Re: BRS Chute in a Q2


Larry Severson
 

Not a chance. But, flying the q200 model in X-Plane a lot would help.

 

From: Q-LIST@... [mailto:Q-LIST@...]
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2017 6:07 AM
To: Q-LIST@...
Cc: Jerry Marstall
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] BRS Chute in a Q2

 

 

Another perspective. Would anybody send a non pilot on a solo in a q 200 with only 10 hours of instruction? 

 

 

 

Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone



-------- Original message --------
From: "Paul Fisher rv7a.n18pf@... [Q-LIST]" <Q-LIST@...>
Date: 12/14/17 5:38 PM (GMT-05:00)
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] BRS Chute in a Q2

 

I'm trying to stay out of this ("if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all"), but I will provide some real world numbers.  I've been flying my Q-200 taildragger for 27 years and have about 1,650 hours on it, so I think I can speak authoritatively about my particular airplane.

 

In a typical pattern I slow down to 120mph on downwind.  Abeam the numbers I slow to 100mph.  On short final I slow to 90mph.  My plane stops flying at 80mph, so I always touchdown at or above that number.

 

I have flown 152s.  I can't quote the speeds, but I know things happen considerably faster in my Q-200.  In my opinion anyone who thinks they are about the same has clearly never flown a Q-200 and is doing the community a disservice by implying they are.  Just my opinion.

 

Paul Fisher

Q-200 N17PF

 

On Dec 14, 2017 4:12 PM, "ryan goodman elboy0712@... [Q-LIST]" <Q-LIST@...> wrote:

 

 Sorry Jay, but that was not what I saw as an apples to apples comparison and here is why. I’m happy to be wrong here, but this is where I was coming from.

Approach speed in a 152 is 55kts(63mph). Jim is correct that I have not flown my Q yet, but my understanding is most come in in the area of 70 for final approach(Though the book says 85 which definitely kills my original comparison). It's also my understanding(correct me if I'm wrong)  that you don't want to stall a q down onto the runway like you can with a Cessna, that you must fly it all the way down to avoid bucking. So, assuming you're flying them both all the way down, those stall numbers are not an accurate comparison, and the final approach numbers should be applied.. That is my logic for the 7mph difference i mentioned and my reason for the comparison on approach speeds.  I wont for a second suggest  that a similar speed= similar skill required to land it. I’m aware that there is a reason it is highly advised that folks get some real dual time with an experienced pilot in a q before forging out alone.

Matt, let me finish that formula for you. You know “Science 101” K.E. = 1/2 m vand I will do so with Jays numbers just to keep this on you guys side of the argument.


Cessna 152
Stall Speed Landing Configuration    43 Knots (22m/s)
Wing Area 160 sq. ft.
Gross weight 1670 lb. (757kg)
Wing Loading (gross)    10.43 lbs./sq. ft.
Power Loading    15.2 lbs./hp

Q-200
Stall Speed Landing Configuration    63 Knots (32m/s)
Wing Area 67 sq. ft.
Gross weight 1200 lb. (544kg)
Wing Loading (gross)    17.9 lbs./sq. ft.
Power Loading    12 lbs./hp

 

.5(757) x (22)2 = 183194 kg-m2/s2

.5(544)x(32)= 131648 kg-m2/s2

Approach speed in a 152 is 55kts(63mph). Jim is correct that I have not flown my Q yet, but my understanding is most come in on the area of 70 for final approach. It's also my understanding(correct me if I'm wrong)  that you don't want to stall a q down onto the runway like you can with a Cessna, that you must fly out all the way down. So, assuming you're flying them both all the way down, those stall numbers are not an accurate comparison, and the final approach numbers should be applied. 

 

On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 11:54 AM, jay@... [Q-LIST]

<Q-LIST@...> wrote:

 

Here are the relevant data:

Cessna 152
Stall Speed Landing Configuration    43 Knots
Wing Area 160 sq. ft.
Gross weight 1670 lb.
Wing Loading (gross)    10..43 lbs./sq. ft.
P

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