OK, So I will ring in here again. My original wing had the trailing edge reflexed up from the ailerons out to the tips by about 3/8 or an inch at the tips. Kind of hard to explain, but it was cut on the bottom side of the wing from the aileron to the tip in three locations about 1 inch apart. The trailing edge was then coaxed up at the tip and eased off so it matched the aileron location on that end. This was done because the plane would not keep weight on the tail as a TD. But it worked. When I changed the plane to a Tri I made not changes and found that it worked great for the Tri also. I used the reflexor as trim as well to speed things up. This plane was 225mph as a TD and I could get an honest 200 at a tri. Because I was too quick to cut the wing out when I got it back I did NOT check the incidence on it before I removed. However my father in law built the plane originally so I am 100% certain that it was built at 0' per the plans. This is why I put the new wing back in that location other than about 1/2 a degree to hopefully act like the previous modified wing. If I have issues I will make the same modification to the new wing, however I do not think I will have to as this new wing is a little heaver than the original because of the Wadlow layup. I can take come photo's of the parts of the old wing if anyone wants to see how it was modified. It may help some of you with the issues you are having. Let me know. Again this plane took 3rd place in the CAFE 400 in 1985 and would run over 225 flat out. I have over 300 hours on it as a Tri gear. The wheel pants are our design and worked very well.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
--- In Q-LIST@..., jay@... wrote:
I do not want to represent myself as an expert, but I have measured the wing/canard angles on six extensively flown Tri-Q's. As far as I know all of the owner/pilots seem to be satisfied with the take-off performance.
I am listing these measurements below and I ask that the owners comment further if they wish. For this listing, positive numbers mean that the canard has higher angle of incidence than the main wing, negative means that the wing is higher incidence than the canard.
Kevin Boddicker N7868B Canard-to-wing -0.2 degrees
Mitch Hargin N311DM Canard-to-wing -0.02 degrees
Lynn French N142LF Canard-to-wing +1.34 degrees
Jerry Marstall N625JM Canard-to-wing +0.82 degrees
Bruce Crain N96BJ Canard-to-wing +1.02 degrees (waddelow&extended LS1)
Bob Clark N817RC Canard-to-wing +3.14 degrees
The spreadsheet from Martin's Tri-Q indicates his Canard-to-wing is +0.40 degrees, so that is within the range of numbers listed above.
Jay Scheevel -- Tri-Q, still building
--- In Q-LIST@..., "Mick Davies" <mickdavies1967@> wrote:
I would NOT have the canard at 0 degree incidence if itâ€™s a Tri Q. I had to:
1 put ballast at the rear of the tail
2 got Fast Little Airplanes (FLAPS) to make a larger nose gear fork to raise the nose
3 fit a larger diameter tyre
4 set the refexors to trailing edge up
1 was to shift the c of g rearwards, 2 and 3 to lift the canard incidence up and 4 was to make sure the canard had more lift than the main wing.
Before doing this the plane wouldnâ€™t get airborne, even at 80 kts, as the aircraft was â€œwheelbarrowingâ€� down the runway.
Tri Q200 G-BWIZ
Just finishing the flight testing on mine (several minor faults) done 18 hours and 35 landings
Sent: Saturday, April 07, 2012 4:30 AM
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Progress update
If it's a TriQ are you sure you want 0 incidence with the Canard?
I'm not sure I know of any that are that way and the owners are happy with them.
Short & simple from my mobile
On Apr 6, 2012, at 5:22 PM, "Martin" <mailto:mskiby%40bak.rr.com> wrote:
So I have been quiet for a while, but wanted to share the progress on the rebuild of the TriQ. I got an amazing wing from Rick Hole to replace the busted one and Jay Scheevel loaned me the measuring tool to help get it in at 0 degrees with the canard. I have all the control rods now made, both nav lights in the wing and started glassing the tips. I am using the sheared tips and it looks really different at this point. I will need to change the tips on the canard as well and I made the tail match also. Looks like a bat! Anyway, my son is in Virginia Beach at Oceana Naval Station and will be deploying on the Eisenhower in the next few months so my helper is not here. So now I can get some work done...... JK. Anyway it is coming along and I posted some new photos for the group to comment on. I will also post one of the plane before the accident do you can see how she was.
All for now and thanks again to both Jay and Rick for the help thus far. It is great to have a group to call on.
Quickie Builders Association WEB site
Yahoo! Groups Links