Re: E: Re: Quickie Taxi Testing


Sam Hoskins
 

I unintentionally ground looped mine in early taxi tests, due in part to the
fact that I had not yet done the Gall alignment. It didn't hurt the plane.

However, a few years ago I had a tailspring break which led to an off-runway
excursion, which lead to a ground loop. The left wheelpant caught on
something and broke off. This resulted in a prop strike and a bent the
crankshaft.

So, no, I couldn't really recommend doing this intentionally.

Sam Hoskins

On 4/12/07, Peter Harris <peterjfharris@...> wrote:

Jim,

There is no need for you to go to the trouble to rebut my opinion, that is
kind of ugly. That is the kind of response that makes others not want to
express an opinion of any kind . Are you really the ultimate authority who
knows all? Have you stopped learning?

Disagree is cool. Whenever I give my opinion it is qualified as an
engineer
with hands on installation experience and over 300 hours as a Q dragger
pilot and I explain the reasons why so folk can think about the issue and
make up their own mind . I am not offended if they do something else. I
have
explained why I think it is a good plan to try taxi deviations before take
off to be fully prepared for the first landing and I am entitled to that
opinion without some kind of rebuttal or attempts to discredit me.

I don't understand your suggestion that this practice will risk
overturning
the Q dragger, you must have had some wild rides some time. In the
practice
that I have suggested I do not believe it is possible. I guess it is a
long
time since you first began with fast taxi practice.

As for ground loops I suspect I have had no more than you Jim, 3 times in
11
years, what is your score?

How about getting into Global earth and visiting my airstrip at S26
17.0;E 152 42.1. I turn final to 14 at the farm house . The approach
crosses
the river in a ravine twice with up and down drafts and the strip slopes
down at 4 deg. There is a big depression in the strip at about 1800 ft
which
is sometimes enough to make the ground run airbourne. I have ground looped
there twice. Reflexed aelerons has now solved the problem. I was based
before at Noosa at S 26 25.4 E 153 03.8 for 5 years . It has canals
running full length both sides and just 30yd. off the centre line. I have
not ground looped at Noosa it would finish in the canal. There is a lake
at
one end and tall trees at the other.

Jim you do lousy rebuttals but I know you bake a good turkey so you can't
be
all bad. I refute your rebuttal.

Peter

_____

From: Q-LIST@... <Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com> [mailto:
Q-LIST@... <Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf Of
Jim Patillo
Sent: Thursday, 12 April 2007 3:03 AM
To: Q-LIST@... <Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [Q-LIST] Re: Quickie Taxi Testing

Peter,

I have over 1,000 takeoff and landings in my Q200 in all kinds of
conditions including rain, snow, heat, high, altitude and wind and
just like the opinion you provide and Dwyer agrees with, I have one
too and am here to rebut yours.

The testing you are encouraging is debatable and potentially
dangerous. There's plenty to concentrate on before first flights
besides trying to ground loop and possibly overturn your airplane.
Not smart! We all know too well what can happen when that occurs. If
and when someone gets in that position (apparently you both have
several times?) its simply a matter of understanding when you stomp
on a rudder and or brake you will in fact ground loop. Just because
fire will burn you doesn't mean you have to light your clothes up to
understand the concept of heat. This idea is like one of yours older
ones to load test (and possibly overstress) the canard, for what? It
was done a 1,000 times on spars at the factory a long time ago.

I appreciate the past work you've done toward our cause even though
sometimes I have to shake my head in total confusion. This airplane
is simple to build and fly, if you follow instructions and take
advise from those you trust.

To all you fellas finishing and testing your airplanes, again, beware
of who you are getting information from . When it finally comes down
to it, its your ass on the line, period.

Further the Q airplane handles crosswinds better than any tail
dragger I've ever flown. Case in point, was in 2004 when Brad and I
were returning from Oshkosh and landed at Wendover, Ut with 38K
gusting to 42K in quartering crosswinds (only because we had no other
options). It was his first time landing in heavy crosswinds and he
did just fine. I was our stupidity that got us there but it was the
planes that kept us out of trouble.

Regards,
Jim Patillo

--- In Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <mailto:Q-LIST% <Q-LIST%25>40yahoogroups.com>
com, "Peter
Harris" <peterjfharris@...>
wrote:

Joseph,

I suggested the divergent exercise because the landing and initial
ground
handling is likely to be different from normal fast taxi practice
depending
on a lot of factors and the better prepared is the way to go. JMHO.

The cross wind landing normally works out fine when I straighten
just before
touch down and once the canard is stalled the Q has a lot of
stability in
crosswind on the ground. The flare and touch down happen fast.

Peter



_____

From: Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <mailto:Q-LIST% <Q-LIST%25>40yahoogroups.com>
com
[mailto:Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <mailto:Q-LIST% <Q-LIST%25>40yahoogroups.com>
com] On
Behalf Of
Joseph M Snow
Sent: Wednesday, 11 April 2007 10:37 AM
To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <mailto:Q-LIST% <Q-LIST%25>40yahoogroups.com>
com
Subject: [Q-LIST] RE:Quickie Taxi Testing



Peter,
Recovery from stalls is a secondary objective of stall training. We
teach
MCA and stalls because with MCA the aircraft passes through MCA
just after
takeoff and just before touchdown and with stalls the wings/canard
and
elevators must be stalled for the aircraft to quit flying. So, it is
appropriate that I should determine pitch buck prior to the first
landing.
Unusual attitudes is something I teach after solo and before solo
cross
country.

During increasingly fast taxi, I agree that I should lay off the
brakes and
decelerate strait ahead with stick back to keep the tail wheel
firmly
planted for control. I agree that a pneumatic tail wheel will
increase
controlability.

I do teach management of landing problems prior to solo, i.e. high
approaches, low approaches, gusty, turbulent landings, crosswind
landings.
However, for first solo I insure calm winds and emphasize "correct"
technique prior to sign off. You can bet I will choose calm wind
conditions
for my first flight. I will get it on the ground in the first third
of a
wide, long runway. I will decelerate all the way to the end, taxi
to the
ramp and celebrate!

So, at this point I still do not see the need for intentional taxi
divergence or ground loops during taxi testing. However, I do
appreciate
your recommendation and I understand its purpose and merit.

How about a vote: How many Q drivers practiced intentional
divergent taxi
during taxi testing? How many Q drivers think this is a good idea?

Now, I have a question.. During a crosswind landing, I assume a
side slip
with alerons nto the wind and opposite rudder to keep the longitude
axis of
the a/c lined up parallel to the runway. If I touchdown in this
configuration, I would expect some divergence... So I am thinking,
do the
side slip until just prior to touchdown and simultaneously
neutralize
rudder. Will that work?

Joseph

Joseph
Peter Harris <peterjfharris@ <mailto:peterjfharris%40bigpond.com>
bigpond.com> wrote:
Joseph,

The reason that I recommend the ground divergence practice before
finally
flying the Q dragger is similar to the practice we get in flight
training
when we need to learn how to recover from the stall and unusual
flight
attitudes. Then if an incident happens we are prepared and know
exactly what
to do without delay or freaking out.

There have been many ground handling issues which can be avoided
with
correct practice.

The initial ground runs may give a false sense of security unless
finally
taken to the divergence limits .While accelerating the Q dragger is
stable
and there should be no problems at all, but when decelerating it is
unstable
like any other tail dragger as CG is behind the main gear and any
divergence
is likely to continue as the inertia force works to maintain the
deflection.

The use of brakes at this time will set up a couple and accelerate
the
divergence and rudder is less effective at this speed, so we need a
good
load on the tail wheel and I recommend a pneumatic tail wheel for
best grip.
It is also very springy.

Joseph you are going to enjoy this.

Cheers

Peter

_____

From: Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <mailto:Q-LIST% <Q-LIST%25>40yahoogroups.com>
com
[mailto:Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <mailto:Q-LIST% <Q-LIST%25>40yahoogroups.com>
com]
On Behalf
Of
Joseph M Snow
Sent: Wednesday, 11 April 2007 6:26 AM
To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <mailto:Q-LIST% <Q-LIST%25>40yahoogroups.com>
com
Subject: RE: [Q-LIST] Test

Peter,

I have been thinking about this. I prefer to practice learning how
to do the
landing right. I realize the Q is springy with the wheels on the
end of the
canard and that PIO'S must be avoided with elevator control, power
control
and visual references. Later in the testing period or even later, I
will
experiment with divergence issues.

Joseph

Peter Harris <peterjfharris@ <mailto:peterjfharris%40bigpond.com>
bigpond.com> wrote:
Joseph if you have a Q dragger, before you fly, spend several
sessions fast
taxi and when confident deliberately upset and practice recovery.
Jerking
the stick back and forth may set up an oscillation which happens
very
occasionally on landing. The fix for me is to hold the stick back
hard and
that damps the oscillation. Try taking your eyes off the end of the
runway
and I will bet you lose control due to PIO. Be sure to watch the
end of the
runway no matter what.

I would recommend also try a ground loop at say 20KTS. There is no
recovery
and normally no damage except to the ego but inspect for sure.

(If a Tri Q the above does not apply.)

Peter

_____

From: Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <mailto:Q-LIST% <Q-LIST%25>40yahoogroups.com>
com
[mailto:Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <mailto:Q-LIST% <Q-LIST%25>40yahoogroups.com>
com]
On Behalf
Of
Joseph M Snow
Sent: Monday, 9 April 2007 8:59 AM
To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <mailto:Q-LIST% <Q-LIST%25>40yahoogroups.com>
com
Subject: RE: [Q-LIST] Test

OOPs! I got that just opposit. Thanks for pointing that out.

Joseph

Peter Harris <peterjfharris@ <mailto:peterjfharris%40bigpond.com>
bigpond.com> wrote:
Joseph note that I am saying that my Q rotates better at take off
and flares
better landing and steers better on roll out with the aelerons up
not down.

Peter

_____

From: Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <mailto:Q-LIST% <Q-LIST%25>40yahoogroups.com>
com
[mailto:Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <mailto:Q-LIST% <Q-LIST%25>40yahoogroups.com>
com]
On Behalf
Of
Joseph M Snow
Sent: Monday, 9 April 2007 7:16 AM
To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <mailto:Q-LIST% <Q-LIST%25>40yahoogroups.com>
com
Subject: RE: [Q-LIST] Test

No, I am not yet flying. Hopefully in June. Currently painting the
bottom
surfaces.
I have heard pitchbuck speeds range from 64-80 mph (your 55 kts is
equal to
64 mph). The variations are functions of gross wt. and cg position.
Several
Q dirvers agree with your assessment that the Q lands better with
reflexor
down. Thanks for your description of landing configuration and
performance.
Joseph

Peter Harris <peterjfharris@ <mailto:peterjfharris%40bigpond.com>
bigpond.com> wrote:
Joseph,

Pitch buck for my Q happens at 55 KTS. I have no belly board, there
do seem
to be some various opinions about the merit of a belly board. I did
not like
the idea of a board opening forward. In any case air speed is going
to be
limited by the stall speed, but the board could reduce the ground
run.I am
using a small amount of power on final approach. On a few occasions
I have
used more power and flown on back of the curve with the nose higher
but
visibility is less.The final flare is a mush I suppose, but it
happens
quickly. I never could understand all the talk about ground handling
problems until I tried landing with the aelerons neutral. Now with
reflex
ground handling is good again.

Are you flying Joseph.?

(Sometimes I get delays through Yahoo also)

Peter

_____

From: Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <mailto:Q-LIST% <Q-LIST%25>40yahoogroups.com>
com
[mailto:Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <mailto:Q-LIST% <Q-LIST%25>40yahoogroups.com>
com]
On Behalf
Of
Joseph M Snow
Sent: Sunday, 8 April 2007 2:57 PM
To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <mailto:Q-LIST% <Q-LIST%25>40yahoogroups.com>
com
Subject: RE: [Q-LIST] Test

Ok, you seemed to get through. I have tried to respond to you post
on three
occasions. It does not show up in my Inbox. Here is my earlier
response:

Very interesting! So, on final your configuration is reflexor up,
70 kts
over the fence. Are you using a bellyboard? Are you using power to
fly onto
the runway (power controls altitude at MCA)? At what airspeed does
the pitch
buck occur in this configuration? Are you "mushing" without the
pitch buck?

Joseph

Peter Harris <peterjfharris@ <mailto:peterjfharris%40bigpond.com>
bigpond.com> wrote:
What troubles Joseph ?

Peter

_____

From: Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <mailto:Q-LIST% <Q-LIST%25>40yahoogroups.com>
com
[mailto:Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <mailto:Q-LIST% <Q-LIST%25>40yahoogroups.com>
com]
On Behalf
Of
Joseph M Snow
Sent: Sunday, 8 April 2007 2:38 PM
To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <mailto:Q-LIST% <Q-LIST%25>40yahoogroups.com>
com
Subject: [Q-LIST] Test

Is anyone having trouble with replies on the Q-list?

Joseph































--
Sam Hoskins
www.MistakeProofing.Net
618-967-0016 ph.
312-212-4086 fax

Join main@Q-List.groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.