From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 16:17:34 -0600 (CST)
Subject: COZY: Fueling - Static Electricity

Some time ago, I sent a message to the NFPA (National Fire Protection 
Association) (The main research, testing, and code organization for fire 
safety). Here in its entirety is my message and their response. I haven't 
checked the wording of their reference yet, but this would be the most 
authoritive source there is. They have a web site referenced below.

------Begin forward message-------------------------

Return-Path: <mconroy@nfpa.org>
Received: from eagle.nfpa.org (eagle.nfpa.org [12.16.75.98])
	by ixmail8.ix.netcom.com (8.8.7-s-4/8.8.7/(NETCOM v1.01)) with SMTP 
id HAA09018; 
	for <cdenk@ix.netcom.com>; Thu, 28 Jan 1999 07:34:26 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <199901281534.HAA09018@ixmail8.ix.netcom.com>
Received: from nfpa.org by eagle.nfpa.org
          via smtpd (for ixmail8.ix.netcom.com [199.182.120.68]) with SMTP; 
28 Jan 1999 15:37:19 
UT
Received: from 10.0.2.97 by nfpa.org
     with SMTP (QuickMail Pro Server for MacOS 1.1.1r1); 28 JAN 99 10:09:00 
UT
Date: 28 Jan 99 10:03:10 +0000
From: Mark Conroy <mconroy@nfpa.org>
Subject: Reply
To: cdenk <cdenk@ix.netcom.com>
X-Mailer: QuickMail Pro 1.5.2 (Mac)
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Reply-To: Mark Conroy <mconroy@nfpa.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-Ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by 
ixmail8.ix.netcom.com id HAA09018

I would rely on the designer of the home-built composite aircraft kit to 
provide appropriate 
advise regarding the fueling system design on the aircraft.  With regard to 
advising your E-mail 
forum on the proper methods for fueling aircraft, I would refer t
hem to NFPA 407, Standard for Aircraft Fuel Servicing.  This standard goes 
into great detail on 
equalizing the potential between the fueling equipment and the aircraft.

This standard can be ordered from our customer service department at 800-
344-3555 or National Fire 
Protection Association, 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA 02269-9101 or 
www.nfpa.org.
--------------------------------------
Date: 12/24/98 11:10 AM
From: Carl Denk
I am a member of a homebuilt composite aircraft E-Mail forum
where there has lately been discussion of static electricity
issues during fueling. The fuels used are 100LL aviation
gasoline and automobile gasolines. Although there has been
an absence of fueling incidences, there is a concern to
continue the trend.

The aircraft including the inner surfaces of the fuel tanks
are fiberglass (a few carbon or graphite) fiber cloth with
epoxy matrix. All use aluminum tubing outlets and brass
external fuel drains at the bottoms of the tanks. The fuel
caps are generally aluminum, and possibly stainless steel.

Several methods of static charge reduction during fueling
have been used.
1: A metallic chain or light cable, with an end in the tank,
and the other bonded to the fuelling facility ground is
used.
2: A bond to the fuel drain (not at the fuel top surface)
form the facilty ground, possibly through the aircraft
ground system.
3: A few have conductive  fiberglass on the interior of the
fuel tanks, bonded to the aircraft ground system, that is
then bonded to the fuel facility ground.
4: Wipe the fuel cap are with a cloth dampened with water.
5: Touch the fueling nozzle to the fuel cap, before removing
the cap. These caps are not vented, separate tank vents at
least several feet away are used.

There are many of these aircraft flying, and under
construction at this time. Any comments to help guide the
operators/builders would be appreciated. Are there
provisions of the NFPA code regulating the operation of a
fueling facility?
------End forward message---------------------------

Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 23:23:23 -0500
From: "Marc J. Zeitlin" <marcz@ultranet.com>
Subject: COZY: Chapter 21: Tips on Capacitance Fuel Level Senders

People;

After hooking up the wiring for the electric dual fuel level gauge with the
capacitance senders, I found that one side seemed to be working fine, while
the other was pegged at 3/4 tank no matter how I adjusted the "empty" or
"full" potentiometers on the sender.  I switched the senders from side to
side (on the back of the dual gauge) to make sure that the problem wasn't
the gauge.  The problem switched sides, so I knew it was the sender.  Next,
I measured the voltage on the signal wire, and it did not change with pot
adjustments.  I took the sender out of the tank and examined the
capacitance probe (an aluminum tube with a copper tube inside it, with
plastic spacers to keep them from touching).  It was a bit gunked up, and I
intuited that this was from the time that I had filled the tank with water
to try to find the leaks.  I dried it out and cleaned it up (so I thought)
but it still didn't work.  In the instructions, it said that if it wasn't
working, it might be because it had been immersed in water (would have been
nice if they had put a warning in the installation section somewhere,
instead of just in the troubleshooting section...).  Anyway, I called up
Skysports (the MFG of the sender) and they said "Oh, yeah, if it's been in
water you probably blew it up" or the functional equivalent.  They said
they might be able to fix it (for ~$25) or replace it (for $88).  I figured
I'd give it one shot before sending it in, so I baked it for 6 hours in the
oven at 220 deg F (because I forgot it was in there - a couple of hours
would be more than enough).  I figured this would dry it out without
destroying the electronics inside.

Every once in a while I get lucky - it worked.  Sends like a charm now.
Anyway, don't immerse your electronic capacitance fuel level senders in water.
--
Marc J. Zeitlin           marcz@ultranet.com
                          http://www.ultranet.com/~marcz/

From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 17:13:12 -0600 (CST)
Subject: Re: COZY: Chapter 21: Tips on Capacitance Fuel Level Senders

The Westtach (Skysports) mechanical gages are notorious, I have 2 old ones in the basement. 
Sometimes a bump on a hard surface will cure it. The needles bypass each other, and bend easy, then 
sticking against each other. Today I would use the Electronic International gages.

Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 20:37:24 -0500
From: "Marc J. Zeitlin" <marcz@ultranet.com>
Subject: Fwd: Re: COZY: Chapter 21: Tips on Capacitance Fuel Level

Carl Denk wrote:

>The Westtach (Skysports) mechanical gages are notorious, I have 2 old ones 
>in the basement. 
>Sometimes a bump on a hard surface will cure it. The needles bypass each 
>other, and bend easy, then sticking against each other.

I may not have made my message clear - I had absolutely no problem (yet,
anyway) with the Westach gauge.  The problem was completely with the
Skysports sender unit, which I got wet when I shouldn't have.  The Westach
gauge may indeed suck - I don't know - but as of yet I've had no problems
in the garage :-).
--
Marc J. Zeitlin           marcz@ultranet.com
                          http://www.ultranet.com/~marcz/

From: "Mara Liston" <maraliston@hotmail.com>
Subject: COZY: Fuel sender covers?
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 16:39:10 PST

Has anyone out there installed the non-bendable fuel senders and made 
some sort of cover for them?   I've tried a couple different things and 
haven't been too pleased.  At one point our Cozy had hips that were not 
very sleek looking.  The way we installed them they are only about 1/4 
of the way under the turtle back to strake fairing and they stick up 
above the top of the strake approximately 1/2".  

Any ideas other than putting them into the growing 
not-going-on-to-the-airplane pile and getting the bendable ones?  

Thanks

Mara Liston
N559CZ    still sanding...

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

From: "DeFord, Brian" <brian.deford@intel.com>
Subject: COZY: Ch 22 - What is purpose of hole in strake baffle OD?
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 08:46:40 -0700

Builders,

I just flipped my aircraft over last night to prepare for the bottom strake
glassing and prior to that will be attaching the OD baffles to the outer
ends of the strake. Can anyone tell me what the purpose of this area is? Why
is there a hole in the center of the baffle? As I understand the plans, the
baffle will be covered up by a filler block that goes between the wing and
the strake. Am I missing something, or is this an exercise in hole cutting?

Regards,
Brian

Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 19:19:00 +0200
From: Rego and Noleen Burger <rnb@intekom.co.za>
Subject: COZY: Ch 22 - What is purpose of hole in strake baffle OD?

If it is the big rib like hole I would guess it's to save on a bit of
weight (A) and (B) give you access to apply any last minute sealing
jobs on the last rib should you pick up a leak in your pressure
testing of the tanks... 2c
The designer would know better.
:-)
-- 
Rego Burger
CZ4#139 South Africa 
Web:http://home.intekom.com/glen/rnb.htm 
Work e-mail, mailto:burgerr@telkom.co.za

From: "John Slade" <rjslade@bellsouth.net>
Subject: COZY: Fule lines in passenger compartment
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 1999 12:23:01 -0400

Builders.
I've seen discussion in the archives about the issue of fuel lines in the
passenger compartment. Yesterday I received an email from a prospective
builder, David Kirkley. He has an interesting suggestion which wasn't
covered in any of the discussion I saw.
Anyone know of source for double walled fuel line?
John Slade
Cozy #757.
http://kgarden.com/cozy


From: David Kirkley
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------
I have been working flight test for many years, mostly systems Hydraulics,
Flight controls,  ECS and currently Fuel. Just finished the certification
program for the global express and DH-8 400.
There is one thing that bothers me quite a bit on the Cozy design and that
is
having fuel and vent lines running thru the fuselage. This is not good and
indeed would not pass muster on a FAR 25 aircraft. Many aircraft have
fuel and vent lines that run thru the passenger cabin however they are
shrouded (double walled). and the cavity drained overboard. This gives a
heads up of a leak during the preflight of the airplane the fuel leaves a
streak on the exterior of the aircraft. During flight test we did find a
leak
by chance in an electrical conduit (carrying 115V power) inside the fuel
tank
that was not drained overboard, subsequent inspection revealed several
conduits on each of the 3 flight test aircraft with the same fault. (It is
now drained) I believe that the weight penalty for shrouding fuel feed and
vent lines
from the tank exit to the powerplant interface is a small price to pay for
the potential gain. Additionally in case of a complete severing of the
primary feed line the shroud will if designed correctly still allow fuel
flow
to the engine. The shroud should be flame resistant aft of the firewall.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------


Date: Wed, 2 Jun 1999 12:37:50 -0600
From: James Russell <fshort@flash.net>
Subject: Re: COZY: Fuel lines in passenger compartment

>Builders.
>I've seen discussion in the archives about the issue of fuel lines in the
>passenger compartment. Yesterday I received an email from a prospective
>builder, David Kirkley. He has an interesting suggestion which wasn't
>covered in any of the discussion I saw.
>Anyone know of source for double walled fuel line?
>John Slade
>Cozy #757.
>http://kgarden.com/cozy
>
>
>From: David Kirkley
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>-----------------------------------------
>I have been working flight test for many years, mostly systems Hydraulics,
>Flight controls,  ECS and currently Fuel. Just finished the certification
>program for the global express and DH-8 400.
>There is one thing that bothers me quite a bit on the Cozy design and that
>is
>having fuel and vent lines running thru the fuselage. This is not good and
>indeed would not pass muster on a FAR 25 aircraft. Many aircraft have
>fuel and vent lines that run thru the passenger cabin however they are
>shrouded (double walled). and the cavity drained overboard. This gives a

Hi all:
	Same thoughts...Gulfstream uses double wall lines inside the fuselage
w/ a drain... I don't have a clew as to cost or vendor...my solution is
stainless lines - heavy, but bulletproof. This means no hand bending or flaring
but the machine's flares always look better than mine.

Regards,
James


Date: Wed, 02 Jun 1999 11:27:21 -0700
From: hrogers@slac.stanford.edu (Howard Rogers)
Subject: Re: COZY: Fule lines in passenger compartment

In response to David Kirkley's fuel suggestions, I'd like to make a few
comments.  In no way would I suggest that you modify the tried and proven
methods in the Cozy Plans.  The changes I have made (and WILL make) are
strictly my own solution to my own perception of something that could use a
bit of improvement.  I, too, did not like the idea of fuel lines and fuel
valve in the passenger compartment of the Long EZ.  I did something a bit
similar to what was done in the airplane John Denver lost his life in, with
some important differences, that take flying ergonomics into account.  I
mounted the fuel valve on the forward face of the firewall, and I actuate
it with a torque tube that runs forward, through one standard u-joint (the
same type that is in the primary flight control system of many certified
aircraft) to a handle inside of my right console, just beside my right hip.
I can reach it with my left hand, very comfortably, with heads up,
shoulder harness tight, and a normal, comfortable grip on the right hand
control stick.  I will be able to see it's position clearly in a mirror
(for convenience--I can look directly at it, also, if necessary).  There
will be a lock-out that must be conciously overridden to place it in the
"off" position, and there will be microswitches on the valve itself, to
light leds adjacent to my panel-mounted fuel gages, to indicate which tank
is currently selected.  The detents are crisp, the effort required is
minimal, and the action is extremely smooth.  What do I gain from this?  My
fuel system is exactly identical to the stock system, with regards to the
plumbing circuit, including elevation of all the components in reference to
the water line.  The lines are just shorter, which I feel is an additional
bonus, in the event of selecting a contaminated tank, then switching back
to the good one.  Just that much less contaminated fuel has to run through
the engine, before it is drawing from the clean tank again.  I paid special
attention to making sure, to the best of my ability, that the failure mode
most commonly seen in a truly bad landing (like off-field in a plowed
pasture, for example) of wiping off the main gear, would be unlikely to
yank on or damagefuel-lines or components.  The additional change I am
planning, is to the vent system.  This one hurts, because I put a LOT of
time into bending lines perfectly (I had a whole pile of reject bent 1/4
inch aluminum tube to prove it) to bring the stock tubes out exactly where
I wanted them, and I built the maximimum-snarky, low-profile, four-abreast,
slick......(oops, I got carried away) vent array on top of the airplane,
that I was SURE would bring a lot of ooh's and ahhs from the knowlegeble
flightline-prowlers some day.  I'm gonna grind all that off and do it over,
though, because I never liked the idea of being upside-down, and maybe
trapped after an off-field flip-over, with fuel dribbling steadily out of
the vent lines.  CSA shows a neat installation of running the vent lines up
and over the top of the firewall, then down and outboard along the bottom
aft edge of the opposite-side centersection spar, then out the bottom, and
bent facing forward.  Makes perfect sense to me.  I can't see anything
wrong with it, and I'm asking if anyone here can, either, because it is the
nature of fuel systems to contain hidden "gotchas", and I am always all
ears on the subject.
        I am very interested in the double wall fuel lines, though I can't
envision how they would benefit my particular installation.  I can
certainly visualize how they would benefit others I have seen, though.  Is
there a website where we could look at some pictures of how this stuff
works?  I am having a hard time visualizing how the inner line could become
ruptured or seperated, yet the outer line remains intact enough to continue
supplying fuel.  Did I misunderstand something major, here?  I am also
confounded by why a designer would run 115 vac through a fuel tank, in the
first place.  If I were designing airplanes, I think I would make it a high
priority to keep any wiring, aside from that required for level-indicators,
FAR from the fuel lines and tanks.  Again, am I missing something big,
here?
        Sorry for the long rant.

--Howard Rogers


From: Epplin John A <EpplinJohnA@jdcorp.deere.com>
Subject: RE: COZY: Fule lines in passenger compartment
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 1999 14:00:24 -0500 



> -----Original Message-----
> From:	hrogers@slac.stanford.edu [SMTP:hrogers@slac.stanford.edu]
> Sent:	Wednesday, June 02, 1999 1:27 PM
> To:	cozy_builders@canard.com
> Subject:	Re: COZY: Fule lines in passenger compartment
	 <snip> 
> The additional change I am
> planning, is to the vent system.  This one hurts, because I put a LOT of
> time into bending lines perfectly (I had a whole pile of reject bent 1/4
> inch aluminum tube to prove it) to bring the stock tubes out exactly where
> I wanted them, and I built the maximimum-snarky, low-profile,
> four-abreast,
> slick......(oops, I got carried away) vent array on top of the airplane,
> that I was SURE would bring a lot of ooh's and ahhs from the knowlegeble
> flightline-prowlers some day.  I'm gonna grind all that off and do it
> over,
> though, because I never liked the idea of being upside-down, and maybe
> trapped after an off-field flip-over, with fuel dribbling steadily out of
> the vent lines.  CSA shows a neat installation of running the vent lines
> up
> and over the top of the firewall, then down and outboard along the bottom
> aft edge of the opposite-side centersection spar, then out the bottom, and
> bent facing forward.  Makes perfect sense to me.  I can't see anything
> wrong with it, and I'm asking if anyone here can, either, because it is
> the
> nature of fuel systems to contain hidden "gotchas", and I am always all
> ears on the subject.
>         
	<snip>
>  --Howard Rogers
> 
	[Epplin John A]

	I did a similar thing here.  I ran 2 lines into each tank, one just
forward of the spar about center of tank, the other forward at about the
point where the skin curves down.  I brought each line up to the top center
aft firewall, there I made a fitting from an aluminum block about .5 by .75
and 2+ inches long.  I drilled and tapped 3 holes in each side for 1/8 pipe
and a through hole from the top to connect all holes together.  I tapped 1/8
pipe and plugged this drill hole at the top.  Connected the vent lines to
the upper 2 holes each side and ran another line out the lower hole parallel
the lines to the tank and brought it out just aft of the spar through the
cowling mount flange.  I had to make a clearance cut in the cowling edge to
clear the line and rubber grommet that it passes through.  At this time I
scarfed the line forward about 45 degrees and drilled a small hole in the
aft side just above the scarf cut, supposed to allow the thing  to breath in
case the forward faced scarf ices up.  I am still concerned about icing,
have no intention to fly into known icing conditions but.....    One problem
I see with my setup is that I will have to disconnect everything at
conditional inspection time to guarantee no plugged lines, as everything is
redundant.

	Anybody see a problem with this scheme?  As Howard says, I am all
ears.

	John Epplin   MK4  #467   N100EP

Date: Wed, 02 Jun 1999 13:25:51
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls@aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: COZY: Fule lines in passenger compartment

At 12:23 PM 6/2/99 -0400, you wrote:

>There is one thing that bothers me quite a bit on the Cozy design and that
>is
>having fuel and vent lines running thru the fuselage. This is not good and
>indeed would not pass muster on a FAR 25 aircraft. Many aircraft have
>fuel and vent lines that run thru the passenger cabin however they are
>shrouded (double walled). and the cavity drained overboard. 

  Curious. I've done a quick word and phrase search in Part 25 and
  did find references to shrouding fuel lines in vicinity of fuel fired
  heaters to prevent leaking fuel from entering the ventilation system.
  I found no requirement for extra ordinary enclosure of fuel lines in
  the cabin or anywhere else. There were lots of words about adequate
  support, showing that materials used were suited to task, and taking
  special note of fuel lines that run through especially hot or cold
  areas.

  I've been a stong advocate of electric primer systems to avoid
  running primer lines all the way to the pilot's position. Electric
  primers plumbed to 4 or 6 port primer systems offer a unique 
  opportunity to build a stand-by fuel delivery system that is
  totally independent of the normal running system.

  The larger plumbing used to carry fuel from tanks to selector
  valves and ultimately to the engine don't figure high on the list
  of hazards in accident history . . . indeed, one builder's quest
  to keep fuel out of the cockpit gave rise to a fuel selector handle
  that Mr. Denver couldn't reach . . . not a bad deal for the guy
  who designed it but a real problem for the guy who bought the 
  airplane.

  For canard-pusher aircraft, the potential for long runs of fuel
  lines in cockpit are certainly greater . . . but keep in
  mind that fuel line failures happen most often at compormised
  joints or at locations where lines are not properly supported
  and protected from chaffing.  If the joints you make in
  your fuel lines are no greater in number than those found
  in the average Cessna or Piper, I'll suggest that aside from
  the obvious need for mechanical security of the installation,
  there's not much of an argument for the use of exotic tubing
  for fuselage fuel handling . . .



  
       Bob . . .

                       ////
                      (o o)
       ===========o00o=(_)=o00o=========
       <  Independence Kansas: the     >
       <  Jurassic Park of aviation.   >
       <  Your source for brand new    >
       <  40 year old airplanes.       >
       =================================
          http://www.aeroelectric.com

From: "Nat Puffer" <cozy@extremezone.com>
Subject: COZY: Fuel lines in cockpit
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 1999 13:53:54 -0500

Builders,
In the Varieze design, the fuel selector valve was located at the firewall,
at the end of a torque tube, even though there was a fuselage tank (inside
the fuselage) besides two wing tanks. There were too many forced landings
attributed to the torque tube breaking, or the fuel valve sticking, or the
pilot not positioning it correctly because he couldn't feel the detents.
When Burt designed the Long EZ, he located the fuel selector valve at the
instrument panel, either in the panel or in the thigh support between the
pilot's legs, so the pilot could feel the detents and see the position of
the valve. This meant running a line from each tank up to the front where
the valve was located, and then a single line back to the firewall.
Obviously the builder of the Long EZ that John Denver purchased thought the
torque tube was the better idea, but it cost John his life.
When we designed the Cozy, we were able to eliminate some of the fuel lines
by locating the selector valve in the back cockpit, but with the handle
extending through the front seat back so the pilot could place his hand
directly on the valve, see the position, and feel the detents. I am not
aware that there have been any reported leakages of the fuel lines in the
cabin in any Cozys or Long EZs for that matter, even in crashes. There has
been a decided reduction of forced landings and/or crashes due to fuel
valves located on the firewall. The first rule in problem solving is to
define the problem. We are not aware of any problem remaining to be solved.
The idea of the vent lines going over the top of the firewall and then down
underneath the strake was originated by the designer of the Cozy to solve
two problems: 1) the risk of fuel draining out in the event of a crash and
the airplane tipping upsidedown, and 2) the risk of the vent line picking
up rain and freezing in flight. The idea was presented to RAF, but never
incorporated in the Long EZ plans.
Regards,
Nat

From: SWrightFLY@aol.com
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 1999 16:58:41 EDT
Subject: Re: COZY: Fule lines in passenger compartment

In a message dated 6/2/99 1:40:39 PM Central Daylight Time, 
hrogers@slac.stanford.edu writes:

<<  CSA shows a neat installation of running the vent lines up
 and over the top of the firewall, then down and outboard along the bottom
 aft edge of the opposite-side centersection spar, then out the bottom, and
 bent facing forward.  Makes perfect sense to me.  I can't see anything
 wrong with it, and I'm asking if anyone here can, either, because it is the
 nature of fuel systems to contain hidden "gotchas", and I am always all
 ears on the subject. >>

this is a great idea and is what I have done in my Stagger EZ but with one 
exception-

1. Rather than running the vent lines on the engine side of the firewall, I 
ran the lines on the passenger side of the firewall and laid up a 2 inch wide 
BID tape over each of the 1/4 inch Al tubes. The ONLY fuel lines in the 
engine compartment containing vapor or fuel will be the fuel line (having a 
fire sleave) going through the firewall to the Ellison TB.
Steve Wright
<A HREF="http://www.canard.com/noselift/">Wright Aircraft Works LLC: Electric 
Nose-Lift for EZEs
</A> 

From: "Ernesto Sanchez" <es12043@utech.net>
Subject: Re: COZY: Fuel lines in cockpit
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 1999 17:09:45 -0000

> Obviously the builder of the Long EZ that John . > Denver purchased
thought the torque tube was  > the better idea, but it cost John his life.

Mr Denver died because he did not have fuel in his plane (maybe 3 gal
total).  Even if he had the valve per plans, he was still out of gas.  His
plane had many hours on the clock by differnet owners.  They did not crash.
Now, the Denver estate is suing everybody because John failed to take the
most basic percautions, fuel his plane and become familar with it's systems
before flight.  A very sad situation for all involved.

Best wishes,
Ernesto Sanchez
90% done, 90% left on my Long




From: "Morten Brandtzaeg" <morten@scandisoft.no>
Subject: Re: COZY: Fuel lines in cockpit
Date: Thu, 3 Jun 1999 02:24:07 +0200

Hello friends,
I'm new to this group. I'm from Norway were it's cold and dark most of the
year!
I've been flying Cozy III for some years and even seen my plane been away
with all its landing gear during a VERY rough landing (1700 hrs to repair
the plane..) by an inexperienced pilot on the type and windshear. The
pressure test of the tanks and fuel system showed no sign of leakage after
the rough impact-
The good thing for me is that I CAN smell fuel if something is wrong. Have
not experienced any leakage these years..
I fly a lot in winter conditions and the way the fuel went is designed I
haven't seen any ice building at any time.
Keep it as it is folks!

Safe flying!
Morten Brandtzaeg, LN-USA Cozy III

Brgds Morten Brandtzaeg, ScandiSoft
Tel: +47 6126 1050 Fax: +47 6126 4392 Mob: +47 9011 7526
-----Original Message-----
From: Nat Puffer <cozy@extremezone.com>
To: Cozy_builders@canard.com <Cozy_builders@canard.com>
Date: 2. juni 1999 23:28
Subject: COZY: Fuel lines in cockpit


>Builders,
>In the Varieze design, the fuel selector valve was located at the firewall,
>at the end of a torque tube, even though there was a fuselage tank (inside
>the fuselage) besides two wing tanks. There were too many forced landings
>attributed to the torque tube breaking, or the fuel valve sticking, or the
>pilot not positioning it correctly because he couldn't feel the detents.
>When Burt designed the Long EZ, he located the fuel selector valve at the
>instrument panel, either in the panel or in the thigh support between the
>pilot's legs, so the pilot could feel the detents and see the position of
>the valve. This meant running a line from each tank up to the front where
>the valve was located, and then a single line back to the firewall.
>Obviously the builder of the Long EZ that John Denver purchased thought the
>torque tube was the better idea, but it cost John his life.
>When we designed the Cozy, we were able to eliminate some of the fuel lines
>by locating the selector valve in the back cockpit, but with the handle
>extending through the front seat back so the pilot could place his hand
>directly on the valve, see the position, and feel the detents. I am not
>aware that there have been any reported leakages of the fuel lines in the
>cabin in any Cozys or Long EZs for that matter, even in crashes. There has
>been a decided reduction of forced landings and/or crashes due to fuel
>valves located on the firewall. The first rule in problem solving is to
>define the problem. We are not aware of any problem remaining to be solved.
>The idea of the vent lines going over the top of the firewall and then down
>underneath the strake was originated by the designer of the Cozy to solve
>two problems: 1) the risk of fuel draining out in the event of a crash and
>the airplane tipping upsidedown, and 2) the risk of the vent line picking
>up rain and freezing in flight. The idea was presented to RAF, but never
>incorporated in the Long EZ plans.
>Regards,
>Nat

From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 1999 21:01:23 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: RE: COZY: Fule lines in passenger compartment

My vents are: the plans location brought to forward and high above the spar, and a second set of 
vents from the high point inboard just forward of the spar (this is the high point when the plane 
is kneeling) brought to the same point. Then one from each tank continues down exiting just 
outboard of the inner wing bolts below and between the spar and wing on opposite sides of the tank 
served. The others do a 180 turn high on the inside firewall and exits adjacent to the others, but 
at the same side as the tank served. 2 advantages, if upside down, no fuel leakage, and if a mud 
dabber wasp builds a nest on both on one side, I still have vents. I check them by removing the 
fuel caps, have a friend listen at the opening, and blow compressed air.

One opening per tank, not the best.

From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 1999 21:07:37 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: COZY: Fuel lines in cockpit

Fuel starvation may have been contributing, and an EZ mostly survives a water landing (Number one job fly the plane), but as I 
understand the plane went near vertical down. The plane was recently painted, I doubt that the control surfaces were balanced, 
and doubt even the paint shop was given access to the instructions. Sounds to me like elevator flutter and canard failure, 
resulting in loss of lift at the forward part of the plane.

From: TRCsmith@aol.com
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 1999 22:47:53 EDT
Subject: Re: COZY: Fule lines in passenger compartment

Gee, Let's see! 
	If I recall, a DC-10 has a fuel line (single wall) running from the 
center wing tank and under the passenger compartment to the APU.  MD and the 
FAA don't seem to have a problem with that.
		Improvements  have come along through the years, and several 
have been installed on aircraft and work well. I've done some myself that I 
liked.  But double wall fuel lines, do we really need them,  and when was the 
last time you heard of a regular single wall fuel line leaking, other than at 
the fitting?  Double wall fuel lines also have fittings?
	I built mine by the plans, and have a great deal of trust in the man 
that designed and tested it. 
	The perfect and safest airplane that will satisfy everyone will never 
be built and fly!
Our's homebuilts are safe, if you can make them safer, then do so, fly it and 
let us know how it goes... 

Tom
LongEZ  N12TS
A&P

From: Lee810@aol.com
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 1999 23:15:30 EDT
Subject: Re: COZY: Fuel lines in cockpit

In a message dated 6/2/99 6:13:47 PM Mountain Daylight Time, 
es12043@utech.net writes:

> Mr Denver died because he did not have fuel in his plane (maybe 3 gal
>  total).  Even if he had the valve per plans, he was still out of gas. 

This is not correct.  JD was distracted by the unorthodox way the valve was 
installed and put the plane into an attitude from which he could not recover. 
 FMI see:

http://www.ntsb.gov/aviation/LAX/98A008.htm

I find it very disheartening that people would elect to ignore history and 
repeat the exact same mistakes of the Varieze fuel system in an attempt to 
prevent a fuel leak from entering the cockpit.  A fuel leak into the cockpit 
does not mean the plane will spontaneously burst into flames.  That requires 
a source of heat or flame/spark and the right oxygen/fuel vapor mixture.  
Fuel in the cockpit has the beneficial effect of alerting you to a fuel leak 
because you will be able smell the fuel.  The most likely source of a fuel 
leak is at the fittings and installing the fuel selector valve on the 
firewall puts more fuel fittings in the engine compartment.   Would it be 
preferable for a potential fuel leak to occur undetected into the engine 
compartment? 

A torque tube introduces many more problems that it solves.  All the 
certified planes like Pipers, Cessnas, Mooneys, etc, have fuel lines running 
through the fuselage and if it really was as risky as some people would have 
you believe, this would have been changed many years ago.

Lee Devlin
Greeley, CO

Date: Sat, 05 Jun 1999 15:42:44 -0500
From: Bulent Aliev <atlasyts@bellsouth.net>
Subject: COZY: [Fwd: Fuel System Do's/Don'ts]

I think some of us may find this interesting.
Bulent
Received: from mail4.bellsouth.net (mail4.bellsouth.net [205.152.0.4])
	by mail0.mia.bellsouth.net (8.8.8-spamdog/8.8.5) with ESMTP id KAA16810
	for <atlasyts@mia.bellsouth.net>; Sat, 5 Jun 1999 10:31:41 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from penguin.prod.itd.earthlink.net (penguin.prod.itd.earthlink.net [207.217.120.134])
	by mail4.bellsouth.net (8.8.8-spamdog/8.8.5) with ESMTP id KAA26755;
	Sat, 5 Jun 1999 10:31:41 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from noname.nodomain.nowhere (pool114-cvx.ds59-ca-us.dialup.earthlink.net [209.179.170.114])
	by penguin.prod.itd.earthlink.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id HAA04297;
	Sat, 5 Jun 1999 07:26:17 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: root@penguin.prod.itd.earthlink.net
Message-ID: <375935C3.5591136F@earthlink.net>
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 1999 07:35:47 -0700
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (X11; I; Linux 2.0.33 i686)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: zz <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Fuel System Do's/Don'ts
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000

Bill Freeman wrote:
> 
> Paul,
> 
> DO  NOT - Use  the sexy looking, expensive stainless braid
> exterior, teflon-lined hose.  Why?  The FALSE story is that the
> teflon hose lasts forever, so even if it costs many times what
> the H-8794 hose does it is worth it.   Let me repeat THIS IS
> FALSE.   The teflon hose has an unlimited SHELF LIFE,
> **not** service life and should be replaced every decade or
> sooner, just exactly like H-8794.  Also, this hose is known to have
> caused fuel system fires if the teflon gets too hot and starts to flow
> and break down. If you doubt the above, go to Parker's web site
> and verify it.

http://www.parker.com/fcg/index.htm

Bill do you have the exact page address where it talks about
teflon verses rubber?


> DO - Use Mil  H-8794 fuel line (cloth braid exterior, steel braid
> next, then rubber liner).
> 
> Mil H-8794 is met by Aeroquip 303 hose with Aeroquip 491
> fittings or Stratoflex 111 hose with 111 fittings.  This hose is
> rated at 2,000 psi operation pressure in the 3/8" ( -6) size.
> 
> DO - Put fire sleeve on all fuel lines on engine side of firewall.
> 
> DO NOT - Use any fuel valve that uses a tapered brass plug
> in a brass body.   I think the brand is Weatherhead.
>  These WILL seize and CANNOT be kept permanently lubed
> well enough to work reliably.  This has been fought for many
> decades by Piper and verified for over a decade by Rutan designs.
> Piper finally gave up and commisioned a direct replacement (no
> changes to lines, fittings, mntg bolts, etc) which Wickes
> sells and works beautifully, if more expensive.  I have flown it
> for 10 yrs and it works great.  My Weatherhead was seizing up
> in the garage during "play flying" during construction!
> 
> DO drill a 1/16" hole in the back of each forward facing fuel
> vent standpipe to keep air flowing if a big bug or ice blocks
> the main inlet.
> 
> Bill


The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.

http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org

From: "Nat Puffer" <cozy@extremezone.com>
Subject: Re: COZY: [Fwd: Fuel System Do's/Don'ts]
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 1999 15:42:38 -0500

The valve with a brass body and plug is the Imperial. That is the one you
are not supposed to use. The Weatherhead has a delrin spool inside a brass
body which eliminates the sticking problem. The Weatherhead is the one we
recommend in the Cozy plans. Let's not publish false information.
Nat

----------
> From: Bulent Aliev <atlasyts@bellsouth.net>
> To: canard-aviator <canard-aviators@canard.com>; Cozy
<cozy_builders@canard.com>
> Subject: COZY: [Fwd: Fuel System Do's/Don'ts]
> Date: Saturday, June 05, 1999 3:42 PM
> 
> I think some of us may find this interesting.
> Bulent
> 

Date: Sun, 06 Jun 1999 07:58:20 -0700
From: Eric Westland <ewestland@altavista.net>
Subject: Re: COZY: [Fwd: Fuel System Do's/Don'ts]

>
> Bill Freeman wrote:
> >
>   The teflon hose has an unlimited SHELF LIFE,
> > **not** service life and should be replaced every decade or
> > sooner, just exactly like H-8794.  Also, this hose is known to have
> > caused fuel system fires if the teflon gets too hot and starts to flow
> > and break down. If you doubt the above, go to Parker's web site
> > and verify it.

OK, I did.  The H-8794 has a temp. range of -65 to 250 degrees F.  The 124
teflon goes up to 500 degrees.  Am I missing something here?

-ew

Date: Sun, 06 Jun 1999 10:01:58 -0500
From: David Domeier <david010@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: COZY: [Fwd: Fuel System Do's/Don'ts]

Bulent,

    re "I think some of us may find this interesting."

    Interesting indeed.  My experience with 303 hose is as follows.
After 4 years of service on a LEZ with the Lycoming 0-235, I modified
the carb heat system and discovered when doing a system check with the
cowling off, the 303 hose was leaking like a sieve food strainer.  With
just 6 psi pressure the entire hose was wet from fuel pump to carb.  It
leaked dangerously and could not be detected with the engine shut down.

    I think one needs to take with a grain of salt any black and white
assertions concerning such matters.  In other words, don't believe
everything you read....it may not be completely true.

dd



Date: Wed, 09 Jun 1999 12:33:21 -0500
From: David Domeier <david010@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Fw: COZY: Re: [c-a] Fuel level sensor

Brian,

    re "In this case I would stick to the plans.  What you see is what
you get!!!"

    I agree.  The cost, time to install, lost panel space and
questionable reliability are not worth replacing the stone simple plan
site gauges.  If there's anything primal in avaition, it's seeing your
fuel....

dd



Date: Wed, 9 Jun 1999 13:22:47 -0500 (CDT)
From: Tom Brusehaver <tgb@cozy.core.wamnet.com>
Subject: Re: Fw: COZY: Re: [c-a] Fuel level sensor


>>From my 22 years working on aircraft with capacitive fuel sensors (as in
>>C-12s "King Air 200s") don't rely on then for quantity. They are very
>>susceptible to moisture.
>
>In this case I would stick to the plans.  What you see is what you
>get!!!

I think the site gauges are great, I wouldn't consider not putting 'em
in. The only trouble I have with 'em might be if I loaded up the back
seat with stuff, they might be hidden from view.

Having an instrument in the panel provides you with something to
remind you to at least look.  Having something electronic, offers the
chance to augment the system with addition al warnings.  They do have
2-1/4" dual gauges (one gauge for both tanks), so panel space
shouldn't be an issue.

Jim Weir in his article (see link below) talks about water in tanks,
and the diaelectric constant of gas is ~1.94 and water is 78.  If your
gauge is wrong, you may have water in the tanks, that is another good
warning.  

  <http://www.rst-engr.com/rst/magazine/kp-89sep.zip>

I am real tempted to just put some foil on either side of a couple of
the ribs in my strake, and call it a capacitive sensor.  Dunno yet,
it'll be a couple months before I have to decide that, and oshkosh is
coming up, so I'll have a chance to talk to folks about different
systems.  

From: alwick@juno.com
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 1999 14:09:31 -0700
Subject: Re: COZY: Fuel level sensor

Since fuel exhaustion is one of the leading causes for crashes, it is
certainly worth discussing. I hold an entirely different view on this
subject.  Passive fuel level systems like the plans version have higher
probability of pilot oversight. Hard to appreciate the increased risk
unless you have had experience with that type of failure. All passive
systems, ones that require the pilot to notice something, include
increased risk. Examples of poor passive systems also include items such
as gear down with no warning light and buzzer, fuel cap sys (hopefully
you will notice cap off), canopy latch w/o light and buzzer, flap and air
brake w/o light and buzzer, oil pressure, etc. We are all used to such
passive systems. When we hear of a failure, we tend to identify a cause
such as "pilot error", and not realize that it's also a systemic failure.
The system is never improved, so every once in a while a pilot gets
caught ..... fuel exhaustion. It's always that  "other guy", or so we
think.
The plans fuel sys is good in it's simplicity. Very good. Low risk of
false readings (except for fuel stains affecting readability,shadows).
But if you can add an active sys to it, your risk would drop
dramatically. I've added some of the "low fuel" sensors from automobiles.
They weight darn near nuttin. They are cheap (5$). They are proven by
their use in millions of vehicles. When fuel level is low, dash bulb "low
fuel" lights up just like it does in your car. I also have my sys doing
stuff like voice in headset, predicting fuel use, verifying calibration,
etc etc. 
Passive systems were the only way to handle these things in the 1950's.
But the new stuff is way safer.
I consider some sort of active fuel sys essential. Either these low fuel
sensors, capacitance sensor, or variable resistor with float. I know that
very few of us have been exposed to active, intelligent systems, but any
move in that direction is a big improvement over passive. I've proven it
by doing experiments in various industries.
FWIW.

-al wick
Canopy Latch System guy.
Artificial intelligence in Cockpit
Cozy sn 389 driven by stock Subaru 2.5 ltr.95% complete.

On Wed, 9 Jun 1999 12:07:03 -0500 extensionsystems@mindspring.com writes:
> From my 22 years working on aircraft with capacitive fuel sensors (as 
in
> C-12s "King Air 200s") don't rely on then for quantity. They are  very
> susceptible to moisture.
> 
> In this case I would stick to the plans.  What you see is what you 
> get!!!
> 
> Brian Dempster




___________________________________________________________________
Get the Internet just the way you want it.
Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month!
Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.

From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 1999 16:32:26 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: Fw: COZY: Re: [c-a] Fuel level sensor

I forgot to mention in the previous message: The King Air 200 is a turboprop burning Jet-A, not gasoline, I don't know what 
effect that has plus the unreliablity of certified equipment. I would be happy if my gauge went goofy, flagging the possibilty 
of water. Knock on wood for good luck, I have never seen water in my fuel. Make sure your fuel caps seal out water on the 
strake, and use caution when fueling. Never (even you auto) fuel from a tank that is or just has been filled from a tanker. It 
stirs up water and sediment in the bottom of the tank.

From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 1999 16:27:20 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: Fw: COZY: Re: [c-a] Fuel level sensor

With Luggage in the back to at least the level of the upper longerons, the sight gauges are not visible, and since the COZY is 
a long haul machine, and one of the features bragging about is luggage space with 2 people, this is a very common occurance. 
Some type of remote sensing gauges should be mandatory. Part of the caution that came with my gauges was water will cause a 
full scale indication (even a small quantity). Part of normal operations is comparing the electronic gauge with the clock and 
if there is a major difference don't rely upon (don't anyhow). My Skysports capacitive sending units have been fairly good, I 
had to replace one due to an adjustment pot being intermittent. THe Westach mechanical gauge can be troublesome also and have 
had one replaced und warranty, and another on my nickle. My preference would be the capacitive sending with electronic gauge. 
One could also use a mechanical (float arm with variable resistance) could also be used.

From: "Hunter Welch" <nogofsu@sprintmail.com>
Subject: Re: COZY: Fuel level sensor
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 1999 09:13:24 -0700

I am approaching this point but have not gotten there yet.  I remember a
couple years ago in the Wicks catalog I found a lightweight float type of
sensor that would break a circuit when the float was so many degrees from
horizontal.
I had thought of an indicator system that would have one of these placed at
about the 1/2 full level and on that would be placed at about the 1/4-1/8
level.  The lower one would be attached to a warning system the type Al has
mentioned.  I have not really researched this to a full extent but was a
thought I had cataloged in the back of my mind.
I know when I helped on the last Cozy we decided not to go with the
capacitor type because we were getting all sorts of erroneous readings even
after replacing the units several times.  We installed and calibrated
correctly because the one side worked but never could get the other to work
correctly

Good Day

Bill W


From: Ryan Amendala <longpup@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Fw: COZY: Re: [c-a] Fuel level sensor
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 1999 08:28:46 PDT

Brian,

Rely on them, no, add them as a second view , up to you.  I know of a long 
EZ that has site gauges, capacitive fuel gauges with a switch on panel to 
select tank, fuel totalizer on the  RMI micromonitor and a "sump" in fuel 
lines which hooks up to a Simplifly for voice warning.  The only added panel 
space is the switch and a fuel guage.  Think it is too much?  Read the 
history on how many forced landings are due to fuel starvation.  It is 
something that should never happen, yet its takes a big bite when it does.  
The best thing about this system is that you have to enter in the amount of 
fuel you added into the RMI so that you know exactly how much fuel you have, 
if you don't it will tell you you are out of fuel when you actually have 
plenty! NOTE: the first gauge mentioned is the site gauges, I do not believe 
in deviating from plans, but adding additional safety features does not hurt 
either.

Ryan
From ???@??? Fri Jun 11 22:11:15 1999
Return-Path: owner-cozy_builders@betaweb.com
Received: from twc2.betaweb.com (majordomo@betaweb.com [206.43.209.18]) by acestes-fe0.ultra.net (8.8.8/ult/n20340/mtc.v2) with ESMTP id RAA17356 for <marcz@ultranet.com>; Fri, 11 Jun 1999 17:47:22 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from majordomo@localhost)
	by twc2.betaweb.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id QAA07639
	for cozy_builders-list; Fri, 11 Jun 1999 16:21:15 -0400
X-Authentication-Warning: twc2.betaweb.com: majordomo set sender to owner-cozy_builders@betaweb.com using -f
Received: from penguin.prod.itd.earthlink.net (penguin.prod.itd.earthlink.net [207.217.120.134])
	by twc2.betaweb.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id QAA07634
	for <cozy_builders@canard.com>; Fri, 11 Jun 1999 16:21:11 -0400
Received: from earthlink.net (ip198.saint-louis2.mo.pub-ip.psi.net [38.12.208.198])
	by penguin.prod.itd.earthlink.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA08445;
	Fri, 11 Jun 1999 14:04:03 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <37617B46.A500624E@earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1999 16:10:32 -0500
From: David Domeier <david010@earthlink.net>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Ryan Amendala <longpup@hotmail.com>
CC: cozy_builders@canard.com
Subject: Re: Fw: COZY: Re: [c-a] Fuel level sensor
References: <19990610152847.18769.qmail@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-cozy_builders@betaweb.com
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: David Domeier <david010@earthlink.net>
X-UIDL: 0883f04a834efdfa17b128cb174b91fe

Ryan,

    re "Rely on them, no, add them as a second view , up to you.  I know
of a long
EZ that has site gauges, capacitive fuel gauges with a switch on panel
to
select tank, fuel totalizer on the  RMI micromonitor and a "sump" in
fuel
lines which hooks up to a Simplifly for voice warning."

    I have the Vision Micro engine gauge system which includes a very
accurate fuel flow system.  It is so accurate with regard to fuel
remaining, I use it as a backup for the site gauges.  When the fuel
ramaining hits a certain level (I'd have the check the manual on what
that level is) it begins to flash "REM".  You can't miss it if you
monitor the engine gauges at all....of course it is predicated on
accuate pilot input with regard to "fuel add" like any other computer.

dd

From: alwick@juno.com
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 1999 11:11:25 -0700
Subject: Re: Fw: COZY: Re: [c-a] Fuel level sensor

On Fri, 11 Jun 1999 16:10:32 -0500 David Domeier <david010@earthlink.net>
writes:
>>     I have the Vision Micro engine gauge system which includes a  very
> accurate fuel flow system.  It is so accurate with regard to fuel
> remaining, I use it as a backup for the site gauges.  When the fuel
> ramaining hits a certain level (I'd have the check the manual on  what
> that level is) it begins to flash "REM".  You can't miss it if you
> monitor the engine gauges at all....of course it is predicated on
> accuate pilot input with regard to "fuel add" like any other 
> computer.

Sounds like a good improvement over the stock sight gage sys. Looking at
it from a system point of view, it would be substantially improved if it
didn't rely on pilot input time after time. Concerned that periodically
pilot will forget or input wrong value. But still it is a substantial
improvement, particularly if you continue to use sight gage during
preflight to double check instrument reading.
I have my computer set up to recognize that the tanks were just filled,
and ask me during preflight if they were filled and how many gallons?
Helps reduce chance of pilot oversight and allows frequent fuel gage
recalibration (assuming I fill tanks). This would be a big improvement,
except I doubt I will fill tanks very often since they hold way too many
gallons for normal flight use. We'll see.

-al wick
Canopy Latch System guy.
Artificial intelligence in Cockpit
Cozy sn 389 driven by stock Subaru 2.5 ltr.95% complete.

___________________________________________________________________
Get the Internet just the way you want it.
Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month!
Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.

From: Militch@aol.com
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1999 08:58:57 EDT
Subject: COZY: Fuel line planning for injection systems

I am now beginning chapter 6, and so will soon be working on the fuel valve 
installation.  If I eventually install a fuel injected engine, I will need a 
return line to each tank.  How do other builders accommodate this?  Do I have 
to use a two channel fuel switch in place of the single channel 
plans-specified unit (which I already have) or would it be sufficient to 
install a "T" return line, expecting the majority of the return flow to go to 
the tank that is sourcing the flow to the engine.  Somehow, I don't think the 
"T" idea would be a very good approach. I don't see anything in the archives 
about this, but if it's there, a pointer would be appreciated.

Peter Militch
Cozy Mark IV #740

From: alwick@juno.com
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1999 15:26:28 -0700
Subject: Re: COZY: Fuel line planning for injection systems

I'm using auto conversion in my cozy, but it too requires return line for
fuel. I added a 2.5 gallon tank just above the center of main gear.
Pretty common solution that has worked well for others. It also allows
you to eliminate tank switching if you so choose, or not. If you go this
route, you would want to do some testing to verify that return line
doesn't induce vapor lock. Size & shape of tank and inlet filter may
affect this. Returning fuel must be allowed to dissipate bubbles and mix
with virgin fuel. I followed progress of EZ guy who started out sending
return line directly to fuel pump inlet. Big no no.
Good luck.

-al wick
Canopy Latch System guy.
Artificial intelligence in Cockpit
Cozy sn 389 driven by stock Subaru 2.5 ltr.95% complete.


From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1999 20:44:07 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: COZY: Fuel line planning for injection systems

I have the Bendix RSA-5 injector, which is the standard factory installed injector on all Lycoming 320, and I believe 
360 engines. I am looking at the Lycoming "Schematic Diagram". I see noted a fuel inlet, a tube to the flow divider block, and 
the tubes (one per cylinder) to the injector nozzles. There is no return line indicated. Next time I'm at the airport, I'll 
have to look, but I DO NOT have a return line going to the tanks. There might be a return line going to the  gascolator area. 
The aircraft has more than 700 hours on it, with no issues. Remember with updraft cooling, the distribution block and nozzle 
tubing must be mounted on the cool side (not top) of the engine. This might be an advantage of the Bendix unit, besides if you 
have a problem at a distant airport, probably the mechanics there will be familiar, and an exchange unit readily available.

0abcf00@mail>
X-Sender: cherney@mail
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.1 
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1999 23:30:35 -0400
To: cozy_builders@canard.com
From: Rob Cherney <cherney@home.com>
Subject: Re: COZY: Fuel line planning for injection systems
In-Reply-To: <d4bd69c8.24965691@aol.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: owner-cozy_builders@betaweb.com
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Rob Cherney <cherney@home.com>
X-UIDL: e83c7a192cc4dac34a1c333c88f4cb0d

Peter:

While at Sun-N-Fun I asked some people about this very subject.  Airflow
Performance, the maker of an after-market injection system, makes a nice
manually-operated relief valve.  This valve can redirect fuel back to one
of your tanks and purge the system of any vaporized fuel.  If I recall
correctly, it is mounted immediately upstream of the fuel distribution
spider.  As someone else pointed out, the spider should be mounted on the
underside of an updraft-cooled engine.  Operating the valve would be part
of a hot start procedure.

If you take this route, I'd be very cautious about the installation and use
the application information provided by the manufacturer.  In addition, I'd
give careful consideration to any potential failure modes when working out
the details.

Rob-
From ???@??? Wed Jun 16 21:17:54 1999
Return-Path: owner-cozy_builders@betaweb.com
Received: from twc2.betaweb.com (majordomo@betaweb.com [206.43.209.18]) by acestes-fe0.ultra.net (8.8.8/ult/n20340/mtc.v2) with ESMTP id JAA27812 for <marcz@ultranet.com>; Tue, 15 Jun 1999 09:38:47 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from majordomo@localhost)
	by twc2.betaweb.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id IAA11295
	for cozy_builders-list; Tue, 15 Jun 1999 08:22:13 -0400
X-Authentication-Warning: twc2.betaweb.com: majordomo set sender to owner-cozy_builders@betaweb.com using -f
Received: from omzrelay03.mcit.com (omzrelay03.mcit.com [199.249.19.245])
	by twc2.betaweb.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id IAA11290
	for <cozy_builders@canard.com>; Tue, 15 Jun 1999 08:22:08 -0400
Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON by firewall.mcit.com (PMDF V5.2-32 #38418)
 id <0FDD00N01DN0QK@firewall.mcit.com> for cozy_builders@canard.com; Tue,
 15 Jun 1999 13:04:12 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from ndcrelay.mcit.com ([166.37.172.49])
 by firewall.mcit.com (PMDF V5.2-32 #38418)
 with ESMTP id <0FDD00NCKDMZK0@firewall.mcit.com> for cozy_builders@canard.com;
 Tue, 15 Jun 1999 13:04:11 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from omzmta04.mcit.com (omzmta04.mcit.com [166.37.194.122])
 by ndcrelay.mcit.com (8.8.7/) with ESMTP	id NAA09434 for
 <cozy_builders@canard.com>; Tue, 15 Jun 1999 13:03:33 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from localHost ([166.34.97.45])
 by omzmta04.mcit.com (InterMail v03.02.05 118 121 101)
 with SMTP id <19990615130410.BRJB632@localHost> for
 <cozy_builders@canard.com>; Tue, 15 Jun 1999 13:04:10 +0000
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 1999 08:03 -0500 (CDT)
From: Michael Pollock <Michael.Pollock@wcom.com>
Subject: Re: COZY: Fuel line planning for injection systems
To: cozy_builders@canard.com
Message-id: <19990615130410.BRJB632@localHost>
Organization: MCI WorldCom Network Integration Lab
X-Mailer: MailRoom for Internet v2.3h (www.SierraSol.com)
Sender: owner-cozy_builders@betaweb.com
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Michael Pollock <Michael.Pollock@wcom.com>
X-UIDL: cb67039974b95b909dfbc445aec130fc

We too fly a Lycoming IO-3From ???@??? Wed Jun 16 21:17:54 1999
Return-Path: owner-cozy_builders@betaweb.com
Received: from twc2.betaweb.com (majordomo@betaweb.com [206.43.209.18]) by acestes-fe0.ultra.net (8.8.8/ult/n20340/mtc.v2) with ESMTP id JAA27812 for <marcz@ultranet.com>; Tue, 15 Jun 1999 09:38:47 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from majordomo@localhost)
	by twc2.betaweb.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id IAA11295
	for cozy_builders-list; Tue, 15 Jun 1999 08:22:13 -0400
X-Authentication-Warning: twc2.betaweb.com: majordomo set sender to owner-cozy_builders@betaweb.com using -f
Received: from omzrelay03.mcit.com (omzrelay03.mcit.com [199.249.19.245])
	by twc2.betaweb.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id IAA11290
	for <cozy_builders@canard.com>; Tue, 15 Jun 1999 08:22:08 -0400
Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON by firewall.mcit.com (PMDF V5.2-32 #38418)
 id <0FDD00N01DN0QK@firewall.mcit.com> for cozy_builders@canard.com; Tue,
 15 Jun 1999 13:04:12 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from ndcrelay.mcit.com ([166.37.172.49])
 by firewall.mcit.com (PMDF V5.2-32 #38418)
 with ESMTP id <0FDD00NCKDMZK0@firewall.mcit.com> for cozy_builders@canard.com;
 Tue, 15 Jun 1999 13:04:11 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from omzmta04.mcit.com (omzmta04.mcit.com [166.37.194.122])
 by ndcrelay.mcit.com (8.8.7/) with ESMTP	id NAA09434 for
 <cozy_builders@canard.com>; Tue, 15 Jun 1999 13:03:33 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from localHost ([166.34.97.45])
 by omzmta04.mcit.com (InterMail v03.02.05 118 121 101)
 with SMTP id <19990615130410.BRJB632@localHost> for
 <cozy_builders@canard.com>; Tue, 15 Jun 1999 13:04:10 +0000
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 1999 08:03 -0500 (CDT)
From: Michael Pollock <Michael.Pollock@wcom.com>
Subject: Re: COZY: Fuel line planning for injection systems
To: cozy_builders@canard.com
Message-id: <19990615130410.BRJB632@localHost>
Organization: MCI WorldCom Network Integration Lab
X-Mailer: MailRoom for Internet v2.3h (www.SierraSol.com)
Sender: owner-cozy_builders@betaweb.com
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Michael Pollock <Michael.Pollock@wcom.com>
X-UIDL: cb67039974b95b909dfbc445aec130fc

We too fly a Lycoming IO-360 and do not have return lines.  We installed
the engine per the engine manufacturers recommendations.

From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 1999 16:23:54 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: COZY: Fuel line planning for injection systems

Was Said <operate valve for hot starts>

Valve not necessary with Bendix, and the Airflow is very similar, I wouldn't think it required! Can't speak of the Ellison. 
Never - EVER have had hot start, or cold start problems. When cold engine, trottle cracked, mixture rich, electric fuel pump 
for say 5 seconds, and start. Hot engine (within an hour or 2 of flying) cracked trottle, mixture closed, electric fuel pump 
for 5 seconds, crank, when fires mixture rich.

It is mandatory with the updraft cooling to have the distribution block mounted in a cool location, and the injector tubes 
also cool as much a possible. My distribution block is mounted with a homemade bracket on the prop governor pad. The tubes 
stay low running under the rocker covers, the vertical next to the rocker covers, through the baffles with a rubber grommet to 
the top mounted injector nozzles. Airflow can supply custom length inlector tubes. The injector tubes mounting is the subject 
of and A.D. note, and should be followed to the spirit, which is close supports with cushion clamps. Of course the tubes 
should be inspected routinely.

When I majored the engine 4 years ago, I thought the standard Lycoming installation of distribution block and tubes would be 
better, and installed all new pieces. Within less than 4 hours and only a couple of flights, I switched back. The difficulty 
in starting a hot engine was bad enough, but the engine wouldn't run at low power settings, nearly quiting on short final.

I have a good deal for someone with downdraft cooling for the very near injection tubes, A.D. required mounting hardware, and 
paperwork from an approved repair station. 

From: "Darcy & Karen Reed" <reedinc@email.msn.com>
Subject: Fw: COZY: Fule lines in passenger compartment
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 20:22:40 -1000


>Ground all airplanes now!!!, or we'll all die!!!!
>Tom
>Longez

Good comment.  I worry about Boeing, Airbus, Douglas, etc. only when I
fly on their aircraft and since I decide to fly I accept the risk.  I have
not
herd of an aircraft or sub-component that has not had their share of
problems. The experimental industry we embark in, by building our own
aircraft, is no different.  We as Cozy builders are in control of our future
by striving to perfect the craft through education.   There are people who
do not believe that we are in control of the experimental aircraft future.
People who modify their aircraft  to the point that it/they have a mishap
we all pay.  Either through an insurance hike/denial or through regulation.
I prefer to fly and maintain my aircraft without all the restrictions that
could
be drafted and implemented.  Most of the FARs are from individuals
who thought an accident would not happen to them and almost all of
the accidents have been contributed to pilot or maintenance error.

Sorry to harp, but we have an excellent opportunity to build and fly the
aircraft we chose, in the experimental side of aviation.  I would hate to
have the same restrictions as our counter parts with a standard category
certificate issued to their aircraft.

Talking has solved some problems, but listening has solved more.
I am not sure if that statement applies, but I like it.  Back to the topic.
I believe most of the  aircraft that I have worked on or flown in have
fuel lines routed through some portion of the fuselage.  It reality it
doesn't
matter if is routed through the passenger compartment or any
other means as long as it is per the aircraft's proven/tested instructions.
And I understand the other side  of the coin.  The manufacture or designer
are usually slow to change to new ideas.  We should be careful with those
urges and think of the others we could effect.  Listen to someone who is
griping about an FAR and think about how that rule came about

I do enjoy the comments and I have taken heed to the errors and pit falls.
Mean while I will concentrate on building chapter 13 with the proven plans
provided by Nat.

Thanks everyone and keep up the good work,

Darc











From: alwick@juno.com
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 1999 22:23:21 -0700
Subject: Re: COZY: Heads up on FC100-002 fuel cap...

The fuel caps are made locally in Portland, Or. Usher Enterprises made a
design change a few years ago. I had long visit and tour by owner a few
months ago. He replaced both of my plastic inserts with the new stainless
one.
You also want to watch out when adjusting the o-ring tension. Easy to
break cap if you don't loosen the locknut before adjust. I broke the
little roll pin that holds tab to the stud. The design of cap is not the
best IMHO. Owner was nice enough to replace my damaged components. Nice
guy. FWIW, he also makes all the RV stuff, wing ribs, etc.
Sorry I didn't think to post the info.

Excellent description Dave.


-al wick
Canopy Latch System guy.
Artificial intelligence in Cockpit
Cozy sn 389 driven by stock Subaru 2.5 ltr.95% complete.

On Wed, 30 Jun 1999 22:52:10 -0500 David Domeier <david010@earthlink.net>
writes:
>     FC100-002 fuel cap.....
> 
>     Two days ago after adding some fuel I noticed the right fuel cap
> would not lock in position.  The over center tab device that causes 
> the
> O ring to spread would not stay down but popped up about 30 after 
> being
> forced down flat.  The left fuel cap behaved normally.
> 
>     Today I took both of them apart to determine what was going on.  
> I
> found that the open-close tab rides on an insert which is above the
> small O ring around the vertical stem.  The tab bottom rotates on 
> this
> insert as it is pushed forward and down which in turn causes the 
> stem to
> rise and that in turn causes the big O ring to expand and seal the 
> cap
> to the fuel tank opening.  A very simple, neat device which I believe
> Burt Rutan invented about 25 years ago.
> 
>     I found is that the left tank cap insert below the tap was made 
> of
> metal.  However, the insert under the tab in the right cap was made 
> of
> plastic.  It was broken and crimped.  The tab could not rotate to the
> over center position because it jammed against the broken plastice 
> and
> as a result, the cap could not be locked.
> 
>     I called Wicks and spoke to Don about the plastic material of the
> right cap insert.  He said he had not ever had such a report, but did
> check their stock of caps and they all had a metal insert.  It's 
> easy to
> check.  Just lift the tab and you can see the insert under the tab.
> 
>     My fuel caps are about 7 years old.  I believe the inserts may 
> well
> have been plastic at one time, but I can't prove it.  I got one with
> metal and one with plastic, probably when it was changed to metal.
> 
>     I suggest that if you have this fuel cap system, check the insert
> under the tab.  These things have come off inflight and the plastic
> insert may have been the cause of it.  I made a new insert of .049
> aluminum in about 15 minutes and the cap works fine now.
> 
> dd
> 
> 
> 

___________________________________________________________________
Get the Internet just the way you want it.
Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month!
Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.

From: N433DP@aol.com
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1999 23:54:05 EDT
Subject: COZY: Wing Strakes

Hi all
 Chapter 21 Page 1 drawing B33.  Has a hole to view the outlet screen.
1 Is that a 3x5 Hole?
2 Is it centered top to bottom

Thanks

Doug

Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1999 23:01:28 -0400
From: "Marc J. Zeitlin" <marcz@ultranet.com>
Subject: Fwd: COZY: Wing Strakes

Doug ? writes:

> Chapter 21 Page 1 drawing B33.  Has a hole to view the outlet screen.
>1 Is that a 3x5 Hole?

According to the drawing, it is.

>2 Is it centered top to bottom

About.  It's not critical.  All it needs to be is a hole so that you can
visually inspect the sump screen.

--
Marc J. Zeitlin           mailto:marcz@ultranet.com
                          http://www.ultranet.com/~marcz/

From: "Jim White" <jimwhi@televar.com>
Subject: COZY: Wing Strakes View Hole is Wrong
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 22:19:41 -0700

Before you cut the view hole in B33, be aware that there is an error on the
location of the hole from the spar.  Nat may have mentioned it in a previous
newsletter, but the view hole in B33 should be 6" from the spar, NOT 3" as
shown in the plans.  I found this out in time for on my second strake, but
too late for the first one.  Oh well, I'll just have to use a mirrot to
check the left fuel strainer.
Jim White
N44QT

-----Original Message-----
From: Marc J. Zeitlin <marcz@ultranet.com>
To: Cozy Builders Mailing List <cozy_builders@canard.com>
Date: Wednesday, August 04, 1999 8:50 AM
Subject: Fwd: COZY: Wing Strakes


>Doug ? writes:
>
>> Chapter 21 Page 1 drawing B33.  Has a hole to view the outlet screen.
>>1 Is that a 3x5 Hole?
>
>According to the drawing, it is.
>
>>2 Is it centered top to bottom
>
>About.  It's not critical.  All it needs to be is a hole so that you can
>visually inspect the sump screen.
>
>--
>Marc J. Zeitlin           mailto:marcz@ultranet.com
>                          http://www.ultranet.com/~marcz/
>

Date: Fri, 06 Aug 1999 22:19:51 -0400
From: Gregg Perry <gperry@usit.net>
Subject: COZY: Builder question

Hi everyone,

     I just got back from a family trip to Wisconsin.  I managed to
break away on Monday and visit Oshkosh for about 6 hours.  As luck would
have it, I entered at the gate where the canards were (had) been parked
and got to see David Dormeier's VERY nice looking project and Nat's
plane at the commercial building.  Not much else left by that time.  My
wife and I tried on every ANR headset that we could find and a unanimous
decision as to the most comfortable led to the purchase of two sets for
my future plane.  I also almost bought a stepladder but...
     QUESTION:  How do you get those impossibly tight joints between the
wing and strake junctures?  With all the fittings and sanding on my
project, there is a 1/8" - 1/4" gap all around.  Any help would be
appreciated.

Gregg Perry


From: alwick@juno.com
Date: Sat, 7 Aug 1999 15:25:13 -0700
Subject: Re: COZY: Builder question ..wing seam line.

I just happen to be completing that part of the process right now. There
is a small section in the plans that describes wedging a piece of foam in
the joint. You are supposed to glue wing side only of that wedge. If you
followed that approach, you would end up with crooked seam.
I glued both the wing and strake side of the wedge... effectively gluing
the wing in place. Then use a straight edge to cut a perfectly straight
line down the middle of the wedge. Dissassemble wing from strake, glass
the foam wedge piece. Reassemble after cure. Then, go ahead and micro the
seam. Once again, you have glued the wing to strake. Now recut with
straight edge again and you have perfectly straight, sharp edge at the
joint.

-al wick
Canopy Latch System guy.
Artificial intelligence in Cockpit
Cozy sn 389 driven by stock Subaru 2.5 ltr.97% complete.

On Fri, 06 Aug 1999 22:19:51 -0400 Gregg Perry <gperry@usit.net> writes:
>
>      QUESTION:  How do you get those impossibly tight joints between
the
> wing and strake junctures?  With all the fittings and sanding on my
> project, there is a 1/8" - 1/4" gap all around.  Any help would be
> appreciated.
> 
> Gregg Perry
> 
> 

___________________________________________________________________
Get the Internet just the way you want it.
Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month!
Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.

From: "Ugolini, Nick J" <UgoliniNJ@efdsouth.navfac.navy.mil>
Subject: RE: COZY: Builder question ..wing seam line.
Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1999 09:10:37 -0400 

Here some other tips:
Velocity:
For the long wing seam, they take a 48" straight edge and using the center
of the joint as a guide make two marks at each end.  Flock and glass (2 BID)
over the joint for a smooth surface.  Bondo the straight edge to the wing to
the original marks, then use a saw blade (my favorite is the Fein Sander
cutting disk), cut the joint back open.  A perfect straight and re-enforced
seam.

Berkuk..? :
for the joint around the leading edge of the strake...  take a piece of the
thinnest Alum (.020" or less) wax both sides slip it into the joint.  Pack
both sides of the dam with micro.  When cured, pop the Alum lose and sand to
flush.  

Nick

-----Original Message-----
From: David Domeier [mailto:david010@earthlink.net]
Sent: Sunday, August 08, 1999 11:29 AM
Cc: cozy_builders@canard.com; gperry@usit.net
Subject: Re: COZY: Builder question ..wing seam line.


Gregg,

    To supplement what Al said about the wing/strake joints, I layed up
2 plies of bid across the joint, then carefully marked the middle of it
and cut the straight line with the wing attached.  The critical part is
finding the middle of the joint after the lay up.  You can do that with
a piece of masking tape running parallel to the joint and measured from
the middle before the lay and they transcribed back on tip of the lay
up.

dd

Date: Sun, 08 Aug 1999 23:46:55
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls@aeroelectric.com>
Subject: COZY: Re: Emergency Fuel System


>A comment about using a primer to keep an engine running with injector or
>carb failure reminded me of a simple emergency fuel  system we used in
>various aircraft in jungle flying that totally replaced all pumps,
>filters, control valves, pressure carb or float carb systems, etc.  It
>uses the venturi in the carb, a stainless fuel line with an orifice
>outlet the same size as your jet in the carb, a simple (brake parking)
>valve controlled by a vernier knob on the instrument panel and an extra
>line from the header tank to the carb.  It worked great.  I flew a Helio
>for a few years with this system and would check it every week.  Pulling
>out the vernier knob would turn on the emergency fuel.  I shut off the
>main fuel valve and adjusted the emergency fuel flow to maintain the
>power setting I wanted.  Always worked.  Seemed strange to fly along with
>the whole normal fuel system shut down. 

   I mentioned this thread to another pilot a few
   weeks ago on a business trip. He told me of a
   system installed in an amateur built airplane
   with which he was not familiar. What he described
   to me sounded like a Falco. The builder didn't like
   the fuel selector valves available at the that 
   time. Decided to plumb his engine into the right
   wing tank with no selector valve. He used an
   electric pump on the left tank to pump fuel to
   the right during the flight. He had a second
   pump draining from a separate outlet on the left
   tank that fed a similarly architectured emergency
   fuel delivery system to the engine. His fuel
   management consisted of two switches, only one
   of which was normally used in flight with a
   second switch to back up the primary fuel delivery
   path. Normal operation called for transfering just
   enough fuel to keep the unbalance inacceptable 
   limits so that the left tank always had more fuel
   in it than the right.

   Now, if he just took care of his battery and 
   replaced it when capacity dropped below a level
   necessary to sustain flight for duration fuel,
   I'd consider the system to be pretty robust!






       Bob . . .
                       ////
                      (o o)
       ===========o00o=(_)=o00o=========
       <  Independence Kansas: the     >
       <  Jurasic Park of aviation.    >
       <  Your source for brand new    >
       <  40 year old airplanes.       >
       =================================
         http://www.aeroelectric.com

From: "Jim White" <jimwhi@televar.com>
Subject: COZY: Strake Construction Tips
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1999 22:32:41 -0700

Having just completed my second strake, I thought I would pass on a few tips
I learned from others and a few I added myself.
1. Attach the wing before working on the strake and bondo a 1/4" or so thick
template to the end of the main spar that matches the contour of the wing.
This is needed so that the strake matches up to the leading edge.
2.  When cutting out the top and bottom PVC foam pieces, finish one (top or
bottom).  The top is the same as the bottom except it is 0.2" longer.  All
the angles are the same.  Use the top or bottom strake as a template by
simply shifting it up or down 0.2" accordingly.  You might as well make all
four top and bottom skins at once.  MAKE SURE TO GET THE FIRST ONE RIGHT OR
YOU WILL HAVE FOUR WRONG ONES.
3.  I placed blocks under the ends of the landing gear struts (front and
back) to level the airplane perfectly and give it a solid foundation.  I
supported the jig table with two saw horses, and four pieces of 2X4's
individually clamped to the saw horses.  The jig table simply rests on the
ends of the 2x4's that are adjusted up or down.
4.  INSTALL THE RELEASE TAPE ON THE BACK OF THE JIG TABLE BEFORE ATTACHING
IT TO THE MAIN SPAR.
5.  Place a block of on top of the spar and place a long clamp from the top
of the spar to the jig table beneath to firmly attach the plane to the jig
table.  Do this close to the fuselage and at the end of the spar.  (Like the
man said, having too many clamps is like having too much money.  It is just
not possible.)  I did not use any bondo and the jig table never moved
relative to the plane, even when getting in and out of it repeatedly to cut
out the openings and tape the inside joints.
6.  As mentioned in an earlier post, I believe the strainer inspection hole
in B33 is marked wrong in the plans.  The inspection hole should start 6",
not 3" from the spar.
7.  For B33 bulkhead reference I clamped a straight edge to the canard
bulkhead and strung a string back to a mark on the top of the spar.  For the
B57 bulk head I simply used a plumb bob hung over the edge of the jig table
at BL 57 and attached the other end to a mark at 57" from centerline on the
spar.
8.  The B.L. dimensions are to the INSIDE face of the bulkhead.  Carve the
outside (farthest from the fuselage) to get the contours of the bulkheads to
match the sweep of the strake.  DO NOT CARVE THE INSIDE EDGES.
9.  String a line from the leading edge of the template you made in step 1
described above to the fuselage using the leading edge of the bulkheads as a
guide.  This will ensure the leading edges of the wing and strake come
together.
10.  1" spacing is fine for the scoring of the bottom foam to bend around
the bulkheads.
11.  I used cuts that were 1/2" apart instead of 1" for the top foam.  The
smaller cuts take longer to cut, but they minimize the flat spot the will
occur on the top of the curved part of the strake between the two bulkheads.
Make the cuts just after the 1 ply bid layup has cured.  If you can make the
cuts while the fiberglass is hard but still pliable, you can bend it over
the bulkheads to let it finally cure in its final shape.
12. I fully trimmed the strake openings into the fuselage before putting the
top on permanently.  If you jig the top foam sufficiently, it will match up
repeatedly to same place on the fuselage.
13.  I wanted to make sure my upper skin was firmly attached to the
bulkheads so I made a flange to go on the bulkheads instead of simply
stacking flox on the bulkheads.  The flox method probably works just fine,
but I have heard of some Cozy's developing fuel leaks after time and thought
this might minimize the possibility of this occuring.  Be forwarned, this
modification added several days work to the process!  When the top foam is
all ready to flox to the bulkheads, I carefully marked the location of the
bulkheads on the bottom of the top strake skin.  I then turned the top foam
over.  You only need to do this for the interior fuel tank edges.  Do not
extend the flanges into the storage area, you can tape those areas like
normal.  Do the leading edge, but not the trailing edge along the main spar.
On top of each bulkhead marking I put a WIDE layer of box sealing tape,
followed by a layer of peal ply, one layer of bid tape 2" wide, and peel ply
on the outer edges of the 2" bid tape.  On this second layer of peel ply, DO
NOT PUT THE PEEL PLY WHERE THE BULKHEAD WILL SIT.  Err on the cautious side
when putting this peel ply.  You can always sand the area not peel plyed,
but it is difficult to remove peel ply between the flange and bulkhead.
Place a thin layer of flox on the bulkheads and place the top on to cure.
Let it fully cure for at least a day or the one layer of bid will sag after
you pull the top back off.  Pop the top off and remove all of the peel ply.
Glass the interior corner of the new flange with one layer of bid tape, let
cure, trim with dremel, and voila', flanges that perfectly match your strake
skin.
14.  When you place the top skin to the bulkheads realize that it is a ton
of work to tape all the inside edges.  But doing the top skin placement and
inside tapes in one sitting will save lots of sanding while upside down in
the back of your airplane.
Good luck,
Jim White
N44QT
"Heavy airplanes are ugly, even if they look pretty!"

Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1999 23:06:25 -0400
From: kent ashton <kjashton@vnet.net>
Subject: COZY: Strake construction

Addition to Jim White's tips:

Strainer:  I bought a couple of 5"-wide stainless steel tea-strainers at
a kitchen shop, cut off the rim and flox the screen in the tank.  Pretty
sturdy and easier than trying to get a piece of flat screen to stay in
place.

--Kent Ashton

From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 21:23:46 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: COZY: Builder question

How do you get those impossibly tight joints between the
wing and strake junctures?  

Check the archive for my notes on building the strakes, if you can't find, ask me. Just takes time, nibble a little at a time, 
there is no rush. When getting close, don't remove anymore material, that you want a gap to be. This is part of the education 
part of the building process - patience..

Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 16:02:17
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls@aeroelectric.com>
Subject: COZY: Re: Over Voltage Question


>I performed my first engine run in my RV-4 the other day,, and all went
>very well, except for a problem with excessive (excessive to me anyway)
>voltage. I have a standard, "Vans-issue 35amp alternator with a sealed,
>solid state voltage  regulater,,, again, from Vans. I am using your crowbar
>OV protection module and I have a standard setup of a split-type master,
>with a field circuit protected with a 5amp breaker.
>
>The voltage ranged from 15.1 to as high as 15.8v. Now, I only ran it twice
>for five minutes per run so I didn't allow myself to much time for
>troubleshooting.

>I am fairly confident in the reliability of the voltmeter, curtesy of a
>VM1000 which shows a "normal" bus voltage of 12.3 with the engine not
>running. Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe your OV module triggers at
>16v?? In any case, the field breaker did not trip but this still seems very
>odd to me as the regulator is pre-set at the factory at 13.8v,, or so I
>have been told.

   A regulator can be confused into believing that the bus voltage
   is too low and causing the system voltage to run too high. This
   happens when there is excessive voltage drop between the alternator's
   output terminals and the regulator. The problem is generally caused
   by undersized wiring.

   You're correct that our OV modules are set for 16.0 to 16.5 volts
   with 16.2 being the room temperaure nominal. The readings you were
   getting are too low to cause the ovm to trip . . . but getting close.
   Do you have a voltmeter with some long leads? There are a couple of
   measurements that would be good to know:

   While the engine is running and the VM1000 is reporting a high
   bus voltage, what is:

   (1) voltage at the regulator's input and ground terminals?

   (2) voltage across the battery posts?

   (3) voltage from alternator b-lead and alternator case?

    If all these voltages are within a few hundred millivolts
    of the VM1000 reading, then the regulator is bad. If the
    regulator input voltage (1) is 13.8 and other voltages
    high, then we need to diagnose some excessive wiring or
    ground voltage drops.

       Bob . . .

                       ////
                      (o o)
       ===========o00o=(_)=o00o=========
       <  Independence Kansas: the     >
       <  Jurassic Park of aviation.   >
       <  Your source for brand new    >
       <  40 year old airplanes.       >
       =================================
          http://www.aeroelectric.com

Date: Sat, 07 Aug 1999 16:36:18 -0700
From: Eric Westland <ewestland@altavista.net>
Subject: Re: COZY: Builder question ..wing seam line.

I'll just add to Al's post that it is very helpful before you do
anything to have some reference marks 6" or so away from the intended
cut line.  Once it is glassed/micro'd over, it's almost impossible to
tell where the "middle" is.  How do you suppose I know that <dumb grin>?

If I remember right, I also just jammed a bunch of foam in there, block
sanded it smooth, glassed over it, filled over it as best as I could
with dry micro, cut after cure, removed wings and then went about
supporting the glass "underneath".

-eric

alwick@juno.com wrote:
> 
> I just happen to be completing that part of the process right now. There
> is a small section in the plans that describes wedging a piece of foam in
> the joint. You are supposed to glue wing side only of that wedge. If you
> followed that approach, you would end up with crooked seam.
> I glued both the wing and strake side of the wedge... effectively gluing
> the wing in place. Then use a straight edge to cut a perfectly straight
> line down the middle of the wedge. Dissassemble wing from strake, glass
> the foam wedge piece. Reassemble after cure. Then, go ahead and micro the
> seam. Once again, you have glued the wing to strake. Now recut with
> straight edge again and you have perfectly straight, sharp edge at the
> joint.

From: "John Slade" <rjslade@bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: COZY: Fuel caps
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1999 21:21:30 -0400

Jerry,
>fuel caps leaking and someone had so new ones that did not leak
I think the "someone" you're looking for is Jack Wilhelmson
Wilhelmson@scra.org

John Slade Cozy #757



Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 05:32:30 -0400 (EDT)
From: "George A. Graham" <ca266@freenet.buffalo.edu>
Subject: Re: COZY: Fuel caps

On Tue, 24 Aug 1999, Jerry Kennel wrote:

> There was some discussion lately about fuel caps leaking and someone had so new ones that did not leak.  Could someone tell me which ones the new ones are?  Thanks.

Great Plains sells plastic "deck fill" type fuel fill assemblies, which
include the housing and the screw-in cap.  They cost less than $ 20 ea,
and may be available in white with a red cap (mine were black).

Something similar appears in the West Marine catalog for $ 9.

These do not leak nor lock with a key.

George Graham
RX-7 Powered Graham-EZ, N4449E
Homepage <http://freenet.buffalo.edu/~ca266>

Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 09:27:32 -0500
From: Curt Smith <csmith@siue.edu>
Subject: Re: COZY: Fuel caps

At 09:21 PM 8/24/99 -0400, John Slade wrote:
>Jerry,
> >fuel caps leaking and someone had so new ones that did not leak
>I think the "someone" you're looking for is Jack Wilhelmson
>Wilhelmson@scra.org
>
>John Slade Cozy #757
>
I just installed a set of Jack's caps (they retain the Brock filler neck, 
but replace the Brock caps) on my Long and I am very happy with them. Leaks 
are a thing of the past.

Curt Smith
LE N86CS
Cozy III in progress

From: gmellen@juno.com
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 1999 09:34:43 -0400
Subject: COZY: Strakes

I am building the fuel strakes for my 3 place cozy using feather lites
leading edge kit.
I will be closing up the outboard end of the strake with  a rib to match
the wing.
My question is will the OD rib be necessary between this outboard rib and
rib R45.
The instuctions that come with this kit are only a 1/2 a sheet of paper !


Thanks

George Mellen                                                          
gmellen@juno.com

___________________________________________________________________
Get the Internet just the way you want it.
Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month!
Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.

Date: Fri, 24 Sep 1999 12:20:51 -0700
From: hrogers@slac.stanford.edu (Howard Rogers)
Subject: Re: COZY: Strakes


>My question is will the OD rib be necessary between this outboard rib and
>rib R45.
>The instuctions that come with this kit are only a 1/2 a sheet of paper !
>
>
>Thanks
>
>George Mellen


George,
        I used Featherlite's kit, too, so perhaps I can help.  My strakes
came out looking beautiful, and I had no leaks, first try!  I don't have my
plans here, so I don't remember which rib is which, by name.  I will just
say this:  Put the outboard rib on with a little 5-minute mixed with flox,
only where it joins the spar front face.  Mount the wing, and sand the rib
to match it perfectly.  Finish out all the work, just as shown, but don't
glue this "dummy" rib to the inside of the strake anywhere.  When you are
done, knock out this rib, because you won't need it any more.  The
resultant space in the outboard end of the strake can be very useful.  I
put my stobe power supply in the left one, and I may use the right side
space for some remotely mounted somethingorother before I'm finished.

-Howard Rogers


Date: Mon, 27 Sep 1999 13:10:12 -0700
From: "LCDR James D. Newman" <infaero@flash.net>
Subject: COZY: Re:  Strakes

Hi Howard,

> > In Europe the canard boys are required to have that bulkhead at the end of the strake, and to
> put a bulkhead into the end of the wing, and join the leading edge of the wing to the leading edge
> of the strake with a 1/2" bolt and the layup schedule used for the wing and center section spar
> build up.  They (the European FAA) don't like how the wing moves up and down at the strake end as
> you're flying along.

> Howard Rogers wrote:
> Hi, JD,
>         I seem to remember that Burt Rutan was appalled at the above requirement, and objected to
> it strenuously.

    Yes, I know.  I was just relaying an interesting tid bit that I didn't know whether you knew or
not since you where talking about a bulkhead at the end of the strakes.

> I am not an engineer, but I work with them and for them daily.  Any engineering student knows that
> you can't add an additional restraint to an already engineered flexible support system, without
> analyzing the consequenses very carefully.

    Very true.

> You could, in a misguided attempt to "strengthen", actually shift a load-path in a way that could
> encourage a whole new failure mode, including the possibility of effectively weakening the
> structure.

    Very true again.

> The wing-to-fuselage-spar-joint would certainly seem a likely candidate for such careful analysis.

    That's certainly been done on my plane.

>  Somehow, I doubt if this was done by the European beauracracy that required this knee-jerk "fix"
> for a non-problem.

    The way I understand the story, this was German structures engineers that are part of their FAA
staff who analyzed this concern and said that this should be done.


Infinity's Forever,

            JD

From: "Nat Puffer" <cozy@extremezone.com>
Subject: COZY: 4th wing attach point
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 1999 13:03:07 -0500

Builders,
     I seem to remember that the aviation authorities in Germany (or was it
Switzerland?) required Long EZ builders to put a 4th attachment point for
the wings at the leading edge of the strakes on the Long EZ, and Burt
objected adamantly saying that it was very poor design practice because you
cannot predict how the load would be distributed through 4 attach points. I
think Uli adopted this 4th attach point on the Cosy Classic. I have not
heard from any Cozy III or Cozy Mark IV builders that they were required to
do this. We have the largest number of Cozy builders and Cozys flying in
France. Would some of you builders in Europe care to comment? 
     Incidently, I have never noticed any relative movement between the
leading edge of the wing and the leading edge of the strake (as someone
suggested there might be), even before I filled the joint with clear
silicone, and certainly not after. I know of no failures of the wing attach
system on Long EZs or Cozys  built per plans in either torsion or excess
gs. 
     It is worth mentioning that after the centersection spar is installed
and before the strakes are built, if you mount a wing on the centersection
spar, it is possible to twist the centersection spar by twisting the wing.
However, once the strake is built, it is no longer possible. So the strake
is very important in reinforcing the centersection spar, providing
torsional strength,  so the wing cannot twist. This is the reason I don't
like to see anyone changing the structure of the strake, like cutting in to
the bottom and removing part of the structure.
     It is also very important not to reduce the spacing between the two
outboard wing attach bolts. We noticed AeroCad had done this, and we told
them we could not approve it, so they agreed to change it back to the
spacing we show in our plans. So be sure the vertical spacing on your
outboard bolts is not less than shown in the plans, whether you drilled the
holes or someone else did.

Best regards,
Nat

From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 1999 18:35:39 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: COZY: Re:  Strakes

Aggee with J.D.'s comments, in particular the issue of unknown forces. Think about a 3 legged stool on a rough floor, ALWAYS 
we know where the load is. The 4th bolt can create loads in any direction, and at the long lever arm, the loads to the 
original bolts could be sizable, and I'm not worried about the exceptionly large bolts failing, but tearing of fiberglass, at 
a location that may not be easily seen.

Also agree with Nat's comments, never seen movement. On design of caulked joints with good elastic sealant like R.T.V. 
Normally the allowable joint movement with a well designed joint is 1/4 of the joint width. My joints are 1/8" wide, then the 
allowable movement would be 1/32", not much! With the almost knife edge of the wing flange is not a well designed joint, and I 
would expect to require a wider joint. I have never seen a failed sealant joint (sealant torn loose from either side) on an 
Ez. If someone said they had 1/32" movement at the leading edge, I think that would not be excessive. I frquently fly at 
higher gross weights than most, have had my share of hard hits of turbulence and landing without any ill effects.

I was the one that questioned Burt at the Ez forum, I think it was 1991 or 1992. His comment was don't do it.



Date: Thu, 04 Nov 1999 19:02:54 -0700
From: hrogers@slac.stanford.edu (Howard Rogers)
Subject: Re: COZY: Opon cell foam

>Hi all
> I am looking for a source of open foam , to put in fuel tank , to
>prevent sloshing .
> Does anyone know where i can find this.
>                                      Thanks
>                               Jerry Garrett coze MK_IV #573

I wouldn't reccomend it, Jerry.  The baffles do a fine job of preventing
sloshing, and several such schemes have been tried to prevent flame
propogation in a crash.  As far as I know, none of them has ever been very
successful, long-term, because they inevitibly decompose to some degree and
present a problem with particles and crud in the fuel system, which could
BRING ABOUT your need for fire protection in a crash.
        Reminds me of a true story about a local constable who was helping
extricate a pilot from a bent bird, who had run out of fuel, and landed
short of a Sothern California runway.  The officer's comment (paraphrasing)
was something like, "Good thing you had no fuel on board, or you could have
burned up in a fire!"

--Howard Rogers

--Howard Rogers

 650-926-4052
hrogers@slac.stanford.edu
pager: 650-997-1089

New! email directly to my pager.  Try it!:

6509971089@alphapage.airtouch.com

(approximately 50 word limit.  I'll see no header, so be sure to sign it,
and trim off trailing messages, etc.).


From: JHTanstaaf@aol.com
Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 22:14:31 EST
Subject: Re: COZY: Opon cell foam

In a message dated 11/4/99 9:05:52 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
hrogers@slac.stanford.edu writes:

<< I wouldn't reccomend it, Jerry.  The baffles do a fine job of preventing
 sloshing, and several such schemes have been tried to prevent flame
 propogation in a crash.  As far as I know, none of them has ever been very
 successful, long-term, because they inevitibly decompose to some degree and
 present a problem with particles and crud in the fuel system, which could
 BRING ABOUT your need for fire protection in a crash. >>


This might be a little overcautious. I remember reading about the foam in 
either Sport Aviation or Kitplanes within the last year. It fills the tank 
but has such a high porosity that it only results in a <10% reduction in 
capacity while eliminating sloshing (and more importantly per the 
manufacturer -- bringing the potential for fire to near 0). Race cars have 
been using similar materials for years without incident and the new materials 
were built on this technology with extra attention to the impact of avgas.
 

From: jhocut@mindspring.com
Date: Fri, 05 Nov 1999 08:05:29 -0500
Subject: COZY: Reticulated Urethane Foam (was Opon cell foam)


At my last CFI Revalidation Class one of the speakers was an NTSB chief inspector.  One of the subjects he touched on was Reticulated Urethane Foam.  They've done a fair amount of research on this and are very much supportive of it.  As was pointed out previously it's been used in higher end race cars for several years now.  One of the EAA officers has additonal information on this material, if anyone is interested let me know and I can search through my notes to see if I can find the name.

Jim Hocut
Cozy Mk IV #448 - ch 19

From: Militch@aol.com
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 11:16:59 EST
Subject: Re:  COZY: Opon cell foam

There was an article on this in Sport Aviation I think within the last year.  
They listed the vendor.

Regards

From: "Wendell Best" <wbest@zianet.com>
Subject: Re: COZY: Re:  Opon cell foam
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 09:38:39 -0700

Hello,
    The foam serves the same purpose as the baffling in the tank does, but
it also acts as a fire retardant and reduces out flow of the fuel (not to
worry, F-15's and A-10's use the same stuff and it does effect fuel flow).
    I read something about the safety concerns about private aircraft and
this was one of the suggestions (possible new FAR) along with a halon system
in the engine bay. The halon system is probably going to be pricy. You might
be able to buidl one if the FAA allows it, you just need some sort of fire
detection system that detects tempatures around 700 degrees and will produce
a visual and/or audio warning in the cockpit. You can then get a regular
halon bottle, mount it in the engine bay, rig a cable around the handles
that is routed to the cockpit. Check it for operation so that one quick jerk
will activate it. You'll probably want to make provisions for disarming the
system on the ground (insert the pin back in the bottle).

Just some info and some ideas,


Wendell Best
217 Fireball Dr.
Clovis, NM 88101
(505)769-9001
wbest@ZiaNet.com
http://www.zianet.com/wbest


----- Original Message -----
From: J. D. Newman <infaero@flash.net>
To: Canards - 'R' - Us <cozy_builders@canard.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 1999 9:23 PM
Subject: COZY: Re: Opon cell foam


> Hi Jerry, Howard, Jim and All,
>
> > Jerry Garrett wrote:
> > I am looking for a source of open foam, to put in fuel tank, to prevent
sloshing. Does anyone know
> where i can find this.
>
>     The latest yet dated info I have is as follows (the area codes have
probably changed too):
>
> ****************************************
>
> Reticulated Foam for Fuel Tank Flame and Explosion Reduction
>             aka Safety Foam  -  Trade Name "Foamex"
>
>             Product Description - Fuel Safety Foam
>             Sold in "Buns" of 8" x 44" x 110"
>             Bun is approx. 294 sq. ft.
>             Average price - $3.00 per board ft. plus S & H
>             Color - grey for fuel tanks
>             29 PPI (pores per inch)
>             Material - Reticulated Vinyl Foam
>             Must be cut with a hot wire to retain "clean certification"
> (so vacuum and blow it off *real* well if you need to sand it a little to
get it to fit; check your
> filters extra often for the first year)
>
> Sources:  Pacific Foam  POC - Stacey  (714) 662-0277
>     $800.00 per bun plus $50.00 freight from Irvine, CA
>     Minimum order - $150.00
>
>               Wilshire  (213) 549-5444
>                             Minimum order - $300
>
> *******************************************
>
>     You will lose a couple(+) gallons per side.  Howard's right that the
current baffles are fine.
> Jim's info is correct.
>     I only know of 2 canards (both Long-EZ's) that have burned from an
incident (there's probably
> more):  one caught on fire right after take-off cause he forgot to tighten
and test his fuel
> fittings under the cowling, landed in a residential area, rolled into a
vehicle at the end of the
> street - didn't make it; the other was shot down, caught on fire after
immediate landing, evidently
> from the hot bullets.  I don't know of any fires from the tanks ripping
open during a crash - no
> tearing of metal like those "other" kind of planes have.
>     HTH.
>
>
> Infinity's Forever,
>
>             JD
>
>

Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 11:26:26 +0000
From: Eric Westland <ewestland@altavista.net>
Subject: Re: COZY: fuel cap, vent, ice failures

I have seen caps on planes with fine screen made to go over the end of
the aluminum fuel vent lines.  Originally, I think their purpose was to
keep bugs out of natural gas vent lines.  Anyone know where I can get a
couple?

Thanks,

Eric

From: alwick@juno.com
Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 09:27:25 -0800
Subject: Re: COZY: fuel cap, vent, ice failures

<Eric said: source for stainless vent screen>

Eric, you may want to consider using piece of Scotchbrite pad inserted
into end of vent. I have low density pad I cut to "T" shape. Insert base
of the "T" into vent, cut top portion of "T" to same diam as vent o.d.
My pad is not fuel sensitive, and low density material should have 0
effect on airflow. This is same approach used by thousands of Cessna
owners who place a nylon scrubbie in their fresh air inlet to keep out
the yellow jackets and flies.


-al wick
Canopy Latch System guy.
Artificial intelligence in cockpit, powered by Subaru.
Mounting the engine to firewall.
___________________________________________________________________
Why pay more to get Web access?
Try Juno for FREE -- then it's just $9.95/month if you act NOW!
Get your free software today: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.

From: "John Slade" <rjslade@bellsouth.net>
Subject: COZY: Chap 21 - extra fuel
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 10:34:55 -0500

Any Cozy builder's not out partying?

I'm working on the strakes and would like to maximize the fuel carrying
capacity. (possible long distance flights planned).

Plans say to fill the area behind bulkhead TTE with instafoam. I avoid using
this stuff wherever possible because of problems with it expanding and
contracting after a while, and I'm wondering about leaving out bulkhead TTE
or putting a hole in it.  The extra area would probably hold about 3 gallons
and C of G moment is small. I'd estimate that (with full tanks) we're
talking about 20 lb at 10 inches aft.  I'll be adding an electric nose
lift - say 10 lb at 70 inches forward, so surely this would more than cancel
the aft moment of the extra fuel. I could also move bulhead BAB forward an
inch or two and loose a little "baggage space".

Anyone done this? What am I missing?

John Slade, Cozy MKIV #757, progress: http://kgarden.com/cozy
West Palm Beach, FL


Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 10:29:04 -0600
From: David Domeier <david010@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: COZY: Chap 21 - extra fuel

John,

    re "Anyone done this? What am I missing?"

    One guy did it in a Velocity and ended his flying career in an
inverted flat spin near Orlando after flying behind a part 121 jet.  He
could not get the nose down.

    I wouldn't do it.

    If you think you'll go for a record, install a tank in the back
seat.

dd

Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 11:29:03 -0600
From: David Domeier <david010@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: COZY: Chap 21 - extra fuel

John,

    re "I'll be adding an electric nose
lift - say 10 lb at 70 inches forward, so surely this would more than
cancel
the aft moment of the extra fuel."

"Anyone done this? What am I missing?"

    Even with the electric nose lift, I must carry 27 lbs of ballast to
keep the CG forward of the aft limit when flying solo.  Moving fuel aft
is not a good idea.....one Velocity pilot did just that and ended his
flying career in and inverted flat spin near Orlando after an upset
behind and part 121 jet.

    Another consideration - you'll have to increase the holding capacity
of your bladder relative to increased fuel.  I can not sit in the
machine long enough to burn a full load of gas as is.  At long range
cruise it will stay up 6 or 7 hours...

    I wouldn't mess with the fuel system and Nat will tell you the same
thing.

dd

Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 20:16:55 +0200
From: Jannie Versfeld <qmain@intekom.co.za>
Subject: Re: COZY: Chap 21 - extra fuel

John Slade wrote:
<snip>
I'm wondering about leaving out bulkhead TTE or putting a hole in it. 
The extra area would probably hold about 3 gallons
<snip>

The Long-Eze does not make use of this bulkhead and I think that this
was added for CG considerations.

Regards,
Jannie Versfeld
#673

Starting the strakes as well

From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 13:57:40 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: COZY: Chap 21 - extra fuel

Was asked <what am I missing>

C.G. limits apply to all situations, including empty and full tanks. Since a normal flight may approach both situations, the 
allowable loading for a flight should include both empty and full (or whatever you start with).

I have a spreadsheet printout that covers nearly every extreme loading light and heavy that is allowable. Its about a half 
dozen loadings. Then its very easy when having an extreme loading to consult the data, and most of the time no further work 
need be done. I believe this meets the requirement for carrying weight and balance data and calulations. 

From: gmellen@us.ibm.com
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 17:02:48 -0500
Subject: Re: COZY: Chap 21 - extra fuel



John,

I think that what some people have done in the past (to increase fuel
capacity) is to eliminate the baggage cut outs.  My 3 place does not have
the trailing edge baffles in the strakes. I was told that because of the
longer span on the mark IV there was the need to move the fuel forward a
bit for C.G. purposes!

George Mellen
IBM Global Services
Bank One Delivery Team
gmellen@us.ibm.com
614-244-4438



From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 20:29:26 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: COZY: Chap 21 - extra fuel

The Cosy Classic has fuel against the fuselage sides from the forward of the spar to my featherlite leading edges. The B.L. 23 
bulkhead has the half moon openings like the other bulkheads. With the wider fuselage (same as a MKIV at front seat) it 
doesn't leave much space for luggage any way. My fuel capacity is 52 gallons. The spar length is the same as the MKIII.

From: "John Slade" <rjslade@bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: COZY: Chap 21 - extra fuel
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 21:09:47 -0500

Builders,
>I'm wondering about leaving out bulkhead TTE
> or putting a hole in it.

A lot of the replies I got to this were private, so I thought I'd summarize
the consensus for the archives...

                                                           DON'T

I'll be putting the TTE bulkhead in, per plans.
Regards, & happy new year to all.

John Slade, Cozy MKIV #757, progress: http://kgarden.com/cozy
West Palm Beach, FL


From: "Doug Shepherd" <DougSheph@home.com>
Subject: COZY: Extra fuel
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 17:33:01 -0800

I thought the nicest thing about the stock fuel tanks is that your cg
doesn't change as you add or subtract fuel.  If you change the strakes, your
cg could move as you consume fuel.  It wouldn't be much but I don't think
I'd want to have to figure it out.

Doug Shepherd

From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 21:14:56 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: COZY: Extra fuel

Was said <It wouldn't be much but I don't think I'd want to have to figure it out.>

Well the easiest, and I think most proper way is when weighing the airframe, with empty tanks, then fill the tanks, and if you 
want do it half full or something, and weigh it again. Then you will know the C.G. of the fuel with backwards calculations.

But not that easy, first the plane must be weighed in a hangar with the doors closed, even the slightest breeze will due to 
lift cause erroneous readings. Then the airframe must be moved outside to fuel, and then moved back inside, releveled, and 
weighed.

I have to admit, that as fussy as I am, I only weighed empty tanks, and used the book C.G. for fuel, and the other variable 
weights (luggage and passengers). By adding various known weights, sizes, shapes, and locations of passengers one could also 
determine the C.G. of those items. But after one has done numereous calculations of balance, it be comes evident that the 
front seat, and ballast change the C.G. greatly (and takeoff/landing speeds and distance), where backseat, fuel, and luggage 
barely move the C.G.

The bottom line, the test time is to ensure the aircraft is safe and the test flying must verify and determine the C.G. and 
weight limits, hopefully within the book limits.

A local repair station specializing in Aerostars, weighs every plane they do an annual on, even if there wasn't any reason tha 
changed the weight and balance. With their electronic scales, everytime we read a scale they were different, until we closed 
the half open hangar door, and we were behind the closed portion.


