brendanw

The flow rate test that we performed did, in fact, go through the entire circuit. We pulled the line off of the carb and pumped fuel through WITH the boost pump. This is where the 2:05 for one gallon came from. So you're saying that we need to log the gravity (WITHOUT boost pump) flow rate through the circuit? I imagine that number would be pretty small. Is that intended so that we know what the flow rate would be if the mechanical and electrical pumps crapped out? It wouldnt account for advantage gained from the vent line 'pressurization' of the tanks in flight. Anyway, it wouldnt be hard to run the test. Thanks for the info.

Thanks for the feedback guys. Very helpful. Here's what I ended up doing: - Pulled the gascolator inlet line off and installed a ball valve from the plumbing section of the hardware store. - Filled a 5 gallon gas can 4 times and dumped 5 gallons at a time into the left wing, marking the sight gage at each 5 gallon mark. Note: the self serve pump at KWST allows you to program in 5 gallons, rather than $20 or whatever. very helpful. - I sloshed the fuel around in the left tank to rinse it as much as I could, then drained 10 gallons (5 gallons at a time with a paint fileter) to put into the right wing, making the first two marks on the sight gages. I didnt find any contaminates at the gascolator, but the sump screen might be holding onto some bigger stuff. - Reattached the gascolator (left the right wing clean-out for a later date) - Pulled the line off the carb and used the boost pump to fill a one-gallon jug from the left wing and timed it. 2 minutes and 5 seconds, or about 30 GPH... cool! Filtered that fuel and put it back into the left wing. List of things to do: - slosh the right wing, drain the fuel and filter it looking for contaminates. - pull the gascolator and fuel filter out to check for contaminates. - pull the sump drains and drain a bunch of fuel directly form the wing to look for any big chunk that may be getting to the sump screen - continue filling the right wing and make the rest of the sight gage marks.

ENGINE START!!!!! Woohoo, N34YN came to life!!! After a morning of inspecting, checking, verifying and making things up, we finally turned the key on our Cozy yesterday afternoon. The O-360 turned over nicely a handful of times, then she choked and sputtered once, then finally drained the battery . A quick run to the auto parts store produced a pair of jumper cables. We turned her over again and she sprung to life and made lots of noise. As my partner Don said "we turned avgas into noise, yipee". In all we started her up 3 times. We had a few issues and have a small list of things to fix and look into. Mostly associated with the Rocky Mountain engine monitor and all the sensors that are hooked up to it (or not hooked up in some cases!). We have to make some adjustments to the throttle, mixture and carb heat linkages too. All are off by some amount - idle too high, full lean wont cut the engine, full carb heat off doesnt close the flapper. All in all it was a good day though. I look forward to getting back over there to tidy up the loose ends and get her taxiing around the tarmac!

So, in preparation for the upcoming first engine start, I need to plan the first fill of the fuel tanks. And I imagine that this would be one of the best opportunities to mark the level indications on the sight gages. Thoughts and questions... (1) I spoke with a lineman at the FBO on the field at KWST regarding the fuel pump. I asked if he can accurately (± 0.2 gallons or so) stop the pump every 5 gallons so that I can mark the sight gages. He said yes. Does this sound like a good idea? (1a) What graduation does everyone typically use? 5 gallons seems about right given the ~10 GPH burn rate of my O-360 (1b) What do you mark the sight gages with? I was counting on an indelible ink marker (Sharpy), then making up the numbers on the labeling machine. (2) Not that I think I'll have any catastrophic problems (knocking on wood now), having two full fuel tanks on the first engine start is way more than I need and I suppose could be a safety issue. In this case though, I'm not sure that 5 gallons is any less of a safety risk than 50 gallons. Thoughts? (2a) I suppose that once I fill the tanks and mark the gages, I can drain the tanks (I'm going to need a bunch of tanks!!!) through a paint filter and clean out any debris that may have gotten in there. Thoughts? (2b) I can then refill the tanks to, say, the 5 gallon mark with my filtered fuel. Thoughts? (3) I suppose I could avoid all of this at this point by feeding the engine from an external tank via some bastardized plumbing sequence. Thoughts? Getting exciting now!!

It looks like those are made for a bolt-on application and not a glass-in application. No worries though. Your best bet would be to recess the top surface of the cap below the upper wing skin. Flox it in place and then put a couple layers of BID over it. A properly sized hole saw will help cut the hole, but dont go too deep. It might help to dig out a bit of foam from under the lip of the cutout and push some flox back under the skin when you flox the flange in place. You might need to glass the ID of hole before you put the flange in, given that the flange doesnt look deep enough to cover the entire upper wing section thickness. I did something similar with my flanges, though mine were deep enough that I had to reach my finger in with some flox and put a bead around the intersection of the inside skin and the flange. Check out this site: http://www.velocityxl.com/Strakes.htm Good luck

Thanks! Check out my post under 'paint and finish' for the details of the painting experience. We used the much maligned Polyfiber Ranthane paint over the UV Smooth Prime, EP420 epoxy primer and PPG K36 primer with a K201 catalyzer. The EP420 doesnt cover very well, so that's why we employed the readily available (local NAPA Auto Part store) PPG K36 / K201. I should say that before we shot the paint on, we contacted Polyfiber and asked some questions about the gallons of paint, catalyzer, etc that we had sitting on the shelf for a couple of years. They wasted no time in saying "throw that stuff out" and then sent us an entire, fresh paint system package at no charge. Probably due to all the grief they got from the Cozy folks in years past. In the end, I as a complete painting novice, was able to put together a paint job that's drawn a lot of compliments from both paint novices AND some pros. I did get a couple of runs, but they sanded out nicely and all is well now. Good luck with your project.

We installed the 'Hendricks' latch a while back (Aircraft Spruce $285; http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/appages/doorlatch.php) and have been quite satisfied with it after a few slight modifications. It really is a very clean, fully airtight and effective latch /lock that we expect to get some good life out of. It's one of a few options that allows you to seal the canopy down from the outside while incorporating a key lock. Essentially you can easily hook it right into the plans dog-down mechanism and glass it into the side of the plane. We trimmed the size of the interior handle to not scrape against the inside of the tub and built a threaded adjustment rod to get the throw right, but that was about it for installation really. Also, because aluminum-on-aluminum is quite sticky, we ended up taking the exterior handle hinge and barrel apart and greasing it up. In addition, the parts are machined so tightly that you need to take some 400 grit wet sand paper and burnish all of the mating edges - add a radius to a few of them. The latch works very smoothly now. In the end I built and installed an adjustable stop for the interior side of the handle. Previously it could travel all the way past what I refer to as top-dead-center (TDC) of the dog latch. Building in a stop made the latch travel stop just past the tightest point so that it snaps down into place. Essentially it serves as a primary canopy 'lock down' mechanism. The catch tab will be in place as well

So after a handful of years for me, and too many year to count for Don, we're finally rounding the corner to first flight. Right now we're working on the final bits and pieces to get the bird fully assembled. The engine start and the DAR inspection are right around the corner. Here's a link to some more recent pics: http://picasaweb.google.com/bwoolrich/CozyMarkIVN34YN?authkey=5JvEE4a5o6A I'll be updating the album as we get her buttoned up, start the engine, etc. Very exciting!!!

The battery is in the rear up on on the spar. The forwardishness (I'm an engineer, i can make up these words) is likely due to the Strong Pitch Trim, electric noselift and the $1000/lb Garmin stack. You're right. I let the spreadsheet so the walking, rather than my brain. No worries, I'm better now! 432 lb appears to be my front seat fwd CG limit with full fuel (no nose ballast this time!). I suppose that as the fuel burns off and the CG moves forward, I'll throw the cell phone, wallet, shoes, pee bottle, etc. into the back seat We're in the same ballpark then. With me flying solo at about 200 lbs, it looks like I'll need about 15 lbs of nose ballast to keep just fwd of the aft CG No kidding?!?!? I guess I'll be crossing that bridge shortly. Having cut the filler holes (twice on the left wing thanks to Don's !@#$* measurements!) and being intimately familiar with their location, it just doesnt seem like you could fill the tanks all the way with the nose down. We'll see Good point. Thanks for all the info Marc

So, I hope I'm starting this thread in a reasonably sensible spot given that W&B is such an integral part of flight preparation and operations. We're in the midst of our first flight preparations, W&B being part of the picture. May I suggest to the folks who run this site that a section titled 'First Flight Preparations' be added to the main page? Anyway, here's what we have ... We weighed our Cozy IV for the first time this past Saturday and all is well. We came in at 1184 - 592 on the right main, 591 on the left main, and 11 (10 lb nose ballast) on the nose. I'm now knee deep in the W&B Excel spreadsheet that I downloaded from the Cozy Builders site. Our CG is at 110 in, which is right about where it should be!!! Questions: 1) According to the spreadsheet, a setup with a 210 lb pilot, full fuel and zero nose ballast would be beyond the aft CG limit. Putting 10 lbs of ballast in the nose gets you just fwd of the aft CG limit. Is this generally what everyone else gets? 2) If I add a 200 lb co-pilot to the above configuration (10 lb nose ballast), we're fwd of the fwd CG limit, requiring aft ballast. 35 lbs in the "baggage compartment" seems to get us just aft of the fwd CG limit. Again, is this generally what everyone else gets? 3) Assuming the one would need to maintain the aircraft in ground-level condition to fill the fuel tanks all the way up, do you normally stand there and hold the nose down while someone fills the tanks? What's the general MO here? Thanks for your input at this most exciting time!! Brendan and Don

The bottom line seems to be that a small handful of builders have made access to the latch or the location of the latch a consideration for use by passengers in the back seat but NOBODY has stated that there is a requirement to do so. Therefore, do it or don't do it, your choice.

Does anyone know about any requirements that back seat passengers be able to open the canopy? I suppose it would relate to the need to get out after a crash where the pilot is incapacitated. Does anyone have this feature incorporated into their latching system?

As a data point, I'm a hair over 6' 1" and I weigh in at about 210. I only have a soft, 3" thick cushion on the front seats. Everything has been constructed to the original Cozy Mk IV plans. I fit 'snugly' into place with just enough room to turn my head side to side without hitting the canopy. I have a tough time wearing a hat in there. Also, I have size 12 feet, so I'll be flying shoeless (wool socks though) so that my shoes dont interfere with all the hardware down by the pedals. Leg room is snug but sufficient. My $0.02

We went ahead and used the Polyfiber system (www.polyfiber.com) for the most part, with a little bit of PPG added in. The UV Smooth Prime was first rolled on, then spayed on per manufacturer recommendation. It sanded very nicely and filled lots (not all) of the pin holes. In hindsight, I wish I had rolled on another couple of coats and then sanded it down with the sanding board. I had a lot of low spots that were only evidenced after I, from a few feet away, misted a light gray primer over the top, then went at it with the sanding boards. I filled each of those spots using a roller, then sanded it all again. Once I was satisfied with the smooth prime finish, I sprayed on the Polyfiber EP420 epoxy primer. Now here is where you need to make a choice. The EP420 went on nicely with only a few runs due to my own lack of competence. However, it DID NOT cover a handful of darker areas that were bleeding through, even after 3 or 4 coats. I ended up going to the auto store and purchased PPG K36 primer with a K201 catalyzer. This stuff went on like a dream, with only a splash of reducer. Had I not already owned the Polyfriber Ranthane topcoat, I would have sprayed the whole thing with K36 primer then purchased a PPG topcoat. Unbelievable how nicely it went on, covered the dark areas and then sanded ... unbelievable!! We just applied the Polyfiber Ranthane top coat this past weekend. It went on VERY nicely, gave me great coverage and I only got a few runs that I'll need to work out. It was amazing to watch the 2nd and 3rd coats go on over the previous coats and blend in so perfectly. Really neat stuff! Bottom line for you ... if you have the opportunity to use a PPG product / system, I say go for it. It may be expensive, but boy oh boy it's nice to work with. The only thing you need to watch out for is that you need a topcoat that can withstand the flexing. PPG does make additives for flexible surfaces (rubber bumpers, etc), but I dont have any experience with them. 2nd from bottom line ... after a lot of tough criticism about the Polyfiber products, I've had an OK time using them. Except for the crappy coverage of the EP420 the whole system is pretty good. Coming from a novice like me of course. Have fun and good ucj