Date   

Some Qs

Tim
 

Hi All,

I have a few questions which have come up during my completion…

1) Stick extension - I have noticed on the Q tours (thanks for those Sam and all) that some have the extension on the front of the stick and some don’t. I can see it in the LS1 plans. My Tri-Q200 with LS1 (dual elevator rods) doesn’t have this, the previous owner says it meets the control throw limits, but I have it in bits at the minute and didn’t check. Why was this mod introduced? (Avoids having to cut a tunnel into the tank?) 

2) Tail cone bolts - again in the tours I see some have the per plans dome headed screws and some you can’t see, have people fitting countersunk machine screws instead and filled over the heads?

3) My nose leg has a phenolic disc (adjusts deck angle?) plain washers and then 4-5 ‘cupped’ washers. I can’t see reference to this assembly in the plans, should I have this number of the cup washer or just one each side of the gear, I assume these allow you to preload the assembly without clamping down on it too much.

Thanks for reading! Tim


Re: Flight report

Mike Dwyer
 

Great flight report!  Please remind us what engine your running, and if your running mags or ee.  Thanks, Mike Q200


On Sat, Jun 12, 2021, 4:30 PM Jay Scheevel <jay@...> wrote:

Took a flight this morning to check out my service ceiling. Sam mentioned that he thought I should do the service ceiling test during his comments at my hangar tour in April. I had filled the O2 bottle anticipating coming to Kevin’s fling in May and I never made it there, so I had some oxygen to experiment with. Took off with about 15 gallons of fuel and only me on board. The takeoff was at 6100’ DA and it got off smartly in less than 1500’ of runway.  I kept climbing steadily between 500 and 300 fpm showing around 105-110 mph IAS or around 125 TAS. Got up over 15,800 feet pressure altitude, and when it  slowed down, I grew bored of climbing at only 100 fpm, so I terminated the experiment. That was about 17,700 Density altitude, so I think I could climb to 18K pressure altitude on a standard day if I wanted to. At this point I pushed the nose over and got it trimmed up to fly level at a little over 15,800 PA. I was able to indicate 107 mph, which translated to 141 mph TAS and I was burning less than 4 gph! The wind was from the SW at 29 mph, so if I had turned to the NE and headed over the hills, I would have had minimum 2500’ feet clearance over the highest peaks and done 170 mph ground speed…at 4 gph, that would be very economical. The aircraft handling was solid during the entire flight. Controls were always agile. Also, the powerplant ran flawlessly all the way up and back down with no hesitations, roughness, heating/cooling problems, etc.

 

My conclusions: This airplane will do anything that I require it to do in order to fly safely in my high altitude environment, and I am very happy with the performance overall. Also, had a nice landing at the end. Smiley face. 😊

 

Cheers,

Jay Scheevel, Tri-Q2 N8WQ, 151 hours.


Re: Flight report

Frankenbird Vern
 

 Yes indeed! So the numbers prove that the Q design is still a serious CAFE contender. Jay, your flying with which powerplant? Normally aspirated (I presume), carb or injection? 

 It is important to have the actual service ceiling known in the aircraft operations info. I lived in the Taos area for quite a while. Better know your location and winds aloft ALL the time. Too many flatlanders ended up permanently parked out on the slopes because they let the Ego take over at pre-flight! I learned to fly in Arkansas so for me it was a transition, and again when I lived the Pacific Northwest (sometimes busy as I was flying from Paine Field in Everett where my employer at the time flys BIG airliners to and from).   

 When the day comes for this test I'll be hoping to see some similar numbers! 😊 Big grins. Squeekers are always good after a challenge flight. 

Vern       


From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> on behalf of Jay Scheevel <jay@...>
Sent: Saturday, June 12, 2021 3:29 PM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: [Q-List] Flight report
 

Took a flight this morning to check out my service ceiling. Sam mentioned that he thought I should do the service ceiling test during his comments at my hangar tour in April. I had filled the O2 bottle anticipating coming to Kevin’s fling in May and I never made it there, so I had some oxygen to experiment with. Took off with about 15 gallons of fuel and only me on board. The takeoff was at 6100’ DA and it got off smartly in less than 1500’ of runway.  I kept climbing steadily between 500 and 300 fpm showing around 105-110 mph IAS or around 125 TAS. Got up over 15,800 feet pressure altitude, and when it  slowed down, I grew bored of climbing at only 100 fpm, so I terminated the experiment. That was about 17,700 Density altitude, so I think I could climb to 18K pressure altitude on a standard day if I wanted to. At this point I pushed the nose over and got it trimmed up to fly level at a little over 15,800 PA. I was able to indicate 107 mph, which translated to 141 mph TAS and I was burning less than 4 gph! The wind was from the SW at 29 mph, so if I had turned to the NE and headed over the hills, I would have had minimum 2500’ feet clearance over the highest peaks and done 170 mph ground speed…at 4 gph, that would be very economical. The aircraft handling was solid during the entire flight. Controls were always agile. Also, the powerplant ran flawlessly all the way up and back down with no hesitations, roughness, heating/cooling problems, etc.

 

My conclusions: This airplane will do anything that I require it to do in order to fly safely in my high altitude environment, and I am very happy with the performance overall. Also, had a nice landing at the end. Smiley face. 😊

 

Cheers,

Jay Scheevel, Tri-Q2 N8WQ, 151 hours.


Re: Flight report

Jerry Marstall
 

Great report! Jerry 


On Sat, Jun 12, 2021, 4:30 PM Jay Scheevel <jay@...> wrote:

Took a flight this morning to check out my service ceiling. Sam mentioned that he thought I should do the service ceiling test during his comments at my hangar tour in April. I had filled the O2 bottle anticipating coming to Kevin’s fling in May and I never made it there, so I had some oxygen to experiment with. Took off with about 15 gallons of fuel and only me on board. The takeoff was at 6100’ DA and it got off smartly in less than 1500’ of runway.  I kept climbing steadily between 500 and 300 fpm showing around 105-110 mph IAS or around 125 TAS. Got up over 15,800 feet pressure altitude, and when it  slowed down, I grew bored of climbing at only 100 fpm, so I terminated the experiment. That was about 17,700 Density altitude, so I think I could climb to 18K pressure altitude on a standard day if I wanted to. At this point I pushed the nose over and got it trimmed up to fly level at a little over 15,800 PA. I was able to indicate 107 mph, which translated to 141 mph TAS and I was burning less than 4 gph! The wind was from the SW at 29 mph, so if I had turned to the NE and headed over the hills, I would have had minimum 2500’ feet clearance over the highest peaks and done 170 mph ground speed…at 4 gph, that would be very economical. The aircraft handling was solid during the entire flight. Controls were always agile. Also, the powerplant ran flawlessly all the way up and back down with no hesitations, roughness, heating/cooling problems, etc.

 

My conclusions: This airplane will do anything that I require it to do in order to fly safely in my high altitude environment, and I am very happy with the performance overall. Also, had a nice landing at the end. Smiley face. 😊

 

Cheers,

Jay Scheevel, Tri-Q2 N8WQ, 151 hours.


Flight report

Jay Scheevel
 

Took a flight this morning to check out my service ceiling. Sam mentioned that he thought I should do the service ceiling test during his comments at my hangar tour in April. I had filled the O2 bottle anticipating coming to Kevin’s fling in May and I never made it there, so I had some oxygen to experiment with. Took off with about 15 gallons of fuel and only me on board. The takeoff was at 6100’ DA and it got off smartly in less than 1500’ of runway.  I kept climbing steadily between 500 and 300 fpm showing around 105-110 mph IAS or around 125 TAS. Got up over 15,800 feet pressure altitude, and when it  slowed down, I grew bored of climbing at only 100 fpm, so I terminated the experiment. That was about 17,700 Density altitude, so I think I could climb to 18K pressure altitude on a standard day if I wanted to. At this point I pushed the nose over and got it trimmed up to fly level at a little over 15,800 PA. I was able to indicate 107 mph, which translated to 141 mph TAS and I was burning less than 4 gph! The wind was from the SW at 29 mph, so if I had turned to the NE and headed over the hills, I would have had minimum 2500’ feet clearance over the highest peaks and done 170 mph ground speed…at 4 gph, that would be very economical. The aircraft handling was solid during the entire flight. Controls were always agile. Also, the powerplant ran flawlessly all the way up and back down with no hesitations, roughness, heating/cooling problems, etc.

 

My conclusions: This airplane will do anything that I require it to do in order to fly safely in my high altitude environment, and I am very happy with the performance overall. Also, had a nice landing at the end. Smiley face. 😊

 

Cheers,

Jay Scheevel, Tri-Q2 N8WQ, 151 hours.


Photo 0186343C-CE41-438B-8F95-0370E9E7E715.jpeg updated #photo-notice

main@Q-List.groups.io Notification <noreply@...>
 

The following photos have been updated in the Looking from my hangar. (KBVU) album of the main@Q-List.groups.io group.

By: Mike <n7000t@...>


Re: Panel Progress

Jay Scheevel
 

You may be absolutely right Sam that is not needed, but the reason I put it there is not because of interference or friction, but because I know from solid mechanics that a minor flex can cause a long thin walled tube to buckle instantaneously when exposed to a torsional load if it is flexed slightly out of straight. I did not do the catastrophic yield threshold calculation to see how much of a deflection from straight would be required to fail under normal torsional working loads, but that was my reasoning, and it gives me peace of mind. The guard weighs much less than one pound.

 

Cheers,

Jay

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of Sam Hoskins
Sent: Friday, June 11, 2021 4:45 PM
To: main@q-list.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Panel Progress

 

Honestly, IMHO a guard is not necessary, just adding weight and complexity. I have had luggage back there a lot, and I certainly imagine that it was rubbing on that torque tube at times. With absolutely no noticeable difference. Same with the rudder cables. 

 

Sam 

 

 

 

On Fri, Jun 11, 2021, 1:01 PM Richard Thomson <richard@...> wrote:

Hi Jay

I like the protection over the control tube, is that just glass ?

Do you think it would be sufficient to use heavy duty velcro on the flanges rather than nuts ?

Rich T.

On 11/06/2021 16:27, Jay Scheevel wrote:

Here’s my roll servo installation.

 

 


Re: Panel Progress

Jay Scheevel
 

It is 1/8’ plywood with glass over the top. Velcro would probably work.

 

Cheers,

Jay

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of Richard Thomson
Sent: Friday, June 11, 2021 12:02 PM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Panel Progress

 

Hi Jay

I like the protection over the control tube, is that just glass ?

Do you think it would be sufficient to use heavy duty velcro on the flanges rather than nuts ?

Rich T.

On 11/06/2021 16:27, Jay Scheevel wrote:

Here’s my roll servo installation.

 


Re: Panel Progress

Sam Hoskins
 

Honestly, IMHO a guard is not necessary, just adding weight and complexity. I have had luggage back there a lot, and I certainly imagine that it was rubbing on that torque tube at times. With absolutely no noticeable difference. Same with the rudder cables. 

Sam 



On Fri, Jun 11, 2021, 1:01 PM Richard Thomson <richard@...> wrote:

Hi Jay

I like the protection over the control tube, is that just glass ?

Do you think it would be sufficient to use heavy duty velcro on the flanges rather than nuts ?

Rich T.

On 11/06/2021 16:27, Jay Scheevel wrote:

Here’s my roll servo installation.

 


Re: O-235 on Q2

Kevin Boddicker
 

First name same as yours?

On Jun 11, 2021, at 8:20 AM, Richard Thomson <richard@...> wrote:

 Was he a fugitive Jerry ?

:-)

On 06/06/2021 14:09, Jerry Marstall wrote:
Kimb u ll


-----Original Message-----
From: main@Q-List.groups.io [mailto:main@Q-List.groups.io] On Behalf Of Bruce Crain
Sent: Saturday, June 5, 2021 10:50 PM
To: main@q-list.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] O-235 on Q2

Yep. That would be correct. Kimball McAndrew.
On Jun 5, 2021, at 5:20 PM, Chris Walterson <dkeats@...> wrote:
 Years ago a fellow from Calgary Canada installed a 235 in his Q2. He is in the old newsletters somewhere.

I think his last name was Kimbell McAndrew or something like that. Some of the life long members may be able to

add more info. Take care------------ Chris


--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus






____________________________________________________________
Sponsored by https://www.newser.com/?utm_source=part&utm_medium=uol&utm_campaign=rss_taglines_more

Government Flips on Seizure of Reporters' Phone Records
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/60bc37d6cd38f37d6453fst01duc1
A Cryptocurrency CEO Died at 30, Then Things Got Weirder
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/60bc37d6f251337d6453fst01duc2
Plane Drops Off Passenger Screaming 'Stop the Plane'
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/60bc37d723a1f37d6453fst01duc3














Re: Panel Progress

Richard Thomson
 

Hi Jay

I like the protection over the control tube, is that just glass ?

Do you think it would be sufficient to use heavy duty velcro on the flanges rather than nuts ?

Rich T.

On 11/06/2021 16:27, Jay Scheevel wrote:

Here’s my roll servo installation.

 


Re: This is bad

John Hartley
 

Those folks, Warbird Adventures, are my hangar neighbors. Excellent fellas (and lady). They're working hard to get it cleared up for themselves and the rest of us.

Outside of writing our representatives, how can we help?


Re: Panel Progress

Jay Scheevel
 

Here’s my roll servo installation.

 


This is bad

ryan goodman
 

https://www.eaa.org/eaa/news-and-publications/eaa-news-and-aviation-news/news/06-10-2021-ga-groups-faa-flight-training-policychanges-reduce-safety-create-administrative-logjam


Re: Panel Progress

Jay Scheevel
 

Same with mine. Here’s a picture.

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of Jerry Marstall
Sent: Friday, June 11, 2021 8:54 AM
To: Q-list <main@q-list.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Panel Progress

 

My Dynon pitch servo is also mounted on canard. Connects to vertical arm off of the elevator control tube.

Works great. Jerry 

 

On Thu, Jun 10, 2021, 7:11 PM Kevin Boddicker <trumanst@...> wrote:

Corbin,
There was once a TriQ fellow named David Chalmers.
He had an auto pilot that had pitch control.
He mounted the servo in the slot between the aft canard and the main tank.
Fit quite nicely as I remember.
I think he has/had a page in the photo archives.
Maybe look it up. should be of value.

Good luck,

Kevin Boddicker
TriQ 200 N7868B   551 hrs
Luana, IA.



> On Jun 9, 2021, at 9:36 PM, Corbin via groups.io <c_geiser=icloud.com@groups.io> wrote:
>
> We’ve had 2-3 weeks of delays but are back working on the new panel now.  We took off the tail tonight in prep for the autopilot servo and new aux battery.
>
> As you can see in the attached photo, I can easily get to and replace my fuel filter now that the panel is out.  I love being able to easily access and see everything with the panel gone.
>
> If there are any other items I should pay attention to at this time behind the panel please let me know.  For instance, I’ll replace the overflow fuel hose since it’s likely the original one.
>
> I also need to revisit where most people have placed their pitch servo (those with autopilots) because it seems a bit crowded in the center in front of the trim wheel and under header tank so I need to decide where to place it.
>
> Love learning more about these planes but sure wish I was flying more these days.   It will all be worth it with these upgrades though.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Corbin
>
> --
> Corbin
> N121CG
>
>
>
>
>
> <IMG_8267.jpg><image0.jpeg>







Re: Panel Progress

Corbin <c_geiser@...>
 

Thanks Jerry!
--

Corbin 
N121CG


Re: Panel Progress

Jerry Marstall
 

The vertical arm for the servo connect is offset from center to the left.


On Thu, Jun 10, 2021, 7:11 PM Kevin Boddicker <trumanst@...> wrote:
Corbin,
There was once a TriQ fellow named David Chalmers.
He had an auto pilot that had pitch control.
He mounted the servo in the slot between the aft canard and the main tank.
Fit quite nicely as I remember.
I think he has/had a page in the photo archives.
Maybe look it up. should be of value.

Good luck,

Kevin Boddicker
TriQ 200 N7868B   551 hrs
Luana, IA.



> On Jun 9, 2021, at 9:36 PM, Corbin via groups.io <c_geiser=icloud.com@groups.io> wrote:
>
> We’ve had 2-3 weeks of delays but are back working on the new panel now.  We took off the tail tonight in prep for the autopilot servo and new aux battery.
>
> As you can see in the attached photo, I can easily get to and replace my fuel filter now that the panel is out.  I love being able to easily access and see everything with the panel gone.
>
> If there are any other items I should pay attention to at this time behind the panel please let me know.  For instance, I’ll replace the overflow fuel hose since it’s likely the original one.
>
> I also need to revisit where most people have placed their pitch servo (those with autopilots) because it seems a bit crowded in the center in front of the trim wheel and under header tank so I need to decide where to place it.
>
> Love learning more about these planes but sure wish I was flying more these days.   It will all be worth it with these upgrades though.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Corbin
>
> --
> Corbin
> N121CG
>
>
>
>
>
> <IMG_8267.jpg><image0.jpeg>








Re: Panel Progress

Jerry Marstall
 

My Dynon pitch servo is also mounted on canard. Connects to vertical arm off of the elevator control tube.
Works great. Jerry 

On Thu, Jun 10, 2021, 7:11 PM Kevin Boddicker <trumanst@...> wrote:
Corbin,
There was once a TriQ fellow named David Chalmers.
He had an auto pilot that had pitch control.
He mounted the servo in the slot between the aft canard and the main tank.
Fit quite nicely as I remember.
I think he has/had a page in the photo archives.
Maybe look it up. should be of value.

Good luck,

Kevin Boddicker
TriQ 200 N7868B   551 hrs
Luana, IA.



> On Jun 9, 2021, at 9:36 PM, Corbin via groups.io <c_geiser=icloud.com@groups.io> wrote:
>
> We’ve had 2-3 weeks of delays but are back working on the new panel now.  We took off the tail tonight in prep for the autopilot servo and new aux battery.
>
> As you can see in the attached photo, I can easily get to and replace my fuel filter now that the panel is out.  I love being able to easily access and see everything with the panel gone.
>
> If there are any other items I should pay attention to at this time behind the panel please let me know.  For instance, I’ll replace the overflow fuel hose since it’s likely the original one.
>
> I also need to revisit where most people have placed their pitch servo (those with autopilots) because it seems a bit crowded in the center in front of the trim wheel and under header tank so I need to decide where to place it.
>
> Love learning more about these planes but sure wish I was flying more these days.   It will all be worth it with these upgrades though.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Corbin
>
> --
> Corbin
> N121CG
>
>
>
>
>
> <IMG_8267.jpg><image0.jpeg>








Re: Panel Progress

Kevin Boddicker
 

Corbin,
There was once a TriQ fellow named David Chalmers.
He had an auto pilot that had pitch control.
He mounted the servo in the slot between the aft canard and the main tank.
Fit quite nicely as I remember.
I think he has/had a page in the photo archives.
Maybe look it up. should be of value.

Good luck,

Kevin Boddicker
TriQ 200 N7868B 551 hrs
Luana, IA.

On Jun 9, 2021, at 9:36 PM, Corbin via groups.io <c_geiser@...> wrote:

We’ve had 2-3 weeks of delays but are back working on the new panel now. We took off the tail tonight in prep for the autopilot servo and new aux battery.

As you can see in the attached photo, I can easily get to and replace my fuel filter now that the panel is out. I love being able to easily access and see everything with the panel gone.

If there are any other items I should pay attention to at this time behind the panel please let me know. For instance, I’ll replace the overflow fuel hose since it’s likely the original one.

I also need to revisit where most people have placed their pitch servo (those with autopilots) because it seems a bit crowded in the center in front of the trim wheel and under header tank so I need to decide where to place it.

Love learning more about these planes but sure wish I was flying more these days. It will all be worth it with these upgrades though.







Corbin

--
Corbin
N121CG





<IMG_8267.jpg><image0.jpeg>


Re: O-235 on Q2

Jim Patillo
 

Thank you for  the information. 
Jim
N46JP - Q200

Sent from Outer Space


From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> on behalf of Gary McKirdy <gary.mckirdy21@...>
Sent: Wednesday, June 9, 2021 9:53:21 PM
To: main@q-list.groups.io <main@q-list.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] O-235 on Q2
 
Hi Jim,

The F1 Cassutt racers were running 0200s at nearly 4000rpm at the time so "pumped up" possible for sure.
Pretty bog standard 0-235 in a Q felt more comfortable at sustained high cruise speeds but the law of diminishing returns still at play there.
Biggest practical difference was in useful acceleration and rate of climb from our shorter strips and ability to climb on top so more vertical than horizontal.

Gary

On Sun, 6 Jun 2021, 20:20 Jim Patillo, <Logistics_engineering@...> wrote:
Gary, was the O-235 any faster than a pumped up 0200?

Just curious,
Jim
N46JP Q200

Sent from Outer Space

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> on behalf of Gary McKirdy <gary.mckirdy21@...>
Sent: Sunday, June 6, 2021 12:05:52 PM
To: main@q-list.groups.io <main@q-list.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] O-235 on Q2
 
Yes, flown 2 o235 Qs, both in europe. both LS1 canard. It is perfectly doable but suggest you hang engine as far back as possible.

Gary

On Sat, 5 Jun 2021 at 03:24, ryan goodman via groups.io <elboy0712=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:
Anyone tried an O-235 on a Q2? I know it may be a bit heavy. Only asking because I have two hopped up ones sitting in my hangar and it sparked my curiosity 

Cross posted to Facebook group.

Ryan

3281 - 3300 of 55457