Thanks Jerry. That is partially on my to-do list and partially on my to-done list.

Cheers,

Jay

Time will tell, Richard, Time will tell.

I have an alternate setup on my reflexor. Two photos are worth a thousand words, so here you go:

Cheers,

Jay

My body, the Q and the weather all aligned today to usher in my first Q flight since August when I face-planted into a mountain off my motorcycle. 

I just finished the condition inspection and was ready to go.  Fortunately, it was totally uneventful except for the wonderful thrill it was to be back in the air in the Q again.  The Q cockpit is a special place to be.

Surprisingly, my flying skills (or lack of) seemed to not have deteriorated sufficiently to scare me any more than they usually do. I am sure it helped that Nancy would periodically take me flying so I could “see the picture” down final a few times before launching off in my plastic fantastic.

Anyway, the skies are no longer safe.  I have returned to flight.

Everyone fly safe.

Jerry

Be careful of cylinder envy, Bruce!

Cheers,

Jay

Hi Kevin,

I am now at up to 58%, since I put the engine back on today!

Cheers,

Jay

The reflexor was an approved mod by QAC. It was sold as a retrofit kit or as an option by QAC in the very latest kits they sold. Usage recommendations are addressed in one of the QAC newsletters, but I don’t remember which one. The range of up 6 degrees to down 2 degrees is recommended.

I have been trying to determine the significance of those numbers and establish limits for my own plane, so I can do what Jerry recommends and put limit stops on mine. To do this, I have been modeling the effect of a range of reflexor settings on my airplane’s decalage of -1.5 degrees, meaning the canard is 1.5 degrees higher angle than plans built. The factory prototype was a -1.0 degree decalage, meaning its canard was leading edge up 1 degree wrt plans. Jerry’s plane has a decalage of +1, meaning his canard angle relative to wing is 1 degree leading edge LOWER than plans. I have personally measured this on his plane.

The first graph below is how different decalages fly (angle of attack/alpha vs elevator setting). Each colored curve corresponds to a different decalage. The black contours are airspeed, so at the right side of the graph is where the at highest angle,  elevator and lowest speed (in graph is in ground effect). Jerry’s plane should follow the dark green line when no reflexor is used, so without reflexor he will arrive at the ground with his plane around 4.5 degrees. His taxi angle is 4.5 degrees, so he would land 3 point. If he reflexed trailing edge down, it would indeed slam his nose into the ground even with full elevator as he has said.  This is not the case for his landings, because he is using a highly reflexed trailing edge up when landing.

So how does reflexor change the curves in the first graph? I have been modeling this for my plane only on the second graph. With no reflexor, my plane will fly the green curve, and I will arrive at the ground with an angle of about 6.5 degrees, This is 2 degrees higher than Jerry, because my declage is about 2.5 degrees different from his. If I reflex up 6 degrees (-6 by my sign convention), I will land at angle of a little over 8 degrees, so the change in alpha at landing caused by reflex is about 0.25 degrees of alpha increase for each degree of trailing edge up deflection of reflexor.

Jerry actually lands at about 8 degrees angle, so his reflexor, according to my modeling is up about 14 degrees. This would correspond to more than 1 inch of up deflection at the trailing edge. Seems high, but Jerry can let me know if I am off base.

Anyway, as Sam H. says: “Your results may vary”. I would only add the following:  You need to know your decalage before you will know what your reflex limits should be. If you have a decalage of -1.0 like the QAC factory prototype, then you would want to use the factory recommendations of up 6 degrees to down 2 degrees.

Cheers,

Jay Scheevel, Tri-Q, still building