Nathan Gifford

Well I saw the news stories on that too. Amazing how NASA avoids talking about how much it is going to cost to make the system work.

I thought you still had to have an A&P sign-off on the annual, but the repairman was authorized to do the conditional inspection. ??

I think one of the comments I read was that most of Keith's increased performance may have come from getting the engine timing right. Picking up 500 RPMs at the top, is a significant amount of HP.

If you don't build the plane then my understanding is that you don't qualify for a Repairmen's Certificate. That means you will have to find an A&P to perform work on your bird. I think you can test for this certificate, but I am not really sure. This is always a problem when buying a used a/c. If you search the forums, I think there are some posts about someone buying an EZ that had some serious structural (construction) problems that were hidden by the seller (a new coat of paint, and lots of cleaning). The plane was eventually grounded. If you go down that path, it is good advice to seek recommendations are enquire about the skill of the builder. Further, getting an expert on the a/c to inspect the prospect machine is really very wise. Remember that even an expert cannot examine all the hidden parts of a machine, but if the expert notices some deficiencies it may be an indication of greater troubles within.

Yeah, I've been there and cruised around before. Really I think the best idea is to go for a visit sometime and see if I can get some pancakes...

I wish I could see some real pictures/drawings highlighting what they have done. I still haven't decided on whether to go with front or side opening canopy, but I am leaning toward side opening canopy because of the miserably hot weather we have here and that I probably won't install A/C like John did.

Aren't those from NASA's Highway in the Sky Concept?

I'm sure John did start CA,I to make money, and to finish his plane...But I don't see any evidence that he started the forum to do the same. Least ways, I haven't seen shameless plugs for CA,I except on the home page. If you bookmark the forum, you don't even see the homepage either. To my thinking, if you are not getting pop-up or unsolicited e-mails via registering with the forum John really isn't working very hard to make bucks through that vehicle.

There is certainly enough information to believe that weather played a large role in the loss of this aircraft and occupants. It is doubtful, that some kind of control failure leading to the crash will ever be determined one way or the other. That is one of the problems with experimentals, the aircraft will probably always be more suspect than their certified cousins.

I have heard that said before but avoided repeating them because of the litigious atmosphere. I hope the problems can be resolved too. That fight has gone far too long.

With the legal system who knows what the final outcome might be. If I understand the legal battles, the arguments are whether Aerocad can sell plans sans quick builds and can/was Cozy withdrawal from the agreement OK. Realistically, I would not worry one way or the other about it because both ships are really plans built which means win, lose, or draw you have all the information necessary to complete building process. Besides that, Aircraft Spruce now owns the Cozy plans and that may change everything. Some people have bought both sets of plans, using some of the fuselage templates to build a wider Cozy. This was less financially draining when you could pickup the Aerocanard plans for $250. The Cozy and Aerocanard are pretty much the same machine. Someone else will need to chime in on how critical this issue is, but I think the really important updates for the Aerocanard are the same ones that apply to Cozys.

Well I finally found it at http://www.cozybuilders.org/flying_reports/2003_04_07_S&F_trip.html

Have them show you an aluminum plane with hail damage. Have they beat out all the little dings that stones have left? I know the local FBO got a great deal on Piper Cherokee they bought because it had a little hail damage (and still does). Try reading Sucker Hole by Al Hodges about hail damage on a composite structure in flight. Its only one incident, and not every flight may have such an outcome. Its hard to judge whether it is easier to repair an aluminum structure or composite one. The problem about hail damage while on the ground, is what weather is likely to bearing down on tarmac. Those pesky high winds and little tornados like converting a/c into lawn darts. I guess that is what insurance is for? Do realize that canard forums are going to be prejudice towards composite structure, construction techniques, and canards. There are a pot full of RVs out there and they seem to make up the bulk of new experimental a/c (means they are obviously doing something right). That said, you are going to find it difficult indeed to build an RV for what a Cozy (or Aerocanard) costs. The tools for composite structures are fewer than they are for aluminum (save big bucks on tools), but some people would rather shoot rivets rather sand, sand, sand fiberglass a/c. The BIG THING TO REMEMBER is that 80 PERCENT of the projects started are never completed, aluminum or composite. This is where the Cozy shines since you only need buy the materials for the sections you are working on. If you tire and abandon your project along the way you are going to get cents on the dollar for your material. That means the new buyer gets the good deal if you quit (and Ebay!). Right now, you are doing the right thing: asking questions! Remember, like Dust says, "Enjoy the build", because that is what you will be doing for 2 to 10 years. I talked to the Cozy designer, Nat Puffer. He says you can build a Cozy in 2.5 years if: Stick to the plans. You do something everyday on the a/c (Mike Meville says if you are curing something everyday). Stick to the plans. Nat said he still took a week off each year with the family and did other fun things, but the rest of his vacation, mornings, nights, Saturdays were spent building the plane.

It shows how little he knows. I don't know how many of these foam planes are flying but the Varieze 30th Anniversary is coming up. There will be a number of high time birds at this celebration. If it were true, you'd be able to read the NTSB reports about about structural failure of composite a/c. The failures that have happened have everything to do with poor construction or bad flying and no UV radiation. Heck plenty have been left out in the sun in Arizona and New Mexico. There are other homebuilts that have more room: Aerocanard (Cozy Clone) and Velocity XL. None, I think have the comfort of nice Camry, but neither can a Camry do 180 knots for 1,000 miles! The big advantage of the Cozy and Aerocanard are the construction costs and the fact that you can build everything directly from the plans. The $500 plans set gives all the information you need to build one. These planes can be and have been built for around $45K. The Velocity XL, is also a very nice plane but it will cost considerably more depending on how it is equipped and which fast build kits you purchase. Another advantage of the Velocity is that the parent corporation is still doing development work. I haven't seen much done with the Cozy beyond what Aerocad did with the Aerocanard. What a few people have told me is that they believe most four-seaters fly with only two people aboard. That leaves a humongous space for baggage. I was hoping I could dig up the link on someone's Cozy trip to Florida, but I can't find it. The final photo of that trip shows all the gear they stowed in the back seats.

The other question I would have about the videos is whether the construction techniques are up-to-date. I am a newbie here and do a lot more lurking, but it seems to me that a lot of people use a Fein tool to make cuts on cured components instead of the way it was once done. I am also like you since I know of one other builder in the area.

BTW, Dyno makes a really neat printer (Rhino). The are probably better panel printers, but this little printer makes some of the neatest wire labels. They really stay stuck, durable, legible and are available up to 3/4".

Is that 5000 flight hours or 5000 test stand hours? How many hours has it been operated in Cessna 182?

It would be interesting to see more information about the powerplant (like fuel consumption, cruise power, etc). I'm guessing the Hangar57 webpage is not the home page of engine's manufacturer. I did find this link showing the turbine in another application Savonia Generators TurboPak

Its still $16K for the unit, weighs nearly 70 pounds, and cannot be deployed above 135 knots. The good news is that it only needs to be repacked once every 10 years.

Good points Chris. Its real important not to give you adversary anything to run with. One take, no edits, keep it short and to the point.

You may want to video tape the transaction too. You can then demonstrate, along with the documents, that you did not misrepresent the transaction and that buyer knew full well what s/he was getting into.

Fuel cells do have a lot of advantages and Karoliina is correct that the methanol fuel cells produce more power than their battery cousins (and have a longer useful life since they don't work by oxidation/reduction). The whole idea of clean hydrogen never has considered how you make it and transport it. While hydrogen has more power per kilogram, it takes a lot more volume of hydrogen to the same fossil fuels needs. There have been attempts to use photovoltaics to extract hydrogen, and wind farms, etc can be used to do the same but these do offer thus far the capacity needed to make vast quantities of H2. Certain types of fission reactors can be used to generate these quantities, but then the problem of transport remains (ie can current pipeline technology be safely used to at three time the current pressure). I would love to see fuel cell technology succeed. This will happen and it will happen in our lifetimes (well I guess that depends on your current health!!). Hydrogen transmission is still up in the air in my book since some basic physics have to be applied. Other energy technologies may beat hydrogen to the market place (fusion, room temp superconductors) first.

There are other problems using hydrogen, principally storage. Hydrogen is very bulky and difficult to store. While it does not weigh anything like methanol or other fuels it takes a lot more volume to get the same energy release. The other problem with clean burning hydrogen is where you get it. The dirty secret about hydrogen is that it is not extracted from seawater, its extracted from oil. If you want to extract it from seawater, you can do that too but it takes one of those things called a fission reactor (fusion later). Then you have the problem of transporting the hydrogen which is nowhere near as easy as propane. None of these are insurmountable tasks. However, it will take a long time to build the infrastructure that will allow for the safe handling and transport of hydrogen by common, everyday people.

Well the prototype has flown. However, I've never seen anyone brave enough to fly it without a tether (it has always been tethered on a crane). Before you really get involved with the powered lift vehicles you really do need to consider how it handles power failures. In the powered lift phase about the only way engine failure is to grab the eject curtain in a big, fat hurry! Another thing to remember is the energy required for lift can crudely be calculated. If you look at the available energy in 5 liters of fuel I daresay you would find it difficult to keep such a creature aloft for more than a few minutes. Throw in efficiency factor into that calculation and you can probably lower that flight time even more. This isn't to say they are being dishonest, or trying to get seed money, but do be careful..

Levansic, you darn well this thing is practical once lightweight fusion reactors are a reality. Or you could just open the bottom of the reactor and do the same thing!