Date: Fri, 27 Jan 1995 14:18:31 -0500 From: SidLloyd@aol.com Subject: Drilling main gear attach points I used a different technique for drilling out the main gear attach points. I drilled the initial 1/4" hole with the gear in place mounted between the bulkheads, thus assuring a perfect fit. Here's how: Get a LONG 1/4" drill (preferably 24") and drill completely through both bulkheads AND the firewall. Put a 1/4" steel rod through making sure it extends about 8" or so into the rear compartment. Drill a 1/4" hole in several scrap small pieces of 2X4. Slide the pieces over the rod (inside the fuselage) and bondo (or hot glue) the 2X4 pieces to the forward edge of the forward gear bulkhead and remove the rod. What you now have is a jig. Put the fuselage upside down on some saw horses and carefully align and block the main gear in place. You can now drill out the gear attachment tabs from the rear using the firewall and rear bulkhead holes as the drill guide and from the front using the built up pile of 2X4 pieces as the drill guide. This gives you very good alignment for the mounting bolts, plates, etc. Sid Date: Thu, 20 Apr 95 10:02:29 EDT Subject: Chapter 9 costs People; I spent an hour last night going over my spreadsheet of costs for each chapter. I had originally checked Wicks/Aircraft Spruce/Alexanders against each other for Chapters 4 and 5, and Wicks came out slightly ahead (and they had chapter kits) so I decided to go with the Wicks chapter kits. I have noticed (at least here on the east coast), that the shipping costs have been a substantial portion of the total cost of the kits - on the order of 5% - 10%. I got an Aircraft Spruce flyer yesterday saying that they're going to be paying the shipping cost on small volume orders over $500, and since I just bought chapters 8,10,11,12 from Wicks, I looked at Chapter 9 for cost differences. Aircraft Spruce was about $40 - $50 cheaper on parts, but since the overall cost was ~$1000, the freight would be free, and given the weights of the wheels, tires, tubes, glass, etc., that could easily run to $100. I plan to buy the epoxy (and a couple of other things that A.S. doesn't carry) from Wicks and the rest in one or two orders of > $500 from A.S. This should save ~$150 on chapter 9 alone. This of course does not even include the actual gear legs from Featherlite or Russell Aero (for another ~$600). I'll be doing this analysis for any chapter (or combination of chapters) over $500 as I go along. -- Marc J. Zeitlin E-Mail: marcz@an.hp.com Date: Fri, 28 Apr 1995 12:41:24 -0400 From: CozyBldr@aol.com Subject: MG-1,MG-2 Screw Length Last night I started mounting the landing gear mounting plates (MG-1 & MG-2) and found that the MS24694-S60 screws were not long enough. I got the nuts on some of them but even then there wasn't much thread into the nut. I recommend using MS24694-S64s to give plenty of extra thread. Has anyone else run into this problem? Paul Stowitts Date: Wed, 14 Jun 1995 21:32:51 -0700 (PDT) From: Eric Westland Subject: Re: Landing Gear On Wed, 14 Jun 1995 MKansky@aol.com wrote: > FYI > > I finally recieved the main landing gear from Featherlite. It took three > months to receive. The lesson learned is to Plan Ahead! > > ...Marty > I ordered mine from Featherlite as well, but since then I understand that Aerocad sells one as well, already wrapped in unidirectional glass (8 plies?) that sells for about the same price. They also ship it for less somehow. Even if it costs a little more, not having to sand the bugger for those lay-ups would make it worth it. Eric From: Marc J. Zeitlin Subject: Re: Landing Gear (fwd) Date: Thu, 15 Jun 95 9:15:20 EDT Eric W. wrote: >MKansky@aol.com wrote: >> I finally recieved the main landing gear from Featherlite. It took three >> months to receive. The lesson learned is to Plan Ahead! >I ordered mine from Featherlite as well, but since then I understand that >Aerocad sells one as well, already wrapped in unidirectional glass (8 >plies?) that sells for about the same price. They also ship it for less >somehow. Even if it costs a little more, not having to sand the bugger >for those lay-ups would make it worth it. I seem to remember having a discussion with Lee D. about some Aerocad L.G. which (Nat claimed) was less than optimal. Lee - could you comment on what you know? If I need to order the Featherlite one, I should probably do it soon (as should a few of us - maybe some volume could pump up our buying power!). -- Marc J. Zeitlin E-Mail: marcz@an.hp.com From: Lee Devlin Subject: Re: Landing Gear Date: Thu, 15 Jun 95 9:27:56 MDT Marc wrote: > I seem to remember having a discussion with Lee D. about some Aerocad > L.G. which (Nat claimed) was less than optimal. Lee - could you comment > on what you know? If I need to order the Featherlite one, I should > probably do it soon (as should a few of us - maybe some volume could > pump up our buying power!). Yes, I talked with Nat and he had come into possession of a landing gear set from Aerocad which he felt was a lot heavier than it should have been. He was also concerned with the surface roughness of the part since it had been wrapped in triaxial and had not been peel-plied. He felt that it would take a lot of finishing to make it smooth. Aerocad had obviously deviated from the plans, as they are apt to do, and I think this also negatively affected Nat's opinion of the gear set. If you are considering the Aerocad gear, you may want to talk with Nat and get his opinion of it first. Lee Devlin Date: Thu, 15 Jun 1995 15:39:01 -0400 From: SidLloyd@aol.com Subject: Re: Landing Gear (fwd) In a message dated 95-06-15 09:16:59 EDT, you write: >I seem to remember having a discussion with Lee D. about some Aerocad >L.G. which (Nat claimed) was less than optimal. Lee - could you >comment >on what you know? If I need to order the Featherlite one, I should >probably do it soon (as should a few of us - maybe some volume could >pump up our buying power!). I bought mine from AeroCad and it was great. As far as I know, Nat recommends them as well. Just not the AeroCanard parts. Sid Date: Thu, 22 Jun 1995 14:08:51 -0400 (EDT) From: Tech Support - Rick Subject: Re: Cozy grass strip perfortmance Question for you: did you cut your main gear by two inches? I am building a Cozy 3 myself, and have talked to other cozy 3 and Long-EZ pilots builders, they all recommend doing this as it reduces the T/O distances by a couple hundred feet. Ed Strickland , who has a cozy 3, lands in 1200' and takes off in 900' solo. He did the above mod when he built. Rick Crapse Now where is that epoxy cup? I just had it ......hey ! stop ! cat not yours! Date: Thu, 6 Jul 1995 17:05:02 -0400 From: MKansky@aol.com Subject: Landing gear strut I put the first 4 layups of UND on the main strut. How much of a gap is allowable? The gap is larger in the center and at the widest sections. Second, is the angle to trim the main strut 8 degrees? Any suggestions on how to ensure it is cut at the correct angle? The plans state that about 2 inches from the strut. I found that I only need to cut .5 inch from each end. Has anyone else found this to be true? ...Marty Date: Thu, 6 Jul 1995 17:31:55 -0400 (EDT) From: Tech Support - Rick Subject: Re: Landing gear strut On Thu, 6 Jul 1995 MKansky@aol.com wrote: > I put the first 4 layups of UND on the main strut. How much of a gap is > allowable? The gap is larger in the center and at the widest sections. Up to a quarter of an inch is 'supposedly allowable'...anything more than a eighth is excessive! Best is butting not overlapping. > > Second, is the angle to trim the main strut 8 degrees? Any suggestions on > how to ensure it is cut at the correct angle? cut a triangle template, then mark the line to cut. > > The plans state that about 2 inches from the strut. I found that I only need > to cut .5 inch from each end. Has anyone else found this to be true? > > ...Marty > Rick Crapse Date: Fri, 7 Jul 1995 00:51:35 -0400 From: Danky01@aol.com Subject: Re: Landing gear strut In a message dated 95-07-06 17:10:58 EDT, Marty wrote: >The plans state that about 2 inches from the strut. I found that I only need >to cut .5 inch from each end. Has anyone else found this to be true? > > I did not cut my strut as much as the plans stated. I think I was closer to the .5 inch as you stated. I was thinking that this would give me more prop clearance. The only problem here is that you then need to leave the nose strut longer, which I did and now the plane is about an 1 or 2 inches taller than it should be. It is very large step from the ground to the step on the fuselage side. If I had it to do over again I would for sure cut the 2 inches as stated in the plans. Just my 2 cents worth Kyle Dansie Date: Fri, 7 Jul 1995 09:16:34 -0400 From: Marcnadine@aol.com Subject: Re: Landing gear strut In a message dated 95-07-06 17:10:58 EDT, MKansky@aol.com writes: >I put the first 4 layups of UND on the main strut. How much of a gap >is >allowable? The gap is larger in the center and at the widest >sections. > >Second, is the angle to trim the main strut 8 degrees? Any >suggestions on >how to ensure it is cut at the correct angle? > >The plans state that about 2 inches from the strut. I found that I >only need >to cut .5 inch from each end. Has anyone else found this to be true? > >...Marty Marty, I just started working on my sturts last and had the same concern about the angle to cut and that the struts needed just a hair to cut off. I faxed Nat on Friday and recived a phone call back. Nat said to use Fig.12 on page 2 of Ch. 9 to get the right angle. He said that it will be cut later anyway, so don't worry too much about getting it just right. Good Luck Marc P. Date: Wed, 26 Jul 1995 12:19:45 -0400 From: CozyBldr@aol.com Subject: Re: seatbelt 7-ply reinforcements Marc pretty well covered the seatbelt layup but Norm writes: >I dread doing those landing gear reinforcements in chapter nine. I had the same feelings about those layups but I made the paper patterns (which I'm finding to be great for almost every layup) as Nat described. I then marked the outlines of where the layup was to go, cut the BID for an overlay and they went great. I peel plied the edges and where the aluminum plates mounted. They're easier than they look. The layups for each of the areas took me 2.5 hours including the glass cutting. Paul S. Sender: From: "Michael Antares" Organization: Eldepro Date: Fri, 4 Aug 1995 08:29:43 -0800 Subject: Landing gear strut Reply-To: mantares@crl.com I'm just starting chapter 9 and am a little confused about the covering of the strut. When I measure the circumference of my strut I find it to be about 13 inches. But Nat says to cut 11 inch wide strips to cover the strut. Is this correct? A news letter change says to reduce the number of strips from 16 to 13. The number 13 triggers my concern that possibly the number should refer to the strip width and not to the number of strips. Comments? Also Marc, I would be happy to proof read and correct several of the newsletters if you want to send your OCR'd files to me. Michael Date: Fri, 4 Aug 1995 17:32:26 -0700 (PDT) From: Eric Westland Subject: Re: Landing gear strut I can't remember just how wide I cut them, but cut one and see how it fits at the widest part. If ok, cut a dozen more, if you run short, cut one or two more. The exact number is not important, but it is nice to error on the short side as you would not have much use for the leftovers. Eric p.s. enjoy sanding that strut :-). I did :-( On Fri, 4 Aug 1995, Michael Antares wrote: > I'm just starting chapter 9 and am a little confused about the > covering of the strut. When I measure the circumference of my strut > I find it to be about 13 inches. But Nat says to cut 11 inch wide > strips to cover the strut. Is this correct? A news letter change > says to reduce the number of strips from 16 to 13. The number 13 > triggers my concern that possibly the number should refer to the > strip width and not to the number of strips. Comments? > > Also Marc, I would be happy to proof read and correct several of the > newsletters if you want to send your OCR'd files to me. > > Michael > Date: Fri, 15 Sep 1995 07:22:24 -0400 From: MKansky@aol.com Subject: Landing Gear Attachment I have my landing gear ready to be attached. However, all the 1/4" holes do not line up perfectly. Does anyone have any hints on attaching it? I want to think this one through before proceeding Second, I may have over torqued the bolts for the canard lift tabs. I didn't strip them. What is the implication of over torquing a bolt? ...Marty Date: Thu, 5 Oct 1995 14:49:42 -0400 From: NBalog@aol.com Subject: Chapter 9 questions Oh, Boy. This is the second time this has happened... what "this" is concerns getting the "wrong" sized screws from Wicks. First time was seatbelt attach screws for chapter 8; I had to get the right length screws from The Dillsburg Aeroplane Works in PA after wrangling with Wicks on the phone over their minimum order charge and shipping and handling fees for about $2 worth of hardware; I'd been neglecting my motorcycle anyway and it turned out to be a really nice ride (about 1.5hrs). I can recommend Dillsburg for anyone in the immediate area - they have everything (literally) in the way of hardware. Okay, got the hdwr, installed the pieces and have been plodding along into chapter nine which has taken months 'cause I broke my ankle - not sprained - July 5th and am now in a cast hobbling about on crutches for another month waiting for things to heal then I'll still need surgery to repair a broken ligament. Aerobic exercise is out so I'm a little more stressed than usual. NOW, I find that the screws I have for mounting the LDG Gear mtg plates (MG-1 & -2) are the MS24694-S58's NOT the -S60's as specified in the change from newsletter #37 of April '92 which brings me to some observations and questions and possibly another trip up to Dillsburg unless I can get Wicks to "play." 1. Besides Paul Stowitts (he wrote about this APR 28, '95 in this forum, suggested the S64's which I think are about right), has anyone else had this problem? I know Eric Westland had a similar problem with the trim lever mounts on the instr. panel (Have you repaired this yet, Eric?), but I have this sick feeling this will be a recurring issue (and please don't welcome me to the wonderful world of homebuilding, I've already been initiated). 2. Nat made the change available in APR of 1992 (!) and I bought my "kits" through Wicks starting in December of '94. How do they find out about these changes, should I call Nat and whine about it and can anyone suggest how I can impress upon them that I've already paid shipping costs many times over and all I need (right now) are the correct damned screws? In this case, since I measured all the components involved, the -S64's that Paul recommends are just about right. Wicks insisted on adding an extra couple of bucks to the price 'cause it was under their minimum $25 plus S&H. Now that I've gone back into the plans/parts list and have looked at my receipts I see that they got about 90% of the changes updated in their computer. I'd thinking of sending the 2 dozen or so wrong parts back and asking for an exchange. Any suggestions here? 3. This means I need to go through my entire collection of subkits (to chapter nineteen, sitting in my basement - I have ambitions), correct the order sheets, send the "wrong" parts back and order the "right" ones?. This will not only be a colossal bummer and block of time, but very likely ineffective at this point as Paul and Eric have apparently discovered that the upgraded components don't fit either. 4. Next subject has to do with wrapping the gear legs: in the interest of time, I'm thinking of wetting out the UNI strips on polyethylene sheets (visqueen) and transferring them to the legs. This should save a lot of time and ensure the glass is more uniformly wet. Anyone else do this? How do you wet out the glass otherwise, with a brush? Anyone care to join me? 5. Leg length? Talked to Nat about this a few weeks ago. Seems that Featherlite has been saving some unneccessary weight and wastage by shortening the overall length of the gear legs. You probably won't have to take much more than one or one and a half inches off each side; I forget how much I cut off but it was something like 1.3" each side plus the piece for the 8 deg. cutoff. 6. That wrapped leg from Aerocad has to be the first four two layers, which incidentally, ARE 8 pieces of 13" wide UNI. Nat got this wrong in the plans change: you should need 16 sheets of 13" wide UNI if, as he says, it'll take at least two sheets per layer. Unless Aerocad installed the brakeline tubing and trailing edge, I don't think this will be the full eight-layer layup. More will come later, I'm sure. Sorry about the length but I had to compromise between inarticulate grunts, monosyllablic curses and my usual fifty cent verbiage. -Norm Date: Mon, 9 Oct 1995 01:10:43 -0400 From: KSPREUER@aol.com Subject: Re: Chapter 9 questions >4. Next subject has to do with wrapping the gear legs: in the interest of >time, I'm thinking of wetting out the UNI strips on polyethylene sheets >(visqueen) and transferring them to the legs. This should save a lot of time >and ensure the glass is more uniformly wet. Anyone else do this? How do you >wet out the glass otherwise, with a brush? Anyone care to join me? > Due to the curvature of the gear the plies don't want to wrap around nicely when wet out on polyurethane on a flat surface. I found it worked better to wet this one out on the gear with a brush. Date: Wed, 8 Nov 1995 17:24:57 -0500 From: NBalog@aol.com Subject: *#!@#* Electric Speed Brake mounting... Spent an interesting hour today trying to mount the Lanza Speed Brake. 1- Figured out where the map pocket was by using a 300 watt halogen lamp on either side of the seat back brace (also finding many small air bubbles I didn't know existed) 2- When flush with fuse' bottom, can line brackets up ok. 3- When extended, brake only goes to about 80 degrees from perpendicular (Wayne's notes say up to 15 deg. variation is ok). 4- Mounting tabs on LB-19 can only be moved so far forward before any mechanical advantage is lost 5- Tradeoff for hardware from Brock in weight and expense is nearly equal frustration 6- Haven't called Wayne yet; a nice guy (whose family I spent time with at SnF). Wanted some feedback from anyone in this forum who's mounted one of these gadgets. Thanks. -Norm Date: Wed, 8 Nov 1995 20:14:02 -0500 From: Danky01@aol.com Subject: Re: *#!@#* Electric Speed Brake mounting... In a message dated 95-11-08 17:32:26 EST, Norm wrote: >2- When flush with fuse' bottom, can line brackets up ok. > >3- When extended, brake only goes to about 80 degrees from perpendicular >(Wayne's notes say up to 15 deg. variation is ok). > >4- Mounting tabs on LB-19 can only be moved so far forward before any >mechanical >advantage is lost > >5- Tradeoff for hardware from Brock in weight and expense is nearly equal >frustration > > I mounted up my Lanza brake actuator about a year ago, and it seemed to work as described. I dont remember exactly how long it took but a couple of hours seems about right to me. ( I am kind of slow sometimes ). Mine also extends down about 80 degrees and this looks like it should create lots of drag to me. Do the Brock actuated brakes go down a full 90 degrees? If so does it really matter? I would think not. Kyle Dansie Cozy IV #86 Date: Wed, 8 Nov 1995 21:14:50 -0500 From: CozyBldr@aol.com Subject: Re: *#!@#* Electric Speed Brake mounting... I mounted the Lanza speed brake last year and it went very well. It took a little time to get it lined up but otherwise I had no problems. It certainly seemed easier to do than the mechanical Brock setup the plans show. Paul Stowitts Date: Wed, 8 Nov 1995 22:42:21 -0500 From: KSPREUER@aol.com Subject: Re: *#!@#* Electric Speed Brake mounting... Just a quick note about the electric speed brake. I calculated the aero loads for the Cozy MkIV brake at the 90KIAS deplyment speed. It is very close the the stall load of the direct drive actuator. I made a sissors mechanism for mine that changes the mechanical advantage such that the actuator is escentailly lower geared at the fully deployed position. The guy that designed the system says he has used it for awhile with no problems. Maybe I solved a problem that doesn't exist. If any one is interested I can mail the drawings or with some help transfer the files. They are in "Designer" draw format. Date: 09 Nov 95 12:47:21 EST From: Chuck <75501.356@compuserve.com> Subject: Speed Brake deployment angle In various postings regarding speed brake deployment, I noted several writers giving 80 degree, 90 degree figures for deployment. I think this is much too great for the size of the board. Particularly for the electric, or any other mechanism, to overcome. Drawing M-28 shows full deployment at, my best measurement, approximately 62 degrees or 118 degrees, depending how you measure. I have not had any problems with the electric speed brake in my flying MkIV, but the downward deflection angle is only in the 60 degree range. (Incidentally, the fittings from the kit I got from Wayne Lanza (sp?) are the older, 2nd generation, adjustment brackets) I had to "test" deployment many time before drilling the mounting holes. Suggest you check with Nat (or others) about the maximum recommended downward deployment angle for the speed brake. This information is NOT stated in the plans, the only place to reference the figure is from M-28. Chuck Wolcott From: Lee Devlin Subject: Chap 9 MKMG-4 bushings Date: Mon, 13 Nov 95 17:22:40 MST I find that Brock is a master at pricing things just at a threshold where it's difficult to justify taking the time to make the parts yourself. To his credit, there's not a very big market for Cozy parts, relatively speaking, so we should be happy that he's participating in it at all. I was looking over the MKNG-4 bushings and spacers and thought that they would be less expensive to make they were made from a single piece of 304 stainless tubing. Wicks has 3/4" O.D., 1/2" I.D., 304 stainless tubing for around $12/ft. It would be relatively easy to use around 15" (~$15 worth) of this tubing, cut two pieces to length, and ream the inside for .500-.502, (provided the I.D. was not oversized to begin with). The weight difference would be 2.5 oz. each (5 oz. total) because they would have .125" wall thickness all the way through. However, this material could be removed with a boring bar for those who wanted to keep it the same weight as the 4130 spacer/304 stainless bushings design. Alternately, the part could be reduced in diameter on the O.D. in the middle and knurled which would give the 2 ply BID layup something to hold on to, as opposed drilling dimples along its length. Brock's prices are $34 each which I think is a little excessive. I'm seriously considering making my own. Anyone see any flaws in my thinking? If not, I'll run it by Nat and see what he thinks but I wanted to get a reality check before I subject myself to the potential verbal abuse he's likely to give me. After all, he may not recognize the brilliance of my idea. :-) Lee Devlin From: Lee Devlin Subject: Re: Chap 9 MKMG-4 bushings Date: Tue, 14 Nov 95 18:04:17 MST I posted a message yesterday about potentially changing the MKNG-4 bushings by making the whole assembly out of stainless tubing. After talking with Nat today, I realized that there are problems with my idea. The bushings have an extremely tight tolerance (+ or - .001") on the ID. If I were to try to hold this tolerance for the whole tubing length, it would be virtually impossible to push the studs through it. In addition, the vendor at one time substituted the material I was considering using so that he wouldn't have to machine out the ID. It turns out that the batch he used was .010" larger than nominal ID and therefore wasn't appropriate for the tight fit that Nat recommends. A .010" clearance on the bushings translates to 3/16" of gear wobble out at the wheels. So there you have it. Nat had excellent advice for my questions and was quite cordial to boot. Lee Devlin Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 16:00:47 -0600 From: Scott Mandel Subject: Chap 9, Landing Gear X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII I've been thinking about buying the AeroCanard finished gear from Jeff Russell. There's a guy near me who installed and removed the gear in favor of retractable gear. He willing to sell the gear and hardware for the Jeff Russell price of the gear. I save hardware and shipping cost. Does anyone know if the gear installation is unique enough that the way he fit his hardware may not be reusable? In other words when making adjustments (those of you who have installed your gear) do you make them to the gear tabs or the Landing gear bulkhead hardpoints? The holes I have now in my bulkheads are only quarter inch, since I have to make them larger will these gear most likely fit fine? Date: Thu, 16 Nov 1995 14:04:14 -0600 From: Scott Mandel Subject: Gear Chap 9 X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII I've talked to a couple of builders and I want to get some more opinions. 1. What do you guys feels about the Jeff Russell Gear being made of Tri-axial glass and E-Glass? 2. Has any structural testing been done on Jeff's Gear, by anyone other than Jeff? Date: Thu, 16 Nov 1995 14:49:11 -0600 From: Scott Mandel Subject: Landing Gear X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII Let me give the first input to my Gear questions. I guess I should have said in the first E-Mail that Jeff Russell tested his gear by dropping his Aerocanard loaded to 2200 lbs. one and half feet. From: Lee Devlin Subject: Re: Gear Chap 9 Date: Thu, 16 Nov 95 13:54:21 MST Scott wrote: > 1. What do you guys feels about the Jeff Russell Gear being made of Tri-axial > glass and E-Glass? I talked with Nat about this a while ago after he had come into possession of an Aerocad gear set from the widow a Cozy builder. He did not recognize the construction technique that was used and thought that it felt somewhat heavy. During a recent phone call with them, I asked Featherlite about the construction of their gear. It is evidently the same process used from the Varieze onward. They have a mold in which they lay up the rovings of S glass and the squeeze it together and then post cure it in an oven. According to the A/C spruce catalog, S-glass is 30% stronger, 15% stiffer, and tougher than E-Glass. It's also about twice as expensive per lb. as E-Glass, although this comparison is difficult to make since they are not offered in exactly the same configurations. A destructive test on the gear sets would be rather expensive as the materials alone would exceed $1100. I'd be most concerned with whether or not the Aerocad gear is postcured as melting a gear leg is a distinct possibility during emergency braking. Lee Devlin Fri, 17 Nov 1995 15:36:21 +1000 Date: Fri, 17 Nov 1995 15:27:26 +0200 From: parkyn@citr.uq.oz.au (Nick Parkyn) Subject: Re: Gear Chap 9 >Scott wrote: > >> 1. What do you guys feels about the Jeff Russell Gear being made of Tri-axial >> glass and E-Glass? Lee Devlin wrote: >During a recent phone call with them, I asked Featherlite about the >construction of their gear. It is evidently the same process used from >the Varieze onward. They have a mold in which they lay up the rovings >of S glass and the squeeze it together and then post cure it in an oven. Different resins have different properties after postcure. Some (approved) resins may be better than others for this particular application, where high teperature properties are required to prevent "melt-down". >According to the A/C spruce catalog, S-glass is 30% stronger, 15% >stiffer, and tougher than E-Glass. It's also about twice as expensive >per lb. as E-Glass, although this comparison is difficult to make since >they are not offered in exactly the same configurations. The S-glass is also lighter. There is S-glass and S2-glass! S-glass has the best properties and is the one used for the landing gear. I believe that RAF originally used the same S-glass tow as used for the Defiant spar caps. Nick Parkyn #0018 From: Sid Lloyd Subject: RE: Gear Chap 9 Date: Fri, 17 Nov 1995 13:14:31 -0600 ---------- From: Scott Mandel[SMTP:mandel@newsnet.esy.com] Sent: Thursday, November 16, 1995 2:04 PM Subject: Gear Chap 9 I've talked to a couple of builders and I want to get some more opinions. >1. What do you guys feels about the Jeff Russell Gear being made of Tri-axial >glass and E-Glass? I like it. Same price as Featherlite but you get the torsional layups as well. Plus, Jeff will do the tabs for you if you want. I seem to recall Nat not liking the triax on the gear in one of the newsletters. >2. Has any structural testing been done on Jeff's Gear, by anyone other than >Jeff? No idea. Other than use and no failures to date (that I have heard of.) Sid Date: Fri, 17 Nov 1995 14:50:49 -0500 From: NBalog@aol.com Subject: Chapter 9: Main Gear Mounting Tab Layups When all else fails, read the instructions. . . Here's the deal folks, after merrily measuring and cutting out layer after layer of UNI and BID for my ldg gear mtg tabs, I FINALLY noticed the difference in layers between outside and inside layups. Outside: #UND Plies # BID Plies Layup #1: 25 Layup #2 20 Inside: Layup #3: 20 Layup #4: 25 I know, I know, it's on the plans, plain as day, maybe I'm a little dyselxic, you know, that brain-eye reversal thing... So I'm out of BID cloth now, and may have to rob from future chapters (again) to get this thing right. I have enough scraps to make that last five ply layer, not enough for a full 12x38" piece (that's right, 12", not 15". The plans don't take into account the decreased radius of the inside layup). Question: Is this critical? will five plies one way or another matter that much? Any Cozy 3-place (Dewey, Ken, Kevin?) or Long-EZ /Vari-EZ or other RAF-type craft builders out there with OTHER numbers for layers on mounting tab layups? I'm sure this is compensation for weight/load-bearing but, last but not least, did Nat get the numbers right on this one? Is this just one more in a string of sometimes not-so-user-friendly changes that haven't gotten around to getting posted in the newsletters? Would appreciate an answer ASAP, I plan on doing the outside layup tonight, inside can wait a few days. Thanks. -Norm Date: Mon, 20 Nov 1995 13:11:04 -0500 From: CozyBldr@aol.com Subject: Landing Gear Cover The plans call for a flat piece of PVC foam for the landing gear cover but it seemed to me that the the cover should curve to match the front and back area of the air scoop. This is the approach I used and it turned out very well. Since I have a number of pieces of styrofoam left over from the wing, I decided I would hot wire the landing gear cover pieces. I started by transfering the scoop sides to a couple of plywood templates. I then hotwired the side pieces (oversized in all directions) by first cutting the curve and the moving the template down 1/2". I then cut the pieces to a tight fit between the bulkheads while leaving the top and bottom oversize dimensions (these get trimmed after the center and side pieces are attached). Don't forget to leave the 1/32" dimension for the BID layup. I used a small piece of Clark foam weighted down at both ends to span the gap between the bulkheads. I traced the curves of the scoop and the fuselage bottom onto cardboard held up to the foam piece. These curves were then transfered to plywood templates. I then hotwired a piece of foam 8" wide x 3" high to a tight fit between the bulkheads the entire width of the fuselage. From that I sawed off a piece to fit in the scoop area. Using the scoop curve templates, I cut the curve into the foam just as I did with the scoop sides. I then placed it back between the bulkheads, put the scoop side pieces back in and traced the inside edges against the scoop bottom. I then removed the scoop bottom and cut along the tracings with a utility knife. To make the outside pieces, I took the remaining piece of 8" x 3" foam, cut it in half and traced and cut one side on each piece. To assemble the cover, I put the scoop bottom in, made sure it was aligned properly, and attached the sides with 5 minute epoxy. I used some small nails to keep the sides tight to the scoop. After cure I attached the side pieces in the same way. I will micro some small urethane pieces on the outside edges (this idea was stolen from Mark Dalrymple) and sand them to get the final ouside shape. Glassing is then according to plans. The entire process took about two hours and it really looks nice. From: Marc J. Zeitlin Subject: Chapter 9 hints/tips Date: Wed, 22 Nov 95 15:41:32 EST People; Having just spent a few days working on the Landing Brake installation in chapter 9, I thought I'd pass along a few hints/tips on what not to do, and what (maybe) to do to make things a bit easier. 1) When installing LB-19 (the squarish rectangular plywood piece) on the hinge and in the Landing Brake, be very careful which end of the hinge you 5-min epoxy the LB-19 to, since it's off center. The plans show which side it goes on, but there's a lot of interpretation, since the fuselage is upside down, the landing brake is both upside down and rightside up depending on the task, and it's not far off center. I bet you can guess why I know this :-). I 5-min epoxied the LB-19 to the hinge, shaved the foam off the landing brake and floxed the LB-19 in place, and then spent 1/2 hour staring at the plans trying to decide what was going to happen next, when it became apparent to me that I had made a mirror image of what I should have. At least the flox hadn't cured :-). 2) The plans call for removing 1/8" from the Landing Brake recess area, and recommend cutting 1/8" deep grooves and then sanding the rest away. I used a router set to an appropriate depth, and then easily got a smooth, flat bottom surface with a minimal amount of sanding. This took all of 15 minutes. 3) The plans call for glassing 2 BID (3 BID locally) in the LB recess area, and then 3 BID on the top of the LB. I plan to glass the 3 BID on the LB first, to ensure that I've removed enough foam and created enough clearance for the LB to fit in the recess. It would be a lot easier to remove foam than to remove glass. -- Marc J. Zeitlin Email: marcz@an.hp.com Date: Thu, 23 Nov 1995 19:49:46 +1100 From: allana@interconnect.com.au (allana@interconnect.com.au) Subject: Re: Chapter 9 hints/tips >People; > >Having just spent a few days working on the Landing Brake installation >in chapter 9, I thought I'd pass along a few hints/tips on what not to >do, and what (maybe) to do to make things a bit easier. Another hint re the landing brake is to be very careful when you drill and tap the holes through the ply/al reinforcement now embedded in the fuselage (I don't have the plans handy so can't give the component designation) for the top half of the piano hinge. I ended up with the bolts mounted a bit too close to the hinge line resulting in interference with the other half of the hinge when the brake is closed. I'll figure out a fix but I could have avoided the problem with a bit more care. Allan Aaron From: Marc J. Zeitlin Subject: Re: Chapter 9 hints/tips (fwd) Date: Mon, 27 Nov 95 9:29:04 EST Allan Aaron wrote; >Another hint re the landing brake is to be very careful when you drill and >tap the holes through the ply/al reinforcement now embedded in the fuselage >(I don't have the plans handy so can't give the component designation) for >the top half of the piano hinge. I ended up with the bolts mounted a bit >too close to the hinge line resulting in interference with the other half of >the hinge when the brake is closed. I meant to mention this issue in my list, but forgot. There are two places in the plans which talk about the aluminum slugs which later get drilled and tapped. One says to make them 1/2" square and the other says 5/8" square (both say 1/4" thick). I saw (and made) the 1/2" square before I noticed the 5/8". I had decided to pilot drill the holes for the tapping PRIOR to installing the assembly in the fuselage, and when I tried to line up the epoxied hinge and slugs on the drill press, I found that I would have the same problem as Allan A. I broke the slugs off, made the 5/8" pieces, and 5 min. epoxied them back on the hinge positioned so that I KNEW I'd have space for the screw heads and the washers. Then, I pilot drilled the holes on the drill press so that I knew exactly where they'd be. I put a small piece of tape over the back hole so that micro won't get in the hole when I install it in the fuselage. -- Marc J. Zeitlin Email: marcz@an.hp.com Date: Mon, 27 Nov 1995 10:01:00 -0500 From: Dick.Finn@FNB.sprint.com Subject: Re: Chapter 9 hints/tips Having just spent a few days working on the Landing Brake installation in chapter 9, 1) When installing LB-19 (the squarish rectangular plywood piece) on the hinge and in the Landing Brake, be very careful which end of the hinge you 5-min epoxy the LB-19 to, since it's off center. As a suggestion to everyone, whenever faced I'm faced with a duplicate but mirror image part I redraw the sketches and note the measurements. It only takes ten or fifteen minutes and can save a lot of grief. Obviously I learned the same way that Marc did. 2) The plans call for removing 1/8" from the Landing Brake recess area, and recommend cutting 1/8" deep grooves and then sanding the rest away. I used a router set to an appropriate depth, and then easily got a smooth, flat bottom surface with a minimal amount of sanding. This took all of 15 minutes. I used a router too. You can use one on the wing roots and several other areas. It gives a much better recess then just sanding. Dick Finn Cozy #46