Can a Cozy be "safely" ditched at sea?

[robinson217]

Hi. I'm new to the forum.

I want to build an Airplane that can take me from California to Hawaii with a rear seat tank. Then eventually I would like to fly around the world. I think a Coxy MKIV is the plane for the job.

 

My biggest concern about such a trip would of course be a forced landing at sea. I imagine there would be almost no way to do it without flipping over as soon as the mains "bite" the water. Any theories on how to ditch and survive?

 

Here are the options I came up with. Please tell me what you think of them.

 

1. Retractable gear. (only realy would help in calm seas. A wing catching the water is still a high probability) Also, adds weight, complexity, expense. Lowers usefull load.

 

2. Large tundra tires. Ever seen those videos of bush pilots locking up their breaks and skidding across the water? You could lock the brakes and skip along the water untill slowed down. Again, only good in calm seas, and the nose would probobly "torpedo" after the canard ran out of lift. not to mention drag.

 

3. Rig gear legs with small explosive charge, to blow them off, or at least weaken them so they fold back harmlessly when you hit the water. Saves weight and allows use of intended gear...... but you have explosives strapped to your airplane.

 

4. BRS chute. Pop the chute and do a gentle belly flop into the sea. Wait for help. This sounds the best to me, but I can think of more than a few issues with having a chute on a Cozy. Anyone done it?

 

any thoughts?

[raiki]

My sugestion would be to strap on another engine !!!!!

 

Seriously though, for all out survivability I'd think the BRS would the best out of your options. I am certainly considering it, but then I also considered a second engine (for 68 milliseconds, which is an eternity for an android (can anyone pick the quote????)). Do a search on my posts in modifications have a look at my sketch. No thought or engineering, will never do it but looks cool.

[Marc Zeitlin]

I want to build an Airplane that can take me from California to Hawaii with a rear seat tank. Then eventually I would like to fly around the world. I think a Coxy MKIV is the plane for the job.

There's at least one COZY fitted with a rear seat tank, and the owner intends to one day do the same thing with 175 gallons on board.

 

Bill Swears attempted a flight from Hawaii to California in a COZY III, and ditched 100 miles off the Hawaii coast due to engine failure from oil loss.

 

My biggest concern about such a trip would of course be a forced landing at sea. I imagine there would be almost no way to do it without flipping over as soon as the mains "bite" the water.

Bill's plane did NOT flip over when he hit the water, according to Bill. So apparently there is a way.

 

2. Large tundra tires.

Big mistake. They would add so much drag, you probably couldn't add enough fuel to make the trip. Plus, with the main gear being below and behind the CG, there'd be no skipping. And since the plane doesn't flip, you don't need to do anything to make it not flip.

 

3. Rig gear legs with small explosive charge, to blow them off...... but you have explosives strapped to your airplane.

Yeah.... count me out on that one - I'm not putting explosive charges on my plane, thanks.

 

4. BRS chute.

Possible. No one has installed one in a COZY (yet), and certainly not tried it.

 

If you're really interested in building a COZY MKIV, you should join the COZY mailing list.

[Cozy Girrrl]

"Bill Swears" ...thanks Marc for bringing up one of the more amusing moments in piloting folleys, karma at its finest. Bill and I used to seriously go at each other offlist; me the yachty -vs- Bill the Coast Guard officer, his attitude being that yachties were a bunch of know it alls that would put themselves in harms way poorly prepared against the forces of nature, get themselves in mortal danger and expect the Coasties to put lives and millions of tax payers dollars at risk to rescue their sorry butts.

 

Now, could sombody please tell me they could not see the karmic retribution coming a mile off when Bill announces he's going to fly his Long-ez back to the mainland?

 

...Chrissi

[emteeoh]

[RE: BRS]

Possible. No one has installed one in a COZY (yet), and certainly not tried it.

 

If you're really interested in building a COZY MKIV, you should join the COZY mailing list.

IIRC, I've seen some discussion recently on this forum about what would be needed to be done to a cozy to make it safe to deploy a BRS... It kinda sounded like a lot of effort if you didn't want the BRS to just rip the plane in half.

[Richard Schubert]

Cozy Girrrl

"Bill Swears....... "

"Geen schoner vermaak dan leedvermaak"

[MarcEZ]

Having done 6 ocean crossings in light twins and 2 in a cherokee, Here are some suggestions. If you're flying a plane with a couple of thousand hours on the airframe and maybe 500-1000 on the engine, the probability of a failure during the 10+ hours between California and Hawaii is very small. Nevertheless, don't skimp on survival gear. Don't even consider going with a freshly overhauled or new engine with 20 hours on it. Don't go with an airplane that has just flown off its restrictions. You'll need/want an HF radio. Its true that routine communications can be relayed via vhf from airliners, but we're talking emergencies. You'll need an HF antenna. Thats a bit tough, but not impossible on a glass plane. The airframe is a poor counterpoise. All transoceanic flight (above 5000 ft) is IFR even if you're in VMC. That means currency and competency. You'll need lots of planning. The north atlantic is simple compared to what you're attempting in terms of visas and permits. A north atlantic round trip, in a 180 HP cherokee, from VA to Glasgow cost about 3K in the late 80s. I'd guess its twice that or more today.

 

Flying the ocean is very easy, planning and preparation is significant, but very enjoyable. Its very doable, a bit pricey and most fun. Think about a prep flight to Greenland. Rent a kayack and spend a couple of days on iceberg laden fjords. You'll love it.

Have fun,

Marc LongEz 770EZ

[robinson217]

Thanks for the insight. I was aware that Bill Swears had ditched, but I was under the wrong impression that he flipped it.

 

Most of the ideas I mentioned were the result of some hare brain suggestions that came up during a conversation with some co-workers (including the son of an explosive ordinance expert). The BRS chute is the one I'm leaning towards.

 

I think if the engine quit over open water, the best thing would be to:

Slow up to near stall, hopefully stopping the prop from windmilling. Then as the stall warning horn goes, pop the chute. I think the airframe might stay in one peice, if deployed at that low speed.

[Cozy1200]

....Then as the stall warning horn goes, pop the chute. I think the airframe might stay in one peice, if deployed at that low speed.

I have a feeling it'll be a long wait for that stall horn to go off in a canard!

[robinson217]

I have a feeling it'll be a long wait for that stall horn to go off in a canard!

I am baseing all of this on my own theories. I have never flown, or even sat in a cozy. I wrote down all the requirements that a plane must be capable of for the mission I intend. after running the numbers on countless planes, I have decided on a cozy mark IV.

 

Now I just need to know if I could survive an engine failure at sea. If I'm barking up the wrong tree with the brs chute, please let me know. I'm open to any suggestions.

[Tyson]

4. BRS chute. Pop the chute and do a gentle belly flop into the sea. Wait for help. This sounds the best to me, but I can think of more than a few issues with having a chute on a Cozy. Anyone done it?

 

Depends on what you mean by "gentle." Research Ilan Reich's incident of plopping his Cirrus down in the Hudson. The landing gear does little to absorb energy when hitting water. A 26 fpm drop on my rear end with an inch or so of miracle foam to cushion the blow isn't what I'd consider to be a "gentle belly flop."

[robinson217]

Depends on what you mean by "gentle." Research Ilan Reich's incident of plopping his Cirrus down in the Hudson. The landing gear does little to absorb energy when hitting water. A 26 fpm drop on my rear end with an inch or so of miracle foam to cushion the blow isn't what I'd consider to be a "gentle belly flop."

"Gentle" may have not been the right word. Let me give you an idea of what I see in my head:

 

I'm flying along at 12.500 ft, 1,000 miles from land....and its night time. My engine seizes. I go through the check list and try to re-lite, to no avail. I send off a mayday, asking any passing airliners to pass it along.

 

Now its time to ditch. As I get low to the water, I have trouble estimating my height off the water....even the horizon. I flip on the landing lights....and see 15 foot rollers. CRAP.

 

I do my best to get the speed down, but despite my best efforts, I drag a wing into a wave. At 70 MPH, i'm cartwheeling through a froth of sea foam, and well, um, PVC foam. Not good.

 

Rewind to the part where I realize my engine is not going to come back to life:

 

I slow up, pull the handle, do the sign of the cross, and put my head between my legs untill I hit. I imagine it might feel like when that kid plowed into the back of my jeep at a stop light....he was doing 60. I walked away from that. I think I could "walk" away from a sea ditching with a chute. If you all think I'm crazy for wanting to do this to a Cozy, please tell me before I drop $500 on a set of plans.

[Edge 513]

I am raising my hand. You fit the bill. Certifiable.

So was Mike Melville.

Loons.

I would spend an hour to an hour and a half crossing the baha water at 11k feet but only because the exposure is only about a half hour regarding not being able to reach land. Thats just me and my comfort level.

Go rent a 172 and head out for an hour past the horizon off southern calif and extrapolate that feeling into your ''mission''. Is the bacon saver enough to make you comfortable? You have spent 6 years building the Cozy [not the 172] and you are ready to possibly commit it to Davey Jones regarding the mission risk? Did anyone you care about fly with you at this risk? Heck, buy a friggin' 269.00 round trip commercial flight to Oahu. Wait till you have been sweating your tiny hairs off for 3 or 4 years building a fine Cozy IV and then examine your willingness to possibly throw it away....wow? I think your perspective will change as you build.

And...

The BRS idea is going to be installed WHERE in the Cozy? Who is going to design the restructuring of the fuse with the center loading the BRS will impose on the center of the airframe? How much will this cost to find out it isn't the best of ideas? Professionals have rolled their eyes here about the BRS idea. Throw a bunch of money at the idea and see if they are wrong.

But then, that what explorers are all about- pushing limits. Are you that type?

You look like a healthy young man, maybe you are.

Me- I am 50 and an old fart, so I have a different perspective.=]

[robinson217]

I am raising my hand. You fit the bill. Certifiable.

So was Mike Melville.

Loons.

I would spend an hour to an hour and a half crossing the baha water at 11k feet but only because the exposure is only about a half hour regarding not being able to reach land. Thats just me and my comfort level.

Go rent a 172 and head out for an hour past the horizon off southern calif and extrapolate that feeling into your ''mission''. Is the bacon saver enough to make you comfortable? You have spent 6 years building the Cozy [not the 172] and you are ready to possibly commit it to Davey Jones regarding the mission risk? Did anyone you care about fly with you at this risk? Heck, buy a friggin' 269.00 round trip commercial flight to Oahu. Wait till you have been sweating your tiny hairs off for 3 or 4 years building a fine Cozy IV and then examine your willingness to possibly throw it away....wow? I think your perspective will change as you build.

And...

The BRS idea is going to be installed WHERE in the Cozy? Who is going to design the restructuring of the fuse with the center loading the BRS will impose on the center of the airframe? How much will this cost to find out it isn't the best of ideas? Professionals have rolled their eyes here about the BRS idea. Throw a bunch of money at the idea and see if they are wrong.

But then, that what explorers are all about- pushing limits. Are you that type?

You look like a healthy young man, maybe you are.

Me- I am 50 and an old fart, so I have a different perspective.=]

Hey, I really do appreciate the perspective. I am an admitted Cozy noob. I have been studying a borrowed set of plans for a couple weeks, and I have picked the brains of a few self proclaimed "experts". Certifiable, however, I am not.

 

I have dreamt of circumnavigating this third rock from the sun since I was just a kid. Some people climb mountains. I fly airplanes. Call it my Everest.

 

I know I can hop on a jet in SFO and be sipping a Mai Tai in Waikiki 5 hours and $400 later. Hell, for twice the price my wife can come too. But there are 200 people on that same plane, doing the same thing. I gaurantee you though, I'm the only one who stared out the window the ENTIRE time, trying to imagine going the same way, but four times lower, and four times slower.

 

I do push limits, but I am not one to be wreckless. I have lost some close friends to aviation, even my flight instructor. I am fully aware of my mortality. And thats why, when I am your age, and I'm telling stories to my grand kids, about my flying adventure around the world, they will know I did all a man could to conquer a dream. I will do it solo, simply because, I don't think I could impress upon another person, how great the risk is, without scareing them off. If I go down, I go down alone.

 

Now, you should know...When people tell me I can't do something, it only bolsters my resolve. I AM going to build an airplane. I AM going to fly it around the world. Whether or not I figure out how to get a BRS in, well, thats down the road a ways. The point is, I want to BE AROUND to tell my grand kids stories. I started this thread to see if anyone knew how to survive a ditching at sea in a cozy. I toyed with the notion of a BRS...and the general consensus is "Don't bother".

 

Maybe I should put the extra $10,000 a BRS would cost into building up a reliable engine. Maybe I should leave flying to the birds.

 

As for potentially "Throwing away" my cozy by flying over the ocean, after years of painstaking building: I equate that mentality to the guy who dreams of owning a corvette his whole life, but is afraid to take it out of the garage when he finally gets one. "Lets take the Taurus honey...that theater has such narrow parking spots!". What a waste!

 

I have spent a year at a time building scale R/C models, only to destroy them on the first flight. Dissapointment? Yes. Wish I had just hung it from the ceiling? Of course not! I am not planning on needing any of these emergency contingencies. But it is far better to epext anything. If I crash my Cozy...and survive...I will re-build it. I don't have a lot of money, but I have a ton of determination. I might have to buy foam and fiberglass one paycheck at a time. And I may have to sell the luscombe to buy an engine and instruments.....But 15 years and $50,000 from now, when I'm sitting on that beach, sipping that Mai Tai... I'll raise my glass to you. Because you said I was certifiable.

 

And when I have my grandson on my knee and he says "Why did you build a plane and fly it around the world?" I will be able to honestly answer: "Because they said I was crazy.":cool2:

[Cozy1200]

....trying to imagine going the same way, but four times lower, and four times slower.

I LIKE THAT!!!!

[macleodm3]

The BRS...

The BRS has been brought up here a few times, and some unresolved issues are

1.) The prop in rear could chew up the chute are lines (engine may be out, but prop may still be rotating).

2.) Can't get a Cozy slowed down enough to activate the chute. It just won't get that slow while in the air. If you activate the chute a Cozy flying speeds, the forces will hurt you and the plane.

3.) The Rutan EZ type structure used in the Cozy has no structure to mount the system to. It would take some major structural redesigning, which has not yet been done.

 

ALSO... if you are flying around the world, do you expect to fly into any airports that are less than perfect? For a Cozy with a whole bunch of fuel onboard, you need a Long paved runway.

 

If my goal were to fly around the world, I would have to limit my selection to airplanes that were suited to landing on unimproved runways, maybe an RV. You don't need a 4 seater for your intended missions, do you?

 

I would also consider an amphibian. You're planning for a water landing... why don't make it a bigger part of your plans, and use the water all over this globe as a runway?

[TMann]

As far asthe BRS:

I don't think they will sell you one based on the aircraft application.

In the event that you did acquire one on the sly, they would not repack it for you when it came time.

 

So ........ take your BRS budget and buy a better powerplant. You'll get a better ROI. If you think you need a chute, buy one for youself. Much cheaper.

[macleodm3]

The BRS...

The BRS has been brought up here a few times, and some unresolved issues are

1.) The prop in rear could chew up the chute lines (engine may be out, but prop may still be rotating).

2.) Can't get a Cozy slowed down enough to activate the chute. It just won't get that slow while in the air. If you activate the chute at Cozy flying speeds, the forces will hurt you and the plane.

3.) The Rutan EZ type structure used in the Cozy has no structure to mount the system to. It would take some major structural redesigning, which has not yet been done.

 

ALSO... if you are flying around the world, do you expect to fly into any airports that are less than perfect? For a Cozy with a whole bunch of fuel onboard, you need a Long paved runway.

 

If my goal were to fly around the world, I would have to limit my selection to airplanes that were suited to landing on unimproved runways, maybe an RV. You don't need a 4 seater for your intended missions, do you?

 

I would also consider an amphibian. You're planning for a water landing... why don't make it a bigger part of your plans, and use the water all over this globe as a runway?

[Edge 513]

I just woke up -put on my long pants and turned the heater on out in the garage...came in to see what robinsons response to my post would be...

BRAVO! Mr robonson217! Just the tack I hoped you would be on this morning....headed upwind..pretty close to it, I might add. You might sheet out just a bit as Andrew is pointing towards[maybe an roughfielder capable plane is a better idea]...but BRAVO...great spirit.

Now you just have to SUSTAIN that spirit for several years! After you have sustained that course, built your plane, and rounded the buoy, its a blistering broad reach to your goal... We wish you all kinds of stamina and success!

BTW, my age says I am an old fart...but my body is going to be scaling El Cap in Yosemite at the end of this Summer..so I have a few ideas ahead for myself.

[robinson217]

The BRS...

The BRS has been brought up here a few times, and some unresolved issues are

1.) The prop in rear could chew up the chute lines (engine may be out, but prop may still be rotating).

2.) Can't get a Cozy slowed down enough to activate the chute. It just won't get that slow while in the air. If you activate the chute at Cozy flying speeds, the forces will hurt you and the plane.

3.) The Rutan EZ type structure used in the Cozy has no structure to mount the system to. It would take some major structural redesigning, which has not yet been done.

 

ALSO... if you are flying around the world, do you expect to fly into any airports that are less than perfect? For a Cozy with a whole bunch of fuel onboard, you need a Long paved runway.

 

If my goal were to fly around the world, I would have to limit my selection to airplanes that were suited to landing on unimproved runways, maybe an RV. You don't need a 4 seater for your intended missions, do you?

 

I would also consider an amphibian. You're planning for a water landing... why don't make it a bigger part of your plans, and use the water all over this globe as a runway?

OK, OK, I get it! No BRS chute! I can see it now... I get in trouble and pop the chute...... and the only thing left hanging from it are my Fadec controlled, tuned exhuast IO-360, and a couple good size chunks of foam.

 

Now, as for building a different plane... As I mentioned earlyer, I may not know a lot about Cozy's, but I did pick the plane based on my mission. I have considered MANY other designs. While many of them excel at one aspect of my goal, they are lacking in others. Unimproved runways arent my only problem. There is also the consideration of finding 100LL. Finding places to land that are safe for an American. And yes, finding a little pavment to put my feet on. I thought about it and found a simple answer to all those problems:

 

RANGE. If I can fly 5000 miles at a time I can: Find fuel, friends and pavement. I can even take indirect routes to go around unfriendly places.

 

I considered an amphibian. Can you name an amphibian that can cruise above 150 kts and carry enough fuel for my mission? I can't. Amphipbs are slow, so the miles per gallon are very low.

 

I did consider an rv with a fusealage tank. Its been done. But I work on small airplanes for a living. I know my abilities.(I'm re-building a Luscombe) I'm not ready to build a metal plane.

 

As for the four place thing: I originally was looking to buy a set of un-used long ez plans, but soon realized I could never fit all that fuel, PLUS a life raft, emercency rations, a first aid kit and my baggage. Not to mention it has a small panel, and I need a lot of navigation and communication equipment.

 

I've been dreaming of this flight since I was a boy, been planning it since I was a teenager and have been searching for the right plane for a couple of years. I don't mean to come onto this forum and make waves. I'm trying to get a better understanding of this aircraft from people with first hand knowlege. Because when I commit to the design, buy my plans, and set up my shop, I'm jumping in with both feet and not stopping untill its done. When I'm finished, I hope to have made all the right decisions and be left with a flying machine that will take me around the world. Thats why I'm asking some questions that my seem stupid to many of you. But admit it...you guys weren't born Cozy experts. Didn't you ask some of these things yourself once?

[Spodman]

I slow up, pull the handle, do the sign of the cross, and put my head between my legs untill I hit. I imagine it might feel like when that kid plowed into the back of my jeep at a stop light....he was doing 60. I walked away from that. I think I could "walk" away from a sea ditching with a chute.

If you could get your head between your legs in a Cozy it would be the last time you would do it. Head between your legs protects your spine if you plow into something horizontally, but would snap it like a carrot for a vertical impact. I would say the Cozy seating would protect you better than anything else. The Cirrus BRS system relies on the undercarriage soaking up part of the impact. You don't get that overwater, I've read of one vertical ditching that broke the pilot's spine.

 

If you ditch in 15' waves your survival problems are only beginning...

 

I've read up a bit on the BRS system in the Cirrus and don't think your concept is that unreasonable. MCDM3 has summed up the usual objections. I don't know if BRS systems in general resemble that bolted to a Cirrus:

1.) The prop in rear could chew up the chute lines (engine may be out, but prop may still be rotating).

The chute is fired away from the airframe, the leaders that may come in contact with the prop are supposedly prop-proof. You don't have to stop the prop in a Cirrus to pop the chute, even in a spin. Snotta problem.

2.) Can't get a Cozy slowed down enough to activate the chute. It just won't get that slow while in the air. If you activate the chute at Cozy flying speeds, the forces will hurt you and the plane.

The beauty & secret of the BRS system is a sleeve over the shroud lines that holds the shrouds together and doesn't allow the chute to fully inflate until the whole aircraft/chute slows down. You deploy and the chute 'candles' and acts like a drogue, gradually deploying as the speed washes off.

3.) The Rutan EZ type structure used in the Cozy has no structure to mount the system to. It would take some major structural redesigning, which has not yet been done

There's no single point on the Cirrus strong enuf either. The cables to the 3 (from memory) hard points lie under the paint in 'soft' channels. This could be duplicated in the Cozy. For hard points how about a cable around each inboard wing attach and one attached to two canard tabs? No idea if it would be strong enuf, but it holds up the aircraft as it is.

[robinson217]

If you could get your head between your legs in a Cozy it would be the last time you would do it. Head between your legs protects your spine if you plow into something horizontally, but would snap it like a carrot for a vertical impact. I would say the Cozy seating would protect you better than anything else. The Cirrus BRS system relies on the undercarriage soaking up part of the impact. You don't get that overwater, I've read of one vertical ditching that broke the pilot's spine.

Yeah, I thought of that after I posted. I've never sat in a Cozy, but If you could get a brs in one, bending over would be difficult and pointless. A good head rest is all you would need.

 

But I have to go with the consensus that a BRS is not going to happen. If someone out there engineers it, I will consider it. I'm no engineer, and I'm not looking for a way to get rid of money. I simply wish there was an added measure of safety, such as a BRS, because I plan on flying over water. I want to circumnavigate the globe....not get turned into shark chum.

[Zulu Yankee]

Is the objective to go into the ocean in your bird if the engine goes quiet? In stead of putting a BRS into the airplane, why not strap a conventional human-saving parachute to your back.

 

I am assuming that you will be wearing a thermal suit, etc also.

 

If you are going to ditch it, is it not pretty much certain that the airplane is a gonner? I vote for saving your own behind at that point. Maybe with a personal ELT or satellite phone in hand?

 

ZY

[TMann]

Maybe with a personal ELT or satellite phone in hand?

 

Marc had an interesting post in the CA list that relates to this.

www.findmespot.com

 

When I was a jumpmaster, some of the jumpers wanted to make a jump from 25,000 ft. With all the prep work and research, I came to realize that at the end of the day, all I would be able to say is that I had survived the day ...... nothing more.

[macleodm3]

Some of our posts may seem rude, or like the poster seems they are a knowitall. Sorry, thats only what it seems like.

 

Many of us, including me, are still new at this. I've been here long enough to know that big mods like BRS add years. Like Edge seems to be pointing out, it takes a lot of effort to finish, and big mods make it tough.

 

I'm glad you considered many options, and I'm glad you settled on the Cozy. I did the same. Not perfect, but for me, the funnest to build, the best looking, and the performance looks like its going to be a hell of a lot of FUN!