Date   

Re: Q-List Rules?

Steve <sham@...>
 

Keith,
Sorry to here of your mifortune. I will put the word out. Do you still have your C170? Sold mine a couple of years ago.



Steve Ham

----- Original Message -----
From: Keith Welsh
To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, April 17, 2010 7:58 AM
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Re: Q-List Rules?



If the Q-list could be venturing in the an area if inactivity or dying as you say I have
something I've been considering for a while but holding off on until about a week ago.

About midnight last Saturday April 10 we had a fire which destroyed my utility building / shop.
We suspect the fire had some. Vicki was awoken at 1230 am to noise, a door closing, shortly
there after our motion detector light went on. She went outside and noticed embers rising from the rear of
the building. Our fire wood stack had been set a fire. By the time I got there it was to far along. Took the
fire dept a half hour to arrive and that was the end of that.

In the building was a pickup, 5th wheel camper, mower, diesel tractor w/ loader, backhoe and several implements (bushhog
box scraper, rear blade etc...) many tools, welder and on and on plus 30 years of memories. The fire
was so hot that nothing survived. I didn't even have a shovel and wheel barrel to fill the hole left when
a fire truck got stuck in the yard. The fire never got to the camper but was so hot we witnessed it
erupt. With the grand kids getting older and considering I haven't flown the Quickie in about 2 years and now
not sure when or if I'll fly it anytime soon I would like to see if anyone might be interested in it.

It is currently out of annual and was not made trailerable (fuselage cut) when I built it.
Many know of the bird it is Onan P220 powered N494K.

If anyone might be interested in it let me know and if the price is in the area I would like
I will consider selling it.

Thanks
Keith Welsh

From: Clive
Sent: Saturday, April 17, 2010 5:41 AM
To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Q-LIST] Re: Q-List Rules?

Hi you guys

Live and let live, brilliant.
In this day and age we are all over-regulated world wide unless we want to live in a dictatorship.... I think not?
There is a wealth of info - chit chat and sometimes a bit of stupidity/naiveté. Anyone lucky enough to have a Q, has a great plane, some people on the list aspire to join our band, we need a little involvement from every one, and a nudge now and then.

Clive.........Goboxy

--- In Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com, Brad Walker <bwalker@...> wrote:
>
> Very true..
>
> If a post starts to wander from what is acceptable, a friendly reminder
> usually gets people back on track. In this world we live in, it's nice to
> not have so many rules sometimes..
>
> -brad w.
>
> On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 8:09 PM, Allan Farr <afarr@...> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > In my opinion the Q-List is getting very quiet and is in danger of dying.
> > One of the main reasons for this is all the rules. Let people (within
> > reason) post what they want - let the list "live" for better or for worst.
> > Allan
> >
>
>
>
>







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


Re: Q-List Rules?

Jeff McComb
 

I think it would be easier to follow the topics (and search archives) on a forum setup, but I also agree with Terry's point that having forums may mean that some stuff won't get noticed as much. I would think a max of 3 sub-forums; Q1, Q-2/Q-200, and Q-Engine? I don't really care whether the Q-200 engine is merged or not, although I think it'd be nice to have the files in the same area.

I personally find that the emails arguing where things do or don't belong more tedious than those which are on any Q topic, the only things I'd prefer not to see are political tangents... but delete works just fine for me regardless. Using email filters to direct all emails with "Q-List" in the subject line into one folder makes it pretty easy to sort out anything you don't want to read since it is all in one folder.

In regards to the comment of the list dying, I don't agree. Only lists/forums where people become rude or unhelpful die, people here in general have always been very helpful and nice. The amount of knowledge on our Qs can't be surpassed elsewhere, so whether it remains in a list format or forum format... I'll be there.


Jeff McComb
Now in Waller TX
Q-200
N3245B

----- Original Message -----
From: Doug Humble
To: Q-List
Sent: Saturday, April 17, 2010 9:18 AM
Subject: [Q-LIST] Re: Q-List Rules?



I am one of those that liked the two list idea, however since I have "retired" as editor, I changed my Yahoo Groups membership to getting all the emails in one composite email once a day. This allows me to scan the topics and skip the ones I don't want to read. This takes a lot less of my time. The down side is if you want to respond to an email, your always a day late. The recent diesel discussion would have prompted me to say move the discussion, but I just managed it from my end instead.

I think it would be nice to move the list to Dan Yager's new site, but old habits die hard.

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


Re: Q-List Rules?

Rick Hole
 

I like to think of it more as guidelines than rules. The more I think about
it the less I want to see only one forum. If we put all the discussions
into Q-List there is no place for the farther-out topics to go that will
only annoy the more traditional builder. Well, I could drop the email
delivery and read the posts on the website and only look at threads that are
of interest. Thouble is there I would only end up checking in one a day or
less.

So I suggest keeping the performance list. And not be too hard on people if
they start a topic on the wrong list. A nudge usually works.

Moving to Dan's site? Do we still get email delivery or have to go to the
website?

Rick


Re: Q-List Rules?

Doug Humble <hawkidoug@...>
 

I am one of those that liked the two list idea, however since I have "retired" as editor, I changed my Yahoo Groups membership to getting all the emails in one composite email once a day. This allows me to scan the topics and skip the ones I don't want to read. This takes a lot less of my time. The down side is if you want to respond to an email, your always a day late. The recent diesel discussion would have prompted me to say move the discussion, but I just managed it from my end instead.

I think it would be nice to move the list to Dan Yager's new site, but old habits die hard.

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


Re: 1984 Homebuilt Aircraft Magazine

Doug Humble <hawkidoug@...>
 

I would like to suggest that Mike also send this stuff to Dan Yager to be put at the QBA web site. Nothing wrong with having it at two locations, but it would make the new QBA web site even more robust.

Thanks Mike for the nostalgia!

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


Re: Q-List Rules?

Keith Welsh <kfly@...>
 

If the Q-list could be venturing in the an area if inactivity or dying as you say I have
something I've been considering for a while but holding off on until about a week ago.

About midnight last Saturday April 10 we had a fire which destroyed my utility building / shop.
We suspect the fire had some. Vicki was awoken at 1230 am to noise, a door closing, shortly
there after our motion detector light went on. She went outside and noticed embers rising from the rear of
the building. Our fire wood stack had been set a fire. By the time I got there it was to far along. Took the
fire dept a half hour to arrive and that was the end of that.

In the building was a pickup, 5th wheel camper, mower, diesel tractor w/ loader, backhoe and several implements (bushhog
box scraper, rear blade etc...) many tools, welder and on and on plus 30 years of memories. The fire
was so hot that nothing survived. I didn't even have a shovel and wheel barrel to fill the hole left when
a fire truck got stuck in the yard. The fire never got to the camper but was so hot we witnessed it
erupt. With the grand kids getting older and considering I haven't flown the Quickie in about 2 years and now
not sure when or if I'll fly it anytime soon I would like to see if anyone might be interested in it.

It is currently out of annual and was not made trailerable (fuselage cut) when I built it.
Many know of the bird it is Onan P220 powered N494K.

If anyone might be interested in it let me know and if the price is in the area I would like
I will consider selling it.

Thanks
Keith Welsh



From: Clive
Sent: Saturday, April 17, 2010 5:41 AM
To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Q-LIST] Re: Q-List Rules?



Hi you guys

Live and let live, brilliant.
In this day and age we are all over-regulated world wide unless we want to live in a dictatorship.... I think not?
There is a wealth of info - chit chat and sometimes a bit of stupidity/naiveté. Anyone lucky enough to have a Q, has a great plane, some people on the list aspire to join our band, we need a little involvement from every one, and a nudge now and then.

Clive.........Goboxy

--- In Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com, Brad Walker <bwalker@...> wrote:

Very true..

If a post starts to wander from what is acceptable, a friendly reminder
usually gets people back on track. In this world we live in, it's nice to
not have so many rules sometimes..

-brad w.

On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 8:09 PM, Allan Farr <afarr@...> wrote:



In my opinion the Q-List is getting very quiet and is in danger of dying.
One of the main reasons for this is all the rules. Let people (within
reason) post what they want - let the list "live" for better or for worst.
Allan

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




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


Re: Q-List Rules?

Clive Clapham
 

Hi you guys

Live and let live, brilliant.
In this day and age we are all over-regulated world wide unless we want to live in a dictatorship.... I think not?
There is a wealth of info - chit chat and sometimes a bit of stupidity/naiveté. Anyone lucky enough to have a Q, has a great plane, some people on the list aspire to join our band, we need a little involvement from every one, and a nudge now and then.

Clive.........Goboxy

--- In Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com, Brad Walker <bwalker@...> wrote:

Very true..

If a post starts to wander from what is acceptable, a friendly reminder
usually gets people back on track. In this world we live in, it's nice to
not have so many rules sometimes..

-brad w.

On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 8:09 PM, Allan Farr <afarr@...> wrote:



In my opinion the Q-List is getting very quiet and is in danger of dying.
One of the main reasons for this is all the rules. Let people (within
reason) post what they want - let the list "live" for better or for worst.
Allan



Re: Q-List Rules?

Brad Walker
 

Very true..

If a post starts to wander from what is acceptable, a friendly reminder
usually gets people back on track. In this world we live in, it's nice to
not have so many rules sometimes..

-brad w.

On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 8:09 PM, Allan Farr <afarr@ihug.co.nz> wrote:



In my opinion the Q-List is getting very quiet and is in danger of dying.
One of the main reasons for this is all the rules. Let people (within
reason) post what they want - let the list "live" for better or for worst.
Allan


Re: Q-List Rules?

Allan Farr
 

In my opinion the Q-List is getting very quiet and is in danger of dying. One of the main reasons for this is all the rules. Let people (within reason) post what they want - let the list "live" for better or for worst.
Allan

----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Perry" <dmperry1012@att.net>
To: <Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, April 17, 2010 11:17 AM
Subject: [Q-LIST] Q-List Rules?


Hello All:

I am asking for opinions and ideas about "The Rules" for Q-List. I want
to see what rules -- guidelines, really -- we want now, and then try to
make those rules clear to everyone (especially new people on the list).

Recently Roger made several posts about his proposed diesel engine for a
Quickie. That's a new, untried engine and by the rules we agreed on in
2003, that should be on Q-Performance. It appears Roger didn't
understand the rules, and I don't think we have been doing a good job of
letting new members know the rules. Members publish interesting ideas
on this list and then don't understand why they were sent off to the
other list.

Background: November of 2003 Pat Panzera started Q-Performance after a
poll in which 88% of the voters asked that Q-List be "a site with the
necessary/correct information to finish their Quickies as quickly and
accurately as possible." The general idea was to keep Q-List for
building and flying standard Quickies, Q2s, Q200s and tested mods.
Q-Performance was for untested ideas, design changes and new engines.
Some of the information on Q-Performance is very interesting (4 place
Quickies? Tri-Foil designs? 40 kg/37 hp Wankles?) but it has little to
do with building and flying standard Quickies.

About the moderators: We have discussed this issue several times. Some
of us like having two lists, some don't care. We generally agree that
we don't have enough time or interest to police this issue. We can do a
better job of publishing "The Rules" but we are not going to herd people
around from list to list.

Options:
-- continue to use the 2003 rules with 2 lists. If we do this "The
Rules" need to be clear and generally available, so the list can be
self-policing.
-- use a single list. If we do this the subject line must reflect the
content of the post; also posters must explain where their ideas come
from and what testing has been done.

Possible problems:
If we loosen the rules, how does this group keep any focus? Do we have
any limits (4 seat tri-foil Quickies?) and where do we send people with
those ideas?

I've been reading this list since it's inception and it is usually a
pleasure. I'm willing to put some effort into keeping it that way. I
would like to see some input on how to make it a better list, especially
what guidelines we should all work by.

Hope to hear from you all -- Mike




Re: Q-List Rules?

Terry Adams
 

The ThorpList (Thorp T18) recently shut down its email list after moving
everything into a forum. It allows posts to be segregated to specific
subjects: Fuselage, Wing, Interior, Personal, Flying, Engines, etc. I
find that I spend a lot less time reading the posts unless it is in a
forum subject that I wish to check on.

Terry Adams
N41521 DF MkI
KSCK


quickheads2 wrote:



Perhaps I am a bit biased. :-) However, I am still a big proponent of
moving all of the discussions to the QBA website forums. We could make
several lists there, and if someone posts in the wrong area, the
moderators could physically move the post to the other section.

It's also nice to be able to upload pictures and files directly to you
posts. I know that there is some resistance to starting a new group
somewhere else, but I think that way eveyone could go to one place to
get whatever info they needed.

http://www.quickheads.com/forum-mainmenu-76.html
<http://www.quickheads.com/forum-mainmenu-76.html>

I already moved the Q1 group over to the website from Yahoo! I could
do the same thing with all the posts from the Q-list and Q-performance.

Just providing yet another option.

Thanks for listening.

Dan Yager
QBA Editor
www.quickheads.com
Q-200 Under Reconstruction

--- In Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com>, Mike
Perry <dmperry1012@...> wrote:

Hello All:

I am asking for opinions and ideas about "The Rules" for Q-List. I want
to see what rules -- guidelines, really -- we want now, and then try to
make those rules clear to everyone (especially new people on the list).

Recently Roger made several posts about his proposed diesel engine
for a
Quickie. That's a new, untried engine and by the rules we agreed on in
2003, that should be on Q-Performance. It appears Roger didn't
understand the rules, and I don't think we have been doing a good
job of
letting new members know the rules. Members publish interesting ideas
on this list and then don't understand why they were sent off to the
other list.

Background: November of 2003 Pat Panzera started Q-Performance after a
poll in which 88% of the voters asked that Q-List be "a site with the
necessary/correct information to finish their Quickies as quickly and
accurately as possible." The general idea was to keep Q-List for
building and flying standard Quickies, Q2s, Q200s and tested mods.
Q-Performance was for untested ideas, design changes and new engines.
Some of the information on Q-Performance is very interesting (4 place
Quickies? Tri-Foil designs? 40 kg/37 hp Wankles?) but it has little to
do with building and flying standard Quickies.

About the moderators: We have discussed this issue several times. Some
of us like having two lists, some don't care. We generally agree that
we don't have enough time or interest to police this issue. We can do a
better job of publishing "The Rules" but we are not going to herd
people
around from list to list.

Options:
-- continue to use the 2003 rules with 2 lists. If we do this "The
Rules" need to be clear and generally available, so the list can be
self-policing.
-- use a single list. If we do this the subject line must reflect the
content of the post; also posters must explain where their ideas come
from and what testing has been done.

Possible problems:
If we loosen the rules, how does this group keep any focus? Do we have
any limits (4 seat tri-foil Quickies?) and where do we send people with
those ideas?

I've been reading this list since it's inception and it is usually a
pleasure. I'm willing to put some effort into keeping it that way. I
would like to see some input on how to make it a better list,
especially
what guidelines we should all work by.

Hope to hear from you all -- Mike


Re: 1984 Homebuilt Aircraft Magazine

quickheads2 <groups@...>
 

Not sure if you guys had seen the magazine article section of the QBA website:

http://www.quickheads.com/magazine-articles.html

It's a work in progress, but the text shows up in the search results if you're looking for something specific.

Cheers,
Dan Yager
QBA Editor
www.quickheads.com

--- In Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com, Mike Dwyer <mdwyer@...> wrote:

I uploaded a 1984 Homebuilt Aircraft Magazine article on the Q200 to the
Yahoo files section as well as the 1984 Sales brochure. Cool History.

See Q-LIST Yahoo group File named "Homebuilt Aircraft March 1984"

Mike Q200 N3QP
http://www.warnerair.com/q200/


Re: Q-List Rules?

quickheads2 <groups@...>
 

Perhaps I am a bit biased. :-) However, I am still a big proponent of moving all of the discussions to the QBA website forums. We could make several lists there, and if someone posts in the wrong area, the moderators could physically move the post to the other section.

It's also nice to be able to upload pictures and files directly to you posts. I know that there is some resistance to starting a new group somewhere else, but I think that way eveyone could go to one place to get whatever info they needed.

http://www.quickheads.com/forum-mainmenu-76.html

I already moved the Q1 group over to the website from Yahoo! I could do the same thing with all the posts from the Q-list and Q-performance.

Just providing yet another option.

Thanks for listening.

Dan Yager
QBA Editor
www.quickheads.com
Q-200 Under Reconstruction

--- In Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com, Mike Perry <dmperry1012@...> wrote:

Hello All:

I am asking for opinions and ideas about "The Rules" for Q-List. I want
to see what rules -- guidelines, really -- we want now, and then try to
make those rules clear to everyone (especially new people on the list).

Recently Roger made several posts about his proposed diesel engine for a
Quickie. That's a new, untried engine and by the rules we agreed on in
2003, that should be on Q-Performance. It appears Roger didn't
understand the rules, and I don't think we have been doing a good job of
letting new members know the rules. Members publish interesting ideas
on this list and then don't understand why they were sent off to the
other list.

Background: November of 2003 Pat Panzera started Q-Performance after a
poll in which 88% of the voters asked that Q-List be "a site with the
necessary/correct information to finish their Quickies as quickly and
accurately as possible." The general idea was to keep Q-List for
building and flying standard Quickies, Q2s, Q200s and tested mods.
Q-Performance was for untested ideas, design changes and new engines.
Some of the information on Q-Performance is very interesting (4 place
Quickies? Tri-Foil designs? 40 kg/37 hp Wankles?) but it has little to
do with building and flying standard Quickies.

About the moderators: We have discussed this issue several times. Some
of us like having two lists, some don't care. We generally agree that
we don't have enough time or interest to police this issue. We can do a
better job of publishing "The Rules" but we are not going to herd people
around from list to list.

Options:
-- continue to use the 2003 rules with 2 lists. If we do this "The
Rules" need to be clear and generally available, so the list can be
self-policing.
-- use a single list. If we do this the subject line must reflect the
content of the post; also posters must explain where their ideas come
from and what testing has been done.

Possible problems:
If we loosen the rules, how does this group keep any focus? Do we have
any limits (4 seat tri-foil Quickies?) and where do we send people with
those ideas?

I've been reading this list since it's inception and it is usually a
pleasure. I'm willing to put some effort into keeping it that way. I
would like to see some input on how to make it a better list, especially
what guidelines we should all work by.

Hope to hear from you all -- Mike


Re: Q-List Rules?

Mike Dwyer <mdwyer@...>
 

I hope you don't hear from all 833 Q-List members! Anyway I have no issue with any Q related post on the Q-List. I do take issue with the people who write personal emails to back and forth to each other VIA the list. Please remember when posting something that 883 people are reading it... My Delete Key works real good tho.

Weather Report: It has been real windy in Florida, but it broke today and became reasonable. There might have been a few sprinkles to hit Lakeland but not much. Expect it is a real dust bowl over there. The Florida pollen count is off the charts this year. I test flew my Elevator center hinge repair job today and the Q flew nice got some beautiful beach pictures. Winds were 080 at 9 gusting to 12, pretty bumpy aloft but no problem landing. Saturday we head to Sun N Fun, a 15 minute flight that takes 30 min cause they make you slow to 100K for 10 miles of S turns behind miles of Cessnas...

I'll post some Sun N Fun pictures hopefully on Sunday.

Fly Safe,
Mike Q200 N3QP


Mike Perry wrote:

Hello All:

I am asking for opinions and ideas about "The Rules" for Q-List. I want to see what rules -- guidelines, really -- we want now, and then try to make those rules clear to everyone (especially new people on the list).
Recently Roger made several posts about his proposed diesel engine for a Quickie. That's a new, untried engine and by the rules we agreed on in 2003, that should be on Q-Performance. It appears Roger didn't understand the rules, and I don't think we have been doing a good job of letting new members know the rules. Members publish interesting ideas on this list and then don't understand why they were sent off to the other list.
Background: November of 2003 Pat Panzera started Q-Performance after a poll in which 88% of the voters asked that Q-List be "a site with the necessary/correct information to finish their Quickies as quickly and accurately as possible." The general idea was to keep Q-List for building and flying standard Quickies, Q2s, Q200s and tested mods. Q-Performance was for untested ideas, design changes and new engines. Some of the information on Q-Performance is very interesting (4 place Quickies? Tri-Foil designs? 40 kg/37 hp Wankles?) but it has little to do with building and flying standard Quickies.
About the moderators: We have discussed this issue several times. Some of us like having two lists, some don't care. We generally agree that we don't have enough time or interest to police this issue. We can do a better job of publishing "The Rules" but we are not going to herd people around from list to list.
Options: -- continue to use the 2003 rules with 2 lists. If we do this "The Rules" need to be clear and generally available, so the list can be self-policing.
-- use a single list. If we do this the subject line must reflect the content of the post; also posters must explain where their ideas come from and what testing has been done.
Possible problems: If we loosen the rules, how does this group keep any focus? Do we have any limits (4 seat tri-foil Quickies?) and where do we send people with those ideas?
I've been reading this list since it's inception and it is usually a pleasure. I'm willing to put some effort into keeping it that way. I would like to see some input on how to make it a better list, especially what guidelines we should all work by.
Hope to hear from you all -- Mike





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

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

Yahoo! Groups Links





Q-List Rules?

Mike Perry
 

Hello All:

I am asking for opinions and ideas about "The Rules" for Q-List. I want to see what rules -- guidelines, really -- we want now, and then try to make those rules clear to everyone (especially new people on the list).

Recently Roger made several posts about his proposed diesel engine for a Quickie. That's a new, untried engine and by the rules we agreed on in 2003, that should be on Q-Performance. It appears Roger didn't understand the rules, and I don't think we have been doing a good job of letting new members know the rules. Members publish interesting ideas on this list and then don't understand why they were sent off to the other list.

Background: November of 2003 Pat Panzera started Q-Performance after a poll in which 88% of the voters asked that Q-List be "a site with the necessary/correct information to finish their Quickies as quickly and accurately as possible." The general idea was to keep Q-List for building and flying standard Quickies, Q2s, Q200s and tested mods. Q-Performance was for untested ideas, design changes and new engines. Some of the information on Q-Performance is very interesting (4 place Quickies? Tri-Foil designs? 40 kg/37 hp Wankles?) but it has little to do with building and flying standard Quickies.

About the moderators: We have discussed this issue several times. Some of us like having two lists, some don't care. We generally agree that we don't have enough time or interest to police this issue. We can do a better job of publishing "The Rules" but we are not going to herd people around from list to list.

Options: -- continue to use the 2003 rules with 2 lists. If we do this "The Rules" need to be clear and generally available, so the list can be self-policing.
-- use a single list. If we do this the subject line must reflect the content of the post; also posters must explain where their ideas come from and what testing has been done.

Possible problems: If we loosen the rules, how does this group keep any focus? Do we have any limits (4 seat tri-foil Quickies?) and where do we send people with those ideas?

I've been reading this list since it's inception and it is usually a pleasure. I'm willing to put some effort into keeping it that way. I would like to see some input on how to make it a better list, especially what guidelines we should all work by.

Hope to hear from you all -- Mike


1984 Homebuilt Aircraft Magazine

Mike Dwyer <mdwyer@...>
 

I uploaded a 1984 Homebuilt Aircraft Magazine article on the Q200 to the Yahoo files section as well as the 1984 Sales brochure. Cool History.

See Q-LIST Yahoo group File named "Homebuilt Aircraft March 1984"

Mike Q200 N3QP
http://www.warnerair.com/q200/


1984 Homebuilt Aircraft Magazine&Groups

schmayhoo
 

Thanks Mike for posting that very informative article. I now know the
proper name for "sparrow strainers" which has dogged me for years. And also
it disclosed the equivalent flat plate area of a Q-200 which I had read
somewhere before but forgot. I'm anxious to firewall the throttle when my
Q-200 flies and experience the 220 mph that the sales brochure assures. What
an airplane!!!!!

Regarding the Q-List format. I subscribe to all Quickie lists and don't
even look at which group the information comes from. My delete button works
too.. Jerry Brinkerhuff Q-200 still building

In a message dated 4/16/2010 6:39:51 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
mdwyer@tampabay.rr.com writes:




I uploaded a 1984 Homebuilt Aircraft Magazine article on the Q200 to the
Yahoo files section as well as the 1984 Sales brochure. Cool History.

See Q-LIST Yahoo group File named "Homebuilt Aircraft March 1984"

Mike Q200 N3QP
_http://www.warneraihttp://www._ (http://www.warnerair.com/q200/)





_Reply to sender_ (mailto:mdwyer@tampabay.rr.com?subject=1984 Homebuilt
Aircraft Magazine) | _Reply to group_
(mailto:Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com?subject=1984 Homebuilt Aircraft Magazine) | _Reply via web post_
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Q-LIST/post;_ylc=X3oDMTJxdHY2NTNiBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIxM
jQxNTgEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDY1NjE4BG1zZ0lkAzM2MTU3BHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA3JwbHkEc3Rpb
WUDMTI3MTQ1NzU4OQ--?act=reply&messageNum=36157) | _Start a New Topic_
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Q-LIST/post;_ylc=X3oDMTJlaWNjZnR0BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0
BGdycElkAzIxMjQxNTgEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDY1NjE4BHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA250cGMEc3RpbWUD
MTI3MTQ1NzU4OQ--)
_Messages in this topic_
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Q-LIST/message/36157;_ylc=X3oDMTM2dWg1dnRmBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIxMjQxNTgEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1M
DY1NjE4BG1zZ0lkAzM2MTU3BHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA3Z0cGMEc3RpbWUDMTI3MTQ1NzU4OQR0cGNJZ
AMzNjE1Nw--) (1)
Recent Activity:
* _New Members_
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Q-LIST/members;_ylc=X3oDMTJma2l1anBpBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIxMjQxNTgEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDY1NjE4BH
NlYwN2dGwEc2xrA3ZtYnJzBHN0aW1lAzEyNzE0NTc1ODg-?o=6) 1
* _New Photos_
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Q-LIST/spnew;_ylc=X3oDMTJmNHN1aGVkBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIxMjQxNTgEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDY1NjE4BHNlY
wN2dGwEc2xrA3ZwaG90BHN0aW1lAzEyNzE0NTc1ODg-) 1
* _New Files_
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Q-LIST/files;_ylc=X3oDMTJnNzJmM2YzBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIxMjQxNTgEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDY1NjE4BHNlYw
N2dGwEc2xrA3ZmaWxlcwRzdGltZQMxMjcxNDU3NTg4) 8
_Visit Your Group_
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Q-LIST;_ylc=X3oDMTJlNTVlNmxkBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIxMjQxNTgEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDY1NjE4BHNlYwN2dGwEc
2xrA3ZnaHAEc3RpbWUDMTI3MTQ1NzU4OA--)

Quickie Builders Association WEB site
_http://www.quickiebuilders.org_ (http://www.quickiebuilders.org/)



MARKETPLACE


_Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on -
Get the Yahoo! Toolbar now._
(http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=15o09kp07/M=493064.13983314.13965207.13298430/D=groups/S=1705065618:MKP1/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1271464789
/L=f755504e-49a8-11df-b545-bba3406fbcb3/B=PK0.A0wNBk8-/J=1271457589755337/K=
gPkSA1nbA.5M_nZdC0DLIQ/A=6060255/R=0/SIG=1194m4keh/*http://us.toolbar.yahoo.
com/?.cpdl=grpj)

____________________________________

_Welcome to Mom Connection! Share stories, news and more with moms like
you._
(http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=15oohe0h4/M=493064.13814537.13965224.10835568/D=groups/S=1705065618:MKP1/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1271464789/L=f755504e-49a8-11df-b5
45-bba3406fbcb3/B=Pa0.A0wNBk8-/J=1271457589755337/K=gPkSA1nbA.5M_nZdC0DLIQ/A
=6042764/R=0/SIG=11jbo19n3/*http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/momconnectio
n)

____________________________________

_Hobbies & Activities Zone: Find others who share your passions! Explore
new interests._
(http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=15ornl4to/M=493064.14012770.13963757.13298430/D=groups/S=1705065618:MKP1/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1271464789/L=f755504e-4
9a8-11df-b545-bba3406fbcb3/B=Pq0.A0wNBk8-/J=1271457589755337/K=gPkSA1nbA.5M_
nZdC0DLIQ/A=6015306/R=0/SIG=11vlkvigg/*http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/h
obbiesandactivitieszone/)



(http://groups.yahoo.com/;_ylc=X3oDMTJkbzI1dTIwBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIxMjQxNTgEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDY1NjE4BHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA2dmcARzdGltZQMxMjcxNDU3NTg5
)
Switch to: _Text-Only_
(mailto:Q-LIST-traditional@yahoogroups.com?subject=Change Delivery Format: Traditional) , _Daily Digest_
(mailto:Q-LIST-digest@yahoogroups.com?subject=Email Delivery: Digest) • _Unsubscribe_
(mailto:Q-LIST-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe) • _Terms of Use_
(http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/)





.


__,_._,0.0.0


Re: Diesel Q1, update, and propeller question.

RICHARD GLIMES
 

Hi: The hair splitting goes on The only real Quickie is the Q-1, The Dragon Fly came off the drawing board and into the air before either the Q-2,or the Q-200,a;; three were two place clones of the Rutan designed Q-1 Quickie.  The original  Quickie had an Onan Engine 18 HP.Rugged Relieable and Cheap to buy parts for. Really what difference if you power it with a 23HP Briggs&Stratton? Or whatever else you can find which will do as a replacement?  I think of one day replacing my motorcycle with a Q-1 which reminds me of
having winged motorcycle to enjoy the wide open spaces,rather than having the road traffic to contend with.             Lansair

--- On Wed, 4/14/10, Seeadler18 <marko.rocznik@yahoo.com> wrote:

From: Seeadler18 <marko.rocznik@yahoo.com>
Subject: [Q-LIST] Re: Diesel Q1, update, and propeller question.
To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, April 14, 2010, 12:37 PM







 









Yep - it looks like the Q-performance list is dead. I never liked the idea to splitting plan-build and advanced Qs - since almost everybody subscribed to both and it's just more effort to check the two user groups instead of one.



Marko



--- In Q-LIST@yahoogroups. com, Isaksson Roger <scratchdeeper@ ...> wrote:

If you want performance you must have an engine
____________ _________ _________ __
From: Phil Lankford <britmcman@. ..>
To: "Q-LIST@yahoogroups. com" <Q-LIST@yahoogroups. com>
Sent: Tue, April 13, 2010 11:43:07 AM
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Diesel Q1, update, and propeller question.
 
Is the Q-Performance List dead? Should I begin to post all my
alternate engine and plane mods questions and discussions here on the
Q-List?
Phil Lankford
On Apr 13, 2010, at 10:08 AM, Mike Perry <dmperry1012@ att.net> wrote:
Roger:
I think you have two different planes confused. Jon Finley used to fly
a Quickie with a VW; he now flies a Q2 with a Subaru and a Paul
Lipps prop.
On the three angle valve job and thermal coatings: I'm not sure you
get
much hp benefit at the rpms we usually run (~3200 in the VW). The
thermal coating does make cooling easier (coat the pistons also and
the
oil runs cooler). The Techline website currently shows a slight
decrease in power below ~4500 rpm; when I looked last year they
showed a
slight increase, but it can't be more than +/- 1-2% at that rpm range.
More than 5% is likely in the 6000 rpm range. I can't find a graph
right now but memory says most of the benefit from 3 angle valve jobs
and other intake mods comes in at 4000 rpm.
More discussion on this probably belongs on the VW list?
Mike
Isaksson Roger wrote:
Hi Jon
Thanks, yes I think I will go the way you suggest, get the IVO on it
and get ballpark figures, the Ellipse is definitely an efficient
design, and especially as I don't have much of HP in my project to
start up with, I am keen to have as efficint prop as ever possible.
Once I have my ballpark figure, I can submit it to Paul Lipps. I
am a
long way from there though.
One thing you might consider to get more oomp in your engine to get
more oomp out of it, but not having to machine work too much, is
to do
a small program.
You can let the engine stay in your plane, you only need to take out
the top part. ( I am assuming you have a VW) head, cylinders and
pistons.
In most VW Hot rod books, there are pictures and diagrams how you
can
improve the flow of your head.
If you take a head and hold it in your hand, looking at the
combustion
side of your engine, you should se the valve heads, ok there is a
wall
on one side that is restricting the flow, radius out that portion,
and
you get improved filling of the cylinders.
Do a what is called a three angle valve job, and you will improve
flow
also, once the three angle valve job is done, put the valves back
into
the seat, and grind them in.
You will have on your valves now a polished grind mark on the
contact
face of your valves, it will be a grinded, polished band all around
the contact face (again, the roughly 45 deg angle, that contacts the
valve seat.)
Most probably you will now find that the the polished surface , is
only a small part of the whole contact surface.
The "extra" part is stopping airflow.
This is really easy, you can do all this yourself , get a good
ironfile, and a drill with adjustable speed, and a piece of leather.
Wrap a piece of leather around the valvestem, and inser it into the
drills chuck, like if you were installing a drill.
Start the drill, you will find out with the variable speed what
rpm is
good(, .....it's a feel thing,.... but you will catch on really
quick.) and start filing the valve in following fashion.
Look at the edge of the valve face, and you will most probably see
some square or sharp profile, if it is a standard out of the box
valve.
That edge have to have a radius, a smooth round edge, prefereably
all
the way down to the polished valve seat mark.
Ok once that is done, look at the back of the valve, (still the
round
flat part, but the side that is facing the stem), from the stem, to
the 45 degree cut, you will se that there is a lot of unneccesary
material . The original slope down to the 45 degree cut is very
shallow, and it's meeting the 45 degree cut with a sharp edge.
File down the back of the valve in such a way that you will get a
one
surface funnel all the way to the grinded polished contact surface.
You really don't do too much, just sit there with the drill in your
hand, it's doing the job for you.
Ok that is all the machining you need to do, now clean the parts and
have them thermal coated.
You can either get a kit yourself, but you get the most consistent
result if you send them in to a shop that is doing it.
Coat the inside(compustion chamber) of the head, coat the valves,
especially the head, an up through the backside and the stem on the
exhaust valve.
Coat the top of the pistons, and have the piston skirts coated at
the
same time, with anti friction coating.
Get it back, and put it together, and you will now have an engine
that
breaths easier, runs cooler ( the heat is contained better, doing a
better job of pushing your prop) and will do more work for you. ( of
course, there is also the option of taking the whole engine apart
and
have every nock and cranny done per the book, but the pistons, heads
and the valves are the important parts)
Typical tests in Hot Rod magazines, shows ( they have done thousands
of them by this time) about 5 to 7 % increase in both HP and torque.
So Jon, now you will have an engine that will be more optimized for
your prop, and it is not too much of a deal to do all these steps.
Your prop, and engine compatiability solved.
Good luck Jon.
Roger
Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post | Start a New
Topic
Messages in this topic (10)
RECENT ACTIVITY: New Photos 1
Visit Your Group
Quickie Builders Association WEB site
http://www.quickieb uilders.org
MARKETPLACE
Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're
on - Get the Yahoo! Toolbar now.
Welcome to Mom Connection! Share stories, news and more with moms
like you.
Hobbies & Activities Zone: Find others who share your passions!
Explore new interests.
Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use
.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





















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


Re: Diesel Q1, update, and propeller question.

Rick Hole
 

We have the wrong subject for this discussion of Q-List and Q-Performance.
How about someone who knows how running a poll on the question?

Rick


Re: Diesel Q1, update, and propeller question.

Seeadler18 <marko.rocznik@...>
 

Yep - it looks like the Q-performance list is dead. I never liked the idea to splitting plan-build and advanced Qs - since almost everybody subscribed to both and it's just more effort to check the two user groups instead of one.

Marko

--- In Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com, Isaksson Roger <scratchdeeper@...> wrote:

If you want performance you must have an engine




________________________________
From: Phil Lankford <britmcman@...>
To: "Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com" <Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tue, April 13, 2010 11:43:07 AM
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Diesel Q1, update, and propeller question.

 
Is the Q-Performance List dead? Should I begin to post all my
alternate engine and plane mods questions and discussions here on the
Q-List?

Phil Lankford

On Apr 13, 2010, at 10:08 AM, Mike Perry <dmperry1012@ att.net> wrote:

Roger:

I think you have two different planes confused. Jon Finley used to fly
a Quickie with a VW; he now flies a Q2 with a Subaru and a Paul
Lipps prop.

On the three angle valve job and thermal coatings: I'm not sure you
get
much hp benefit at the rpms we usually run (~3200 in the VW). The
thermal coating does make cooling easier (coat the pistons also and
the
oil runs cooler). The Techline website currently shows a slight
decrease in power below ~4500 rpm; when I looked last year they
showed a
slight increase, but it can't be more than +/- 1-2% at that rpm range.
More than 5% is likely in the 6000 rpm range. I can't find a graph
right now but memory says most of the benefit from 3 angle valve jobs
and other intake mods comes in at 4000 rpm.

More discussion on this probably belongs on the VW list?

Mike

Isaksson Roger wrote:


Hi Jon

Thanks, yes I think I will go the way you suggest, get the IVO on it
and get ballpark figures, the Ellipse is definitely an efficient
design, and especially as I don't have much of HP in my project to
start up with, I am keen to have as efficint prop as ever possible.
Once I have my ballpark figure, I can submit it to Paul Lipps. I
am a
long way from there though.

One thing you might consider to get more oomp in your engine to get
more oomp out of it, but not having to machine work too much, is
to do
a small program.

You can let the engine stay in your plane, you only need to take out
the top part. ( I am assuming you have a VW) head, cylinders and
pistons.

In most VW Hot rod books, there are pictures and diagrams how you
can
improve the flow of your head.

If you take a head and hold it in your hand, looking at the
combustion
side of your engine, you should se the valve heads, ok there is a
wall
on one side that is restricting the flow, radius out that portion,
and
you get improved filling of the cylinders.

Do a what is called a three angle valve job, and you will improve
flow
also, once the three angle valve job is done, put the valves back
into
the seat, and grind them in.

You will have on your valves now a polished grind mark on the
contact
face of your valves, it will be a grinded, polished band all around
the contact face (again, the roughly 45 deg angle, that contacts the
valve seat.)

Most probably you will now find that the the polished surface , is
only a small part of the whole contact surface.

The "extra" part is stopping airflow.

This is really easy, you can do all this yourself , get a good
ironfile, and a drill with adjustable speed, and a piece of leather.

Wrap a piece of leather around the valvestem, and inser it into the
drills chuck, like if you were installing a drill.

Start the drill, you will find out with the variable speed what
rpm is
good(, .....it's a feel thing,.... but you will catch on really
quick.) and start filing the valve in following fashion.

Look at the edge of the valve face, and you will most probably see
some square or sharp profile, if it is a standard out of the box
valve.

That edge have to have a radius, a smooth round edge, prefereably
all
the way down to the polished valve seat mark.

Ok once that is done, look at the back of the valve, (still the
round
flat part, but the side that is facing the stem), from the stem, to
the 45 degree cut, you will se that there is a lot of unneccesary
material . The original slope down to the 45 degree cut is very
shallow, and it's meeting the 45 degree cut with a sharp edge.

File down the back of the valve in such a way that you will get a
one
surface funnel all the way to the grinded polished contact surface.

You really don't do too much, just sit there with the drill in your
hand, it's doing the job for you.

Ok that is all the machining you need to do, now clean the parts and
have them thermal coated.

You can either get a kit yourself, but you get the most consistent
result if you send them in to a shop that is doing it.

Coat the inside(compustion chamber) of the head, coat the valves,
especially the head, an up through the backside and the stem on the
exhaust valve.

Coat the top of the pistons, and have the piston skirts coated at
the
same time, with anti friction coating.

Get it back, and put it together, and you will now have an engine
that
breaths easier, runs cooler ( the heat is contained better, doing a
better job of pushing your prop) and will do more work for you. ( of
course, there is also the option of taking the whole engine apart
and
have every nock and cranny done per the book, but the pistons, heads
and the valves are the important parts)

Typical tests in Hot Rod magazines, shows ( they have done thousands
of them by this time) about 5 to 7 % increase in both HP and torque.

So Jon, now you will have an engine that will be more optimized for
your prop, and it is not too much of a deal to do all these steps.

Your prop, and engine compatiability solved.

Good luck Jon.

Roger





Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post | Start a New
Topic
Messages in this topic (10)
RECENT ACTIVITY: New Photos 1
Visit Your Group
Quickie Builders Association WEB site
http://www.quickiebuilders.org

MARKETPLACE
Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're
on - Get the Yahoo! Toolbar now.


Welcome to Mom Connection! Share stories, news and more with moms
like you.


Hobbies & Activities Zone: Find others who share your passions!
Explore new interests.


Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use
.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]







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


Re: Diesel Q1, update, and propeller question.

Isaksson Roger <scratchdeeper@...>
 

If you want performance you must have an engine




________________________________
From: Phil Lankford <britmcman@aol.com>
To: "Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com" <Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tue, April 13, 2010 11:43:07 AM
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Diesel Q1, update, and propeller question.

 
Is the Q-Performance List dead? Should I begin to post all my
alternate engine and plane mods questions and discussions here on the
Q-List?

Phil Lankford

On Apr 13, 2010, at 10:08 AM, Mike Perry <dmperry1012@ att.net> wrote:

Roger:

I think you have two different planes confused. Jon Finley used to fly
a Quickie with a VW; he now flies a Q2 with a Subaru and a Paul
Lipps prop.

On the three angle valve job and thermal coatings: I'm not sure you
get
much hp benefit at the rpms we usually run (~3200 in the VW). The
thermal coating does make cooling easier (coat the pistons also and
the
oil runs cooler). The Techline website currently shows a slight
decrease in power below ~4500 rpm; when I looked last year they
showed a
slight increase, but it can't be more than +/- 1-2% at that rpm range.
More than 5% is likely in the 6000 rpm range. I can't find a graph
right now but memory says most of the benefit from 3 angle valve jobs
and other intake mods comes in at 4000 rpm.

More discussion on this probably belongs on the VW list?

Mike

Isaksson Roger wrote:


Hi Jon

Thanks, yes I think I will go the way you suggest, get the IVO on it
and get ballpark figures, the Ellipse is definitely an efficient
design, and especially as I don't have much of HP in my project to
start up with, I am keen to have as efficint prop as ever possible.
Once I have my ballpark figure, I can submit it to Paul Lipps. I
am a
long way from there though.

One thing you might consider to get more oomp in your engine to get
more oomp out of it, but not having to machine work too much, is
to do
a small program.

You can let the engine stay in your plane, you only need to take out
the top part. ( I am assuming you have a VW) head, cylinders and
pistons.

In most VW Hot rod books, there are pictures and diagrams how you
can
improve the flow of your head.

If you take a head and hold it in your hand, looking at the
combustion
side of your engine, you should se the valve heads, ok there is a
wall
on one side that is restricting the flow, radius out that portion,
and
you get improved filling of the cylinders.

Do a what is called a three angle valve job, and you will improve
flow
also, once the three angle valve job is done, put the valves back
into
the seat, and grind them in.

You will have on your valves now a polished grind mark on the
contact
face of your valves, it will be a grinded, polished band all around
the contact face (again, the roughly 45 deg angle, that contacts the
valve seat.)

Most probably you will now find that the the polished surface , is
only a small part of the whole contact surface.

The "extra" part is stopping airflow.

This is really easy, you can do all this yourself , get a good
ironfile, and a drill with adjustable speed, and a piece of leather.

Wrap a piece of leather around the valvestem, and inser it into the
drills chuck, like if you were installing a drill.

Start the drill, you will find out with the variable speed what
rpm is
good(, .....it's a feel thing,.... but you will catch on really
quick.) and start filing the valve in following fashion.

Look at the edge of the valve face, and you will most probably see
some square or sharp profile, if it is a standard out of the box
valve.

That edge have to have a radius, a smooth round edge, prefereably
all
the way down to the polished valve seat mark.

Ok once that is done, look at the back of the valve, (still the
round
flat part, but the side that is facing the stem), from the stem, to
the 45 degree cut, you will se that there is a lot of unneccesary
material . The original slope down to the 45 degree cut is very
shallow, and it's meeting the 45 degree cut with a sharp edge.

File down the back of the valve in such a way that you will get a
one
surface funnel all the way to the grinded polished contact surface.

You really don't do too much, just sit there with the drill in your
hand, it's doing the job for you.

Ok that is all the machining you need to do, now clean the parts and
have them thermal coated.

You can either get a kit yourself, but you get the most consistent
result if you send them in to a shop that is doing it.

Coat the inside(compustion chamber) of the head, coat the valves,
especially the head, an up through the backside and the stem on the
exhaust valve.

Coat the top of the pistons, and have the piston skirts coated at
the
same time, with anti friction coating.

Get it back, and put it together, and you will now have an engine
that
breaths easier, runs cooler ( the heat is contained better, doing a
better job of pushing your prop) and will do more work for you. ( of
course, there is also the option of taking the whole engine apart
and
have every nock and cranny done per the book, but the pistons, heads
and the valves are the important parts)

Typical tests in Hot Rod magazines, shows ( they have done thousands
of them by this time) about 5 to 7 % increase in both HP and torque.

So Jon, now you will have an engine that will be more optimized for
your prop, and it is not too much of a deal to do all these steps.

Your prop, and engine compatiability solved.

Good luck Jon.

Roger





Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post | Start a New
Topic
Messages in this topic (10)
RECENT ACTIVITY: New Photos 1
Visit Your Group
Quickie Builders Association WEB site
http://www.quickiebuilders.org

MARKETPLACE
Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're
on - Get the Yahoo! Toolbar now.


Welcome to Mom Connection! Share stories, news and more with moms
like you.


Hobbies & Activities Zone: Find others who share your passions!
Explore new interests.


Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use
.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

17901 - 17920 of 53564