Date   

Re: Offline Address

Larry Severson
 

At 07:40 PM 11/2/2006, you wrote:

Joseph I have it in a zip file but it is 4MB. If you let me have your
offline address I will try it.
I see a lot of requests for offline addresses. Every message posted on the Q-List has the person's offline address buried in it. Check the full print of the message's header.


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


Re: Headset & FCC

FR Jones <seabeevet@...>
 

rholen8rl, thanks for the enlightening! No more shooting from the hip!

On 11/1/06, rholen8rl <rickhole@...> wrote:

The cellphone prohibition is an FCC matter. The reason is that cell
phones normally have short range and will communicate with one or
several nearby cell towers. From an airplane, your cell phone can
easily be in contact with dozens or more towers. So your one cell
phone trtansmission impacts channel usage over a large geographic
area. To keep channel usage reasonable, these high altitude
transmissions are prohibited. You will probably find at our lower
altitudes you cell phone will work just fine, though still in
violation of FCC rules. (When your phone is detected on too many
towers you may get an "out of service" indication). To stay legal,
restrict usage to on-the-ground. In an emergency, of course, do what
you have to do.

--- In Q-LIST@... <Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com>, "FR Jones"
<seabeevet@...> wrote:

Shooting from the hip on this, two issues come to mind. First, why
would
using a cell phone in a private plane make a difference? Cars,
comercial (on
the ground taxi), boats etc. are all okay. Next, who would know if
someone
did use their cell from their private ac?
All answers come from how you ask the question. The definitely "no"
answer
may have been intended for a passenger on an airliner in flight...
that "no"
comes from the disruption of navaids etc.
Just some thought to think about.
Dick


Re: Exhaust Augmenter (was Canard Root Faring)

Dave Richardson <dave@...>
 

Hi Joseph,



I just found this index for Kitplanes on a Cozy website.



http://www.cozybuilders.org/ref_info/kitplane.html



There is an article from the March 92 issue called Low Drag Exhaust on
page 76. Perhaps that's the one he's talking about.



Dave



_____

From: Joseph M Snow [mailto:1flashq@...]
Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2006 6:47 PM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: RE: [Q-LIST]Exhaust Augmenter (was Canard Root Faring)



Great! I will look forward to reading more about augmenters. Maybe
"Kitplanes" has an archive on line that I can access.

Joseph


Re: Exhaust Augmenter (was Canard Root Faring)

Terry Adams
 

Peter,
I would appreciate the info on augmenters also.
terrywadams@...

Thank you

----- Original Message -----
From: Peter Harris
To: Q-LIST@...
Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2006 7:40 PM
Subject: RE: [Q-LIST]Exhaust Augmenter (was Canard Root Faring)


Joseph I have it in a zip file but it is 4MB. If you let me have your
offline address I will try it.

Peter

_____

From: Q-LIST@... [mailto:Q-LIST@...] On Behalf Of
Joseph M Snow
Sent: Friday, 3 November 2006 9:47 AM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: RE: [Q-LIST]Exhaust Augmenter (was Canard Root Faring)

Great! I will look forward to reading more about augmenters. Maybe
"Kitplanes" has an archive on line that I can access.

Joseph


Re: Exhaust Augmenter (was Canard Root Faring)

Joseph Snow <1flashq@...>
 

Thanks Patrick. I will check my pile of Contacts to see if I happen to have those issues.

Joseph

----- Original Message -----
From: Patrick Panzera
To: Q-LIST@...
Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2006 7:30 PM
Subject: RE: [Q-LIST]Exhaust Augmenter (was Canard Root Faring)


Check issues 39 and 66.

http://www.contactmagazine.com/backissu.html

Pat

> Great! I will look forward to reading more about augmenters. Maybe
> "Kitplanes" has an archive on line that I can access.


Re: Headset & FCC

Chick Masoner <chick@...>
 

Pipeline pilots would be lost without there cell phones to call in the leaks
especially in the production fields. But, I don't know if flying below 300'
AGL counts.



_____


Re: Headset & FCC

Chick Masoner <chick@...>
 

Pipeline pilots would be lost without there cell phones to call in the leaks
especially in the production fields. But, I don't know if flying below 300'
AGL counts.



_____


Re: Headset & FCC

Patrick Panzera <panzera@...>
 

This is directly off the FCC (not FAA) website:

"FCC rules currently ban cell phone use after a plane has taken off
because of potential interference to cellular phone networks on the
ground."

http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/cellonplanes.html

But they do plan to change the rule.

I almost always carry one but always turn it off before preflight. In an
emergency I would certainly turn it on, but currently it's illegal to
use one in flight.

Pat

Several comments re cell phones:

1) My first flight instructor always carried a cell phone and said
she
had
used it exactly once to land in controlled airspace with radios out.
I
don't remember the details.


Re: Exhaust Augmenter (was Canard Root Faring)

Peter Harris <peterjfharris@...>
 

Joseph I have it in a zip file but it is 4MB. If you let me have your
offline address I will try it.

Peter



_____

From: Q-LIST@... [mailto:Q-LIST@...] On Behalf Of
Joseph M Snow
Sent: Friday, 3 November 2006 9:47 AM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: RE: [Q-LIST]Exhaust Augmenter (was Canard Root Faring)



Great! I will look forward to reading more about augmenters. Maybe
"Kitplanes" has an archive on line that I can access.

Joseph


Re: Headset & FCC

Mike Perry <dmperry1012@...>
 

Several comments re cell phones:

1) My first flight instructor always carried a cell phone and said she had
used it exactly once to land in controlled airspace with radios out. I
don't remember the details.

2) "cell phones" include both analog and digital; digital includes at
least a couple of protocols. The protocol Verizon uses is called CDMA; in
this system every tower sends out a brief time signal several times per
second; the cell phone decides which signal is best and sends out a signal
each second "this is who I want to talk to." The system routers then
decide which signals to ignore. The problem with signals hitting too many
towers is system overload: the system knows which signals to pay attention
to and which to ignore but you still have to filter out the extraneous
signals. However, this is far easier with digital than analog signals.

3) One problem with digital cell phones is that they will revert to analog
under some conditions. This "feature" allows you to get some signal in
areas that only have analog service (eg: some resort areas here in
California have a single analog cell tower just for the town or
resort). See Craig Steffen's comments below re analog cell phones in the
cockpit.

My son once worked on a software project for a cell phone system; I picked
up bits and pieces of info on the protocols.

Mike Perry

At 08:55 AM 11/2/2006 -0600, you wrote:

Quoting FR Jones <<mailto:seabeevet%40gmail.com>seabeevet@...>:

Shooting from the hip on this, two issues come to mind. First, why would
using a cell phone in a private plane make a difference?
As has already been pointed out here:

The core prohibition is from the FCC, because it would cause your phone
to claim
an active channel on dozens of towers at once, rather than one or two
as is the
design.

The Mythbusters show on the discovery channel tried this Myth out (on the
ground; they weren't allowed to in the air). They built a device that
broadcast broad-band signal on cell frequencies. They couldn't get a
certified
aircraft to react at all.

However, they also built a mock-up of a cockpit with just some surplus
instruments. The digital cell phone signal (1.8 GHz or so) didn't produce any
results. However, analog cell signals (900 MHz range) made the VOR go
haywire.

SO...I think that depending on shielding, in a homebuilt particularly,
an active
analog cell phone on board could very easily cause the VORs to lose
their lock. This would be particularly true in a fiberglass airplane,
which doesn't have the
natural conductive shielding of a metal airplane.

I've always assumed that the cell phone jack on aviation headsets was to call
flight service to activate or close your flight plan while taxiing, or to call
other people while you're on the ground and the engine is running.

Craig Steffen


Re: Q2 Kit for Sale

BARRY AMANDA STEARNS <stearns2559@...>
 

I would be interested in the kit

Barry Stearns

----- Original Message -----
From: gmichaelhuffman<mailto:mikehuffman@...>
To: Q-LIST@...<mailto:Q-LIST@...>
Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2006 11:01 AM
Subject: [Q-LIST] Q2 Kit for Sale


A guy contacted me, saying he has a virgin Q2 kit for sale. Here
are some of his words about the project:

"My kit is near Marietta GA, in back-in-the-box status. It is
naturally missing all of the liquid plastics, long beyond useful
life. It is a virgin kit, lots of peripheral things done, though.
It has an extra tinted canopy, some of the Q200 conversion parts
(plans & instructions, cowl halves, but no tapered spars, prop), 2
extra reduced size plans/instruction copies, a mechanical liquid
plastic proportioner, jigs, aluminum hotwire templates, construction
table, some QBA pubs. All in good condition. I'm never going to
get to build it, so it needs a good home. If you are interested, I
can meet you there to show it. I'm in Miami FL, 305-685-0000 (W),
305-502-3695 (Mobile), phlyer48@...<mailto:phlyer48@...>.

Please let me know if anyone there is interested in making an offer
subject to seeing it. There is a boat trailer available which needs
some work but will carry the big box & 2 or 3 of the foam billets.
I think there is a 4th one which would go with it. I need to know
if there is interest or if I should list it on ebay.

Regards, Charles Wirt"

He is wanting $3000 negotiable for the kit. Go for it!

Mike Huffman
816-838-6235


Re: Exhaust Augmenter (was Canard Root Faring)

Patrick Panzera <panzera@...>
 

Great! I will look forward to reading more about augmenters. Maybe
"Kitplanes" has an archive on line that I can access.


Re: Headset & FCC

wesisberg <wes@...>
 

I agree with others (no, no, no), but I do know a CFI who lost comm
under IFR conditions, spoke to tower on his cell phone, and got in
safely and without repercussions for phone use. (That was his
argument for carrying a directory with tower numbers.)

If you were under IFR or perhaps VFR flight following, your brother
might be able to track your progress himself, e.g.,

http://flightaware.com/live/airport/KLVK

Wes

--- In Q-LIST@..., denpau@... wrote:

Since, like most of you, I use a cell phone, I was intrigued by the
advertising of headsets with cell phone connections.
I had been reading, off and on, about regulations against using a
cell in
flight. It would be great to give my brother a call, 20 minutes out,
to pick
me up at the airport.
I e-mailed the EAA to get some reliable info. The reply was that the
FAA
didn't have any regs against cell use in the air but the FCC says
no, no,
definitely NO!

Dennis








Re: Exhaust Augmenter (was Canard Root Faring)

Joseph M Snow <1flashq@...>
 

Great! I will look forward to reading more about augmenters. Maybe "Kitplanes" has an archive on line that I can access.

Joseph


Re: Exhaust Augmenter (was Canard Root Faring)

Peter Harris <peterjfharris@...>
 

Joseph,

The Norton ejector is purpose built into the base of a Supertrapp megaphone.
It has a side entry and is used to scavenge cooling air through the rotors
and would not suit your application. There was an article in Kitplanes mag
years ago which covered the design of this kind of device and showed
dimension ratios for optimum performance. I will see if I can find it.

Peter



_____

From: Q-LIST@... [mailto:Q-LIST@...] On Behalf Of
Joseph Snow
Sent: Thursday, 2 November 2006 3:14 PM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST]Exhaust Augmenter (was Canard Root Faring)



Peter,

Thanks again for your perseverance. Do you have a picture or link to the
system?
Joseph

----- Original Message -----
From: Peter Harris
To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com> com
Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 9:15 PM
Subject: RE: [Q-LIST] Canard Root Faring

Joseph a weld bead would do the job best if you can get a sharp edge facing
the exhaust stream. The Norton extractor was made with the end of the
tailpipe crushed and shaped like a rectangular cross. It would be possible
to enclose the whole thing inside the lower cowl?

Peter

_____

From: Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com> com
[mailto:Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com> com] On Behalf
Of
Joseph Snow
Sent: Thursday, 2 November 2006 10:19 AM
To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com> com
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Canard Root Faring

Peter,
Except for the 1/16" venturi ring, your description of the augmenter setup
sounds like my current setup. The 1/16" ring generates the turbulence? If it
worked, I would be happy to keep it as is. However, I do think the parts
outside of my cowl will be draggy. How do you get the 1/16" ring?...perhaps
lay a weld bead on the inside end of the pipe?

Joseph


Q2 Kit for Sale

gmichaelhuffman <mikehuffman@...>
 

A guy contacted me, saying he has a virgin Q2 kit for sale. Here
are some of his words about the project:

"My kit is near Marietta GA, in back-in-the-box status. It is
naturally missing all of the liquid plastics, long beyond useful
life. It is a virgin kit, lots of peripheral things done, though.
It has an extra tinted canopy, some of the Q200 conversion parts
(plans & instructions, cowl halves, but no tapered spars, prop), 2
extra reduced size plans/instruction copies, a mechanical liquid
plastic proportioner, jigs, aluminum hotwire templates, construction
table, some QBA pubs. All in good condition. I'm never going to
get to build it, so it needs a good home. If you are interested, I
can meet you there to show it. I'm in Miami FL, 305-685-0000 (W),
305-502-3695 (Mobile), phlyer48@....

Please let me know if anyone there is interested in making an offer
subject to seeing it. There is a boat trailer available which needs
some work but will carry the big box & 2 or 3 of the foam billets.
I think there is a 4th one which would go with it. I need to know
if there is interest or if I should list it on ebay.

Regards, Charles Wirt"

He is wanting $3000 negotiable for the kit. Go for it!

Mike Huffman
816-838-6235


Re: stall indicator - Phil's response

Larry Severson
 

At 06:42 AM 11/2/2006, you wrote:

Does a stall indicator work in gusting conditions for landing?`
An AOA indicator always works, but it may show fluctuating AOA during gusting conditions. Then, you merely adapt as you do with the AS indicator under similar conditions.

Basically, a plane will stall at different speeds based on weight and bank angle (could be anywhere from 60 to 90+ MPH), BUT ALWAYS AT THE SAME AOA under all conditions.


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


Re: Headset & FCC

craig@...
 

Quoting FR Jones <seabeevet@...>:

Shooting from the hip on this, two issues come to mind. First, why would
using a cell phone in a private plane make a difference?
As has already been pointed out here:

The core prohibition is from the FCC, because it would cause your phone to claim
an active channel on dozens of towers at once, rather than one or two as is the
design.

The Mythbusters show on the discovery channel tried this Myth out (on the
ground; they weren't allowed to in the air). They built a device that
broadcast broad-band signal on cell frequencies. They couldn't get a certified
aircraft to react at all.

However, they also built a mock-up of a cockpit with just some surplus
instruments. The digital cell phone signal (1.8 GHz or so) didn't produce any
results. However, analog cell signals (900 MHz range) made the VOR go haywire.

SO...I think that depending on shielding, in a homebuilt particularly, an active
analog cell phone on board could very easily cause the VORs to lose their lock. This would be particularly true in a fiberglass airplane, which doesn't have the
natural conductive shielding of a metal airplane.

I've always assumed that the cell phone jack on aviation headsets was to call
flight service to activate or close your flight plan while taxiing, or to call
other people while you're on the ground and the engine is running.

Craig Steffen


Re: stall indicator - Phil's response

Tri-Q1 <rryan@...>
 

Does a stall indicator work in gusting conditions for landing?

Ryan

--- In Q-LIST@..., britmcman@... wrote:


In a message dated 10/30/2006 6:23:53 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
dmperry1012@... writes:

I don't really understand why anyone wants
to install an AOA or a stall indicator of any type on a Quickie
or Q-2xx
other than curiosity


I 'll take this one. Mike, I always wanted to know precisely what
was the
best L/D glide angle as a glider aircraft. In the event of
any "engine out"
scenario, one could hypothetically set up on best angle of attack
and thus be
at an optimum condition for flying the farthest distance over the
ground
regardless of weight conditions. I suspect that the best glide
speed may vary
based on how the aircraft is loaded. If the aircraft is loaded
to about 900
pounds the best glide may be some amount faster or slower than if
the aircraft
is loaded to 1350. Regardless of what the aircraft load happens
to be, the
pilot could set upon best angle and have the greatest opportunity
to make a
greater radius to a potential field.

I experienced a broken prop at 9500' MSL (9000 AGL). By the time
I found
nearest airport, it was still about 12 NM out. I wished I had
such a tool.

Cheers,

Phil
N87TQ Tri-Q
Q-2 Rev




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


Re: Exhaust Augmenter (was Canard Root Faring)

Joseph Snow <1flashq@...>
 

Peter,

Thanks again for your perseverance. Do you have a picture or link to the system?
Joseph

----- Original Message -----
From: Peter Harris
To: Q-LIST@...
Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 9:15 PM
Subject: RE: [Q-LIST] Canard Root Faring


Joseph a weld bead would do the job best if you can get a sharp edge facing
the exhaust stream. The Norton extractor was made with the end of the
tailpipe crushed and shaped like a rectangular cross. It would be possible
to enclose the whole thing inside the lower cowl?

Peter

_____

From: Q-LIST@... [mailto:Q-LIST@...] On Behalf Of
Joseph Snow
Sent: Thursday, 2 November 2006 10:19 AM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Canard Root Faring

Peter,
Except for the 1/16" venturi ring, your description of the augmenter setup
sounds like my current setup. The 1/16" ring generates the turbulence? If it
worked, I would be happy to keep it as is. However, I do think the parts
outside of my cowl will be draggy. How do you get the 1/16" ring?...perhaps
lay a weld bead on the inside end of the pipe?

Joseph