Re: Sparrow strainer stall

David J. Gall


Jay’s elevator needs a bit more “reflex” on its trailing edge before it could completely go without a sparrow strainer or trim tab. But he’s on the right track. 

Washout is not a hindrance to airfoil substitution, but willpower is. Would a Jay Scheevel-modified LS1 be “better” than a Roncz airfoil? Define “better:” if you already have an LS1 canard, changing out the elevator is “better” than building a new canard. If “better” means more suitable for new construction, then having QAC carbon spars on hand might weight the contest. If “better” means “higher cruise speed” or “lower landing speed,” well... you get the idea. 

To me, the Roncz airfoil is appealing for new construction because it’s almost the same thickness as the GU — I think I could fudge it a bit and use the same structure as the GU. BUT, then I’d be limited to the lower gross weight of the Q2 instead of the Q200 unless I beefed up the structure. Then I’d be in structural design and analysis mode, so 🤷‍♂️! However, for the Q1 it would be a drop-in replacement............. 🤔

David J. Gall

On Mar 24, 2020, at 11:23 AM, Bruce Crain <jcrain2@...> wrote:

So Jay,
Are you saying that the LS1 with a different elevator would not need a sparrow strainer?  Would it be better than a Roncz canard?
I also remember the main wing has wash out.  But I cannot remember if the canard does.  i would have to get out my templates to look unless someone remembers.  If there is wash out that would make designing a Roncz canard off of the templates pretty difficult.  Is it even possible?

Please note: message attached

From: "Jay Scheevel" <jay@...>
To: <>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Sparrow strainer stall
Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2020 09:38:13 -0600


Join to automatically receive all group messages.