On Jun 20, 2020, at 7:35 PM, Joe Hood <joe.hood@...> wrote:

I have about a half inch of play in relationship to my tail wheel. This is still pre-Six pack, so cable comes from wheel to rudder. I haven't figured out where in the plans this number might be, anyone know?

On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 9:02 AM, Jon Finley

<jd@...> wrote:

That is always a tough question to answer Ryan.

The final configuration performed fine - much better than a Revmaster, maybe approaching a Q200.  However; that does not tell the real story. It required thousands of hours to get it to work (yes, thousands, plural), the cost, and the limitations that existed after all that effort were absolutely not worth it. I fly behind a Lycoming now - ya, big old ugly dinosaur.  I fly whenever and wherever I want - including some places most pilots avoid. I pull the cowling off once every six months or so just cause it feels like a should.  The reliability and resulting peace of mind cannot be understated.  The cost of an aircraft engine (Lycoming/Continental) and bad-mouthing "ancient tech" are the basic tenants of those desiring an "alternative engine".- they are lies we tell ourselves. If you want to fly (soon & reliably) - fork out the dollars at the front end and install an O-200.  If you want to spend years tinkering, troubleshooting, scaring yourself to death, increasing your risk of significant injury or death, and spending MORE $$$ than an O-200 costs - go with an alternative engine.  Btw, having flown with a HAPI VW and Revmaster (and Rotax 503), I put them in the 'alternative engine' category.  

Not sure it matters but my opinions are based on twenty years of working on alternative engines and ten years flying behind aircraft engines.  So, not exactly an opinion based on a couple articles that I read.

Jon Finley
Somewhere in the Southwest flying an RV-4

On Jun 20, 2020, at 6:14 PM, Mike Dwyer <q200pilot@...> wrote:



As reported earlier my 20 year old Facet Fuel pump failed last week.  These things now go for $70 (auto parts store) but the BraveX (knockoff?) sells for $20.  I've got one flight in with the BraveX and seems to be nice.  It's virtually the same form fit and function as the Facet but it runs quieter.

I made a video so you can hear the difference in the two pumps when dry.  They are both pretty quiet when they have fuel to pump.  The video also shows the 20 year old Facet pump insides.  I'm always curious what's inside stuff so I took it apart.  The Facet previously did nothing when powered up but on the bench when I jumped the protection diode the darn thing started working and now won't quit.

Funny that today Facet advertises the pump as new "Solid State Fuel Pump" but it looks like 20 years ago it was also solid state!  Marketing...

We'll see how long the BraveX runs!

youtube video

https://youtu.be/KFf9NMctICo

Mike Dwyer

YouTube Videos: https://goo.gl/yKEHfK

Q200 Website: http://goo.gl/V8IrJF

On Jun 19, 2020, at 12:34 PM, Jon Finley <jd@...> wrote:

Yes indeed, that is a radiator.  Here's a photo of the ducting for it that was in the tailcone.

Now that I'm looking at this stuff again, I'm starting to understand why people looked at me kinda strange, shook their head, and walked away!! :-)

Jon Finley
Somewhere in the Southwest flying an RV-4 <314JF_RadiatorDuct.jpg>

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of Jon Finley
Sent: Friday, June 19, 2020 11:18 AM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Old Video - Subaru Q2

Thanks Joe! Wing root is another place for improvement. Both wing and canard to fuselage intersections are tough due to the diverging angles. I think it was Bob Farnum that took some interesting photos of the bellies of several jets at OSH (long ago). I suspect the secret to a few kts might exist in those photos.  Several of us also did some oil flow testing. I'm sure (??) Sam did so on his speedy machine.  Mine were horrible, as already shown, but that (oil) is another way to get some fairly good info - particularly if you don't have someone to fly and video for you. It is messy though!! :-)

Jon Finley
Somewhere in the Southwest flying an RV-4

That is always a tough question to answer Ryan.

The final configuration performed fine - much better than a Revmaster, maybe approaching a Q200.  However; that does not tell the real story. It required thousands of hours to get it to work (yes, thousands, plural), the cost, and the limitations that existed after all that effort were absolutely not worth it. I fly behind a Lycoming now - ya, big old ugly dinosaur.  I fly whenever and wherever I want - including some places most pilots avoid. I pull the cowling off once every six months or so just cause it feels like a should.  The reliability and resulting peace of mind cannot be understated.  The cost of an aircraft engine (Lycoming/Continental) and bad-mouthing "ancient tech" are the basic tenants of those desiring an "alternative engine".- they are lies we tell ourselves. If you want to fly (soon & reliably) - fork out the dollars at the front end and install an O-200.  If you want to spend years tinkering, troubleshooting, scaring yourself to death, increasing your risk of significant injury or death, and spending MORE $$$ than an O-200 costs - go with an alternative engine.  Btw, having flown with a HAPI VW and Revmaster (and Rotax 503), I put them in the 'alternative engine' category.  

Not sure it matters but my opinions are based on twenty years of working on alternative engines and ten years flying behind aircraft engines.  So, not exactly an opinion based on a couple articles that I read.

Jon Finley
Somewhere in the Southwest flying an RV-4