Talk me out of a velocity...

[Jon Matcho]

I can't take it any longer... every time I see the subject of this thread I find myself asking, "Why?" Sure, the Cozy is a great plane, and I am building one, but that doesn't mean that I wouldn't have acquired a Velocity kit if funds permitted. If I had the money a year ago, I probably would have purchased one of the Velocity kits.

 

The Velocity SE FG is very similar to the Cozy, and is a kit from a well-established company. Presently, aside from the AeroCanard (which remains in questionable status), the Velocity is the only canard-kit game in town. If you can afford to purchase the entire kit contents outright, then you have a real decision to make.

 

Regardless, and in hindsight, I am VERY happy with my decision that has me building a high-performance aircraft from "scratch".

[VelocityFlyer]

Interesting the miss-information being posted about the Velocity...

 

I bought a project that was barely completed, wrecked and abandoned for 5 years.

 

Its a Standard RG with an IO360, Catto 3 bladed prop.

 

It cruises at 170+ KTAS at 2700 RPM. 175 if its just me and bags. Thats burning about 9 GPH at 12,000 ft.

 

The fusalges is not just glass, its a sandwich glass-foam-glass, like all the other canards.

 

The velocity and the 4 place cozy are very similar performing airplanes, I'd place them at a dead heat as far as speed, load , etc.. Of course how you build them and whats goes into them can vary that tremendously, but the potential is pretty even. I personally think the Cozy is a bit more cozy.

 

When I was looking for a completed or almost complete project, I started looking at Longs, realized my wife would like the back seat, niether would I, then switched to looking at any side by side seating canard. Almost bought two different Cozy's, one was extramly miss-represented by the seller, the other was bought out from under me. Bought the Velocity and am very happy with it.

 

It is challanged as all fast glass planes are by my 6500 ft altitude desert air field. Density altitude was 9700 today and it was not a really hot day. Thats its biggest weak point for me, so I'm going to install a larger engine next year. A TSIO520 with a fixed pitch prop.

 

We'll see how she performs with 325 HP behind her..

 

Scott

[CBarber]

A TSIO520 with a fixed pitch prop.

 

 

Ya gonna squeeze that engine in with a shoehorn??? Actually, Scott Baker at Velo, Inc has told me it has been done and is tight.....but, who cares......you should zoom along even at your high density altitude airport......really kewl.

 

It is my understanding the original reason the XL was developed was to more easily fit in the larger engine. I will be looking forward to you progress. I hope to get some pretty good numbers with the 13b turbo we are planning to use. Hopefully, and our intent, is to be able to use the turbo to fly high and faster.

 

Glad to hear about your inflight numbers too. I am always a little nervous to tout the Velocity and make statements that its performance may equal a Cozy. Also, IMHO, the Velo is prettier (can we say "biased") The conventional wisdom on this and the other forum is the Cozy always out performs a Velo (there MAY be some slight bias to the Cozy as I think I was the only Velo builder, but the forums are "Canard"....not Cozy.......not yet anyway )........"forget-about-it" as far as differences that occur during the build.......of course yours is a retract, as I am sure we will be reminded <g>....mine is fixed gear. Also, I a still building, so I have no real flight data. But, now that I think about it most those Cozy guys are just building too.....or just PLANNING on building.....hmmmmmmmm (noted execptions being John Slade et al). Cozy propaganda????

 

Are you one of the Scotts on the Reflector?

 

All the best,

 

Chris

[VelocityFlyer]

Yeah, I'm on the reflector. I ussually don't participate in forums of this type. I like the freedom of a elist coming to me via email...

 

I considered a 3 rotor, or two rotor turbo, but this engine fell into my lap.

 

Hopefully I can rebuild it and install it for less than 15K, total cost.

 

I'm looking forward to seeing what it will do at 20,000 ft.

 

Scott

[Todd Sanderson]

I owned the 3rd Velocity RG Elite (Gull wing doors) ever to fly and will say that the gull wing doors is the way to go. I don't want to climb up on anything to get in the plane if possible. I got about 175 Knots on 11 GPH with an IO-360 @ 9000 ft. It was a stable plane and easy to fly, but the baggage room was only good for two people. With 4 people it was definitely no baggage.

[MarkW]

Hi,

 

I'm a new member and don't own any kit yet, but I'm considering a Velocity SE kit.

I was wondering if there is any Velocity builder out there who has converted a top hatch door (found in the earlier Velo kits, like 173, etc) to the new style gull wing doors??

 

I found an older kit that I'm thinking of buying (second hand) that has the top hatch door, but I really prefer the dual gull wing doors. So I'm wondering if that's possible and what would be involved (cost and labor and degree of complexity to get it completed)

 

Any input will be greatly appreaciated.

 

Thanks.

Mark W.

[VelocityFlyer]

There is a modification kit available from the factory.

 

Give them a call for pricing. I know of two people who have done the mod and like it.

 

Scott

[CBarber]

Yes, give the factory a call. They have always been great to work with and to my knowledge have always been very helpful to, not only purchasers of second/third/etc. hand kits, but also to builders of any kit/plans plane. Don't be shy.

 

Even though construction is different between the hatch style and the elites, my bird was originally an SUV. They discontinued the single door SUV the day after my kit was delivered. Velocity sold me the second door for about $400.00 and that was the only change needed, other than a few additional layups, to make it the two door SE. Funny, what was part of the cheaper SUV kit, the yoke option, is now about a $1200.00 option/upgrade(?)

 

So far I have been very lucky with vendors. Velocity, Inc. and Real World Solutions (Tracy Crooks rotary solutions) being the clear standouts. I even lucked out with Conversion Concepts rotary engine mounts a few years ago before Fred Breeze's injury and fall from grace (he was always helpful to me and shipment was prompt. I was suprised and disappointed to hear folks lost money).

 

All the best,

 

Chris

[MarkW]

Chris / Scott,

 

Thanks much for your valuable input!

 

I have already talked to Scott Baker at Velocity (prior to posting my message) and frankly he made it sound like a really big deal that may cost around 10K and advised against doing it (suggested I find a kit with gull wing doors made at the factory or buy the kit from the factory). So I'm a bit puzzled here, after reading feedback from you, particularly when you (Chris) said that you paid for the right door kit around $400.

 

Being a complete layman (when it comes to working with composites and building Velocity) at this point, I still think that reattaching the hatch door (it has not yet been installed) should be similar to joining the fuselage halves (in terms of complexity and structural impact on the fuselage itself - please let me know if my assumption is correct). I agree that modifying the windows (to make them bigger like in the new models and also to fit the door) will probably be more complex and require more work.

 

However, I don't really consider extra "work" as a extra cost at this point (particularly if this refers to my work on the kit), so I only wanted to get a cost of what I would need to spent in terms of getting all the parts to make the mod. Even if I have to hire some one to help do the mod, that's still not a "cost" for me because I would paying for something I don't have to do.

 

So given what Chris paid for the door kit, the mod should cost about $1000 (take $500 for each door to include shipping, etc). Let's say the new side windows (glass) costs another $1000, so that's $2000 total cost. Let's add another $500 of other stuff (extra foam? fiberglass?) that still leaves $7500 unaccounted for. Any ideas what Scott B could have had in mind (what the additional $7500 might be spent for)?

 

I tried to call Scott B. today (Friday) again to clarify this (after reading your replies) but I was told that the factory is closed on Fridays and Scott B. wasn't in. So I guess I have to wait until Monday.

 

Again, thanks for your inputs. Although I don't have any building experience, I have studied many Velocity builders sites (including yours, Chris, it's an excellent resource and I've learned so much from yours and others sites - THANKS FOR MAKING THOSE SITES AVAILABLE for people like me!!!)

 

By the way, one of the determining factor for me to build a Velocity (aside from great specs, performance and, of course, the cool looks) is the amount of resource from builders that is available out there all of which seem like very nice and helpful individuals which certainly is a motivating factor for a newbie like me. I'm very happy (and looking forward) to be soon joining this family!

 

Thanks.

 

Mark

[CBarber]

Mark,

 

I understand your confusion. As I stated in my original post, the construction method between the Elite (gull wing doors model name) and the old hatch syle is different. VERY different. When I said the construction method was different, I should have been more clear. They are both composite, however, the older style of build (read that more as STRUCTUAL methods) for the hatch version is much more akin to the Cozy with bulkheads being part of the front seat etc.

 

The Elites are more of a empty shell thus allowing for the gull doors. The structure comes from the "shell" and center console (which is structual and kinda acts as a spine for the outer shell). The Cozy and older Velocity's get there structure from the additional builkheads (such as the front seat bulkhead and instrument panal bulkhead etc). So putting the gull wing doors on an older Velocity would be similiar to putting them on a Cozy...which I think most who are on this forum would concede would be a huge undertaking. I have no idea how Velocity is able to do it and I understand why they are saying it would be so expensive. Also, knowing Velocity Inc, I would think they would try to disuade you not to sell a new kit, but because it is the better way to go.

 

The SUV had one gull wing door but other than the yokes as oppossed to a center stick, the SUV WAS an SE (Standard Elite) with one door on the pilot side....the yokes allowed passangers to slide to the front passanger seat since there was no center stick in the way. The SE needs a stronger spine for structure as the SUV got more structual regidity by not having the second door, thus the extra layups on the SE are a result of extra glass on the center console/spine

 

I would not suggest the conversion unless you have a bird that is already flying and consider it ONLY if there is some REALLY compelling reason. That much price difference for the conversion would likely undermine any price advantage to a used project...you would be better off buying a new one from the factory, IMAO.

 

I am VERY biased in my preference for the Velocity. I like its "lines" better than the Cozy and do like the gull wing doors (I also prefer getting IN a plane as oppossed to strapping one on:) ), however, the Cozy is a great plane that can be started NOW with a $500.00 plans purchase and kit purchase for Chapter 4 form ASS or Wicks.

 

I would still sugest the Velocity. I am VERY pleased with mine. However, I would continue the search for a newer project. I know they come available somewhat routinly.....Usually, as a rule, more XL's than SE's though.

 

There is no real urgency, however, you may very well regret, like most of us, that you were not able to start sooner. Also, building a plane is kinda like having kids....if you wait 'till you have the money, you will never do it. I had some money fall out of the sky (two clients unexpectanly paid me pretty large past due fees while I was practicing law full time before I started playing cop too). Before I did something really stupid with the money like pay bills or invest for my retirement, I bought my kit.

 

I am currently in rotary engine tuning, wire runs and some preliminary taxi testing.....so, 85% done, 75% to go.

 

Good luck. Feel free to contact me if you should have other questions, concerns, comments, rants, *****es, confusions, curiosities etc. or if you are in Houston, stop by.

 

I regret if my earlier post was misleading and caused confusion. Go to my webpage and then go to John Slade's Cozy page ( www.canardaviation.com/cozy )and you should be able to tell the differences between the fusalage sections and the way they are put together structually.

 

All the best,

 

Chris

 

Sorry for the spelling. I have no spell check on this 'puter and I AM the reason God invented spell checkers.

[MarkW]

Chris,

 

Thanks for your reply and explanation. No need to apologize, I think it was me who didn't express this clearly. I do understand your point. The seat bulkhead must be used in the earlier model because, like in Cozy, the door is much larger and takes up much of the upper portion of the fuselage which in turn makes the fuselage lose some of its structure support.

 

However, what I was trying to say is that given all of the above, if one would reattach the top hatch door back to the fuselage (and also remove the side windows and refill them with the same composite material that the fuselage is made of) then logically speaking, one would get (or should get) the same fuselage shell as in the newer models that use gull wing doors. So then, one should be able to cut out the gull wing doors and matching windows just like in the new SE models.

 

Now, I'm stating all of the above making following assumptions (as you know, I have zero experience with composites or velocity!):

 

1. earlier velocity models (that used the top door) have the same fuselage as as the new SE models (that use gull wing doors) in terms of thickness, composite material, shape, size, etc.

 

2. the process of reattaching the top door would be the same as joining the top and bottom fuselage halves, meaning that the bonding will be as good as if the the door were never cut out (or at least, strong enough to withstand any structural stress so that the safety would not be compromised - again, my logic here is based on the assumption that joining the top and bottom halves of the fuselage is strong enough to withstand any structural stress that can be encounter in flight under even rough conditions like severe turbulence).

 

Of course, if any of the above assumtions is incorrect, then the reattaching the top door and refilling the windows will not work as I described and that's the end of it. So the big question really is (at least that's what I think) whether or not both of above assumptions are correct.

 

I will try to see what the guys at the factory will say about this, but you or anyone on the forum are most welcome to provide any input (opinions, facts, advice, etc.)

 

Again, thanks for your help and also for the invitation to your shop, Chris! I'd love to stop by, but unfortunately I'm in the east coast (New York) so it would be a long travel, but if I'm in the area, I'll be sure to make a detour (of course, I give you advance notice!)

 

Thanks.

Mark

[CBarber]

I will be very curious as to what the factory tells ya. I do not believe your first presupostion is correct. I do not believe the seat bulkhead is the only difference. I also think the instruent panel is structual in the classic Velocity fuselage and there is no structual center console along with any others that I am unaware of. Of course I am only really familiar with the Elites. I have only sat in a couple of the classic style Velo's over the last few years and they seem quite different.

 

Also, one of the gripes folks will try to use to tear down the Velocity (I think it gives some solace to condemn something that so many seem to like:sad: ) is that with the gull wing doors the Elites do not have enough structural intergrity to be safe while flying. Jeff Russell (who did not in anyway condemn the Velo), the former owner of Aerocanard, stated that the Velo structure could kinda have the gull wing doors bellow out a bit during flight. I don't know if this was before or after Velo intergrated four point rod closure secure points. To my knowledge the fuselage integrity has not been an issue with the Velocity....Cozy, longEZ et al. I do seem to recall a structual breakup of a Velo when a pilot (who's son referred to as a "cavalier pilot") flew into a thunderstorm and the plane came out in pieces. But, IMAO, you really can't blame that on the design.

 

Please let me/us know what you find out.

 

All the best,

 

Chris

[Steve Innova]

It appears that the velocity is made from solid glass.

 

It is not. It's made of a glass/foam core composit, just like the Cozy.

 

The reason it's heavier is because it's larger.

[MarkW]

I will be very curious as to what the factory tells ya. I do not believe your first presupostion is correct. I do not believe the seat bulkhead is the only difference. I also think the instruent panel is structual in the classic Velocity fuselage and there is no structual center console along with any others that I am unaware of. Of course I am only really familiar with the Elites. I have only sat in a couple of the classic style Velo's over the last few years and they seem quite different.

 

 

Chris,

OK, I finally got (what I believe) a clear picture what's involved in the conversion (many thanks to Scott B who's been so patient with me!) Apparently, my assumption #1 was incorrect (as you pointed that out earlier) because the top of the fuselage that is designed to house the gull-wing doors has some extra (structural) reinforcements that the old top-door version doesn't. In addition, since the top door has already been cut out (in the kit that I was referring to) re-attaching is not really an option, particularly in the light that all windows have already been installed as well.

 

So the best way to proceed with the conversion is the get a brand new top of the fuselage from the factory (with new windows design and gull wing door templates) to replace the old top-door top and then proceed in the same manner as if you bought the gull-wing door version. Of course, this is only possible if the fuselage top and bottom parts have not yet been joined (which is the case here, fortunately ).

 

The negative part is the relatively high cost of all the parts (including fuselage) to make this conversion (around $10K) but it may be worth it anyway given the advantage of being able to get in and out of velocity with ease - particularly for those with mobility problems - (not to mention the "cool look" ) that the gull-wing door version of Velocity provides.

 

Anyway, this is my report for now. I will post more later once I become the owner of a Velo kit (and then I'm sure I'll have tons of other questions! )

 

Mark

[CBarber]

Thanks for the update. I figured the factory would try there best to help. Please keep us posted.

 

All the best,

 

Chris

[flybuddy]

New to the forum and own an older style Velocity (Standard FG with the clamshell door). First off--speed, most everyone that's been said was true, some are dirt slow and others move along quite nicely. Building variations (straightness), weight and extraneous drag all fit into the equation. Same is true for most canards. I owned a Varieze many years back that I bought as a wreck and re-did, my neighbor has a similar Varieze (O-200)--it's about 30 knots slower and is lucky to see 130K. The plane simply isn't straight--there's a piece of wood used to hold one rudder out several degrees to get the plane to fly straight.

The Velo I currently own was the last one built by Danny Maher (original designer of Velo)-excellent glass work and weighed in at 1234 lb empty. It will cruise all day at 185 mph and top speed is over 215 mph. (It does have a cruise prop which I'm swapping out for a Catto to get better takeoff perf). The factory did dabble with the 173 wing in an attempt to get RV9 type performance--although they land slower and have improved takeoff perf, they are significantly slower and that needs to be considered

Clamshell--it takes getting used to. Mine has a combo pitot tube/step that makes it fairly easy for ingress/egress. I don't find it any more difficult to get in than neighbors Mustang IIs, T-18s, various taildraggers, etc. You'll find that clamshell type Velos command anywhere from 10 to 15K less than gullwings. You can always try to convert later on if you absolutely can't live with the clamshell but, more than likely, you'll get used to it and find that's it no big deal. My neighbor hops in and out and he's 85 next month.

[HighVelocity]

I have read ALL of your threads from beginning to end and here is the REAL DEAL.

 

There seems to be a “thread” of:envy:jealousy:envy:regarding the Velocity® Kit Plane.

 

Maybe it’s the modern gull-wing doors, spacious 4-place cabin, fast-build options, continued state-of-the-art improvements, superior builder support or proven track record making it one of the fastest canard home-builts available. Performance & quality is time purchased. Safety is priceless.

 

When you get right down to it (and do the math) it’s all about dollars & sense. The reality is that the Cozy could very well be the Poor Man’s Velocity®.:pI don’t mean to:yikes:bastardize:yikes:the world renowned Velocity® name by comparing it with a Cozy, but facts are facts.

[Jon Matcho]

I'm not entirely clear what your position or point is, but...

 

I don’t mean to:yikes:bastardize:yikes:the world renowned Velocity® name by comparing it with a Cozy, but facts are facts.

The "standard" 4-seat fixed gear Lycoming 360-powered Velocity is VERY comparable to the Cozy Mark IV design, except the Cozy is lighter and faster in this configuration. Doesn't mean the Cozy is better (it doesn't have gull-wing doors), but it is comparable.

 

There very well be a thread of jealousy with regard to Velocity aircraft. There often is when one wants things that they cannot afford.

[HighVelocity]

My position is that there are many people on here who post completely false accusations about Velocity®. This is beyond “jealousy.” It is downright slanderous and misleading in nature. Case in point, where Dust posted, “It appears that the Velocity® is made from solid glass” or where Marbleturtle posted, “they explode right after takeoff”. This is just not true! If CO$T is really an issue; there are plenty of pre-owned Velocity® aircraft to purchase on a budget. What, still not cheap enough? Try all the folks who lose momentum and just want to sell the airframe before their wives serve them (divorce). Whether you're an eagle or a buzzard, you can still fly...

[macleodm3]

HighVelocity My position is that there are many people on here who post completely false accusations about Velocity®. This is beyond “jealousy.” It is downright slanderous and misleading in nature.

I don't think you really understand the nature or purpose of this forum. Some people such as Marbleturtle have a history of being very "creative" and honestly quite funny at times. Who cares if MT said they explode on takeoff... I would consider myself very overly sensitive if these statements upset me. We all must learn to not take every thing we read here seriously. (myself included at times).

 

 

We all really like CANARD HOMEBUILTS... that the main thing.

[Cozyman]

Folks,

 

This is an interesting thread for several reasons. I will post this in the taxiing thread, and Cozy vs Velocity thread.

 

First some background:

 

I owned a Cozy III for 12 years, and absolutely loved it. I put about 600 hours on it. I did not build it, I cheated and bought it. My only complaint - it was Cozy!! I am now 5'10', 200lbs. OK, 12 years ago I weighed less :-) This is a great cross country plane for two people who are smaller than me. It also has lots of space in the back for two individuals. It appears most of my friends are retired fighter pilots and not petit!! I know, I should get smaller friends

 

I significantly upgraded the panel in the Cozy (GNS 430, Dynon D10, Dynon D10A).

 

I recently traded up my Cozy III for a Velocity 173FG. It was a unique circumstance, and I am quite happy. I currently only have about 15 hours in the Velocity.

 

My initial taxi of the Velocity was horrible. It was not like my Cozy which after 600 hours, I was very comfortable with. Granted, the Cozy at times would "catch" and want to pull left or right with only minor adjustments to keep it straight. Clearly there were problems with this aircraft. The mechanics contacted Velocity to get the technical specifications. After painstaking work, they made sure the toe in measurements, and landing gear calibration was correct. It taxied significantly better. This would have been a deal breaker if this was the normal taxiing characteristics.

 

I was thrilled with the flight characteristics during my Velocity insurance "check out," and purchased it.

 

After flying the aircraft back from Florida to Virginia (what a great cross country aircraft - did I mention how much more room there is!!), I encountered two separate events when I overheated the left brake, to the point of failure. I was not using the left brake aggressivley - thus it was a bit surprising when this happened. After a period of cooling off, no problem.

 

The flight characteristics are very similar between the two aircraft. The one noticeable difference is the roll rate. The Cozy roll rate is much quicker, more responsive. From my experience, the Cozy is a BMW sports car, and the Velocity is a BMW station wagon. This is what I was looking for.

 

I also encountered a problem during a takeoff role which was significantly increased due to the need to use the right brake to keep on the center line. (Again, I have 600 hours in the Cozy. I encountered this in the Cozy, but strong crosswinds were the cause). This lead me to look into this in more detail.

 

I am currently in Beijing, China and will not have physical access until I return. (This is the reason I have time to research this topic on the internet).

 

What I learned:

 

This is not a highly unusual event (taxiing issues) for the Velocity. There is a thread of this on the Velocity forum as well. (I agree with the postings, when the differential braking works, it works exceptionally well). I do "feel" there is a difference with the Velocity. The overall weight of the aircraft, and more importatnly the weight resting on the nose gear).

 

I will look into:

Ensure Nose Gear is physically installed correctly (worn washers, nut is tightened properly……….)

The new Fixed Gear Nose Replacement Bumber

Brake Pedal System

Misler Nosewheel lock (A pin locks in place to keep the nose gear straight at appropriate times)

Steerable Nosewheel

 

I will post my findings as I work through the problem solution process. I am very lucky, there is an incredibly helpful canard community at Manassas. These guys have been my adult supervision for 13 years.

 

I am also in the process of upgrading the panel. I will install the same Garmin/Dynon avionics pacakge I had in my Cozy. My intent is to have a comfortable IFR aircraft for pleasure flying. I will not fly in hard IFR. My plan is to have a safe comfortable aircraft.

 

Safe Flying. Tim

[Lynn Erickson]

Folks,

 

 

This is not a highly unusual event (taxiing issues) for the Velocity. There is a thread of this on the Velocity forum as well. (I agree with the postings, when the differential braking works, it works exceptionally well). I do "feel" there is a difference with the Velocity. The overall weight of the aircraft, and more importatnly the weight resting on the nose gear).

 

I will look into:

Ensure Nose Gear is physically installed correctly (worn washers, nut is tightened properly……….)

The new Fixed Gear Nose Replacement Bumber

Brake Pedal System

 

 

Safe Flying. Tim

You said you over heated the left brake and need to use right brake on take off. sounds like the left brake is dragging all the time. are these matco triples? if so the problem is most likely that the spacers that the calipers slide on are sticking. they may be corroded and / or need lube. this is a common problem with this brake.

[CBarber]

I will be interested in this. I am very biased though <g>. You did say you have the 173. Isn't that the standard fuselage with the XL wings? The theory being the longer/bigger wing made a more docile bird....thus, the slower response you indicate. IIRC, that is why it is called a 173...one better than a 172 Cessna.

 

I am thinking the Cozy wings would be closer to the SE wings on my Standard Elite Velocity.

 

I am thrilled to get your opinions on comparing the two planes.

 

All the best,

 

Chris

[Cozyman]

Chris,

 

Sent you a private reply. Bottom line, I am happy to help in any way!! Tim

[bferrell]

I'd be interested in hearing what you find as well, I've not taxied a Cozy, but our XL taxis pretty well if you keep up a bit of speed, at very low speeds she wallows and misses stays, as they say. You don't have to hot rod it, just a brisk walking pace, and an occasional stab on take-off roll.

 

B