From: extensionsystems@mindspring.com
Subject: COZY: Hollow Core
Date: Sat, 2 Oct 1999 09:54:26 -0000

I have a friend that has another (non Cozy) project going and I was hoping
that someone in this group could lead us in the direction of learning how to
make hollow core products.

1. How is the core formed and attached to the outer skin.
2. What makes a good core.

Any Internet sites that you could lead us to would be a great help.

Any books on the subject would be of great help.

Any first hand experience would be GREAT.

Thanks
Brian Dempster

Date: Sat, 02 Oct 1999 15:00:13 -0500
From: Bulent Aliev <atlasyts@bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: COZY: Hollow Core



extensionsystems@mindspring.com wrote:

> I have a friend that has another (non Cozy) project going and I was hoping
> that someone in this group could lead us in the direction of learning how to
> make hollow core products.
>

I don't get it: Hollow core? You can build something over a foam core and than
dissolve the core with solvent. If that's the target there are few ways to do
it. Let us know more exactly what are you goals and the nature of the "thing"
you are building.
Regards
Bulent



From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Sat, 2 Oct 1999 19:45:49 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: COZY: Hollow Core

was said <dissolve the core with solvent>

Much caution is urged here. On many canard pushers (note I am being more or less generic) the foam core is a MAJOR structural 
component. The function is to provide lateral (perpendicular) to the plane of the glass support. Both in compression , and 
example being take a 1/4" wood dowel 36" long. Set one end on the floor, and use a finger to load the dowel, noting the force 
before it bows (buckles). THen take your other hand's fingers and gently at mid height provide enough force to prevent bowing 
at the middle. The amount of side force is small, but the end force is about 4 times greater. In tension on curved surfaces 
the foam prevents the glass from assuming a flat surface. Although the foam is relatively weak when compared to wood, steel, 
or aluminum, its strength is predictable and consistant. The functionality is from large areas that are loaded.

Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1999 11:43:51 +0200
From: ernie de goveia <edegov@iafrica.com>
Subject: COZY: Hollow Cores

The Europa,a kitplane, designed and built by Ivan Shaw, uses hollow foam
cores, or,more correctly, cores with two circular cutouts thru the length
of the cores. Incidently. Shaw was also responsible for fitting two engine
to a long ez, one in each wing.

Since wing foam has a density of 2lb/ cu ft. I doubt the weight saving of
two such cutout is significant. It is more likely a manufacturing thing.

Shaw would have considered that in the design of his wing, doing something
similar in a cosy wing would have serious design implications not intended
by Bert or Nat, would also extent the already long wing building proceedure.

See www.ez.org go to canard pusher reprint then to the bottom where you
will find Full core composite sandwich wing . For more info.

FWIW
Ernie in Cape Town


Date: Sat, 02 Oct 1999 13:29:15 -0400
From: "Johnson, Phillip" <phillip.johnson@lmco.com>
Subject: Re: COZY: Chap 14

Carl Denk Wrote>
snip>
was said <getting rid of the center console >

Not sure that is a good idea, I think the console is a floor stiffener,
and helps distribute the load from a vertical impact 
to the airframe.

End<

I've seen a lot of remarks such as this one over the growth of this
group and my comments are not pointed at Carl. I have used Carl only to
illustrate a point:

When Burt Rutan designed the Vari Eze and Long Eze he did this with the
aid of a hand held Texas calculator. Personal computers were in their
infancy and only available to the select few. Most engineers were not
capable of writing the software necessary to complete finite element
analysis and little or no application software existed from which they
could work. The engineering consisted of computing the main controlling
factors to the best of their ability, add a few good back up concepts
that surly could not hurt and that was the design. Adding elements such
as centre consoles added strength but I would bet it was not included in
the design calculations as are most of the elements within the design.
Perhaps Nat could jump in here in telling us how much analysis he did in
the design of the MK IV. My guess is that he did a lot of eyeball
engineering and incorporated designs that worked from other working
designs such as the Defiant. There is nothing wrong with this but it
does suggest that in many areas we are getting "all bent up out of
shape" for things that don't matter. There are clearly areas that are
highly stressed and it's my guess is that both Burt and Nat concentrated
their analytical talents in these arenas leaving the rest to the MK 1
eyeball. It is my belief that a large part of the internal structure is
there to benefit the human factors aspect of the design and even though
they may add to the strength they were not designed with the overall
structure in mind.

In example of the above statement. Look at the lay-up schedule for the
wing skins. The UNI plies lie with their fibres running corner to corner
for the foam blocks from which the wing cores were cut. Burt obviously
found that this angle was close enough for what he wanted from his
design, and that this gave some reference point for the builder. I do
not believe that this had to be exactly this value nor do I believe that
the torsional stiffness was ever calculated other than by a very
rudimentary method. The result worked and there became no reason to
change it until stitched TRIAX became available and this gave a 45
degree angle. Notice that the AeroCanards and the Velocities are not
falling out of the sky with torsional failures.

Having made this statement it is not fitting that a builder should
remove all of the internal structure, nor change his wing lay-up,, but
he should recognize that there is some room to manoeuver without
expecting hell and damn nation for removing the centre console, cutting
out bigger leg holes etc.

Phillip Johnson

From: "Rick Maddy" <cozy@maddyhome.com>
Subject: COZY: Lessons Learned
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 22:39:19 -0600

To All,

Edmond Richards' last posting made an excellent point.  As a newbie in the
pre-build stages I am very interested in all the potential gotchas.  This
latest about vacuum lines is a perfect example.

I am requesting that each and everyone of you send me items to be compiled
into a "lessons learned" section for my new web site.  I will gladly compile
these and make them available.  Please refer to what chapters are effected.
For example, the vacuum line stuff is addressed in chapter X but should
really be dealt with in chapter Y.

I am also interested in issues you dealt with while installing "approved
modifications" such as power nose lifts and the like.  Anything a lot of
people are doing but aren't explicitly described in the plans.

I will admit I have only read through chapter 7 so I am pretty ignorant of
the later steps.  But from reading the archives, FAQ, and this mailing list
the last month, it appears there are some possible areas for minor
improvement.  By compiling all these bits of wisdom we new builders can
avoid some of the trouble the "older" builders have gone through.

Hopefully all this will find its way into revision 3 of the Cozy Mark IV
plans.

One last thing - to help me out please put the word "Lesson" as the start of
your subject when you send me these items.  It will help me to sort through
my mail easier.

Thanks,

Rick Maddy  (cozy@maddyhome.com)
Cozy Mk IV #0824: Pre-build (www.maddyhome.com/cozy)

Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 08:49:34 -0400
From: "L. Wayne Hicks" <lwhicks@erols.com>
Subject: Re: COZY: Lessons Learned

Rick Maddy wrote:
> I am requesting that each and everyone of you send me items to be compiled
> into a "lessons learned" section for my new web site.  

--------> Read the archives and FAQ's for almost every lesson learned to
date.  My personal lessons learned are posted on my website in the
individual chapters. You can find it at:

http://www.geocities.com/yosemite/falls/2027

Wayne Hicks
Cozy IV #678
Chapter 18

From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 19:24:18 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: COZY: Lessons Learned

Was said <I have only read through chapter 7 >

Highly recommend reading to the end very early in the process. I made a copy of the 
instructions for at work, and with feet on the desk and sandwich in hand read. DOn't have to 
remember every detail, but understand the whole process. Also did like someone recently 
commented, yellow highlighter of every instruction when complete to your satisfaction.

Don't want to burst any bubbles, but I have been answering for several years, have saved the 
more lengthy comments, which on request, if can't find in the archives, I dig out and send. To 
dig out all items is a major undertaking beyond my time limitations.



From: "Nat Puffer" <cozy@extremezone.com>
Subject: Re: COZY: Transition to Flying the Cozy
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 09:13:24 -0500



----------
> From: Rich Carrico <rcarrico@printerspecialists.com>
> To: Cozy builders <cozy_builders@canard.com>
> Subject: COZY: Transition to Flying the Cozy
> Date: Wednesday, October 27, 1999 9:35 AM
> 
> Is it easier to transition to flying the Cozy from a high wing aircraft
such
> as the Cessna 172 or a low wing such as the Piper Archer II or the Piper
> Cherokee 180?  

Rich,
There isn't any other airplane that flies exactly like a Cozy. Maybe the
closest is a Long EZ, but it isn't dual, and you aren't likely to find
someone willing to let you fly their Long EZ from the front seat. There
might be several reasons for suggesting that someone have recent experience
in more than one airplane. The first, of course, is to become comfortable
checking out and transitioning to other airplanes. The second, of course,
it to make sure you have recent experience flying solo. My recommendation
is to check out in every aircraft you can rent, and do this after your taxi
tests and after your FAA approval. Before I flew my Varieze, I hadn't flown
for almost 25 years. I took two hours of instruction, and then went up with
an instructor in a Cessna 150, and told him I wanted to do everything
WRONG! This was just simply to get used to the unusual, so it didn't
unnerve me. Hope this helps.
Best regards,
Nat

> 

From: "Rich Carrico" <rcarrico@printerspecialists.com>
Subject: COZY: Transition to Flying the Cozy
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 09:35:55 -0500

Is it easier to transition to flying the Cozy from a high wing aircraft such
as the Cessna 172 or a low wing such as the Piper Archer II or the Piper
Cherokee 180?  I have access to them from my local aircraft rental company,
but am not checked out in the Archer or the Cherokee yet.  Which one would
be the best to prepare me to fly the Cozy.

Rich Carrico

From: SWrightFLY@aol.com
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 11:08:58 EDT
Subject: Re: COZY: Transition to Flying the Cozy

In a message dated 10/27/99 9:40:00 AM Central Daylight Time, 
rcarrico@printerspecialists.com writes:

<<  Which one would
 be the best to prepare me to fly the Cozy. >>
Both including a J-3, Citabria, etc., ..........the main point is that you 
can go from one type to another type and make the transition safely. In the 
same day go fly a cub then a cessna then a high performance "anything" and 
then go fly the cub again.......then you can go fly an EZ and should have no 
problem. It's different like the cub is different from the cessna. Strongly 
recommend you get an experienced EZ pilot to test fly your bird first and 
give you a check-out in a Cozy. Where are you located?
Steve Wright
<A HREF="http://www.canard.com/noselift/">Wright Aircraft Works LLC: Electric 
Nose-Lift for EZEs</A> 

From: "james leturgey" <julietlima7@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: COZY: Transition to Flying the Cozy
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 08:25:13 PDT

Hi Rich:
To answer your question--neither in my opinion. Both have steerable nose 
gear, (cozy is full castering). Some benefit might be gained from some tail 
dragger time, but not necessary. Canard aircraft takeoff differently, and 
land different than planes that have tail feathers. Other than that flight 
is very much the same. The only way to "get the feel" is to get some real 
time at the controls of a canard type. It took me about a ten to twelve 
takeoffs and landings in Longeze with the owner/pilot in the back seat 
coaching and I was very comfortable for my first flight last year. Only my 
opinion.

Good Luck
Jim (Longeze 537JL)


>From: "Rich Carrico" <rcarrico@printerspecialists.com>
>Reply-To: "Rich Carrico" <rcarrico@printerspecialists.com>
>To: "Cozy builders" <cozy_builders@canard.com>
>Subject: COZY: Transition to Flying the Cozy
>Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 09:35:55 -0500
>
>Is it easier to transition to flying the Cozy from a high wing aircraft 
>such
>as the Cessna 172 or a low wing such as the Piper Archer II or the Piper
>Cherokee 180?  I have access to them from my local aircraft rental company,
>but am not checked out in the Archer or the Cherokee yet.  Which one would
>be the best to prepare me to fly the Cozy.
>
>Rich Carrico
>
>

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

Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 12:06:39 -0400
From: Paul Krasa <p.w.krasa@larc.nasa.gov>
Subject: Re: COZY: Transition to Flying the Cozy

snip 

I agree with everything Steve said.  If you can get some right seat time in
a Cozy.  This will give you a sense of the handling dynamics of the
airplane.  If not a canard then some other high performance homebuilt.  I
had flown a Lancair 320, a Lancair IVP, a Glasair 1, and a Glasair III
prior to my Long EZ.  These airplanes gave me more of a sense of what to
expect.

I did my first flight without a canard checkout.  Conceptually, I did
exactly what Steve describes over a couple of day period.  What I found was
nose wheel lift offs are mandatory to getting a feel for control dynamics
before takeoff.  Once you can "fly" the canard down the runway safely,
repeatably, and confidently, you are ready to fly the airplane.  The
biggest consideration is that you must "break" the canard loose, and
immediately release back pressure or you will over rotate.  Do not try to
fly the airplane until you have this under control.  The first couple of
times that you attempt this, you will over rotate, or bounce the nose wheel
off the runway.  Once you have a feel for "breaking" the canard loose, it
will become natural.

As for the handling characteristic.  Unless the Cozy is much different from
the Long Ez which I doubt, The airplane has control authority, roll rate,
and pitch rate which are more aggressive than any FAR Part 23 aircraft that
you could rent.  The difference is a comparison between a Buick Station
Wagon, and a BMW M3.  The Buick is a big boat which lumbers along.  The BMW
is very light weight, responsive, high powered, and turns on a dime.  When
the POH says the aircraft does not handle like a slow sluggish trainer,
this is no lie.  It is more like a little fighter airplane.

Energy management is the rule here.  As an example, I fly a Mooney
sometimes with a friend.  It is nothing to come barreling down the approach
to final at 120-130kts, and bleed off the speed in the flare.  If I
attempted this in my Long EZ, I would use up all of the 6000ft runway and
still not be below 90kts.

This has wondered a little, but I think I have made the point.  





From: "astrong" <astrong@mscomm.com>
Subject: Re: COZY: Transition to Flying the Cozy
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 09:15:19 -0700


-----Original Message-----
From: Rich Carrico <rcarrico@printerspecialists.com>
To: Cozy builders <cozy_builders@canard.com>
Date: Wednesday, October 27, 1999 7:57 AM
Subject: COZY: Transition to Flying the Cozy


>"Is it easier to transition to flying the Cozy from a high wing aircraft
such
>as the Cessna 172 or a low wing such as the Piper Archer II or the Piper
>Cherokee 180?
>
>Rich Carrico"

Rich, I found flying the low wings with out the use of flaps was a close
approximation of the COZY landing and takeoff characteristic. When you are
ready ,have aCOZY flyer take you up and check you out.

Alex



From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 18:28:05 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: COZY: Transition to Flying the Cozy

Was said <If not a canard then some other high performance homebuilt.  >

I respectfully disagree, nothing handles like a canard, if too slow on liftoff or approach. THe Ez's I have flown (only a Long 
from backseat and my Cosy) I have found easy to handle in the air. Numerous including an 4th grade girl who I told use the 
stick like a computer joystick, and my son-in-law's father (greying senior citizen) who had never been in a small plane before  
have not had any problems with reasonable control, in fact they were better than my first flight in a J-3.

From: "STEPHEN  OBRIEN" <OBRIEN.11985@prodigy.net>
Subject: Re: COZY: Transition to Flying the Cozy
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 22:02:48 -0500

Try to get some time in a Grumman Yankee or Tiger.  They have castoring
nosewheel similar to the Cozy, bubble canopy, and are light and nimble.
They are probably as close to the Cozy as you can get for a spam can.

Just my opinion - we own a Yankee.

Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 10:51:36 +0200
From: "Rego Burger" <BurgerR@telkom.co.za>
Subject: COZY: Transition to Flying the Cozy

Nat is correct in what he says.... the handbook makes sense...but I have had  my first ride in a Vari-Eze to state...that it is not your average aeroplane...
Not all will get this opertunity but if in doubt get to someone with the type you are to fly.... for a ride...do not take risks....

Now if there is nothing like it near you and you want 1% of an idea what it would be like try my sim file.... http://home.intekom.com/glen/rnb.htm
go to canard builders link.... it;s there somewhere...if you can't find it e-mail me on rnb@intekom.co.za
The file is not perfect....(low graphics)  but good on the float for landing... fly the C182 first then try it...treat it as if it were your first flight and follow the handbook ( cozy) for real. set the elevator trim to 30% up first...on the "cozy" Do not use flaps.... use the / key for the landing brake.

Plan B on real aeroplanes STOP using flaps on landings provided the runway is long enough....on types that use 70kts on approach... now see how much runway you use up... then add 50% to that in your mind before trying your test flight on your own cozy. P.S. low wing aeros will give you more ground effect.

If you can do all emergency opps. in a type you are familiar with first prior to test flying any unknown.... the mind MUST be right for any test flight.
Never turn back with an engine failure on T/Off...keep straight ahead look out each side way ahead for an off field...


Now when you are finished playing..go build on your real aircraft...:-)




Rgo Burger
RSA

Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 06:01:34 -0500
From: Jeff Russell <JRaero@gte.net>
Subject: Re: COZY: Fiberglass bolt size

Rick Maddy wrote:
> 
> Just out of curiosity - how many yards of fiberglass are on a full bolt?

Rick, fiberglass is normally sold by the pound.  If you are talking
about
BID and UNI, there should be from 100 to 140 yards.  This is what our 
roll size comes in.  There should hve been a label on the outside of the
box giving the style, pounds and yards.

Hope that helps
-- 
Jeff Russell/AeroCad Inc.         
Website:   http://www.Aerocad.com

From: "wydo van de waerdt" <wydo.vandewaerdt@fae.storkgroup.com>
Subject: COZY: Stress calculations done on canard
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 08:26:24 +0100

To all canard builders,

I was wondering if there have been made stress calculations on the following
designs,Varieze,long EZ, Cozy.
In Europe especially in the Netherlands, stress reports on all primary
structures are made for a certified design.

I am looking for  professional stress calculations done on any part of a
canard type airplane. (Specially Cozy)
Is there someone working at the FAA or knows people having excess to these
reports?
May be some one is the author or knows the author of stress reports on this
subject.

It can't be true that there isn't any stress calculation done.
Rutan can't design canards without a little calculation.
Nat Puffer wasn't able to supply my any stress reports.

I don't know how the regulations are in the US for getting a certificate of
Airworthiness of a new/ improved design.
Perhaps building and just testing are OK in the US.
Please  contact me about this subject;

Regards,
Wydo van de Waerdt
The Netherlands
Cozy MkIV #827

From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 08:18:09 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: COZY: Stress calculations done on canard

In the USA, stress calculations are not required for Amatuer built experimental (homebuilt) aircraft. If there are any they 
are probably Rutan's, and most likely not available. There may be some other calculations of local areas, BUT, just cause 
there are calculations, doesn't assure competence and adequate safety margins.

From: "Romulo Augusto" <romulojr@brhs.com.br>
Subject: COZY: Structural loads vectors
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1999 14:35:52 -0200

Hi Cozybuilders,
any of you can help me in display the structural loads on Cozy?

If necessary, I can send privatelly a image in .GIF, . BMP or another, from the
sides, to make easy imagine what I mean.

I am trying to figure the loads vectors at fligth and in the touchdown,
regarding a engine something more heavy than Lyco O-320 and how may I perform
reiforcements on the sides to work fine in a power of 250 Hp, and not with just
180-200 Hp, like in the original project.

The guys in general makes reinforcements in the hardpoints on the firewall, of
course, but maybe will be necessary more than this, to provide a more complete
and equal load distribution along the sides?

Thanks in advance.
________________________________________________________
Romulo Augusto da Cruz, Jr, Ten.Md. , Cozy #0730
Rua da Bahia 1345/sala1103 Lourdes Belo Horizonte, MG
Fones: 55-31-274-5667, 55-31-9948-2075, 55-31-497-2080
http://www.geocities.com/capecanaveral/hall/3186
http://www.onelist.com/subscribe/aviacao-experimental


From: Militch@aol.com
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 22:28:48 EST
Subject: Re:  COZY: Templates


In a message dated 12/2/99 7:01:54 AM, Moparofer@aol.com wrote:

>   First a generic question: If a dimension is listed as 11.5 inches and the 
>template measures 11.7 inches which do you use? Now a more specific one: 
>Drawing M-5, the two piece landing gear bulkhead. I'm looking at the "L" 
>shaped piece, the one with the 7/8" inch hole.  Below where it says "1 ply 
>UND both sides" there is a horizontal dashed line, I believe this is for a 
>piece that will come later from behind, is that accurate? If so then what is 
>the solid line 2.2 inches above it? More specifically is the width of that 
>area supposed to be 2.8 "or  2.5"? I hope that was clear enough and thank 
you 
>in advance.

I go with the template.

This is a convention in engineering drawings. If there is an edge that is 
hidden, it is shown as a dashed line.  Generally, a side view will also be 
presented on the same drawing so you can see this in more detail. M5 has such 
a side view to the left of the page.  As you can see, the upper drawing shows 
a part (it will serve as a cover for the landing gear bulkheads eventually) 
that has a champfered edge at the bottom and on the upper portion of the 
cross piece.  The reason? This part gets installed at a slope - ultimately, 
the lower sloping edge will "sit" on top of the front bulkhead.  At the very 
top of the cover (at the top of the part that has the 7/8 hole), that sloping 
edge will but against (or close to) the spar. The sloping part by the words 
"After Assembly ...." is for appearance.  If you laid the finished part on a 
table, the dimension you ask about will be 2.8".  You will see 2.5" from the 
bottom edge to the line that defines the edge of the top champfer, and then 
the extra 0.3" that slopes back.

Hope that all helps.

Regards,
  Peter Militch Cozy Mark IV #740 Chapter 10

From: "John Slade" <rjslade@bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: COZY: Templates
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 09:47:05 -0500

Hello Ofer,
I had nothing to do this morning, so I looked at the M5 drawing.

>that my skills are not developing as quickly as the drawings.
Reading ahead usually makes things come clear. If its not clear, read it
again. Eventually you'll get a feel for the "style" and things will become
clear more quickly.

>   First a generic question: If a dimension is listed as 11.5 inches and
the
>template measures 11.7 inches which do you use?
First you check that you're reading the text and the drawings correctly.
Usually you'll find a good explanation for the difference - eventually.
There are VERY few errors in the plans.

>Now a more specific one:
>Drawing M-5, the two piece landing gear bulkhead. I'm looking at the "L"
>shaped piece, the one with the 7/8" inch hole.  Below where it says "1 ply
>UND both sides" there is a horizontal dashed line, I believe this is for a
>piece that will come later from behind, is that accurate?
No. I think these lines indicate the relief i.e. the angles that the foam
will be sanded or cut to later. If you read on, you'll learn that this piece
goes in at about a 45 degree angle. The dotted line indicates the "hidden"
edge after sanding. The solid line indicates the front view of the angled
edge. The plans use this approach a lot.

>More specifically is the width of that area supposed to be 2.8 "or  2.5"?
2.8. The 2.5 will be from the angled edge.

I think this is right, but no doubt others with jump in if I'm wrong.
Regards,
John Slade, Cozy #757
West Palm Beach, FL

Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 06:58:50 -0500
From: Jeff Russell <JRaero@gte.net>
Subject: COZY: Re: Right-hand Drive Cozy

NAFAIA@aol.com wrote:
>
> I am considering reversing the Instrument Panel and the Canopy Hinges
> from the MkIV Plans to make a Right-hand Drive Cozy.
> 
> Are there any other Right-hand Drives out there ?  I would really appeciate
> your comments.

Nelson, I think Uli Wolters drove on the right side of his 3 place Cozy.
He did hinge on the right but I would reverse then as you said so your
the last one in.  You could always go the Cosy Classic way and hinge in
the
front then both pilot and co-pilot can get in from either side.
Instructors do this all the time.  Standard left hand pattern work is 
not so good for sight, but you can get used to it.
-- 
Jeff

From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 09:32:25 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: COZY: Re: Right-hand Drive Cozy

Consider resale value, and flight instruction situation. Are you left handed, I am heavily, and when trying to copy a 
clearance in turbulence, at times I would prefer sitting on the right side, using rudders to maintain heading, but if building 
again, I would stay with the left seat. Many planes are set up for flying with either hand or trottle and stick on either 
side. The J-3 and Super Cub (PA-18) have trottle, elevator trim on left, and stick between the knees where I use either hand. 
The last plane I flew before the COSY (left side) was left side Skyhawk, and occasionally fly a Mooney right seat as safety 
pilot and have no problems with either seat.

Either way, check clearances for instruments (flight and engine), radio stack, etc. with elevator trim, etc. With IFR 
instruments on left side, radios middle, if I switched sides, the radios would be right in the way of the elevator trim 
springs (or probably electric trim). 

From: Signfun@aol.com
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 21:12:13 EST
Subject: COZY: 233.35 mph

233.35 mph was recorded at Jean Nevada during a RACE event.  I encourage 
everyone to come out to these events.  They are always a lot of fun & an 
opportunity to see many canards & to share ideas.  This was the first time I 
participated in the kilo races.  I have participated in the regular races.  
We run a stock IO360 engine, no high compression, klaus electronic ignition & 
prop, we are turning 2900 rpm.  The were many mods during the building 
process & after the plane was flying to optimize efficiency.
Bruce Elkind
Cozy MK IV 
795DB
Flying since March 1996

From: Signfun@aol.com
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 11:36:39 EST
Subject: Re: COZY: 233.35 mph

Here is a list of most of my mods.  Gear doors for the front wheel.  No under 
wing sumps, better flow under wings.  Jeff Russell cowls, better flow/angle 
to prop.  8" extention, more air to prop.  cut 2 1/2" off cowl, space in 
front of prop.  Tight fitting wheel pants, min. amount of tire showing.  
Efficient prop, (tried 3 props, Klaus is fastest by 6 knots & provides better 
fuel burn.  Electronic ignition, optimizes timing.  Spinner by Klaus.  
Harmonic balancer.  Fine tuning airframe, aileron position neutral & slightly 
reflexed.  Canard elevator, in trail at cruise.  IO 360 built by Ly-con, 
stock but with ported heads ( dyno'd at 220?).
I have tried many different mods that were discarded along the way, a lot of 
trial & error.
Bruce

From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 21:30:31 -0500 (EST)
Subject: COZY: Operation limitations - major modifications

When installing a new prop, the F.A.A. required 2 hours in the test area, and 10 takeoffs and landings. After several rounds 
with the Sensenich props I was testing, they gave me a letter authorizing any of 2 Sensenich models with any pitch, providing 
weight and balance, prop model and serial numbers were entered in the log book; and proper engine RPM could be attained. The 
F.A.A. flexibility was a result of these props being built and designed to the same standard as the Sensenich certified props. 
Actually Sensenich could certify (if they sell enough to warrant the bother) these props for a given engine. THis would reduce 
the required test time to 25 hours. BUT, my experience has been that 40 hours is prudent. Its possible (not sure how probable) 
with a certified prop, one could change to a certified prop with minimal if any test time, which would be very good if you 
damage a prop miles from home. The F.A.A. was very strict with the log book entries. If something ever happened, they wanted 
to know which prop was being used.


From: "Stanley Magill" <vaportrails@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: COZY: Survival tips
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 13:51:25 -0800

While in Alaska, I picked up the following survival tips from the FAA
(might be useful to carry a copy in your plane)

Stan Magill

SURVIVAL USES FOR AIRCRAFT PARTS


AIR FILTER--fire starter since its usually made of paper and is impregnated
with oilhighly
                        flammable
ALUMINUM SKINreflector for warm from a fire, signaling device, splint, snow
shovel, saw
                                     blade
BATTERYsignaling with aircraft lights or radio, fire starter
BATTERY BOXstove or cooking container
CHARTS/MAPSstuff inside clothing for insulation; dont burn them since you
may need them
                                for navigation if it becomes inevitable that
you need to walk to rescue
COMPASSdirection indicator
CONTROL CABLESbinding for shelter, splints
DOORSshelter, windbreak
ENGINE COWLINGshelter, water collection, windbreak, fire platform
ENGINE MAGNETOSfire starter
ENGINE OIL AND GASfire starter and fuel for fire, makes black smoke for
signaling
FABRIC SKINfire starting material and fuel, water collection
FUEL CELLSmelt snow on black surface, burn for black smoke, lay out on
ground for signals
HOSESsiphoning fuel from tank
INNER TUBEScanteen, elastic binding material when cut in strips, black
smoke when burned
INSIDE FABRICwater straining or filter, clothing or coverings, bandages,
fuel for fire
LANDING LIGHTS, STROBES, ETCsignals when used with battery, lights at
night,
                                                                  reflective
surfaces for signaling when the battery dies
NOSE CONE/SPINNERbucket; container for sand, oil, and fuel; scooping tool,
pot for
                                            cooking, funnel
OIL FILTERburn for black smoke
ROTATING BEACON LENSdrinking cup
RUGSground pad, insulation, clothing or warm covering
SEATSsleeping cushions, back brace for spinal injury, insulation, ground
pad, sponge rubber
                for neck support
SEATBELTSbinding material, slings, bandages
TIRESblack smoke when burned
VERTICAL STABILIZERshelter support, fire platform
WINDOWScutting tool
WINGSwindbreak, shelter supports, overhead shade, platform for fire, water
collector,
                  signaling device; if the aircraft is intact, blankets or
plastic tarps draped over the
                  wings and secured to the ground make an excellent tent
WINGTIPSdrip collection and water carriers
WIRINGbinding and rope, starting fire with battery
WOODEN WING STRUTS, BRACES, OR PROPSfire starter and fuel




From: "Michael Sausen" <cozybuilder@hotmail.com>
Subject: COZY: Nice builders logging program
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 13:59:26 CST

All,

  I ran across I really nice program for logging all of your efforts and 
money put into building the aircraft.  It is completly freeware and can be 
found at the following:

http://www.vvm.com/~tromain/Company/3shome.htm

  It also looks like it is MS Access based so you could pop it open in there 
and manipulate it anyway you wanted.

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

