Date   

Load Limits

Mike Perry <dmperry1012@...>
 

I know the canard stalls at a particular angle of attack. Does anyone know
what that would mean in terms of G forces at cruise speed? In other words,
what are the most Gs we can generate in the Q2xx before we get canard stall?

Background: looking for more information on the limit loads of the Q2xx.

Mike Perry


Re: Load Limits: Confessions of an Obsessive Compulsive Nerd

Doug Humble <hawkidoug@...>
 

Well said again Mike.

Doug "Hawkeye" Humble
A Sign Above www.asignabove.net
Omaha NE
N25974

----- Original Message -----
From: Mike Perry
To: Q-LIST@...
Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 11:12 AM
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Load Limits: Confessions of an Obsessive Compulsive Nerd


John, that's awfully harsh, however:

Mark, your post reads like a non-engineer reporting on what an engineer
said, esp. "the numbers of Carbon fiber plys, LS1 design by W X L X
Cord." I think you are trying to say your engineer friends analyzed the
carbon spar with the overlying fiberglass/foam composite structure and came
to the conclusion it was safe to 1340 lbs. If so, it wasn't clear. (I'm a
non-engineer, I often understand better than I report.)

As far as ". . . no one knows how fiberglass will react under certain
conditions. It's not repeatable." I don't think that is accurate. Two
major things will affect the strength of this type of composite fiberglass
structure: workmanship (orientation of fibers, air bubbles, attachment of
surface to core) and temperature. However, low temperature merely slows
the cure process, it doesn't stop it, and none of our projects go from shop
to airworthy in just a few weeks.

I think Rutan and others have shown that this process is repeatable for the
amateur builder. Get "Moldless Composite Homebuilt Sandwich Aircraft
Construction" by the Rutan Aircraft Factory or any of the other books sold
by Aircraft Spruce that explain the process and strength.

Workmanship is important -- critical perhaps -- and post cure or time fixes
the temperature issue.

Mike Perry

At 10:09 PM 6/3/2008 -0500, you wrote:
>Mike,
>
>
>I just want to say thank you for providing some helpful information on Q200
>Gross Weight. A few months ago I asked for the Max Gross Weight for a
>Tri-Q200 with an LS1 Canard. The conversation went from bad to worst. I
>think I was part of the problem because I expected the data to be ready and
>available. My rule of thumb is I have to have supporting data to believe
>what is being stated. Unless the data is from a owner, builder, operator
>who has done the home work to prove their clam in which they are more then
>happy to provide. I usually don't believe them. So in having said that I'm
>going to break my own rule of thumb.
>
>
>
>After the let down with the Website conversation. I went back to some of my
>friends who are aeronautical engineers and love to crunch numbers. After
>figuring the numbers of Carbon fiber plys, LS1 design by W X L X Cord. The
>LS1 wing loading came out to an acceptable safety margin wing loading of
>1340 lbs. I wanted to publish the data on the web but my friends asked me
>not to because these were not hard facts but based on soft data. We need
>more engineer data to build a data predicable simulation. Which really means
>IF AND BUT were not calculated in to the math. My friend affectionately
>called it; Rutan math.
>
>
>
>Because no one knows how fiberglass will react under certain conditions.
>It's not repeatable. I mean that we have data to tell when 4130 steel
>will start to bend, temperature, shear factors and tensile strength just to
>name a few. Metal will shear or show signs that its going to or ductile
>overload. Metal is repeatable but fiberglass still has a lot of unknowns.
>If I build a metal airplane in my Hangar in the winter (30 *) the metal
>still has the same repeatable calculated stress load limits. Same
>conditions; Fiberglass not so much. Pound for pound fiberglass is ten times
>stronger than metal, if properly manufactured. But you just can't tell when
>it's going to break, it just doesn't tell you and there is the dilemma in
>calculating fiberglass load limits.
>
>
>
>So after all that I guess I'm supporting your findings. I'm still building
>on Tri Q200 and I'm still just about done. Just one more thing to finish up
>and I'll be flying. BTW I'm listing my Max Gross Weight at 1300 lbs.
>
>
>
>Mark


Re: Parting out TriQ200

David Chalmers <David@...>
 

Hi Richard, well I still have it but I expect it to be gone very
shortly. A California builder will most likely take what remains
(including the trailer) by the end of the week. If he doesn't take it
I'll let you know.

Thanks

Dave

On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 12:31 PM, viggenbuilder2 <richard@...> wrote:
Hi David, Do you still have your nose leg or is it sold now. I need
one as my brand new one has been damaged.

Richard Thomson
TriQ200 G-BMFN
richard@...





--- In Q-LIST@..., "David Chalmers" <David@...> wrote:

On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 10:44 PM, <ClairJohns@...> wrote:

What do you have this stuff listed under, I cannot find Light
speed
ignition, or you as a seller


In a message dated 4/29/2008 10:49:11 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
David@... writes:



.

I just removed the control stick which is the regular Q2 stick
with a
Ray Allen G207 grip with all the buttons on top. The wires are
threaded out the bottom through a custom made plug and a plate
holding the connector attaches to the aileron torque tube so it
all
rotates together and the wires don't flex or get caught in the
pivot.
Seems like this might save someone building a Q a lot of work. If
you're interested let me know and I'll send you a picture
otherwise
I'll sell the grip separately on ebay.

If you want any of the other metal Q2 hardware let me know too.

Thanks

Dave Chalmers
Redmond, WA



_Messages in this topic _
(
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Q-
LIST/message/31155;_ylc=X3oDMTM2bzN0N240BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIxMj
QxNTgEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDY1

NjE4BG1zZ0lkAzMxMjYxBHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA3Z0cGMEc3RpbWUDMTIwOTUyNzMyMgR0cG
NJZAMzMT
E1NQ--) (25) _Reply (via web post) _
(
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Q-
LIST/post;_ylc=X3oDMTJxZWdrdDY4BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIxMjQxNTgEZ3J
wc3BJZAMxNzA1MDY

1NjE4BG1zZ0lkAzMxMjYxBHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA3JwbHkEc3RpbWUDMTIwOTUyNzMyMg--?
act=repl
y&messageNum=31261) | _Start a new topic _
(
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Q-
LIST/post;_ylc=X3oDMTJlZzB1dmJ1BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIxMjQxNTgEZ3J
wc3BJZAMx
NzA1MDY1NjE4BHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA250cGMEc3RpbWUDMTIwOTUyNzMyMg--)
_Messages_
(
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Q-
LIST/messages;_ylc=X3oDMTJlNmw5ZzB1BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIxMjQxNTg
EZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDY1NjE4BHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA
21zZ3MEc3RpbWUDMTIwOTUyNzMyMg--) | _Files_
(
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Q-
LIST/files;_ylc=X3oDMTJmdXRnNW5hBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIxMjQxNTgEZ3
Jwc3BJZA
MxNzA1MDY1NjE4BHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA2ZpbGVzBHN0aW1lAzEyMDk1MjczMjI-)
|
_Photos_
(
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Q-
LIST/photos;_ylc=X3oDMTJldGNpNW1hBF9TAzk3MzU5N

zE0BGdycElkAzIxMjQxNTgEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDY1NjE4BHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA3Bob3Q
Ec3RpbWU
DMTIwOTUyNzMyMg--) | _Members_
(
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Q-
LIST/members;_ylc=X3oDMTJlZ3Bvb3Z1BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIxMjQxNTgE
Z3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDY1
NjE4BHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA21icnMEc3RpbWUDMTIwOTUyNzMyMg--)
Quickie Builders Association WEB site
_http://www.quickiebuilders.org_ (http://www.quickiebuilders.org/)



(
http://groups.yahoo.com/;_ylc=X3oDMTJkZnNiZ2dlBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElk
AzIxMjQxNTgEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDY1NjE4BHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA2dmcARzdGltZQMxMj
A5NTI3MzIy
)
_Change settings via the Web_
(
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Q-
LIST/join;_ylc=X3oDMTJmNmVrc2wwBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIxMjQxNTgEZ3J
wc3BJZAMxNzA1MDY1NjE4B
HNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA3N0bmdzBHN0aW1lAzEyMDk1MjczMjI-) (Yahoo! ID
required)
Change settings via email: _Switch delivery to Daily Digest_
(mailto:Q-LIST-digest@...?subject=Email Delivery:
Digest) |
_Switch format to
Traditional_ (mailto:Q-LIST-traditional@...?
subject=Change
Delivery Format: Traditional)
_Visit Your Group _
(
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Q-
LIST;_ylc=X3oDMTJkNW85bjdqBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIxMjQxNTgEZ3Jwc3BJ
ZAMxNzA1MDY1NjE4BHNlYwNmdHIEc2xr
A2hwZgRzdGltZQMxMjA5NTI3MzIy) | _Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use _
(http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/) | _Unsubscribe _ (mail
to:Q-LIST-unsubscribe@...?subject=)




Recent Activity
* 3
_New Members_
(
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Q-
LIST/members;_ylc=X3oDMTJma242N2FoBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIxMjQxNTgE
Z3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDY1NjE4BHNlYwN2dGwEc2
xrA3ZtYnJzBHN0aW1lAzEyMDk1MjczMjI-)
* 2
_New Photos_
(
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Q-
LIST/spnew;_ylc=X3oDMTJmNDNmYTQ1BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIxMjQxNTgEZ3
Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDY1NjE4BHNlYwN2dGwEc2xrA
3ZwaG90BHN0aW1lAzEyMDk1MjczMjI-)

_Visit Your Group _
(
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Q-
LIST;_ylc=X3oDMTJlZTAydmFrBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIxMjQxNTgEZ3Jwc3BJ
ZAMxNzA1MDY1NjE4BHNlYwN2dGwEc2xr
A3ZnaHAEc3RpbWUDMTIwOTUyNzMyMg--)


Health Zone
_Look your best!_
(
http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=13ob02t3o/M=493064.12016236.12445728.99776
93/D=groups/S=1705065618:NC/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1209534522/L=/B=Zf0qBkLaX9

g-
/J=1209527322872385/A=4430620/R=0/SIG=11fhbjsi1/*http://promotions.yah
oo.com
/healthandfitness/)
Groups to help you
look & feel great.

Yahoo! Finance
_It's Now Personal_
(
http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=13oe913pc/M=493064.12016257.12445664.86745
78/D=groups/S=1705065618:NC/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1209534522/L=/B=Zv0qBkLa

X9g-
/J=1209527322872385/A=4507179/R=0/SIG=12de4rskk/*http://us.rd.yahoo.co
m/ev
t=50284/*http://finance.yahoo.com/personal-finance)
Guides, news,
advice & more.

Need traffic?
_Drive customers_
(
http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=13okgte7j/M=493064.12016308.12445700.86745
78/D=groups/S=1705065618:NC/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1209534522/L=/B=Z_0qBkLaX9

g-
/J=1209527322872385/A=3848644/R=0/SIG=131l83flq/*http://searchmarketin
g.yaho
o.com/arp/srchv2.php?
o=US2006&cmp=Yahoo&ctv=Groups5&s=Y&s2=&s3=&b=50)
With search ads
on Yahoo!


.





**************Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for
U.S. used
car
listings at AOL Autos.
(http://autos.aol.com/used?NCID=aolcmp00300000002851)





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

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: Load Limits: Confessions of an Obsessive Compulsive Nerd

Mike Perry <dmperry1012@...>
 

John, that's awfully harsh, however:

Mark, your post reads like a non-engineer reporting on what an engineer
said, esp. "the numbers of Carbon fiber plys, LS1 design by W X L X
Cord." I think you are trying to say your engineer friends analyzed the
carbon spar with the overlying fiberglass/foam composite structure and came
to the conclusion it was safe to 1340 lbs. If so, it wasn't clear. (I'm a
non-engineer, I often understand better than I report.)

As far as ". . . no one knows how fiberglass will react under certain
conditions. It's not repeatable." I don't think that is accurate. Two
major things will affect the strength of this type of composite fiberglass
structure: workmanship (orientation of fibers, air bubbles, attachment of
surface to core) and temperature. However, low temperature merely slows
the cure process, it doesn't stop it, and none of our projects go from shop
to airworthy in just a few weeks.

I think Rutan and others have shown that this process is repeatable for the
amateur builder. Get "Moldless Composite Homebuilt Sandwich Aircraft
Construction" by the Rutan Aircraft Factory or any of the other books sold
by Aircraft Spruce that explain the process and strength.

Workmanship is important -- critical perhaps -- and post cure or time fixes
the temperature issue.

Mike Perry

At 10:09 PM 6/3/2008 -0500, you wrote:
Mike,


I just want to say thank you for providing some helpful information on Q200
Gross Weight. A few months ago I asked for the Max Gross Weight for a
Tri-Q200 with an LS1 Canard. The conversation went from bad to worst. I
think I was part of the problem because I expected the data to be ready and
available. My rule of thumb is I have to have supporting data to believe
what is being stated. Unless the data is from a owner, builder, operator
who has done the home work to prove their clam in which they are more then
happy to provide. I usually don't believe them. So in having said that I'm
going to break my own rule of thumb.



After the let down with the Website conversation. I went back to some of my
friends who are aeronautical engineers and love to crunch numbers. After
figuring the numbers of Carbon fiber plys, LS1 design by W X L X Cord. The
LS1 wing loading came out to an acceptable safety margin wing loading of
1340 lbs. I wanted to publish the data on the web but my friends asked me
not to because these were not hard facts but based on soft data. We need
more engineer data to build a data predicable simulation. Which really means
IF AND BUT were not calculated in to the math. My friend affectionately
called it; Rutan math.



Because no one knows how fiberglass will react under certain conditions.
It's not repeatable. I mean that we have data to tell when 4130 steel
will start to bend, temperature, shear factors and tensile strength just to
name a few. Metal will shear or show signs that its going to or ductile
overload. Metal is repeatable but fiberglass still has a lot of unknowns.
If I build a metal airplane in my Hangar in the winter (30 *) the metal
still has the same repeatable calculated stress load limits. Same
conditions; Fiberglass not so much. Pound for pound fiberglass is ten times
stronger than metal, if properly manufactured. But you just can't tell when
it's going to break, it just doesn't tell you and there is the dilemma in
calculating fiberglass load limits.



So after all that I guess I'm supporting your findings. I'm still building
on Tri Q200 and I'm still just about done. Just one more thing to finish up
and I'll be flying. BTW I'm listing my Max Gross Weight at 1300 lbs.



Mark


Re: Relocating a Quickie Tri Q2

Doug Humble <hawkidoug@...>
 

Dave is speaking of Dave Richardson's Tri-Q. He sent me an email off list wondering if someone would fly it part way to Canada. I think he's open to ideas and he'll correct me if I'm wrong, I hope. Dave, you might give out your contact information for those who might want to help you. Email, phone # , etc.

Doug "Hawkeye" Humble
A Sign Above www.asignabove.net
Omaha NE
N25974

----- Original Message -----
From: dkomaike
To: Q-LIST@...
Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 8:58 AM
Subject: [Q-LIST] Relocating a Quickie Tri Q2


Good Morning from sunny Whitecourt, Alberta! I've purchased a Quickie
and was wondering if a few of you fine aviators would be interested in
flying the Quickie from Wooster, OH toward Alberta. The FAA screwed up
my plans a few weeks ago and now need to think of something new.

Regards

Dave


Re: Relocating a Quickie Tri Q2

Reginald Clarke <airryder@...>
 

Good morning from sunny Lethbridge Alberta I've got a Quickie, Q2 /N624JC I remember it took me some time to get through with Faa

Reg Clarke
Q2/Subaru/Xpresso/N624JC

On Jun 04, 2008, at 7:58 AM, dkomaike wrote:

Good Morning from sunny Whitecourt, Alberta! I've purchased a Quickie
and was wondering if a few of you fine aviators would be interested in
flying the Quickie from Wooster, OH toward Alberta. The FAA screwed up
my plans a few weeks ago and now need to think of something new.

Regards

Dave


Relocating a Quickie Tri Q2

dkomaike <dkomaike@...>
 

Good Morning from sunny Whitecourt, Alberta! I've purchased a Quickie
and was wondering if a few of you fine aviators would be interested in
flying the Quickie from Wooster, OH toward Alberta. The FAA screwed up
my plans a few weeks ago and now need to think of something new.

Regards

Dave


Re: Load Limits: Confessions of an Obsessive Compulsive Nerd

John ten
 

Mark,

Unfortunately your posting is riddled with error as well.

You need to get to grips with structural analysis before you post.

This is just plain (and plane) nonsense.

After
figuring the numbers of Carbon fiber plys, LS1 design by W X L X
Cord. The
LS1 wing loading came out to an acceptable safety margin wing loading of
1340 lbs.

LS1 design by W x L x cord ? Huh?

"wing loading of 1340 lbs" is absurd and meaningless. Rutan is known
as one of the most adept composite engineers around, he is well known
for being unbeatable for his speed and accuracy of calculation. The
engobabble you are offering is the opposite.

You are also completely wrong about the behaviour of fiberglass it is
repeatable and well known. The fact that you do not know it should
sound loud warning bells that you need to find out, not make
engineering decisions based on an absence of information.

ten times stronger in what? tension, compression, shear?

If this is the depth of your knowledge and this what you have based
your decision upon to raise the MAUW to 1300 lbs, change your decision
before you kill yourself and others.

John








--- In Q-LIST@..., "Mark Alexander" <6oclockhigh@...> wrote:

Mike,


I just want to say thank you for providing some helpful information
on Q200
Gross Weight. A few months ago I asked for the Max Gross Weight for a
Tri-Q200 with an LS1 Canard. The conversation went from bad to
worst. I
think I was part of the problem because I expected the data to be
ready and
available. My rule of thumb is I have to have supporting data to
believe
what is being stated. Unless the data is from a owner, builder,
operator
who has done the home work to prove their clam in which they are
more then
happy to provide. I usually don't believe them. So in having said
that I'm
going to break my own rule of thumb.



After the let down with the Website conversation. I went back to
some of my
friends who are aeronautical engineers and love to crunch numbers.
After
figuring the numbers of Carbon fiber plys, LS1 design by W X L X
Cord. The
LS1 wing loading came out to an acceptable safety margin wing loading of
1340 lbs. I wanted to publish the data on the web but my friends
asked me
not to because these were not hard facts but based on soft data. We
need
more engineer data to build a data predicable simulation. Which
really means
IF AND BUT were not calculated in to the math. My friend affectionately
called it; Rutan math.



Because no one knows how fiberglass will react under certain conditions.
It's not repeatable. I mean that we have data to tell when 4130 steel
will start to bend, temperature, shear factors and tensile strength
just to
name a few. Metal will shear or show signs that its going to or ductile
overload. Metal is repeatable but fiberglass still has a lot of
unknowns.
If I build a metal airplane in my Hangar in the winter (30 *) the metal
still has the same repeatable calculated stress load limits. Same
conditions; Fiberglass not so much. Pound for pound fiberglass is
ten times
stronger than metal, if properly manufactured. But you just can't
tell when
it's going to break, it just doesn't tell you and there is the
dilemma in
calculating fiberglass load limits.



So after all that I guess I'm supporting your findings. I'm still
building
on Tri Q200 and I'm still just about done. Just one more thing to
finish up
and I'll be flying. BTW I'm listing my Max Gross Weight at 1300 lbs.



Mark

On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 12:00 PM, Mike Perry <dmperry1012@...> wrote:

Recently I produced a set of files designed to help people using
Q200s
at
gross weight over 1100 lbs. (Now posted on Jon Finley's website as
Q200_POH_supplement.zip) That drew questions on and off list about
Marc
Waddelow's analysis of the wing and the allegedly marginal
strength of the
main wing. Meanwhile Larry Severson keeps posting a claim that the Q2
canard was designed to 30Gs. Last nite and this AM I re-read
everything I
can find on Waddelow's analysis and all the old materials I have
on the
Q2xx from QAC and others. Here is my summary:

I did locate one statement supporting the 30G design of the
canard, along
with some other interesting information:

Lightweight does not, however, imply low structural margins; at
the drawing

board stage, the Q2 rear wing was designed for a positive 12G
limit load
and the canard, since it doubles as the main landing gear is
required to
withstand over 30G's of positive inflight loads and a 500 ft./min.
landing
impact. (Sport Aviation, May 1981, as reprinted by QAC for
distribution as
advertising)

The only documentation I have of Marc Waddelow's analysis of the
wing is in

Quicktalk # 28, pp 9-10. This is a summary of an exchange of letters
between Marc and Gene Sheehan. To summarize two pages of material, the
more detailed Marc's analysis, the closer he got to Sheehan's
numbers. I
have no doubt Marc had a better design, but I think it was only
slightly
better. If anyone has more information I am interested. Read the
newsletter, it's too long to reproduce here.

One quote from Sheehan: "As to your [Waddelow's] suggested
modifications I
can't see anything wrong with them other than an increase in
weight. This
may seem to be a small matter to you but my experience has shown
that the
typical homebuilder who doesn't trust the designer and adds a
little beef
here and there usually ends up with a very heavy airplane. He also
insists
on flying over gross weight. So instead of having a stronger
airplane he
may actually have less margin. . . "

Furthermore, Sheehan reported non-destructive testing to 8Gs, and
recommended any modification of the main wing or canard be tested
to "at
least 50% above what you wish to use as your limit G loading."

I did not find any documentation of testing to actual limits; that
is, no
one built a wing and loaded it until it broke. I think QAC should
have,
but they didn't.

We do have other data: there are some amazingly heavy Quickies
flying. Some Q2xxs were built with O235s, full panels, design mods
and the
kitchen sink. I have Larry Koutz's listing of flying Qs in the USA,
probably from about year 2000. There are several planes with empty
weights
over 825 lbs! Charlie Harris of Littleton Colorado has a Q200
weighing 832
lbs with 1000 hours.

Then we have the Weight and Balance info sent with my kit, showing
a gross
of 1300. There is no testing or engineering documentation to
support this
that I am aware of.

All this suggests to me the wing structure is safe at gross above 1100
lbs. I only remember two wing failures. One was an improper
repair; one
plane had a secondary gas tank above the main wing and a fuel leak
eroded
the foam.

Conclusions: I think the Q2xx main wing is safe up to a gross of 1300
lbs., but anyone flying at gross weights over 1100 lbs should read the
discussion in Quicktalk 28.

I still get angry with people who post "information" like "designed to
30Gs" but don't provide documentation. Then I end up doing the
research. See Title. Monk is my friend. I prefer sleep to research.

Mike Perry

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



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


Re: Kansan City Anyone?

Ron Weiss <ronweiss4@...>
 

--- Thanks for the response. I'm back in L.A. RonIn Q-
LIST@..., "FR Jones" <seabeevet@...> wrote:


Yes, Ron. A Super Quickie hangered at Billard Airport.

On Sun, Jun 1, 2008 at 7:56 PM, Ron Weiss <ronweiss4@...> wrote:

I'll be in Kansas Mon. June 2nd. Any Quickie's out there? Ron



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


Web site update

Joseph M Snow <1flashq@...>
 

Hi Q-listers,
I have added some pages to my web site. Under Fairings.htm there are now six sub-topics. The new topics are about the outboard elevator fairings, the aeleron/elevator end closeouts,and the outboard main wing tip. See http://corvairq.info/Fairings.htm Also, the Wheelpant page has been revised to include some photos I found in the early mounting and shaping of the wheelpant.

The engine mount page has been revised to show modifications to the mount and re-testing. See http://corvairq.info/Engine%20Mount.htm

Under the home page, the "Controls" page has been added with a sub-link to the Elevator page. See http://corvairq.info/ControlSystems.htm Included in this page is information about the balance weights, elevator roll trim according to a builder's article in Q-Talk, and the sparrow strainers.

Joseph


Re: Load Limits: Confessions of an Obsessive Compulsive Nerd

Mark Alexander <6oclockhigh@...>
 

Mike,


I just want to say thank you for providing some helpful information on Q200
Gross Weight. A few months ago I asked for the Max Gross Weight for a
Tri-Q200 with an LS1 Canard. The conversation went from bad to worst. I
think I was part of the problem because I expected the data to be ready and
available. My rule of thumb is I have to have supporting data to believe
what is being stated. Unless the data is from a owner, builder, operator
who has done the home work to prove their clam in which they are more then
happy to provide. I usually don't believe them. So in having said that I'm
going to break my own rule of thumb.



After the let down with the Website conversation. I went back to some of my
friends who are aeronautical engineers and love to crunch numbers. After
figuring the numbers of Carbon fiber plys, LS1 design by W X L X Cord. The
LS1 wing loading came out to an acceptable safety margin wing loading of
1340 lbs. I wanted to publish the data on the web but my friends asked me
not to because these were not hard facts but based on soft data. We need
more engineer data to build a data predicable simulation. Which really means
IF AND BUT were not calculated in to the math. My friend affectionately
called it; Rutan math.



Because no one knows how fiberglass will react under certain conditions.
It's not repeatable. I mean that we have data to tell when 4130 steel
will start to bend, temperature, shear factors and tensile strength just to
name a few. Metal will shear or show signs that its going to or ductile
overload. Metal is repeatable but fiberglass still has a lot of unknowns.
If I build a metal airplane in my Hangar in the winter (30 *) the metal
still has the same repeatable calculated stress load limits. Same
conditions; Fiberglass not so much. Pound for pound fiberglass is ten times
stronger than metal, if properly manufactured. But you just can't tell when
it's going to break, it just doesn't tell you and there is the dilemma in
calculating fiberglass load limits.



So after all that I guess I'm supporting your findings. I'm still building
on Tri Q200 and I'm still just about done. Just one more thing to finish up
and I'll be flying. BTW I'm listing my Max Gross Weight at 1300 lbs.



Mark

On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 12:00 PM, Mike Perry <dmperry1012@...> wrote:

Recently I produced a set of files designed to help people using Q200s
at
gross weight over 1100 lbs. (Now posted on Jon Finley's website as
Q200_POH_supplement.zip) That drew questions on and off list about Marc
Waddelow's analysis of the wing and the allegedly marginal strength of the
main wing. Meanwhile Larry Severson keeps posting a claim that the Q2
canard was designed to 30Gs. Last nite and this AM I re-read everything I
can find on Waddelow's analysis and all the old materials I have on the
Q2xx from QAC and others. Here is my summary:

I did locate one statement supporting the 30G design of the canard, along
with some other interesting information:

Lightweight does not, however, imply low structural margins; at the drawing

board stage, the Q2 rear wing was designed for a positive 12G limit load
and the canard, since it doubles as the main landing gear is required to
withstand over 30G's of positive inflight loads and a 500 ft./min. landing
impact. (Sport Aviation, May 1981, as reprinted by QAC for distribution as
advertising)

The only documentation I have of Marc Waddelow's analysis of the wing is in

Quicktalk # 28, pp 9-10. This is a summary of an exchange of letters
between Marc and Gene Sheehan. To summarize two pages of material, the
more detailed Marc's analysis, the closer he got to Sheehan's numbers. I
have no doubt Marc had a better design, but I think it was only slightly
better. If anyone has more information I am interested. Read the
newsletter, it's too long to reproduce here.

One quote from Sheehan: "As to your [Waddelow's] suggested modifications I
can't see anything wrong with them other than an increase in weight. This
may seem to be a small matter to you but my experience has shown that the
typical homebuilder who doesn't trust the designer and adds a little beef
here and there usually ends up with a very heavy airplane. He also insists
on flying over gross weight. So instead of having a stronger airplane he
may actually have less margin. . . "

Furthermore, Sheehan reported non-destructive testing to 8Gs, and
recommended any modification of the main wing or canard be tested to "at
least 50% above what you wish to use as your limit G loading."

I did not find any documentation of testing to actual limits; that is, no
one built a wing and loaded it until it broke. I think QAC should have,
but they didn't.

We do have other data: there are some amazingly heavy Quickies
flying. Some Q2xxs were built with O235s, full panels, design mods and the
kitchen sink. I have Larry Koutz's listing of flying Qs in the USA,
probably from about year 2000. There are several planes with empty weights
over 825 lbs! Charlie Harris of Littleton Colorado has a Q200 weighing 832
lbs with 1000 hours.

Then we have the Weight and Balance info sent with my kit, showing a gross
of 1300. There is no testing or engineering documentation to support this
that I am aware of.

All this suggests to me the wing structure is safe at gross above 1100
lbs. I only remember two wing failures. One was an improper repair; one
plane had a secondary gas tank above the main wing and a fuel leak eroded
the foam.

Conclusions: I think the Q2xx main wing is safe up to a gross of 1300
lbs., but anyone flying at gross weights over 1100 lbs should read the
discussion in Quicktalk 28.

I still get angry with people who post "information" like "designed to
30Gs" but don't provide documentation. Then I end up doing the
research. See Title. Monk is my friend. I prefer sleep to research.

Mike Perry





sale

Reginald Clarke <airryder@...>
 

Q2 group

I have two Subaru engines for sale that I am going to list on E bay
soon, if they are not sold
EA81 / 0-time firewall forward with engine mount,prop adapter, ready
to mount and run , Direct Drive Turbocharged,Intercooled 100HP//Retail over $12000.00, Make me an offer
EJ25 new as it came out car ready for convertion Make me an offer.
Also I am planning to sell my Q2, after I finish some mods, lowering
engine and thrust line and making new cowling and some improvements. I am planning to fly it to Tandam wing flyinn Race it if theres a race and then its for sale unless someone wants it sooner.

Reg Clarke
Q2/Subaru/N624JC


Re: Load Limits: Confessions of an Obsessive Compulsive Nerd

jon@...
 

Yeah - I agree. Good stuff Mike, thanks for digging it out and writing it up.



Jon

-----Original Message-----
From: David Posey <dlposey-atlanta@...>
Sent: Tuesday, June 3, 2008 1:23pm
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Load Limits: Confessions of an Obsessive Compulsive Nerd

Mike Perry wrote:

Recently I produced a set of files designed to help people using Q200s at
gross weight over 1100 lbs. (Now posted on Jon Finley's website as
Q200_POH_supplement.zip) That drew questions on and off list about Marc
Waddelow's analysis of the wing and the allegedly marginal strength of
the
main wing. Meanwhile Larry Severson keeps posting a claim that the Q2
canard was designed to 30Gs. Last nite and this AM I re-read everything I
can find on Waddelow's analysis and all the old materials I have on the
Q2xx from QAC and others. Here is my summary:
<snip>


Mike Perry



Mike , thanks for the work you have done on the documentation for the
canard and wing.

David Posey
TriQ200


Re: Load Limits: Confessions of an Obsessive Compulsive Nerd

David Posey <dlposey-atlanta@...>
 

Mike Perry wrote:

Recently I produced a set of files designed to help people using Q200s at
gross weight over 1100 lbs. (Now posted on Jon Finley's website as
Q200_POH_supplement.zip) That drew questions on and off list about Marc
Waddelow's analysis of the wing and the allegedly marginal strength of the
main wing. Meanwhile Larry Severson keeps posting a claim that the Q2
canard was designed to 30Gs. Last nite and this AM I re-read everything I
can find on Waddelow's analysis and all the old materials I have on the
Q2xx from QAC and others. Here is my summary:

I did locate one statement supporting the 30G design of the canard, along
with some other interesting information:

Lightweight does not, however, imply low structural margins; at the drawing
board stage, the Q2 rear wing was designed for a positive 12G limit load
and the canard, since it doubles as the main landing gear is required to
withstand over 30G's of positive inflight loads and a 500 ft./min. landing
impact. (Sport Aviation, May 1981, as reprinted by QAC for distribution as
advertising)

The only documentation I have of Marc Waddelow's analysis of the wing is in
Quicktalk # 28, pp 9-10. This is a summary of an exchange of letters
between Marc and Gene Sheehan. To summarize two pages of material, the
more detailed Marc's analysis, the closer he got to Sheehan's numbers. I
have no doubt Marc had a better design, but I think it was only slightly
better. If anyone has more information I am interested. Read the
newsletter, it's too long to reproduce here.

One quote from Sheehan: "As to your [Waddelow's] suggested modifications I
can't see anything wrong with them other than an increase in weight. This
may seem to be a small matter to you but my experience has shown that the
typical homebuilder who doesn't trust the designer and adds a little beef
here and there usually ends up with a very heavy airplane. He also insists
on flying over gross weight. So instead of having a stronger airplane he
may actually have less margin. . . "

Furthermore, Sheehan reported non-destructive testing to 8Gs, and
recommended any modification of the main wing or canard be tested to "at
least 50% above what you wish to use as your limit G loading."

I did not find any documentation of testing to actual limits; that is, no
one built a wing and loaded it until it broke. I think QAC should have,
but they didn't.

We do have other data: there are some amazingly heavy Quickies
flying. Some Q2xxs were built with O235s, full panels, design mods and the
kitchen sink. I have Larry Koutz's listing of flying Qs in the USA,
probably from about year 2000. There are several planes with empty weights
over 825 lbs! Charlie Harris of Littleton Colorado has a Q200 weighing 832
lbs with 1000 hours.

Then we have the Weight and Balance info sent with my kit, showing a gross
of 1300. There is no testing or engineering documentation to support this
that I am aware of.

All this suggests to me the wing structure is safe at gross above 1100
lbs. I only remember two wing failures. One was an improper repair; one
plane had a secondary gas tank above the main wing and a fuel leak eroded
the foam.

Conclusions: I think the Q2xx main wing is safe up to a gross of 1300
lbs., but anyone flying at gross weights over 1100 lbs should read the
discussion in Quicktalk 28.

I still get angry with people who post "information" like "designed to
30Gs" but don't provide documentation. Then I end up doing the
research. See Title. Monk is my friend. I prefer sleep to research.

Mike Perry


Mike , thanks for the work you have done on the documentation for the canard and wing.

David Posey
TriQ200


Load Limits: Confessions of an Obsessive Compulsive Nerd

Mike Perry <dmperry1012@...>
 

Recently I produced a set of files designed to help people using Q200s at
gross weight over 1100 lbs. (Now posted on Jon Finley's website as
Q200_POH_supplement.zip) That drew questions on and off list about Marc
Waddelow's analysis of the wing and the allegedly marginal strength of the
main wing. Meanwhile Larry Severson keeps posting a claim that the Q2
canard was designed to 30Gs. Last nite and this AM I re-read everything I
can find on Waddelow's analysis and all the old materials I have on the
Q2xx from QAC and others. Here is my summary:

I did locate one statement supporting the 30G design of the canard, along
with some other interesting information:

Lightweight does not, however, imply low structural margins; at the drawing
board stage, the Q2 rear wing was designed for a positive 12G limit load
and the canard, since it doubles as the main landing gear is required to
withstand over 30G's of positive inflight loads and a 500 ft./min. landing
impact. (Sport Aviation, May 1981, as reprinted by QAC for distribution as
advertising)

The only documentation I have of Marc Waddelow's analysis of the wing is in
Quicktalk # 28, pp 9-10. This is a summary of an exchange of letters
between Marc and Gene Sheehan. To summarize two pages of material, the
more detailed Marc's analysis, the closer he got to Sheehan's numbers. I
have no doubt Marc had a better design, but I think it was only slightly
better. If anyone has more information I am interested. Read the
newsletter, it's too long to reproduce here.

One quote from Sheehan: "As to your [Waddelow's] suggested modifications I
can't see anything wrong with them other than an increase in weight. This
may seem to be a small matter to you but my experience has shown that the
typical homebuilder who doesn't trust the designer and adds a little beef
here and there usually ends up with a very heavy airplane. He also insists
on flying over gross weight. So instead of having a stronger airplane he
may actually have less margin. . . "

Furthermore, Sheehan reported non-destructive testing to 8Gs, and
recommended any modification of the main wing or canard be tested to "at
least 50% above what you wish to use as your limit G loading."

I did not find any documentation of testing to actual limits; that is, no
one built a wing and loaded it until it broke. I think QAC should have,
but they didn't.

We do have other data: there are some amazingly heavy Quickies
flying. Some Q2xxs were built with O235s, full panels, design mods and the
kitchen sink. I have Larry Koutz's listing of flying Qs in the USA,
probably from about year 2000. There are several planes with empty weights
over 825 lbs! Charlie Harris of Littleton Colorado has a Q200 weighing 832
lbs with 1000 hours.

Then we have the Weight and Balance info sent with my kit, showing a gross
of 1300. There is no testing or engineering documentation to support this
that I am aware of.

All this suggests to me the wing structure is safe at gross above 1100
lbs. I only remember two wing failures. One was an improper repair; one
plane had a secondary gas tank above the main wing and a fuel leak eroded
the foam.

Conclusions: I think the Q2xx main wing is safe up to a gross of 1300
lbs., but anyone flying at gross weights over 1100 lbs should read the
discussion in Quicktalk 28.

I still get angry with people who post "information" like "designed to
30Gs" but don't provide documentation. Then I end up doing the
research. See Title. Monk is my friend. I prefer sleep to research.

Mike Perry


Re: Kansan City Anyone?

FR Jones <seabeevet@...>
 

Yes, Ron. A Super Quickie hangered at Billard Airport.

On Sun, Jun 1, 2008 at 7:56 PM, Ron Weiss <ronweiss4@...> wrote:

I'll be in Kansas Mon. June 2nd. Any Quickie's out there? Ron



Re: Q-List question!

Bruce Crain
 

OMGosh!
Jimmeh hasn't been voted off the "Island" has he!!!
Has he been a "Bad Dog"?
Bruce


____________________________________________________________
Click to find information on your credit score and your credit report.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2131/fc/Ioyw6iifRxYaADKKJwKyNfIXyVM914b1ukmYHLXTYvzwhbCUQgYi9a/


Re: Q-List question!

Mike Perry <dmperry1012@...>
 

I've had weird experiences with Yahoo Groups. One time I received a
message I sent out ~16 hours after everyone else. (VW list) Never could
figure out why. A few messages never get to me but show in the
archives. So rare I can't figure it out.

Mike Perry

At 02:28 AM 6/3/2008 +0000, you wrote:
Hey I went into the Members Only section and looked in the Archives
etc. I saw an e mail from Jimmeh in there for me. But it hasn't shown up
on my e-mail yet. Is there a long wait that I don't know about or is the
note from Jimmeh not coming to me?

Inquiring mind wants to know
Bruce Crain (Friend of the Dumb radio guy)
(He couldn't help me with my computer question either)
(Boy is that guy estupido or what)


Re: Q-List question!

Sam Kittle
 

Hi Bruce,

His message came through on my email @ 2109 PST Sunday.

Regards,
Sam

-----Original Message-----
From: Q-LIST@... [mailto:Q-LIST@...] On Behalf Of
jcrain2@...
Sent: Monday, June 02, 2008 7:29 PM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: [Q-LIST] Q-List question!

Hey I went into the Members Only section and looked in the Archives etc. I
saw an e mail from Jimmeh in there for me. But it hasn't shown up on my
e-mail yet. Is there a long wait that I don't know about or is the note
from Jimmeh not coming to me?

Inquiring mind wants to know
Bruce Crain (Friend of the Dumb radio guy)
(He couldn't help me with my computer question either)
(Boy is that guy estupido or what)

_____________________________________________________________
Compete with the big boys. Click here to find products to benefit your
business.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2111/fc/Ioyw6iifXQ8neBUgb75E1XolnP5hzehD
JeRKxyWAIQReJFCdS54eaU/?count=1234567890



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

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

Yahoo! Groups Links


Q-List question!

Bruce Crain
 

Hey I went into the Members Only section and looked in the Archives etc. I saw an e mail from Jimmeh in there for me. But it hasn't shown up on my e-mail yet. Is there a long wait that I don't know about or is the note from Jimmeh not coming to me?

Inquiring mind wants to know
Bruce Crain (Friend of the Dumb radio guy)
(He couldn't help me with my computer question either)
(Boy is that guy estupido or what)

_____________________________________________________________
Compete with the big boys. Click here to find products to benefit your business.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2111/fc/Ioyw6iifXQ8neBUgb75E1XolnP5hzehDJeRKxyWAIQReJFCdS54eaU/?count=1234567890