No4

Which is why they have an alternate air source which draws hot air from the engine cowling. The P68 Partenavia has two IO-360's with ram air ducts right behind the prop. Induction ice is very common on the P68. Any time entering cloud or near icing conditions, and it's alternate air on for me. Same in the Arrow with an IO-360, although there is less chance of induction ice. Lycosaurus 0-360's with carburettors get the carb heat treatment every time. Down here in the southern alps of NZ, there are not too many places for a forced landing. Hail, snow, and freezing rain are common enough to make good engine management essential. Once you understand Bernoulli's theorem, that air accelerates, drops in temperature and pressure as it passes through a carb or semi closed throttle plate (or over a wing for that matter); It is a simple leap of faith to realise that descending through cold damp air with the throttle closed is likely to induce ice formation. Cases of carb icing have been recorded at up to 30'Centigrade in conditions of high humidity. Murphy states that your toast will hit the deck on the butter and marmalade side. Bad maintenance or pilot decision making decides when you are going to crash.

YOU CAN'T DO THAT! THATS OUTRAGEOUS! I'M RINGING UP THE UN COMMISSION FOR HUMAN RIGHTS! CENSORSHIP GONE CRAZY! Oh, 1 minute you say, alright then. Cheers Adam

Well there is Murphy's law, and then there is selecting alternate air at any sign of induction ice and warming your engine on descent. It's not the first time this has happened in an aircraft, they teach it to you in your PPL. Some people here are fearful of retracts, some get upset if you mention aerobatics, and enraged if you enquire about the flight envelope of the Cozy. If I may quote Dirty Harry " Mans just gotta know his limitations." It just depends on what sort of pilot you want to be. There are no good excuses when you or someone else is dead. This guy is responsible for the construction, equipment fitted, and maintenance of this plane. Furthermore he managed to land on a house. I hope we can all learn from his unfortunate circumstances. For the record I suggest carb heat or alternate air ON at any sign of icing conditions, especialy on decent. Remember Mixture rich, and fuel pumps on. Especialy if using an air cooled aero engine, bring up the manifold pressure well before you reach the circuit. That may mean planning your descent very carefuly.

"I bought my bird a Hot grip for Christmas." Why didn't you just buy her a pair of gloves and tell her to stop complaining? I'd have kept the hot grip for myself. Thanks for the advice Chuck, I'll be getting myself a nice pair of electric heated undies and all the rest of it. Brilliant idea. Cheers Adam PS in case it gets lost in the translation, bird = female of the species where I come from

"when No4 jumps in my sh*t, he doesn't act like he invented all those formulas " Well someone has got to keep you and Marc honest. Anyway, you'd be bored stiff without me throwing rocks at you. ( By the way, I dare not post without triple checking my numbers, and I go to sleep with one eye open!) Mr Tyson doesn't seem to hold AS&S in very good stead. Anybody any comments on the spruce suppliers?? Cheers Adam

Is an RV10 like an RV8? http://www.cafefoundation.org/services.htm Flight tests of RV 4,6,8 and Cozy MkIV Good Stuff:D

Thanks Largeprime:D

Thanks Marc, more violent agreement, I retract my comment about Lancair's utter tosh

Hang on a minute! just to quote Marc again.. "RR believes that no aircraft using the Roncz canard should use a number higher than 300 mph TAS for Vne". Sorry but I thought that was what I was planning all along. If anybody can give me anything constructive on flutter I'd be grateful. Cheers

Evan, The Cozy's mentioned had IO-360 engines, they have insufficient horsepower to go above 200 mph at 10,000 feet. At 25 they would be down to 50 hp, as quoted by dust. Marc is very knowledgeable, he is an aeronautical engineer, a pilot, and a succesful Cozy builder. Hats off. However, in my last three discussions with him, he has admitted to errors in his posts. I disagree that a shock stall will occurr anywhere near Mcrit. At Mcrit, an already large amount of drag (Indicated Air Speed) will start to increase rapidly from the onset of supersonic flow. The proppeller will now be less and less efficient. So to accelerate into even a Mach tuck condition will require a massive increase in power, which simply will not be available. At any time cutting the power will turn the prop into a huge brake. It would be great if some one could run it through a simulation tool, but as to how accurate it would be to a real Cozy would be equaly as debatable.

Well Evan, I think we are agreed that not everything on this site should be taken as gospel. Marc's opinion I regard higher than most. But in this instance I believe 300 true is possible, and I disagree that the plane will suddenly take a nosedive. Marc in fact quotes Vne ( I would call it Vmo, max operating) to be 300 True. 300 is a common cruise speed in a long line of proppeller driven aircraft, many of which are far less aerodynamic than a Cozy. I have stated elsewhere many times that the Mach drag on the prop will cause immense drag above 300 knots. Have any Lancair's "Shock Stalled"? I doubt it. Even by building a Cozy, you are at the cutting edge of aircraft design, only now are composites considered for commercial aircraft, and the superior canards fail to reach production because of conservative purchasing. I have spent 12 months researching my project, concurrently with studying for my ATPL license. By the time I finish building this plane I will hopefuly be working as a pilot, spending several hours a day at 300 mph or faster. I do not enter into this project lightly, and for anyone else I suggest to stick to the plans. I am discussing with a flight test engineer a full test program, and I look forward to it immensely. So yes, it will be good fun finding out anyway.

Well I can't speak for us, Large, only for myself, and I'm not changing my opinion. Be good fun finding out anyway.

Hi Steve, Welcome aboard, posting can be b#gger eh? One thing is for sure, we all agree to disagree as to which engine to choose. Nat clearly states in the plans that the Cozy is not the plane to start experimenting with engines in, use a Piper Cub. Unfortunately my Cub is away having new leather seats, tinted windows and plasma injection engine installed, so I will have to take my chances:D Using the Lycoming IO -360, as per plans, is one option. I personaly can't afford one, can't afford to run one, and wouldn't trust it as far as I can throw it, which is about to where my big toe is. Dust is using a turbocharged Continental 360, with a constant propeller and U- bute injection. That plane will hammer along! Jim and John ( sorry anyone else I've forgotten) are using Mazda rotaries, which have very few moving parts, and are light weight. Don't ask me how it works. The Subaru's are flat fours and sixes, so fit nicely in the cowl, don't know anyone trying it here. GM, Ford, Nissan, Honda, and Toyota all offer engines that could be used, but you'll be flying solo here. Lastly come the diesels, my weapon of choice, Helge in Denmark is installing a Volvo 5 cylinder, and I have decided on a ridiculous V10. Diesels offer fantastic fuel consumption, run on cheap Jet fuel or diesel, have no ignition system, and the decider for me, a low volatility fuel source, you can stub a cigarrette out in a pool of diesel, no dramas. Whilst others reccommend charging straight in, I like to use The 7 P's Proper Planning and Preparation Prevents P/ss Poor Performance or maybe I'm just lazy

ERM, bit out of my depth with the petrol engine, but I'm sure they use water meth to PREVENT detonation, No? Same same intercooling. preventing detonation = retard timing = loss of power water meth = advance timing = more power. They put dry ice in the water intercooled dragsters to get serious density. Now maybe if I run a pipe from the air conditioner to the ... stop it no4, oh ok. I'm going to design in a 44 gallon drum, and have a pressure washer blasting onto the intercooler, radiator, and into the turbo intake.. ah no, I can't back that one up either..

Increased air density = more fuel = more hp For pistons they say there is a problem with hydraulicing if too much un atomised water is pumped in. They advanced the timing by 5' degrees. No idea how it might affect a rotary; don't have to worry about detonation in a diesel, its always detonating, and when it stops you start to worry.

http://www.smaengines.com/en/product.shtml http://www.smaengines.com/en/faq.shtml# you might want to sit down with a stiff drink for the price.. i think it's about $70,000.

Hallo Jim, I only know this from books, not experience. What you describe I was told is called Mach Tuck. A nose down tendency caused by the Centre of pressure moving rearwards, requiring big trim changes. My understanding of a shock stall is that there is a sudden and considerable increase in the density of air at the shock wave, a rise in pressure and temperature, and flow breaks away from the surface. The sudden and considerable increase in drag, combined with the loss of lift and change in the centre of pressure and pitching moment causes severe buffeting, and hence the name Shock stall. I thought it was more of a transonic problem. I am not sure this will occurr very close to Mcrit, but then I'm not sure otherwise, lets just say I'm not sure eh? However from my limited knowledge, I know we have Mcrit, where some supersonic flow begins; Mdet (Mach detachment) where the bow wave attaches to the leading edge; and Mcdr (critical drag rise) where there is a significant rise in drag. I was led to believe these all happened before the shock stall. However, the canard is very short in depth, so Mach tuck may be very severe. 300 mph TAS sounds a very reasonable Vmo to work around. Most turbo props and jetliners sit at Mcrit in the cruise.

Every now and again I buy a Drag racing magazine for Japanese cars. It has been interesting to look at the turbo and intercooler set ups. One loony gets 1100 hp at the wheels from a 2.5 litre Nissan six, running 45 psi boost at 11,000 rpm, phew. I turned to page 69, and there was an article on water injection! weird. In their example, they have fixed two misting irrigation nozzles over the intake of a carburretor, attached to a windscreen washer pump. ( de ja vu?). They claimed a 20 kw ( 26 hp) rise in power, and it can replace the intercooler, or supplement it. Nice rig the Jetstream 41, Jim. There are quite a few down here in NZ. One was parked at the Aero club for us to look at, i gave it the fine tooth comb treatment. I hope to use an "emergency power" system with my diesel, but I'm not so sure I'll use water/meth.

Hallo Helge, Good to hear the D5 is coming on nicely, I think you might have the worlds first Diesel Cozy. I havn't seen a power curve for the 1.9, but I would imagine it peaks closer to 3750 rpm. Added to which the gyroscopic and asymetric torque loadings of direct drive on the crank might not be a good thing. I personaly prefer the reduction drive, like Helge says, it brings the prop up higher as well. You are right that it sounds an ideal candidate for a Cozy IV, and the V10 is COMPLETELY unneccesary, but if I am going to build a plane, I want "The Beast", no discussion necessary. Mine will be a two seater with ultra long range tanks. I want to see this lovely planet of ours. Over here in NZ, avgas costs about US$ 0.60 cents a litre, whilst diesel only $0.30. The Diamond Star with a Lyco IO-360 burns 35 litres per hour at 135 knots, or US$ 21; whilst the Thielert Tdi burns 18.5 lph, or US$ 5.55 . Doing the math, thats a saving of US $ 15.45 per hour! Remarkable indeed. On the life of a Thielert (2000 hrs), one would save an incredible US $ 30,900 in fuel costs. Same for the rotary guys (lights blue touch paper and retreats to the dug out). MMMmmmmmmm, propane and nitrous now we're talking! Blue flames coming out of the tailpipe, should look speccy at night!

Thanks alot for that Marc, I'm enjoying this, as I have been working through my "Mechanics of Flight" by A.C. Kermode ( I recommend it to anyone, my bible) and this discussion brings me to chapter 11, Flight at Transonic speed. Only two chapters left, Flight at Supersonic speed, and space flight. I guess that will be left up to Marble and myself to conquer:D (only joking) You are correct that Mach 0.5 is 300 knots at 25,000 feet on a standard day. Slower if it is colder. I understood that Mcrit is the speed at which the local velocity of the air begins to turn supersonic and a shock wave may occur. So the Mach stall will occurr above this point. Mcrit is the point where drag increases massively, so horsepower required will increase proportionaly, thus I think it will be very hard to actualy enter a Mach stall. As you say though, extreme caution must be taken. You are right that it is a very important consideration, but one that makes me only more eager to try it, (I am in no way suggesting any one else try it). Would you suggest some sweep in the canard, or perhaps a different canard aerofoil section? Thanks for the info, 300 mph TAS sounds good to me anyway.

"I was sharing constructive criticism to Dust directly" "I suggest the policy be" "so who the heck are you?" Jon if you havn't noticed, some of us are not so appreciative of your input as you might think. Sorry mate, you just can't move in and take over like this. I know Largeprime, we all know him, so should you. No one wants to read each others PM's. But as he says, this place holds no secrets if you know which buttons to press. "Try to be a little gentler here. This aint a business - it's essentially a chat club" Try reading John's post again. Good Day:cool:

Hallo Largeprime, Well actualy you could run it on vegetable oil, or the slops out of a deep fat fryer, but thats a different story.. (Goggles On etc) I would have choosen the Volvo D5 @ 200 hp , I wonder how Helge in Denmark is going? From my doing my maths homework, I just don't get the same smile as when the hp figure is over 250 . I've lost a lot of sleep on this V10, and I'm not complaining. I actualy tried designing a way to join two D5's before VW came up with the goods. I think we agreed elsewhere that you're the guru on injection. I take it that is where a lot of improvement has been made with the diesels. Anything you have to share on tuning diesels is much appreciated. Would they be getting 200 hp out of the 1.9? Why not a new thread indeed? I've been running a few engines through that Ray Hall Turbo sizer. I suppose Diesel might be a bit different, but it looks like the turbo really is working well. I think most were boosting to about 15 psi at full chipped up noise. Any more and I heard the rods start bending from the torque. I think I forget to say clearly that my main reason for choosing a diesel is the greatly reduced fire risk from it's low volatility. Just for the record.

Hello Trendsetters, If I may add my tupence worth. Anonymity After the brief flash of my identity, I am afraid I must again become anonymous. I really don't like having my personal information on a public forum, or on the internet at all. I subscribe to another forum, where I mainly listen , and some times ask questions of airline pilots, flight engineers, and ground engineers from around the world. That forum is totaly anonymous, and so I cannot see why this one should not be aswell. The aviation business is a small world, and as it is my chosen proffesion, I hope you can respect my point of view. Administrator When Nat decided to pass the plans over to Spruce, there was a thread for a while, where people voted on who should be at the helm. http://www.canardzone.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=543&perpage=15&highlight=moderator&pagenumber=1 I was some what surprised to see Jon Matcho on his sixth post put himself forward, and be succesfuly chosen as administrator. It was a descision that seemed to be made against the general consensus. No offense to you Jon, but I see you still have not begun building, and I am not sure if you hold a pilots license. Checking the posts, you have not added much to the forum. Can you not see that Dust might be upset by the fact that a newbie, non builder, non pilot has moved in, within the last six months, taken over, and started hinting at registration and rearrangement of this forum? I was led to believe that non moderation was the backbone of this site. I appreciate your plan for the canardzone, but that website is not particularly brilliant. In the time it has run it still only contains the list of canards I posted over Christmas, and a few links. It doesn't appear to be very proffesional, useful, or a site run by a true enthusiast. Since becoming a member of this forum, Dust has been the most friendly person here, and by his experience, the first I would ask about construction. His enthusiasm is contagious, and if geography would allow I would be a regular slave for sure. John Slade has nearly finished his Cozy, is an experienced pilot, would like to go into the composite aviation business, and works with computers. I am sure he put himself forward to be administrator. He had my vote then as now. It defies belief for me why he was past over for Jon. Jon, I know you have website experience, have seen all this before, and can quote reports and statistics about managing forums, but that just gives me the creeps. I like to come here and discuss things with other builders, wannabes, and pilots, not have a computer person tell me how it should be. Dust, Please calm down bro, being rash is just making things worse. This is your forum as much as ours, and losing your input would be very sad indeed.

Dr Hans says Hallo Jim! Thanks enough for you kind considerations. I believe if you notice, we have decided to keep areas outside the Coffee House as on track as possible. As you know, we have had this conversation before, so for the sake of those who actualy might be interested in the V10, PLEASE NO MORE Do the Math, Do the Math, and Mazda, Mazda, Mazda. You like one set of figures, I like another. I disagree completely with your speed horsepower formula, and think you will find that you are wrong, if you check. http://www.nar-associates.com/technical-flying/turbo/turbo.pdf Take a look at the power required chart for a big fat Beech Bonanza on page 2. 210 hp = 230 mph at 25,000 feet, @3300 lbs So if it takes 270 hp to go 205 mph at 2000 lbs in a Cozy, either we are all building the wrong plane, or you need new batteries in your calculator. Look in any aerodynamic text, drag = indicated airspeed, until Mach effects Drag of Cozy @ 200 knots Indicated= 750 Newtons 750 * 100 metres per second (200 knots)= 75,000 thrust watts 75 Thrust KW = (prop efficiency 75%) = 100 Shaft Kw = 135 hp 135 hp is 75% power of a 180 hp engine. At 25,000 feet. 200 indicated = 300 True 750 * 150 metres per second (300 knots) = 112,500 thrust watts 112.5 TKw = (prop 75%) = 150 Kw = 200 hp 200 hp is 75% power of a 270 hp engine. 200 hp is 50% power on a VW V10. One which has been heat treated should never come close to wearing itself out. In Dr Hans eyes, the initial outlay on the engine is repayed by not having to re build the engine for many years. Using the Thielert's fuel figures of 0.208 kg/kw/hr 150 * 0.208 = 31.2 Kg/hr Jet A1 31.2 Kg = 39 litres /hr SO, for Dr Hans 300 knots = 40 litres per hour, at 50% power in a big V10. Dr Hans is happy with his math

"I Wish I could paint it RED." She'll look very nice in red, easy to spot against those white mountains.