Date   

Re: Q-Talk subs quandry

JMasal@...
 

In a message dated 11/30/04 8:47:25 PM Central Standard Time, judd@...
writes:


Jimmy,

I just tried to subscribe to Q-Talk via PayPal and got a message "The
recipient qtalk@... is not yet registered with PayPal." Comments?
You'll wanna refer this to.......................... qtalk@... (DAVID
RICHARDSON)


Re: Sport pilot legal?

haiqu
 

Peter,

The target is 51mph (45 kts). The Q2 will never make it.

Rob

--- In Q-LIST@..., "Peter Harris" <peterjfharris@b...> wrote:
If the brains trust would coordinate and focus on the task of
getting that stall speed down to 55mph Q2 and Q1 ....that would be one
giant leap for Q-kind.
Peter
----- Original Message -----
From: anav8r_guy
To: Q-LIST@...
Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2004 5:01 PM
Subject: [Q-LIST] Re: Sport pilot legal?



Does this also apply to the Q1? I'd hope for a slower stall speed from
a small plane with a sub mach cruise speed. Is there a future for the
Q1 as a Sport Pilot capable aircraft?

John
So Oregon


--- In Q-LIST@..., Mike Perry <dmperry1012@c...> wrote:
> Not even close as I understand the rules. Pitch Buck = Canard
Stall;
> happens at over 60 mph in the best of these planes. Even with VG's
James
> Postma can't get under 60 mph.
>
> Mike Perry
> Atascadero, CA
>
>
> At 12:44 AM 11/28/2004 +0000, you wrote:
>
> >Subject line says it all.
> >
> >I had first looked into purchasing a "Q" kit in the '80s but time
did
> >not permit me to pursue it. I instead bought a Cessna 172 and later
> >177RG. I am now again considering building a "Q" but need to
> >re-educate myself about the aircraft. Since I plan to fly under the
> >new Sport Pilot rules and not my rusty commercial ticket will a Q2
fit
> >into the new Sport Pilot aircraft criteria? Although the gross
weight
> >and max cruise speed are within limits with a landing speed of
70mph
> >is the stall speed under the 51mph maximum? It appears the single
seat
> >Quickie fits in the Sport Pilot category but I'd really like to get
> >two seats instead of one.
> >
> >Any information or guidance you might provide would be appreciated.
> >
> >Regards,
> >John
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >Quickie Builders Association WEB site
> ><http://www.quickiebuilders.org>http://www.quickiebuilders.org
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> >ADVERTISEMENT
>
><http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=129pjqrmu/M=298184.5
639630.6699735.3001176/D=groups/S=1705065618:HM/EX
P=1101689061/A=2434971/R=0/SIG=11eeoolb0/*http://w
ww.netflix.com/Default?mqso=60185400>1391114.jpg
> >1391182.jpg
> >
> >
> >----------
> >Yahoo! Groups Links
> > * To visit your group on the web, go to:
> > *
> >
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Q-LIST/>http://grou
ps.yahoo.com/group/Q-LIST/
> > *
> > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > *
> >
<mailto:Q-LIST-unsubscribe@...?subject
=Unsubscribe>Q-LIST-unsubscribe@...

> >
> > *
> > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
> > <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>
> ----------
>
>
>
>





Quickie Builders Association WEB site
http://www.quickiebuilders.org




Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

Get unlimited calls to

U.S./Canada




------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Q-LIST/

b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Q-LIST-unsubscribe@...

c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.




Re: Sport pilot legal?

haiqu
 

John,

The answer is "maybe". Official stall speed of the Q1 is 53,ph which
is a whisker over the requirements. This has been discussed very
recently, please backtrack the list.

Rob

--- In Q-LIST@..., "anav8r_guy" <anav8r@c...> wrote:

Does this also apply to the Q1? I'd hope for a slower stall speed from
a small plane with a sub mach cruise speed. Is there a future for the
Q1 as a Sport Pilot capable aircraft?

John
So Oregon


--- In Q-LIST@..., Mike Perry <dmperry1012@c...> wrote:
Not even close as I understand the rules. Pitch Buck = Canard
Stall;
happens at over 60 mph in the best of these planes. Even with VG's
James
Postma can't get under 60 mph.

Mike Perry
Atascadero, CA


At 12:44 AM 11/28/2004 +0000, you wrote:

Subject line says it all.

I had first looked into purchasing a "Q" kit in the '80s but time
did
not permit me to pursue it. I instead bought a Cessna 172 and later
177RG. I am now again considering building a "Q" but need to
re-educate myself about the aircraft. Since I plan to fly under the
new Sport Pilot rules and not my rusty commercial ticket will a Q2
fit
into the new Sport Pilot aircraft criteria? Although the gross
weight
and max cruise speed are within limits with a landing speed of
70mph
is the stall speed under the 51mph maximum? It appears the single
seat
Quickie fits in the Sport Pilot category but I'd really like to get
two seats instead of one.

Any information or guidance you might provide would be appreciated.

Regards,
John





Quickie Builders Association WEB site
<http://www.quickiebuilders.org>http://www.quickiebuilders.org




Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
<http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=129pjqrmu/M=298184.5
639630.6699735.3001176/D=groups/S=1705065618:HM/EX
P=1101689061/A=2434971/R=0/SIG=11eeoolb0/*http://w
ww.netflix.com/Default?mqso=60185400>1391114.jpg
1391182.jpg


----------
Yahoo! Groups Links
* To visit your group on the web, go to:
*
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Q-LIST/>http://grou
ps.yahoo.com/group/Q-LIST/
*
* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
*
<mailto:Q-LIST-unsubscribe@...?subject
=Unsubscribe>Q-LIST-unsubscribe@...


*
* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>Yahoo! Terms of Service.
----------




Re: certifying projects without logs

haiqu
 

Hi James,

Not sure about FAA rules, but the Australian CASA boys don't care if
we do 1000 hours of work on it, since we may just be slow workers. The
operative rule is "greater than 51% of the manufacturing". The actual
rules state that consecutive homebuilders can claim the prior time
spent by the earlier builders, but only if full documentation is
presented. i.e. 8" x 10" colour glossies with the arrows and the
circles ... in reality they are unlikely to grant maintenance rights
to someone who bought a near-completed project, for obvious reasons.

Rob


--- In Q-LIST@..., "James Postma" <james@p...> wrote:
The best info I have on this at this time is that you only have to
show that
it was amateur built to have it certified. You do not have to do
the work,
but you should do some of it to get an airworthiness certificate
with you as
the manufacturer. If you have any of the build history it will be
helpful.
It would not be economical for a professional to build this airplane.
Usually they sell for less than the cost of completion, so there
should be
no question that it was amateur built. Do you have a bill of sale
from the
previous owner? Does he have a bill of sale? etc.

This info is from talking to the FAA in the Seattle area . Your
mileage may
vary.

You may be able to get the repairman's certificate if you do 1,000
hours of
work on it.

James Postma
Q2 Revmaster N145EX
Q200 N8427
Steilacoom, Washington
(253) 584-1182 9:00 to 8:00 PDT
May your header tank be always full and your wings right side up.

----- Original Message -----
From: "fionapple" <fionapple@y...>
To: <Q-LIST@...>
Sent: Saturday, November 27, 2004 10:39 PM
Subject: [Q-LIST] certifying projects without logs




I'm worried that I wouldn't be able to certify or inspect a project I
complete if it has no logs to establish that it was built for
recreational purposes.

Let's say I buy a quickie project without logs. The airframe and
avionics are mostly complete, but I spend, say, 1,000 hours on
installing the engine, fitting the controls and building a couple
control surfaces, and checking the avionics. The prior builders are
unavailable, but I believe the panel was started by an avionics shop
and some airframe work and painting was done by another company. When
I look at the FAA documents listed at

http://www.faa.gov/certification/aircraft/av-info/dst/amateur/default.htm

I wonder:

(1) Can the plane be certificated (assuming it is airworthy)?
See 14 CFR part 21.191(g), ac20-139, ac20-27F.

Does anyone know about the designated airworthiness representatives
(DAR's) in the LVK/SFO area? Can I submit a prospective form 8000-38
to the local DAR for evaluation?


(2) Can I be certificated as the repairman for purposes of the annual
condition inspection?

This seems to be the applicable FAA document:
http://www.faa.gov/avr/afs/faa/8300/8300_vol2/2_025_00.pdf

The only avenue seems to be (7)(B)(3), proving my ability to perform
condition inspections, since I'd fail (1) & (2). However, AC20-27F
(16)(a) suggests that I would also have to be the primary builder.
Does anyone have experience with getting this certificate without
prior builders' logs?

Thanks in advance...







Quickie Builders Association WEB site
http://www.quickiebuilders.org


Yahoo! Groups Links








Re: Anyone know gross for Q1 ?

Dorothea Keats and Chris Walterson <dkeats@...>
 

Ralph-------- As the other post said, the plans for the Super Quickie
mods are in the files in the Q list.
Ryan---------- The fuel burn gets pretty scarey in the 6,000 rpm range.
Must be 5 gph. Throttle back to 5200 and it's around 3.5 . With the 8
US gallons on board I get about 1 1/2 hrs at a resonable cruise and then
I'm into my reserve.
As for the gross weight , In Canada as long as we can get our 300fpm
climb rate at gross, that can be our new gross. We need to stay within
the "utility" cataglory for G loading. I think it's 3.7. With the
amount of weight I carry and the wing area I end up at 13 lbs per sq .
ft. If I went to 13.3 lbs per Sq ft, the airplane would be classified
as High performance and I would need another rating. Or you can try to
convince Transport Canada that the elevators act as flaps and then you
can get a higher wing loading. With me and fuel I'm at 580 and someday I
may install and aux. fuel tank, but for now my 1400fpm climb blows the
carbon out of my arteries, just fine ------------ canada chris


Re: N44BJ

John ten Have <Jtenhave@...>
 

David,

sometimes you get that as a free bonus...

John

----- Original Message -----
From: David Posey
To: Q-LIST@...
Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2004 3:26 AM
Subject: RE: [Q-LIST] N44BJ


Hey, guys all I asked for was info on one particular air frame, not to
start a controversay.

David Posey
dlposey-atlanta@...
112 Timber Ridge Court
Woodstock, GA 30188
770.442.0988 Home
678.640.9671 Mobile


> [Original Message]
> From: Kevin Fortin <kfortin@...>
> To: <Q-LIST@...>
> Date: 11/29/2004 10:31:25 PM
> Subject: RE: [Q-LIST] N44BJ
>
>
> David and gang,
>
> In the below reference to a Corvair engine, my thoughts went back to my
> dune buggy days. I was never impressed with the engine, but at the time
> we could buy a complete car for $40.00, so price prevailed. I may be
> crazy or just uninformed, but my thought was when I read this, I would
> never want a Corvair engine on anything of mine that might kill me if it
> quit.
>
> Maybe someone has worked out the details of making the Corvair a
> reliable aviation powerplant but I just wanted to throw out my
> "terrestrial only" experience with the thing and say; I'm not so sure. I
> had an engine overheat and seize on 2 occasions. (I have to admit, we
> weren't too kind to them).
>
> If I had the financial choice, (and I admit the O-200 can get a bit
> spendy) I would go for the aviation engine, which I know is pretty darn
> crude, but has been proven over the years as pretty darn bulletproof.
>
> In any airplane that lands as fast as a Q, wants to avoid an off field
> landing if at all possible. The landing speeds are so high the
> probability for "bad" is too high to be ignored.
>
> My opinion and nothing more,
>
> Kevin Fortin
> sales@...
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Posey [mailto:dlposey-atlanta@...]
> Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 5:48 PM
> To: Q-LIST@...
> Subject: [Q-LIST] N44BJ
>
>
> Have purchased N44BJ less engine (O-200). Will be powered with a Corvair
> when I finish. Does anyone on the list have any info relevant to this
> Tri-Q ? If so please let me know. It will be greatly appreciated.
>
>
> David Posey
> dlposey-atlanta@...
> 112 Timber Ridge Court
> Woodstock, GA 30188
> 770.442.0988 Home
> 678.640.9671 Mobile
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Quickie Builders Association WEB site
> http://www.quickiebuilders.org
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Quickie Builders Association WEB site
> http://www.quickiebuilders.org
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>




Quickie Builders Association WEB site
http://www.quickiebuilders.org




Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

Get unlimited calls to

U.S./Canada




------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Q-LIST/

b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Q-LIST-unsubscribe@...

c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


Re: N44BJ

HawkiDoug <hawkidoug@...>
 

Sorry Larry, you are new and it was an inside joke to those who know me and the story of my prop falling of. Long story which will be chronicled in an upcoming Q-Talk Newsletter.

Doug "Hawkeye" Humble
www.asignabove.net
Omaha NE
N25974

----- Original Message -----
From: "larry severson" <larry2@...>
To: <Q-LIST@...>
Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2004 12:44 PM
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] N44BJ



At 11:53 AM 11/30/2004 -0600, you wrote:

Ah, a little spirited conversation never hurt anyone! So let me add to the
controversay... Bugs are better!!! (VW's that is) Best engine ever made as
long as you can keep the prop on!!!! :)
Look at the added 4th bearing in the front of the Revmaster (VW) and be
prepared to be impressed. Prop won't leave.


Larry Severson
Fountain Valley, CA 92708
(714) 968-9852
larry2@...




Quickie Builders Association WEB site
http://www.quickiebuilders.org


Yahoo! Groups Links








Re: N44BJ

HawkiDoug <hawkidoug@...>
 

Pat P. said: "BTW, I've never had a car engine bust on me... ever. I've worn them out, I've
had system failures, I've run out of gas, but I've never had one seize on me or
fail in any way, as long as spark and fuel were being properly fed to it."

I don't know if I want to fly with you Pat! :)

Doug "Hawkeye" Humble
www.asignabove.net
Omaha NE
N25974

----- Original Message -----
From: "Patrick Panzera" <panzera@...>
To: <Q-LIST@...>
Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2004 10:54 AM
Subject: RE: [Q-LIST] N44BJ



I had the crank from a 3500 hour TT (1400 SMOH*, just a few hours out of annual)
O-360 A3A in a Cherokee 180, snap in half and jamb itself up in the crankcase
webbing (the engine completely stopped and would not turn by hand) while under
the hood, on a full power missed approach. Fortunately we had enough altitude to
make "the impossible turn" from the x-wind departure leg, and landed back on the
opposite runway from which we had just over flown.

Had it been actual IMC, I'd probably be dead now. Had we been 100'-300' lower,
the plane would be broken now. We were lucky.

Long and short of it, engines can and WILL bust, be they auto conversions or
certified. There is no certification fairy that will magically protect you if
you fly certified, or will cast an evil spell on you if you fly an auto
conversion.

BTW, I've never had a car engine bust on me... ever. I've worn them out, I've
had system failures, I've run out of gas, but I've never had one seize on me or
fail in any way, as long as spark and fuel were being properly fed to it.

Pat

*hours are from memory

-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin Fortin [mailto:kfortin@...]
Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 7:31 PM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: RE: [Q-LIST] N44BJ


David and gang,

In the below reference to a Corvair engine, my thoughts went back to my
dune buggy days. I was never impressed with the engine, but at the time
we could buy a complete car for $40.00, so price prevailed. I may be
crazy or just uninformed, but my thought was when I read this, I would
never want a Corvair engine on anything of mine that might kill me if it
quit.

Maybe someone has worked out the details of making the Corvair a
reliable aviation powerplant but I just wanted to throw out my
"terrestrial only" experience with the thing and say; I'm not so sure. I
had an engine overheat and seize on 2 occasions. (I have to admit, we
weren't too kind to them).

If I had the financial choice, (and I admit the O-200 can get a bit
spendy) I would go for the aviation engine, which I know is pretty darn
crude, but has been proven over the years as pretty darn bulletproof.

In any airplane that lands as fast as a Q, wants to avoid an off field
landing if at all possible. The landing speeds are so high the
probability for "bad" is too high to be ignored.

My opinion and nothing more,

Kevin Fortin
sales@...



Quickie Builders Association WEB site
http://www.quickiebuilders.org


Yahoo! Groups Links








Re: Sport pilot legal?

Peter Harris <peterjfharris@...>
 

If the brains trust would coordinate and focus on the task of getting that stall speed down to 55mph Q2 and Q1 ....that would be one giant leap for Q-kind.
Peter

----- Original Message -----
From: anav8r_guy
To: Q-LIST@...
Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2004 5:01 PM
Subject: [Q-LIST] Re: Sport pilot legal?



Does this also apply to the Q1? I'd hope for a slower stall speed from
a small plane with a sub mach cruise speed. Is there a future for the
Q1 as a Sport Pilot capable aircraft?

John
So Oregon


--- In Q-LIST@..., Mike Perry <dmperry1012@c...> wrote:
> Not even close as I understand the rules. Pitch Buck = Canard
Stall;
> happens at over 60 mph in the best of these planes. Even with VG's
James
> Postma can't get under 60 mph.
>
> Mike Perry
> Atascadero, CA
>
>
> At 12:44 AM 11/28/2004 +0000, you wrote:
>
> >Subject line says it all.
> >
> >I had first looked into purchasing a "Q" kit in the '80s but time
did
> >not permit me to pursue it. I instead bought a Cessna 172 and later
> >177RG. I am now again considering building a "Q" but need to
> >re-educate myself about the aircraft. Since I plan to fly under the
> >new Sport Pilot rules and not my rusty commercial ticket will a Q2
fit
> >into the new Sport Pilot aircraft criteria? Although the gross
weight
> >and max cruise speed are within limits with a landing speed of
70mph
> >is the stall speed under the 51mph maximum? It appears the single
seat
> >Quickie fits in the Sport Pilot category but I'd really like to get
> >two seats instead of one.
> >
> >Any information or guidance you might provide would be appreciated.
> >
> >Regards,
> >John
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >Quickie Builders Association WEB site
> ><http://www.quickiebuilders.org>http://www.quickiebuilders.org
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> >ADVERTISEMENT
>
><http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=129pjqrmu/M=298184.5
639630.6699735.3001176/D=groups/S=1705065618:HM/EX
P=1101689061/A=2434971/R=0/SIG=11eeoolb0/*http://w
ww.netflix.com/Default?mqso=60185400>1391114.jpg
> >1391182.jpg
> >
> >
> >----------
> >Yahoo! Groups Links
> > * To visit your group on the web, go to:
> > *
> >
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Q-LIST/>http://grou
ps.yahoo.com/group/Q-LIST/
> > *
> > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > *
> >
<mailto:Q-LIST-unsubscribe@...?subject
=Unsubscribe>Q-LIST-unsubscribe@...

> >
> > *
> > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
> > <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>
> ----------
>
>
>
>





Quickie Builders Association WEB site
http://www.quickiebuilders.org




Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

Get unlimited calls to

U.S./Canada




------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Q-LIST/

b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Q-LIST-unsubscribe@...

c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


Re: N44BJ

Larry Severson
 

At 11:53 AM 11/30/2004 -0600, you wrote:

Ah, a little spirited conversation never hurt anyone! So let me add to the
controversay... Bugs are better!!! (VW's that is) Best engine ever made as
long as you can keep the prop on!!!! :)
Look at the added 4th bearing in the front of the Revmaster (VW) and be prepared to be impressed. Prop won't leave.


Larry Severson
Fountain Valley, CA 92708
(714) 968-9852
larry2@...


Re: N44BJ

HawkiDoug <hawkidoug@...>
 

Ah, a little spirited conversation never hurt anyone! So let me add to the controversay... Bugs are better!!! (VW's that is) Best engine ever made as long as you can keep the prop on!!!! :)

Doug "Hawkeye" Humble
www.asignabove.net
Omaha NE
N25974

----- Original Message -----
From: "David Posey" <dlposey-atlanta@...>
To: <Q-LIST@...>
Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2004 10:26 AM
Subject: RE: [Q-LIST] N44BJ



Hey, guys all I asked for was info on one particular air frame, not to
start a controversay.

David Posey
dlposey-atlanta@...
112 Timber Ridge Court
Woodstock, GA 30188
770.442.0988 Home
678.640.9671 Mobile


[Original Message]
From: Kevin Fortin <kfortin@...>
To: <Q-LIST@...>
Date: 11/29/2004 10:31:25 PM
Subject: RE: [Q-LIST] N44BJ


David and gang,

In the below reference to a Corvair engine, my thoughts went back to my
dune buggy days. I was never impressed with the engine, but at the time
we could buy a complete car for $40.00, so price prevailed. I may be
crazy or just uninformed, but my thought was when I read this, I would
never want a Corvair engine on anything of mine that might kill me if it
quit.

Maybe someone has worked out the details of making the Corvair a
reliable aviation powerplant but I just wanted to throw out my
"terrestrial only" experience with the thing and say; I'm not so sure. I
had an engine overheat and seize on 2 occasions. (I have to admit, we
weren't too kind to them).

If I had the financial choice, (and I admit the O-200 can get a bit
spendy) I would go for the aviation engine, which I know is pretty darn
crude, but has been proven over the years as pretty darn bulletproof.

In any airplane that lands as fast as a Q, wants to avoid an off field
landing if at all possible. The landing speeds are so high the
probability for "bad" is too high to be ignored.

My opinion and nothing more,

Kevin Fortin
sales@...





-----Original Message-----
From: David Posey [mailto:dlposey-atlanta@...]
Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 5:48 PM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: [Q-LIST] N44BJ


Have purchased N44BJ less engine (O-200). Will be powered with a Corvair
when I finish. Does anyone on the list have any info relevant to this
Tri-Q ? If so please let me know. It will be greatly appreciated.


David Posey
dlposey-atlanta@...
112 Timber Ridge Court
Woodstock, GA 30188
770.442.0988 Home
678.640.9671 Mobile





Quickie Builders Association WEB site
http://www.quickiebuilders.org


Yahoo! Groups Links










Quickie Builders Association WEB site
http://www.quickiebuilders.org


Yahoo! Groups Links









Quickie Builders Association WEB site
http://www.quickiebuilders.org


Yahoo! Groups Links








Re: N44BJ

Patrick Panzera <panzera@...>
 

Phil,

You are absolutely right! (At 16 years old, we both know engine
management didn't play a big role).

On the other hand, being an engineer (I know that dulls the dialog a
bit), I know there was a process that the guys went through to certify
the O200 that included a lot of things that are only visible when you
are looking at things in the aviation mind-frame.
You might want to read up on the process of getting an engine certified. It
might just scare the beejeebies out of you. Ford and GM do WAY more R&D and
testing on their engines than anyone wanting to get an engine certified would be
required to do (or has been required to do in the past). With some time and
money (and not many actual test stand or flight hours), I could get the Corvair
certified, and I'd have to change nothing from the way it's currently being
"converted" for aviation... which is basically accessories. (I might have to put
in a second set of plugs, but it's been done, flight proven, and there are
conversion plans available.)

Additionally, did you realize that a run out certified engine can be busted
down, parts cleaned and inspected, found to be at the extreme wear limit (but
still inside the specified limit) put back together, and called 0-SMOH?

One hour later (or maybe 100 hours if you prefer), the majority of the mostly
worn parts could then be out of spec.

Pat


Re: N44BJ

Patrick Panzera <panzera@...>
 

I had the crank from a 3500 hour TT (1400 SMOH*, just a few hours out of annual)
O-360 A3A in a Cherokee 180, snap in half and jamb itself up in the crankcase
webbing (the engine completely stopped and would not turn by hand) while under
the hood, on a full power missed approach. Fortunately we had enough altitude to
make "the impossible turn" from the x-wind departure leg, and landed back on the
opposite runway from which we had just over flown.

Had it been actual IMC, I'd probably be dead now. Had we been 100'-300' lower,
the plane would be broken now. We were lucky.

Long and short of it, engines can and WILL bust, be they auto conversions or
certified. There is no certification fairy that will magically protect you if
you fly certified, or will cast an evil spell on you if you fly an auto
conversion.

BTW, I've never had a car engine bust on me... ever. I've worn them out, I've
had system failures, I've run out of gas, but I've never had one seize on me or
fail in any way, as long as spark and fuel were being properly fed to it.

Pat

*hours are from memory

-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin Fortin [mailto:kfortin@...]
Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 7:31 PM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: RE: [Q-LIST] N44BJ


David and gang,

In the below reference to a Corvair engine, my thoughts went back to my
dune buggy days. I was never impressed with the engine, but at the time
we could buy a complete car for $40.00, so price prevailed. I may be
crazy or just uninformed, but my thought was when I read this, I would
never want a Corvair engine on anything of mine that might kill me if it
quit.

Maybe someone has worked out the details of making the Corvair a
reliable aviation powerplant but I just wanted to throw out my
"terrestrial only" experience with the thing and say; I'm not so sure. I
had an engine overheat and seize on 2 occasions. (I have to admit, we
weren't too kind to them).

If I had the financial choice, (and I admit the O-200 can get a bit
spendy) I would go for the aviation engine, which I know is pretty darn
crude, but has been proven over the years as pretty darn bulletproof.

In any airplane that lands as fast as a Q, wants to avoid an off field
landing if at all possible. The landing speeds are so high the
probability for "bad" is too high to be ignored.

My opinion and nothing more,

Kevin Fortin
sales@...


Re: N44BJ

Dave Richardson <dave@...>
 

Hi Kevin,

You can learn more about the excellent work done by A&P William Wynne at:

http://www.flycorvair.com

Dave Richardson

-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin Fortin [mailto:kfortin@...]
Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2004 1:06 AM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: RE: [Q-LIST] N44BJ



Phil,

You are absolutely right! (At 16 years old, we both know engine
management didn't play a big role).

On the other hand, being an engineer (I know that dulls the dialog a
bit), I know there was a process that the guys went through to certify
the O200 that included a lot of things that are only visible when you
are looking at things in the aviation mind-frame.

That said, it makes me trust the O200 more because it was designed for
flying applications and has been proven there. (I know from personal
experience that sometimes things that seem obvious are radically
different when one looks at the tiny details).

Keep thinking out of the box anyway, it keep fuddy-duddys like me from
wrecking the fun!

Kevin

-----Original Message-----
From: britmcman@... [mailto:britmcman@...]
Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 10:28 PM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] N44BJ


Kevin:

Consider this. Had your car been equipped with an 0-200 Continental
engine,
I'd bet a dollar to a dime that you would have managed to seize that
engine
too. Engine management probably was not in your realm of interest back
in
those days. Consider what success you might have had if you had
watched your
cylinder head and exhaust gas temperatures. Just imagine.

Cheers,

Phil







Quickie Builders Association WEB site
http://www.quickiebuilders.org


Yahoo! Groups Links










Quickie Builders Association WEB site
http://www.quickiebuilders.org


Yahoo! Groups Links


Re: N44BJ

David Posey <dlposey-atlanta@...>
 

Hey, guys all I asked for was info on one particular air frame, not to
start a controversay.

David Posey
dlposey-atlanta@...
112 Timber Ridge Court
Woodstock, GA 30188
770.442.0988 Home
678.640.9671 Mobile

[Original Message]
From: Kevin Fortin <kfortin@...>
To: <Q-LIST@...>
Date: 11/29/2004 10:31:25 PM
Subject: RE: [Q-LIST] N44BJ


David and gang,

In the below reference to a Corvair engine, my thoughts went back to my
dune buggy days. I was never impressed with the engine, but at the time
we could buy a complete car for $40.00, so price prevailed. I may be
crazy or just uninformed, but my thought was when I read this, I would
never want a Corvair engine on anything of mine that might kill me if it
quit.

Maybe someone has worked out the details of making the Corvair a
reliable aviation powerplant but I just wanted to throw out my
"terrestrial only" experience with the thing and say; I'm not so sure. I
had an engine overheat and seize on 2 occasions. (I have to admit, we
weren't too kind to them).

If I had the financial choice, (and I admit the O-200 can get a bit
spendy) I would go for the aviation engine, which I know is pretty darn
crude, but has been proven over the years as pretty darn bulletproof.

In any airplane that lands as fast as a Q, wants to avoid an off field
landing if at all possible. The landing speeds are so high the
probability for "bad" is too high to be ignored.

My opinion and nothing more,

Kevin Fortin
sales@...





-----Original Message-----
From: David Posey [mailto:dlposey-atlanta@...]
Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 5:48 PM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: [Q-LIST] N44BJ


Have purchased N44BJ less engine (O-200). Will be powered with a Corvair
when I finish. Does anyone on the list have any info relevant to this
Tri-Q ? If so please let me know. It will be greatly appreciated.


David Posey
dlposey-atlanta@...
112 Timber Ridge Court
Woodstock, GA 30188
770.442.0988 Home
678.640.9671 Mobile






Quickie Builders Association WEB site
http://www.quickiebuilders.org


Yahoo! Groups Links










Quickie Builders Association WEB site
http://www.quickiebuilders.org


Yahoo! Groups Links






Re: N44BJ

David Posey <dlposey-atlanta@...>
 

Thanks for your opinion.

David Posey
dlposey-atlanta@...
112 Timber Ridge Court
Woodstock, GA 30188
770.442.0988 Home
678.640.9671 Mobile

[Original Message]
From: Kevin Fortin <kfortin@...>
To: <Q-LIST@...>
Date: 11/29/2004 10:31:25 PM
Subject: RE: [Q-LIST] N44BJ


David and gang,

In the below reference to a Corvair engine, my thoughts went back to my
dune buggy days. I was never impressed with the engine, but at the time
we could buy a complete car for $40.00, so price prevailed. I may be
crazy or just uninformed, but my thought was when I read this, I would
never want a Corvair engine on anything of mine that might kill me if it
quit.

Maybe someone has worked out the details of making the Corvair a
reliable aviation powerplant but I just wanted to throw out my
"terrestrial only" experience with the thing and say; I'm not so sure. I
had an engine overheat and seize on 2 occasions. (I have to admit, we
weren't too kind to them).

If I had the financial choice, (and I admit the O-200 can get a bit
spendy) I would go for the aviation engine, which I know is pretty darn
crude, but has been proven over the years as pretty darn bulletproof.

In any airplane that lands as fast as a Q, wants to avoid an off field
landing if at all possible. The landing speeds are so high the
probability for "bad" is too high to be ignored.

My opinion and nothing more,

Kevin Fortin
sales@...





-----Original Message-----
From: David Posey [mailto:dlposey-atlanta@...]
Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 5:48 PM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: [Q-LIST] N44BJ


Have purchased N44BJ less engine (O-200). Will be powered with a Corvair
when I finish. Does anyone on the list have any info relevant to this
Tri-Q ? If so please let me know. It will be greatly appreciated.


David Posey
dlposey-atlanta@...
112 Timber Ridge Court
Woodstock, GA 30188
770.442.0988 Home
678.640.9671 Mobile






Quickie Builders Association WEB site
http://www.quickiebuilders.org


Yahoo! Groups Links










Quickie Builders Association WEB site
http://www.quickiebuilders.org


Yahoo! Groups Links






Re: Help for new Q-200 pilot/owner

joseph.m.tygart.alion@...
 

OK Tim - What's up? Where is Cold Lake? Near Cold water? Joe



CW5 Joseph M. Tygart

Aviation Systems Engineer

AGSE - Fort Lee, VA 23801

804.7340326 Mobile: 910.5844100

T-Q2 (N672CP)

-----Original Message-----
From: Tim [mailto:tlc2@...]
Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2004 3:54 AM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Help for new Q-200 pilot/owner



Joe give me a call when in Cold Lake

594-5675
or cell
573-3160

Tim Cramb



Quickie Builders Association WEB site
http://www.quickiebuilders.org <http://www.quickiebuilders.org>








Yahoo! Groups Sponsor



ADVERTISEMENT

<http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=12994agvl/M=298184.5639630.6699735.3001176/D=gr
oups/S=1705065618:HM/EXP=1101891994/A=2434971/R=0/SIG=11eeoolb0/*http:/www.n
etflix.com/Default?mqso=60185400> click here



<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=298184.5639630.6699735.3001176/D=groups/S=
:HM/A=2434971/rand=551985650>



_____

Yahoo! Groups Links

* To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Q-LIST/
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Q-LIST/>


* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Q-LIST-unsubscribe@...
<mailto:Q-LIST-unsubscribe@...?subject=Unsubscribe>


* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Service.


Re: Help for new Q-200 pilot/owner

Tim <tlc2@...>
 

Joe give me a call when in Cold Lake

594-5675
or cell
573-3160

Tim Cramb


Re: Comet failure

L Koutz <koutzl@...>
 

Yes I went back and read about the pressure cycling problem. Glad I'm not building a Spam
can! But then again we are not trying to blow our planes up either. I have enough trouble
just getting gas to flow the right way.

Larry

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim" <tlc2@...>
To: <Q-LIST@...>
Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2004 3:20 AM
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Comet failure



and square passenger window...aka built in stress risers

Tim C
Cold Lake AB

Kevin Fortin wrote:

Mr. Koutz,

FYI: The Comet failed but to metal fatigue caused by
pressurization/depressurazition, not vibration.

Guess you don't like me much, huh?

Kevin


Re: Comet failure

Tim <tlc2@...>
 

and square passenger window...aka built in stress risers

Tim C
Cold Lake AB

Kevin Fortin wrote:

Mr. Koutz,

FYI: The Comet failed but to metal fatigue caused by
pressurization/depressurazition, not vibration.

Guess you don't like me much, huh?

Kevin

-----Original Message-----
From: L Koutz [mailto:koutzl@...]
Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 11:10 PM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] BTW: Final followup to the rest of the


Isn't that just real nice stir up the group and then leave!

I don't know what your point was in the last several posts but it sure

wasn't informative,
educational or productive. Glad to see you will be leaving.

You know I hear those aluminum things are known to break up due to
vibration. Back when you
were just a thought, I hear those Comet aircraft lost their tails due
to
that ugly
vibration. You better take your parachute just in case. Some of those
new fangled air'chines
could do the same. Then with that parachute you can jump out the ass
end.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Kevin Fortin" <kfortin@...>
To: <q-list@...>
Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2004 12:44 AM
Subject: [Q-LIST] BTW: Final followup to the rest of the



Guys,



Ooops,



I forgot that the implications of posting here was possible flaming
and
general bedlam. (Hopefully, I haven't awakened another sleeping
giant
like I did with controllability).



Anyway, tomorrow, I am spam-cannin' my backside down to Texas
(weather
permitting????) so I can't defend myself.



Enjoy yourselves,



Kevin



Quickie Builders Association WEB site
http://www.quickiebuilders.org


Yahoo! Groups Links









Quickie Builders Association WEB site
http://www.quickiebuilders.org




Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
[click here]


---------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

* To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Q-LIST/

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Q-LIST-unsubscribe@...

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.