Date   

Re: Anyone know gross for Q1 ?

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

Ralph------- There's enough room behingd the seat in a Quickie to
install a wedge style aux fuel tank. Could be 3--5 gallons and it's
close enough to the cg to not be a real problem. I'm not breaking new
ground here, but following the lead of Jinx and Hawk and also getting
alot of help from Robert Bounds. ---------- Canada Chris


--umm, info? FLOAM --inFLAMEation

David Haydon <dhaydon@...>
 

To no one in particular,
The more you know the less you know you know. Surely thatís what this
list and the net in general are about.
I joined to learn anything I could about my Q --- probably because I
didnít build it, but mostly cause its not a Cessna or Piper.
--This is pretty much the only source of info available. Thatís why it
really grates to see someoneís enthusiasm for any aspect of the design
or its development withered by the scorn of Grumpy oldies*. There
wouldnít be a Q2 or DF if someone hadnít wanted to think outside the
loop.

* (hereafter Groldies)

David Haydon --- (not having a dig at Larry Ė more thinking out loud on
the -sometimes- tone of this list.)

-----Original Message-----
From: Larry Hamm [mailto:LDHAMM@...]
Sent: Thursday, 2 December 2004 5:15 PM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Re: Foam???

Rob,

Where do you come up with this, umm, info? I don't think Safe-T-Poxy has

been around since it was discovered to contain carcinogens, some 15
years or so ago.

Why would one need to redesign the plane to use other epoxy??? I'm quite

sure many have been built using E-Z Poxy, West System epoxy, and my
personal favorite, Aeropoxy.

While there is CERTAINLY a lot of redesigning being done, I don't know
of any of it relating to the brand of epoxy being used.

Larry Hamm
Park City, UT
"SubyQ"

HAIQU_OZ wrote:
What brand name of epoxy is best?

The recommended epoxy is Safe-T-Poxy. Use anything else and you will
have to redesign the airplane.


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







Yahoo! Groups Sponsor


ADVERTISEMENT
HYPERLINK
"http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=1291dl9kd/M=298184.5639630.6699735.3001176/
D=groups/S=1705065618:HM/EXP=1102054578/A=2434971/R=0/SIG=11eeoolb0/*htt
p:/www.netflix.com/Default?mqso=60185400"click here

HYPERLINK
"http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=298184.5639630.6699735.3001176/D=group
s/S=:HM/A=2434971/rand=935796855"

_____

Yahoo! Groups Links
* To visit your group on the web, go to:
HYPERLINK
"http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Q-LIST/"http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Q-L
IST/

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
HYPERLINK
"mailto:Q-LIST-unsubscribe@...?subject=Unsubscribe"Q-LIST-un
subscribe@...

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

---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.777 / Virus Database: 524 - Release Date: 14/10/2004


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.777 / Virus Database: 524 - Release Date: 14/10/2004



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Re: certifying projects without logs

JMasal@...
 

In a message dated 12/2/04 5:50:50 PM Central Standard Time,
larry2@... writes:


There is a $10K fine for
making a false statement on the form.
velly intelesting, thanks for dat.
j.


Re: Anyone know gross for Q1 ?

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

Ryan--------- I use a GSC wood prop made in British Columbia,
Canada. I have the "big wheel " mod so I get to run a 52 inch prop.
I don't remember the exact pitch , but it's about all I can get from the
ground adjustment. I'm guessing about 28 degrees. I have the 2.58
reduction in the gear box.
Any Quickie with 52 hp should get at least a 125 mph cruise if it's
setup well. My cowl is a bit draggy and I could probably get a bit more
with some cleaning up , but for now it's fine. Have fun-------------
Canada Chris


Re: Experts???

Larry Hamm <LDHAMM@...>
 

Jeff,
Yes, I am aware of that, but someone new to the list might take it as gospel. That's what chaps my hide! Getting to be quite a number of them on this list, and I see the D-Fly list gets a "larikin" on occasion, too.

Q's are a challenge to build and fly anyway, without having wild assertions made with little basis in fact. I've only been around this list four years, and still prefer to let the more seasoned members respond to requests for info. None of them challenged this post, so I stepped in.

Thanks for the response,
Larry

Letempt, Jeffrey CW4 wrote:

Larry,
You have to watch very closely the information that comes from some people
(I know you know this). Certain individuals will make wild statements or
claims just because they have bought an airplane, even though they have
never done any work on it or even flown it (or maybe they do not even have
an airplane at all). That is one of the drawbacks of these email lists,
someone can claim they know everything when in fact they may have never even
have sat in the airplane they are proclaiming to be an expert on.


Epoxy

David Haydon <dhaydon@...>
 

For what its worth the current Aircraft Spruce Cat. states that RUTAN
Aircraft Factory now recommend WEST SYSTEM EPOXY .


--------is this the word from the mount?

David Haydon


---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.777 / Virus Database: 524 - Release Date: 14/10/2004


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.777 / Virus Database: 524 - Release Date: 14/10/2004


Re: certifying projects without logs

Larry Severson
 

At 10:17 AM 12/3/2004 +1100, you wrote:

JIm,

just a thought - could you simply declare a new build? your "ahem, raw materials might just happen to be different from others "and your 51% rule will be a whole lot easier to comply with"

Too simple?
Yes, too simple. The FAA has a detailed list of construction components needed to create the 51%. It needs to be consulted before trying that call. The rule has nothing to do with the time involved. There is a $10K fine for making a false statement on the form.


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


Re: VW variations and Liquid cooled heads

David Haydon <dhaydon@...>
 

Mike ,
I have an Aeropower (West Australian ) 2074 cc (D)LO-126/1 is rated at
78HP at 3600RPM and 72HP at 3200RPM which performs very well Ė they have
a good and informative web site
---http://www.arach.net.au/~munks/AEmenu.htm
Cheers
David Haydon

-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Harris [mailto:peterjfharris@...]
Sent: Thursday, 2 December 2004 12:07 PM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] VW variations and Liquid cooled heads

* Mike my Revmaster 2100D normally aspirated published power
curve shows peak power a touch over 65HP at 3200rpm.
Peter
----- Original Message -----
From: Mike Perry
To: Q-LIST@...
Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2004 11:50 AM
Subject: [Q-LIST] VW variations and Liquid cooled heads


After reading James Postma's note below, I wondered: Has anyone used
a
Type 1 VW engine other than the 65 hp Revmaster.

---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.777 / Virus Database: 524 - Release Date: 14/10/2004


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.777 / Virus Database: 524 - Release Date: 14/10/2004



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Re: certifying projects without logs

John ten Have <Jtenhave@...>
 

JIm,

just a thought - could you simply declare a new build? your "ahem, raw materials might just happen to be different from others "and your 51% rule will be a whole lot easier to comply with"

Too simple?

John

----- Original Message -----
From: JMasal@...
To: Q-LIST@...
Sent: Friday, December 03, 2004 2:28 AM
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] certifying projects without logs


In a message dated 11/28/04 7:35:53 PM Central Standard Time,
micallahan@... writes:


> IF the plane had never been certified, it
> basically doesn't exist,

Ok, Mike, I have one that was taken off the FAA registry after a pretty good
crash. Do you suppose this one exists? Seems like it wont if its not on the
registry anymore.

j.






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




Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT





------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.


McKirdy elevator mod

Paul Spackman
 

Anyone on the list tried the elevator mod (message # 10108)? James Postma have you thought about this one? Gary are you still on the list?
Paul Spackman
Q-2 Gu Canard


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Jazz up your holiday email with celebrity designs. Learn more.


Re: Interesting Xmas present

Steve <sham@...>
 

Looks like Malachecs (sp) Plane, I bought one for $69.00 on Ebay.
Steve Ham

----- Original Message -----
From: HAIQU_OZ
To: Q-LIST@...
Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2004 9:10 PM
Subject: [Q-LIST] Interesting Xmas present




http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=26438&item=4507593427&rd=1






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




Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT





------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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: Foam???

Larry Hamm <LDHAMM@...>
 

Rob,

Well, I guess YOU won't be building or modifying any Q's, since Safe-T-Poxy is no longer available. Your statement may stand, but not with any credibility.

Yes, according to QAC, ANY variation from plans makes it a "new design", which is not the same as having to "redesign the airplane". We still call 'em Q's even if they have the Jim-Bob six pack, or an extra fuel tank, or the tailwheel on the wrong end, or even (gasp!) a bigger rudder. (QAC can protest, if they like. They don't return my calls anymore.)

To anyone else wishing to build or modify a Q, please don't bother Burt right now. He's kinda busy. Rest assured that there ARE improved epoxy systems available through Aircraft Spruce that will do the job quite well.

Composite Design touts it's EZ-Poxy as being the successor to Safe-T-Poxy, but it's certainly not the same stuff. West System says that Burt recommends their product for "certain homebuilt applications, particularly where a moisture resistant epoxy is desired". I use Aeropoxy due to it's ease of use and very low odor. I can do layups in the house without getting divorced.

Now, I'M willing to be educated:

Is there ANYONE currently flying (or crashed!), who used something other than Safe-T-Poxy, or completed a project that was started with Safe-T-Poxy and finished with another brand, who has encountered ANY bonding or structural problems, that could remotely be related to your epoxy? Did you "have to redesign the airplane" to avoid those problems? C'mon, guys, let me have it!

Don't we have enough real challenges in building and flying these birds, without these kinds of comments being made? It's tough enough on us newbies without that!

Damn, for someone who's had a Quickie kit for, umm, (has it arrived yet?), you sure have a lot of answers.
Love your country, though. R&R in 1970. Didn't get much past the league clubs in Sydney, however.

Larry Hamm
"SubyQ"



HAIQU_OZ wrote:

Larry,
Until I see comparative strength data for one of those systems using
the same layup conditions, the statement stands. It's what was
specified for the aircraft, and using anything else immediately makes
this a new design PER THE MANUFACTURER'S OWN STATEMENTS.
Yes, I'm aware other systems have been used successfully. However, the
effects of mixing parts made by two different systems has never been
explored as far as I can tell.
I'd trust very few people to evaluate this for me, Burt being one of
those few.
Rob
--- In Q-LIST@..., Larry Hamm <LDHAMM@X...> wrote:

Rob,

Where do you come up with this, umm, info? I don't think Safe-T-Poxy
has
been around since it was discovered to contain carcinogens, some 15 years or so ago.

Why would one need to redesign the plane to use other epoxy??? I'm
quite
sure many have been built using E-Z Poxy, West System epoxy, and my personal favorite, Aeropoxy.

While there is CERTAINLY a lot of redesigning being done, I don't know of any of it relating to the brand of epoxy being used.

Larry Hamm
Park City, UT
"SubyQ"

HAIQU_OZ wrote:

What brand name of epoxy is best?

The recommended epoxy is Safe-T-Poxy. Use anything else and you will
have to redesign the airplane.


Re: Foam???

Dave Richardson <dave@...>
 

The supplier of Safe-t-poxy/EZpoxy has also changed hands a couple of times
and there have been changes to the formulation as well.

Hey, the salesman told you they're the same, so it must be true! At least
that means we don't have to redesign the whole plane.

Dave Richardson

-----Original Message-----
From: larry severson [mailto:larry2@...]
Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2004 10:51 AM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Re: Foam???




Where do you come up with this, umm, info? I don't think Safe-T-Poxy has
been around since it was discovered to contain carcinogens, some 15
years or so ago.
I have been told by Aviation Spruce that in fact, EZpoxy is Safe-T-Poxy
under a different name.


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




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


Yahoo! Groups Links


Re: Foam???

James Postma <james@...>
 

Is not the orange more common now for the flying surfaces?

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: "HAIQU_OZ" <judd@...>
To: <Q-LIST@...>
Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2004 5:59 PM
Subject: [Q-LIST] Re: Foam???




Hi Rich,

--- In Q-LIST@..., Armilite@a... wrote:
Hello:
What is the recommended brand names, part numbers, for the foam used
today
for building the different Q200 parts?
This was a Trade Secret (tm) but can be found by studying Rutan's
work. The QAC vaguely described it as "Orange, Red, Blue and Green foam".

The Blue is 2lb/ft3 large-cell styrofoam billets, and is used on the
wings, canard and rudder.
The Green is 1" thick U-Thane 210 which is 2lb/ft3 low-density
urethane. It is used on the fuselage.
The Red and Orange are two different densities of PVC foam, and are
used on everything else.

Is there anyone offering precut foam?
Not for years. This is an obsolete and unsupported design.

Any recommendations for brand name foam cutters tools?
Make your own like everyone else. It does show how to do that in the
plans, which I assume you haven't read yet.

What brand name of epoxy is best?
The recommended epoxy is Safe-T-Poxy. Use anything else and you will
have to redesign the airplane.

Does anyone have molds for any of the Q200 parts?
At one time, yes. But no longer, afaik. See answer to precut foam
question.

Rob







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


Yahoo! Groups Links








Re: Foam???

Larry Severson
 

Where do you come up with this, umm, info? I don't think Safe-T-Poxy has
been around since it was discovered to contain carcinogens, some 15
years or so ago.
I have been told by Aviation Spruce that in fact, EZpoxy is Safe-T-Poxy under a different name.


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


Re: VW variations and Liquid cooled heads

James Postma <james@...>
 

Mike,

Revmaster and Great Plains upgraded the 64 hp to 75 hp with large valve
heads. These are available from them or most VW suppliers. The second plug
hole must be drilled. Most Q2 people are flying these heads and they
perform as promised. The heavy duty heads last longer but need a 3/4 inch
reach plug.

Rene and I are using 94 mm pistons and modified camshaft and there is more
power here.

As to continuous power, Rev says 65 hp. This is over 5 gph. I think you
should stay at less than 4 gph for range and reliability. The extra power
is for take off and climb. Anything less than 75 hp does not have enough
power to fly over 1,000 lbs gross safely. I've scraped rocks at 100 fpm and
it is not fun.

Steve says the liquid heads are lighter. Coolant will probable add weight.
Objections to Jabiru are price and units in service (development again), and
the Corvair has not yet been developed for the Q2. I wish someone would do
it as I think the Corvair is the most promising all things considered.

Don't underestimate the development cycle. GM or Cessna would spend $$$$$
and time and many units doing what we are. That's why they have recalls.
This is the advantage of the VW. It is well developed and the known
problems have and are being addressed by many persons. Revmaster and Great
Plains have a factory solution. QAC had the O200. Everything else is up to
you. You can pay $14,000 for a Jabiru and help them developed the system.
This would also be true for the liquid heads.

I'm waiting for a developed Corvair package. There's lots of good looking
engines, but none flying in a Q2.

I've got my fire extinguisher ready on this one.

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: "Mike Perry" <dmperry1012@...>
To: <Q-LIST@...>
Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2004 5:50 PM
Subject: [Q-LIST] VW variations and Liquid cooled heads



After reading James Postma's note below, I wondered: Has anyone used a
Type 1 VW engine other than the 65 hp Revmaster? Options I am aware of
and
factory claims:

-- Revmaster R2100: 77 hp at 3300 rpm
-- Aero-Vee 2002: 80 hp continuous at 3400 rpm
-- Great Plains 2180 cc: 76 hp takeoff at 3600 rpm, 70 hp continuous
-- Great Plains "rear drive" 2180 cc: 80 hp takeoff, 75 hp continuous
(Steve Bennett once told me the main hp difference was better
intake
manifold airflow)

As far as the 100 hp liquid cooled head VW, I see greater weight, more
complex installation and higher price. Why not go Jabiru or Corvair?

Mike Perry


At 08:21 PM 11/30/2004 -0800, James Postma wrote:
Guys,

Have you seen this. 100 hp.

A little cheaper than an O-200.
<http://www.greatplainsas.com/llc1.html>http://www.greatplainsas.com/llc1.h
tml


James Postma







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


Yahoo! Groups Links








Experts???

Letempt, Jeffrey CW4 <jeffrey.letempt@...>
 

Larry,

You have to watch very closely the information that comes from some people
(I know you know this). Certain individuals will make wild statements or
claims just because they have bought an airplane, even though they have
never done any work on it or even flown it (or maybe they do not even have
an airplane at all). That is one of the drawbacks of these email lists,
someone can claim they know everything when in fact they may have never even
have sat in the airplane they are proclaiming to be an expert on.

For my airplanes (a pair of Dragonfly's) the PTM&W AeroPoxy has worked very
well. The only drawback for guys who have maybe used the old epoxy with a
pump is the ratio is different.

Jeff
Dragonfly MK-IIH N41GK, 24.1 hours on the modifications and 390.1 hours on
the airplane
Dragonfly MK-III N1277W - a few years working on the MK-I to MK-III
conversion.....a few years to go

-----Original Message-----
From: Larry Hamm [mailto:LDHAMM@...]
Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2004 12:15 AM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Re: Foam???



Rob,

Where do you come up with this, umm, info? I don't think Safe-T-Poxy has
been around since it was discovered to contain carcinogens, some 15
years or so ago.

Why would one need to redesign the plane to use other epoxy??? I'm quite
sure many have been built using E-Z Poxy, West System epoxy, and my
personal favorite, Aeropoxy.

While there is CERTAINLY a lot of redesigning being done, I don't know
of any of it relating to the brand of epoxy being used.

Larry Hamm
Park City, UT
"SubyQ"

HAIQU_OZ wrote:
What brand name of epoxy is best?

The recommended epoxy is Safe-T-Poxy. Use anything else and you will
have to redesign the airplane.



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


Yahoo! Groups Links


Re: Foam???

Bruce Crain
 

Rob,
I used EZ poxie for my Waddelow wing and canard and tri gear lay ups etc. Works fine and the ratio pump is a must. I didn't really look in to the other epoxies but have used Aero Poxie and really like the high temp room cure epoxie from Adtech for under the cowl applications (high heat).
Bruce


________________________________________________________________
Juno Gift Certificates
Give the gift of Internet access this holiday season.
http://www.juno.com/give


Re: certifying projects without logs

JMasal@...
 

In a message dated 11/28/04 7:35:53 PM Central Standard Time,
micallahan@... writes:


IF the plane had never been certified, it
basically doesn't exist,
Ok, Mike, I have one that was taken off the FAA registry after a pretty good
crash. Do you suppose this one exists? Seems like it wont if its not on the
registry anymore.

j.


One Man/Plane & World

Tim <tlc2@...>
 

Just about to get underway 'rumor is'

Steve Fossett and yet another Burt Rutan Airplane

http://www.globalflyer.com/Home/index.jsp

Tim C
Cold Lk.