Jon Matcho

I think this is a very interesting idea, but would like for the seating to be side-by-side instead of as we have with the Long-EZ and Ibis. Who's got the CAD system? I don't think it looks that bad. Sure, a Long-EZ looks much better, to me at least, but I think just changing the shape of the rudders on the Ibis would do wonders. They're also hampered by using that stuff from trees -- I think it's called 'wood', which imposes some of the shape on the plane.

The skills and materials required to build a Long-EZ or a Cozy are essentially the same. If you're at all handy, then you should be able to pull it off. I don't see why not. I know a number of computer "geeks", such as myself, who haven't done much in the way of using saws and sandpaper. This has been the most crafting I've done in decades, and will be for the next several years. It's not hard. Aside from the 1+1 vs. 2+2 seating configuration consideration, your best bet may be a Cozy, especially if you are concerned with being able to build. For example, if you ask, "What does the 4th sentence in Step 3 Chapter 4 mean?" to both builder groups, I think you'll find several answers from active Cozy builders, but Long-EZ builders might have to pull their plans out from storage. Either that, or you'll get fewer responses from Long-EZ builders than you would Cozy builders. You can do it either way.

Yes, it is entirely possible. Most of the parts and materials for the Long-EZ are carried over with the Cozy Mark IV design. I have Long-EZ plans and don't see anything that isn't available today, or could be fabricated. Is there any particular part or material you're concerned with? Contrasting those words of encouragement, I do feel that you WILL have a harder time with building a Long-EZ than you would a Cozy. Most of the Long-EZ community is flying rather than building, I believe. As a result, builders are scarce (I know 1). The Cozy community, on the other hand, consists mostly of builders, for which I know several, and 1 nearby where I live. I'm not saying building a Long-EZ cannot be done, just more work for you and the reason why I chose to build a Cozy.

Erick, welcome! Having had the joy of flying in a Cozy, I'm certain you will be thrilled with the performance and feel of a canard type. I suggest that you stick to Long-EZ and Cozy-like options, as these are the most modern designs. You also have the Velocity and SQ2000 kit options, and perhaps an AeroCanard kit option from a new manufacturer in the near future. Back to your question about rides, your best bet will be to sign-up to the COZY mail list as that is where the vast majority of COZY flyers reside. After that, you have the Canard Aviators (CA) Yahoo mail list where you can find VariEze, Long-EZ, Cozy, and other flyers across the country. Or, you can do as I did... take someone's word for it, buy plans, and worry about a ride later.

I may never use the "plastic pressure bagging" technique again... I thought some might be interested in an economical and EZ approach for utilizing a vacuum to assist with hand layups. The page is here, and feel free to let me know your thoughts or questions.

Attached is a picture of Kai Christensen's Opus-3 -- a one-off Cozy III derivative. It has a unique forward-opening canopy and modified longerons. The amazing thing is that, by chance, I met a fellow at Rough River 2004 that is considering the same modification. Check back w/me in a year or two on this. The picture is copyright© 2000 David S. Joelsen.

Now that was fun! Outside of the pizzazzle of Sun-n-Fun (not mentioning my transportation there) and what I guess would be the craziness of Osh, this event has my vote as THE must-see fly-in of the year for canard enthusiasts. I'll upload a few more pics to my Web site when I can, but in the meantime I attached a shot of Jack Morrison saying "goodbye" by going 1,000mph down the runway in his supercharged ERacer. *Also, to stir the snipe out for the retracts vs. fixed gear debate, pictures like this are one of the reasons why you get retracts.

So far the weather forecast is sun on Friday, 40% chance of rain on Saturday, and partly cloudy on Sunday. Not too shabby...

Hmmm, that looks curiously similar to a plan I know two ladies are building...

G, you have plenty of room to begin. I am building in 1/2 of a 2-car garage. By the time you get to the wings, you'll have some new decisions to make, such as how to get it out of there if you decide to assemble in the garage. You're set to build for many hours if you can: Build using the entire space Build in the 2-car part Build in the 1-car part

I am building a "custom Cozy" with the following modifications: Widened rear per AeroCanard FG plans. This involves widening of the rear landing gear bulkheads and firewall bulkheads, as well as the turtleback. Forward opening canopy per Cosy Classic plans. That's it really. Some of the misconception with "AeroCanard plans" is that they're substantially different than Cozy IV plans. What is mentioned in #1 here is available within the AeroCanard FG/SB plans (same book), which is nothing more than a ~1% change to Cozy IV First Edition plans. There are no other modifications available than what I mentioned. On the other hand, the AeroCanard kit has its own plans and parts. Modifications available with that route include armpit scoops (instead of NACA scoop), additional fuel capacity, and nose-mounted oil cooler (cabin heat) to name a few.

That's a Berkut, out of business here: www.berkutengineering.com Several builders are implementing the Cosy Classic forward-opening canopy, for which you can get a chapter replacement from Uli Wolter in Germany. The popular mod seems to be to forward-hinge the front portion, and then have a standard hinge in the back. Criticism of the rear-hinge is as you suspect -- that the whole thing could get ripped off in-flight.

Carl, we have similar backgrounds and interests. I was first looking at a Velocity, but decided on a Cozy based on price and performance. The small Velocity aircraft are similar in size and performance to a Cozy, but I believe the trend has been for them to become quite large, especially with the XL and XL-5 models. I chose to build a Cozy IV with AeroCanard FG adjustments, which makes for a slightly wider rear. Others have widened the front a couple inches as well. I know of the 'King Kozy' which attempted to be the biggest Cozy modification, but was never finished. I met a fellow at Sun-n-Fun who was increasing dimensions of the entire plane by 15%. Several have raised their canopies, as well as increased the room within the bubble. As long as you choose a canard, you're making the right decision, and are welcome to discuss here. I've just started the journey myself.

They might think that canards actually fly backwards.

Adilson, I think you are asking to get Cozy plans for free, which is not possible. They cost US$500 and are available from http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/kitspages/cozymark.php You'll find that the plan cost is cheap compared to what you'll really need to spend.

On the other hand, there's something to be said about the freedom of being able to go to the discussion at one's leisure, without e-mail access (at someone else's house, etc.) Other benefits of forum-based communication include: Topic Categorizationemail lists do not allow easy categorization of the topics, whereas with a forum you need to consciously determine what you're writing about before you send something to everyone's Inbox. Browser Based (email NOT Required)No matter where I'm at, as long as I have access to any sort of Web browser, I can get my fill of canard-related shop talk. Topic SubscriptionYou can subscribe to topics that interest you and have e-mails sent notifying you of discussion in that particular area. In this regard, the modes of communication are almost the same, with the exception of being able to reply via your e-mail client (I'm looking for a solution for this BTW). AttachmentsMost email lists prohibit attachments. Here you can attach a file, and if a graphic, see a thumbnail to help determine whether you want to bother looking at it. Instant Archive & SearchWhen my Inbox began to consume 100MB of canard-related messages, the time came to prune and rely on the archive database. Most e-mail list-based archives and search are not up to par with the searching capabilities of this particular forum software configuration. URL Discussion Thread ReferenceForum discussion topics and text is permanent, allowing me to forward a simple URL to someone if I want to direct them to a particular sub-forum, discussion/thread, or individual post. Text EmbellishmentsHaving rich word processor-like functionality facilitates good communication. The freedom of choice is yours, and by all means, do feel free to choose to use this forum however you like.

I hope so, since I'm building one. I'm flying in commercial, sharing a rental car w/Jerry Schneider and Larry Wimble, but have no idea where I'm staying other than I'm bringing my tent, toothbrush, and soap.

Sent via e-mail: To which I asked, "Are you looking to sell the project, or have someone partner w/you to complete?" Bruno's reply: You can contact Bruno direct via e-mail: bc4delta (at) aol (dot) com

Here's another fellow who has the same prop. on a VariEze no less: http://www.experimental-aviation.com/Directory.asp?m=detail&id=503991478 Here's a link with e-mail discussions mentioning Ted: http://pulsar.westmont.edu/aeronca/digest/orig/props The August 1973 issue of EAA's Sport Aviation has an article titled 'Ted Hendrickson Prop Maker', by Jack Cox. From this message, Ted may have retired: http://mail.westmont.edu/pipermail/aeronca/2002-September/014537.html (All found through various www.google.com searches.)

The link in the prior post is incorrect. You can search on N200TZ using the NTSB query tool here, or just look at the attached PDFs. Factual.pdf Probable Cause.pdf

I forgot to mention that Chad Robinson at www.lucubration.com bought Cozy IV plans and began building without ever having flown in a small plane. Marc Zeitlin was able to save him from this situation with another gracious ride. Not counting my 45 minutes in a small plane prior, I made the same decision as Chad. I still can't believe I was in a Cozy for 12+ hours in just a few days. Lucky me for sure. The 2-year part is my plan as well, but for whatever reason the IFR rating is daunting to me. I might want to pick that up after a year of VFR flying. All things considered, that fact remains that we've decided to begin building ourselves some airplanes!

Here's a link to the IBIS site: http://www.junqua-aircraft.com

I gathered as much. It's really just the feelings that get stirred in this gray area of advice. Agreed and accepted. For the benefit of readers of this discussion, now and in the future, could you elaborate on some of this? What are you talking about exactly? Avionics? Electrical system? Engine? Fuel system? Maybe this is another discussion, but I'm sure others would like to know your thoughts on what to improve, even considering they've "been there and done that". My intention is to build a per-plans airframe, minimizing the obstacles of choices. When my options run out, I fully intend to get my PPC. This might be next year, the year after, etc., but will not be this year. Is that possible, or actually been done 100%? Thanks!

Sure, we're interested -- it's an interesting airplane, and this is the Canard Zone, so why not? The IBIS is almost a great plane for the new Sport Pilot rule in the U.S., but just misses the requirements on a few specs. It's light enough, a two-place, but is just a bit too fast. So please, do feel free to talk about your project here. I moved this message to this IBIS sub forum. Why don't you get things started by posting a pic or two of your project there?

Dale, thanks for your thoughts on the topic. You make some excellent points, particularly with pointing out the medical issue and the areas of the plane where choices present themselves. On the other end of the spectrum, there are very few choices presented for the first few parts that you need to build with a Cozy or Long-EZ. "Just do it." For many parts and sub-assemblies you don't even need to know what an airplane is. As a non-flying builder, without a CERTIFICATE, I have sadistically solicited feedback on this topic from several flyers and builder-flyers. Answers generally fall into these two categories: You are an idiot. Get your license (I can't tell you how many flyers use this term) and then I'll talk to you.- or - Sure, you can build first, but at some point near when you finish you'll need to get your certificate. As Dan pointed out, it's a matter of building vs. flying (or building and/or flying). A particularly critical element on the path of building and flying a Rutan composite is to actually complete the build. I set aside $5,000 dollars to invest in a mission to build and fly my own aircraft, and my decision has been to build rather than "blow" it on lessons that will no doubt go stale and require maintenance to keep my skills up to par ("keeping current"). Dale, again, I agree w/many of your points and appreciate the input. The problem I have is where your words fall into the #1 category. Finally, let's not forget the first non-certificated canard homebuilders, the Wright brothers... and they didn't even have plans!