Date   

Re: GU angle of incidence. . .

Larry Severson
 

Page 78 of the Q2 manual addresses the mounting of the GU canard, along
with pictures. The manual is available of the Q2 web site under the
title Q2plans.pdf.

On 7/15/2010 4:28 AM, quickheads2 wrote:

Hey can you guys help me answer a question on the QBA forums?

http://www.quickheads.com/12-q2q-200-forum/929-q2-canard-angle-of-incidence.html#930

I did the best I could, but I've never built a GU canard. (Or any
canard for that matter) Mine came pre-assembled. :-)
--
Larry Severson
18242 Peters Ct
Fountain Valley
CA 92708
(714) 968-9852


Re: New file uploaded to Q-LIST

Mick Davies <mickdavies@...>
 

Richard,
Sorry to contact you this way but need some advice. I've a Tri Q200 that's
now been given permission to test fly (last flew 1999-new engine fitted).
I am based at Turweston with 800m concrete runway 09/27. The prop is quite
coarse at 58x68.
What are hints/tips/must do/must not do?!! What are the TriQ operating
differences?
regards
Mick Davies

----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard" <richard@cloudland.co.uk>
To: <Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2010 6:50 PM
Subject: [Q-LIST] Re: New file uploaded to Q-LIST


Cracking picture Jim, one to be proud of.

Richard Thomson
Tri Q200
Somerset
UK.





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

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

Yahoo! Groups Links




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



No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.830 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3007 - Release Date: 07/15/10
12:09:00

----------


No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.830 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3007 - Release Date: 07/15/10 12:09:00


Re: New file uploaded to Q-LIST

Richard Thomson
 

Cracking picture Jim, one to be proud of.

Richard Thomson
Tri Q200
Somerset
UK.


Re: GU angle of incidence. . .

Fisher Paul A. <fisherpaula@...>
 

Sure, ask the question on the Q-list and we'll chime in.


From: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of quickheads2
Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2010 06:29
To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Q-LIST] GU angle of incidence. . .



Hey can you guys help me answer a question on the QBA forums?

http://www.quickheads.com/12-q2q-200-forum/929-q2-canard-angle-of-incidence.html#930

I did the best I could, but I've never built a GU canard. (Or any canard for that matter) Mine came pre-assembled. :-)

Thanks,
Dan Yager
QBA Editor
www.quickheads.com


GU angle of incidence. . .

quickheads2 <groups@...>
 

Hey can you guys help me answer a question on the QBA forums?

http://www.quickheads.com/12-q2q-200-forum/929-q2-canard-angle-of-incidence.html#930

I did the best I could, but I've never built a GU canard. (Or any canard for that matter) Mine came pre-assembled. :-)

Thanks,
Dan Yager
QBA Editor
www.quickheads.com


Re: AC

John Loram <johnl@...>
 

I agree. I've included all of them on my project along with the Gall
alignment.

-john-


_____

From: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
Jim P
Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2010 9:02 PM
To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Q-LIST] AC





Good Evening John,

When you refer to the Jim-Bob six pack it was based on several items that
Bob Farnam and I installed on our planes to make them work correctly. They
were Toe Brakes, LaRue Brake Mod, Split Rudder Cables, Unlocking/Pivioting
Tailwheel, Reflexor and Belly Board.

While it is true Bob Farnam flew before me, I changed to a 6" pivoting tail
wheel with 5/8" steel tail spring (my mod)well before I ever met him. I was
also in the process of changing to a double cable rudder system when I took
my plane to LVK the first time in 1998-1999. Bob and I were both the
original Guinea Pigs on this one, he slightly before me.

After visiting some of our Tandem Wing flyins and seeing how well our planes
worked, I believe it was Mike Perry that came up with the phrase "Jim-Bob
Six Pack", which stuck. Correct me if I'm wrong Mike but you coined that
phrase to identify the six mods we did. I do not take credit for inventing
the LaRue Mod, The QAC Reflexor, Jim Hamm Toe Brakes, QAC Belly Board, Etc.
but when you hear the term JBSP they are refering to the mods Bob and I did
on our planes. The real credit goes to Mike Perry.

By the way, I am still a very strong advocate of these mods and several
builders around the world have incorporated our solutions. I hope this
clears it up for you.

Best regards,
Jim Patillo
N46JP Q200-Flying consistantly since 2000.


Hi Jim:

Did I get it wrong? While Mike Perry coined the term Jim-Bob Six Pack and
attributed the Jim to you, it was my understanding that the Jim should
have
referred to Jim Hamm, Bob Farnam's building partner.

Back in the early '90s when I bought my Q2 project, I quickly learned that
an old friend, Jim Hamm, was build a Q200. I went down to Palo Alto to
visit
him and he showed me his project. This was during the time that Jim Hamm
and
Bob Farnam were jointly building their projects.

At the time Jim showed me the Six Pack modifications and told me about the
value of including them. As I remember, it was Jim Hamm that came up with
the split rudder/tail-wheel cables, and I remember him telling me about
Bob
Farnam doing engineering calculations about toe brake peddle forces for
the
dual toes brakes.

I've always thought that Bob Farnam had his plane flying a few years
before
you and that you were an early adopter of the improvements that Bob Farnam
and Jim Hamm developed.

Have I got it wrong? Were you involved in the design of the six-pack? In
which case I owe you an apology!

-john-




_____

From: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com> ] On Behalf
Of
Jim P
Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2010 2:28 PM
To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [Q-LIST] Quickie Info.





Fellas,

I came across this site again and thought some of you might like to see
it.
Has some good info.

Especially (no self promotion here) note the article "Las Vegas Quickie"
and
John Loram remember the Jim-Bob Six Pack coined by Mike Perry,came from
Jim
Patillo and Bob Farnam, just so were clear. Couldn't resist it!

Regards,
Jim P.
N46JP Q200

http://imageevent.com/qdf_files/quickiefiles









AC

Jim Patillo
 

Good Evening John,

When you refer to the Jim-Bob six pack it was based on several items that Bob Farnam and I installed on our planes to make them work correctly. They were Toe Brakes, LaRue Brake Mod, Split Rudder Cables, Unlocking/Pivioting Tailwheel, Reflexor and Belly Board.

While it is true Bob Farnam flew before me, I changed to a 6" pivoting tail wheel with 5/8" steel tail spring (my mod)well before I ever met him. I was also in the process of changing to a double cable rudder system when I took my plane to LVK the first time in 1998-1999. Bob and I were both the original Guinea Pigs on this one, he slightly before me.

After visiting some of our Tandem Wing flyins and seeing how well our planes worked, I believe it was Mike Perry that came up with the phrase "Jim-Bob Six Pack", which stuck. Correct me if I'm wrong Mike but you coined that phrase to identify the six mods we did. I do not take credit for inventing the LaRue Mod, The QAC Reflexor, Jim Hamm Toe Brakes, QAC Belly Board, Etc. but when you hear the term JBSP they are refering to the mods Bob and I did on our planes. The real credit goes to Mike Perry.

By the way, I am still a very strong advocate of these mods and several builders around the world have incorporated our solutions. I hope this clears it up for you.

Best regards,
Jim Patillo
N46JP Q200-Flying consistantly since 2000.


Hi Jim:

Did I get it wrong? While Mike Perry coined the term Jim-Bob Six Pack and
attributed the Jim to you, it was my understanding that the Jim should have
referred to Jim Hamm, Bob Farnam's building partner.

Back in the early '90s when I bought my Q2 project, I quickly learned that
an old friend, Jim Hamm, was build a Q200. I went down to Palo Alto to visit
him and he showed me his project. This was during the time that Jim Hamm and
Bob Farnam were jointly building their projects.

At the time Jim showed me the Six Pack modifications and told me about the
value of including them. As I remember, it was Jim Hamm that came up with
the split rudder/tail-wheel cables, and I remember him telling me about Bob
Farnam doing engineering calculations about toe brake peddle forces for the
dual toes brakes.

I've always thought that Bob Farnam had his plane flying a few years before
you and that you were an early adopter of the improvements that Bob Farnam
and Jim Hamm developed.

Have I got it wrong? Were you involved in the design of the six-pack? In
which case I owe you an apology!

-john-




_____

From: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
Jim P
Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2010 2:28 PM
To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Q-LIST] Quickie Info.





Fellas,

I came across this site again and thought some of you might like to see it.
Has some good info.

Especially (no self promotion here) note the article "Las Vegas Quickie" and
John Loram remember the Jim-Bob Six Pack coined by Mike Perry,came from Jim
Patillo and Bob Farnam, just so were clear. Couldn't resist it!

Regards,
Jim P.
N46JP Q200

http://imageevent.com/qdf_files/quickiefiles









Re: Quickie Info.

John Loram <johnl@...>
 

Hi Jim:

Did I get it wrong? While Mike Perry coined the term Jim-Bob Six Pack and
attributed the Jim to you, it was my understanding that the Jim should have
referred to Jim Hamm, Bob Farnam's building partner.

Back in the early '90s when I bought my Q2 project, I quickly learned that
an old friend, Jim Hamm, was build a Q200. I went down to Palo Alto to visit
him and he showed me his project. This was during the time that Jim Hamm and
Bob Farnam were jointly building their projects.

At the time Jim showed me the Six Pack modifications and told me about the
value of including them. As I remember, it was Jim Hamm that came up with
the split rudder/tail-wheel cables, and I remember him telling me about Bob
Farnam doing engineering calculations about toe brake peddle forces for the
dual toes brakes.

I've always thought that Bob Farnam had his plane flying a few years before
you and that you were an early adopter of the improvements that Bob Farnam
and Jim Hamm developed.

Have I got it wrong? Were you involved in the design of the six-pack? In
which case I owe you an apology!

-john-




_____

From: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
Jim P
Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2010 2:28 PM
To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Q-LIST] Quickie Info.





Fellas,

I came across this site again and thought some of you might like to see it.
Has some good info.

Especially (no self promotion here) note the article "Las Vegas Quickie" and
John Loram remember the Jim-Bob Six Pack coined by Mike Perry,came from Jim
Patillo and Bob Farnam, just so were clear. Couldn't resist it!

Regards,
Jim P.
N46JP Q200

http://imageevent.com/qdf_files/quickiefiles


Re: Quickie Info.

Mike Dwyer <mdwyer@...>
 

Thanks Jim, I hadn't read that article, it was great!
Mike Q200 N3QP
http://www.warnerair.com/q200/



Jim P wrote:

Fellas,

I came across this site again and thought some of you might like to see it. Has some good info.
Especially (no self promotion here) note the article "Las Vegas Quickie" and John Loram remember the Jim-Bob Six Pack coined by Mike Perry,came from Jim Patillo and Bob Farnam, just so were clear. Couldn't resist it!
Regards,
Jim P.
N46JP Q200

http://imageevent.com/qdf_files/quickiefiles



Quickie Info.

Jim Patillo
 

Fellas,

I came across this site again and thought some of you might like to see it. Has some good info.

Especially (no self promotion here) note the article "Las Vegas Quickie" and John Loram remember the Jim-Bob Six Pack coined by Mike Perry,came from Jim Patillo and Bob Farnam, just so were clear. Couldn't resist it!

Regards,
Jim P.
N46JP Q200


http://imageevent.com/qdf_files/quickiefiles


Re: New file uploaded to Q-LIST

Sam Kittle
 

Jim,



You should have that picture put on a T-shirt.



Sam



_____

From: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2010 4:44 PM
To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Q-LIST] New file uploaded to Q-LIST






Hello,

This email message is a notification to let you know that
a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the Q-LIST
group.

File : /Jim Patillo- N46JP Q200/IMG_0819.jpg
Uploaded by : logisticsengineering <logistics_engineering@msn.com
<mailto:logistics_engineering%40msn.com> >
Description : Coming through the Golden Gate Bridge at sundown

You can access this file at the URL:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Q-LIST/files/Jim%20Patillo-%20%20N46JP%20Q200/
IMG_0819.jpg

To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit:
http://help.yahoo.com/l/us/yahoo/groups/original/members/forms/general.htmlf
iles

Regards,

logisticsengineering <logistics_engineering@msn.com
<mailto:logistics_engineering%40msn.com> >


New file uploaded to Q-LIST

Q-LIST@...
 

Hello,

This email message is a notification to let you know that
a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the Q-LIST
group.

File : /Jim Patillo- N46JP Q200/IMG_0819.jpg
Uploaded by : logisticsengineering <logistics_engineering@msn.com>
Description : Coming through the Golden Gate Bridge at sundown

You can access this file at the URL:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Q-LIST/files/Jim%20Patillo-%20%20N46JP%20Q200/IMG_0819.jpg

To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit:
http://help.yahoo.com/l/us/yahoo/groups/original/members/forms/general.htmlfiles

Regards,

logisticsengineering <logistics_engineering@msn.com>


Field of Dreams T-shirts

Doug Humble <hawkidoug@...>
 

Hi all,

Sort of a shameless plug here. I just wanted to remind anyone who wants me to bring a 20th Annual Field of Dreams t-shirt with me to AirVenture so you can save the shipping needs to get a check to me by July 15th so I can get them made in time. Send a check for $18.00 (add $1.00 for 2XL) to:

A Sign Above
P.O. Box 540458
Omaha NE 68154

Please give me a note telling me you want me to bring it to AirVenture and specify the type and size you want. Please include a cell phone # so we can make arrangements to meet. I will be there Sunday July 25th thru Thursday July 29th. My Cell phone # is below.

You can review the styles at this web page: http://www.asignabove.net/asa_015.htm

Also, as a reminder, we have our annual "type club" meeting on Thursday, July 29th from 8:30 - 10 AM at the Home Builders HQ.

Doug Humble
A Sign Above
www.asignabove.net
Omaha NE
402-250-9075


Re: [Dragonflylist] RE: [Q-Performance] Quickie as LSA

Rick Hole
 

Be careful you get your regulations straight before trusting what someone
(including myself) tells you. I believe you will find that ELSA does NOT
give you design modification rights as does Experimental Amateur...

Anyway this whole discussion is off topic for Q-List. We simply fly too
fast to qualify flying one under the LSA rule (not Sport eligible), and
there is no possibility of certifying one outside the Experimental Amateur
Home-built category. ELSA is not possible, it only can be done as a
kit-build duplicate of an SLSA aircraft.

As to modifying a Quickie/Q2 to meet the stall and Vno speeds required, you
no longer have a Quickie/Q2. Performance list is a good place to explore
that possibility. Realize that you would be in uncharted territory and
basically designing an airplane from scratch. Make sure you know what you
are doing and are prepared for unexpected adverse characteristics. Not for
the beginner or faint-of-heart.

It's a bit like building a Ferrari but putting in a transmission with only
1st and 2nd gear...

Rick

-----Original Message-----
From: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
Edward Lysogorski
Sent: Tuesday, July 06, 2010 9:43 PM
To: dragonflylist@yahoogroups.com; q-list@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Q-LIST] RE: [Dragonflylist] RE: [Q-Performance] Quickie as LSA


This ELSA thing can be very confusing. We were taught at the September
2009, 120 hour course by RAINBOW AVIATION, in OSHKOSH, that after the
expiration of the transition dead line for fat ultralights, there will still
exist one (1) way to build an ELSA. The requirement is that a manufacturer
that has an approved SLSA can market it in kit form and the 'homebuilt kit'
must be an exact replica of the original SLSA. Seems like there is no 51%
rule or builders log to deal with.

Once the ELSA airworthiness is issued, (that very afternoon) you can change
anything you wish because it is an experimental and anybody, including your
12 year old child, can work on or make changes to an Experimental (ELSA or
Amature Built). For example, you can take off an approved Rotax engine, and
replace it with a Harly Davidson engine if you think you can get the results
you are looking for. For those of you that just gasped in disbelief about
the ability to modify, check it out with Rainbow Aviation.

The annual condition inspection is a whole different matter. With the ELSA
airworthiness you will not be able to get a builders certificate because
those are available only for 'Experimental Amature Built Aircraft';
However, as an "owner" of an ELSA you can perform your own annual condition
inspection if you take the 16 hour inspection course; and the big benifit is
that a subsequent "ELSA owner" can perform the condition inspections as well
if the new 'owner' takes the 16 hour course. That may increase the resale
value of your aircraft considerably over an Experimental Amature Built.

Vans Aircraft offers an ELSA kit,. Any manufacture that chooses to offer
an ELSA kit can do it if they have one (1) factory built SLSA that meets the
ASTM standards and they are offering a kit to build an exact replica of that
SLSA aircraft and the completed aircraft is an exact replica. By now,
other manufacturers may be offering a 10%, 50%, or a 95% kit. I'd expect
people to get into the buisiness of building ELSA aircraft for others. You
can even buy a complete flying SLSA built by any manucturer and convert the
airworthiness to ELSA if you choose to do so, that would probably lower the
resale value, however; if you were to buy a SLSA wreck, converting the
airworthiness to ELSA might be a very good option.

See http://www.kitplanes.com/magazine/sport_pilot/8873-1.phtml for Vans
approach to marketing.

The punch line is that an ELSA would seem everybit as flexible for
modification purposes (after the airworthiness is issued) as an Experimental
Amature Built. The regulatory befuddlement of it all is that two planes
that are exactly the same can have different paperwork. Given the option
(even if I could prove 51% to get a builders certificate) I'd much prefer an
ELSA airworthiness to an Experimental Amature Built Airworthiness for the
purpose of improving the resale value.

Edward Lysogorski, 6822 Dixie Highway, Bridgeport, Michigan 48722
Phone/FAX (989) 777-9070




To: Q-Performance@yahoogroups.com
CC: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com; Dragonflylist@yahoogroups.com
From: panzera@experimental-aviation.com
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2010 08:41:37 -0700
Subject: [Dragonflylist] RE: [Q-Performance] Quickie as LSA




I was wondering if thier has been any work done on adapting the Quickie to
Light Sport Aircraft catagory by making the wing(s) larger for the slower
stall speed.
This might be splitting hairs here, but it's a pet peeve so please forgive
my rant in advance.

There is no way that the Q or any other homebuilt will ever be a "light
sport aircraft." It will always be an experimental, amateur-built. If
someone was to take the time to build and fly a prototype that is 100%
compliant with the ASTM consensus standards (jumping through all the
bureaucracy to document it properly), and then offer a kit that contains
100% of the parts it takes to build an exact replica of that plane, and the
builder went by the plans 100% all the way down to the exact placement in
the panel of the exact specified instruments (it could be painted a
different color if the prototype was painted but you could not install a
Dynon if steam gauges are specified), then that builder can register his
plane in the E-LSA category.

Note that the E-LSA kit does NOT need to meet the 51% rule. The "kit" could
literally consist of the "builder" uncrating it and installing the
propeller... but I digress.

If you as the builder of a variant of a Dragonfly or Quickie (or any plane
for that matter), were able to prove that it meets the performance
parameters of an LSA (max 2 seats, 1320 gross weight, fixed gear and prop,
cruise speed limit of 120 knots, 52 mph stall speed, etc.) then any sport
pilot may legally fly this experimental, amateur-built aircraft.

It is NOT however an LSA by any measure. It is an experimental,
amateur-built aircraft that is "sport pilot eligible."

Pat





_________________________________________________________________
The New Busy is not the too busy. Combine all your e-mail accounts with
Hotmail.
http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?tile=multiaccount&ocid=PID283
26::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_4





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

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

Yahoo! Groups Links


Re: [Dragonflylist] RE: [Q-Performance] Quickie as LSA

Edward Lysogorski <eplyso@...>
 

This ELSA thing can be very confusing. We were taught at the September 2009, 120 hour course by RAINBOW AVIATION, in OSHKOSH, that after the expiration of the transition dead line for fat ultralights, there will still exist one (1) way to build an ELSA. The requirement is that a manufacturer that has an approved SLSA can market it in kit form and the 'homebuilt kit' must be an exact replica of the original SLSA. Seems like there is no 51% rule or builders log to deal with.

Once the ELSA airworthiness is issued, (that very afternoon) you can change anything you wish because it is an experimental and anybody, including your 12 year old child, can work on or make changes to an Experimental (ELSA or Amature Built). For example, you can take off an approved Rotax engine, and replace it with a Harly Davidson engine if you think you can get the results you are looking for. For those of you that just gasped in disbelief about the ability to modify, check it out with Rainbow Aviation.

The annual condition inspection is a whole different matter. With the ELSA airworthiness you will not be able to get a builders certificate because those are available only for 'Experimental Amature Built Aircraft'; However, as an "owner" of an ELSA you can perform your own annual condition inspection if you take the 16 hour inspection course; and the big benifit is that a subsequent "ELSA owner" can perform the condition inspections as well if the new 'owner' takes the 16 hour course. That may increase the resale value of your aircraft considerably over an Experimental Amature Built.

Vans Aircraft offers an ELSA kit,. Any manufacture that chooses to offer an ELSA kit can do it if they have one (1) factory built SLSA that meets the ASTM standards and they are offering a kit to build an exact replica of that SLSA aircraft and the completed aircraft is an exact replica. By now, other manufacturers may be offering a 10%, 50%, or a 95% kit. I'd expect people to get into the buisiness of building ELSA aircraft for others. You can even buy a complete flying SLSA built by any manucturer and convert the airworthiness to ELSA if you choose to do so, that would probably lower the resale value, however; if you were to buy a SLSA wreck, converting the airworthiness to ELSA might be a very good option.

See http://www.kitplanes.com/magazine/sport_pilot/8873-1.phtml for Vans approach to marketing.

The punch line is that an ELSA would seem everybit as flexible for modification purposes (after the airworthiness is issued) as an Experimental Amature Built. The regulatory befuddlement of it all is that two planes that are exactly the same can have different paperwork. Given the option (even if I could prove 51% to get a builders certificate) I'd much prefer an ELSA airworthiness to an Experimental Amature Built Airworthiness for the purpose of improving the resale value.

Edward Lysogorski, 6822 Dixie Highway, Bridgeport, Michigan 48722
Phone/FAX (989) 777-9070




To: Q-Performance@yahoogroups.com
CC: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com; Dragonflylist@yahoogroups.com
From: panzera@experimental-aviation.com
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2010 08:41:37 -0700
Subject: [Dragonflylist] RE: [Q-Performance] Quickie as LSA




I was wondering if thier has been any work done on adapting the Quickie to
Light Sport Aircraft catagory by making the wing(s) larger for the slower
stall speed.
This might be splitting hairs here, but it's a pet peeve so please forgive
my rant in advance.

There is no way that the Q or any other homebuilt will ever be a "light
sport aircraft." It will always be an experimental, amateur-built. If
someone was to take the time to build and fly a prototype that is 100%
compliant with the ASTM consensus standards (jumping through all the
bureaucracy to document it properly), and then offer a kit that contains
100% of the parts it takes to build an exact replica of that plane, and the
builder went by the plans 100% all the way down to the exact placement in
the panel of the exact specified instruments (it could be painted a
different color if the prototype was painted but you could not install a
Dynon if steam gauges are specified), then that builder can register his
plane in the E-LSA category.

Note that the E-LSA kit does NOT need to meet the 51% rule. The "kit" could
literally consist of the "builder" uncrating it and installing the
propeller... but I digress.

If you as the builder of a variant of a Dragonfly or Quickie (or any plane
for that matter), were able to prove that it meets the performance
parameters of an LSA (max 2 seats, 1320 gross weight, fixed gear and prop,
cruise speed limit of 120 knots, 52 mph stall speed, etc.) then any sport
pilot may legally fly this experimental, amateur-built aircraft.

It is NOT however an LSA by any measure. It is an experimental,
amateur-built aircraft that is "sport pilot eligible."

Pat





_________________________________________________________________
The New Busy is not the too busy. Combine all your e-mail accounts with Hotmail.
http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?tile=multiaccount&ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_4

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


Re: [Dragonflylist] RE: [Q-Performance] Quickie as LSA

Edward Lysogorski <eplyso@...>
 

This ELSA thing can be very confusing. We were taught at the September 2009, 120 hour course by RAINBOW AVIATION, in OSHKOSH, that after the expiration of the transition dead line for fat ultralights, there will still exist one (1) way to build an ELSA. The requirement is that a manufacturer that has an approved SLSA can market it in kit form and the 'homebuilt kit' must be an exact replica of the original SLSA. Seems like there is no 51% rule or builders log to deal with.

Once the ELSA airworthiness is issued, (that very afternoon) you can change anything you wish because it is an experimental and anybody, including your 12 year old child, can work on or make changes to an Experimental (ELSA or Amature Built). For example, you can take off an approved Rotax engine, and replace it with a Harly Davidson engine if you think you can get the results you are looking for. For those of you that just gasped in disbelief about the ability to modify, check it out with Rainbow Aviation.

The annual condition inspection is a whole different matter. With the ELSA airworthiness you will not be able to get a builders certificate because those are available only for 'Experimental Amature Built Aircraft'; However, as an "owner" of an ELSA you can perform your own annual condition inspection if you take the 16 hour inspection course; and the big benifit is that a subsequent "ELSA owner" can perform the condition inspections as well if the new 'owner' takes the 16 hour course. That may increase the resale value of your aircraft considerably over an Experimental Amature Built.

Vans Aircraft offers an ELSA kit,. Any manufacture that chooses to offer an ELSA kit can do it if they have one (1) factory built SLSA that meets the ASTM standards and they are offering a kit to build an exact replica of that SLSA aircraft and the completed aircraft is an exact replica. By now, other manufacturers may be offering a 10%, 50%, or a 95% kit. I'd expect people to get into the buisiness of building ELSA aircraft for others. You can even buy a complete flying SLSA built by any manucturer and convert the airworthiness to ELSA if you choose to do so, that would probably lower the resale value, however; if you were to buy a SLSA wreck, converting the airworthiness to ELSA might be a very good option.

See http://www.kitplanes.com/magazine/sport_pilot/8873-1.phtml for Vans approach to marketing.

The punch line is that an ELSA would seem everybit as flexible for modification purposes (after the airworthiness is issued) as an Experimental Amature Built. The regulatory befuddlement of it all is that two planes that are exactly the same can have different paperwork. Given the option (even if I could prove 51% to get a builders certificate) I'd much prefer an ELSA airworthiness to an Experimental Amature Built Airworthiness for the purpose of improving the resale value.

Edward Lysogorski, 6822 Dixie Highway, Bridgeport, Michigan 48722
Phone/FAX (989) 777-9070




To: Q-Performance@yahoogroups.com
CC: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com; Dragonflylist@yahoogroups.com
From: panzera@experimental-aviation.com
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2010 08:41:37 -0700
Subject: [Dragonflylist] RE: [Q-Performance] Quickie as LSA




I was wondering if thier has been any work done on adapting the Quickie to
Light Sport Aircraft catagory by making the wing(s) larger for the slower
stall speed.
This might be splitting hairs here, but it's a pet peeve so please forgive
my rant in advance.

There is no way that the Q or any other homebuilt will ever be a "light
sport aircraft." It will always be an experimental, amateur-built. If
someone was to take the time to build and fly a prototype that is 100%
compliant with the ASTM consensus standards (jumping through all the
bureaucracy to document it properly), and then offer a kit that contains
100% of the parts it takes to build an exact replica of that plane, and the
builder went by the plans 100% all the way down to the exact placement in
the panel of the exact specified instruments (it could be painted a
different color if the prototype was painted but you could not install a
Dynon if steam gauges are specified), then that builder can register his
plane in the E-LSA category.

Note that the E-LSA kit does NOT need to meet the 51% rule. The "kit" could
literally consist of the "builder" uncrating it and installing the
propeller... but I digress.

If you as the builder of a variant of a Dragonfly or Quickie (or any plane
for that matter), were able to prove that it meets the performance
parameters of an LSA (max 2 seats, 1320 gross weight, fixed gear and prop,
cruise speed limit of 120 knots, 52 mph stall speed, etc.) then any sport
pilot may legally fly this experimental, amateur-built aircraft.

It is NOT however an LSA by any measure. It is an experimental,
amateur-built aircraft that is "sport pilot eligible."

Pat





_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail is redefining busy with tools for the New Busy. Get more from your inbox.
http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_2

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


Re: [Q-Performance] Quickie as LSA

Patrick Panzera <panzera@...>
 

I was wondering if thier has been any work done on adapting the Quickie to
Light Sport Aircraft catagory by making the wing(s) larger for the slower
stall speed.
This might be splitting hairs here, but it's a pet peeve so please forgive
my rant in advance.

There is no way that the Q or any other homebuilt will ever be a "light
sport aircraft." It will always be an experimental, amateur-built. If
someone was to take the time to build and fly a prototype that is 100%
compliant with the ASTM consensus standards (jumping through all the
bureaucracy to document it properly), and then offer a kit that contains
100% of the parts it takes to build an exact replica of that plane, and the
builder went by the plans 100% all the way down to the exact placement in
the panel of the exact specified instruments (it could be painted a
different color if the prototype was painted but you could not install a
Dynon if steam gauges are specified), then that builder can register his
plane in the E-LSA category.

Note that the E-LSA kit does NOT need to meet the 51% rule. The "kit" could
literally consist of the "builder" uncrating it and installing the
propeller... but I digress.

If you as the builder of a variant of a Dragonfly or Quickie (or any plane
for that matter), were able to prove that it meets the performance
parameters of an LSA (max 2 seats, 1320 gross weight, fixed gear and prop,
cruise speed limit of 120 knots, 52 mph stall speed, etc.) then any sport
pilot may legally fly this experimental, amateur-built aircraft.

It is NOT however an LSA by any measure. It is an experimental,
amateur-built aircraft that is "sport pilot eligible."

Pat


Re: Flight Report

Jim Patillo
 

Mike and Sam,

Thanks for the replies. Maybe next year you both can make it to our fly in. It's turned into a pretty nice event.

Regards,

Jim P.

--- In Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com, "Jim P" <logistics_engineering@...> wrote:


Hi Mike, greetings from the left coast.

Thanks for taking the time to create your flight reports. I'm sure it modivates others who are still building. I fly all the time but don't have the "umpapa" to come home and write it down.

Been using my Q for business travel to customer locations around California and Nevada and find it most rewarding. It sure beats the highway. I took our 4 year old grand daughter flying last week for the first time and she loved it. The only comment made when we returned was that she wanted to park near a cloud so she could get off and go for a walk.

BTW our flyin is coming up. Why don't you take off for a few days and come visit. That would be a great cross country and one hell of a story to report. Looks like we'll have a good one with Norm Howell coming. He's a very interesting fellow.

Regards,
Jim Patillo
N46JP Q200





--- In Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com, Bill Allen <billallensworld@> wrote:

Great read Mike, as always.

Bill Allen

On 27 June 2010 01:36, Mike Dwyer <mdwyer@> wrote:



Got off the ground today. It is 95F here in Florida today and very
humid. I had planned a snorkel trip to Key West for this weekend but
Tropical storm Alex forced me to change my plans due to the forecast
20-25K winds in the Keys. The snorkel boats don't go out in that kind
of wind. We decided to go north instead of south. If you remember I
asked the list about recommendations for transponder repairs. Thank you
to all that responded. I got quotes like "most repairs are $300 but if
the internal tube is bad that's $600 by itself". I was very afraid! I
took the AT150 to St. Pete Avionics at KSPG 727-822-4217
avionicsdanielle@ <avionicsdanielle%40yahoo.com> and he hooked it
up on his bench and
pronounced the receiver weak and needing a tune up. He said the
transmitter was kicking! Their posted labor rate was $75 per hour. At
least it wasn't the expensive part that was bad. In 5 days they emailed
me a pdf bill for $90! I was expecting a couple of hundred (don't tell
them that). Part of todays mission was to check out my transponder so I
asked Tampa Approach for flight following to Ocala FL. We were in
search of the $100 hamburger. I noticed right off that the green ident
light was way more active. As I got away from Tampa in the past it
would flash maybe once every 10 seconds but today it was flashing every
second or two. It's receiving great from the looks of it. Anyway back
to the flight report. There we were with a ground temp of 95F and a
request for 3500'. We were climbing pretty well (800FPM) and got up
there pretty fast. It wasn't particularly cool up there (77F) outside
but there was a wall of clouds up ahead. What to do, ask for a climb,
or fly around them through the valleys. It is so pretty to see
towering white puffies against the blue sky. They kinda look like soft
mountains that shake you around if you get too close. We got pretty
close. For the FAA folks on this list I was never closer than 2000'
(isn't that the rule?). As we got closer to KOCF we tuned to the
unicom. Lots of talking but nothing about Ocala. That's peculiar. I
knew they had been building a control tower but all my flight planning
sources did not list the tower. So I called FSS on 122.2 a couple of
times. Don't know if you guys have tried that recently but it is a real
crap shoot to call FSS and actually get an answer these days. Back to
Unicom to ask for an airport advisory for Ocala. They came back and
told me the Tower frequency. Ok, I love it when a plan comes together.
We slipped into a right downwind for RWY 18 behind a touch and go
Cessna. Turned off the runway and told me to call ground on 121.4.
What? They even have ground control up here. I taxied by this huge 3
engine biz jet and parked in piston row, right outside the restaurant
window. The FBO desk lady was great. She says, I see you (pointing at
me) get out of it and then I see your wife get out! She couldn't
comprehend how small the Q is compared to the C172 we're parked next to
yet two people get out of it! That was great. We grabbed a table by
the window and started talking to the three guys next to us in aviator
shirts with those cool epaulets. I always wanted one of those, maybe
with some captain wings... but I digress again. They were nice guys
working on their commercial ticket. I wished them well on their 4 leg
cross country. Nice day for it except for the darn heat. We got out of
the restaurant for $13 and headed back to the plane. On the way back we
climbed to 5-6000. No particular number as we were again buzzing around
the clouds and heading for the Gulf of Mexico. It was ok inside air
temp at 5500. The oil was running 190F, not bad. I was in no hurry and
powered back to 2400 RPM after getting to altitude (full power climb).
So heres the deal, no hurry, enjoying the view and a 15K tail wind! Why
is is when we are in a hurry there is always head wind? Over the gulf
beaches I scoped out a couple of boat launch points in Tarpon Springs to
see how crowded they were and then slowly descended to 3000' to stay
under the class B. Uneventful approach and landing and taxied to the
hangar. Total cost for 1.5 hours of flying was 7.5gal of Premium Auto
gas = $17 + 13 for lunch = $30. Hey, the Q can still do a lunch on the
cheap!
Mike Q200 N3QP
http://www.warnerair.com/q200/



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


Q-talk 141 - In your inbox. . .

quickheads2 <groups@...>
 

Hey All,
I just e-mailed the newsletter to all current QBA members. So check your inboxes and let me know what you think. If you didn't get it, you can check it out in the Q-Talk online archive here:

http://www.quickheads.com/q-talk-141-mayjun-2010-index.html

You'll need to be a member, and logged-in to see it though. If you're not a current member, and you're wondering what you're missing, please consider joining:

http://www.quickheads.com/join-QBA.html

Thanks everyone! Enough shameless promotion, gotta get back to sanding!

Cheers,
Dan Yager
QBA Editor
www.quickheads.com


Re: Flight Report

Jim Patillo
 

Hi Mike, greetings from the left coast.

Thanks for taking the time to create your flight reports. I'm sure it modivates others who are still building. I fly all the time but don't have the "umpapa" to come home and write it down.

Been using my Q for business travel to customer locations around California and Nevada and find it most rewarding. It sure beats the highway. I took our 4 year old grand daughter flying last week for the first time and she loved it. The only comment made when we returned was that she wanted to park near a cloud so she could get off and go for a walk.

BTW our flyin is coming up. Why don't you take off for a few days and come visit. That would be a great cross country and one hell of a story to report. Looks like we'll have a good one with Norm Howell coming. He's a very interesting fellow.

Regards,
Jim Patillo
N46JP Q200

--- In Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com, Bill Allen <billallensworld@...> wrote:

Great read Mike, as always.

Bill Allen

On 27 June 2010 01:36, Mike Dwyer <mdwyer@...> wrote:



Got off the ground today. It is 95F here in Florida today and very
humid. I had planned a snorkel trip to Key West for this weekend but
Tropical storm Alex forced me to change my plans due to the forecast
20-25K winds in the Keys. The snorkel boats don't go out in that kind
of wind. We decided to go north instead of south. If you remember I
asked the list about recommendations for transponder repairs. Thank you
to all that responded. I got quotes like "most repairs are $300 but if
the internal tube is bad that's $600 by itself". I was very afraid! I
took the AT150 to St. Pete Avionics at KSPG 727-822-4217
avionicsdanielle@... <avionicsdanielle%40yahoo.com> and he hooked it
up on his bench and
pronounced the receiver weak and needing a tune up. He said the
transmitter was kicking! Their posted labor rate was $75 per hour. At
least it wasn't the expensive part that was bad. In 5 days they emailed
me a pdf bill for $90! I was expecting a couple of hundred (don't tell
them that). Part of todays mission was to check out my transponder so I
asked Tampa Approach for flight following to Ocala FL. We were in
search of the $100 hamburger. I noticed right off that the green ident
light was way more active. As I got away from Tampa in the past it
would flash maybe once every 10 seconds but today it was flashing every
second or two. It's receiving great from the looks of it. Anyway back
to the flight report. There we were with a ground temp of 95F and a
request for 3500'. We were climbing pretty well (800FPM) and got up
there pretty fast. It wasn't particularly cool up there (77F) outside
but there was a wall of clouds up ahead. What to do, ask for a climb,
or fly around them through the valleys. It is so pretty to see
towering white puffies against the blue sky. They kinda look like soft
mountains that shake you around if you get too close. We got pretty
close. For the FAA folks on this list I was never closer than 2000'
(isn't that the rule?). As we got closer to KOCF we tuned to the
unicom. Lots of talking but nothing about Ocala. That's peculiar. I
knew they had been building a control tower but all my flight planning
sources did not list the tower. So I called FSS on 122.2 a couple of
times. Don't know if you guys have tried that recently but it is a real
crap shoot to call FSS and actually get an answer these days. Back to
Unicom to ask for an airport advisory for Ocala. They came back and
told me the Tower frequency. Ok, I love it when a plan comes together.
We slipped into a right downwind for RWY 18 behind a touch and go
Cessna. Turned off the runway and told me to call ground on 121.4.
What? They even have ground control up here. I taxied by this huge 3
engine biz jet and parked in piston row, right outside the restaurant
window. The FBO desk lady was great. She says, I see you (pointing at
me) get out of it and then I see your wife get out! She couldn't
comprehend how small the Q is compared to the C172 we're parked next to
yet two people get out of it! That was great. We grabbed a table by
the window and started talking to the three guys next to us in aviator
shirts with those cool epaulets. I always wanted one of those, maybe
with some captain wings... but I digress again. They were nice guys
working on their commercial ticket. I wished them well on their 4 leg
cross country. Nice day for it except for the darn heat. We got out of
the restaurant for $13 and headed back to the plane. On the way back we
climbed to 5-6000. No particular number as we were again buzzing around
the clouds and heading for the Gulf of Mexico. It was ok inside air
temp at 5500. The oil was running 190F, not bad. I was in no hurry and
powered back to 2400 RPM after getting to altitude (full power climb).
So heres the deal, no hurry, enjoying the view and a 15K tail wind! Why
is is when we are in a hurry there is always head wind? Over the gulf
beaches I scoped out a couple of boat launch points in Tarpon Springs to
see how crowded they were and then slowly descended to 3000' to stay
under the class B. Uneventful approach and landing and taxied to the
hangar. Total cost for 1.5 hours of flying was 7.5gal of Premium Auto
gas = $17 + 13 for lunch = $30. Hey, the Q can still do a lunch on the
cheap!
Mike Q200 N3QP
http://www.warnerair.com/q200/



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

18821 - 18840 of 54800