Jump to content

Marc Zeitlin

Verified Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Marc Zeitlin last won the day on January 5

Marc Zeitlin had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

40 Excellent


About Marc Zeitlin

  • Rank
    Flying Cozy MKIV N83MZ
  • Birthday 08/06/1957

Personal Information

  • Real Name (Public)
    Marc J. Zeitlin
  • Location (Public)
    Tehachapi, CA 93561
  • Occupation
    Principal - Burnside Aerospace
  • Bio

Flying Information

  • Flying Status
    Flying - 15200 hrs.
  • Registration Number
  • Airport Base

Project/Build Information

  • Plane
    Cozy Mark IV
  • Plane (Other/Details)
  • Plans Number

Contact Methods

  • City
  • State/Province
  • Country
    United States
  • Email (Visible)
  • Phone Number
  • Website URL

Recent Profile Visitors

552 profile views
  1. While there is very little evidence that there is a large difference, especially on updraft cooled engines, between plug gasket probes on the top and head probes on the bottom, the answer is yes - probes in the head (if there ARE places for them - some heads are not drilled/tapped) are better and will be more accurate, because you're actually measuring what you care about and what the POH / engine operating manual determines the limits are. No one ever lists limits for spark plug gasket probes, so who knows what the right answer is? Maybe you're reading high - maybe you're reading low. No way to know. I NEVER recommend plug gasket probes unless the heads aren't prepped for the internal probe. And I definitely recommend using probes with bayonet mounts - WAY easier to install and remove for service.
  2. Actually, just go to: http://cozybuilders.org/ref_info/ and download it from there. Forgot I had it on the web pages.
  3. If it hasn't been used in a long time, it may very well need a disassembly and cleaning. The instructions do NOT indicate how to do this, and Alex is no longer in business. So you're on your own. But it's not rocket science, and it'll go back together after disassembly. Also, the torque is settable - remove the electrical tape over the bottom of the motor, and turn the torque setting ring. I've got the instruction manual as a PDF I can send if you give me an email address.
  4. The "ratcheting" sound you hear when the unit reaches the end of its travel is, in fact, the clutch slipping, because the motor _IS_ a cordless drill, with a torque setting. What do you think the unit is doing incorrectly, since what you describe is the correct operation of the system?
  5. Interesting that you bring this up. I discussed this issue in some depth in my presentation on canard aerodynamics at the Columbia Fly-In a few weeks ago. You can see the presentation here: http://cozybuilders.org/Oshkosh_Presentations/index.htm under "Other Presentations", down near the bottom. I also discussed the issue on the COZY mailing list a while back in relation to a Long-EZ I've flown that has a very long and rounded (but not THAT long) nose as well as very small lower winglets, and it has substantially less directional stability at lower speeds, especially.
  6. I don't remember exactly what the difference is between the LE and COZY MKIV nose gear strut, but it's pretty minor. But Jack's NG-6A's aren't different in the way they attach to the strut - they're different in their overall width and how they fit between The NG-30's, which is different between the LE and COZY MKIV. And as someone who's built one of each, you should know that :-).
  7. Folks: I am assisting a customer in selling Aerocanard #1, built by Jeff Russell. For more information, see: Any questions, feel free to get in touch.
  8. Geez, what a lot of work for no purpose whatsoever except to satisfy a bureaucracy. In any case, what Kent asked above, and the following comment: I'd just like to point out that AS SHOWN, the wing load distribution will be incorrect, as the moment contribution from the inward forces from the winglets is not included (at least, I don't see any force applied inward to the winglet). This doesn't mean that the test is useless - it all depends on what's being tested, and to what level. But the distribution of forces will not be correct. Jochen Fuglsang had to do the same testing on his COZY III, and he did, in fact, impart the correct winglet forces to the plane to ensure that the moments were correct.
  9. Two things - first, you should ALWAYS get a Pre-Buy examination that YOU pay for when purchasing an airplane. Whomever did the CI on this plane (and since Nate built it and almost certainly has the RC for it, I'd bet a lot of $$$ that he signed it off) was working for Nate, if in fact it wasn't Nate. If you don't see a conflict of interest in using the CI as a Pre-Buy when it was signed off by the guy who's selling the plane (or who works for the guy who is selling the plane), well... And aside from that, as nice a plane as Nate has built here, it's overpriced, although I suppose if someone's willing to pay it, good for Nate (and for the rest of us, as it'll set a high bar for the rest of the planes). The $79K plane is also way overpriced, although it too is a very nice plane. All IMO.
  10. So I have an exceptionally qualified CFII (and you should get an exceptionally qualified canard expert to do a Pre-Buy for you on the LE) in Rosamond, CA that I recommend all my clients to. The first question is, what's the definition of a "signoff"? If they require actual instruction, you can't do "instruction" in a Long-EZ because (unless it's been modified) it doesn't have full dual controls. My CFII does checkouts in his COZY MKIV. If they don't require "instruction", the LE might be adequate, but I/we still recommend doing the training in the COZY, as the right seat is functionally identical to a LE, but the instructor is next to you rather than isolated in the back seat. Safer all around. You know how to contact me if you want to get in touch with him (or me, for the PB).
  11. Other than Perry Mick, who has (at last count, anyway) under 1000 hours on his plane in 25 years or so, please name some other members of the "canard aircraft with Mazda engines who swear by the conversion" camp.
  12. Mr. Quinton Oliviero. Which is a wonderful name, BTW.
  13. I went down and took a look at the plane with Bill O. and the owner. In my opinion, it is NOT safe to fly as is, and needs a LOT of work to make it safe to fly. It's extremely heavy, poorly built and a pig in a poke. I was hoping to be able to tell the current owner otherwise when I went to Chino to take a look (at my time and expense), but I couldn't in good faith say that anyone should fly the thing, even though Bill O. did once. He said (directly to me) that it was almost uncontrollable. The fact that Mr. Hanson signed off a CI on a plane that he himself had built, in my opinion, isn't worth (in the words of John Nance Garner) a bucket of warm piss. There are MANY safety issues with this plane that need addressing - I have a list... For QO, I wouldn't let Mr. Hanson look at any plane I was going to fly in, much less work on it.
  14. Bill has been trying to get the plane down to me for a Condition Inspection for months now, but between his schedule and the weather, we haven't been able to arrange it. It's still in the plan, though, as the weather improves in the spring. If you're truly interested in the plane, you can work with Bill to be here when the CI is done, so you can learn about the plane (and Long-EZ's in general). At this point, you can buy a flying Long-EZ for about 1/2 of what it would cost you to build one. It won't be as nice or exactly what you want, but it'll be flying 3 - 7 years earlier. All depends on what's important to you, what you want, and what your mission is. And you can upgrade/modify it to BE what you want over time, while it's flying.
  15. Can one of you send me her contact info? I may have an interested buyer...
  • Create New...

Important Information