Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

10 Good

About Orinoco

  • Rank
  • Birthday 05/15/1947

Flying Information

  • Flying Status

Personal Information

  • Real Name (Public)
    Mike Stull
  • Location (Public)
    Denver, Pa.
  • Occupation
    Piedmont Airlines (Retired) Former Missionary pilot.
  • Bio
    Third homebuilt project, KR-2 and Tailwind. Building is the background to my life.

Project/Build Information

  • Plane
    Cozy Mark IV
  • Plans Number
  • Chapter
  1. I use the West pumps and have a worm clamp on the resin side to get the correct ratio, but I always check it with a balance scale. Occasionally the pump will spit out a slug of air messing up the ratio, but its easy to adjust with the scale. I thought I might be able to use just the pump but after checking with the scale I would no way trust them alone. I could buy one of those expensive pumps too, but I'm another one of those cheepskapes! Starting chapter 11, Mike
  2. Orinoco

    Microlight 410

    I'm in the process of ordering some micro balloons and I notice this product by West System called Microlight 410. The description says it's "the ideal low-density filler... mixes with greater ease... and is approximately 30% easier to sand, also more economical for large fairing jobs". Costs about $27. for 4.3 OZ.!! A pound of micro balloons is less than $9.00. Anyone know anything about this stuff? I'm not sure but it looks like they intend it to be a replacement for micro as a filler. Easier sanding is always a plus, but... Mike
  3. All I know about this prop and it's designer is from the Experimenter article, where he goes into a layman's level explanation of his theories. I find it interesting that no one has explained why his claims can't be true from that perspective. In the article he claims 82-84% efficiency in a 110 mph i.a.s. climb at 2370 RPM, sea level density altitude, which according to him, is better than most props in cruise. In other words, even though his prop is optimized for cruise, it is also better than other props in climb conditions. All sounds to good to be true, I'll be watching to see where it goes. Mike
  4. The jury is still out on this prop for sure, but anything that looks that far from what has become conventional wisdom and works as good as the conventional, would seem to indicate that there might be some science behind it. I notice that even Marc didn't give any scientific or engineering reason why it doesn't perform as advertised, just that it hasn't been empirically proven by head to head comparison. I wonder Marc, why you say it would seem to be more suited to racing? Mike
  5. Thanks Audioflyer for the photos, not as good as being there but motivation for next year. On to building that canard!
  6. Anyone have news from Rough River? I had planned to fly in from Pa. but the flooding kinda scared me off. Mike
  7. Orinoco


    Retired from Piedmont Airlines where I flew the Dash 8. As a younger whipper snapper I flew with Mission Aviation Fellowship in Venezuela and Honduras, mostly Cessna 185's, in support of Christian missionaries. My wife allows me to use some of her income to help finance the Cozy. Mike
  8. I have considered using a rotary very seriously. About four years ago I bought an RX 7 and overhauled the engine to learn more about it. It was dead simple to work on compared to a piston engine. I sold the car about a month ago after driving it about 25 thousand miles with no problem. No problem except keeping the gas tank full, it never got more than 24 miles per gallon, and usualy about 20 around town. I've decided against using a rotary for the following reasons: 1. The mechanics of the engine are very simple but the systems necessary to use it in an aircraft are not. Cooling, induction, ignition and exhaust are all systems that would need to be developed for a particular installation. It seems that someone has done each of them well but very few have them all well done in a flying aircraft. Something as simple as a muffler isn't simple on a rotary. Add a PSRU, even a good one like that of Tracy Crook, and it seems to me you have negated the value of mechanical simplicity compared to a Lycoming. 2. Most don't seem to produce the horsepower they are expecting. The nature of the rotary requires that the induction and exhaust system be tuned to narrow limits to get the performance the engine is capable of. I'm not aware of off the shelf products that provide that and I'm not interested in spending a couple of years trying to develop them myself. 3. It would take a lot longer to build and tweek the rotary to a usable level, probably cost as much as a used Lyc with 1500 hours on it and even longer (and more money) to feel comfortable going over the horizon. That's not where I want to spend my time or money. With the Lyc I have 500 hours before overhaul (if I want to do it at TBO) which will last me about 7 years. In that time I can save for the overhaul and enjoy a lot of flying. I could go on. I'm sure there are those who will argue with each of my observations, but for me the Lycoming is the better choice. I'm currently flying my second project, a Wittman Tailwind with an O-360. It had 1300 hours on it when I bought it ($6000.) so I considered it 'well proven'. Add gas, a little oil now and then and fly, its that simple. With any luck it'll still have a few hours left when I finish the Cozy. Works for me. Mike
  9. Orinoco

    Max pilot weight?

    I, on the other hand have the opposite problem. I'm as fat as I've ever been at 136 pounds (5'6" tall) this morning. Has anyone ever put a O-320, 160 hp in a Cozy? My wife and I together weigh about 265. How about a water ballast system using a bladder which could be stored easily when not needed? Laying up the shear web on the canard today. Mike
  10. That may be a bubble in the paint. I'd suggest puncturing it with an awl to see how thick it is. I doubt if a layer of glass would come up that high in such a small area.
  11. Vlad, You should understand that a forum like this gets a lot of posts from people who want to hang a 300 pound engine on the front of a Cozy with little or no understanding that there might be a weight and balance consideration or widen the fuselage by 18 inches with no thought of the potential increased risk of deep stall. For the most part they are well intentioned dreamers who will never do a layup. In your initial post you mentioned ratary engine and direct drive as coexisting characteristics of the same engine. I'm not an engineer but I've done lots of research on the rotary and know enough to say that you either don't know anything about the engine or you've made a breakthrough that no one else knows about. The fact that your on this forum asking strangers for their dream list of engine characteristics tends to indicate that your not a serious player. But, when you have your 200 pound 200 horspower direct drive rotary ready sell, with a few thousand hours of flight time, I'll take one! Mike
  12. Who cares what the circumstances were??? I think you would if you had been in that cockpit. Sully has handled the aftermath of this incident just as professionally and with as much class as he did the incident itself. Let them have their 15 minutes of fame, it'll be over soon enough. Mike
  13. Iffoso, Where in Pa. are you? I live in Lancaster county, am an A&P and have extensive experience propping aircraft. Be glad to help if your close and are still in the need. Orinoco

The Canard Zone

  • Create New...

Important Information