Date   

Re: newbie

j tay <mnjtaylor2001@...>
 

Thanks Doug. I am so excited i want to do it NOW. I have printed off everything from QBA and paid my subscription for the newsletter and ordered several back issues searched websites and basically ignored my job for several days. LOL I will be out of town during Field of Dreams or I would be there. I am interested in purchasing your Q2 plans. Just can't get enough quickie stuff as i want.
Micheal

Doug Humble <hawkidoug@...> wrote:
Welcome Micheal! Start by going to the QBA web site
http://www.quickiebuilders.org/ and surf it thoroughly. I mean click every
button. Then I suggest you come to Sullivan MO on Sept. 23 thru 25th for the
"Field of Dreams" Fly-in (under Events on the web site) to see several Q's
and maybe get a ride in one. I have a complete set of Q2 plans I could sell
you. You could visually see them before you buy them at Sullivan. I would
also highly recommend buying the back issues of the Newsletter (if you click
evey button on the web site, you'll see how to order them), and since I'm
the current newsletter editor, I might as well say you should subscribe to
it as well.

Try your darnest to make Sullivan MO. You need to be there!!!

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

----- Original Message -----
From: "j tay" <mnjtaylor2001@...>
To: <Q-LIST@...>
Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 1:49 PM
Subject: [Q-LIST] newbie


I just purchased a Q2 that is approx.50% complete (Revmaster engine). I
have no plans (except the ones I bought off eBay which are not very good).
I need some help! The basics are done, canard,wing tail but that is about
all. I am looking for original plans or good copies. Anyone in the Tulsa
Oklahoma area with a Q to look at would be my hero. I do not have the
center console or arm rests and have no control stick or idea how to
fabricate one.
Thanks in advance for the help.
Micheal


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com






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


Yahoo! Groups Links








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





SPONSORED LINKS
Aviation maintenance Aviation maintenance training Aviation maintenance schools Aviation maintenance schools Aviation Aviation art

---------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS


Visit your group "Q-LIST" on the web.

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.


---------------------------------




__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com


Re: newbie

damiantwinsport@...
 

Michael, I second that ! I am restoring a crashed Q200 and I made it a point to attend both Sam Hoskin's Spring Fling and the Livermore fly-in even though I had to fly comercial and rent cars both trips were worth every penny ( Bring Camera) Loads of ways of getting the same thing accomplished and loads of things to NOT DO. These guys are a wealth of info collectively take advantage of it if you can.

Regards,
Damian Gregory N8427 Q200

-----Original Message-----
From: Doug Humble <hawkidoug@...>
To: Q-LIST@...
Sent: Wed, 14 Sep 2005 15:21:41 -0500
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] newbie


Welcome Micheal! Start by going to the QBA web site
http://www.quickiebuilders.org/ and surf it thoroughly. I mean click every
button. Then I suggest you come to Sullivan MO on Sept. 23 thru 25th for the
"Field of Dreams" Fly-in (under Events on the web site) to see several Q's
and maybe get a ride in one. I have a complete set of Q2 plans I could sell
you. You could visually see them before you buy them at Sullivan. I would
also highly recommend buying the back issues of the Newsletter (if you click
evey button on the web site, you'll see how to order them), and since I'm
the current newsletter editor, I might as well say you should subscribe to
it as well.

Try your darnest to make Sullivan MO. You need to be there!!!

Doug "Hawkeye" Humble
www.asignabove.net
Omaha NE
N25974
----- Original Message -----
From: "j tay" <mnjtaylor2001@...>
To: <Q-LIST@...>
Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 1:49 PM
Subject: [Q-LIST] newbie


I just purchased a Q2 that is approx.50% complete (Revmaster engine). I
have no plans (except the ones I bought off eBay which are not very good).
I need some help! The basics are done, canard,wing tail but that is about
all. I am looking for original plans or good copies. Anyone in the Tulsa
Oklahoma area with a Q to look at would be my hero. I do not have the
center console or arm rests and have no control stick or idea how to
fabricate one.
Thanks in advance for the help.
Micheal


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com






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: newbie

Doug Humble <hawkidoug@...>
 

There are also plans at the QBA site.

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

----- Original Message -----
From: <rondefly@...>
To: <Q-LIST@...>
Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 3:18 PM
Subject: RE: [Q-LIST] newbie


Check Jon's site, he had some plans on it.
http://www.finleyweb.net/default.asp?id=113

Ron

Ron & Carolyn Triano Q-200 N4710P
My Web
http://bld01.ipowerweb.com/contentmanagement/websites/rtrianoc/page8.html
Quickie 1:
http://bld01.ipowerweb.com/contentmanagement/websites/rtrianoc/page9.html


-----Original Message-----
From: Q-LIST@... [mailto:Q-LIST@...]On Behalf Of j
tay
Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 11:49 AM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: [Q-LIST] newbie

I just purchased a Q2 that is approx.50% complete (Revmaster engine). I have
no plans (except the ones I bought off eBay which are not very good). I need
some help! The basics are done, canard,wing tail but that is about all. I am
looking for original plans or good copies. Anyone in the Tulsa Oklahoma area
with a Q to look at would be my hero. I do not have the center console or
arm rests and have no control stick or idea how to fabricate one.
Thanks in advance for the help.
Micheal


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com




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





SPONSORED LINKS
Aviation maintenance
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Aviation+maintenance&w1=Aviation+mainte
nance&w2=Aviation+maintenance+training&w3=Aviation+maintenance+schools&w4=Av
iation+maintenance+schools&w5=Aviation&w6=Aviation+art&c=6&s=161&.sig=NYqbfr
CRSu-_RfVcTvi4nA>
Aviation maintenance training
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Aviation+maintenance+training&w1=Aviati
on+maintenance&w2=Aviation+maintenance+training&w3=Aviation+maintenance+scho
ols&w4=Aviation+maintenance+schools&w5=Aviation&w6=Aviation+art&c=6&s=161&.s
ig=UheaD83XCnCASi%20>
Aviation maintenance schools
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Aviation+maintenance+schools&w1=Aviatio
n+maintenance&w2=Aviation+maintenance+training&w3=Aviation+maintenance+schoo
ls&w4=Aviation+maintenance+schools&w5=Aviation&w6=Aviation+art&c=6&s=161&.si
g=aX8ElLSzXlWeeJ4%20>
Aviation maintenance schools
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Aviation+maintenance+schools&w1=Aviatio
n+maintenance&w2=Aviation+maintenance+training&w3=Aviation+maintenance+schoo
ls&w4=Aviation+maintenance+schools&w5=Aviation&w6=Aviation+art&c=6&s=161&.si
g=aX8ElLSzXlWeeJ4%20>
Aviation
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Aviation&w1=Aviation+maintenance&w2=Avi
ation+maintenance+training&w3=Aviation+maintenance+schools&w4=Aviation+maint
enance+schools&w5=Aviation&w6=Aviation+art&c=6&s=161&.sig=dx8FsS6KYgxHm3RuBm
YoSA>
Aviation art
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Aviation+art&w1=Aviation+maintenance&w2
=Aviation+maintenance+training&w3=Aviation+maintenance+schools&w4=Aviation+m
aintenance+schools&w5=Aviation&w6=Aviation+art&c=6&s=161&.sig=dRTZGQXiIldZ3q
X6IHfOfQ>

_____

YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

* Visit your group " Q-LIST <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Q-LIST>
" on the web.

* 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
Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .

_____







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


Yahoo! Groups Links






Q-Talk Newsletter

Doug Humble <hawkidoug@...>
 

If you were suppose to get a pdf file version of the newsletter, you should have it by now. If you haven't gotten it, email me at qtalk@... and we'll try again.

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


Re: newbie

Doug Humble <hawkidoug@...>
 

Welcome Micheal! Start by going to the QBA web site http://www.quickiebuilders.org/ and surf it thoroughly. I mean click every button. Then I suggest you come to Sullivan MO on Sept. 23 thru 25th for the "Field of Dreams" Fly-in (under Events on the web site) to see several Q's and maybe get a ride in one. I have a complete set of Q2 plans I could sell you. You could visually see them before you buy them at Sullivan. I would also highly recommend buying the back issues of the Newsletter (if you click evey button on the web site, you'll see how to order them), and since I'm the current newsletter editor, I might as well say you should subscribe to it as well.

Try your darnest to make Sullivan MO. You need to be there!!!

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

----- Original Message -----
From: "j tay" <mnjtaylor2001@...>
To: <Q-LIST@...>
Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 1:49 PM
Subject: [Q-LIST] newbie


I just purchased a Q2 that is approx.50% complete (Revmaster engine). I have no plans (except the ones I bought off eBay which are not very good). I need some help! The basics are done, canard,wing tail but that is about all. I am looking for original plans or good copies. Anyone in the Tulsa Oklahoma area with a Q to look at would be my hero. I do not have the center console or arm rests and have no control stick or idea how to fabricate one.
Thanks in advance for the help.
Micheal


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com





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


Yahoo! Groups Links







Re: newbie

rondefly@...
 

-----Original Message-----
From: Q-LIST@... [mailto:Q-LIST@...]On Behalf Of j
tay
Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 11:49 AM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: [Q-LIST] newbie

I just purchased a Q2 that is approx.50% complete (Revmaster engine). I have
no plans (except the ones I bought off eBay which are not very good). I need
some help! The basics are done, canard,wing tail but that is about all. I am
looking for original plans or good copies. Anyone in the Tulsa Oklahoma area
with a Q to look at would be my hero. I do not have the center console or
arm rests and have no control stick or idea how to fabricate one.
Thanks in advance for the help.
Micheal


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com





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





SPONSORED LINKS
Aviation maintenance
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Aviation+maintenance&w1=Aviation+mainte
nance&w2=Aviation+maintenance+training&w3=Aviation+maintenance+schools&w4=Av
iation+maintenance+schools&w5=Aviation&w6=Aviation+art&c=6&s=161&.sig=NYqbfr
CRSu-_RfVcTvi4nA>
Aviation maintenance training
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Aviation+maintenance+training&w1=Aviati
on+maintenance&w2=Aviation+maintenance+training&w3=Aviation+maintenance+scho
ols&w4=Aviation+maintenance+schools&w5=Aviation&w6=Aviation+art&c=6&s=161&.s
ig=UheaD83XCnCASi%20>
Aviation maintenance schools
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Aviation+maintenance+schools&w1=Aviatio
n+maintenance&w2=Aviation+maintenance+training&w3=Aviation+maintenance+schoo
ls&w4=Aviation+maintenance+schools&w5=Aviation&w6=Aviation+art&c=6&s=161&.si
g=aX8ElLSzXlWeeJ4%20>
Aviation maintenance schools
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Aviation+maintenance+schools&w1=Aviatio
n+maintenance&w2=Aviation+maintenance+training&w3=Aviation+maintenance+schoo
ls&w4=Aviation+maintenance+schools&w5=Aviation&w6=Aviation+art&c=6&s=161&.si
g=aX8ElLSzXlWeeJ4%20>
Aviation
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Aviation&w1=Aviation+maintenance&w2=Avi
ation+maintenance+training&w3=Aviation+maintenance+schools&w4=Aviation+maint
enance+schools&w5=Aviation&w6=Aviation+art&c=6&s=161&.sig=dx8FsS6KYgxHm3RuBm
YoSA>
Aviation art
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Aviation+art&w1=Aviation+maintenance&w2
=Aviation+maintenance+training&w3=Aviation+maintenance+schools&w4=Aviation+m
aintenance+schools&w5=Aviation&w6=Aviation+art&c=6&s=161&.sig=dRTZGQXiIldZ3q
X6IHfOfQ>

_____

YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

* Visit your group " Q-LIST <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Q-LIST>
" on the web.

* 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
Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .

_____


Re: Original Builder Poll

n17pf <FisherPaul@...>
 

Builder/Owner: Paul A. Fisher
Aircraft: Q-200 N17PF 1200 hours
Original Kit purchased 22Apr1983; first flight 13Aug1990 (sorry, I
don't remember the serial number from QAC)
Engine: Continental O-200 - stock
Based at Davenport Iowa (KDVN)

In 15 years of flying this plane I have had my share
of "experiences". It is on its second engine (purchased the second
from Q200 driver Art Jewett before his death). Originally I was
going to pump up the original engine (it was reaching TBO) like
Patillo, but instead I sold it as part of my transition to the dark
side of the force. :-)

I've replaced the alternator on the accessory case for a belt driven
model, the vacuum pump has given up twice, I've replaced Mags twice
(or was it three times?!?). It still leaks some oil. I replaced the
oil filter with a cooler because I couldn't keep the temps in range
(too lazy to build a plenum!). It had a stuck valve once in
Albuquerque, and I've had two episodes of "vapor lock" that I
attribute to the header tank being too full.

The plane has been to Oshkosh 14 times (it's only 1.5 hours away!);
Tucson AZ; Edwards AFB California; Sun 'n Fun three or four times
including one excursion to the Bahamas. Also I believe it is the
only plane to attend every single Ottawa/Burlington/Sullivan fly-in
ever held (at least so far!).

The airframe is pretty stock. The only exceptions I can think of
are the reflexor (as described in one of the past Qtalks);
differential hand brakes replacing the single control in the plans;
and the LaRue brake mounts (also described in Qtalk). I haven't
done the Gall wheel alignment yet, but I still intend to. I have
too much fun flying it to get that done!

I have not built an auxillary fuel tank. The plane has a fuel range
of about three hours and 45 minutes. The pilot has a bladder range
of about three hours, so the aux tank didn't seem necessary! ;-)

As Bob and Jim have both said it is a pleasure to fly.

I hope to see you all in Sullivan in a couple of weeks!

- Paul


--- In Q-LIST@..., "Jim Patillo"
<logistics_engineering@m...> wrote:

Fella's,

I'm taking a general poll to find out how many original
builder/flyers we have amongst us. If you bought your kit from QAC
and are finishing, or have flown please let us know who you are. I
think you'll see something interesting here.

Please note how many hours you've flown your plane, serial #, what
engine you use or any that you've tried, any major structural,
engine or other problems over the years.

I'll go first:

Jim Patillo
Aircraft: Q200 N45JP Q200 - 650 hours
Serial Number:#2468 - Kit purchased October 1980
Engine: Continental - pumped up & dual electronic ignitions

This airplane has never suffered any deviation from the runway and
is totally controllable though all ranges of ground taxi and
flight.

The engine has had three failures; The first - fuel starvation
100'
off the runway which was a vapor lock (throw those gascolators
away!). The second was also fuel starvation about 100' off the
runway where I had mistakenly taken off while pumping a full aux
tank into a full header/main tank. The other was a push rod seal
failure which lost all the oil and almost created a forced
landing.

This airplane suffered what appeared to be the only documented
canard failure to date due to a poor testing process at the
factory.

Other than that N46JP Q200 has been a pleasure to fly.

Regards,

JIm Patillo N46JP Q200


newbie

j tay <mnjtaylor2001@...>
 

I just purchased a Q2 that is approx.50% complete (Revmaster engine). I have no plans (except the ones I bought off eBay which are not very good). I need some help! The basics are done, canard,wing tail but that is about all. I am looking for original plans or good copies. Anyone in the Tulsa Oklahoma area with a Q to look at would be my hero. I do not have the center console or arm rests and have no control stick or idea how to fabricate one.
Thanks in advance for the help.
Micheal


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com


Re: Original Builder Poll

Bob Farnam <bfarnam@...>
 

Here's mine.

Bob Farnam
Aircraft: Q200 N200QK - 470 hours
Serial number 2351 - Purchased in 1981, first flight in May 1998
Engine: Continental O200A - stock engine with 700 hours SMOH
Based at Livermore, CA

The engine had an exhaust valve leak (low compression) which surfaced at
about 120 hours. Valve grind done on that cylinder. It has been fine since.
Erratic oil pressures during original flight test at about 20 hours traced
to sticky oil pressure relief valve. No other problems other than some oil
leaks.
Like Jim's, this airplane is completely controllable on the runway. It was
the development airplane for the "six-pack". The fuel system is totally Q200
stock
(no gascolator) and has never had a problem. I added an aux. fuel tank 5
years ago which has also been trouble free. It gives me 4 hrs 20 minutes to
dry tanks.
This airplane is tested to 1300 lbs gross and I routinely fly it at 1250
lbs. This airplane has been to OSH twice, Ottawa twice, and all over the
western states.
Also like Jim's, a pleasure to fly.
Bob F.
N200QK
EAA Flight Advisor

-----Original Message-----
From: Q-LIST@... [mailto:Q-LIST@...]On Behalf Of
Jim Patillo
Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 10:03 AM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: [Q-LIST] Original Builder Poll



Fella's,

I'm taking a general poll to find out how many original
builder/flyers we have amongst us. If you bought your kit from QAC
and are finishing, or have flown please let us know who you are. I
think you'll see something interesting here.

Please note how many hours you've flown your plane, serial #, what
engine you use or any that you've tried, any major structural,
engine or other problems over the years.

I'll go first:

Jim Patillo
Aircraft: Q200 N45JP Q200 - 650 hours
Serial Number:#2468 - Kit purchased October 1980
Engine: Continental - pumped up & dual electronic ignitions

This airplane has never suffered any deviation from the runway and
is totally controllable though all ranges of ground taxi and flight.

The engine has had three failures; The first - fuel starvation 100'
off the runway which was a vapor lock (throw those gascolators
away!). The second was also fuel starvation about 100' off the
runway where I had mistakenly taken off while pumping a full aux
tank into a full header/main tank. The other was a push rod seal
failure which lost all the oil and almost created a forced landing.

This airplane suffered what appeared to be the only documented
canard failure to date due to a poor testing process at the factory.

Other than that N46JP Q200 has been a pleasure to fly.

Regards,

JIm Patillo N46JP Q200





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





----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

a.. Visit your group "Q-LIST" on the web.

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.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--


Original Builder Poll

Jim Patillo
 

Fella's,

I'm taking a general poll to find out how many original
builder/flyers we have amongst us. If you bought your kit from QAC
and are finishing, or have flown please let us know who you are. I
think you'll see something interesting here.

Please note how many hours you've flown your plane, serial #, what
engine you use or any that you've tried, any major structural,
engine or other problems over the years.

I'll go first:

Jim Patillo
Aircraft: Q200 N45JP Q200 - 650 hours
Serial Number:#2468 - Kit purchased October 1980
Engine: Continental - pumped up & dual electronic ignitions

This airplane has never suffered any deviation from the runway and
is totally controllable though all ranges of ground taxi and flight.

The engine has had three failures; The first - fuel starvation 100'
off the runway which was a vapor lock (throw those gascolators
away!). The second was also fuel starvation about 100' off the
runway where I had mistakenly taken off while pumping a full aux
tank into a full header/main tank. The other was a push rod seal
failure which lost all the oil and almost created a forced landing.

This airplane suffered what appeared to be the only documented
canard failure to date due to a poor testing process at the factory.

Other than that N46JP Q200 has been a pleasure to fly.

Regards,

JIm Patillo N46JP Q200


Kevin Fortin - First Flights

Jim Patillo
 

Kevin,

Are you totally confident you've solved the fuel starvation problem
on your Q. If so what did you do to fix it? Have you "fuel flowed"
the plane with the tail off and the rear of the main fuselage on the
floor. If you haven't done so, you might want to cause that
simulates takeoff attitude.

Have you tied your plane down and ran to full power for a few
minutes so you can see the engine is not stumbling?

Do you have a chase plane, emergency ground crew and flight sylabus
in place for your 40 hour fly off?

When do you plan to get airborne again?

Regards and good luck,

Jim Patillo N46JP Q200 Asphalt advisor
--- In Q-LIST@..., "Peter Harris" <peterjfharris@b...>
wrote:
Kevin have you read all the posts about blocked air vents. That
will cause the starvation you had.
Peter
----- Original Message -----
From: Kevin Fortin
To: Q-LIST@...
Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2005 11:31 AM
Subject: RE: [Q-LIST] Building philosophy (was Engines)


Mike,

Just make sure what you do engine-wise is good and solid. I have
about 90
seconds (total time) in my Q200 (N275CH) where fuel starvation
let gravity
get the upper hand. I managed to get it around the pattern and
back on the
ground but, let me tell, you the pucker factor is beyond the
peg. These are
fast little birds that don't appreciate off field landings,
fences, trees,
etc.

Kevin Fortin
Nervous and looking forward to trying again.


-----Original Message-----
From: Q-LIST@... [mailto:Q-LIST@...] On
Behalf Of
Mike Perry
Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 7:06 PM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: [Q-LIST] Building philosophy (was Engines)

Jim, let me put this a different way:

If you will only use what already has "a gazillion hours of
proven
performance" you will end up with a Cessna-150, a Piper Cherokee
or a
Boeing 747. You won't end up with an experimental aircraft.

When you build an experimental aircraft you can follow standard
practice
and end up with a reasonable and safe aircraft that you can test
in 40
hours and then feel reasonably safe to carry family/friends. Or
you can
try something radically new, in which case 40 hours is only the
beginning. However, none of us can neglect the details that
make us (and
our flying partners) safe as we go along. I think this is MORE
important
for those of us currently building than for you guys who are
thru the test
period.

I wrote my earlier comments partly because I think alternate
engines can be
safe and effective, but mostly because I think ANY change from
standard
practice needs very careful thought, testing and consultation
with
experts. That includes electronic ignition.

I agree that making only one change in a functioning
experimental is
reasonable.

Mike Perry


At 03:32 PM 9/12/2005 +0000, Jim Patillo wrote:

>Mike, I just couldn't let you get away without another
statement on
>this subject.
>
>While I also respect your comments, I deal with reality while
you are
>still in the dreaming stage! My plane flys a lot. Yours
doesn't. In
>fact you don't have a complete and flying Q - do you? You can
>speculate all you want but until you are flying your family and
>friends behind some particular engine, its still speculation on
you
>part. Let's get real here! What other proven engine outperforms
the
>0200 in HP and reliability in a Q - NONE! What is the price for
your
>life? Is it another 3-4K? Thats pretty cheap, wouldn't you say.
Hey
>0200's are just engines and subject to failure as well but LOOK
AT
>THE RECORD!
>
>The e-mails from guys who regualrly fly Q200's make my point
>perfectly and you know what I said is true. I made those
comments for
>new builders who want to fly and not just "dream about it".
I'll say
>it again, experimentation with marginal engines on first
flights is
>dangerous.
>
>So lets clear something else up. I, like several others, have
two
>mods to my engine type that has a "gazillion hours of proven
>performance on it".
>
>Note: I did not do either of those mods until I had a safe
flying
>airplane and they were done at different times for full
evaluation
>purposes.
>
>One is a larger piston 9:4 to 1, no great shakes here. That mod
>offers up no demons as far as I can tell from my own
experiences and
>from others who have done the same conversion.
>
>Two, electronic ignition are no big deal when properly
installed.
>There are thousands of them flying in airplanes. Mike think
about it,
>would you perfer an ignition that has no moving parts and no
>maintenance to one that has to be inspected often and
>and is subject to mechanical failures?
>
>I rest my case on this subject.
>
>Regards,
>Jim Patillo N46JP Q200 "Flying"
>
>
>
>
>Mike Perry <dmperry1012@c...> wrote:
> > I respect Jim's viewpoint, but I would like to offer some
different
> > thoughts. To start with, Jim, you aren't flying an engine
with "a
> > gazillion hours of proven performance"; you have higher
compression
>and electronic ignition.
>
>
>If you think those aren't significant, re-read
> > Terrance O'Neill's story about turning his Dragonfly into a
glider
>by
> > mis-wiring his LSE Plasma ignition. (Kitplanes, Nov. 2000,
p. 77-
>82)
> >
> > I would like to suggest to people considering alternate
engines
>that you
> > read and re-read what is written by the experts. Read what
they
>say about
> > durability, modifications, longevity. (I'm sure I can get
200
>horsepower
> > out of a VW -- with an engine life expectancy measured in
>minutes.) Some
> > of the limits are not obvious if you come from an auto
application
> > background (eg: maximum compression ratios and continuous
>horsepower).
> >
> > Some of these engines are safe ONLY if installed EXACTLY as
> > recommended. For example, you cannot use a prop extension
and you
>must use
> > a light-weight prop with VW, Corvair and Jabiru engines.
All three
>have
> > had broken crankshafts when used with heavier props or prop
>extensions.
> >
> > If you have a "great idea" please check with an expert, such
as
>Steve
> > Bennett for VWs or William Wynne for Corvairs, or find
someone with
>a lot
> > of hours on the same setup. Then ask yourself, "is 40 hours
really
>long
> > enough to feel safe carrying passengers with this setup?" (4
>Corvair
> > engines have broken crankshafts. They averaged 60 hours of
flight
> > time. All had prop extensions.)
> >
> > The best idea: Build and install the engine and accessories
>EXACTLY as
> > recommended by the experts. And that's true whether you
start with
>a
> > "Certified" engine or an auto conversion. Then go fly.
> >
> > Mike Perry
> > (0 hours on Q-200. Lots of hours rebuilding VWs)
> >
> >
> >
> > At 05:04 PM 9/9/2005 +0000, Jim Patillo wrote:
> >
> > >Fella's,
> > >
> > >I hope you take this message the way its intended cause I
realize
>we
> > >are all experimental in this business.
> > >
> > >I don't know much but alls' I know is; "anyone who
willingly puts
> > >his or his family/friends butts on the line to fly with any
engine
> > >except one that is approved for airplane flight with a
gazillion
> > >hours of proven performance may or could be considered
nuts". What
> > >am I missing here? Many have gone before you and with their
lives
> > >proven what works and what doesn't. Why tempt fate anymore
than you
> > >have to? At best anything you install on one of these
planes is in
>a
> > >failure mode the second it is installed. If you fly it long
enough,
> > >it will fail. Why provoke the evil gremlins of flight.
> > >
> > >New guys seriously consider sticking with proven engines.
Trust me,
> > >you will have way to many other things happening during
your first
> > >flights to throw a failed engine into the frey.
> > >
> > >The 0200 may be old and expensive but you can damn near
decapitate
> > >it and it still works. If its got gas, air and spark it
will run.
> > >
> > >A couple of years ago I had a seal fail on one of the push
rod
>tubes
> > >and ran the engine out of oil quickly about 40 miles from my
> > >airport. I started to make a forced landing in the central
valley
>of
> > >California but with minimal RPM and oil pressure limped
back to
>LVK.
> > >When I pulled off the runway, the engine quit. I thought
for sure
> > >it was fried. After cutting the filter apart and finding no
metal,
>I
> > >changed the 15W-50 oil and filter still expecting the
worst. I
> > >started the engine but to my suprise it worked as if
nothing had
> > >happened. I did a compression check and all cylinders were
fine. It
> > >now has several hundred hours since the failure and still
going
> > >strong. Look at the history of the Q200. The engine that
has worked
> > >sucessfully over the years is the 0200.
> > >
> > >The Jabiru 3300 appears to be a good option for this bird
but
> > >there's little docummented performance or longevity numbers
to back
> > >it up at this point. Time will tell.
> > >
> > >You can spend 8-12K for a pumped up modernized 0200 or 11-
12K for
> > >the new Jabiru 6. Which one is for you? The other options
may be
> > >cheaper but how much is your life worth?
> > >
> > >Regards,
> > >Jim Patillo N46JP Q200 - Technical ground & asphalt advisor
> > >LVK-"More flying Q200's than any place on earth".
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >








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


Yahoo! Groups Links









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





-------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

a.. Visit your group "Q-LIST" on the web.

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: Kevin Fortin - First Flights

MartinErni@...
 

Kevin,
There are a few situations that will have good fuel flow on the ground
but not in the air. The fuel filler is in a low pressure area so make sure it
seals properly. If your fuel vent is directly behind the cowl opening it
could also be in a low pressure area. I would blow up a balloon on the vent
tubing and make sure it will hold pressure.
Earnest
Been there and it is no fun.


Re: Building philosophy (was Engines)

Steve <sham@...>
 

Sorry Mike , I missed the last line in your message...
Steve Ham

----- Original Message -----
From: Mike Perry
To: Q-LIST@...
Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 6:06 PM
Subject: [Q-LIST] Building philosophy (was Engines)


Jim, let me put this a different way:

If you will only use what already has "a gazillion hours of proven
performance" you will end up with a Cessna-150, a Piper Cherokee or a
Boeing 747. You won't end up with an experimental aircraft.

When you build an experimental aircraft you can follow standard practice
and end up with a reasonable and safe aircraft that you can test in 40
hours and then feel reasonably safe to carry family/friends. Or you can
try something radically new, in which case 40 hours is only the
beginning. However, none of us can neglect the details that make us (and
our flying partners) safe as we go along. I think this is MORE important
for those of us currently building than for you guys who are thru the test
period.

I wrote my earlier comments partly because I think alternate engines can be
safe and effective, but mostly because I think ANY change from standard
practice needs very careful thought, testing and consultation with
experts. That includes electronic ignition.

I agree that making only one change in a functioning experimental is
reasonable.

Mike Perry


At 03:32 PM 9/12/2005 +0000, Jim Patillo wrote:

>Mike, I just couldn't let you get away without another statement on
>this subject.
>
>While I also respect your comments, I deal with reality while you are
>still in the dreaming stage! My plane flys a lot. Yours doesn't. In
>fact you don't have a complete and flying Q - do you? You can
>speculate all you want but until you are flying your family and
>friends behind some particular engine, its still speculation on you
>part. Let's get real here! What other proven engine outperforms the
>0200 in HP and reliability in a Q - NONE! What is the price for your
>life? Is it another 3-4K? Thats pretty cheap, wouldn't you say. Hey
>0200's are just engines and subject to failure as well but LOOK AT
>THE RECORD!
>
>The e-mails from guys who regualrly fly Q200's make my point
>perfectly and you know what I said is true. I made those comments for
>new builders who want to fly and not just "dream about it". I'll say
>it again, experimentation with marginal engines on first flights is
>dangerous.
>
>So lets clear something else up. I, like several others, have two
>mods to my engine type that has a "gazillion hours of proven
>performance on it".
>
>Note: I did not do either of those mods until I had a safe flying
>airplane and they were done at different times for full evaluation
>purposes.
>
>One is a larger piston 9:4 to 1, no great shakes here. That mod
>offers up no demons as far as I can tell from my own experiences and
>from others who have done the same conversion.
>
>Two, electronic ignition are no big deal when properly installed.
>There are thousands of them flying in airplanes. Mike think about it,
>would you perfer an ignition that has no moving parts and no
>maintenance to one that has to be inspected often and
>and is subject to mechanical failures?
>
>I rest my case on this subject.
>
>Regards,
>Jim Patillo N46JP Q200 "Flying"
>
>
>
>
>Mike Perry <dmperry1012@c...> wrote:
> > I respect Jim's viewpoint, but I would like to offer some different
> > thoughts. To start with, Jim, you aren't flying an engine with "a
> > gazillion hours of proven performance"; you have higher compression
>and electronic ignition.
>
>
>If you think those aren't significant, re-read
> > Terrance O'Neill's story about turning his Dragonfly into a glider
>by
> > mis-wiring his LSE Plasma ignition. (Kitplanes, Nov. 2000, p. 77-
>82)
> >
> > I would like to suggest to people considering alternate engines
>that you
> > read and re-read what is written by the experts. Read what they
>say about
> > durability, modifications, longevity. (I'm sure I can get 200
>horsepower
> > out of a VW -- with an engine life expectancy measured in
>minutes.) Some
> > of the limits are not obvious if you come from an auto application
> > background (eg: maximum compression ratios and continuous
>horsepower).
> >
> > Some of these engines are safe ONLY if installed EXACTLY as
> > recommended. For example, you cannot use a prop extension and you
>must use
> > a light-weight prop with VW, Corvair and Jabiru engines. All three
>have
> > had broken crankshafts when used with heavier props or prop
>extensions.
> >
> > If you have a "great idea" please check with an expert, such as
>Steve
> > Bennett for VWs or William Wynne for Corvairs, or find someone with
>a lot
> > of hours on the same setup. Then ask yourself, "is 40 hours really
>long
> > enough to feel safe carrying passengers with this setup?" (4
>Corvair
> > engines have broken crankshafts. They averaged 60 hours of flight
> > time. All had prop extensions.)
> >
> > The best idea: Build and install the engine and accessories
>EXACTLY as
> > recommended by the experts. And that's true whether you start with
>a
> > "Certified" engine or an auto conversion. Then go fly.
> >
> > Mike Perry
> > (0 hours on Q-200. Lots of hours rebuilding VWs)
> >
> >
> >
> > At 05:04 PM 9/9/2005 +0000, Jim Patillo wrote:
> >
> > >Fella's,
> > >
> > >I hope you take this message the way its intended cause I realize
>we
> > >are all experimental in this business.
> > >
> > >I don't know much but alls' I know is; "anyone who willingly puts
> > >his or his family/friends butts on the line to fly with any engine
> > >except one that is approved for airplane flight with a gazillion
> > >hours of proven performance may or could be considered nuts". What
> > >am I missing here? Many have gone before you and with their lives
> > >proven what works and what doesn't. Why tempt fate anymore than you
> > >have to? At best anything you install on one of these planes is in
>a
> > >failure mode the second it is installed. If you fly it long enough,
> > >it will fail. Why provoke the evil gremlins of flight.
> > >
> > >New guys seriously consider sticking with proven engines. Trust me,
> > >you will have way to many other things happening during your first
> > >flights to throw a failed engine into the frey.
> > >
> > >The 0200 may be old and expensive but you can damn near decapitate
> > >it and it still works. If its got gas, air and spark it will run.
> > >
> > >A couple of years ago I had a seal fail on one of the push rod
>tubes
> > >and ran the engine out of oil quickly about 40 miles from my
> > >airport. I started to make a forced landing in the central valley
>of
> > >California but with minimal RPM and oil pressure limped back to
>LVK.
> > >When I pulled off the runway, the engine quit. I thought for sure
> > >it was fried. After cutting the filter apart and finding no metal,
>I
> > >changed the 15W-50 oil and filter still expecting the worst. I
> > >started the engine but to my suprise it worked as if nothing had
> > >happened. I did a compression check and all cylinders were fine. It
> > >now has several hundred hours since the failure and still going
> > >strong. Look at the history of the Q200. The engine that has worked
> > >sucessfully over the years is the 0200.
> > >
> > >The Jabiru 3300 appears to be a good option for this bird but
> > >there's little docummented performance or longevity numbers to back
> > >it up at this point. Time will tell.
> > >
> > >You can spend 8-12K for a pumped up modernized 0200 or 11-12K for
> > >the new Jabiru 6. Which one is for you? The other options may be
> > >cheaper but how much is your life worth?
> > >
> > >Regards,
> > >Jim Patillo N46JP Q200 - Technical ground & asphalt advisor
> > >LVK-"More flying Q200's than any place on earth".
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >







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





------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

a.. Visit your group "Q-LIST" on the web.

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: Oil Temperature N275CH

Sam Hoskins <shoskins@...>
 

Kevin,

The oil in an O-200 is simply cooled by air passing over the cylinder heads,
the barrels, and the crankcase. It is just routed all over the top of the
engine, then forced down through the cylinder fins. Make sure you have no
leaks! Make sure you have inter-cylinder baffles, particularly on the
heads. (TCM is actually removing some of the fin material from the barrels
as a weight saving - they say most of the heat transfer is at the head).

You can also build a shroud over your spin-on oil filter and route a SMALL
diameter hose to it. An excellent cooling duct hose is found at
http://www.vansaircraft.com/cgi-bin/catalog.cgi?ident=1126666647-334-177
<http://www.vansaircraft.com/cgi-bin/catalog.cgi?ident=1126666647-334-177&br
owse=engines&product=blast-tubes> &browse=engines&product=blast-tubes

A lot of the baffle systems I have looked at are missing parts, particularly
around the heads and barrels and they have lots of leaks. The advantage of
the plenum system, is it does a better job of controlling leaks. It really
forces the air to flow where it is needed. Does that help at all?

Send me some photos off line and I'll take a look. Be sure and take some
looking straight down at the engine.

Sam

_____

From: Q-LIST@... [mailto:Q-LIST@...] On Behalf Of
Kevin Fortin
Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2005 8:20 PM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: RE: [Q-LIST] Oil Temperature N275CH



Sam and guys,

I am missing one BIG piece of understanding on oil cooling. Is the oil
cooled more by contact in the cylinders or from cooling elsewhere? The
really tight baffling shown in your pictures seems to restrict all airflow
to only over the cylinders and heads, then the air heads out of the engine
compartment. If oil cooling occurred other than in the cylinders, it doesn't
seem like enough airflow would be available for the cooling elsewhere.

If someone asked me to guess, I would guess that the cylinders add to oil
temp to be removed elsewhere but your baffling (and all baffling I have
looked at) suggests that the cylinders are a major oil cooling point.

Is this true or am I just not seeing things right. (It would be easier to
fix my oil temp problem if I actually understood it.)

Kevin
Q200 N275CH

-----Original Message-----
From: Q-LIST@... [mailto:Q-LIST@...] On Behalf Of
Sam Hoskins
Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 9:14 PM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: RE: [Q-LIST] Oil Temperature N275CH

Q-200s do not need oil coolers.

Oil coolers add unneeded weight, have a leak potential and rob space.

The baffling needs to be correct. 235 is way too high from just taxing
around. E-mail me some photos of your baffling, from several angles, and
I'll take a look.

Here is how I did it, but it's not the only way
http://samhoskins.blogspot.com/

Full plenum baffling is the trick.

Sam



_____

From: Q-LIST@... [mailto:Q-LIST@...] On Behalf Of
Kevin Fortin
Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 7:02 PM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: [Q-LIST] Oil Temperature N275CH



Guy's



Got N275CH (Q200) nearly put all back together and started fast taxing
again. I have about 4 hours on the engine at this point after replacing the
very high compression pistons (Venolia) to C85 pistons.



My engine oil temperature when fast taxing went up to approx 235 F and I am
sure would have continued further had I let it. I am guessing this took
about 15 to 20 minutes.



Two notes: 1. CHT was running about 325 F.

2. I don't have an oil cooler at this point but am
considering one.



This brings 4 questions.



1. Is it normal for a Q200 to overheat when run in the "taxi" only
mode?
2. Do others with oil cooler have this problem?
3. Would flight speeds/flight airflow keep this from happening?
4. Does anyone think this indicates a basic problem with the engine?



It makes me uncomfortable I cannot prove out the engine on the ground before
taking to the skies.



Thanks in advance,



Kevin











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






SPONSORED LINKS


Aviation
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Aviation+maintenance&w1=Aviation+mainte
&k=Aviation+maintenance&w1=Aviation+mainte
nance&w2=Aviation+maintenance+training&w3=Aviation+maintenance+schools&w4=Av
iation+maintenance+schools&w5=Aviation&w6=Aviation+art&c=6&s=161&.sig=NYqbfr
CRSu-_RfVcTvi4nA> maintenance

Aviation
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Aviation+maintenance+training&w1=Aviati
&k=Aviation+maintenance+training&w1=Aviati
on+maintenance&w2=Aviation+maintenance+training&w3=Aviation+maintenance+scho
ols&w4=Aviation+maintenance+schools&w5=Aviation&w6=Aviation+art&c=6&s=161&.s
ig=UheaD83XCnCASim3ftrZHw> maintenance training

Aviation
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Aviation+maintenance+schools&w1=Aviatio
&k=Aviation+maintenance+schools&w1=Aviatio
n+maintenance&w2=Aviation+maintenance+training&w3=Aviation+maintenance+schoo
ls&w4=Aviation+maintenance+schools&w5=Aviation&w6=Aviation+art&c=6&s=161&.si
g=aX8ElLSzXlWeeJ4RuRL4kw> maintenance schools


Aviation
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Aviation+maintenance+schools&w1=Aviatio
&k=Aviation+maintenance+schools&w1=Aviatio
n+maintenance&w2=Aviation+maintenance+training&w3=Aviation+maintenance+schoo
ls&w4=Aviation+maintenance+schools&w5=Aviation&w6=Aviation+art&c=6&s=161&.si
g=aX8ElLSzXlWeeJ4RuRL4kw> maintenance schools

Aviation
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Aviation&w1=Aviation+maintenance&w2=Avi
&k=Aviation&w1=Aviation+maintenance&w2=Avi
ation+maintenance+training&w3=Aviation+maintenance+schools&w4=Aviation+maint
enance+schools&w5=Aviation&w6=Aviation+art&c=6&s=161&.sig=dx8FsS6KYgxHm3RuBm
YoSA>

Aviation
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Aviation+art&w1=Aviation+maintenance&w2
&k=Aviation+art&w1=Aviation+maintenance&w2
=Aviation+maintenance+training&w3=Aviation+maintenance+schools&w4=Aviation+m
aintenance+schools&w5=Aviation&w6=Aviation+art&c=6&s=161&.sig=dRTZGQXiIldZ3q
X6IHfOfQ> art



_____

YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



* Visit your group "Q-LIST <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Q-LIST> "
on the web.

* 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!
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Terms of Service.



_____








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


Yahoo! Groups Links









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






SPONSORED LINKS


Aviation
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Aviation+maintenance&w1=Aviation+mainte
nance&w2=Aviation+maintenance+training&w3=Aviation+maintenance+schools&w4=Av
iation+maintenance+schools&w5=Aviation&w6=Aviation+art&c=6&s=161&.sig=NYqbfr
CRSu-_RfVcTvi4nA> maintenance

Aviation
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Aviation+maintenance+training&w1=Aviati
on+maintenance&w2=Aviation+maintenance+training&w3=Aviation+maintenance+scho
ols&w4=Aviation+maintenance+schools&w5=Aviation&w6=Aviation+art&c=6&s=161&.s
ig=UheaD83XCnCASim3ftrZHw> maintenance training

Aviation
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Aviation+maintenance+schools&w1=Aviatio
n+maintenance&w2=Aviation+maintenance+training&w3=Aviation+maintenance+schoo
ls&w4=Aviation+maintenance+schools&w5=Aviation&w6=Aviation+art&c=6&s=161&.si
g=aX8ElLSzXlWeeJ4RuRL4kw> maintenance schools


Aviation
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Aviation+maintenance+schools&w1=Aviatio
n+maintenance&w2=Aviation+maintenance+training&w3=Aviation+maintenance+schoo
ls&w4=Aviation+maintenance+schools&w5=Aviation&w6=Aviation+art&c=6&s=161&.si
g=aX8ElLSzXlWeeJ4RuRL4kw> maintenance schools

Aviation
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Aviation&w1=Aviation+maintenance&w2=Avi
ation+maintenance+training&w3=Aviation+maintenance+schools&w4=Aviation+maint
enance+schools&w5=Aviation&w6=Aviation+art&c=6&s=161&.sig=dx8FsS6KYgxHm3RuBm
YoSA>

Aviation
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Aviation+art&w1=Aviation+maintenance&w2
=Aviation+maintenance+training&w3=Aviation+maintenance+schools&w4=Aviation+m
aintenance+schools&w5=Aviation&w6=Aviation+art&c=6&s=161&.sig=dRTZGQXiIldZ3q
X6IHfOfQ> art



_____

YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



* Visit your group "Q-LIST <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Q-LIST> "
on the web.

* 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!
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Terms of Service.



_____


Re: Building philosophy (was Engines)

Steve <sham@...>
 

Mike , I think you ARE MISSING THE POINT THAT SEVERAL OF US ARE TRYING TO MAKE..Yes we build experimental aircraft...big risk in itself. Why double the equation by building an experimental aircraft AND an experimental engine. Build ONE project first and get 40-60 hours of working the bugs out and then go on to the next project if you want. But to build and new plane with a new engine AND be a new test pilot,,,no wonder there have been may mishaps in the past. The military does not even take on these risk.

Steve Ham

----- Original Message -----
From: Mike Perry
To: Q-LIST@...
Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 6:06 PM
Subject: [Q-LIST] Building philosophy (was Engines)


Jim, let me put this a different way:

If you will only use what already has "a gazillion hours of proven
performance" you will end up with a Cessna-150, a Piper Cherokee or a
Boeing 747. You won't end up with an experimental aircraft.

When you build an experimental aircraft you can follow standard practice
and end up with a reasonable and safe aircraft that you can test in 40
hours and then feel reasonably safe to carry family/friends. Or you can
try something radically new, in which case 40 hours is only the
beginning. However, none of us can neglect the details that make us (and
our flying partners) safe as we go along. I think this is MORE important
for those of us currently building than for you guys who are thru the test
period.

I wrote my earlier comments partly because I think alternate engines can be
safe and effective, but mostly because I think ANY change from standard
practice needs very careful thought, testing and consultation with
experts. That includes electronic ignition.

I agree that making only one change in a functioning experimental is
reasonable.

Mike Perry


At 03:32 PM 9/12/2005 +0000, Jim Patillo wrote:

>Mike, I just couldn't let you get away without another statement on
>this subject.
>
>While I also respect your comments, I deal with reality while you are
>still in the dreaming stage! My plane flys a lot. Yours doesn't. In
>fact you don't have a complete and flying Q - do you? You can
>speculate all you want but until you are flying your family and
>friends behind some particular engine, its still speculation on you
>part. Let's get real here! What other proven engine outperforms the
>0200 in HP and reliability in a Q - NONE! What is the price for your
>life? Is it another 3-4K? Thats pretty cheap, wouldn't you say. Hey
>0200's are just engines and subject to failure as well but LOOK AT
>THE RECORD!
>
>The e-mails from guys who regualrly fly Q200's make my point
>perfectly and you know what I said is true. I made those comments for
>new builders who want to fly and not just "dream about it". I'll say
>it again, experimentation with marginal engines on first flights is
>dangerous.
>
>So lets clear something else up. I, like several others, have two
>mods to my engine type that has a "gazillion hours of proven
>performance on it".
>
>Note: I did not do either of those mods until I had a safe flying
>airplane and they were done at different times for full evaluation
>purposes.
>
>One is a larger piston 9:4 to 1, no great shakes here. That mod
>offers up no demons as far as I can tell from my own experiences and
>from others who have done the same conversion.
>
>Two, electronic ignition are no big deal when properly installed.
>There are thousands of them flying in airplanes. Mike think about it,
>would you perfer an ignition that has no moving parts and no
>maintenance to one that has to be inspected often and
>and is subject to mechanical failures?
>
>I rest my case on this subject.
>
>Regards,
>Jim Patillo N46JP Q200 "Flying"
>
>
>
>
>Mike Perry <dmperry1012@c...> wrote:
> > I respect Jim's viewpoint, but I would like to offer some different
> > thoughts. To start with, Jim, you aren't flying an engine with "a
> > gazillion hours of proven performance"; you have higher compression
>and electronic ignition.
>
>
>If you think those aren't significant, re-read
> > Terrance O'Neill's story about turning his Dragonfly into a glider
>by
> > mis-wiring his LSE Plasma ignition. (Kitplanes, Nov. 2000, p. 77-
>82)
> >
> > I would like to suggest to people considering alternate engines
>that you
> > read and re-read what is written by the experts. Read what they
>say about
> > durability, modifications, longevity. (I'm sure I can get 200
>horsepower
> > out of a VW -- with an engine life expectancy measured in
>minutes.) Some
> > of the limits are not obvious if you come from an auto application
> > background (eg: maximum compression ratios and continuous
>horsepower).
> >
> > Some of these engines are safe ONLY if installed EXACTLY as
> > recommended. For example, you cannot use a prop extension and you
>must use
> > a light-weight prop with VW, Corvair and Jabiru engines. All three
>have
> > had broken crankshafts when used with heavier props or prop
>extensions.
> >
> > If you have a "great idea" please check with an expert, such as
>Steve
> > Bennett for VWs or William Wynne for Corvairs, or find someone with
>a lot
> > of hours on the same setup. Then ask yourself, "is 40 hours really
>long
> > enough to feel safe carrying passengers with this setup?" (4
>Corvair
> > engines have broken crankshafts. They averaged 60 hours of flight
> > time. All had prop extensions.)
> >
> > The best idea: Build and install the engine and accessories
>EXACTLY as
> > recommended by the experts. And that's true whether you start with
>a
> > "Certified" engine or an auto conversion. Then go fly.
> >
> > Mike Perry
> > (0 hours on Q-200. Lots of hours rebuilding VWs)
> >
> >
> >
> > At 05:04 PM 9/9/2005 +0000, Jim Patillo wrote:
> >
> > >Fella's,
> > >
> > >I hope you take this message the way its intended cause I realize
>we
> > >are all experimental in this business.
> > >
> > >I don't know much but alls' I know is; "anyone who willingly puts
> > >his or his family/friends butts on the line to fly with any engine
> > >except one that is approved for airplane flight with a gazillion
> > >hours of proven performance may or could be considered nuts". What
> > >am I missing here? Many have gone before you and with their lives
> > >proven what works and what doesn't. Why tempt fate anymore than you
> > >have to? At best anything you install on one of these planes is in
>a
> > >failure mode the second it is installed. If you fly it long enough,
> > >it will fail. Why provoke the evil gremlins of flight.
> > >
> > >New guys seriously consider sticking with proven engines. Trust me,
> > >you will have way to many other things happening during your first
> > >flights to throw a failed engine into the frey.
> > >
> > >The 0200 may be old and expensive but you can damn near decapitate
> > >it and it still works. If its got gas, air and spark it will run.
> > >
> > >A couple of years ago I had a seal fail on one of the push rod
>tubes
> > >and ran the engine out of oil quickly about 40 miles from my
> > >airport. I started to make a forced landing in the central valley
>of
> > >California but with minimal RPM and oil pressure limped back to
>LVK.
> > >When I pulled off the runway, the engine quit. I thought for sure
> > >it was fried. After cutting the filter apart and finding no metal,
>I
> > >changed the 15W-50 oil and filter still expecting the worst. I
> > >started the engine but to my suprise it worked as if nothing had
> > >happened. I did a compression check and all cylinders were fine. It
> > >now has several hundred hours since the failure and still going
> > >strong. Look at the history of the Q200. The engine that has worked
> > >sucessfully over the years is the 0200.
> > >
> > >The Jabiru 3300 appears to be a good option for this bird but
> > >there's little docummented performance or longevity numbers to back
> > >it up at this point. Time will tell.
> > >
> > >You can spend 8-12K for a pumped up modernized 0200 or 11-12K for
> > >the new Jabiru 6. Which one is for you? The other options may be
> > >cheaper but how much is your life worth?
> > >
> > >Regards,
> > >Jim Patillo N46JP Q200 - Technical ground & asphalt advisor
> > >LVK-"More flying Q200's than any place on earth".
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >







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





------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

a.. Visit your group "Q-LIST" on the web.

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: Onan Engine Weight??

John Loram <johnl@...>
 

The Onen engine, complete as unbolted from the firewall, without the
prop, but with the prop hub and bolts, all engine and mounting
components including baffling, weighs in at 80 lbs as weighed on a UPS
postage scale.

Another way of saying it is, "everything ahead of the firewall less the
prop and the fiberglass cowls".

-john-

________________________________

From: Q-LIST@... [mailto:Q-LIST@...] On Behalf
Of RICHARD GLIMES
Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 6:04 AM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Onan Engine Weight??


Hi:
I would like to learn the weight of an Onan engine 18 HP used on the
Q=1.

Lansair

DDD <log@...> wrote:
Doug,
I thought you used all great planes stuff for your engine including
the
cases.
I must have misunderstood ( not surprising ) do you just use a stock
VW
case . Darrell

----- Original Message -----
From: "Doug Humble" <hawkidoug@...>
To: <Q-LIST@...>
Sent: Sunday, September 11, 2005 6:14 PM
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Engines - Long read editorial


No I'm not telling you to stay away from the type 4 VW. Just don't use
the
std. crank that comes with the auto engine. The end you use to fit the
prop
hub has a small taper which is unsuitable for a prop hub. Buy a new
crank
which has the shaft full size to the end. Then it can be properly
machined
to accept a prop hub. I know Great Planes sells them. Not sure about
RevMaster.

If you haven't bought the type 4 engine and want to go with something
that
has more airtime under it, consider a type 1 with an aftermarket
aluminum
case. Yes the case is heavier than the magneasium case, but it is much
stronger. The magneasium case has always been a throw away item on
the
type
1. A 2180 type 1 VW has a longer stroke than a 2400 type 4. The type 4
has
never been dyno'd, so I don't know what its tourque curve is. However,
it
is
my understanding, tourque comes from the stroke. What I'm getting at
here,
is the reason "we" went for the type 4 is more horsepower, but torque
plays
a factor as well and the difference between the 2400 type 4 and the
2180
type 1 may not be that sigificant. I'm not going much faster, if any,
than
the 2180 type 1's. You can build a type 4 up to a 2600 which may have
a
torque advantage, but until one is dyno'd, who knows. There are other
issues
you have to consider if you choose to do a 2600 type 4, the case needs
to
be
clearanced to accept the longer stroke. Not impossible, just something
else
that needs to be done. Expect to pay more for your type 4 than the
type 1.

This whole thred started about doing what is known to get your Q in
the
air.
I went the other way and it has cost me airtime. The type 1 VW's are
more
prevelant, as well as the parts. If you want to build up a type 4, do
it.
Some of us (not many) have been paving the way.

Doug "Hawkeye" Humble
www.asignabove.net
Omaha NE
N25974
----- Original Message -----
From: <raoborg@...>
To: <Q-LIST@...>
Sent: Sunday, September 11, 2005 6:32 PM
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Engines - Long read editorial


Doug are you telling me not to go with type 4? Raoul

--- "Doug Humble" <hawkidoug@...> wrote:

From: "Doug Humble" <hawkidoug@...>
Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2005 17:15:09 -0500
To: <Q-LIST@...>
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Engines - Long read editorial
Larry, you are making my point brilliantly. The Force One prop
(as Pat P.
pointed out) does do the same thing as what Revmaster's bearing
does. I
don't believe Great Planes has had a broken crank either. If
you are
refering to what happen with my crank, it was a type 4 crank.
Its an
entirely different situation. Read my article and you will see
the crank
didn't break.
The only reason I even responded to your email is because you
had clipped
off what I had wrote about and I knew you didn't know what you
were talking
about. I was warning someone else not to use the standard type
4 crank. Its
the crank that comes with the auto engine. Its not suitable for
any
manufacters prop hub. Even a RevMaster prop hub. As far as I
know, RevMaster
doesn't offer a type 4 conversion. You do know there is a
difference
between a type 1 and a type 4, right?
You were making a statement that basicly said if you don't go
with a
RveMaster you will break a crank. That's just not true and we
are always
getting newbies on this list and I couldn't let the statement
go.
Both RevMaster and Great Planes build quality Type 1 VW
conversions, both
with outstanding track records. My conversion was a type 4 and
I broke new
ground. Again read my article and my conclusions.
Doug "Hawkeye" Humble
www.asignabove.net
Omaha NE
N25974
----- Original Message -----
From: "larry severson" <larry2@...>
To: <Q-LIST@...>
Sent: Sunday, September 11, 2005 4:32 PM
Subject: RE: [Q-LIST] Engines - Long read editorial
At 11:12 AM 9/11/2005 -0700, you wrote:
No! Based on the fact that only they have taken the effort
to put in a
fourth bearing to support the prop that is larger than the
3 existing
VW
bearings
Doesn't the Force One hub and bearing meet this same
requirement?

Obviously not, since the force one hub requires a special
crank - and has
had broken cranks.
However, look at both, they are not the same.


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






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


Yahoo! Groups Links





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

YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

* Visit your group "Q-LIST" on the web.

* 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.
__________________________________________________________


_____________________________________________________________
Netscape. Just the Net You Need.



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





SPONSORED LINKS
Aviation maintenance Aviation maintenance training Aviation maintenance
schools Aviation maintenance schools Aviation Aviation art

---------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS


Visit your group "Q-LIST" on the web.

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.



---------------------------------








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





________________________________

YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



* Visit your group "Q-LIST <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Q-LIST>
" on the web.

* 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
Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .


________________________________


Re: Oil Temperature N275CH

Kevin Fortin <kfortin@...>
 

Sam and guys,

I am missing one BIG piece of understanding on oil cooling. Is the oil
cooled more by contact in the cylinders or from cooling elsewhere? The
really tight baffling shown in your pictures seems to restrict all airflow
to only over the cylinders and heads, then the air heads out of the engine
compartment. If oil cooling occurred other than in the cylinders, it doesn't
seem like enough airflow would be available for the cooling elsewhere.

If someone asked me to guess, I would guess that the cylinders add to oil
temp to be removed elsewhere but your baffling (and all baffling I have
looked at) suggests that the cylinders are a major oil cooling point.

Is this true or am I just not seeing things right. (It would be easier to
fix my oil temp problem if I actually understood it.)

Kevin
Q200 N275CH

-----Original Message-----
From: Q-LIST@... [mailto:Q-LIST@...] On Behalf Of
Sam Hoskins
Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 9:14 PM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: RE: [Q-LIST] Oil Temperature N275CH

Q-200s do not need oil coolers.

Oil coolers add unneeded weight, have a leak potential and rob space.

The baffling needs to be correct. 235 is way too high from just taxing
around. E-mail me some photos of your baffling, from several angles, and
I'll take a look.

Here is how I did it, but it's not the only way
http://samhoskins.blogspot.com/

Full plenum baffling is the trick.

Sam



_____

From: Q-LIST@... [mailto:Q-LIST@...] On Behalf Of
Kevin Fortin
Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 7:02 PM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: [Q-LIST] Oil Temperature N275CH



Guy's



Got N275CH (Q200) nearly put all back together and started fast taxing
again. I have about 4 hours on the engine at this point after replacing the
very high compression pistons (Venolia) to C85 pistons.



My engine oil temperature when fast taxing went up to approx 235 F and I am
sure would have continued further had I let it. I am guessing this took
about 15 to 20 minutes.



Two notes: 1. CHT was running about 325 F.

2. I don't have an oil cooler at this point but am
considering one.



This brings 4 questions.



1. Is it normal for a Q200 to overheat when run in the "taxi" only
mode?
2. Do others with oil cooler have this problem?
3. Would flight speeds/flight airflow keep this from happening?
4. Does anyone think this indicates a basic problem with the engine?



It makes me uncomfortable I cannot prove out the engine on the ground before
taking to the skies.



Thanks in advance,



Kevin











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






SPONSORED LINKS


Aviation
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Aviation+maintenance&w1=Aviation+mainte
nance&w2=Aviation+maintenance+training&w3=Aviation+maintenance+schools&w4=Av
iation+maintenance+schools&w5=Aviation&w6=Aviation+art&c=6&s=161&.sig=NYqbfr
CRSu-_RfVcTvi4nA> maintenance

Aviation
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Aviation+maintenance+training&w1=Aviati
on+maintenance&w2=Aviation+maintenance+training&w3=Aviation+maintenance+scho
ols&w4=Aviation+maintenance+schools&w5=Aviation&w6=Aviation+art&c=6&s=161&.s
ig=UheaD83XCnCASim3ftrZHw> maintenance training

Aviation
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Aviation+maintenance+schools&w1=Aviatio
n+maintenance&w2=Aviation+maintenance+training&w3=Aviation+maintenance+schoo
ls&w4=Aviation+maintenance+schools&w5=Aviation&w6=Aviation+art&c=6&s=161&.si
g=aX8ElLSzXlWeeJ4RuRL4kw> maintenance schools


Aviation
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Aviation+maintenance+schools&w1=Aviatio
n+maintenance&w2=Aviation+maintenance+training&w3=Aviation+maintenance+schoo
ls&w4=Aviation+maintenance+schools&w5=Aviation&w6=Aviation+art&c=6&s=161&.si
g=aX8ElLSzXlWeeJ4RuRL4kw> maintenance schools

Aviation
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Aviation&w1=Aviation+maintenance&w2=Avi
ation+maintenance+training&w3=Aviation+maintenance+schools&w4=Aviation+maint
enance+schools&w5=Aviation&w6=Aviation+art&c=6&s=161&.sig=dx8FsS6KYgxHm3RuBm
YoSA>

Aviation
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Aviation+art&w1=Aviation+maintenance&w2
=Aviation+maintenance+training&w3=Aviation+maintenance+schools&w4=Aviation+m
aintenance+schools&w5=Aviation&w6=Aviation+art&c=6&s=161&.sig=dRTZGQXiIldZ3q
X6IHfOfQ> art



_____

YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



* Visit your group "Q-LIST <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Q-LIST> "
on the web.

* 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!
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Terms of Service.



_____








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


Yahoo! Groups Links


Re: Building philosophy (was Engines)

Peter Harris <peterjfharris@...>
 

Kevin have you read all the posts about blocked air vents. That will cause the starvation you had.
Peter

----- Original Message -----
From: Kevin Fortin
To: Q-LIST@...
Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2005 11:31 AM
Subject: RE: [Q-LIST] Building philosophy (was Engines)


Mike,

Just make sure what you do engine-wise is good and solid. I have about 90
seconds (total time) in my Q200 (N275CH) where fuel starvation let gravity
get the upper hand. I managed to get it around the pattern and back on the
ground but, let me tell, you the pucker factor is beyond the peg. These are
fast little birds that don't appreciate off field landings, fences, trees,
etc.

Kevin Fortin
Nervous and looking forward to trying again.


-----Original Message-----
From: Q-LIST@... [mailto:Q-LIST@...] On Behalf Of
Mike Perry
Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 7:06 PM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: [Q-LIST] Building philosophy (was Engines)

Jim, let me put this a different way:

If you will only use what already has "a gazillion hours of proven
performance" you will end up with a Cessna-150, a Piper Cherokee or a
Boeing 747. You won't end up with an experimental aircraft.

When you build an experimental aircraft you can follow standard practice
and end up with a reasonable and safe aircraft that you can test in 40
hours and then feel reasonably safe to carry family/friends. Or you can
try something radically new, in which case 40 hours is only the
beginning. However, none of us can neglect the details that make us (and
our flying partners) safe as we go along. I think this is MORE important
for those of us currently building than for you guys who are thru the test
period.

I wrote my earlier comments partly because I think alternate engines can be
safe and effective, but mostly because I think ANY change from standard
practice needs very careful thought, testing and consultation with
experts. That includes electronic ignition.

I agree that making only one change in a functioning experimental is
reasonable.

Mike Perry


At 03:32 PM 9/12/2005 +0000, Jim Patillo wrote:

>Mike, I just couldn't let you get away without another statement on
>this subject.
>
>While I also respect your comments, I deal with reality while you are
>still in the dreaming stage! My plane flys a lot. Yours doesn't. In
>fact you don't have a complete and flying Q - do you? You can
>speculate all you want but until you are flying your family and
>friends behind some particular engine, its still speculation on you
>part. Let's get real here! What other proven engine outperforms the
>0200 in HP and reliability in a Q - NONE! What is the price for your
>life? Is it another 3-4K? Thats pretty cheap, wouldn't you say. Hey
>0200's are just engines and subject to failure as well but LOOK AT
>THE RECORD!
>
>The e-mails from guys who regualrly fly Q200's make my point
>perfectly and you know what I said is true. I made those comments for
>new builders who want to fly and not just "dream about it". I'll say
>it again, experimentation with marginal engines on first flights is
>dangerous.
>
>So lets clear something else up. I, like several others, have two
>mods to my engine type that has a "gazillion hours of proven
>performance on it".
>
>Note: I did not do either of those mods until I had a safe flying
>airplane and they were done at different times for full evaluation
>purposes.
>
>One is a larger piston 9:4 to 1, no great shakes here. That mod
>offers up no demons as far as I can tell from my own experiences and
>from others who have done the same conversion.
>
>Two, electronic ignition are no big deal when properly installed.
>There are thousands of them flying in airplanes. Mike think about it,
>would you perfer an ignition that has no moving parts and no
>maintenance to one that has to be inspected often and
>and is subject to mechanical failures?
>
>I rest my case on this subject.
>
>Regards,
>Jim Patillo N46JP Q200 "Flying"
>
>
>
>
>Mike Perry <dmperry1012@c...> wrote:
> > I respect Jim's viewpoint, but I would like to offer some different
> > thoughts. To start with, Jim, you aren't flying an engine with "a
> > gazillion hours of proven performance"; you have higher compression
>and electronic ignition.
>
>
>If you think those aren't significant, re-read
> > Terrance O'Neill's story about turning his Dragonfly into a glider
>by
> > mis-wiring his LSE Plasma ignition. (Kitplanes, Nov. 2000, p. 77-
>82)
> >
> > I would like to suggest to people considering alternate engines
>that you
> > read and re-read what is written by the experts. Read what they
>say about
> > durability, modifications, longevity. (I'm sure I can get 200
>horsepower
> > out of a VW -- with an engine life expectancy measured in
>minutes.) Some
> > of the limits are not obvious if you come from an auto application
> > background (eg: maximum compression ratios and continuous
>horsepower).
> >
> > Some of these engines are safe ONLY if installed EXACTLY as
> > recommended. For example, you cannot use a prop extension and you
>must use
> > a light-weight prop with VW, Corvair and Jabiru engines. All three
>have
> > had broken crankshafts when used with heavier props or prop
>extensions.
> >
> > If you have a "great idea" please check with an expert, such as
>Steve
> > Bennett for VWs or William Wynne for Corvairs, or find someone with
>a lot
> > of hours on the same setup. Then ask yourself, "is 40 hours really
>long
> > enough to feel safe carrying passengers with this setup?" (4
>Corvair
> > engines have broken crankshafts. They averaged 60 hours of flight
> > time. All had prop extensions.)
> >
> > The best idea: Build and install the engine and accessories
>EXACTLY as
> > recommended by the experts. And that's true whether you start with
>a
> > "Certified" engine or an auto conversion. Then go fly.
> >
> > Mike Perry
> > (0 hours on Q-200. Lots of hours rebuilding VWs)
> >
> >
> >
> > At 05:04 PM 9/9/2005 +0000, Jim Patillo wrote:
> >
> > >Fella's,
> > >
> > >I hope you take this message the way its intended cause I realize
>we
> > >are all experimental in this business.
> > >
> > >I don't know much but alls' I know is; "anyone who willingly puts
> > >his or his family/friends butts on the line to fly with any engine
> > >except one that is approved for airplane flight with a gazillion
> > >hours of proven performance may or could be considered nuts". What
> > >am I missing here? Many have gone before you and with their lives
> > >proven what works and what doesn't. Why tempt fate anymore than you
> > >have to? At best anything you install on one of these planes is in
>a
> > >failure mode the second it is installed. If you fly it long enough,
> > >it will fail. Why provoke the evil gremlins of flight.
> > >
> > >New guys seriously consider sticking with proven engines. Trust me,
> > >you will have way to many other things happening during your first
> > >flights to throw a failed engine into the frey.
> > >
> > >The 0200 may be old and expensive but you can damn near decapitate
> > >it and it still works. If its got gas, air and spark it will run.
> > >
> > >A couple of years ago I had a seal fail on one of the push rod
>tubes
> > >and ran the engine out of oil quickly about 40 miles from my
> > >airport. I started to make a forced landing in the central valley
>of
> > >California but with minimal RPM and oil pressure limped back to
>LVK.
> > >When I pulled off the runway, the engine quit. I thought for sure
> > >it was fried. After cutting the filter apart and finding no metal,
>I
> > >changed the 15W-50 oil and filter still expecting the worst. I
> > >started the engine but to my suprise it worked as if nothing had
> > >happened. I did a compression check and all cylinders were fine. It
> > >now has several hundred hours since the failure and still going
> > >strong. Look at the history of the Q200. The engine that has worked
> > >sucessfully over the years is the 0200.
> > >
> > >The Jabiru 3300 appears to be a good option for this bird but
> > >there's little docummented performance or longevity numbers to back
> > >it up at this point. Time will tell.
> > >
> > >You can spend 8-12K for a pumped up modernized 0200 or 11-12K for
> > >the new Jabiru 6. Which one is for you? The other options may be
> > >cheaper but how much is your life worth?
> > >
> > >Regards,
> > >Jim Patillo N46JP Q200 - Technical ground & asphalt advisor
> > >LVK-"More flying Q200's than any place on earth".
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >








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


Yahoo! Groups Links









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





------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

a.. Visit your group "Q-LIST" on the web.

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.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Looking for Jay Scheevel

Doug Humble <hawkidoug@...>
 

Jay Scheevel- Please contact me off list at HawkiDoug@...

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


Re: VW Quick guide (was Engines - Long read editorial)

Doug Humble <hawkidoug@...>
 

Very Good email Mike!!!

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

----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Perry" <dmperry1012@...>
To: <Q-LIST@...>
Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 11:29 PM
Subject: [Q-LIST] VW Quick guide (was Engines - Long read editorial)


I came back from a long weekend to find many E-mails, some confusing to
me. In particular, Larry Severson said: "Revmaster, unlike all of the
other VW modifiers, has added a 4th bearing to support the prop that is the
biggest bearing in the engine." Also there were questions about Type 4 VW
engines. This is an attempt to clarify some issues.

1) VW produced 5 general aircooled types:
Type 1: Beetle and Karmen Ghia 1200-1600 cc Magnesium case, still
manufactured in Brazil
Type 2: Early Bus (before 1972) 1200-1600 cc
Type 3: Fastback, Squareback, Notchback 1500-1600 cc
Type 4: Late Bus 1700-2000 cc Aluminum case
914: VW produced engines for the Porsche

2) Experimental aircraft have used the Type 1 and Type 4 engines.

3) Some builders wanted more power (surprise!), and began using hot-rod
and dune-buggy parts and techniques to get more power. This led to a
number of problems, especially broken cranks.

4) Several small businesses started up to supply parts or engines. These
3 are still in business in the US:
Revmaster Aviation: primarily produces a 2100cc complete engine and
parts to support it. (May have a 3000 cc engine coming soon.)
Great Plains Aircraft: More of a parts house. Sells complete kits
or parts for modifying your engine. Has kits for Type 1 1600 to 2180 cc
displacement; parts and instructions for Type 4 and 1/2 VW; multiple
different ignition, intake, exhaust, electric and accessory parts.
AeroConVersions: Engine is Aero-Vee, 2180 cc. New Company but
experienced people, associated with Sonnex (not sure of the exact
connection).

5) Propeller bearing: Revmaster and Aero-Vee include heavy prop
bearing. Great Plains includes "Force One" prop hub with "stroker"
crank-shaft and will fit it to other cranks.

6) All of these engines have limitations. You should carefully discuss
your plans with the company, especially your choice of propellers and any
prop extension.

7) Comparing Revmaster with Great Plains Aircraft is like comparing Apples
and Oranges. I like both, but I don't get them confused. Great Plains
gives you far more choices for intake, exhaust and accessories. Revmaster
gives you one carefully developed product.

Mike Perry







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


Yahoo! Groups Links