From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 21:02:24 -0600 (CST)
Subject: Re: COZY: Composit Construction practice kit.

On 01/18/99 20:14:12 you wrote:
>
>Hi Glenn,
>    Good luck buddy.  I hope you feel secure while you are doing it and
>really have a sense of accomplishment when you are finished.  Hey, I bet
>we all felt about like you do right about now.  Let us know how you make
>out.
>Gary Dwinal
>
>Glenn Hobbs wrote:
>
>> Just received my composit construction practice kit from aircraft
>> spruce.  Will soon know if I'm cut out for composit construction.
>
>
>
>
>

Building an EZ is a series of small steps, stating with easy pieces, getting more complicated as 
it goes along. Workmanship and expertice is learned as you go along. Thats not the difficult part. 
The hard part including everyone around you is the time commitment. It took me 4200 hours in 3.5 
years. Thats 4200 hours that your wife or girlfriend has either help, support or find something 
else to do. My wife helped only a little, but supported by bringing a hot or iced tea, waiting for 
the UPS delivery, go to town and get supplies. Their have been more than a few divorces as a 
result of a project, in my book thats not worth it. Good luck!!! 

Date: Thu, 04 Feb 1999 23:21:05 -0600
From: James Russell <fshort@flash.net>
Subject: COZY: RE: Workshops

Hi:
    I went to a builders workshop in Denton, TX a couple of years ago.
Jeff Russell and his wife taught the wet lay-up section. I have been
working in composites since 1990 and still learned allot. Being around
other builders helps as you can trade info, make friends, and just get
connected.
    If you are starting in composites, I would really recommend a
workshop to fill in your knowledge gaps, build confidence in the
materials, and validate your skills.
    My class was Sat.-Sun..: Sat we cut a canard core and laid up the
shear web and spar caps. Sun. we skinned half the lower surface. All in
all, the class was money well spent!
    In general, composites are much more forgiving than sheet metal
but you still must respect the materials as gravity always wins. High
quality parts are always lighter, stronger, and give you a fantastic
feeling of a job well done.
    I picked a Cozy because composites gives you large parts quickly
(which helps me stay motivated), no corrosion, ease of repair/mods,
nominal 4 seats (or 2 place w/ lots of bags/fuel), 20+ years of home
built successes, and a very helpful user group!

Thanks,
James



Date: Tue, 02 Feb 1999 20:55:41 -0600
From: John Hucker <jhucker@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: COZY: Sportair Builders Conference

I recently attended the EAA / Sportair Builders conference in Oshkosh.
Two days immersed in the art of airplane construction! There were 2 day
seminars for composite construction, fabric covering, electronics and
also a 2 day conference of assorted topics.

I was surprised to find my composite instructor was none other than Jeff
Russell! Having only heard of him through this Cozy builders group, I
was not sure what to expect. He was a very good instructor and shared
his composite construction knowledge with the group. I have to say that
I was impressed with both the course and the instructor! I highly
recommend these courses to future and even current builders, what a
resource to draw from.

Thanks Jeff, I learned a lot!

From: "John Slade" <jslade@adelphia.net>
Subject: COZY: Which plane to build?
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 1999 12:08:21 -0500

Hello Canard builders.
I plan to join your distinguished group in the next few weeks. The question
is - which one? I've narrowed it down to the Cozy IV the AeroCanard FG/RG
(Aero) and the AeroCanard SB (which seems to be a kit Cozy). I rejected the
Velocity based on price, single stick and performance.

I know this is primarily a "builders" forum, but I'd really appreciate input
from anyone listening, biased or not. The issues as I see them are:

1. Support. This is probably the biggest issue. How do the plans / manuals
compare? Given the size of this group, and the responsiveness I've already
received from Nat I suspect I'll get better email and voice support if I'm
working on a Cozy. Discussion?

2. Size. The Aero is a little wider at the top. Aero even say that the
SB/Cozy back seat is for children. Can two full sized adults ride in comfort
in the back of a cozy, or does that 4 inches make all the difference?

3. Cockpit heat. Aero uses nose oil cooler. Cozy uses exhaust muff. Any big
deal either way?

4. Speed brake. Aero is electric, Cozy is manual. But I can fit an electric
in a Cozy - right?

5. Wheels / braking. Aero is a little bigger on wheels. 600-6 cf 500-5. Are
the Cozy wheels too small?

6. Useful load.  Cozy claims 1000lb. Aero lists Cozy at 900 and themselves
at 950. Who is right?
This is important to me since I want to occasionally fly with 2 couples and
I want the range.

7. Fuel system. Aero has a sump. Cozy a selector. I'm used to switching in a
Cherokee, so this doesnt seem a big deal. In fact I prefer it. This way I
can KNOW I have fuel in the other tank. Discussion?

8. Seat type. I think Id prefer the Cozy buckets rather than the aero bench.
Are these interchangeable?

9. Build time. I like building things and I'd kinda like to do it from
scratch, but Aero says the cozy takes 2500+ while they claim 1400.   I am,
however, concerned with getting a high quality result. Are those precut
cores etc. going to make that much difference in time and quality for the
$9000 price difference?

10. RG. I can decide on RG later if I go with Aero. Cozy is fixed.

11. Width. I'm currently building my workshop for this project. How wide do
the doors need to be to get the fixed parts of the plane out comfortably.
i.e. wheel it out without the wings attached? 11 feet?

12. Location. Aero is moving to an airport just up the road from me. That
might be very handy.

13. Any other differences I haven't considered but should?

Lastly. I live in West Palm Beach, FL. I see that there are about 20 Cozy
builder in this state, but I don't know how active they are. Are there any
builders in Florida who wouldn't mind my visiting and picking their brains a
little?

Regard, and thanks in advance for any comments you might have.
John Slade

jslade@kgarden.com


Date: Wed, 03 Feb 1999 13:29:07 -0500
From: Paul Krasa <p.w.krasa@larc.nasa.gov>
Subject: Re: COZY: Which plane to build?

I am going to take a shot at this as an unbiased person (Long EZ builder).
IMHO

snip
>I know this is primarily a "builders" forum, but I'd really appreciate input
>from anyone listening, biased or not. The issues as I see them are:
>
>1. Support. This is probably the biggest issue. How do the plans / manuals
>compare? Given the size of this group, and the responsiveness I've already
>received from Nat I suspect I'll get better email and voice support if I'm
>working on a Cozy. Discussion?

Both are well done and as good as the industry gets.  No, matter which you
decide to build I would recommend buying the Cozy IV plans.  If you do not
build a cozy then they will be an excellent reference.


>
>2. Size. The Aero is a little wider at the top. Aero even say that the
>SB/Cozy back seat is for children. Can two full sized adults ride in comfort
>in the back of a cozy, or does that 4 inches make all the difference?

Define full size.  Two 200# adults, probably not.

>
>3. Cockpit heat. Aero uses nose oil cooler. Cozy uses exhaust muff. Any big
>deal either way?

Its a wash.  If I was building either one, I would do the nose oil cooler
with the VW fan as described in Central States and Kitplanes last summer.

>
>4. Speed brake. Aero is electric, Cozy is manual. But I can fit an electric
>in a Cozy - right?

The manual and the electric both work.

>
>5. Wheels / braking. Aero is a little bigger on wheels. 600-6 cf 500-5. Are
>the Cozy wheels too small?


You can put what ever wheels you prefer.


>
>6. Useful load.  Cozy claims 1000lb. Aero lists Cozy at 900 and themselves
>at 950. Who is right?
This is important to me since I want to occasionally fly with 2 couples and
>I want the range.

You are the manufacturer, so it all depends.  If you load up the avionics,
and put in a large engine, the useful load goes down.  Alot will have to do
with your building technique.  If you pay alot of attention to keeping your
layups light, then the fuselage will be light.

>
>7. Fuel system. Aero has a sump. Cozy a selector. I'm used to switching in a
>Cherokee, so this doesnt seem a big deal. In fact I prefer it. This way I
>can KNOW I have fuel in the other tank. Discussion?

You can do the Cozy with a sump. No big deal.

>
>8. Seat type. I think Id prefer the Cozy buckets rather than the aero bench.
>Are these interchangeable?

build it the way you prefer.

>
>9. Build time. I like building things and I'd kinda like to do it from
>scratch, but Aero says the cozy takes 2500+ while they claim 1400.   I am,
>however, concerned with getting a high quality result. Are those precut
>cores etc. going to make that much difference in time and quality for the
>$9000 price difference?

Precut cores are nice but not essential.  The big time savings is in the
molded parts.  To a point you are mixing apples and oranges.  The
AeroCanard is built from a Kit, and the Cozy is built from plans.  The
trade off is time for money.  This is a personal decision.  Either process
will produce a high quality airplane, but the final product is builder
dependent.  

>10. RG. I can decide on RG later if I go with Aero. Cozy is fixed.

Don't waste your time.  Any retractable system is heavier, and thus takes
away from useful load, and the difference in speed is only a few knots.

>11. Width. I'm currently building my workshop for this project. How wide do
>the doors need to be to get the fixed parts of the plane out comfortably.
>i.e. wheel it out without the wings attached? 11 feet?

A large two car garage door is the minumum.  The fuselage with the spar
attached will not go through a single garage door.

>
>12. Location. Aero is moving to an airport just up the road from me. That
>might be very handy.

yep

>
>13. Any other differences I haven't considered but should?


Your size and your significant others.  both the Aero Canard and the cozy
have wieght limits to the front seat.  It will be cramped if either person
is large.

>
>Lastly. I live in West Palm Beach, FL. I see that there are about 20 Cozy
>builder in this state, but I don't know how active they are. Are there any
>builders in Florida who wouldn't mind my visiting and picking their brains a
>little?

go to a EAA Chapter 724 meeting.  Many canard builders there.


MHO

Paul
Long EZ 214LP

Date: Wed, 03 Feb 1999 22:46:52 -0500
From: "Marc J. Zeitlin" <marcz@ultranet.com>
Subject: Fwd: COZY: Which plane to build?

John Slade asks;

>1. Support. This is probably the biggest issue. How do the plans / manuals
>compare?

Unless Jeff has recently updated his instructions in a substantive manner,
you will end up taking copious notes from his videotapes to go along with
the plans he sends.  This one goes to the COZY.

>.... Given the size of this group, and the responsiveness I've already
>received from Nat I suspect I'll get better email and voice support if I'm
>working on a Cozy. Discussion?

Many of the builders on this forum are building COZY/Aerocanard mixtures,
or have used some AC parts in their COZY's, or are building AC's.  This
one's a wash.

>2. Size. ...... Can two full sized adults ride in comfort
>in the back of a cozy, or does that 4 inches make all the difference?

No.  I'm 5'6", and it's pretty cramped back there.  I could sit there for a
couple of hours, but after that, I'd be pretty uncomfortable.  The 4" would
help, but the big issue is leg room, not necessarily width.  Unless the
rear seat passengers are short, they won't be happy.  Advantage, AC, but
not much.

>4. Speed brake. Aero is electric, Cozy is manual. But I can fit an electric
>in a Cozy - right?

Yes.  An approved one from Wayne Lanza, no less.

>5. Wheels / braking. Aero is a little bigger on wheels. 600-6 cf 500-5. Are
>the Cozy wheels too small?

No, they're not too small.  The larger wheels will give you better rough
field performance, but the small wheels have less drag.  Depends what's
important to you - the COZY/AC isn't really a rough field plane in any
case.  WRT brakes, read the archives/FAQ.

>6. Useful load.  Cozy claims 1000lb. Aero lists Cozy at 900 and themselves
>at 950. Who is right?
>This is important to me since I want to occasionally fly with 2 couples and
>I want the range.

Everyone's right.  You're the builder, you can set the gross weight at
anything you want.  Nat's plane was about 1050 lbs. empty, and the gross
was 2050 lbs.  If you build yours heavier but set the gross weight the
same, you'll have less useful load.   Conversely, if you magically build a
950 lb COZY, you'll have 100 lbs more useful load.  Now, you can set your
gross weight to 2300 lbs if you want, but unless you're an
aerodynamic/structural engineer, I wouldn't recommend using anything other
than the weight determined by Nat.

Four 170 lb (standard) people is 680 lbs - 52 gal. of fuel is about 320 lbs
- by golly, that's 1000 lbs :-).  Remember, that's anywhere from 5 - 7
hours in the air - do you really need full fuel?  Will your passengers be
ready to kill you? :-).

>7. Fuel system. Aero has a sump. Cozy a selector..... Discussion?

Read the archives/FAQ.  This is a religious issue.

>8. Seat type. I think Id prefer the Cozy buckets rather than the aero bench.
>Are these interchangeable?

You can certainly build either either way.

>9. Build time. ...... Are those precut
>cores etc. going to make that much difference in time and quality for the
>$9000 price difference?

>10. RG. I can decide on RG later if I go with Aero. Cozy is fixed.

Same with COZY.  The Infinity gear used on both is retrofittable.

>11. Width. I'm currently building my workshop for this project. How wide do
>the doors need to be to get the fixed parts of the plane out comfortably.
>i.e. wheel it out without the wings attached? 11 feet?

The spar is almost 12 ft. - I calculated that you can get it out a 11' door
with the wings off.

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

Date: Thu, 04 Feb 1999 17:47:25 -0500
From: Gary Dwinal <gdwinal@exploremaine.com>
Subject: Re: Fwd: COZY: Which plane to build?

As for the size of the door in your shop.  I have two ten foot doors on my shop
and have taken my completed fuselage out and in a couple of times.  It is very
tight but it can be done.
Gary Dwinal  -  AeroCanard
From ???@??? Thu Feb 04 20:06:41 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 JAA28431 for <marcz@burnside.ma.ultranet.com>; Thu, 4 Feb 1999 09:07:49 -0500 (EST)
Received: (from majordomo@localhost)
	by twc2.betaweb.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id JAA03847
	for cozy_builders-list; Thu, 4 Feb 1999 09:08:34 -0500
X-Authentication-Warning: twc2.betaweb.com: majordomo set sender to owner-cozy_builders@betaweb.com using -f
Received: from urth.netco.com (new-urth.netco.com [206.103.221.15])
	by twc2.betaweb.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id JAA03842
	for <cozy_builders@canard.com>; Thu, 4 Feb 1999 09:08:29 -0500
Received: from dm.wamnet.com([192.168.168.2]) (1895 bytes) by urth.netco.com
	via sendmail with P:esmtp/R:inet_hosts/T:smtp
	(sender: <tgb@cozy.wamnet.com>) 
	id <m108PLf-00E1YkC@urth.netco.com>
	for <cozy_builders@canard.com>; Thu, 4 Feb 1999 08:01:39 -0600 (CST)
	(Smail-3.2.0.104 1998-Nov-20 #1 built 1998-Dec-7)
Received: from cozy.wamnet.com(really [192.168.250.75]) by dm.wamnet.com
	via sendmail with esmtp
	id <m108PLe-00HtKOC@dm.wamnet.com>
	for <@mail-relay.wamnet.com:cozy_builders@canard.com>; Thu, 4 Feb 1999 08:01:38 -0600 (CST)
	(Smail-3.2 1996-Jul-4 #3 built 1996-Nov-12)
Received: (from tgb@localhost) by cozy.wamnet.com (950413.SGI.8.6.12/950213.SGI.AUTOCF) id IAA03144; Thu, 4 Feb 1999 08:01:38 -0600
Date: Thu, 4 Feb 1999 08:01:38 -0600
Message-Id: <199902041401.IAA03144@cozy.wamnet.com>
From: Tom Brusehaver <tgb@cozy.wamnet.com>
To: EGStrong@aol.com
CC: cozy_builders@canard.com
In-reply-to: <1a6ac600.36b90c7f@aol.com> (EGStrong@aol.com)
Subject: Re: Fwd: COZY: Fw: Virus Alert
References:  <1a6ac600.36b90c7f@aol.com>
Sender: owner-cozy_builders@betaweb.com
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Tom Brusehaver <tgb@cozy.wamnet.com>
X-UIDL: 21784a43f2562203122298d920cedef8


>On another note, I am still playing with the practice kit while working on
>getting my pilot's license.  (Thought it might be nice to learn how to fly
>before I decided whether to build a plane).  I have an ad for the Sportair
>workshop.  Have any of you been to one of these and did you think it was worth
>it?  I just finfished my bookend, and frankly, it could use a little
>improvement...

I went to the 2 day sportair workshop where they show'd you how to
buck rivets, layup glass, fabric cover, and talked about motors.
There were some really good hints about laying up glass, and how to
buck rivets, that I really needed.  I thought it was worth the money.  

The class is really for those who havn't decided what kind of kit to
build, and gives you some hands on in the various types of
material. Plus is offers suggestions on the right way to do it. The
evening they also had people with various kits talk about their
planes, and their building experience.

Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 08:17:04 -0600
From: Ken Reiter <ken@quickturn.com>
Subject: COZY: Cozy flight aft of aft CG

Hello Team,

Just wanted to share some info with you about the CozyIII - thanks Nat. 
On a test flight, I had the opportunity to fly the plane close to gross 
with the cg .5" aft of the aft CG limit. I was following the FAA AC on 
testing new experimentals and by slowing moving the cg aft I was ready 
for the aft limit test. I AM NOT A TEST PILOT AND am sharing this info 
in the hope of helping others. 

Warning: If your craft pitches up dramatically on rotation - Please recheck
you cg. This is the result in my plane with the cg aft of the 102 limit.
It was like a spring shot the nose up when I rotated for take off; all 
other controls(feel) were the same as other flights. After the strong nose 
pitch-up, I tried nose down control and the nose started down - ok we have 
pitch control - so keep the speed building and be careful on pitch inputs.
Since I had pitch control and speed, I elected to go around and setup 
for a fast final and touched down 20ks faster than usual. Everything went
well and again thanks Nat for a safe design. Needless to say but the aft cg
test are done!

Good Luck and Keep building it is worth it,
Ken

Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 16:39:10 -0500
From: Jeff Russell <JRaero@gte.net>
Subject: Re: COZY: Cozy flight aft of aft CG



Ken Reiter wrote:

> Hello Team,
>
>  I had the opportunity to fly the plane close to gross
> with the cg .5" aft of the aft CG limit.

> Warning: If your craft pitches up dramatically on rotation - Please recheck
> you cg. This is the result in my plane with the cg aft of the 102 limit.

What canard are you flying?  GU or R1145MS.  If  R1145MS, How long?

> It was like a spring shot the nose up when I rotated for take off; all
> other controls(feel) were the same as other flights. After the strong nose
> pitch-up, I tried nose down control and the nose started down - ok we have
> pitch control - so keep the speed building and be careful on pitch inputs.

Did you do any stall testing on the canard at this limit or did you just try to

fly at those limits?  Power off stalls or Power on stalls.  I did not find this

in your post.

> Since I had pitch control and speed, I elected to go around and setup
> for a fast final and touched down 20ks faster than usual. Everything went
> well and again thanks Nat for a safe design. Needless to say but the aft cg
> test are done!

--
Jeff Russell/AeroCad Inc.

Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 05:58:11 -0500
From: Jeff Russell <JRaero@gte.net>
Subject: COZY: Re: Cozy flight aft of aft CG

> Ken Reiter wrote:
>
> > Hello Jeff - standard GU canard for CozyIII.
>
> > No stalls in this configuration - mainly due to possible main wing stall;
> > however, aircraft was tested at aft cg and gross aft cg - no bad results.
>
> Thanks, it was not clear what you had done.
> --
> Jeff

From: Jim Hocut <jhocut@mindspring.com>
Subject: RE: COZY: COZY plans/templates for sale
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 22:34:32 -0500


>  After few calls things were sorted
> out, but I
> still had to pay him $50 to be able to talk to Nat in the future.


At least a satisfactory arrangement was worked out whereby Nat would 
offer builder support to a "second generation" plans purchaser.  Burt 
has never given builder support in such cases, he has always insisted 
that the plans purchaser get a signed agreement from the person 
selling them to provide any needed builder support.

Jim Hocut
jhocut@mindspring.com



From: "John Slade" <jslade@adelphia.net>
Subject: COZY: "First Flight"
Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 12:00:32 -0500

Thought the group might like to know....
I had my first flight in a canard today. Jeff Russel's AeroCanard FG. What a
beautiful airplane. Flys like a dream. Very natural, very stable, very
responsive. I flew there in a Cherokee. The contrast in stability (not to
mention speed) was quite dramatic. Didn't want to get back in the Piper.

One thought though - Jeff has quite a few mods on his plane which are not
(yet?) Cz approved ...
e.g. front oil cooler / heater, molded (i.e. straight) parts, bent canard,
vernier throttle, larger main wheels, bench seat, side scoops, electric nose
lift & speed brake, canopy design, larger fuel tanks, CD Player :),  wider
back seat, larger control surfaces etc. etc.  Perhaps I speak for others
when I say that I'm looking forward to seeing Nat's list of approvals and
disapprovals after his visit with Jeff next month. I'd like to do some of
these things on my plane, but not if I give up a safety factor (or my Cozy
identification).

The molded parts is a major one for me.  The accuracy and finish on the
molded parts is impressive.  Theyre ready to paint right out of the mold. I
ve looked at quite a few homebuilts and every one is slightly different.
Most have minor wiggles and bumps in the finish and I suspect that quite a
bit of (heavy) filler was needed to get the finish they achieved.  The
moldless technique is the best for individual builders because its
impractical for each builder to build a mold and use commercial techniques.
Theyre also much cheaper to make than buy. But, cost aside, now theyre
available, molded parts seem a better bet.  They may also be more
structurally sound than anything my efforts could produce.

While it's not Nat's resonsibility to venture opinion on every crazy idea a
builder has, Jeff is a commercial approved supplier so I think different
standards should apply. While its always safer to stick with what works,
this is not how the experimental catagory came into being.  We'd all be
flying Wright specials. I'm in favor of careful, controlled evolution. I
want to build the best airplane I can build and I'm not interested in
anyone's internal politics. I hope that Nat will give us all a definitive
list of which of AeroCad's innovations he thinks are safe, which are
optional and which he feels are dangerous and why.  Personally, I think it
would be in all our best interests if what is now called the "AeroCanard"
were renamed something like the Cozy XL after the strict specification for
this airplane is agreed between the experts.

OK. Back to the grind. F22 layup here I come....
John Slade (Cozy #757)


From: "Ernesto Sanchez" <es12043@utech.net>
Subject: Re: COZY: Hand Starting
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 15:23:04 -0800

>>The problem is that I have fitted Airflow Performance fuel injection,
which is marvelous, and now for a hand start I need a second person to turn
on the electric fuel pump when the engine starts. Does anyone know of a
system which will turn on the electric pump automatically when the engine
starts to run?
>>

How about an oil pressure switch closing a circuit at start-up?

-----Original Message-----
From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com <cdenk@ix.netcom.com>
To: EJCV@aol.com <EJCV@aol.com>; cozy_builders@canard.com
<cozy_builders@canard.com>
Date: Tuesday, March 16, 1999 2:55 PM
Subject: Re: COZY: Hand Starting


>On 03/16/99 02:15:32 you wrote:
>>
>>My Long-Ez has a Conti. O-240 with a B&C starter. This starter was made
for
>>the O-200 which has 40% less capacity and, more importantly, significantly
>>lower compression. The result is that the battery has to be fully charged
to
>>turn the engine. This is not a problem as, in any case, I prefer to hand
swing
>>the engine to start, especially from cold.
>>
>>Thanks, Eddie Vann.
>>
>>
>
>I have the Bendix injector, the Airflow should be the same, as someone else
said, a brief
>electric pump on with full rich when cold. When hot I start with idel
cutoff, and richen the
>mixture after it starts firing, that would for hand propping be a problem.
Remember for an EZ
>with updraft cooling, the distribution block should be mounted on the cold
side (under or
>forward of engine). Airflow can make the special length thin tubing. I have
for sale a complete
>set of IO-320 small tubing with clamps, etc. It was used 6 hours, then I
went back to my
>original cool side installation.
>
>

From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 19:19:00 -0600 (CST)
Subject: Re: COZY: Hand Starting

Was asked <How about an oil pressure switch closing a circuit at start-up?>

I think the response time would be too slow. Probably the real solution is fix the starter system 
so it can be used all the time. Much safer that way, plus some insurance policys exclude hand 
propping, and they go to extremes with that definition.

From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 16:14:01 -0600 (CST)
Subject: Re: COZY: Experimental Airplane Sales Agreeement

On 03/17/99 09:41:15 you wrote:
>
>A friend of mine is looking to buy a homebuilt aircraft, and the person
>selling the plane is struggling with the wording for the sales agreement.  I
>have seen posted on the Internet a discussion and sample agreements for the
>sale of experimental aircraft, but now that I want to find it, it eludes me.
>
>Does anyone know where this sample agreement can be found?
>
>Regards-
>Norm Muzzy
>
>

I think the EAA has a model agreement, call them.

From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 20:13:17 -0600 (CST)
Subject: COZY: Procedures

As a result of a recent posting, Everyone building and flying should (MUST) have a current issue of 
the FAR's (or your government's equivalent) in particular "Appendix A to part 43" which defines 
Major repairs, alterations (changes), and preventive maintenance, and follow exactly as your 
operating limitations require. 

Also for Annual Inspections, make a copy from the EZ operator's manual of the requirements, AND 
"Appendix C to part 43" which defines specific items to be inspected. As you do the inspection, 
check off, I use a yellow felt tip pen. Retain these as proof that you did everything you are 
certifing. Note that there are a few items in the FAR's that are not in the Cosy list, and you are 
certifying to the FAR's, and the Cosy list has specific to the type items.

Also other parts of the FAR's define how logbook entries should be made, and by who. When making 
entries one should always include with you name, certificate number, and type certificate (private 
pilot, repairman, or inspection).



From: CHIPSLADE@aol.com
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 1999 03:27:19 EST
Subject: COZY: Cozy-? Purchasing 90% Complete

Am going this afternoon to look at a "90%" complete canard aircraft..this
one's a Vari-Eze.  Any quick clues on first glance items to check or questions
to ask?  Am very serious about finding one to finish/fly.  Thanks in advance
for any replys/advice.  Chip Slade

Date: Thu, 18 Mar 1999 09:59:28 -0800
From: hrogers@slac.stanford.edu (Howard Rogers)
Subject: Re: COZY: Cozy-? Purchasing 90% Complete

>Am going this afternoon to look at a "90%" complete canard aircraft..this
>one's a Vari-Eze.  Any quick clues on first glance items to check or questions
>to ask?  Am very serious about finding one to finish/fly.  Thanks in advance
>for any replys/advice.  Chip Slade


Chip, there are so many things to consider, I hardly know where to start.
Far too much to try to do a complete list here.  I would suggest you scout
your local EAA chapter for a very knowlegeble EZ owner to sit and talk with
for a while.  Then, if possible take him/her with you to look at the
aircraft.  The wing-mounting system of the Varieze is completely different
from the Long and the Cozy.  I would want to do a very careful alignment
check of the wings before committing to purchase, since there is no "EZ"
way to change incidence or sweep, once built.  I would want to weigh some
of the large parts.  I'd want to check out the thrust-line of the motor
mount. I'd look very carefully at the canard, with the profile templates
for correct airfoil shape, and sight down the leading and trailing edge for
straightness, as well as proper elevator positioning and gap.  I'd like to
do the aileron-hang test for proper balance (this one's easy to screw up
on).  Since there were more plans-changes on the Varieze than on any of the
following Rutan-derived designs, I'd check over the plans to see if all the
plans-changes are duely documented and carried out on the structure. I
would want to inspect important layups that were still visible (no
contouring yet).  Pretty good bet that if easily inspectable layups are
neatly done, and with correct number of plies, per plans, that the rest of
the structure is acurately constructed, as well.  I'd look for evidence
that the fuel tanks are tested "leak-tight".  There is more, but this is
where your expert escort can help you.  Good Luck.  Let us hear how this
turns out.

Howard Rogers, A&P 2005148


Date: Thu, 18 Mar 1999 16:57:01 -0500
From: Jeff Russell <JRaero@gte.net>
Subject: Re: COZY: Instruction in a experimental airplane.



"Tannen, Christian" wrote:

> Hi,
> I have a question about the pilot instruction in an experimental plane.
>
> Can somebody give me the FAA rule number, which say that the owner or
> builder of an experimental airplane can learn to fly in is own airplane ?
>
> Any help will be appreciate
>
> See you at Sun & Fun '99
>
> Christian

I did this in a my first experimental I built in 1983.  I asked the FAA
and they told me I must be signed off for that type to solo it.  I could not
find a local airplane that was the same type so I asked my CFI if he
would sign me off on my first 3 flights / landings with him and he
said he would look at me from the ground.  I had already proven that
I could solo a C-172 and he knew that I had hundreds of hours in
ultralites.  This is what I did and he signed me off.  I did the rest
of my time in my airplane except for my long cross country and check
ride.

--
Jeff Russell

From: "Nat Puffer" <cozy@extremezone.com>
Subject: COZY: CAFE Foundation
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1999 05:57:10 -0600

Hey Guys,
Check the article on Mark Beduhn's Cozy Mark IV N494 CZ in Sport Aviation,
April 1999. A very comprehensive evaluation by the CAFE Foundation. The
little discourse on canards providing a smoother ride in turbulence was
interesting. I like the comment on page 63, "Its cross country efficiency
places it among the top homebuilts in its class." Mark and his family
stopped at our house on the way out to Santa Rosa, CA. It was a lot of
effort and expense on his part to have this study done, and all of us
benefit. Thank you, Mark!
Nat

From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1999 11:43:24 -0600 (CST)
Subject: Re: COZY: CAFE Foundation

Ditto on Nat's comment "a smoother ride in turbulence"

I have often been tempted when giving a PIREP on tubulence to upgrade the severity by one step. If your working to keep the 
wings level in an EZ, the others call it Severe.

Have had a G-IV and 737 land after us, where their wings were all over the place, and it was an easy landing for us.


ps: Sorry about the gasoline april fool, I was brain dead when I passed it on. 

From: mbeduhn@juno.com
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1999 21:41:22 -0500
Subject: COZY: I'm back!

Hi everyone!

The movers dropped off our stuff today (tons of boxes), and the first
thing I did was hook up my computer so I could check my Cozy E-mail. 
Last week I was able to fly my Cozy from Conway Arkansas to Oshkosh where
it is now safely hangered (3 hours and 23 minutes of pure fun).  When I
flew in, I was just about ready to call the tower (12 miles out) when a
Cessna announced that he was 8 miles out, apparently right in front of
me.  Bummer!  I was showing a ground speed of 180 knots, and at that
speed I would be on top of him in a couple of minutes!!  I called the
tower, and they sequenced me behind the Cessna.  I told the controller 
that I was trying to slow down from 180 knots, and that I still didn't
see the traffic.  He warned to keep looking, and not to run over the
Cessna.  A few seconds later he called me and told me to keep my speed up
and pass the Cessna.   The controller called the Cessna and warned him
that he was being overtaken by  "a very high speed aircraft".  I couldn't
help smile when he said that, because it is fun to be flying a fast plane
and go screaming by Cessna's and Pipers like they are standing still!

For those of you who are still building, that is just a taste of some of
the fun you will have flying your Cozy.

Mark Beduhn
Cozy IV N494CZ  (now hangered at the big "O")


___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]

Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1999 22:46:02 -0400
From: Brian Freitag <bsf@magicnet.net>
Subject: COZY: How big is it?

Well first I need to thank everybody for the reply on my last E-mail
test. Second I need to appoligize for sending that to everybody, But
What I wanted to send didnt go through like I thought. So I am re typing
my questions to you .
  I just bought a cozy project which i am pleased about, nevertheless I
need to transport this fine plane home, so I need to ask some of you
your opinion on the best way to get it home on my car trailer. I
allready know it is 11' 6" inches wide from strake to strake, thats not
a real problem but I was wondering if I could stand this up on the
firewall to bring it home and make it look like the shuttle. I would
like to know what the length is from nose to firewall, so maybe I could
make a mount to bolt on where the engine mounts to then bolt that to the
trailer, provided its not to tall. Also if I could get a length on the
wing unbolted from the plane so I  can see if it will fit in the back of
my truck..........thanx in advance .....Brian

Date: Wed, 07 Apr 1999 09:13:06 -0500
From: Michael Amick <mkamick@wans.net>
Subject: Re: COZY: How big is it?

Brian Freitag wrote:

> I would like to know what the length is from nose to firewall,

Fuselage length  firewall to F22 =102"
F22 to nose  22" + est 6" for nose bowl =28"
 total firewall to nose = 130" or  10 feet 10 inches approximately

Regards
Michael Amick




From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1999 16:56:03 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: COZY: How big is it?

What distance, kinds of roads are involved. First choice would be on the gear or flat 
attitude and bank, securely tied down to a flat trailer. For local you probably could get 
away with just doing it. Any further distance, you would need oversize highway permits for 
every state you are going through. The permits are available by the states, could start with 
State highway patrol, or call a local trucking company that specializes in machinery moving. 
Probably they can obtain the permits for you (might try the WWW), are set up with an account 
for the various states, or can suggest an organization that can. Not too difficult to get, 
but they can specify route, and no travel at night.

The Cosy manual (and I think all Ez's [The MKIV is wider spar]) have a drawing showing the 
distance to block one axle up, for the horizontal projection of the spar to be under the 
highway width limits. This blocking must be strong enough for horizontal loads of panic 
braking.

Vertical space shuttle style, the wind load on the vertical projection of the fuselage will 
be sizable, possibly 30 pounds/sq.ft. x 10' high and 2' wide = 600 lbs. plus any loads due to 
bouncing. Thats for lengthwise loads. For winds perpendicular to highway travel, the loads 
could be more due to strake area. The issue becomes probably a light trailer, with a 
horizontal load at a relatively high elevation. A gust of wind and a chuck hole on the 
appropriate side, the whole thing could tip over. I would if going this way, use a heavy 
trailer, say one weighing at least 2000 lbs., Make a bolted (not nailed) timber frame bolted 
through the spar wing bolt holes. A caution, some flexibilty is needed since the spar is 
stiff, the trailer may not be. Then with 2" wide nylon webbing (like seat belt material) make 
a dog muzzle sort of harness to fit over the nose with webbing to 4 corners of the trailer. 
The nose will sway several inches, and the flexibilty (above) need to accomodate. The timber 
support ONLY transfers horizontal (wind and chuckholes) and vertical gravity and bumps loads. 
It must be loose to any rotation loads.  

From: SBLANKDDS@aol.com
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1999 19:41:48 EDT
Subject: COZY: Re: [c-a] EZ VIDEO SOURCE

The end of the Rutan and Mellvill video on "Building Composites" shows some 
EZ flying.  Take off, and nice air to air video.  The construction portion of 
the video is a must see. They show hot wire technique, flat layups and 
compound curve layups.

Steve

From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 22:15:40 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: COZY: Sun N Fun notes

Here are my lasting thoughts of equipment, etc. from last week (no special order):
1: An electronic flight director: was only readable nearly straight on. Nice for one for each 
front seat, but unuable by copilot when only one installed. This is common with LCD displays.

2: Cleveland Brakes have new metallic linings, the amount of heat generated is the same for a 
given weight and speed. Pedal pressure is reportedly the same. Don't use them with chromed 
disks (like mine are), they will tear up the chrome! I didn't ask what the benefit is, 
possibly better wear. Both organic and metallic linings require a conditioning (each is 
different) when new or used lightly. Cleveland wants you to stand on them to keep them 
coditioned wich is when you get the best coefficient of friction.

3: Showed and suggested both Jeff Russell and Nat consider the Cosy Classic front hinged 
canopy as an approved option on their designs. Uli Woelter (Cosy Classic designer) has been 
selling details for $25.00, and I have been providing my gas spring details free. I have 
furnished several sets of details over the last months. Jeff liked the idea, Nat thought it 
would be like mating to different breed dogs, and spoil the breed.

4: Liked the Positech oil coolers, they are said to be 10% more efficient than the Stewart 
Warner coolers, also the 360 cooler is slightly larger than the 320. Probably will replace my 
harrison cooler in the near future, considering going to the 360 if it will fit without a lot 
of cowling mods.

5: Found a heavier saw mandel for the dremel.

6: Someone reported my Lightspeed engineering prop spinner was wobbling. Removed it for 
flights home. Will investigate plus test flight to see if it really does increase speed. On 
the way home, and more heavily loaded than my usual prop test flights, at 2 times near 4000', 
the cruise speed was 170k and 177K, I would usually expect 173k with this prop, which is too 
flat of a pitch at this altitude. I like the idea of Jeff Russell's skull cap spinner, but it 
needs a 7" dia. crush plate, and I have a 6". Probably change in the near future. 
 


From: "Brent Sites" <bsites@bewellnet.com>
Subject: COZY: high altitude performance
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 23:36:16 -0700

I live in the middle of the mountains.  Our airport is at about 7,500'.  I
was wondering how well the cozy mark IV will perform taking off at this
altitude with the recommended engine.  My main use will be to transport my
family at a combined weight of roughly 550 lbs.  Does anyone have much
experience with it at high altitudes..or foresee any difficulties?
thanks
Brent Sites
bsites@bewellnet.com

From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1999 17:05:08 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: COZY: high altitude performance

What airport, what are runway lengths, prevailing winds, runway slope. My standard conditions takeoff distance is 1800' runway 
run. Using my Sporty's takeoff performance computer at 90F, and 7500', level, and no wind, I calculate 6300'. This is actual 
ground run! I would add 10% for safety, then 7000' is minimum.

At Colorado Springs at 86F I used 4600', which the calculator prediced within 100'

One thing you never whant to do with a canard, is rotate to early, you may clear the ground, but WILL skim the runway for 500' 
or 1000' before achieving best angle of climb speed and be able to clear obstructions.

From: ZeroGCorp1@aol.com
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 08:48:09 EDT
Subject: COZY: The list is great


I don't want to invoke a bunch  of  additional bandwidth here by saying this, 
but I really must send out a big thanks for this list. The posts, both the 
list and offline, from many builders is really going to be a big help.  One 
problem is I find myself flipping ahead when I see certain posts to figure 
out what they are talking about. Guess that may be good for avoiding future 
mistakes, but it is really going to impede productivity on the plane if I 
spend all my time at on e-mail and "research."

I do appreciate all of the input.

I can't say how much time has been saved by finding Wicks Aircraft, with the 
chapter sections kits.  It was on one of the many builders pages out there 
and it has been a big help. All of my material for chapter's 4-8 arrived and 
it all came well boxed and in good shape.

Oh yeah, I used the "balance" this week mixing epoxy for test layups and 
such...it was great fun building it, great that the physics work out, and 
worked perfectly as advertised; but sorry,  I can't even imagine laying up a 
wing with this thing...My pump will be sitting in its toasty Styrofoam coffin 
by the end of the weekend-promise!

on to F-22..... (six years?, whew...)

Ray Cronise

(Flight minus 2190 days and counting....)

From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 18:20:42 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: COZY: Indications this project is dragging on...

I only planned enough to have the required materials and modification details available when I needed them, considering 
delivery times and thinking ahead more or less only to do order things. Would start thinking of items I wanted to change in 
advance, giving some time for ideas to settle in, but there were items that could only be final planned when I got there. I 
was pushing Uli Woelter for drawings (I became the proof of plans for the Classic) the full time. I was one step at a time, 
and when that was complete, did the next step. Sometimes were done out of sequence from the instructions which caused lost 
time looking for a detail in an earlier chapter. Took 4700 hours in 3.5 years, while working at job 40 hours a week.

I think trying to write down a schedule what I plan to complete for 6 months or a year or 2 in advance would be depressing, 
since this is for education/recreation, and for 99% of the builders this is a first endevour, I don't know how one could even 
with low accuracy predict how many hours a task will take since they are not experienced in this work. A task is complete when 
its complete and ALL items are done correctly with best workmanship you can muster. I have been paid for construction 
management/scheduling for 30+ years, and even after building one plane, I think I would be hard pressed to make a rough 
schedule for another. Trying to stick with a schedule does not allow for the difficulties and goofs in unknown areas, and DOES 
promote poor workmanship and cutting corners which is a NO-NO.

From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Sat, 1 May 1999 17:42:48 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: COZY: Just wanting to say Hi from a new builder.

Was asked <A few of the things I would like input on are>
>
>	1.	Speed Tricks
Excellent workmanship is the best, there are little things, landing gear fairing, flush rudder belhorns, hershey kiss prop 
spinner, wheel pants.
>	2.	Retractable Mains
They take fuel space, if you forget to put down, you aren't going anywhere for more than a few days. Land nose gear up, minor 
damage, most of the time keep going. Expensive, more weight - much longer runway required, weight is very valuable on an EZ.
>	3.	Wider Cabin
The MKIV is nice width, how big are you?? weight, and height?? I can tell you more when I know this.
>	4.	Best Engine for the Bucks & Performance & Safety. (Certified / 		Auto)
Most of the Lycoming 320 or 360 work well, build and fly awhile then if you feel competent think about a different engine. 
There havwe been several that have started with auto engines and switched to Lycoming. There are a few flying with auto 
engines, but it requires special expertice to do successfully. With the Lycomings, it is a well proven installation, there are 
enough other variables on a homebuilt airplane. Its good to have aircraft equipment if you have a problem at a distant 
airport, I don't think you will find many aircraft mechanics willing to put their liabilty on a line with none aircraft 
equipment.
>	5.	Any and all CAD files. ( Owning a CNC Machine Shop should have 		some
>advantages & I would like to offer help to you in this 		regard.)
There are not many cad files that will be useful for CNC machines, there just isn't that many machined parts. If you want to 
do something go into business as competition for Brock, but get Nat's approval of the parts as an approved supplier first.
>
>Even though I have 24 years A&P experience I am as green as they come with
>respect building a MK-4.
It starts with simple parts to make, and gradually gets more complicated. Plenty of support from Nat and everyone else. Become 
a member of Central States Assoc. see Canard.com for a link.



Date: Sat, 01 May 1999 18:15:54 -0400
From: "Marc J. Zeitlin" <marcz@ultranet.com>
Subject: COZY: General Questions

Brian Dempster wrote:

>A few of the things I would like input on are;
>
>	1.	Speed Tricks
>	2.	Retractable Mains
>	3.	Wider Cabin
>	4.	Best Engine for the Bucks & Performance & Safety. (Certified / 		Auto)
>	5.	Any and all CAD files.

All of these subjects have been discussed many times in the past.  The best
thing to do is to read the mailing list archives for the past 4 years
(1995, 1996, 1997, 1998) and this year, read the FAQ (Frequently Asked
Questions) list, and THEN, if your question is still not answered, feel
free to come back to the list with it.

So, you say, where the heck is this archive?


Michael Roe wrote:

>Where can one go to find the archived postings for this e-mail list? There 
>are a few subjects I would like to research.

The email list archives can most easily be accessed on the web at:

    http://cozy.canard.com/mail_list/

You can either go to the year/topic page of interest and read the topic you
choose, or else you can download a "zipped" file of the whole year's worth
of topics.  The FAQ can be accessed at the same address.

For any of you that do NOT have web access, you can retrieve the archives
(same files) via email.  The instructions are in the Charter you received
when you joined, and you can get an updated copy of the charter by sending
an email to:

    majordomo@canard.com

with the lines:

   get cozy_builders ml_charter
   end

in it.  The "Subject" line of the message doesn't matter - you can leave it
blank or put in anything you wish.


>Also...Are there any COZY MKIV builders here in Colorado?

For those of you who would like to get an updated builders list (those on
this mailing list) send an email to:

    majordomo@canard.com

with the lines:

   get cozy_builders mailing_list
   end

in it.

Hope this helps.

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

From: "Brian & Susan DeFord" <brian@deford.com>
Subject: Re: COZY: Re: Just wanting to say Hi from a new builder.
Date: Sun, 2 May 1999 17:35:43 -0700

Hold on there, Gary...

I am going to have to step in here and state my piece before this gets way
out of hand. Carl has a right to his opinion and when asked for it can let
it be known. Unfortunately, IMHO, Carl seems to have a way of making his
opinion sound like facts when they are only opinion. JD has, in his opinion,
had one of his products misrepresented by Carl and certainly has a right to
set the story straight. JD has been involved in the canard community for
many, many years and has helped advance it in ways other than his products
such as the landing gear. You make an unfair statement regarding JD and his
motives and I believe he deserves an apology. He certainly wasn't trying to
sell his gear by his reply, only defending his product.

Let's not make Carl the only voice in this forum. He certainly isn't the
only one with an opinion. I don't agree with his opinion on retract gears.
It certainly isn't accurate when considering Infinity gears as JD was trying
to point out. And, in case you are wondering, I am not installing JD's gear
in my MK-IV, though I have considered it.  One of the benefits of this forum
is the varied number of opinions given that allow a person to make up
his/her mind about a subject under discussion instead of one way being
crammed down their throat. Let's keep it that way.

Regards,
Brian DeFord

Gary Dwinal wrote:

>With all due respect Mr. Newman I think you are way out of line making a
statement of this
>nature to Carl who is one of the most respected members of this forum.
Carl is one of if
>not the most helpful and knowledgeable people from the canard community on
this forum
>group and has helped me and many, many others on here.  You, on the other
hand have
>only one motive and one motive only for coming onto this forum and that is
to do or say
>whatever you feel you must to sell your landing gear and MAKE MONEY!!!!
>So, as I say , with all do respect, unless you have positive, constructive
comments to make
>maybe you should just keep your sales commercials to yourself.

LCDR James D. Newman wrote:

> Hi Carl and All,
>
> > Carl Denk wrote:
> > Was asked <A few of the things I would like input on are>
> > >       2.      Retractable Mains
>
> > They take fuel space, if you forget to put down, you aren't going
anywhere for more than a few
> days. Land nose gear up, minor damage, most of the time keep going.
Expensive, more weight - much
> longer runway required, weight is very valuable on an EZ.
>
>     This is not true!  There ya go talk'n about something you know nothing
about again.  You
> obviously have not read my web site.
>     I'm not going to go into great detail (see my web site, info pack,
video and / or call me for
> that), but you don't lose any gas in a MK-IV; with all the lights and
horns, forgetting to put down
> the gear in ANY aircraft is like forgetting to put your pants on (there
are other underlying
> problems here); our main retracts are not expensive for what you get and
compared with what it
> replaces, and it pays for itself in many ways besides better economy; you
don't gain any weight in a
> MK-IV; and the take-off roll is shorter.  All this is well documented by
the customers who are
> already flying.
>     Again, simply read my web site thoroughly, and / or call me to find
out the facts.
>     HTH.
>
> Infinity's Forever,
>
>         JD





From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Sun, 2 May 1999 21:06:06 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: COZY: Re: Just wanting to say Hi from a new builder.

Was wrote:
I am not installing JD's gear
>in my MK-IV, though I have considered it. 

What was your thinking, why didn't you install??
>
I (Carl said) 
. Land nose gear up,(with fixed mains) minor damage, most of the time keep going. - 
Has happened to me, this is fact.

>Expensive, 
If I remember right more than a few thousand dollars, to me that expensive.

more weight - I believe this to be true, JD - whats the weight difference between the Featherlite strut and hardware and the 
retracts on the market including all items to power and control it.

- much longer runway required, - well maybe not much but if there is additional weight there must be more speed required for 
takeoff and landing. Is the main axle location the same? What is the effect on the C.G.?

but you don't lose any gas in a MK-IV 

WHere does the gear stow? In a Mk IV everthing from the center spar forward is fuel. It doesn't count to put fuel except where 
the plans show. 

forgetting to put down the gear in ANY aircraft is like forgetting -- OF COURSE, its not if, its when!

Sorry if I offended someone, but all of my comments are my own thoughts unless I note a source.

From: lschuler@cellular.uscc.com
Date: Mon, 03 May 1999 09:55:48 -0600
Subject: Re: COZY: Just wanting to say Hi from a new builder. 

Brian Dempster wrote:

>A few of the things I would like input on are;

        >1.        Speed Tricks

        Assuming you are talking about build time (rather than cruise speed), 
        Jeff Russell sells a bunch of excellent Cozy parts, including wings; if 
        Nat's "approved list" is important to you (which it may not be if you 
        are considering auto engines and wider tub), check with Nat.

        >2.        Retractable Mains

        Debates abound on this one, as is the case for just about anything that 
        even slightly deviates from the plans.  As always it all comes down to 
        personal choices for your "experiment".  Biggest single advantage is 
        much wider wheel base and thus stability.  Weight is close to a wash.  
        Can put a sump tank in normal gear area which adds back capacity or 
        reserve lost to wheel wells.  More expensive, but pay back may be 
        efficiency long term.  Sure are snarky looking.  Infinity makes them.  
        Adds some flight complexity, but no more complex than a production 
        retract plane and tons of those flying.  Very big plus is that the 
        retract gear has been drop tested per FARs which cannot be said for the 
        'stock' gear on ANY canard airplane (retract as in Velocity, or the 
        standard hoop-types) to my knowledge.

        >3.        Wider Cabin

        Consider adding 6" to width (makes 48" at front seat back).  After 
        flying in the CAFE Cozy recently (Thanks loads Mark!) it makes some 
        very good sense.  Basically I'd added 3" on either side of BL-0; MUST 
        remember as you build to add the inches to "everything".  As part of 
        the widening, add 1/2" to either side of the heat duct for total 1" 
        wider center consol/arm rest; add 1/2" to outside arm rests to make 
        them nicer for a big elbow and eliminate the stick from hitting the 
        side (as well as eliminated the 1/8" stick depression called out in the 
        plans); the remaining 2" on either side of BL-0 could be used in the 
        leg cut-outs in the instrument panel; totaly diferent nose, canopy, 
        cowling, turtleback and so on.  TONS (repeat TONS) of added work; but, 
        TONS (repeat TONS) of pay back in comfort.  Biggest down side may be 
        added lifting body affect (deep stall stuff) and some structural 
        concerns.

        >4.        Best Engine for the Bucks & Performance & Safety. (Certified 
        >          Auto)

        "Best" engine is, as everything else, debatable.  Some folks like me 
        are using Subaru SVX engines.  Last year these were prodused was 1996.  
        Lots of them still out there.  Don't pay more than $3,500.00 for the 
        engine, wiring, sensors, computer and all.  These things are just 
        getting broken in at 50,000 miles (if they are maintained properly, 
        which is a kicker, cause ya never know).  You could opt for a used cert 
        engine, but if you intend to work on it yourself, you de-certify it and 
        it then becomes just as experimental as an auto engine.  Safety is in 
        the eye of the beholder.  Yer on yer own.  Only comment I'd make 
        relative to engines is that folks who try to get more out of an engine 
        than the designer intended (suping up a Buick V-8 or supercharging a 
        stock Lycoming for example) generally tend to get lots of power for a 
        short period of time (low reliability).


Good luck.

Larry Schuler MK-IV plans #500 Ch-14

Date: Mon, 03 May 1999 10:41:21 -0700
From: "LCDR James D. Newman" <infaero@flash.net>
Subject: COZY: Re: Just wanting to say Hi from a new builder.

Hi Gary,

> Gary Dewinal wrote:
> With all due respect Mr. Newman I think you are way out of line making a statement of this nature
to Carl who is one of the most respected members of this forum.  Carl is one of if not the most
helpful and knowledgeable people from the canard community on this forum group and has helped me and

many, many others on here.

    LOL!  Ya need to learn to lighten up - this is a fun group.  E-mail is tough enough without
people taking things out of context.  You obviously must be new to the group.  I know and have met
Carl, and we are always bantering and / or complementing each other, privately and on the group
(many of us group old timers do it).  Carl, and those who have been on the group for a while, well
knows that I meant nothing disrespectful, just was helping ol Carl out with a few misconceptions ;-)
.
    Also, I realize I'm a no body and never have had anything to contribute to the group, and have
only been into aviation all my life, and only been in the canard world since '82, but be assured I
made no inaccurate statements.

> You, on the other hand have only one motive and one motive only for coming onto this forum and
that is to do or say whatever you feel you must to sell your landing gear and MAKE MONEY!!!!

        HA!  Now that's a laugh!!  You are greatly delusional if you think I am on this forum for
only "one motive and one motive only".  I was *asked* long ago by the illustrious members to join
this group because of my VAST expertise in many areas.  Also, I NEVER just say whatever I feel to
sell anything.  If you took the time to know me, and Carl, you would know this well and not sent
your post.
        If I wanted to "MAKE MONEY" on my landing gear, I wouldn't be selling it so inexpensively.
My landing gear comes from my Infinity 1, and I make it available for those who want something
better for all the logical reasons listed on my web site who want a all retractable plane.
        Hell if I wanted to "MAKE MONEY", I wouldn't be involved with aviation.  Haven't you heard
how to make a little money in aviation, start with a lot :-) .
        Also, if I was only into "MAKING MONEY", I wouldn't be living in a 2 bit apartment trying to
help my fellow home builders.

> So, as I say , with all do respect, unless you have positive, constructive comments to make maybe
you should just keep your sales commercials to yourself.

        I've never made a "sales commercial" to this group.  If you would take the time to read the
archive's, you'll see that ALL I have ever done for this group is make "positive, constructive
comments".
        Take care, and call anytime if you have any other questions.


Infinity's Forever,                                      EAA Nat'l & LCL Member
                                                                EAA Technical Counselor
        JD                                                    EAA Flight Advisor
                                                                AOPA Member
                                                                Test Pilot
James D. Newman, Pres/CEO/CFO        SOTW, OJAAT
LCDR         F-14        USNR

Date: Mon, 03 May 1999 10:42:21 -0700
From: "LCDR James D. Newman" <infaero@flash.net>
Subject: COZY: Re:  Just wanting to say Hi from a new builder.

Hi Carl,

> > Expensive, If I remember right more than a few thousand dollars, to me that expensive.
>
> more weight - I believe this to be true, JD - whats the weight difference between the Featherlite strut and hardware and the
> retracts on the market including all items to power and control it.
>
> - much longer runway required, - well maybe not much but if there is additional weight there must be more speed required for
> takeoff and landing. Is the main axle location the same? What is the effect on the C.G.?
>
> but you don't lose any gas in a MK-IV
>
> WHere does the gear stow? In a Mk IV everthing from the center spar forward is fuel. It doesn't count to put fuel except where
> the plans show.
>
> forgetting to put down the gear in ANY aircraft is like forgetting -- OF COURSE, its not if, its when!

    Again Grasshopper, ALL the answers you seek can be found in great detail in my web site, info pack, video and / or just call
me (Marc and Larry, how's that for Yin and Yang?). :-)


Infinity's Forever,

        JD

Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 17:54:48 -0700
From: Steve Hagan <winnydpu@mediaone.net>
Subject: COZY: re-sale liability

I'm new to the news group; so this may be a dumb question.  If I choose
to sell my Cozy at any point during/after construction is there any way
to avoid personal liability for the rest of the life of the airframe?

Steve Hagan
eagerly waiting for my plans

Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 22:13:07 -0400
From: Steele Olmstead <prsistns@gate.net>
Subject: Re: COZY: re-sale liability; Hey, here's that person wisely trying to 

[To all the lawyer bashers: Here is a smart person who is using our system
logically, wisely and not having the right to go to court cut off.]

Yes Mr. Hagan, there is.  You simply sell the "parts" to the plane and have
the purchaser sign a release which exonerates you from liability and
acknowledging you are selling him/her a plane.  Any competent personal
injury lawyer can help you with such  a release.  Call the local Bar
Association and the person there can direct you to such a professional.

Steve Hagan wrote:

> I'm new to the news group; so this may be a dumb question.  If I choose
> to sell my Cozy at any point during/after construction is there any way
> to avoid personal liability for the rest of the life of the airframe?
>
> Steve Hagan
> eagerly waiting for my plans

From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 21:23:00 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: COZY: re-sale liability

On 05/19/99 17:54:48 you wrote:
>
>I'm new to the news group; so this may be a dumb question.  If I choose
>to sell my Cozy at any point during/after construction is there any way
>to avoid personal liability for the rest of the life of the airframe?
>
>Steve Hagan
>eagerly waiting for my plans
>
>

Probably not 100%, but can reduce liability. Avemco insurance with the EAA endorsement covers for several years (depends on 
how long you have had them for insurance, etc) after you have sold. Having buyer's mechanic do an annual, a good checkout by 
someone of his choosing, and properly worded paperwork would be a good start.

From: "Russ Fisher" <rfisher1@rochester.rr.com>
Subject: Re: COZY: re-sale liability; Hey, here's that person wisely trying to avoid liability.
Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 23:29:28 -0400

OK, I couldn't help it.  Here's my $0.02 worth.  I work in a hospital.
EVERY SINGLE PATIENT signs a release for EVERY SINGLE PROCEDURE performed on
them which outlines all the risks involved, up to and including death.  If
releases truly worked, there would be NO MALPRACTICE SUITS!  I rest my case.

Russ Fisher

-----Original Message-----
From: Steele Olmstead <prsistns@gate.net>



>Yes Mr. Hagan, there is.  You simply sell the "parts" to the plane and have
>the purchaser sign a release which exonerates you from liability and
>acknowledging you are selling him/her a plane.  Any competent personal
>injury lawyer can help you with such  a release.  Call the local Bar
>Association and the person there can direct you to such a professional.


From: "Nat Puffer" <cozy@extremezone.com>
Subject: Re: COZY: re-sale liability; Hey, here's that person wisely trying to avoid liability.
Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 13:41:56 -0500

Builders,
I think Burt said one time that you should have the purchaser sign a
statement in which he agrees that the airplane will kill him.
Nat

----------
> From: Russ Fisher <rfisher1@rochester.rr.com>
> To: cozy_builders@canard.com
> Subject: Re: COZY: re-sale liability; Hey, here's that person wisely
trying to avoid liability.
> Date: Wednesday, May 19, 1999 10:29 PM
> 
> OK, I couldn't help it.  Here's my $0.02 worth.  I work in a hospital.
> EVERY SINGLE PATIENT signs a release for EVERY SINGLE PROCEDURE performed
on
> them which outlines all the risks involved, up to and including death. 
If
> releases truly worked, there would be NO MALPRACTICE SUITS!  I rest my
case.
> 
> Russ Fisher
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steele Olmstead <prsistns@gate.net>
> 
> 
> 
> >Yes Mr. Hagan, there is.  You simply sell the "parts" to the plane and
have
> >the purchaser sign a release which exonerates you from liability and
> >acknowledging you are selling him/her a plane.  Any competent personal
> >injury lawyer can help you with such  a release.  Call the local Bar
> >Association and the person there can direct you to such a professional.
> 
> 

Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 16:27:05 -0500
From: Kent Ashton <kjashton@vnet.net>
Subject: Re: COZY: re-sale liability

This is just whistling in the dark.
	OK, I buy your "parts".  Take a photo of the plane I just bought, which
is in fact, not a collection of parts but an airplane.  I crash and sue
you anyway.  I show the jury you sold me an airplane.
	I think there are a lot of things you can do to protect yourself from
being sued:  have buyer sign a release, fully disclose any defects,
fully disclose your (lack of) qualifications as a designer and engineer,
don't get so rich you invite lawsuits.  You can be sued no matter what
kind of tricks you try to play, and I think a jury would look more
favorably on a person who honestly conveyed the condition of the
airplane to the seller than one who is trying to trick the system.

--Kent A.

Steele Olmstead wrote:
> 
You simply sell the "parts" to the plane and have
> the purchaser sign a release which exonerates you from liability and
> acknowledging you are selling him/her a plane

From: "Ryan Amendala" <longpup@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: COZY: re-sale liability avoid liability.
Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 10:23:49 PDT


All,

Sorry for the waste of bandwidth but what if you were a company that was a 
licensed and bonded LLC say with at $10,000 bond.  And if you were to sell 
an airplane licensed under such a company would that protect you?  There are 
a lot of "home businesses" that could fall into this catigory some of which 
might be homebuilder owned.  This may be a question for Steele.

Thanks

Ryan
>
>Steele Olmstead wrote:
> >
>You simply sell the "parts" to the plane and have
> > the purchaser sign a release which exonerates you from liability and
> > acknowledging you are selling him/her a plane
>


_______________________________________________________________
Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com

Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 19:47:52 -0700
From: "LCDR James D. Newman" <infaero@flash.net>
Subject: COZY: Re:  re-sale liability; Hey, here's that person wisely trying to avoid 

Hi Nat and All,

> Nat Puffer wrote:

> Builders,
> I think Burt said one time that you should have the purchaser sign a
> statement in which he agrees that the airplane will kill him.

    The RAF Oct. 1988 Canard Pusher Newsletter #57 page 7 & 8, had a "Mandatory Ground" Plans Change
requiring the RAF builder placarding both his/her aircraft and Owner's Manual with a new "Warning".
The "Warning" is for those who may purchase or ride in your plane.  It basically states that home
builts are more likely to have an accident, including a fatal accident, than spam cans, to adhere to
strict maintenance and operating procedures, and that the danger is greatest during initial flight
or when operating in a non conservative manner.
    It's interesting reading of how the "Warning" came about and it's exact wording, if your
interested.  It may be a good "Warning" to have in ALL Sport Aircraft, the aircraft's associated
documents and Owners Manual [ I don't like to use the terms "Home Built" or "Experimental" because
of the connotation to Joe and Jane Public :-) ].


Infinity's Forever,

        JD


Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 13:49:40 -0500
From: David Domeier <david010@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: COZY: re-sale liability

Steve,

    re "If I choose to sell my Cozy at any point during/after
construction is there any way
to avoid personal liability for the rest of the life of the airframe?"

    This is a late come back, but I submit my thoughts and experience on
the subject for your perusal.

    I was very serious about selling my LEZ some years ago, but
eventually took it off the market and donated it to a tax exempt
organization under circumstances that precluded it ever flying again.  I
recouped about 35% of my investment in a legitimate tax write off.

    Here's why I did it.

    There is no way to duck the liability issue.  If you build it,
you're liable, forever.  And the cost of defending yourself against the
widow of a dead drunk pilot can easily exceed the value of the airplane.

    In the long run, for peace of mind, decide right now before you
start building - I WILL NOT SELL THIS AIRPLANE.  Especially, if you have
a nest egg to lose.

    This activity, to me, is like belonging to a country club or taking
a long expensive vacation.  It's money spent for fun and I don't expect
to get much of it back.....if the airplane is sold, there is a remote
possibility it could cost you a lot more, as I said, than it is worth.

dd

From: SWrightFLY@aol.com
Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 11:30:17 EDT
Subject: Re: COZY: re-sale liability

In a message dated 5/22/99 1:48:51 PM Central Daylight Time, 
david010@earthlink.net writes:

<<  re "If I choose to sell my Cozy at any point during/after
 construction is there any way
 to avoid personal liability for the rest of the life of the airframe?" >>

The short answer is no as you describe very well in the following;

<<There is no way to duck the liability issue.  If you build it,
you're liable, forever.  And the cost of defending yourself against the
widow of a dead drunk pilot can easily exceed the value of the airplane>>

When I sold my Varieze 5 years ago, I made sure that I did not own anything 
or have any assets and I set up  two living trust, one for me that is empty 
and one for my wife who has assets.
If you own nothing and have no assets, then, when and if you are sued you 
file bankruptcy. This way the lawyers that filed the frivolous suite and are 
"fishing for a payoff" get nothing. You simply go to a bankruptcy lawyer and 
let him take care of it. This will cost a few hundred dollars but just 
consider it an "insurance payment." It is difficult for some folks to 
transfer all assets to the spouse or other family member and they should just 
give it away to a museum.

You might check with a bankruptcy lawyer as to how this works in your state. 
This is a very relevant topic for all of us. I invite any "legal eagles" out 
there to give us your criticism of this thinking.
Steve

From: Iflycozy@aol.com
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 00:28:07 EDT
Subject: Re: COZY: re-sale liability

Steve Wright is correct, but to an extent.  

As a practicing bankruptcy lawyer, and don't hold it against me because I 
consider myself a Cozy builder, we always look for the "reachback periods" to 
make sure that all property transfers are outside of the statute of 
limitations before allowing a debtor to file bankruptcy.  For example, in 
some states, the fraudulent transfer period may be five years.  If a 
plaintiff or a creditor, i.e., a widow of a passenger, can prove that an 
airplane builder fraudulent transferred all of his/her property to a trust or 
to someone else, especially including family members, then the transfers may 
be avoided or declared void by the courts.  If certain facts exist, then the 
bankruptcy court may deny the debtor a discharge.  A discharge means that the 
debtor is no longer legally liable to repay his debts to creditors.  

There are other provisions in the bankruptcy code that allow creditors relief 
or a denial of the debtor's discharge if the debtor acted with fraud or 
malice.  The first crazy example I can think of in this short period of time 
may, and I say "may" very carefully, may be when a builder has constructed an 
airplane while knowing that he/she has built it improperly and with the 
intent of selling it as an inherently dangerous piece of machinery to 
another.  In other words, if the builder knows that the plane is not 
airworthy for the subsequent purchaser, then the builder may have put himself 
in a situation that may be declared by the bankruptcy court as malicious.  
Since this example is extreme and I do not intend on briefing the issue to 
its fullest extent by being verbose, there are always lawyers out there 
testing the statutes to the limits.  

As the old captain of Hill Street Blues used to say, "let's be careful out 
there."

Matt B.

From: Iflycozy@aol.com
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 00:40:24 EDT
Subject: Re: COZY: re-sale liability avoid liability.

Just a quick note on this topic, it is my understanding that the FAA will not 
give a homebuilt airplane its certification to corporations.  The applicant 
for the airworthiness certificate must be a person, not a corporation, etc.  
As for purchasing an already flying aircraft, I would presume that the same 
laws to the acquisition of spam cans apply to homebuilts.  If a corporation 
purchases a homebuilt and the pilot screws up, then the corporation may be 
liable for its negligent acts and the pilot may be liable for his/her 
negligent acts. 

I presume that your question really is as follows:  If a corporation 
purchases an already flying homebuilt aircraft and then sells it the next day 
to another, then what liability would the officers of the corporation have if 
the plaintiff tries to "pierce the corporate veil?"  Good question.  Lawyers 
charge big bucks for an answer to a very short question.  My two cents is 
that it would be liable for the negligence that it committed (or whatever 
negligence that a plaintiff could prove).

Matt B.

Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 08:07:56 -0400
From: bil kleb <w.l.kleb@larc.nasa.gov>
Subject: Re: COZY: re-sale liability avoid liability.

Iflycozy@aol.com wrote:
> 
> [...] it is my understanding that the FAA will not give a homebuilt
> airplane its certification to corporations.  The applicant for
> the airworthiness certificate must be a person, not a corporation, etc.

apparently not true, try a owner database search with someplace like,
http://www.landings.com/ using a search term of "inc".

-- 
bil <mailto:w.l.kleb@larc.nasa.gov>

Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 00:02:49 -0700
From: "LCDR James D. Newman" <infaero@flash.net>
Subject: COZY: Re: Re-sale Liability

Hi Dave, Steve and All,

>> David Domeier wrote:

>> If I choose to sell my Cozy at any point during/after construction is there any way to avoid
> personal liability for the rest of the life of the airframe?  There is no way to duck the
> liability issue.  If you build it, you're liable, forever.  And the cost of defending yourself
> against the widow of a dead drunk pilot can easily exceed the value of the airplane

> Steve Wright wrote:

> When I sold my Varieze 5 years ago, I made sure that I did not own anything or have any assets and
> I set up  two living trust, one for me that is empty and one for my wife who has assets.  If you
> own nothing and have no assets, then, when and if you are sued you file bankruptcy. This way the
> lawyers that filed the frivolous suite and are "fishing for a payoff" get nothing. You simply go
> to a bankruptcy lawyer and let him take care of it.  This will cost a few hundred dollars but just
> consider it an "insurance payment." It is difficult for some folks to transfer all assets to the
> spouse or other family member and they should just give it away to a museum.

> You might check with a bankruptcy lawyer as to how this works in your state.  This is a very
> relevant topic for all of us. I invite any "legal eagles" out there to give us your criticism of
> this thinking.

	I've heard a lot of ideas on this topic.  Some are listed below (in no particular order):

	*  start a company and incorporate it in Nevada.  After you license your plane, sell your plane to
the company.  Then the only asset of the company is the plane.  So if you have an incident (there's
no such thing as an accident), someone can only sue the company which has nothing;
	*  have the company owned by an off shore Trust, and you are just it's manager.  Now the plane is
twice removed from you;
	*  put all your assets in a Trust (whether you build a plane or not);
	*  make sure you use the EAA's Technical Councilor and Flight Advisor Programs;
	*  if you give someone a ride (including friends and relatives), they and their spouse (even if you
don't ever give the spouse a ride) MUST sign a waiver.  Check with EAA for the appropriate form,
and/or a lawyer, then modify the form to suit your needs;
	*  if you sell the plane, you sell the company and it's assets - the plane;
	*  when you sell the plane (or salvage), the new buyer AND his/her spouse MUST sign a Purchase
Agreement that contains a Hold Harmless and Indemnity Agreement, and ALL this is done in front of a
Notary.  The purpose of having the spouse sign is because ~87% of all plane accidents is pilot
error.  The spouse is then convinced by a lawyer to sue, even though it's frivolous.  Without the
spouses signature, the rest we know what happens.  Recently, there has been a landmark case where a
company was being sued by the widow (who had not signed anything) because of pilot error, and the
case was still thrown out.  DO YOUR HOME WORK!;
	*  if you sell your plane, turn in the "N" number to the FAA, and sell the plane as salvage (or as
a lawn dart, or a flower pot - there's a Long-EZ flower pot in Santa Barbara), sell it "as is", and
that the new owner has looked over the salvage.  Also, maybe sell the salvage WITHOUT the canard
(and maybe without the prop too).  The new owner will have to build a new canard and present the
salvage as a new plane to the FAA for certification through the Phase I process into the Phase II
certificate;
	*  the Bungie Jumper outfits video tape all their customers signing a waiver proving that they read
the agreement and knew all the risks.  Evidently holds up pretty well.  So video tape the airplane
sale which is before a Notary;
	*  when you sell your plane, the new owner must buy an insurance policy to cover and protect you
for 18 years.  18 years is the new statute of limitations for aircraft mfg.  Yes, it's still a long
time, and it's not fair compared to limitations other mfg. of products enjoy (90 days), but it's
better than it used to be; i.e. - no limitation at all.  There are still efforts afoot to lower the
limitation time frame.  This is one of he many reasons ALL pilots need to be members of AOPA and
EAA, for they are our only voice against the huumaans who want to control and/or take away our
sport;
	*  if somehow, after all the above, the case is not thrown out and you do get sued (the judge must
be a friend of the suing lawyer), automatically counter sue the person(s) suing you so that when you
win your case you will recover your expenses plus;

	HTH.


Infinity's Forever,

        JD

Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 08:35:02 +0200
From: "Rego Burger" <BurgerR@telkom.co.za>
Subject: COZY: Re-sale Liability FEARS

The ENCOURAGING e-mails are good.
Well done guys... this is what the forum is for.

Don't let fear control you, manage it! This is what Steve Wright and others are getting at. The two basic reactions is "Run" or "Stand and fight"  both goals hope to achieve Protection of  self. 
I feel driving on narrow roads is a greater RISK than flying, yet we do it every day without thinking.
So a warning of RISK is not a negative but a test, how are you going to react and deal with it?

List your options and choose the best shot!

I was an anti-home builder some year ago, I could not believe that people could build their wn aeroplanes and fly them safely.... I stuck to Mr. Cessna and Mr. Piper, this was my security zone. Then it happened, taking an S.A. Airways  ground crew friend of mine for his first time flip in a C150, 22-25min into the flight a serious shaking had us both staring at each other, ROD 350ft/min, not good! The worst thing was we were circling a fishing boat 2 miles out to sea, I guess they thought this was real funny. I had less than 2min. to get back to the coast, boy it was hard work, I remember having clear options in my mind - panic or do your best. I saw a good spot of field pointed the nose at it and prepared my now upset passenger for an "early" landing. The motor stopped on short finals but it was a text book conclusion to the day,clear of the fence to touch down. A valve had lost it's retaining clips. Now Mr. Lycoming and I were not good friends anymore. Did this stop me from !
flying, heck NO! a bit shook up but I had to get back onto the "bicycle" again.
It taught me two things, 1.) Don't fly too far out to sea without floats or a life jacket. 2.) Nothing in this world is perfect, like I had thought until then in regard to production aircraft.
My incident motivated me to become a better pilot and to build my own aeroplane. Not everbody reacts this way.

My cross country check list now includes a 2-5min "spot the field" look out.

:-)
Make Fear your Friend! ( he's just warning you )


Rgo Burger
RSA

From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 20:17:30 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: COZY: Weight and Balance...

Remember when weighing any light aircraft, the aircraft must be indoors (a hangar) with the door closed. Wind across the 
aifoils, both wing, empenage (canard or horizontal stabilizer) WILL effect the weight and balance. While weighing mine in a 
hangar with electronic aircraft scales, we were unable to get consistant reading with the door open. With the door closed, the 
scales settled down and acceptable readings were quickly obtained.

From: "Mark West" <mawest@kanservu.ca>
Subject: COZY: New Member and a few questions
Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 18:37:25 -0400


Greetings all from Canada,
          My name is Mark West and although I am not currently building a
Cozy I hope to begin this fall with the construction of a Cozy MkIV. I am
located near London Ontario Canada and would love to hear from any builders
in the region that may be willing to answer questions as they arise.

		I just wanted to introduce myself to you all and I have one question, What
is Flox that the different builders webpages refer too. If the answer to
theis is somewhere online could somebody point me in the right direction.

	Thank You All, I hope to meet you all at some point in the future

	Mark

Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 22:49:53 -0400
From: "Marc J. Zeitlin" <marcz@ultranet.com>
Subject: Fwd: Re: COZY: New Member and a few questions

Mark West writes:

>...What is Flox that the different builders webpages refer too. If the 
>answer to theis is somewhere online could somebody point me in the right 
>direction.

Flox is "flocked" cotton mixed in with epoxy.  The cotton is chopped up into 
small fibers (dust, almost) and gives the epoxy some strength as a filler, 
as opposed to micro-balloons, which is only for shaping but has no
strength. Flox is a lot heavier than micro, so you don't use it when you
don't need 
the strength.

This (and most of the other terms you'll hear) are described in the plans.  
If you don't have a set, get one :-).  If this isn't in the FAQ, it should 
be, I think, along with a glossary of most of the regular composite 
construction terminology.  The FAQ is accessible on line at:

   http://cozy.canard.com/mail_list/

or from majordomo (see the CHARTER you got when you joined for instructions).

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

Date: Fri, 28 May 1999 07:12:50 -0400
From: bil kleb <w.l.kleb@larc.nasa.gov>
Subject: Re: COZY: New Member and a few questions

"Marc J. Zeitlin" wrote:
> 
> If this isn't in the FAQ [the definition of flox], it should be,
> I think, along with a glossary of most of the regular composite
> construction terminology.

it's not in the faq since this is not a frequently asked/answered
question (afaik) -- probably due to the thoroughness of the education
chapter of the plans (chapter 3).  however, if anyone would like
to create this section, it would be a welcome bonus!

btw: thanks again to wayne hicks, an updated faq (added chapters 12,
14, and 18) will be available shortly.  if anyone else, beginner or
expert, wants to "give back" to the group, write me or see the
instructions in the faq itself.

we could use yearly updates for chapters 5, 6, 10, 11, and 13 and
still need distillations for chapters 15 thru 17 and 19 thru 26,
and perennial topics like antennas, brakes, epoxy, deep stall,
workshop, etc.; just be sure to check with me first so that we
don't have multiple people working on the same chapter or topic...

-- 
bil <mailto:w.l.kleb@larc.nasa.gov>

From: JoeHeag@aol.com
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 1999 12:20:50 EDT
Subject: COZY: Re: [c-a] Lightning strike II

Just one more comment about lightning.  Don't think anything in your plane is 
insulated.  This energy goes sceaming through the atmospere several thousands 
of feet.  I don't think a 30 foot bird is going to have anything to prevent 
its passage (rubber grips included).  I like the protection from the rubber 
tires on your car too.  As someone else mentioned, it's the faraday cage set 
up by the conductive structure of the car (or craft) you're in, not the 
insulating components.  No flame intended, I just think it's a cool thought.

Joe Heagerty
Cozy Mk IV, Chap. 9
Riverside, CA

Date: Wed, 30 Jun 1999 14:07:38 -0500
From: Michael Amick <mkamick@wans.net>
Subject: Re: COZY: twin cozy

Carlos,

The article refered to in Sport Aviation specified Canadian EAA members and
the adrress was:

EAA Headquarters
Attention: Government Programs
P.O. Box 3086
Oshkosh, WI 54903-3086

or Fax to  (902) 426-6560
 or Email at govt@eaa.org

they also give this address for non-eaa members:

FAA
Milwaukee Flight Standards Office
4915 S. Howell Ave.
Milwaukee, WI 53207

and a final phone  number for EAA information services
(902) 426-4821

I would suggest an email to the govt@eaa.org  for clarification.

Best regards
Michael Amick

PS
BTW have you made good progress on timing & valve deposits from fuel in your
twin?

Carlos Vicente Len wrote:

> We want to go to OSH but need a special FAA waiver to bring experimental
> aircraft into the United States.
>
> Does anyone know how to get this special permission?
>
> Some one told me that this information is in the latest Sport's
> Aviation, but we have not received it.   Can anyone look it up ?
>
> Thanks



From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Sat, 10 Jul 1999 07:31:31 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: COZY: GPS reliability

Sorry for the long message, but for those that have thought of GPS as your only navaid, here fresh from DUATS notams is the 
list this morning:


   GPS NOTAMS
GPS 06/001 GPS PRN 15 OTS WEF 9906020110
GPS 06/024 GPS DATE DISCONTINUITY FOR GPS RECEIVERS MAY OCCUR ON
     21 AUGUST 1999 2359 UTC.  THIS IS DUE TO THE ROLLOVER OF THE
     ELAPSED TIME COUNTER WITHIN THE SATELLITE AT THE COMPLETION OF WEEK
     1024 ELAPSED TIME (21 AUGUST 1999).  ALL GPS RECEIVER-TIMING
     COMPUTATIONS ARE BASED ON THE SATELLITE'S ELAPSED TIME COUNTER
     OUTPUT.  THEREFORE OPERATORS WHO USE RECEIVERS NOT CERTIFIED UNDER
     USA FAA TSO-C129, OR THE EQUIVALENT JAA/NATIONAL DOCUMENTS, SHOULD
     CONTACT THEIR GPS SUPPLIER AS THEIR RECEIVER MAY BE IMPACTED BY THE
     ROLLOVER.  GPS RECEIVERS MAY EXPERIENCE ONE OF THE FOLLOWING
     PROBLEMS: UNABLE TO LOCATE SATELLITES RESULTING IN RECEIVER NOT
     WORKING, TAKE MORE TIME THAN USUAL TO LOCATE SATELLITES, OR APPEAR
     TO BE WORKING BUT DISPLAYS INACCURATE POSITIONS, TIMES OR DATES.
     GPS RECEIVERS TSO-C129 CERTIFIED ARE EXPECTED TO OPERATE NORMALLY
     AT THE ROLLOVER.  ADDITIONAL INFORMATION LISTING RECEIVER
     MANUFACTURERS AND CONTACTS CAN BE FOUND AT
     www.navcen.uscg.mil/gps/geninfo/y2k/default.htm, OR BY CALLING THE
     INFORMATION CENTER AT 888-USA-4-Y2K CONSUMERS CAN OBTAIN
     MANUFACTURER'S Y2K PRODUCT INFORMATION. (MODEL NO., SERIAL NO., AND
     FIRMWARE VERSION NO. MUST BE PROVIDED).
GPS 07/008 GPS PRN 13 OTS WEF 9907070330-9907171200
GPS 07/016 ZAB GPS UNRELIABLE WITHIN A 33 NM RADIUS OF LIBBY
     VOR (FHU) AT FL400, DECREASING IN AREA WITH DECREASE IN ALTITUDE
     TO 20 NM RADIUS AT FL250, 12 NM RADIUS AT 10000 AND 1 NM 
     RADIUS AT THE SURFACE.  IFR OPERATIONS BASED UPON GPS NAVIGATION
     SHOULD NOT BE PLANNED IN THE AFFECTED AREA DURING THE PERIODS
     INDICATED.  THESE OPERATIONS INCLUDE DOMESTIC RNAV OR LONG-RANGE

     NAVIGATION REQUIRING GPS.  THESE OPERATIONS ALSO INCLUDE GPS
     STANDALONE AND OVERLAY INSTRUMENT APPROACH OPERATIONS.
     2200-0100 DLY WEF 9907132200-9907150100
GPS 07/017 ZAB GPS NAVIGATIONAL SIGNAL UNRELIABLE WITHIN A 350 
     NM RADIUS CIRCLE AROUND TRUTH OR CONSEQUENCES VORTAC (TCS) FOR
     AIRCRAFT AT FL400 OR ABOVE, DECREASING TO 300 NM RADIUS AT FL250 
     AND 200 NM RADIUS AT 10,000 FT MSL, AND 125 NM RADIUS AT THE
     SURFACE. IFR OPERATIONS BASED UPON GPS NAVIGATION SHOULD NOT
     BE PLANNED IN THE AFFECTED AREA DURING THE PERIODS INDICATED.
     THESE OPERATIONS INCLUDE DOMESTIC RNAV OR LONGRANGE NAVIGATION
     REQUIRING GPS. THESE OPERATIONS ALSO INCLUDE GPS STANDALONE
     AND OVERLAY INSTRUMENT APPROACH PROCEDURES. 
     WEF 9907110200-9907110600
GPS 07/018 ZDV GPS NAVIGATIONAL SIGNAL UNRELIABLE WITHIN A 350 
     NM RADIUS CIRCLE AROUND TRUTH OR CONSEQUENCES VORTAC (TCS) FOR
     AIRCRAFT AT FL400 OR ABOVE, DECREASING TO 300 NM RADIUS AT FL250 
     AND 200 NM RADIUS AT 10,000 FT MSL, AND 125 NM RADIUS AT THE
     SURFACE. IFR OPERATIONS BASED UPON GPS NAVIGATION SHOULD NOT
     BE PLANNED IN THE AFFECTED AREA DURING THE PERIODS INDICATED.
     THESE OPERATIONS INCLUDE DOMESTIC RNAV OR LONGRANGE NAVIGATION
     REQUIRING GPS. THESE OPERATIONS ALSO INCLUDE GPS STANDALONE
     AND OVERLAY INSTRUMENT APPROACH PROCEDURES. 
     WEF 9907110200-9907110600
GPS 07/019 ZFW GPS NAVIGATIONAL SIGNAL UNRELIABLE WITHIN A 350 
     NM RADIUS CIRCLE AROUND TRUTH OR CONSEQUENCES VORTAC (TCS) FOR
     AIRCRAFT AT FL400 OR ABOVE, DECREASING TO 300 NM RADIUS AT FL250 
     AND 200 NM RADIUS AT 10,000 FT MSL, AND 125 NM RADIUS AT THE
     SURFACE. IFR OPERATIONS BASED UPON GPS NAVIGATION SHOULD NOT
     BE PLANNED IN THE AFFECTED AREA DURING THE PERIODS INDICATED.
     THESE OPERATIONS INCLUDE DOMESTIC RNAV OR LONGRANGE NAVIGATION
     REQUIRING GPS. THESE OPERATIONS ALSO INCLUDE GPS STANDALONE
     AND OVERLAY INSTRUMENT APPROACH PROCEDURES. 
     WEF 9907110200-9907110600

From: Robert Donatz <robert.donatz@precisionint.com>
Subject: RE: COZY: Oshkosh and long people in MkIV's
Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 15:10:16 -0700

Fred,
I am 6'-2" 190 pounds and had the opportunity to sit in Eric Westland's MkIV
at Arlington last weekend. Eric is much shorter than I so his rudder pedal
placement didn't match me (he admits to placing his pedal in an extreme aft
position). I was able to comfortably place my feet past his pedals with what
felt like plenty of room for full rudder displacement. His side stick was
about 2" aft of where my left hand naturally fell. Otherwise, my sitting
position was very comfortable (more comfortable than any production
arrangement, except perhaps for the ability to move around). My "co-pilot"
is 5'-7" and we were very pleased with the room we had. 

I am in the "pre-build" process of gathering facts. I am told that the
bulkhead which serves as the front backrest can be placed 2" aft to
accommodate "altitude enhanced" pilots. One Idea I'd like to ferment is
possibly cutting a hole in that bulkhead for each pilot and creating a
structural bucket to help make more room. At first blush, this might also
benefit the C.G. Much more deliberation is needed, but those are my
thoughts. 

Good luck,
Robert Donatz
(MkIV gonnabe)
Robert.donatz@precisionint.com <mailto:Robert.donatz@precisionint.com> 


	-----Original Message-----
	From:	fmooers [SMTP:visnry@itis.com]
	Sent:	Friday, July 16, 1999 4:02 PM
	To:	cozy_builders@canard.com
	Subject:	COZY: Oshkosh

	Hi,
	Will be at Oshkkosh on sat for the day, would like to visit with any
owners
	that have their planes at the show. My primary object is to sit in a
plane
	and try it on for size. At 6' and 230#s I am looking for a
comfortable seat.
	Thank you for any consideration.
	Fred Mooers (visnry@itis.com)

Date: Sun, 18 Jul 1999 18:27:32 -0500
From: Kent Ashton <kjashton@vnet.net>
Subject: COZY: Airport policies re: homebuilts

My local airport, built with FAA grants, does not allow aircraft
homebuilding, restoration, rebuilding, warbird maintenance/restoration
and heavy owner maintenance (this is oversimplified but essentially
true).  I believe this violates FAA Assurances and I've filed a
complaint with the FAA.  If you are based at an Aviation Improvment
Program airport (it accepted FAA grants) I need your experiences to
support my complaint.   This impacts a lot of aviators.  Thanks for the
help.

1.  Does your airport allow the above activities in leased facilities
and T-hangars?
2.  If not, how does your airport accommodate these activities?
3.  Are you permitted to build your own T-Hangar or hangar?
4.  What kind of fire protection do you have, where you work on your
aircraft?
5.  Does your airport require liability insurance, to be based there.
6.  Does your airport require you to name the airport as an "Additional
Insured" on your liability policy.
7.  Does your airport require you to waive its liability as a condition
to store your aircraft there?
8.  Does your airport allow two owners to share a hangar?
9.  How long does your airport permit a non-airworthy airplane on the
airfield?

--Kent Ashton, 
Cozy III flying, Mk IV building, BD-5 in the corner
Concord, NC

From: "Jim White" <jimwhi@televar.com>
Subject: Re: COZY: Moving a Mark IV
Date: Mon, 2 Aug 1999 20:52:58 -0700

I moved my Cozy IV using a Ryder car trailer.  I could figure any way to fit
it into their van.  I did not tilt it, but I did place it at an angle on the
trailer.  As I recall, it was about 12 feet wide.  In Washington and Oregon
I was required to get a trip permit in each state and put a WIDE LOAD sign
in 12" black letters on a yellow background on the front of the truck and on
the back of the trailer.  I also had red flags and bright yellow tape on the
ends of the main strut.  Running down the highway is no sweat, but driving
in the big city made me a nervous wreck.  Everything got to its final
destination okay 310 miles later, but I will admit to kissing the ground
when I got there.
Good luck,
Jim White
N44QT
"There are two ways to build a part; perfectly or over."
-----Original Message-----
From: Vance, John M. <jvance@iso-ne.com>
To: cozy_builders <cozy_builders@canard.com>
Date: Monday, August 02, 1999 8:41 AM
Subject: COZY: Moving a Mark IV


>Folks,
>
>I seem to remember a posting a while back talking about loading a
>completed Cozy MIV into a Ryder type straight truck,  but I have been
>unsuccessful in finding it in the archives.
>
>If memory servers me correctly,  it was stated that the plane would fit
>by lowering the nose to one corner,  and raising the strake on the
>opposite side.  Thus angling the main spar both horizontally and
>fore/aft.
>
>If someone could confirm this,  I would greatly appreciate it.
>
>Else,  if someone could post the dimensions (width, thickness, length)
>of the completed Mark IV spar/strake ends.
>
>John M. Vance
>Cozy III project about to be replaced with Cozy IV from far away.
>

From: mister@neesnet.com
Date: Thu, 05 Aug 1999 08:22:45 -0500
Subject: COZY: OshKosh Trip/COZY Comments

     
     Thought some of you builders might be interested in the following 
     comments I sent to Nat:
     
     
     Hi Nat:
     
     My wife Mary and I were disappointed that we missed both the COZY 
     forum and the dinner this year.  We initially had planned on leaving 
     Oshkosh on Saturday morning because of other committments.  We were 
     watching the weather quite closely and when the forecast started 
     calling for thunderstorms friday night and saturday, we decided to 
     depart on friday morning.  We had a nice flight from OSH to Dunkirk NY 
     where we stopped for fuel.  My GPS was showing about 210 mph over the 
     ground on that leg.  
     
     We ran in to a line of large thunderstorms west of Dunkirk near 
     Williamsport PA.  We opted to land in Lockhaven PA and spend the 
     night.  It turned out to be a good decision and we enjoyed our stay. 
     The Cozy III drew quite a bit of attention and we had several people 
     waiting saturday morning to see us depart.
     
     
     Each time I make a long trip in the COZY I am thoroughly impressed 
     with the comfort and performance of that little airplane.  On the way 
     out to OSH we cruised along smoothly and comfortably at 10,500 
     enjoying the natural air conditioning.  Despite about a 50 mph 
     headwind we went from just north of Providence RI to Saginaw MI (about 
     550 nm) in about 4 hrs 20 min.  We stopped at Browne Field (3SG) in 
     Saginaw to take advantage of their special OSHKOSH fuel price of $1.63 
     per gallon.
     
     We enjoyed chatting with you and Shirley .  We spent quite a bit of 
     time at our airplane talking to builders and potential builders.  They 
     seemed to appreciate it because with the canard planes parked out back 
     in the north 40 as it were, there didn't seem to be too many pilots 
     hanging out near there planes.
     
     
     Once again, thanks to you and Burt Rutan for such a capable and truly 
     delightful traveling airplane.  Hopefully we'll get to go to Sun n Fun 
     next April.
     
     Best regards,
     
     Bob Misterka 
     
     COZY N342RM  
     
     www.gis.net/~bmist

From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 1999 18:58:15 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: COZY: Canadian Authorization for US registered amatuer built aircraft

Yesterday faxed Canada DOT for renewal of my permission to operate the Cosy in Canada. Wife got a 
phone call, no longer a fee, just carry some paperwork. Check 
<http://www.tc.gc.ca/aviation/mainten/regs&docs/download.htm>

As I understand download the "Standard Validation", carry it in the aircraft, and you are done. 
Caution: There is a paragraph, if the registered owner is operating, a written permission is 
required.

Understand the US and Canada have finally come to agreement!!!! (The US was the bad guy)

Date: Wed, 08 Sep 1999 18:35:45 -0400
From: dewayne morgan <dmorgan@mis.net>
Subject: COZY: eating an elephant

I just got my MK IV plans today and thought I would put my two cents
worth in.

I have been looking at kits since 1992 and have 95% completed a
flightstar 2sl . This plane was a 150 hr build and i thought i would
never get it done.  Looking back,I guess now that i was just anxious.
Anyway, I had been trying to justify a 2500 hour build time on this
machine. Then a friend told me to treat it like you were eating an
elephant  (one bite at a time).  The plans also say to do something
every day no matter how small a task.

I have  studied nearly 550 aircraft and  i believe this aircraft is
pound per pound, dollar for dollar the best (by far )  aircraft offered
on the market today. at first, I was sceptical of composite aircraft but
that was due to my ignorance .  Now , composites seem the only logical
way to go .

Now, I have a question. Will a 7x9 room be adequate (for now) for
starting out? And what size room will i need for later?

Also,  a while back i saw a shematic/kit in  an electronic magazine or
maybe a  kitplane/eaa magazine about a intercom kit that you could build
yourself. If anyone remembers this article please let me know.

thanks

dewayne





From: "John Slade" <rjslade@bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: COZY: eating an elephant
Date: Wed, 8 Sep 1999 21:26:52 -0400

Hello DeWayne,
Welcome to the world of Cozy building.
>treat it like you were eating an elephant  (one bite at a time).
Hmm. I suspect elephant hide might be a bit tough. Perhaps a small herd of
cattle would be a better analogy.

>The plans also say to do something every day no matter how small a task.

Absolutely. This is good advice.  Of course - the bigger the bite the more
the progress and ten half hour building sessions will get you about half as
far as one 5 hour session. Continuity is a big factor.

>this aircraft is pound per pound, dollar for dollar the best (by far )
You wont find many to argue with you in this mailgroup.

>Now, I have a question. Will a 7x9 room be adequate (for now) for
>starting out?
You won't get far in a room that size. I guess you could do chapter 4
(bulkheads) but then you'd outgrow it.  Plans call for a workbench roughly
11 * 4 and you DO need it.
Tis said that you can get by in a single garage for a while, then later
you'll need a double garage.  I have a 40 * 20 covered patio which does the
job nicely.  One builder I know bought himself one of those big (30 * 15 I
think) dome buildings, Central Heat and Air and everything. (Jerry - are you
there? - how's it going?)

>Also,  a while back i saw a shematic/kit in  an electronic magazine or
>maybe a  kitplane/eaa magazine about a intercom kit that you could build
>yourself. If anyone remembers this article please let me know.

You might wish to take a look at my progress web site chapter 22
http://www.kgarden.com/cozy/chap22.htm which details my experience building
an intercom / audio panel / marker beacon kit from RST
 http://rst-engr.com/ ). I didnt see the article, but I suspect that Jim
Weir from RST is probably the author. He writes a column in Sport Aviation.

Good luck

John Slade
Cozy Mk IV #757 (Glassing the elevators)
http://kgarden.com/cozy




Date: Thu, 09 Sep 1999 08:13:03 -0500
From: David Domeier <david010@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: COZY: eating an elephant

dewayne,

    It took me about 6 years to eat the elephant, but I eat slowly.
Some guys get it done much sooner.

    The weather had a lot to do with it.  I found it was a waste of time
to lay up glass in 60 temperatures, and about half the year it is such
or less around here.  To heat a shop really runs up the cost.  And
besides, it is important to keep things in perspective - building an
airplane in a short time may not be worth some other things in
life...like a marriage and a social exchange now and then.

    A most frequent comment I get concerning building time is, "....six
years!  Wow!  That's too long for me.", to which I respond, "...it was a
commitment to have some fun and not a scheduled event.  The six years is
going to pass whether you build an airplane or not, why not do it and
have a very fine flying machine rather than wish the rest of your life
you had done it.."  So many people say they have been thinking about it
all their lives.

    re "Now, I have a question. Will a 7x9 room be adequate (for now)
for
starting out? And what size room will i need for later?"

    It will be some kind of challenge to build the MKIV in a 7x9 room,
but you surely can get started.  Many jigs and parts can be built in
that space.  I'd guess you can spend 1000 hours in that little cube if
you want to.  You won't need anywhere near that much room to build one
of RST's intercom systems.

    I say get started and never look back.  You won't regret it.

dd
MKIV N10CZ
(99.6 on the hobbs and all is very well...)









From: Militch@aol.com
Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 10:24:28 EDT
Subject: Re:  Re: COZY: eating an elephant

I almost decided to build a Varieze back in 1983, but didn't because it was 
going to take too long.  Last year it occurred to me that if I had started 
then, I would have already been flying it for several years.  So now I am 
building a Cozy Mark IV.  It might take 10 years, but like someone else said, 
those ten years will pass whether I am building or not.  And, as it turns 
out, it's a lot of fun, so the time doesn't matter all that much anyway (at 
least as far as I am concerned).

Regards

From: "Romulo Augusto" <romulojr@brhs.com.br>
Subject: Re: COZY: eating an elephant
Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 11:24:15 -0300

David Domeier wrote:

> dewayne,
>
>     It took me about 6 years to eat the elephant, but I eat slowly.
> Some guys get it done much sooner.
>
My two Real Cents worth:
In experimental aviation, no pleasure, no gain.
If you have time a lot to build your Cozy, let's build it. If you haven't [like
me], let's build it, too. Fast or slow is not so important.
The pleasure what you will take from the build act is one of the rewards. Don't
allow the schedule take it out from you. Just build.....

Regards.
________________________________________________________
Romulo Augusto da Cruz, Jr, Ten.Md. , Cozy #0730 ( in chapter 5/6, yet!)
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

Date: Sat, 11 Sep 1999 08:07:07 -0400
From: "L. Wayne Hicks" <lwhicks@erols.com>
Subject: COZY: Re: [c-a] Sale prices for completed Cozy/Cosy aircraft

BCGARDNER@aol.com wrote:
has anyone seen prices for completed Cozy four-place or
> three-place airplanes? I'm wondering what they are worth or will be
> worth?
> 
> Maybe the real problem is that once completed, no one wants to sell them
> ;^)


-----------> Go look at http://www.canard.com and at the SoCal EZ
Squadron site (I don't have the URL at the moment...)  You'll find the
Cozy IV's selling in the mid $60,000's.  Another Cozy IV builder was
offered $75,000 for his at Sun N Fun.  People usually keep their birds
not only because they like what they build, but I suspect because the
Cozy IV is an economical bird to build and fly, it's fast and fun, and a
good investment when it is time to sell.

Wayne Hicks
Cozy IV #678
Chapter 18
http://www.geocities.com/yosemite/falls/2027

Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 12:00:35 -0500
From: David Domeier <david010@earthlink.net>
Subject: COZY: Enough Liability Issues - LETS FLY!!

John,

    re " I wish these issues would be discussed in some legal forum
somewhere.  Does anyone have anything to say about actually building and
flying these wonderful airplanes?"

    I agree.  We could easily worry ourselves to death ......and miss
out on a lot of good flying....let's be cautious and press on.

    My hobbs turned 101.0 yesterday after a flight check on the cabin
heat system.  It hadn't been putting out much heat and with winter
coming it needed fixing.  In checking everything, I discovered the door
which directs hot air to the carb intake for anti ice did not seat
tightly against the hot air intake hole when heat was off.  I was
actually getting cold ram air past the door to the cabin.  After
installing some red baffle material on the top of the door, it now seats
very tightly against the carb heat intake, and guess what, I have VERY
hot air coming forward.  With the cabin heat valve full on, I would
estimate the air at about 120 coming forward.  It is hot!  There is a
slight hot odor but the CO detector has not changed color from bright
yellow.

    Another issue - GPS antenna location.  I have found that the antenna
attached to my Lowrance 300 loses signal quite easily in a turn.  The
antenna can be detached so at present I have it duct taped to the under
side of the panel forward of the canard.  It works very well in that
location.  Paint, primer, and a half inch of foam does not seem to
degrade the signal at all.  In fact the system has been finding itself
on start much quicker than before.

     I am using a fuel flow indication to set power vrs rpm.  This
assumes a BSFC of .435 for the 0360 and leaning to peak egt.  75% = 9.8
gph  65% = 8.5 gph 50% = 6.5 gph and 45% = 5.9 gph.  On take off it
should read 13.1 gph but I am actually burning about 14.5, so there's
much cooling fuel at full throttle.  Considering the engine is probably
developing only 150 HP at 2380 rpm on take off, the full rich mixture
providing 14.5 gph is very conservative re cooling.

    I've had to adjust the wing incidence again to fine tune straight
and level flight.  I figured out a way of installing washers with a
mixing stick, masking tape and a 1/2 inch slot in the stick without
removing the bolt entirely.  One of these days I'll have to refinish the
wing/strake joint.  But that's purely cosmetic stuff.   I hate to ground
the airplane for any length of time...it is a fun machine to fly and I
do try to get up 3 or 4 times a week.

    If anyone is interested here is a Cozy MKIV checklist -- (it works
for me)
                            COZY MKIV CHECKLIST
    EXTERIOR PREFLIGHT
        FUEL SELECTOR-ON
        FUEL AND OIL QUANTITY-CHECK
        FUEL SUMP-DRAIN
        PROP CONDITION-CHECK
        TIRES-CHECK
        FLIGHT CONTROLS-CHECK
        SPEED BRAKE UP
    BEFORE START
        ELECTRIC FUEL PUMP-CHECK
        GPS-ON
        NOSE GEAR-FULL DOWN
    AFTER START
        OIL PRESSURE-CHECK
        ENGINE FUEL PUMP-CHECK
        ATIS
    BEFORE TAKE OFF
        MAG/DIS-CHECK
        FUEL VALVE-CHECK
        FUEL PUMP-ON
        NAV/STROBE LIGHTS-ON
        TRANSPONDER-ON
        CANOPY-LOCKED
    AFTER TAKE OFF
        FUEL PUMP-OFF
    CRUISE
        FUEL-CHECK
    BEFORE LANDING
        FUEL PUMP-ON
        MIXTURE-AS REQRD
        GEAR-DOWN
    AFTER LANDING
        SPEED BRAKE-UP
        TRANSPONDER-OFF



dd

From: "Rick Maddy" <cozy@maddyhome.com>
Subject: COZY: A brief intro
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 15:29:26 -0600

I want to introduce myself as the proud new owner of Cozy Mark IV plans
#0824, better known to my friends and family as Rick Maddy.

I was working at home for a change, trying to meet tomorrow's deadline, when
the door bell rang.  It's the mailman (mailwomen actually).  Uh Oh!  She has
my Cozy plans.  I just called Nat Saturday to order them.  This is bad.  How
am I going to get any work done now!?

A brief intro to myself:  I got my private license about four weeks ago out
of Centennial (APA) near Denver, CO.  I am planning on getting my IFR rating
next year followed by a Mountain sign-off.  Eventually I may get a
commercial rating but no rush.  I figure I will be working on the Cozy for
several years.  I spend the bulk of the week working as a software engineer.
This will be my first homebuilt if you don't count a plans built R/C
airplane I built about 10 years ago.  That only took 100 hours.  I destroyed
that on its third flight by getting into a diving spiral I didn't know how
to get out of.  Slammed the poor plane into the trees at full throttle.  I
still can hear the horrible sound of balsa and tree limbs snapping.  I
figure that's out of my system so I don't expect anything even remotely
close to that happening with a real plane :)

OK, now what?  I have a letter, two books of instructions, a stack of
diagrams, and a big stack of newsletters.  Unfortunately I have some time
before I can begin any building on the plane.  I don't have a workshop yet.
My wife Shelly and I are going to fix up our old, single car, detached
garage.  It's actually more barn like.  It's a mess.  Full of crap we don't
want, full of dirt I don't want, full of holes I don't want, and no lighting
or heat.  It's only 18' by 15' so I know I can't build the whole plane in
there.  I realize I can probably work in this for a few years before it is a
real issue (I have a real job that will take up most of my week).

The garage is actually two levels.  We are planning on getting rid of
everything inside, cleaning it up, insulating, drywalling, and painting it.
Of course we will add lighting.  It actually has two, 30amp circuits running
to it so power wont be problem.  My biggest concern is dirt and dust.  The
big garage door opens to an alley.  There is a bit of traffic here and it
kicks up a lot of fine dirt and dust.  I realize working with fiberglass
requires a clean workshop.  Hopefully I can get the garage sealed up well.

Anyway my first real question is what can I do in my spare time with the
plans?  I believe I can go through all the newsletters and mark up the
changes.  I guess I can make notes from the FAQ on the Unofficial Cozy Home
Page.  Anything else?

Oops, not too brief like the subject says.  Keeps the great info flowing.

Thanks

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

Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 18:19:14 -0400
From: "L. Wayne Hicks" <lwhicks@erols.com>
Subject: Re: COZY: A brief intro

Rick Maddy wrote:
Shelly and I are going to fix up our old, single car, detached
> garage.  It's only 18' by 15'.  My biggest concern is dirt and dust.
-------> Plenty big enough for the first few years.  The biggest source
of dust will be from the plane itself.  When doing fiberglass layups,
you only need to vacuum the parts being glassed, ensure you keep your
cloth clean and keep the dust out of your pumps.  Of course, it helps to
keep the shop clean so that the dust doesn't blow around, but the shop
doesn't need to be a 10K NASA cleanroom.  

> Anyway my first real question is what can I do in my spare time with the
> plans?  
--------> Put them under your pillow along with a buck.  Who knows,
maybe the Cozy fairy will save you all that building time! (Ha, Ha!) It
didn't work for me....
Welcome to the group.


Wayne Hicks
Cozy IV #678
Chapter 18
http://www.geocities.com/yosemite/falls/2027

From: "John Slade" <rjslade@bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: COZY: A brief intro
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 18:44:31 -0400

Welcome, Rick

>R/C airplane -  destroyed on its third flight
Happened to me too. There's something weird about flying towards yourself.
Mine landed INSIDE an ice cream vendor's truck. Oops, sorrrrrrry!

>My biggest concern is dirt and dust.  The
>big garage door opens to an alley.  There is a bit of traffic here and it
>kicks up a lot of fine dirt and dust.  I realize working with fiberglass
>requires a clean workshop.

My project is outside on the patio. We have a dirt road in front of our
house.
Its really not a problem. I keep my raw materials covered with dust cloths
and I vacuum the foam (per plans) before each layup.

>Anyway my first real question is what can I do in my spare time with the
>plans?

IMHO -

1. read the plans, study the drawings
2. go through all the newsletters and mark up the changes.
3. make notes from the FAQ and the archives
4. call Wicks, order Chapters 4 - 7 and misc stuff and MGS epoxy. Cost
around $2500.
5. dive in and make stuff. Do your layups in the bathroom if you have to,
but get started!
6. read builder's web sites
7. read the plans, study the drawings

If you're cramped on space you can still do a lot of time consuming work -
like making all the bulkheads, seats, armrests, aluminum parts and every
template and jig for the plane.
I say MGS because its odorless - better if you're working in the house.

I know one guy who is building in a small apartment. His fuselage is right
by his bed.  The more the project is "in your face" or even "in your way"
the more you'll get on with it. Put it in a hanger and visit with other
builders every saturday for hanger talk and you'll take 10 years.

Bottom line - get started and do something on the plane every day. You'll be
amazed at how things start to come together.
Good luck,
John Slade
http://kgarden.com/cozy


From: "John Slade" <rjslade@bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: COZY: A brief intro
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 18:56:31 -0400

Rick,
>I want to introduce myself as the proud new owner of Cozy Mark IV plans
#0824

When you start out it seems overwhelming. I bought plans # 757 in March '99.
I've completed the fuselage, canard, elevators, gear, spar and most of the
fairings.  Just started on the wings. At this rate the airframe will be done
in less than a year.

Just wanted to give some perspective.
John Slade


From: "John Slade" <rjslade@bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: COZY: A brief intro
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 19:10:46 -0400

>maybe the Cozy fairy will save you all that building time! 
The Cozy fairy. Who's the Cozy fairy? Am I missing something good? :)



From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 19:39:17 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: COZY: A brief intro

was said <R/C airplane -  destroyed on its third flight>

May that be the worst that happens to EVERYONE

Recently had a close friend lose control of a RV-8 while hi-speed taxiing. Hit a runway light, VASI, hurry up get out, hit the 
master switch on with fuel pump on, and a broken fuel line. He got out with no injuries, plane burnt to the ground. He never 
experienced first flight, considerable $$$ and building time lost.

Sounded like there wasn't sufficient rudder, pilot inexperience with tailwheel.

Date: Wed, 29 Sep 1999 08:03:40 -0400
From: Paul Krasa <p.w.krasa@larc.nasa.gov>
Subject: Re: COZY: A brief intro

Read, Read, Read, Read.  The more time you spend now understanding the
plans the less time you will have to read the plans later.  Down load all
the Cozy Archives, and read, read, read.  Order all the Central States
Association news letters, and read some more.  What will eventually happen
is a picture will form in your mind of the airplane you are going to build.
 Each homebuilt airplane is unique because of the customization the builder
chooses to incorporate into the airplane.  The customization is not so much
a deviation from plans, but an adding of features.  An example is which
cockpit heating system will be used?  From airplane to airplane this varies
from none to a forced air system using a oil cooler in the nose.

Once the picture of the airplane forms in your mind, make a plan.  The
first part of your plan has already formed: clean and refurbish the garage.
 This is a common first step.  Your garage will last alot longer as a
workshop if you plan for storage of the big items.  Where will you store
the wings and canard while you are working on the fuselage, and visa versa?
 If you put them in your workspace, this could be a problem.  If you have a
pull down stair leading to your attic, then this is a great storage area
for raw materials and finished parts.  A side benefit is composite parts
get post cured in the attic during the summer because of the elevated
temperatures.  

When will you work on your project?  In truth this is the most important
variable to the successful completion of the project.  Be brutally honest
with yourself.  To complete the project you and your family will need to
dedicate a significant amount of your time to building an airplane.  It
takes an average of four to five years of high dedication to finish an
airplane from start to finish.  I worked on my project at least one hour
per week night, and Saturdays.  

Building an airplane is a process.  If you take time to plan now, it will
go alot more smoothly.  Get your family involed now in the planning
process.  Brainstorm everything.  Money, time, storage, make or buy
decisions, etc.  Sit down with your family and make these decisions
together because in most cases when you need that help at 10:30 at night
when a layup is taking to long or some other thing occurs it will be your
family who is available to bail you out.  More projects fail because a
builder forgets to take the family into consideration.  Oh and did I say as
part of your project budgets to budget more money for flowers, and other
nice presents for your spouse.  After your spouse has bailed you out and it
is now 1:30am and she has to work the next morning, you better send flowers
to her work as a way to say thanks.  VERY IMPORTANT!!  Do not neglect your
spouse if you want your marrige to survive the building of an airplane.  

Well this is getting kind of long an I am sure the other "experts" will
chime in.

Paul
Long EZ 214LP


>
>Anyway my first real question is what can I do in my spare time with the
>plans?  I believe I can go through all the newsletters and mark up the
>changes.  I guess I can make notes from the FAQ on the Unofficial Cozy Home
>Page.  Anything else?
>
>Oops, not too brief like the subject says.  Keeps the great info flowing.
>
>Thanks
>
>Rick Maddy  (cozy@maddyhome.com)
>Cozy Mk IV #0824: Pre-build
>
>
>

Date: Wed, 29 Sep 1999 09:13:30 -0400
From: Phillip <LUV2AV8@compuserve.com>
Subject: COZY: A brief intro



-------------Forwarded Message-----------------

From:   Phillip, 75202.370
To:     "Rick Maddy", INTERNET:cozy@maddyhome.com
        
Date:   9/29/99  9:01 AM

RE:     COZY: A brief intro

Rick,

When I first got my plans, I used my spare time to hand trace all the
bulkhead drawings.  I didn't want to use the originals for the purpose of
making my bulkheads.  Some people photo copied these drawings, but if you
do that, you need to be sure that the reproduction is 1 to 1.  I used a big
glass window and taped my original to the glass and then taped a blank
piece of paper over the original and hand traced it.  I then cut the
bulkhead drawings out with scissors.  This system worked great with me and
I was very satisfied with how the bulkheads turned out.  

Good luck,,

Phillip Sill, #707
Chapter 6

From: Muzzy Norman E <MuzzyNormanE@Waterloo.deere.com>
Subject: RE: COZY: A brief intro
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 1999 08:51:43 -0500

>>maybe the Cozy fairy will save you all that building time! 
The Cozy fairy. Who's the Cozy fairy? Am I missing something good? :)>>

A dollar under the pillow beats that business of having to sacrifice
goats...

I am in the process of waiting for the truckload of supplies.  My experience
so far-

Work through the list of what should I do different such that you can come
to the realization that if you change everything you will build nothing.
Pick your battles carefully, there is sufficient challenge in the number of
hours required to build without trying to start from scratch.

Order your materials early.  My gameplan-  Order all of the foam and cloth
up front.  The archives are full of stories of people running short on cloth
at the end of the chapter.  My initial order is for all of the materials
except for the wheels and brakes, fuel system components, electrical, some
of the later stuff.  The bulk of the cost is in the foam, the cloth, and the
resin.  I ordered full rolls of cloth to avoid handling damage, wrinkles,
and such. The truck freight for everything looks to be under $200, so I am
putting everything on the truck that I can think of.  Try to minimize
shipping costs.  There will be plenty of little stuff to keep the UPS guy
busy as it is.

My initial plan was to buy the supplies at Oshkosh to take advantage of the
10% discount.  My order was not 100% fleshed out yet.  In discussions with
Wicks they pointed out that the ad in Kit Planes every month says 'mention
this ad and save 10%'.  So make sure you do that (if you buy from Wicks).

I placed my order the 10th of September.  Some of the foam that is needed
early on will not be in until the 20th of October.  And they were out of
full rolls of BID.  Sigh...  But once the truckload of materials arrives,
there will be no waiting for the truck.  I have plenty of stuff outside of
plane building to stay busy with.  Fuse jigs are built, canard templates cut
out, making the metal parts, still need to see if I can borrow a temporary
firewall...

Do the practice layups.  Many times.  Learn what the difference is between
70 degree epoxy, 80 degree epoxy, and 90 degree epoxy.  It is amazing.  I
will be working in a very warm shop!  I did some of the layups with a scale,
and then bought a pump.  In my opinion, the only way to fly.  Understand how
to check calibration on your pump.  Find another composite builder in your
area.  Try their pump if you want the experience before laying out the
money.  You may find a used pump to buy or borrow.

Find other builders.  Arrange to borrow all of the jigs, templates, and
expertise that is available. I have experts volunteered to help with the
hotwiring.  We will have a hotwire party once the foam is here.  Set up all
of the foam ahead of time, and in one fell swoop wire the wings, canard,
winglets.  I have been hotwiring RC boat hulls for my sun.  It is fun stuff!
I could do this all by my lonesome, but why not lean on the people who have
some experience in the area?

Qualify your experts carefully.  The most outspoken may not know what they
are talking about.  Look at the finished projects, the quality of the work,
and choose carefully who you listen to.  There is a lot of good suggestions
available, but there are a lot of opinions floating around also.  Just like
my opinions in this posting...

Understand where Nat is coming from and why.  He cannot 'approve' design
changes that are thrown at him almost continuously from many different
directions. Talk to someone who is flying a plane, get their take on how to
build.  My collections-  build it by the plans and you will save yourself a
lot of trouble.  There are some 'tricks of the trade' that are learned first
(or second or third) time through, this gets back to leaning on experts.



From: alwick@juno.com
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 23:52:10 -0700
Subject: Re: COZY: A brief intro

On Tue, 28 Sep 1999 15:29:26 -0600 "Rick Maddy" <cozy@maddyhome.com>
writes:
>
> This will be my first homebuilt if you don't count a plans built R/C
> airplane I built about 10 years ago.  

Welcome Rick. I've got 23 rc planes ... most are intact. My favorite
crash: My wife made the kids go to the car when she realized that the
pilot wasn't quite in command. A few minutes later, while the kids were
wrestling in the car, it got hit dead center. Never could get that dent
outa the top of the car. Only took 8 hrs to repair the plane.

I agree with others comments. Just get started. The plans are superb.
Particularly the first chapters.

-al wick
Canopy Latch System guy.
Artificial intelligence in Cockpit
Cozy sn 389 driven by stock Subaru 2.5 ltr 103% complete, Aug 00 first
flight sched..

___________________________________________________________________
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: gmellen@juno.com
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 1999 11:07:34 -0400
Subject: Re: COZY: A brief intro



>When you start out it seems overwhelming. I bought plans # 757 in 
>March '99.
>I've completed the fuselage, canard, elevators, gear, spar and most of 
>the
>fairings.  Just started on the wings. At this rate the airframe will 
>be done
>in less than a year.

John,

Your NOT married with children are you?

I have about 1200 Hrs. of build time in 7 years on my 3 place Cozy!
Still plugging away.

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.

From: "John Slade" <rjslade@bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: COZY: A brief intro
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 1999 11:41:33 -0400

George,
>Your NOT married with children are you?
Hmmm. That's a much more complex question than you might think.  The simple
answer is yes. If you ask "do I have a life outside of the airplane?" the
answer is a definate yes.

>I have about 1200 Hrs. of build time in 7 years on my 3 place Cozy!
>Still plugging away.

I think my build time so far is roughly 760, i.e. around 100 hrs / month as
compared with your 8.  I think the main trick is continuity.

John Slade


Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 22:32:55 -0400
From: Brian Freitag <bsf@magicnet.net>
Subject: COZY: Brief Intro

Hello Rick, Ok This is what I would do if I  was in your situation, I am
only giving my opion and I hope I dont get some people upset........But
sometimes it is wise to help others then help yourself and at the
sametime if you can help yourself thats a bonus. So now that is
said.........if you can afford to do it you should look at the projects
for sale adds in the latest news letter and you will see you can get a
great deal at the price of someone elses sweat, I have talked to a few
people that have said..(.and I quote) if I had to do it all over again I
would buy a project allready in progress. and you will be so far ahead
of the game you will be happy you did it. But take someone with you who
knows what there looking at.
                 Just my opion      Brian     #094

Date: Wed, 29 Sep 1999 11:35:42 -0500
From: Ken Reiter <ken@quickturn.com>
Subject: COZY: Low Time Builders

Hi Group,

Just to pump everybody UP!

It took (ME) over 10 years, yes that's right 10 years
to complete my CozyIII. 

(IT DOES NOT HAVE TO TAKE THIS LONG - IT JUST TOOK ME THAT LONG!)

Regrets:
	- There are now four of us and only three seats
	- took ME to long to build
	
However, I still get a smile whenever I think about the plane and the fun
it gives me as well as the fun for our kid's friends when we take them for
rides. (Have yet to have a parent say no. As a matter of fact, the darn
ride list keeps getting longer no shorter.)

Started the project before I had the Priv ticket and did the 
first flight with the GREAT help of Vance and Ken, total time
for me was only 93 total hours in Cessna 150 and 1 in a Bonanza.
The best help was the 1 hour in the Bonanza, because it gets you 
to realize that each plane flys a little different - just like the
master, Nat, states in the manual. 

Guys, do not give up and no matter how long it take it is worth it!
You too will soon enjoy flying in your our aircraft. 


Keep building,
Ken 


From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 1999 22:24:27 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: COZY: Aircraft des

Below is from DTC DUATS this evening, of the acceptable aircraft designators for the Rutan based family. I had entered ?RUTAN. 
If entering Cosy, or Cozy, the 3rd line is output. Cosy, Classic and Aerocad were not accepted as invalid. I understand these 
are for air traffic control purposes, and the list is maintained by the ATC people. Main purpose is to define performance for 
controllers. Much more descriptive than "HXB/U". It wouldn't surprise me that other arms of the F.A.A. lump according these 
designators. 



**** Current Time: Thu Sep 30 03:07 (UTC) ****

DESIG MODEL NAME                               MANUFACTURER

ARES  151 ARES                                 RUTAN                            
BOOM  202 BOOMERANG                            RUTAN                            
COZY  COZY, CLASSIC                            CO-Z, RUTAN, COSY                
DEFI  40 DEFIANT                               RUTAN                            
LGEZ  61 LONG-EZ                               RUTAN                            
SOLI  77 SOLITAIRE                             RUTAN                            
VEZE  33 VARIEZE                               RUTAN                            
VVIG  27, 32 VARIVIGGEN                        RUTAN                            
  


From: LMAndrasi@aol.com
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 1999 20:55:16 EDT
Subject: COZY: Cozy III vs CozyIV

Hello,
       I was just about to order the Cozy IV plans when I ran across a good 
deal on a set of Cozy III plans. They are complete and unused. I only need a 
two place with good baggage and the III looks as if it would serve my 
purposes. Can someone explain the differences to me? I'm a newbie and I don't 
want to make a mistake. I would appreciate any help I can get.

Thank you,
Bryon  

From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 1999 20:29:38 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: COZY: Cozy III vs CozyIV

Before buying a set of plans, check with Nat to ensure they are genuine, there are more than a few copied sets out there. The 
important if there are only 2 of you, is a roomier front seat which is 3.5" wider, and there is more luggage room. My Cosy 
Classic has the wider front seat, but the 3 place rear seat, and we frequently pack it full with 2 backpacks tent, etc. and 
almost wish for more space.  The wider also is the instrument panel which helps especially if if going to IFR equip. The $500 
cost of the plans is such a small part (1%) of the total cost, if ever sell, will be much more valuable, and otherwise 
literally no difference in cost or building time.

From: "John Slade" <rjslade@bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: COZY: Cozy III vs CozyIV
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 1999 21:58:17 -0400

Hello Byron,
Given the time, effort and money you're going to put into building I'd have
thought you'd be much better off with the Cozy IV.

1. Its the newer model. One evolved into the other. Resale value of the
project [should you give up] and/or the finished airplane will be higher
with the IV.

2. If you buy plans you'll be able to go direct to the designer for support
and you'll get updates / corrections. This has a definate value.

3. You're needs might change during the building process. Its easy to leave
space unused. Its hard to add more space.

4. There are many prefab molded fiberglass parts available for the IV which
(correct me if I'm wrong, AeroCad & Featherlite guys) are not available for
the III.  [wings, canard, spar, etc. etc.] You might decide half way through
to spend some cash and save yourself a LOT of time. You won't have that
option with the III.

I think any one of the above would outweigh the savings of a few hundred $
on a dated set of plans.

Just my opinion. I could be wrong.
regards,
John Slade

