cozy Builders Mailing List Date: Thursday, November 19, 1998 11:52 AM Subject: COZY: Fire Extinguisher? >It's time to purchase a fire extinguisher for the plane, something I >know little about. I have seen the small halon ones in planes that are >flying now, but I believe they are no longer made. Any recommendations? > >Thanks, > >Eric Westland > While attending an engineering course at UAB, I had the opportunity to tour the Birmingham, AL airport tower and a company that builds Amerex fire extinguishers in Trussville, AL. I recall it was a very interesting tour and how the engineer giving the tour remarked (in remorse) about having to shut down their Halon line per EPA. They had done some "custom" engine compartment work (aircraft) and still had some of their jigs around. (they also had some ovens that looked large enough to do some post-cure work ....I was thinking at the time ;>)... From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1998 21:03:13 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: COZY: Fire Extinguisher? On 11/19/98 08:05:35 you wrote: > >It's time to purchase a fire extinguisher for the plane, something I >know little about. I have seen the small halon ones in planes that are >flying now, but I believe they are no longer made. Any recommendations? > >Thanks, > >Eric Westland > > > I have a small (prehaps 9 or 10 inches long x 2.5" dia.) in a rack on my left side aft end 3" +- forward of instrument panel pilot outboard side at lower longeron level. I could reach it in flight if need be. Its Halon gas. Dry powder would be impossible in flight with all the dust, plus the dust is corrosive long term. The halon is not the best to breath, but with decent cabin ventilation and a small shot from the unit, might put out the fire. Best is pay attention to fire sources, i.e. no cigarettes, etc. No fuels i.e. lighters, fuel containers . For camping I carry a very small wood burning stove, no gasoline or propane. From: "Nat Puffer" Subject: Re: COZY: UV degradation over time Date: Tue, 24 Nov 1998 08:34:02 -0600 Allan, My Varieze is now 20-1/2 years old. Part of the time it sat outside in the Arizona Sun, part of the time in the Nevada sun. I think it was repainted twice. It is still flying and I am told it looks great. The Long EZ was designed for the 118 hp 0-235 Lycoming, but most builders installed 0-320s. Mike Melvill and Dick Rutan both installed 0-360s. Nat ---------- > From: Allan Aaron > To: cozy_builders > Subject: COZY: UV degradation over time > Date: Tuesday, November 24, 1998 5:55 AM > > Hi, > > I'm interested in the group's opinions about these two questions - > > 1. Is there any hard (or even anecdotal) evidence of degradation of > fiberglass planes as a consequence of sitting in the sun (rather than being > hangared) over a period of years. The Vari Eze I'm looking at buying has > been parked outside since it was built about 10 years ago. Paintwork is > pretty poor but my main concern is structural. I know this has been beaten > to death over the years but I haven't found anything definitive - what are > your thoughts? > > 2. Is anyone flying Long Eze's with O-200 engines in them. There's one for > sale locally that hasn't yet flown. Sounds pretty marginal to me. What do > you think? > > Thanks to all for your input. > > Allan Aaron > From: "astrong" Subject: Re: COZY: Bolt specs wanted Date: Wed, 2 Dec 1998 12:04:51 -0800 Carl, What about the FAA`s EA-AC 43.13-1A & 2A Acceptable methods and practices. page 115 Aircraft Hardware. Alex -----Original Message----- From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com To: cozy_builders@canard.com Date: Wednesday, December 02, 1998 11:35 AM Subject: COZY: Bolt specs wanted >Can someone point me or provide the following info: For AN3 through AN8 >Bolts, the allowable working load (not to be confused with ultimate or >breaking) in tension and shear. My references tell the tightening torque >limits, and seaching the net, I didn't find bolts, but found among many >others, a sex site on AN.. . > > From: "Wilhelmson, Jack" Subject: RE: COZY: Bolt specs wanted Date: Thu, 3 Dec 1998 11:57:17 -0500 Carl: The reason you can not find this info in a neat table is that there is no way to say what the allowable working load is for a bolt in any application. The load in the bolt from the recommended torque limits can be calculated. The safety factor or each given application must be decided etc. Does the service load add to the load caused by the tightening torque, or does it subtract from it? All these questions must be answered for each engineering problem. An common example of this is cylinder head bolts on a IC engine. They must be tongued up enough to keep the head from leaking combustion gases but not so much that they will break from the load created by the BMEP in the cylinder. In this case the bolt must have a high safety factor because the load is applied and removed many times a minute which creates a fatigue problem. There are tables for the allowable working load for cylinder head bolts, but you would not want to use these tables for anything else. Maybe I don't understand what you are looking for. Jack Wilhelmson N711CZ > -----Original Message----- > From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com [SMTP:cdenk@ix.netcom.com] > Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 1998 2:05 PM > To: cozy_builders@canard.com > Subject: COZY: Bolt specs wanted > > Can someone point me or provide the following info: For AN3 through AN8 > Bolts, the allowable working load (not to be confused with ultimate or > breaking) in tension and shear. My references tell the tightening torque > limits, and seaching the net, I didn't find bolts, but found among many > others, a sex site on AN.. . From: Fritzx2@aol.com Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 20:36:52 EST Subject: COZY: Fastener Safety Wiring Are there any general rules for which fasteners should be of the type that have provisions to safety wire and which ones don't need to be safety wired? For example, I have seen safety wires on the engine oil drain plug, prop bolts, and the oil filter (not a fastener obviously). But, there are other fasteners in planes that I have seen that were not safetied, production planes included. I suppose I could always err on the safe side and make all fasteners safetied but my gut feeling based on other examples is that safetying everything is way overkill. So, where do you draw the line? I'm not questioning the plans, just wondering which type of fastener to spec. for a modification. Rules and/or reference to the list of rules would be appreciated. AC 43.13-13A is on my xmas list - maybe it's in there? Thanks, John Fritz From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 20:45:42 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: COZY: Fastener Safety Wiring Yes the safety wire procedure is in the AC... Important bolts get safetyed with wire, cotter pins, bent tabs or other mechanical. Otherwise locking nuts (either deformed shape or elastic insert [No high temp.], lock washers (one use then throw away). These type requirements (and others) should be memorized, or maybe you will remember after doing it soooo often. From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 17:25:12 -0600 (CST) Subject: COZY: Aircraft Designators While on the GTE Duats today, there was a notice that some aircraft designators had changed, there was a help feature, and here is the current canrd type designators for flight plans: **** Current Time: Mon Dec 14 22:27 (UTC) **** DESIG MODEL NAME MANUFACTURER ARES 151 ARES RUTAN BOOM 202 BOOMERANG RUTAN COZY COZY, CLASSIC CO-Z, RUTAN, COSY DEFI 40 DEFIANT RUTAN LGEZ 61 LONG-EZ RUTAN SOLI 77 SOLITAIRE RUTAN VEZE 33 VARIEZE RUTAN VVIG 27, 32 VARIVIGGEN RUTAN VELO VELOCITY VELOCITY The appropriate designator should be used in filing flight plans and when requested by a controller. Note that usually there is an equipment identifying designator following a "/" after the above designators. These should be accepted by the FAA computers. From: lschuler@cellular.uscc.com Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 14:17:48 -0600 Subject: Re[2]: COZY: Approved parts (was Aerocad) Nat wrote: >... a significant number of voids... >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 lay-up will bend, spread, and maybe buckle and break. Ok, now I'm bugged! I found some voids in the nose strut I received from Featherlite (after waiting for over two months and four follow-up calls to get it). These voids were near the surface and I have no idea how many may have been internal that I couldn't see. Maybe foolish [a good dose of hindsight is what one takes before bedtime if one likes staying up all night :-)], but I trusted the part as it is made by an "approved" supplier. Yup, I "Assumed" it must be "normal" since these struts are "approved". Seemed like a reasonable expectation at the time. I sanded/ground out the voids (to get roughened surface) and filled them with flox before covering the strut with BID. What bugs me is the term "significant". What is and what isn't 'significant'? Would a void in one spot be bad news, but same size in another spot be ok? How do I determine if what I received (from any supplier; approved or not) is bad? How do I find internal voids? Should I be worried about ALL parts and materials used on my airplane, regardless of whether there is "official" approval or not? If so, what benefit, as a builder, do I get from "approval"? Does "approval" status remove my responsibility for the materials I use in my airplane? If not, what specific benefit, as a builder, do I get from "approval"? In this particular case (questionable nose strut), do I worry about my first landing, or wait for the thousandth to get nervous? Do I rip it out and demand a refund after I've already modified it per plans? This inquiring mind would really like to know. Others may too. Sleepless in Wisconsin, Larry Schuler MK-IV plans #500; CH-13 From: "Nat Puffer" Subject: Re: Re[2]: COZY: Approved parts (was Aerocad) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 14:08:12 -0600 Dear Sleepness in Wisconsin, You asked about "approved" parts. Our authorized suppliers are pretty much the same as Burt Rutan picked, based upon their long reputation in the aircraft business. They supply parts for designers to test in their prototypes and plans models, and if satisfactory, agree to make all other parts the same way (like Piper, Beech and Cessna promise the FAA). This is the condition on which we "approve" their parts. If they work for us, we assume they will work for others. You asked the meaning of "substantial" voids. "Substantial" means that they are numerous enough to affect the mechanical properties of the composite structure. Owens Corning wanted us to authorize additional lab time at $175/hour to quantify the voids. We authorized this and will be able to report in due course. You wanted to know whether your nose strut was okay. I haven't heard any complaints so far on the nose strut spreading, but if I do, I will investigate. The investigation of main gear spreading was based upon complaints I received. If I have offended anyone, or if you don't wish to know about these things or the results of my investigating, I will be pleased to report back to only the person who has complained. However, I was instructed that if people post something to the whole group, I should reply to the whole group. I have supplied all of the information I have up until now, so I would like to drop this subject until I have new information. In the meantime, I think you can sleep peacefully. Nat ---------- > From: lschuler@cellular.uscc.com > To: cozy_builders@canard.com > Subject: Re[2]: COZY: Approved parts (was Aerocad) > Date: Monday, December 14, 1998 2:17 PM > > From: lschuler@cellular.uscc.com Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 18:06:11 -0600 Subject: Re[4]: COZY: Approved parts (was Aerocad) In all fairness Nat, I don't believe I was asking that you drop the info on the main gear spreading issue. Also the main gear spreading issue was not mentioned in my post, nor was nose strut spreading (whatever that is). The subject is "Approved parts" on this thread. It may have started via the mains spreading issue (refer to the reference in the subject line), but sometimes that's how new subjects, concerns, issues etc get started on Marc's E-Mail list. I believe I asked a number of fair questions about the value of approval etc and how to be able to tell when an 'approved' part is not acceptable for use on my airplane. You did shed some light on the approval process and, in general, how parts get approved by you. That's informative, but does not answer the main question(s) I posed to the group. Not meaning to pick fly poop off pepper; but, you state that you "assume" that because you tried a part once and it hasn't broke yet, several hundred similar parts made by the same company will perform and be of the same quality for years to come as the one you received. That, company reputation and copying Burt's work, in general are how you arrive at an approval decision. All well and good, but that doesn't exactly match up to the considerable cost or detail of testing which the FAA requires for certified stuff. I think equating your blessing to FAA certification is terribly misleading. Nat, please understand, the only reason I get concerned about this stuff is because it's my keester on the line. As such, it seems to me that I have asked some fair and reasonable questions about approved parts I am receiving. I ask questions in this forum is so that others may benefit from the collective wisdom found here; not just for my benefit. Perhaps you, or anyone else for that matter, could tackle each of my original questions one at a time. That may save some time and some batting stuff back and forth. Still waiting for answers (and yes, still awake) in Wisconsin, Larry From: mbeduhn@juno.com Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 19:22:20 -0600 Subject: Re: COZY: Aircraft Designators Does this mean that we aren't supposed to use HXB/U anymore? On Mon, 14 Dec 1998 17:25:12 -0600 (CST) cdenk@ix.netcom.com writes: >While on the GTE Duats today, there was a notice that some aircraft >designators had >changed, there was a help feature, and here is the current canrd type >designators for >flight plans: > >**** Current Time: Mon Dec 14 22:27 (UTC) **** > >DESIG MODEL NAME MANUFACTURER >ARES 151 ARES RUTAN > >BOOM 202 BOOMERANG RUTAN > >COZY COZY, CLASSIC CO-Z, RUTAN, COSY > >DEFI 40 DEFIANT RUTAN > >LGEZ 61 LONG-EZ RUTAN > >SOLI 77 SOLITAIRE RUTAN > >VEZE 33 VARIEZE RUTAN > >VVIG 27, 32 VARIVIGGEN RUTAN > >VELO VELOCITY VELOCITY > > >The appropriate designator should be used in filing flight plans and >when requested by >a controller. Note that usually there is an equipment identifying >designator following a >"/" after the above designators. These should be accepted by the FAA >computers. > > ___________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 20:21:15 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: COZY: Aircraft Designators Mark questioned Affirmative, the HXB (Homebuilt Experimental approach speed class B) is generic. I have been using COZY/U (Charlie Oscar Zulu Yankee Slash Uniform) for some time, once in a while a controller will revert to experimental. About 10% of the controllers ask what type a COZY is. I am never quite sure what they want, sometimes answer "for the computer its Charlie...." and other times a canard pusher, 3 place longeze. Remember, the FAR's require on first contact with Tower, advise them you are experimental. I do this with "Experimental COZY". When contacting approach and landing in their area, I consider the approach controller as an arm of tower, and consider that adequate, but never had an official ruling on that, will have to ask the queation next time at CLE tower for Operation Rain Check. It gets kind of busy at the end on an IFR approach, when told to contact tower, I try to keep the communications to bare minimum. Flying CLE to Asheville, NC. tomorrow (Wed.) might have the oportunity to get the question answered. The controllers seem to like COZY, and its sounds kind of funny when they give traffic to a 747 as a Cozy at 2 oclock and 8 miles. Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 08:13:06 +0200 From: Rego Burger Subject: COZY: Bug in the system! Ideas please? Some time ago I did a routine walkabout around my + built craft and found one of the fueltank vent tubes blocked(by itself). I cleared it with a homemade ram rod to find a muddy like substance come out, I suspect a Wasp or Hornet had paid a visit. Since then I've found a nest or two inside the main spar open area just behind the rear seats. These things are a pest! Now I have sleepless nights about what may be in my right hand fuel tank! Q's 1.) How can I repel these creatures? 2.) Can I expect to find a nest in the tank? 3.) How do I inspect the tank without cutting holes all over? 4.) How long does it take for hornets to hatch? This is worse than a Y2K problem. Rego Burger RSA Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 14:58 -0600 (CST) From: Michael Pollock Subject: COZY: Aircraft Designators CDENK@IX.NETCOM.COM SENT THESE DESIGNATORS AS FOUND UNDER DUAT >DESIG MODEL NAME MANUFACTURER >ARES 151 ARES RUTAN >BOOM 202 BOOMERANG RUTAN >COZY COZY, CLASSIC CO-Z, RUTAN, COSY >DEFI 40 DEFIANT RUTAN >LGEZ 61 LONG-EZ RUTAN >SOLI 77 SOLITAIRE RUTAN >VEZE 33 VARIEZE RUTAN >VVIG 27, 32 VARIVIGGEN RUTAN >VELO VELOCITY VELOCITY My question is, has anyone tried to use VELO for a velocity as an aircraft designator on duat? I tried, but it would not accept VELO. It would, however, accept COZY... Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 11:15:01 -0500 From: Bulent Aliev Subject: Re: COZY: Bug in the system! How about moth balls? If you can stand the smell :) > > Q's > 1.) How can I repel these creatures? > 2.) Can I expect to find a nest in the tank? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: cozy623@juno.com Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 21:28:35 -0700 Subject: Re: COZY: Bug in the system! In Arizona we have that problem also in the summer. Stick a pipe cleaner in the tube. If you get a bright color you won't miss it hanging out. Also it still breaths but keeps the bugs out. This is also good for pitot holes. Jeb From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 18:14:30 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: COZY: Aircraft Designators, & flight report Mark Beduhn wrote I might have answered this already, but YES use the new. It was neat coming in from Asheville, Nc. to Cleveland, Ohio IFR yesterday. Not one controller, was out of step, all called us "COZY". Most of the flight was in the clear, departing Asheville during a brief clear spot between 1 mile in snow, climbing on top at 9000, and later to 11,000. 50 miles from home, to 6000 at a clear spot to get under layer of icing, 30 miles of ground contact, ceiling above got us eventually to 3000, the minimum IFR altitude, paralleled heavy snow shower, and then got in it, nose mounted landing lights were visible maybe 10 feet, couldn't hardly see the stobes. This kept up for 5 miles (at 205 MPH), broke out to 20 mile visibility and clear, with airport 15 miles ahead. The was 1/8" thick rime ice, 1/4" vertical on all leading edges. Performance on landing was normal. Could have stayed at 11,000' to over airport, then down. Cleveland approach would not have liked, its their approach corridor at 5:30 in the afternoon, but didn't know how big of an area the AWOS was representing. We landed with 28 gallons fuel on board. From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 18:37:44 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: COZY: Aircraft Designators Pollock wrote I usually use the GTE duats, which I previously reported, and just was able to file an IFR flight plan for "VELO" (Velocity). I just tried DTC duats, and it didn't like it, also the Long-Eze and VZ were lumped together, but there was also COZ4.(or was it COZY4). I don't know what to tell you, but yesterday I filed IFR with Raliegh FSS using "COZY", the plan got lost in the system, Asheville ground took the info and generated a flight plan while setting at the end of the runway with a snow storm moving in the far end of the runway. From: cozy623@juno.com Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 17:12:24 -0700 Subject: Re: COZY:bugs I don't really know any more than that I took a pipe cleaner out every time I flew the rental plane and if I forgot to put it back I got yelled :) at. I gathered that if the bugs made their nests it was a pain and no other specific info. Jeb From: cozy623@juno.com Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 17:37:59 -0700 Subject: COZY: Re: 6'5" and still trying to get comfortable After some experimentation in Nat's plane we decided that I would most likely fit with the rudder pedals moved one inch forward and the pegs on the very front notch also with the seat moved back one inch. Like this I wouldn't have to raise the canopy. He also said that we could as a last resort cut the foam out of the seatback right behind me and that would give me another inch. Now let me tell you why I am going to raise my canopy. It is easy and approved by Nat. The mod doesn't have all sorts of wierd ramifications later on. The biggest one I just realized the other day. If you put more padding under your butt you not only feel better, you also move back because of our lovely reclined seat. I want to have the room to do that. As far as the curve of the nose cone, I noticed it but I don't think it will really bug me so I am not yet concerned. If you think it will be a problem for you,(remember, they say you will not have your feet on the pedals so much in cruise) we can shape our nose cone however you think it will look or feel good. Maybe the one you tried on had a good thick wall where your feet were. Lots of longezes have extended noses. Maybe you could ask Nat about that privately since that would kind of be business advice from him. And that's about all I have to say about that. Jeb Gump From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 20:29:19 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: COZY: Re: 6'5" and still trying to get comfortable Jeb writes I use the temperfoam per their directions, 3 plys 1" thick for front seats, 2" in the rear. Its very comfortable, and I would think TEN times before doing different. Wife and I (ages 60) frequently fly 3.5 to 4 hour legs, and occasionly 7 or 8 hours in a day, we climb out and walk normally. My nose cone (the Cosy Classic is the same width as the MKIV in the front seat) extreme front point (where the pitot tube usually is) is the same, but is much more blunt, kind of like the original Cessna Citation. This gives room for 2 landing lights in the bottom quarters of the nose. I have a pulselite for those and makes us very visible day and night head on. The Classic turtleback at the plexiglass bubble is wider and the top corners are tighter radius giving more headset room.