Dave,

Wouldn't that be a useless number anyway? After all, with such variation in
the way each airplane is built and the large effect that even small changes
can have on such a clean airframe, I doubt that such a number would have a
margin of error of less than 20% across the range of completed and flying
Quickies. I recall that John Roncz published a wetted area figure for the
airplane in his series on airplane design published in Sport Aviation a few
years ago (1/90). He quoted 190.5 ft^2. From that you can calculate the
equivalent flat plate area of your airplane. If you use the performance
numbers published by QAC you get ridiculous answers, so use the numbers for
some real airplanes. It would be nice to get Ed Kolano to do a ZTGT (zero
thrust glide test) on a Quickie some day so that we could establish a
baseline drag polar to compare our airplanes against....

Hope this helps,


David J. Gall