Re: NTSB report Jet powered Quickie


David J. Gall
 

All respect and kudos to Mr. Seguin, however, trying to expand the envelope to crosswind landings (15 to 18 kts direct x-wind) on flight number three with 0.8 hours on the airplane is ... well ... dumb. Even if the "airframe" (Q1) is a "known quantity," the new power plants made it a whole new airplane. The downwind (lee side) engine flamed out? Look at the configuration and tell us you couldn't have foreseen that.

Then again, I seem to recall more than one report of a Q1 being unable to recover from a low altitude roll/yaw resulting in ground contact in an undesirable aircraft state ("crash"). Eh, Jimmeh?

ALL envelope expansion, including yaw conditions, should be extensively investigated AT ALTITUDE before being employed as an operational requirement (i.e. crosswind landing *requires* some amount of yaw/slip). Translation: try some slips at altitude before deliberately *needing* them for a crosswind landing. "Discover" that the lee side engine will flame out in a slip while you have sufficient altitude to recover, not on deliberate crosswind landing attempt number one. At least know the engine-out characteristics before *planning* to do touch-and-goes! Sheesh.

Remember, this is Experimental Aviation and it is incumbent on each of us, however many Quickies have flown before, to test fly OUR new Quickie/Q2/Q200/Q-baru/Q-whatever as though it was the first one ever built. When you bought the kit you signed up to be a test pilot - act like one or hire one. (Try SETP.org)

I hope we all learned from this....

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