Jump to content

Marc Zeitlin

Verified Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Marc Zeitlin last won the day on October 12

Marc Zeitlin had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

97 Excellent


About Marc Zeitlin

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

Flying Information

  • Flying Status
    Flying - 1600 hrs.
  • Registration Number
  • Airport Base

Personal Information

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

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

2,781 profile views
  1. The problem, as has been discussed many times previously in this and other fora, is that the worst corrosion is always in places that cannot be seen except by a full disassembly of the wing attach fittings from the spars in both the wing and the main spar. I'm sure I've posted this picture before: but as can easily be seen, one might think that things are reasonably OK when looking at the areas that contain the wing attach hardware (near the hand), but fairly obviously, this is not a safe plane to fly given the extreme corrosion and flaking of the part of the fitting buried in the composite. So "cleaning up" visible portions of the fittings is putting lipstick on a pig. If you do not take the whole fitting apart (probably 10 - 30 hours of work for all four areas - main spar and wings), you'll only be guessing at whether the inside of the fittings looks like this. Hence the disclaimer I put on all VE condition inspection reports that I write: "Both Wing Attach Fittings (ALL VARIEZES) - Due to the inherent design from RAF, it is not possible to check for internal corrosion of wing attach fittings. I recommend removing wings at alternate CI's and checking externally for corrosion, with the understanding that without ~40 - 100 hours of disassembly/reassembly, a full inspection of the fittings and full confidence in the condition of the fittings is not possible. Plan on wing removal for more extensive examination at the XXXX CI. Obey RAF's +2.5G / -1.5G limits"
  2. While it doesn't look like advanced intergranular corrosion, it definitely looks like some sort of corrosion (possibly early stage intergranular) and since there's rust on the steel screws, there's obviously been something going on here. It's not just "schmutz". If there's something like this that's visible on a lower surface AL part, I would be extremely suspect of all of the wing attach fitting parts on this aircraft, and would want to completely disassemble the fittings on both the wing and main spar to investigate. Now, I will say that trying to evaluate material properties via pics on the web is a losing battle, so I could be completely off base here, but I wouldn't fly the plane if this information and pictures were all I had to go on.
  3. The first place to look for information on engine limits is in the engine's operators manual, not on some random online forum. The MFG's info, available here: http://www.franklinengines.com/4a.cfm says that the maximum oil temp is 234F. You don't say what engine you have, but I'm assuming the 4 cylinder Franklin, and I'd be surprised if the oil temp limits were different. In any case, 200 < 234, so no - you don't need an oil cooler if the temps stay below 220F or so. On Long-EZ's, everyone uses an oil cooler (and needs them). On Variezes with O-200's, some have coolers, some don't. Don't know what the few folks with O-235's and O-320's on VE's do - I'd assume that like on the Long-EZ's, they'd need a cooler.
  4. Because you want to turn an airplane that has an incredible useful range into one that has no useful range? No. There's been one electric Long-EZ (Chip Yates'), but he was going for (and set) a speed record for electric aircraft (soon to be broken). He had about a 15 minute endurance. 60 HP is not nearly enough for a Varieze. Emrax makes some nice motors - I fitted a 45 HP Emrax to a Quickie Q1 for a customer, but he still hasn't flown it three years later. It would have had about a 30 minute endurance.
  5. You mean, like Section IIA of the Varieze Manufacturing Manual (otherwise knows as "the plans")?
  6. I'm not familiar with the specifics of the D-fly installation, but I'm going to make the assumption that it's approximately the same as the VE, LE, COZY, and all other canards with 1/8" NPT fittings for fuel drains. There's probably a 1/4" thick AL plate buried in the composite sandwich, and it's spinning between the layers of glass and chewing up the foam. Maybe it was too small - maybe the threads have just galled or something. Don't know - don't care. It's got to come out. You'll need to do some surgery: Drain all the fuel Using a dremel tool and permagrit grinding bits, remove the outer layer of glass around the AL plate, and remove the foam around the plate Sand the surrounding area at least 2 - 3" down to the glass - no paint/fill remaining Pop the plate loose from the internal tank glass layup Sand the internal glass smooth without damaging it or breaking through into the tank Fabricate a new plate - at least 1" square, preferably 2" square Drill and tap it for a 1/8" NPT thread - do NOT tap too deeply - make sure that you can screw in the fuel drain without coming close to bottoming out the threads - this is a guaranteed way to ensure that it'll leak down the road, if it can bottom out Using WET EZ10-87 epoxy/flox, flox the plate into the bottom of the fuselage so that the hole in the plate lines up with the opening in the inner skin - make sure that you don't get flox into the NPT hole Fill the area around the plate with wet flox Layup 2 - 4 plies of BID cloth over the top of the plate, each ply lapping at least 1/2" more onto the surrounding fuselage exterior glass surface (previously sanded) than the previous ply After cure, sand, fill, prime, paint Install a NEW fuel drain with appropriate teflon thread sealant This will take a few hours for the install, and then a few hours for the finishing.
  7. I have PDF's of the Varieze plans. As well as Defiant, Quickie Q1, AeroCad, Long-EZ, and some others.
  8. Not quite. The Long-EZ shown in that video (and in the video on the main page): https://www.merlinlabs.com/ is one that I have maintained for about 6 years, first for a private owner and then for Merlin, at which I was contractor/employee #2 starting in 2018 (as of 6 weeks ago, I'm no longer an employee). It's currently located in Mojave, CA (KMHV), as are the other planes shown in the video. While Merlin is working towards CAA certification in NZ, the test flying is being done in the US at this time. Achieving Certification Basis is a big deal.
  9. Sorry, Kent, but since you're posting publicly, I'll respond the same. That is not at all my interpretation of what's going on. Since the sensor that is now on the plane is the exact same sensor with the exact same setup as the Dynon EMS was originally installed with, and the sensor was calibrated with a candy thermometer, any statement that the issue with high OT measurements was due to sensor issue is contraindicated by the evidence. Multiple flights with the calibrated sensor verified the high OT's. Only after the oil lines and cooler were cleaned and reinstalled, the OT's returned to a normal 180F - 190F from the previously noted 240F - 260F. Although no debris or blockage was found in either, those were the ONLY things (other than the flapper door removal in the oil cooler ducting) that changed. The problem was NOT the sensor. It may or may not have been the duct door, the cooler or the lines - maybe there was an air bubble somewhere that prevented flow - I don't know. But what I DO know is that it was NOT a sensor issue. Now, it's possible that the issue with high OT's was completely coincidental with the installation of the new EMS. It would be a substantial coincidence, since we did not touch the cooler or the oil lines during the EMS install, but anything's possible. In that case, both the RMI and Dynon EMS's would have been reading correctly. So no apologies needed and no forgiveness required. Zebras, indeed.
  10. Did you purchase a fuselage only? Wings? Canard? Engine? What? If the fuselage ONLY, then there may be other options from what Kent is stating. There is, obviously, always the option of misleading the federal government, but that's NEVER a good idea and IS a crime. People do it, though...
  11. It will be. I did a Pre-Buy on it for a prospective buyer in July - they did not purchase it. Although I flew in the plane and it was safe, there was a fairly long list of issues to be addressed, not the least of which involved the state of the engine. At the time, the price was far too high for what it was.
  12. Usually, they'll be yellowish, but that's no guarantee, and it's no guarantee that it's not if it isn't yellowish. But since 99% of the VE's out there were built with non-alodined and protected wing attach fittings, it's a pretty good bet that any VE you look at will not have protected fittings. Based on my experience and the # of corroded wing attach fittings we know about in the population of ~2K - 4K VE's that have flown, I'd estimate that somewhere around 0.1% - 1% of VE's have corroded wing attach fittings that would compromise strength. Total guess, but a mildly educated one.
  13. The only "fix" for a wing attach fitting corrosion issue is to completely disassemble and remove the metal parts, ensure that the composite spar is sound and wasn't damaged in the process of the original metal fitting installation, and then fabricate new fittings, protect them with alodining and appropriate coatings and then re-install everything with wet hardware. If you don't know what ALL of that means and how to do it, you're not in any position to do the work. As I've stated numerous times before, I believe that it all could be done in about 40 - 80 hours of work, assuming that the underlying composite spar is in good shape. As you surmise, there are many things that could bite you - the composite spar could be damaged, you might damage something in the removal of the corroded metal, or you might have trouble getting all the re-fabricated pieces to align and fit together correctly upon re-assembly. Paying someone $4k - $8k to do this work, with no guarantee of success, seems like a risky path to me. VE's change hands fairly regularly, and they don't fall out of the sky regularly, but there HAVE been at least 4 known instances, in around 2K Variezes, of corroded wing attach fittings. Who knows how many are corroded and haven't been discovered? Nobody. I most certainly would never buy one that had any visible corrosion anywhere on the wing attach fittings. See the picture below for a corroded fitting example - the visible portion, near the hand, is fairly decent looking - you wouldn't necessarily expect that the non-visible portion has severe interlaminar corrosion that has removed over 1/3 of the thickness of the material and damaged the rest.
  14. Actually, the first thing wrong that stood out to me when I was asked about the plane by prospective buyers is the 789 lb. empty weight (per the dataplate - heaviest VE I've ever seen), which makes this a single seat aircraft for a light pilot with full fuel. Plus the corrosion on the wing attach fittings; the minimal time on the engine over the years and the ancient panel. I've already warned two people away from this plane, but I hope it works out for you. This is why I recommend Pre-Buy examinations... Just because something is cheap doesn't mean it's a good deal.
  15. Many people know the real story. A) There is no "51% rule". There is a "major portion" rule, which states that the "major portion" of an aircraft must have been built for "education and recreation" in order to meet the requirements for an Experimental Amateur Built Airworthiness Certificate. Doesn't matter if one person or 735 people built it, as long as the "major portion" of the aircraft wasn't built by people getting paid to do so, but were doing it to recreate and learn. Since a Varieze is a plans built plane, as long as you're not paying someone to build it for you, it WILL qualify for an E-AB AC. Since there are no logs, you can't prove that it wasn't built by someone for $$$, but neither can anyone prove that it was. The chance that an FAA inspector or DAR will refuse an E-AB certificate for a Varieze, if you can talk knowledgeably about the build, is as close to zero as one can get. It's NOT what I'd be worried about. Finish the plane, take pics and document what you did, explain that you picked it up as an airframe built by other folks in their garages, and smile when they hand you the AC. And _IF_ you can prove to the FAA that you know enough about the airplane, you may also get the Repairmans Certificate, of which each plane can only have one and goes to the "primary builder", a term for which there is zero definition. Any of the many builders can be called the "primary builder" and get the RC. And if you don't get the RC, then you'll need an A&P for the annual Condition Inspection, but not for anything else. The EAA has more explanations on their website as well. If, for reasons that elude me, you want to build this Varieze from an existing project, do so - you'll get the AC without an issue.

The Canard Zone

  • Create New...

Important Information