Long EZ or Cozy III

[flybeech21]

Man, I hope you snap out of this invincible attitude you have going on. We all go through this phase that you are currently in. "Not me!" "I'm trained!" "I'm experienced." "I know how to do "Gentelman's Aerobatics" properly in a non-aerobatic airplane."

 

I had this same conversation with a good friend of mine. He had the same attitude as you do now and he is DEAD.. Read it again... DEAD. I know what your thinking. "I know how to do aerobatics correctly, that guy obviously didnt." Think again! He was a very accomplished competition aerobatic pilot. And he died doing aerobatics in a non-aerobatic Bonanza.

 

A coworker of mine died this year at Reno doing a simple roll in an airplane designed for aerobatics. One wing decided to give up its lifelong battle against pilots who like to "pull hard." During a 1G maneuver! Maybe it was just her time. Maybe it was the previous pilot's "pushing the envelope" that damaged that wing and failed when she was in it instead. The NTSB will let us know the answer to that in about a year.

 

Can you imagine what was going through her mind for the last 10 seconds of her life just after the wing seperated? Hopefully you will only have to imagine and not experience it first hand.

 

Sincerely,

 

Kevin Harper

[Allen C]

5 degrees up at entry is ridiculous, we aren't F-16's. And a 4 second roll in a Long EZ is not being done correctly. Try 35 degrees or more and you'll have a much nicer result at 1 G, no injection necessary. 45+ degrees will get you two consecutively pleasing rolls...... with minor G pullout. And rudder is not a 'tad maybe' it requires a stong application for coordination of the manuever. You should definitely take an aerobatic lesson before you try this stuff and ignore the dumb nonsense you see on U-tube. I was and continue to be taught by the guy that beat Wayne Handley in his first competition.

Check your operating limitations too.......

 

 

Miss type on my part. Entry was ~15 (about one five) degrees as this entry allowed for a constant gental G loading on the plane rather than load the airframe at either end of the maneuver. "Tad bit" of rudder would be a generalization seeing that I am not certain of the exact pressure being applied; nor did I think that stating one should attempt to press the rudder peddle through the paint seemed to convey the finesse of these maneuvers.

 

The reference to the video is so that you can see for yourself what the roll rate of this aircraft looks like at 0 (zero) risk to oneself. (I.e. no risk of ridiculously performing a maneuver in a manner that others may find grievously offensive)

 

Certainly, my last intention was to somehow offend a long-standing student of the guy that beat Wayne Handley in his first competition.

 

Kevin,

Your point is well taken. I am sorry for your loss.

[rviglierchio]

Kevin,

Tell that to the pilot of the Beech 18 and the VLJ at Oshkosh. Or the EZ's that do a great aerobatic routine in France. Or the couple guys that did full routines with Long EZ's in America, or the simple little Jelly Belly Cub that amzes us all every year at all the airshows. Or his brother that does an even more amazing routine in a T-Craft. Pull your head out of the sand and admit that simple maneuvers are just that, and, correctly done put no stress on the airframe. What is so hard to understand about that? NO STRESS = NO FAILURE, HELLOOOOOOO.....

Don't name drop about Erica without a full understanding of the specifics of her crash. You insult her and the whole Reno Air Racing Association.

 

 

PS: That's good Allen, now a roll may be grievously offensive to some..... Oh boy, and the world is melting.... I give up guys. Fly boring, I don't care, your loss.

 

Allen, take a couple hours with a good aerobatic instructor. They will show you a whole world of fun that is doable with a Cessna 150, let alone a Long EZ that is much stronger. These naysayers have no clue and just won't face facts. My instructor is currently training Corporate pilots in "Upset Training" as they call it because so many of them come from the head-in-the-sand-oh-somebody-died crowd that has no clue about the capabilities of aircraft and can get into a lot of trouble when things get dicey. They all come away amazed at what they didn't know after thousands of hours in flying boring.....

[flybeech21]

Kevin,

Tell that to the pilot of the Beech 18 and the VLJ at Oshkosh. Or the EZ's that do a great aerobatic routine in France. Or the couple guys that did full routines with Long EZ's in America, or the simple little Jelly Belly Cub that amzes us all every year at all the airshows. Or his brother that does an even more amazing routine in a T-Craft. Pull your head out of the sand and admit that simple maneuvers are just that, and, correctly done put no stress on the airframe. What is so hard to understand about that? NO STRESS = NO FAILURE, HELLOOOOOOO.....

Don't name drop about Erica without a full understanding of the specifics of her crash. You insult her and the whole Reno Air Racing Association.

 

 

PS: That's good Allen, now a roll may be grievously offensive to some..... Oh boy, and the world is melting.... I give up guys. Fly boring, I don't care, your loss.

I am very aware of Erica's crash. You are the one who name dropped! Since you know my name, Who are you? Mr. God of Acro? Student of the chosen one... Pull your head out of the sand for all to see. You insult your self with your ignorance.

 

I was merely trying to pass on words of advice to you. With good intentions. If you are so ignorant that you cant appreciate that, whether you take the advice or not, go ahead and keep doing what your doing. Have fun all the way to the end.

 

Good Luck Waldo Pepper!

 

Unbelievable!

[rviglierchio]

Let's see here.... 25,000 hour instructor or some ranting wacko on a forum....hmmm....

I'll listen to the guy that knows what he's talking about.

Sorry Beech - something or whatever......

 

Waldo

[Drew Swenson]

Evidently, aerobatics is a religion. My major point on aerobatics is that if your goal is to fly aerobatics----go buy an aerobatic airplane----one that was intentionally designed to do this. My comments have nothing to do with whether the airframe will take it or not----it just does a crappy job compared to aerobatic designed airplanes. It has nothing to do with the pilot involved. I just don't want some guy to go out there and think he is buying a cheap Extra 300. As it as been pointed out, even an airliner will do fairly nice roll----but don't think that we will see it in a aerobatic competition soon.

 

To be clear, there are two arguments that are getting mixed up. One has to do about how much and to what extent you can fly an EZ (full blown aerobatics, gentlemen aerobatics, g-loads) and the other has to do with how well it actually does it. Like I said before, the second case has nothing to do with the pilot and how much training he has----the plane either has it or not----or somewhere in between. You could certainly call into judgement as to who has the capablitity as to assess the merits of the aircraft----as that person would have to actually have flown a variety of aerobatic aircraft. That is a fair statement. I would like to hear the merits from a Extra 300 (or like pilot) who has experience in a Cozy or Longez.

 

By the way, many (most? all?) aerobatic airplanes make crappy cross country airplanes.

 

In another sort of related topic----if you want to operate out of grass strips---don't buy an EZ. There are plenty of aircraft designed for grass strips. Do people operate EZs out of grass strips? Yes---but sure not designed for it.

[Allen C]

Initially I was reluctant to post to this thread. As you can see from my post count my modus is to listen more than talk, and this topic in particular inevitably decays to nothing short of a simple pissing match.

 

Aerobatics are a religion indeed.

 

As a public service, and as an exercise in time management, I have posted a link to another dead horse that was been continuously flogged since January 2004, with no signs of being allowed to rest in peace. (This may even be a record for the longest flogging of a thread, which serves to show just how heated this topic is within the community.)

 

Since your time is undoubtedly extraordinarily valuable, and the odds are exceptionally high that you may very well not have much of it remaining, I will paraphrase for you:

1. Simple question asked

2. Simple question answered

3. Aerobatic authoritarians emerge

4. Urine flows

5. Two geeks much brighter than I hash out the mathematics of the maneuvers. (One of whom is an M.I.T. engineering graduate currently working at Scaled giving him access to the designer of this aircraft line, and built his own Cozy. It is a personal decision to be sure, but many people listen when this man talks. I do. If Burt puts trust in this man’s ability to design SpaceShip 2, you may wish to consider what this man has to say. )

 

Since you obviously place a great deal of emphasis on the opinions of those who actually fly aerobatics in these planes, and have had copious amounts of training in your particular denomination, I would suggest you begin at post #70 by Wayne Hicks.

 

http://www.canardzone.com/forum/showthread.php?t=644&page=5&highlight=Aerobatics

 

Here you will read the firsthand accounts of aerobatic flying from Tom Staggs. He is a former Navy pilot that flew air shows in his Long-Ez during the 90’s. While he may not be the person that beat Wayne Handley in his first competition and currently teaches upset training to corporate pilots, he does teach Air Force test pilots at Edwards in his Long-Ez. I leave it to you to decide the merit of his credentials.

 

On a more personal note, I would like to take a moment to say thank you for the incredible contribution you are about to make to the canard community. Mere mortals would throttle back a bit when presented with such overwhelming evidence, but I get the impression that you are no quitter. And while your actions may be perceived as having a negative impact on the surviving Long-Ez communities insurance premiums’, I would argue that exploring the extreme edges of the flight envelope comes at a cost; one that many of us more timid (read boring) types are just not brave enough to explore ourselves.

 

I just thought you should hear it while you are still with us.

 

 

“Learn from the mistakes of others. You will not live long enough to make them all yourself.”

[Phil Kriley]

Thanks Allen and Wayne - very interesting! No aerobatics in the Cozy for me! When I feel the desire for aerobatics, I'll get with an instructor in a plane designed for the mission.

[SAF_Zoom]

Hey guys, relax lets keep it fun... OK

 

We are talking here about a plane that you fly and know the history of. A plane that as been built per plan (well mostly) and is well maintain. No history of abuse and always flow within its limits.

 

That being said, I know the LE can do fun stuff... its no Spitfire MkIXe but still...

 

From what I can gather, the Cozy III should also be in the same league as the LE. I've read through many of the early Cozy news letters at it seems pretty close to the LE in performance.

 

Anybody have a set of plan for a Cozy III that I can look at ? Can one still buy one ?

[Edge 513]

Waldo, er, was Rvig; we have had good discussion back and forth in the past and I intend the same for the future. No smearing is intended. No flatulence on my part pointed in your direction regarding your flying habits. I do intend to execute rolls in my aircraft. Loops, no...rolls yes. That's about it for me. Well, maybe a wingover or immelman later down the line. Just FYI.

But thats it for me twisty-wise.

Boring flight at 225 knots? I'm hoping my numbers on speedy cruise light me up with a big grin.

From your posts, I see YMDV [Does vary]

[rviglierchio]

Very nice Knot numbers Edge....that WILL put a smile on you! Looking forward to seeing it.

The canards aren't great aerobatic planes, but then neither is an Aerobat......(and we are a lot more fun) but it is good to get comfortable with an airframe and not be afraid of it. A little yanking and banking sure livens up the lunch runs and gives the rest of the gang something to critique along the way. An American airliner was coming under me over the foothills one morning and I could see both guys looking up so I rolled inverted for a second and waved. They waved back and probably smiled. Overstressing the plane or experimenting close to the ground are both bad ideas. Glad to see more sensible thoughts on the subject and less unwelcomed Beechy insults.

Happy flying!

Waldo

[Edge 513]

I think you have record skipped on a new moniker.

Waldo.

 

Hey- wheres Waldo?

Oh, Rvig?...he's over there.....inverted.

[Carolyn]

A while ago, I had the great pleasure of flying with Mr Staggs. We were flying in my Long Ez with me in the front. During the flight Tom demonstrated a number of maneuvers including a variety of different types of roll as well as some loops. He also pointed out and demonstrated very clearly to me that while rolling maneuvers where safe and simple to perform, the looping plane has margins that were too tight for comfort in my plane:

 

For example, after a 4g pull up we went over the top at about 40 kts indicated. Holding 4g on the downside, I saw a vapor sheet on the canard and 185 kts on the clock. The first was very cool and the second had my eyes as big as saucers.

 

Without wishing to dictate to others, I can say that my Long EZ is certainly capable of a range of aerobatics in skilled and practiced hands. In my hands however, and with my aircraft, i consider the margins in looping maneuvers to be to narrow for my continued hygiene...... So, I restrict myself to having fun doing only rolls, chandelles and other fun stuff.

 

Carolyn

[Wayne Hicks]

Here's a you tuber of Tex

.

[SAF_Zoom]

Ok I have just a few question before I can go the Cozy III route:

 

- As the Ronzc canard been adapted to the Cozy III ? (I've not read trough all the Cozy's newsletters yet, as I'm reading all the CSA newsletters presently...)

 

- How wide is a Cozy III fuselage with and without the main spar attached?

 

As I indicated before, I have spotted a Cozy III in tub state for sale (with complete plans) near Laporte, Texas. I've sent an email to the seller (last Friday) and have not heard from him so far. Looks like I'll have to call him.

 

Because I'm from Montreal Canada (2000 miles away from the spotted project)... I would really appriciate if a builder near it could look it over for me. I am willing to pay for your time and travel expenses.

 

If the project is found to be in decent shape I would go there and pick it up over the course of the holidays.

 

On a side note, if the main spar is attached to this Cozy III fus, is there a way to take it off and reinstall a new one... I ask this because in Canada, a spar would not be approved if it was not inspected prior to closing... and would need to be rebuilt....

 

Thanks,

[NeilK]

The center section spar is open enough for Transport Canada (DABI) inspection if is is already attached to the fuselage. Don't worry about that.

[SAF_Zoom]

The center section spar is open enough for Transport Canada (DABI) inspection if is is already attached to the fuselage. Don't worry about that.

Thx Neilk, just wanted to know if it was possible to do.... just in case...

[Cozy1200]

On a side note, if the main spar is attached to this Cozy III fus, is there a way to take it off and reinstall a new one... I ask this because in Canada, a spar would not be approved if it was not inspected prior to closing... and would need to be rebuilt....

 

It's fiberglass, everything is removable and repairable. Just get comfortable with a sander.

 

A local Velo builder here in Oz bought a partially completed kit. The spar was installed but no stakes. It was going to cost an additional $8k to ship it as he calls it "top load". He had the owner take a hacksaw to the spar. Everything then fit into a single container with a new spar from Velocity. Even after buying the new spar he saved over $5k. So yes it's doable, but he said he spent hours with a grinder cutting the old one out.

[SAF_Zoom]

To go back to one of my original questions:

 

 

I know the LE fuselage is 24" wide at the instruments panel and the back seat is 16" (or 18"??? I'm at work now)... but what about the Cozy III and IV...

 

I believe the Cozy IV to be 42" at the instrument panel but what about the rear seat? And is the Cozy III, 42" at the instrument panel and the same in the back seat as the LE?

 

I would like to be able to decide between the 3.

[Edge 513]

Cozy IV's are 42 inches at the mid shoulders.

III's are narrower at the same location, but dont know exactly...I think its 39 or 40 inches.

[Cozy Girrrl]

Cozy IV's are 42 inches at the mid shoulders.

III's are narrower at the same location, but dont know exactly...I think its 39 or 40 inches.

The Cozy III was two Nats wide

[Richard Schubert]

Gnat's ass

Very small measurement used by toolmakers & engineers, or roughly .0001 or one ten thousandth of an inch. Actual size may vary between shops,......

[SAF_Zoom]

So the Coxy III is 39-40" at mid shoulder... and the back seat is the same as the LE... right ?

[Lynn Erickson]

So the Coxy III is 39-40" at mid shoulder... and the back seat is the same as the LE... right ?

no, the cozy III is wider in the back seat. it has a wide front seat that transitions to a long ez firewall. it has small windows in the back section of the turtledeck and is very hard to see out

[SAF_Zoom]

Thx Lynn,

 

How much room is there in the back of the Cozy III to reinforce the turtleback... can it be made to look similar to that of the Long EZ… Maybe place a longer split canopy like some of the EZs on a Cozy III and modify the turtleback accordingly?

 

I would appreciate if someone as the chapters of the plan that relates to the fuselage of the Cozy III available in electronic format (PDF) so that I can look them over.. and see if the Cozy III turtle back can be modified and still be structurally sound.

 

The more I read the info a gather... the more I'm leaning toward a Cozy III with a modified fuselage... not its shape but rather the way it is put to getter/reinforced (see above). And before people start saying the engine is going to fall off, this would be done after careful reengineering of the structure (if at all possible)...

 

Also, what is the span of the Canard of the Cozy III compared to the one of the LE… and are they both Ronzc…