Potential Deadly Problem Found! Fixing Everything Broken and Planned to Upgrade on my Airplane 

@i.r.wayright1457 Thank you for excellent advice. Looking at some higher resolution pictures I have taken, it looks like the cyl 2 barrel baffle is close, but cannot actually touch the shroud as the adel clamp holding the injector line would prevent it. However...cyl 2 barrel baffle appears very close to its pushrod shroud, from what I can see in the picture. I have added it to my to-do list, and will check it on my next trip out to the hangar. My father is also a lifelong A&P (almost 60 years, retired the last 15), and he gave me a TON of his books, manuals, tools, etc. - and included in that was a copy of "Key Reprints from the Flyer" which I have already read from cover to cover. It's actually literally sitting right here next to me as I write this, as a matter of fact. :)

@@CanardBoulevard I grew up three blocks from Lycoming and worked at their airport annex for two years, overhauling engines. Sounds like you are in good shape if you read that Flyer and have an A&P for a Dad.

I have a CO detector built into my headset, as well as a small portable rechargeable one I keep in the cockpit. I asked my welder about filling in the cracks, he said no way does he have the equipment or skill to do this type of specialized welding. More about this in a video coming soon that I am currently filming!

I had really bad cracking on my Long-EZ pipes from a heat muff that had been welded to the pipes and lead to stress cracking. I changed the heat muff to a clamp-on design and TIG welded up the pipe cracks. 20 yrs later the repaired pipes have never developed new cracks.

I've seen some Cozy's with that done. I actually showed some of them in my "Rough River" video. But running oil cooler lines all the way from the engine to the front of the plane, then putting an auxiliary cooler up there, along with a fan, adds quite a bit of weight. The worst thing is...it doesn't make much heat. Your oil is at only 180 degrees F, it's not transferring a lot of heat into the cabin air. Automotive cabin heat exchangers work with coolant at 220 degrees, and a much larger heat exchanger. The owners I've talked to who have this type of heating system say it doesn't do much when it gets really cold outside.

The new fork is identical to the old one, just machined rather than cast. In the Cozy there's nothing to get jammed on up there - the recess is dedicated to only storing the nose gear.

@@CanardBoulevard 👍

Electric heat requires a TON of electrical current, which just isn't available on small aircraft. A decent sized electric heater that would work in our poorly-insulated aircraft could easily draw between 20-30 amps, and when your alternator has only a 40-60 amp capacity, that doesn't leave much left over to run the rest of the airplane. You could put a bigger alternator on, but now you need larger wire, bus bars and contactors for the additional current, which weigh more, not to mention the much heavier alternator itself.

@@CanardBoulevard just a thought...

I have a video on landing lights coming out soon! I'm doing some rewiring as well while mine is down.

@@CanardBoulevard I might help James Russell do a video on the canard incidence as he has recently encountered two (mine being one of them) Cozy's with bad incidents.

I've already done this. I replaced all of the baffle seals, and sealed up all of the openings around the engine, alternator, etc. It's pretty tight. It's actually a pretty common Canard issue - some owners have tried enlarging the NACA scoop on the bottom to get more pressure and airflow, of course that adds more drag as well. My CHT's are pretty good, except for cyl 2. Once I get it under control I'll be happy with it. I saw one where they tried leaving the engine as downdraft cooled, putting a NACA scoops on the top cowl, and feeding that down like a conventional airplane. The problem with that is during the climb, when you need cooling the most, the higher angle of attack and slow speed reduces airflow into those scoops and the engine overheats.

The front shock is not really a shock - it's just a spring, and a considerable amount of the "springiness" is actually the flexing of the front nose strut. Not really enough weight to do preload.

There's actually a second valve on the inside that can be (and usually is) closed. That will actually be coming out as well - the replacement valve box I have to install on the firewall is stainless steel, unlike the aluminum valve box on there now, so it will sustain 100LL fueled fire, where the aluminum box will just melt.

Well thought through

It takes a tremendous amount of electrical current to generate usable heat, and small airplanes just don't have the excess electrical capacity to do it - and when copious amounts of excess heat is already available for free...which is why virtually ALL small aircraft use heat from the exhaust to heat the cabin.

It is not. The starter gear ring has to be removed to replace the belt, which is why I did not replace the belt when I replaced the alternator - but I do have a new belt on hand to install when I DO pull the prop off.

The reason you run the intake at the rear is that is the cooler part of the pipe. It's all about delta: incoming air is very cold, it gets heated up by the cooler part of the pipe. It then moves forward to the hotter part of the pipe, where it gets heated up even further. If it was the other way around, it would get heated up by the hot part, then move to the cooler part of the pipe, and because the delta between the pipe and air temperature is less, less heat exchage occurs. Oil-to-coolant heat exchangers in cars work the exact same way for the same reason. I'll be getting forced air from the intake anyway because I'm putting a SCAT tube down there to pick up incoming blast air.

3:23 Composites designed and has had them manufactured: 323composites.com/a-better-nose-wheel-fork/

There are multiple different methods of directing air - usually either ramps built into the cowl, or blast tubes made of SCAT tubing.

I think you mean CO (carbon monoxide - poisonous, deadly gas) and not CO2 (carbon dioxide, in your soft drink). :) I have a CO detector built into my headset, as well as a small portable rechargeable one I keep in the cockpit.

Yes, I have been making mistakes like that recently. I didn't know you could get detectors built into a headset, thanks for the info. I find the the idea of carbon monoxide to be frightening.@@CanardBoulevard

@@jeffkutz4917 me too...but we've been flying with this system of heat on small aircraft for over 70 years, it works when it's maintained and inspected, and I have redundant warning devices in case it fails.

Liquid cooling adds a LOT of weight. The solution I'm using is kind of like you are thinking - it has a shroud, with copper coils that contact the exhaust pipe, conduct some heat away and present much more surface area for the air to pick up heat. Recirculating cabin air isn't typically done - when these shroud systems are working correctly, they can take sub-zero outside air and heat it almost instantly to over 100F, which is then put into the cabin. Plus it's less complex - with a recirculation system, you have extra ducts and a circulation fan. The traditional system (which I'm using) uses just ram air to push the hot air into the cabin, no fans required.

The engine is at WOT, and fuel flow and mixture are correct. It's run this way since the prop was put on 20 years ago. I actually did a bunch of very specific power testing at specific density altitudes and airspeeds at the request of the prop manufacturer to give them some numbers before they did their calculations and recommended the pitch of the new prop. Definitely not just a "shot in the dark." :)

Prop Pitch can effect RPM. On my first prop for our O-360 Velocity, we didn’t get max RPM on the Silver Bullet prop. Catto did a second prop and now we get full rpm with a different pitch.

@@CanardBoulevard I wasn’t aware I said it was a shot in the dark. All the best, I enjoyed being a subscriber.

​@@darrylwalker1867oh I didn't mean that's what you said - I was trying to explain that a great deal of testing and calculation has gone into selecting the pitch of the new prop.

Yeah, mice and rats can do an incredible amount of very expensive damage to wiring!

Yeah, I do need to do some testing, and identify the pressure differential between the top and bottom, and how that would be affected by doing this. Another option would be to vent it overboard through the cowl, but that could have consequences, as that air needs to be very smooth for the prop to bite into. I'm determining right now just how much air needs to vent through in order to keep the shroud cool enough - I could restrict it enough that pushing it through the baffle will make not a huge difference.

There are no welds on the exhaust where the heat shroud will be located - I would not trust a weld inside a cabin heater shroud. I will definitely be testing with a fan (leaf blower, actually) into the NACA duct before a flight test is performed. And I have something better for propeller balance...more details on this coming out in a video in a couple of weeks.

Check out 3:23 Composites: 323composites.com/a-better-nose-wheel-fork/

Not technically, as the new prop is the same weight as the old one, and the new shroud and exhaust is almost exactly the same weight as the old one. That said, I was planning to do a new W&B once the new prop was on anyway.

I have some heated gear, but I also have two sensitive CO detectors, one in my headset and one portable rechargeable one in the cockpit!

@@CanardBoulevard not a criticism, just trying to increase awareness that there are other options that won’t kill you. I can’t find a stat but CO in GA is a big enough problem that the NTSB is pushing the FAA to require active CO monitors with both light and sound warnings. As you discovered, cracks in the exhaust can be insidious and difficult to find. I don’t have a heater in my Bushcat but, because the heads are water-cooled, I could cobble together an automotive-like wet heater with a fan that wouldn’t kill me. In the mid-Atlantic, that seems expensive and more trouble than battery-powered clothing for our short and mild winters.

Electric heat requires a TON of electrical current, which just isn't available on small aircraft. A decent sized electric heater that would work in our poorly-insulated aircraft could easily draw between 20-30 amps, and when your alternator has only a 40-60 amp capacity, that doesn't leave much left over to run the rest of the airplane. You could put a bigger alternator on, but now you need larger wire, bus bars and contactors for the additional current, which weigh more, not to mention the much heavier alternator itself.

I've seen some Cozy's with that done. I actually showed some of them in my "Rough River" video. But running oil cooler lines all the way from the engine to the front of the plane, then putting an auxiliary cooler up there, along with a fan, adds quite a bit of weight. The worst thing is...it doesn't make much heat. Your oil is at only 180 degrees F, it's not transferring a lot of heat into the cabin air. Automotive cabin heat exchangers work with coolant at 220 degrees, and a much larger heat exchanger. The owners I've talked to who have this type of heating system say it doesn't do much when it gets really cold outside.

Electric heat requires a TON of electrical current, which just isn't available on small aircraft. A decent sized electric heater that would work in our poorly-insulated aircraft could easily draw between 20-30 amps, and when your alternator has only a 40-60 amp capacity, that doesn't leave much left over to run the rest of the airplane. You could put a bigger alternator on, but now you need larger wire, bus bars and contactors for the additional current, which weigh more, not to mention the much heavier alternator itself.

I've seen some Cozy's with that done. I actually showed some of them in my "Rough River" video. But running oil cooler lines all the way from the engine to the front of the plane, then putting an auxiliary cooler up there, along with a fan, adds quite a bit of weight. The worst thing is...it doesn't make much heat. Your oil is at only 180 degrees F, it's not transferring a lot of heat into the cabin air. Automotive cabin heat exchangers work with coolant at 220 degrees, and a much larger heat exchanger. The owners I've talked to who have this type of heating system say it doesn't do much when it gets really cold outside.

Electric heat uses far more electrical power than the existing electrical system can supply. To do that you'd have to increase the size of the alternator and all the alternator wiring, which decreases available power at the propeller, and you also end up with a lot more weight - heavier alternator and wiring, weight of the electric heater(s) and ductwork. And you need a LOT of power to generate any appreciable heat on cold days. Oil heat has been done by several owners, but the universal opinion is that it doesn't generate a lot of heat, and it is again quite heavy. Oil-filled lines into the cockpit, a secondary radiator and vernatherm, fan, ducts, and the drag of an extra air inlet. In cold weather, your oil isn't getting much above 160 or 170 degrees, and that just doesn't impart much heat into the cabin air. There is a reason why virtually ALL small aircraft use exhaust for heat: it's free, adds virtually no weight, and it is VERY hot. Where oil heat tries to pull heat from 170 degree engine oil, the exhaust is more like 1500 degrees. If there's one thing that there is an excess of in a piston aircraft engines, it's heat. Much less complexity, much less weight, much more heat.

Yup. It's a pusher. EVERYTHING goes through the prop!!

Electric heat requires a TON of electrical current, which just isn't available on small aircraft. A decent sized electric heater that would work in our poorly-insulated aircraft could easily draw between 20-30 amps, and when your alternator has only a 40-60 amp capacity, that doesn't leave much left over to run the rest of the airplane. You could put a bigger alternator on, but now you need larger wire, bus bars and contactors for the additional current, which weigh more, not to mention the much heavier alternator itself. That's why virtually all small aircraft use exhaust-derived heat, and not electric.