Re: Mike Conlin Q-LIST Re: Waddelow canard info

Bruce Crain

When you say the glass webs between the cores are you refering to the
canard or did Mark decide to put an extra shear web in the main wing
also? I am assuming the canard passed the test because of the extra
shear web at 30% cord plus tapered spar caps.
As for the main wing test failure I am confused because the main wing is
built per plans with extra BID lay ups on the aft shear web plus the
tapered spar caps. Wasn't it stronger than the original main wing at that
point? In Mark's notes he says something like load test per Q plans but
leave out the jack. Is that the part of the fixture you referred to as
causing the test failure on the main wing.

Thanks so much for your input!
Bruce Crain

On Mon, 21 Jan 2002 22:24:41 -0000 "conlin_m" <conlin_m@...>

Paul, Mark and I built those per his schedule at about the same
He brought his 240" wing/canard over to my house, then he and I load

tested both of his and mine in my driveway. I have pictures of that

event which I can scan and post for those interested. I will have to

locate them. (that may take a few days.....)
as far as that plane.....I parted it out 100 hrs. the main wing had

previously had a fuel tank above it, and i did some major repair to

it, but did not want the liability associated with that.
Mark made a few revisions to the plans after we were done, such as
the glass webs between the cores. Mind you, that was over 15 yrs
so I may not remember all the details. Mike
-- In Q-LIST@y..., "Paul Buckley" <Buckley@h...> wrote:
Hi Mike
I have been trying to find someone who has built the Waddelow
Canard, as per
original plans, for some time now, and the fact that you have both
tested and flown the canard is fantastic news for us here in
I have built two 200" Waddelow canards, one of which is due to fly
summer. The problem is that we have to persuade our CAA that the
design has
flown before and/or has been load tested satisfactorily. Would you
willing to supply me with details of the load test and the name
info of the present owner so that I could verify the hours the
canard now
has from the aircraft logbook?
Do you have any pics of the construction and the load test ?
Did you modify the design at all, however minor, or is it fully as
Waddelow specified ?
This sort of information would be invaluable to us at this stage
game, and would be very much appreciated.
Thanking you in anticipation!

Paul Buckley Buckley@h...

Tri-Q 200, 85% completed.
Cheshire, England.

----- Original Message -----
From: conlin_m <conlin_m@y...>
To: <Q-LIST@y...>
Sent: Monday, January 21, 2002 5:57 PM
Subject: [Q-LIST] Re: Waddelow canard info

..BOTH Wing and Canard were intended to be 240". One of each
built. The main wing failed the load test, possibly due to the
fixture. the canard passed. I built a 200" canard per his
instructions and load tested at the same time as the others. I
istalled this canard and flew it over 100Hrs before I sold the
I would take a "tested, but broken" canard any day over the butt is worth a little more than that. This is
something you should do half-heartedly. (I'm sure some won't
this.) Mike Conlin

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:

Quickie Builders Association WEB site

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to

Join { to automatically receive all group messages.