AND THE KIS CRUISER ROUNDS THE PYLON...

RobertR237 wrote:

You are sadly mistaken if you think that there is a four seater IFR

platform

with 3 hours (really almost 4) of fuel flying 150 KTAS out there. Just

Well, I suppose, then, that the RV-10 and Velocity XL do not actually
exist. Or that their designers GREATLY exaggerate their performance
figures. Or that, based on your definition of an IFR platform (I can
only imagine), they don't qualify.



They are just illusions and don't really exist. Damn good looking illusions
though.


mentioning an airplane like the KIS Cruiser will make guys jump in and

start

trying to sell you on it regardless of whether it can meet your needs or
not. Their objective, just like the others, is to get you to go with what
they are building. Later on you will find out that it really doesn't meet
your mission profile. In fact, your mission profile doesn't meet your

A devious, devious, bunch, to be sure. I hear many of them sell their
own children to finance their aircraft.



I DID NOT! Nobody would give me what I was asking...they all wanted me to pay
to take them off my hands. BG

objectives above, especially the $85K sticker shock. If you are worried
about the cost of an exhaust valve on a 152, then you need to stick to RC
model airplanes, much less a non-existent four seater.

You think it makes sense that an exhaust valve costs $250? You think
that is perfectly reasonable and logical?

Having to replace all the valves, unexpectedly, isn't something I
relished, but most certainly something I was capable of covering. Yes,
that's aviation. Actually, I fly much _less_ airplane than I can afford.


There are many guys out there that started building airplanes with good
intentions and found out that they just couldn't afford one or had the time
to build it. They are the vast majority in fact. You either need to face
reality now or get ready to face it in a few years when you're selling off
your uncompleted project.

You need to see a therapist and get to the bottom of your pessimistic,
antisocial attitude. You live for this type of thing, don't you?


BTW, a decent IFR platform isn't just a stable airplane that can be flown
hands off for a few seconds. It involves an instrument package that is
going to cost you more than you think.

Oh, yes, you're right, I have not an inkling. I've done no research
whatsoever. The figure of $20,000 for a decent panel that I mentioned
is completely off the wall. Even though the entirely usable, real-world
IFR panel I have in my Cessna 152 (dual King nav/coms, one with GS,
Garmin 340 w/markers, VFR GPS), right now, cost half of that.

Merry Christmas!


Actually, the IFR panel for a homebuilt will cost a whole lot less than one for
a production aircraft.

Yes, how much does a compass, turn coordinator and one nav/comm cost
anyway? :-)


Matt

Merry Christmas!


Actually, the IFR panel for a homebuilt will cost a whole lot less than one
for
a production aircraft.

Yes, how much does a compass, turn coordinator and one nav/comm cost
anyway? :-)


While that may be the minimum required for IFR, I don't think I would want to
limit myself to that. The panel will run upwards of $18k for a good IFR panel.
I could probably build out a panel with the same capabilities of most
available used production aircraft for around $12k. The newer glass panels and
top of the line avionics will run you closer to $25k. As I said in another
post, the difference is in the details and how much of the work you do
yourself.


Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

Paul Folbrecht wrote:

I am based at MWC, which has runways of 3100' and 4100'. What I'm
waiting to find out is whether or not 3100 is a REASONABLE AND SAFE
runway length for a Velocity SE at gross on an average day with 160hp
or
180hp. ...... But, from all I've
read, my current conclusion is that 3100' is most likely pushing
it.......

I fly a COZY MKIV with a 180 HP O-360. The performance (TO, climb,
landing) should be pretty close to the SE FG, although the COZY will
cruise faster (I plan for 175 KT block speed, and get it). I fly out of
Fitchburg, MA (KFIT) which has 4500 and 3400 ft. runways, at 350 ft MSL.
Even at gross weight, I rarely take more than 1/2 the long runway to
lift off. I've often flown into 2900 ft. fields, although I wouldn't be
very comfortable trying to get out of there at gross (2155 lb., for my
plane). I can land and stop my plane, at any weight, in less than 2000
ft - usually closer to 1500 ft.

Personally, I would say that MWC is more than adequate and safe for 99%
of the flying that most folks do with a 4-seater - how often do you
really load the plane to gross weight? When I'm alone, I'm off the
ground in about 1500 ft, and if it's cold, even less. I think that even
if you were at gross weight, the 4100 ft runway is completely adequate
except on the hottest of days.

Also, with respect to cost, I've got $70K in my COZY (IFR legal
w/autopilot), and it's one of the more expensive ones, I'm told - most
build for less.

Contact me directly if you like for more detailed info.

--
Marc J. Zeitlin
http://marc.zeitlin.home.comcast.net/
http://www.cozybuilders.org/
Copyright (c) 2004

I fly a COZY MKIV with a 180 HP O-360. The performance (TO, climb,
landing) should be pretty close to the SE FG, although the COZY will
cruise faster (I plan for 175 KT block speed, and get it). I fly out of

Why is that? (I'm not too familiar with the Cozy - plans building is
over my head.) I can't believe it's cleaner than a Velocity to the tune
of 15 knots.

Fitchburg, MA (KFIT) which has 4500 and 3400 ft. runways, at 350 ft MSL.
Even at gross weight, I rarely take more than 1/2 the long runway to
lift off. I've often flown into 2900 ft. fields, although I wouldn't be
very comfortable trying to get out of there at gross (2155 lb., for my
plane). I can land and stop my plane, at any weight, in less than 2000
ft - usually closer to 1500 ft.

Good to know. Thanks.

Personally, I would say that MWC is more than adequate and safe for 99%
of the flying that most folks do with a 4-seater - how often do you
really load the plane to gross weight? When I'm alone, I'm off the
ground in about 1500 ft, and if it's cold, even less. I think that even
if you were at gross weight, the 4100 ft runway is completely adequate
except on the hottest of days.

No doubt about the 4100 footer, but it's not like I'm going to want to
land with 20 knots of crosswind, right? Could happen. (I've landed
with gusts to 34 knots 30 degrees off the runway in my 152 - we get
windy days in the spring & fall especially.) Thus, really, the 3100 has
got to be adequate as well. After further research, I'm nearly totally
convinced that it is. Thus the Velocity is now a serious contender
again. Fortunately I have as long as 4-5 months yet before I really
want to have my mind made up and the kit ordered.

Also, with respect to cost, I've got $70K in my COZY (IFR legal
w/autopilot), and it's one of the more expensive ones, I'm told - most
build for less.

Well, being a plans-building stud probably helps a bit there. :-)

I fly a COZY MKIV with a 180 HP O-360. The performance (TO, climb,
landing) should be pretty close to the SE FG, although the COZY will
cruise faster (I plan for 175 KT block speed, and get it). I fly out of

Why is that? (I'm not too familiar with the Cozy - plans building is
over my head.) I can't believe it's cleaner than a Velocity to the tune
of 15 knots.

Fitchburg, MA (KFIT) which has 4500 and 3400 ft. runways, at 350 ft MSL.
Even at gross weight, I rarely take more than 1/2 the long runway to
lift off. I've often flown into 2900 ft. fields, although I wouldn't be
very comfortable trying to get out of there at gross (2155 lb., for my
plane). I can land and stop my plane, at any weight, in less than 2000
ft - usually closer to 1500 ft.

Good to know. Thanks.

Personally, I would say that MWC is more than adequate and safe for 99%
of the flying that most folks do with a 4-seater - how often do you
really load the plane to gross weight? When I'm alone, I'm off the
ground in about 1500 ft, and if it's cold, even less. I think that even
if you were at gross weight, the 4100 ft runway is completely adequate
except on the hottest of days.

No doubt about the 4100 footer, but it's not like I'm going to want to
land with 20 knots of crosswind, right? Could happen. (I've landed
with gusts to 34 knots 30 degrees off the runway in my 152 - we get
windy days in the spring & fall especially.) Thus, really, the 3100 has
got to be adequate as well. After further research, I'm nearly totally
convinced that it is. Thus the Velocity is now a serious contender
again. Fortunately I have as long as 4-5 months yet before I really
want to have my mind made up and the kit ordered.

Also, with respect to cost, I've got $70K in my COZY (IFR legal
w/autopilot), and it's one of the more expensive ones, I'm told - most
build for less.

Well, being a plans-building stud probably helps a bit there. :-)


There is a COZY Kit available.


Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

Paul Folbrecht asks:

Why is that? (I'm not too familiar with the Cozy - plans building is
over my head.) I can't believe it's cleaner than a Velocity to the
tune
of 15 knots.

Well, the FG Velocity leaves the nose gear down (you did say SE FG,
right?) while the COZY retracts it. Also, the COZY has less wing area,
so less drag both ways, and the fuselage is a bit smaller, too. The
Velocity RG is a tiny bit faster than the COZY, and the FG is a bunch
slower.

No doubt about the 4100 footer, but it's not like I'm going to want to
land with 20 knots of crosswind, right?

I have a few times - works OK.

...Thus, really, the 3100 has got to be adequate as well.

For landing, it's no problem. As I think I mentioned, I can land and
stop in less than 2500 ft at gross weight at SL. I landed at Meadowlake
airport (6800 ft MSL) at about 1600 lb (light) in under 2500 ft.

The only issue MIGHT be heavy, hot takeoffs with a crosswind.

....After further research, I'm nearly totally
convinced that it is. Thus the Velocity is now a serious contender
again. Fortunately I have as long as 4-5 months yet before I really
want to have my mind made up and the kit ordered.

Good. The more canards, the better, even if they're from a kit :-).

Also, with respect to cost, I've got $70K in my COZY (IFR legal
w/autopilot), and it's one of the more expensive ones, I'm told -
most
build for less.

Well, being a plans-building stud probably helps a bit there. :-)

Actually, I'm not much of a scrounge at all - I've outspent most folks
considering what I've got to show for it :-).

--
Marc J. Zeitlin
http://marc.zeitlin.home.comcast.net/
http://www.cozybuilders.org/
Copyright (c) 2004

My name is Ruben Flores I own a Shipping company in Texas and will give
a cheaper price that no one can match. We can save 50 percent off UPS
and FED-ex prices. We can ship anywhere in the world at anytime. If
you need a quote please feel free to call at 210-364-5333 or e-mail at
. We will need to know the weight, where it is
going and how fast you want it there. We will also donate %5 of
profits to the Tsunami relief in your company name.
If interested please contact me.