Ron Springer

I am not promoting this mod, just answering the question about whether or not there would be a loss of effectiveness. But now that you bring it up, why are you only talking about lift, where the split flap makes a small difference, instead of drag, where the split flap makes a big difference? Now I will directly refer to Todd Parker's statement on the mailing list that a split flat has 20% more lift for the same deflection and three times as much drag. I haven't verified it myself, but he is usually correct. I could certainly see the drag being really high due to the creation of a large wake.

It is more effective. This idea was proposed on the Cozy mailing list by Todd Parker on March 2, 2005. Look it up in the archives to see the discussion that took place ...

He may be referring to Len Johnson's forced landing of a Cozy in Missouri. It happened around the time of the posting, but I am too lazy to look up the exact date! Len posted here after the accident, so that's a good sign.

According to my plans, the Cozy Mk IV is 141" after shortening it from 147". It would have to be shortened twice to get to 135".

Mine were a little smaller than the template after hotwiring. But, after the skin layups, it pretty much matches the template size.

TMann, I used a pair of twin size electric blankets on my canard in my garage (back in N. California) where the garage temps were still colder than your basement. I measured the temp under the blanket with a remote thermometer. I gained about 10 deg when I topped the electric blankets with space (survival) blankets. It is mylar (?) which is orange on one side (with survival directions) and aluminized on the other side. I picked them up at REI. Ron

You might try this trick next time. As you go along and pull out the cross fiber for each ply, put each cross fiber in a pile and line them up. You will know the number of plies by counting the number of piles. You can't lose count that way. I think I even took a photo of my piles when I finished. I didn't do that for the canard, but I did for the main spar, where it is a lot easier to lose count.

OK, that explains it!

I don't think that the camber problem is the fault of the builder. It is just a result of the plans methodology. In the plans (and my direct experience is with a Cozy), the toe is precisely set but the camber just happens. The axle flange is bolted to the gear leg flush (in the vertical sense), so the gear leg angle becomes the camber angle. A flox pad is used to adjust the toe. Since the axle is usually mounted early in the build, the builder can't take into account any changes in camber due to loading. They only have an incomplete tub at that point and it is upside down on sawhorses. But, this is a good thing to keep in mind, and when I am done I will go back and check the camber.

I haven't seen any 3/8" tubing available with more than a 0.065" wall (at Wicks). But, there is 5/16" tubing available with a 0.065" wall. The inner diameter is then 0.1825". You could easily open that up to 0.188" without requiring a machine shop.

That comment is in the FAQ, but it does not make any sense to me. If the pins are installed accurately, then they will be inline with each other and the canard will be easier to remove. If you were terribly inaccurate, the pins might be pointing in completely different directions, and then the canard would be impossible to remove. I just can't see how accuracy is a bad thing. I just completed this step, and this is one mod I chose to skip.

Tim, As Steve mentioned, I am also located in the DC area in Rockville, MD. I'm building a Cozy Mk IV. I would like to stop by Manassas sometime to see your plane and possibly others that are based there. So, just holler when you're back in the area. Ron

When you extend a flap on the wing, it does not allow the wing to go to a higher AOA. Contrary to popular belief, it usually reduces the maximum AOA that is possible without stalling. However, you do get a much higher CL for the SAME AOA with flaps vs. without flaps. It isn't the best reference, but see the plot of CL vs AOA here: http://www.simhq.com/_air/air_002a.html So, does this finally explain why decreasing the canard incidence is bad if you deploy flaps on the wing?

I talked to their CEO at Oshkosh. It is intended for VFR flight only. They advertise that on a typical cross-country trip you could fly in VFR weather, and land at an airport and drive in IFR weather, or when close to your final destination. One problem with that is that you will probably spend more than half an hour at the airport, if there is anyone there, convincing them to let you through the gate to get on the runway with your flying car. That is not going to be too practical on a trip unless you made prior arrangements. His argument was that the runway in MA where they are testing does not have a gate. But, that isn't typical, nor is it the way of the future with tighter security. With regard to Moller, they spent a lot of investor's dollars developing their own rotary engine. He is an entertaining speaker that can motivate an audience. That is how he brings in the dough. But, he refuses to fly any of his vehicles off of a tether because they are too valuable. Also, they burn almost all the fuel doing a vertical takeoff, so there is nothing left to fly around with anyway!

It sure sounds like he didn't use ANY flox on the NG-15, which may easily explain the landing incident, regardless of how hard he may or may not have dropped the nose on landing.

I think one or both of them fly out of Auburn and are members of the EAA chapter at Auburn.

Speaking of the Lincoln airport ... There is a Cozy Mark IV there that is rapidly approaching first flight. See Jon Dembs' web page at Rick Maddy's builder pages.

I'll also be there from Thursday to Sunday.

In both cases, you are probably measuring the stagnation temperature and not the static temperature ... that is why it doesn't change. Even when air is flowing through the vent, it still stagnates (comes to rest) on the surface of the probe and there is a small temperature increase when that happens. The temperature increase is not much more than 5 degrees even at our top speeds, so it is generally ignored.

Rather than indicating the degree of damage, it could be that composite airframes are just much easier to build from scratch and to repair after an accident. After crashing an aluminum airframe, you are typically better off starting over and buying another mass produced kit.

Could the same thing be said about canard aircraft? They have been around for over 100 years and they have not risen to the top as the preferred configuration. Is that because they aren't much better? Stall resistance and aerodynamic efficiency is not a big deal? Or, could there be other factors?

The S-tube is very nice but it is not a new idea. The Diamond Katanas and Eclipses that I have flown are set up that way. They also have a fixed seat and adjustable pedals. On the Diamond, the pedals are moved by pulling a cable and they can lock into many different positions.

I bought a couple electric blankets at Walmart last year. I used to reset them prior to 10 hours because I thought I had to. Once I forgot and they did not shut off. Turns out that I got one of the only Sunbeam models without the auto-off feature. Here is the manual from Sunbeam that shows which models do and do not have auto-off (see page 2): http://www.sunbeambedding.com/manuals/BeddingMan06-English.pdf

That's not exactly what he said. It is definitely feasible to get a CL above 1.6 or even 2.0. There are a large number of airfoil sections that max out "around" 1.6, which is probably why he selected that number as a typical value.

You certainly can find the 209 (tropical) hardener at ACS. Here is a part number for the small size: 01-00362. But, you can also find it locally at any West Marine from coast to coast.