Date   

Re: Chris Walterson's Q-Tour is uploaded to YouTube

Chris Walterson
 

Jay----------  Thanks for the transponder antenna note. I'll move it tomorrow.

 My airplane is built as close to the plans as possible with the addition of the +1 degree on the canard.

 What kind of pictures do you need, and would you like to do the same thing on a Seahawker.?

 According to some of the old newsletters it doesn't follow the proper formula for decalage.

 Getting the weight back to the tail and will do another W+B soon. Waiting for my friend to weld up my modified tail wheel.

 I tack things in place and he welds them up.  I know my week points.  Take care-----------  Chris


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


Re: Chris Walterson's Q-Tour is uploaded to YouTube

Jay Scheevel
 

One other thing, Chris. There was some discussion on how plane responds (reflexor, landing etc). When Paul is talking that I was nodding my head, since I have measured his decalage, and what he does for landing and cruise is predictable based on his decalage. Other planes and pilots with different decalage set-ups will tell you different things. This can be confusing if you do not know the decalage of those planes that people are giving you their impressions of.

 

If you want, Chris, I can do a fairly accurate measurement of your decalage from photos. Let me if you want me to do that prior to your first flight. Be happy to give you whatever insight I can.

 

Cheers,

Jay  Tri-Q2, N8WQ 160 hours

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of Jay Scheevel
Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2021 12:04 PM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Chris Walterson's Q-Tour is uploaded to YouTube

 

Thanks Sam and Chris for this enjoyable tour. Sorry I missed the live version.

 

Only one comment for Chris right now. I would suggest moving the transponder to the other side of the fuselage. The location of the battery will blank out about 150 degrees of receive and transmit. No way to transmit or receive through copper and lead plates.

 

Reg Clarke was doing 220+ mph true in his last race to OSH, but he was at 18,000’  They canceled the race before it finished due to weather, so it was never official.

 

Cheers,

Jay

 

 

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of Sam Hoskins
Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2021 4:44 AM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: [Q-List] Chris Walterson's Q-Tour is uploaded to YouTube

 

Chris packed a lot of innovations into his four-year build.  Really impressive. Be sure to check it out.

https://youtu.be/mhARVpPf9QA


Re: Chris Walterson's Q-Tour is uploaded to YouTube

Jay Scheevel
 

Thanks Sam and Chris for this enjoyable tour. Sorry I missed the live version.

 

Only one comment for Chris right now. I would suggest moving the transponder to the other side of the fuselage. The location of the battery will blank out about 150 degrees of receive and transmit. No way to transmit or receive through copper and lead plates.

 

Reg Clarke was doing 220+ mph true in his last race to OSH, but he was at 18,000’  They canceled the race before it finished due to weather, so it was never official.

 

Cheers,

Jay

 

 

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of Sam Hoskins
Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2021 4:44 AM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: [Q-List] Chris Walterson's Q-Tour is uploaded to YouTube

 

Chris packed a lot of innovations into his four-year build.  Really impressive. Be sure to check it out.

https://youtu.be/mhARVpPf9QA


Re: Chris Walterson's Q-Tour is uploaded to YouTube

Bruce Crain
 

Wonderful video!  I couldn’t be there for virtual!  Had to go to prison!  But that’s another story!
Lots of sharp mods!  Hoping for the best Chris!
You modulated very well Paul!
Bruce and Honey Lamb


On Jul 13, 2021, at 5:43 AM, Sam Hoskins <sam.hoskins@...> wrote:

Chris packed a lot of innovations into his four-year build.  Really impressive. Be sure to check it out.

https://youtu.be/mhARVpPf9QA



Re: Chris Walterson's Q-Tour is uploaded to YouTube

Anthony P
 

Thank you for posting and thank you Chris for presenting.

Very cool plane!

I wanted to be watching live, but had a chance for a flight lesson in a Champ, and had to take it.

See everyone next time, Anthony.


Re: Chris Walterson's Q-Tour is uploaded to YouTube

RK
 

Watching it now.  I've been waiting for this one for the subaru tech.  


Chris Walterson's Q-Tour is uploaded to YouTube

Sam Hoskins
 

Chris packed a lot of innovations into his four-year build.  Really impressive. Be sure to check it out.

https://youtu.be/mhARVpPf9QA


Re: Reminder! Chris Walterson Q-2 close to finishing- Q-Tour - - July 10 9:00 Central time

Jay Scheevel
 

Thanks Sam/Paul,

 

Wont be able to make this at the scheduled time Saturday, but I will definitely catch the replay when it is up on Youtube!

 

Cheers,

Jay

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of Sam Hoskins
Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2021 5:55 PM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: [Special] [Q-List] Reminder! Chris Walterson Q-2 close to finishing- Q-Tour - - July 10 9:00 Central time

 

From Geraldton, Ontario, Canada join Chris (AKA Dorothea Keats) as he gives a tour of his turbo powered 2.5L Subaru, direct drive, Q-2 project, which is nearing completion.   This installation is using a three blade Warp drive ground adjustable prop. It's a tail dragger with inboard gear made from Ford main leaf springs. 

Having an aircraft that has not yet flown is a first for our Q-Tours.  We hope that it may be useful for people who are still making their own progress. This Q-Tour will be moderated by Paul Fisher and as always, the recording will be uploaded a couple of days later.  And as always, after our first Zoom time runs out we will log off, then right back on to complete the session.

   
To join the Q-Tour, click on the Zoom link at the end of this email. As always, don't log onto the meeting until the designated time.

Paul Fisher is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.

Topic: Chris Walterson Q2
Time: Jul 10, 2021 09:00 AM Central Time (US and Canada)

Join Zoom Meeting
https://us04web.zoom.us/j/3425118003?pwd=UlhTS0YyTm1zbWRESHVmZzJCVk1mQT09

Meeting ID: 342 511 8003
Passcode: Qmaster


Re: Reminder! Chris Walterson Q-2 close to finishing- Q-Tour - - July 10 9:00 Central time

Mike Dwyer
 

I think I'd have to put one of those Turbine engine exhaust stacks on this bad boy to freak everyone out!
Mike Dwyer

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


On Thu, Jul 8, 2021 at 7:55 PM Sam Hoskins <sam.hoskins@...> wrote:
From Geraldton, Ontario, Canada join Chris (AKA Dorothea Keats) as he gives a tour of his turbo powered 2.5L Subaru, direct drive, Q-2 project, which is nearing completion.   This installation is using a three blade Warp drive ground adjustable prop. It's a tail dragger with inboard gear made from Ford main leaf springs. 

Having an aircraft that has not yet flown is a first for our Q-Tours.  We hope that it may be useful for people who are still making their own progress. This Q-Tour will be moderated by Paul Fisher and as always, the recording will be uploaded a couple of days later.  And as always, after our first Zoom time runs out we will log off, then right back on to complete the session.
   
To join the Q-Tour, click on the Zoom link at the end of this email. As always, don't log onto the meeting until the designated time.

Paul Fisher is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.

Topic: Chris Walterson Q2
Time: Jul 10, 2021 09:00 AM Central Time (US and Canada)

Join Zoom Meeting
https://us04web.zoom.us/j/3425118003?pwd=UlhTS0YyTm1zbWRESHVmZzJCVk1mQT09

Meeting ID: 342 511 8003
Passcode: Qmaster


Reminder! Chris Walterson Q-2 close to finishing- Q-Tour - - July 10 9:00 Central time

Sam Hoskins
 

From Geraldton, Ontario, Canada join Chris (AKA Dorothea Keats) as he gives a tour of his turbo powered 2.5L Subaru, direct drive, Q-2 project, which is nearing completion.   This installation is using a three blade Warp drive ground adjustable prop. It's a tail dragger with inboard gear made from Ford main leaf springs. 

Having an aircraft that has not yet flown is a first for our Q-Tours.  We hope that it may be useful for people who are still making their own progress. This Q-Tour will be moderated by Paul Fisher and as always, the recording will be uploaded a couple of days later.  And as always, after our first Zoom time runs out we will log off, then right back on to complete the session.
   
To join the Q-Tour, click on the Zoom link at the end of this email. As always, don't log onto the meeting until the designated time.

Paul Fisher is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.

Topic: Chris Walterson Q2
Time: Jul 10, 2021 09:00 AM Central Time (US and Canada)

Join Zoom Meeting
https://us04web.zoom.us/j/3425118003?pwd=UlhTS0YyTm1zbWRESHVmZzJCVk1mQT09

Meeting ID: 342 511 8003
Passcode: Qmaster


Re: O-200 with very low hours 80ish had prop strike but supposed to have no Crank damage. 4,000$

Webcave
 

I would be very interested in the 0200. I have a 0235 firewall aft from a long easy including mount and prop retention, and also a c85FI with logs for trading purposes.

JackM'
Veze

 
Subject: Re: [Q-List] O-200 with very low hours 80ish had prop strike but supposed to have no Crank damage. 4,000$

Glad you brought that up Sam. I was going to say the same thing.
 
Jay
 
From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of Sam Hoskins
Sent: Tuesday, July 06, 2021 5:17 AM
To: main@q-list.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] O-200 with very low hours 80ish had prop strike but supposed to have no Crank damage. 4,000$
 
It's not just the crankshaft flange runout that requires inspection after a prop strike. Per Continental the engine should be torn down and properly inspected.
 
Sam 
 
On Tue, Jul 6, 2021, 4:18 AM victor taylor via groups.io <velocityoner=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:

Brain I would be interested in the O-200. Please PM me at 251 three 77 five two one six.
 
Victor Taylor
Irvington Alabama


On Jul 5, 2021, at 22:24, Corbin via groups.io <c_geiser=icloud.com@groups.io> wrote:
I would never ask for a finders fee for helping someone sell their plane or project.  
Corbin


On Jul 5, 2021, at 9:04 PM, Brian Hutchinson via groups.io <brianmh13=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:

[Edited Message Follows]
Wanted to see if I could get a little finder's fee for this 0-200. Guy is clearing out his hanger and said his 0-200 has around 80 original hours had a propstrike from a ground loop when he was learning to fly a tailwheel. Says that the Crank was dialed and looks fine. Is asking 4,000. I think that's probably a pretty good deal if everything checks out. Located in Indiana. The guy lives in Florida and while this engine could be low hours as he said seems a 80ish original hours engine is pretty unheard of. He could be trying to pass off a high time airboat motor? If due diligence is conducted could be a deal though.

--

Corbin 
N121CG


Re: Q1 Fuselage comes up

Chris Walterson
 

 Eugen--------  One other thing I would recommend is to install a few extra layers of glass on the canard where your feet go.

I sold my Super Q with 100 hrs on it, but on my Dragonfly , after about 200 hrs the canard got soft under the heel area, and I ended up doing as I said.    Take care---------  Chris

On 2021-07-06 1:13 p.m., smeshno1@... wrote:


From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> on behalf of David J. Gall <David@...>
Sent: Tuesday, July 6, 2021 11:48 AM

Virus-free. www.avast.com


Re: Q1 Fuselage comes up

Eugen Pilarski
 

Dear Q-list members,

thank you very much for your notes! That’s great! From a German guy I got the original Q1 plans from 1981 and every time I picked up the roll of paper it’s fell like magic. Thank you Harald Wiegand, please find a picture in the attachment from his airplane he build up. So, the links I send is only to quickly lead the reader of my email to the previously written word. You are right, the plans on quickheads are a bit bulky. I got already your source under my investigation eyes and catch up what I could find :-) . Thank you for that information. So I will use the solution of Jinx/Brock for the firewall/Engine mount position like the picture indicate. 

In my point of view it was really hard to roll off the slice of cuted glass on the inside fuselage, that wasn’t so easy like Rutan indicate in his video :-). The glass didn't want to spread very well when unrolling, it overlapped in parts and then it was difficult to pull the glass smooth again without pulling the fibres out of their original direction. For the now long layers of the BID, for covering the outer sides, I had attached a dispenser device like the one the colleague used when building the LongEz (follow the link in my previous email). After writing the email, however, I remembered that only the UNI glass can be peeled off in the length shown on the dispenser. The BID would shrink in the middle if too much tension was applied, and then it would be very difficult to restore it to its original shape. 

So I will probably have to cut correspondingly long pieces, roll them up again and unroll the roll on the outside of the fuselage with very fine fingertips. Or I will put the long strips of BID on a foil, wet them with resin and put them on the fuselage, the foil should help to fix the glass in its position, then remove the foil and squeeze it. How ever, it will be a long Saturday to glass the fuselage. 

Can someone explain to me why the underside of the fuselage should be cured before the fuselage is turned back into its upper position and the top side is covered with glass? Thats the plans indicate in that section. The micro should be able to hold the wet glass in place and prevent peeling off when the fuselage is rotated? 

Best regards 

Eugen 




Am 06.07.2021 um 19:47 schrieb David J. Gall <David@...>:

Vern,
 
I appreciate your enthusiasm but:

Carbon and titanium and prohibitions – oh, my! These planes are made from super-cheap insulation materials sourced from Home Depot and a second-hand generator motor swiped from the derelict RV parked out back…. (not really, but if you spend more than $10,000 on a Quickie you might be doing it wrong!)
 
The stiffeners are plenty strong (they are, after all, “stiffeners,” not “strengtheners”) with just one layer of BID on each side. By the time they’re installed using 2 BID tapes and all the other nearby added layers of BID from the canard installation, they’re truck-strong….
 
David J. Gall
 
From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of smeshno1@...
Sent: Tuesday, July 6, 2021 10:13 AM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Q1 Fuselage comes up
 
 David.. Eugen is installing a modified B&S Vanguard V2 engine. Structurally I agree with the additional stiffening. My memory of the Onan Q1 I flew years ago was that all things considered the vibration was on par with or a bit less than my O-200 taildragger 150.  It had to be an early build Q1..since I flew it in 1982 from ORK field located in Arkansas. 
 
 Eugen.. the stiffeners could be made with carbon fiber, and doing so will increase the tension strength of the firewall for the engine mount bolts considerably. Just be sure to not have any direct contact with aluminum alloy to the stiffeners (galvanic corrosion). This is a location where we would specify titanium bolts in the bizjet world. No corrosion issues provided no cadmium plated items (tools, washers, cotter pins, ect.) are ever used on the fasteners. Use of Alodine 1200 is also forbidden on titanium. 
 
 I am especially curious to see your engine installation. Your doing great progress and at this pace you'll be test flying soon.  
 
Vern in Mannford (Oklahoma, not Germany)  
 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> on behalf of David J. Gall <David@...>
Sent: Tuesday, July 6, 2021 11:48 AM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Q1 Fuselage comes up
 
Eugen,
 
Yes, you understand the plans correctly with regard to the BID. You really should have a PDF of the original plans for reference; the OCR version on the Quickheads site is very well done but sometimes the original layout of the information on the page can help with understanding. You can download from my non-curated repository: https://DavidJGall.com/Q/Quickie/Quickie%20Plans/
 
While you’re building, be sure to notice on page 4-7 the two pieces called “firewall brace” for which the templates are drawn on page 15-2. I cannot find anywhere in the original plans that callout the installation of these parts or their precise location; perhaps it was covered in a QPC but I’m not going searching for it right now. It’s relatively obscure that these are part of the firewall primary structure because the QAC plans left it for the Onan installation chapter (and then never documented it there). I suspect that people who are not installing the original Onan may overlook these pieces. The best reference I can find for these pieces is on page 15 of the Jinx Hawks/Brock McCaman “SuperQuickie Conversion Plans” for installation of a Rotax 503, wherein they refer to these as “existing lower stiffeners.” See the attached picture:
 
<image001.png>
It appears to me that the placement of these “firewall brace” pieces was far enough apart to admit the original steel “pie pan” firewall extension that accommodated the aft part of the Onan engine between the braces, yet as near to the aircraft centerline as possible to leave foot room for rudder pedal movement clearance. These braces were, partly, to stiffen the firewall for the lower, center engine mount from the three-point Onan mounting scheme; the Jinx/Brock modifications put four ply BID pads outboard of these braces to support the new four-point mount for the Rotax. If you’re installing anything other than an Onan I would strongly recommend following the SuperQuickie Conversion Plans for firewall and airframe preparation. You can download them here: https://davidjgall.com/Q/Quickie/
 
Keep going with the great build progress!
 
David J. Gall



Re: Q1 Fuselage comes up

David J. Gall
 

Vern,

 

I appreciate your enthusiasm but:

Carbon and titanium and prohibitions – oh, my! These planes are made from super-cheap insulation materials sourced from Home Depot and a second-hand generator motor swiped from the derelict RV parked out back…. (not really, but if you spend more than $10,000 on a Quickie you might be doing it wrong!)

 

The stiffeners are plenty strong (they are, after all, “stiffeners,” not “strengtheners”) with just one layer of BID on each side. By the time they’re installed using 2 BID tapes and all the other nearby added layers of BID from the canard installation, they’re truck-strong….

 

David J. Gall

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of smeshno1@...
Sent: Tuesday, July 6, 2021 10:13 AM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Q1 Fuselage comes up

 

 David.. Eugen is installing a modified B&S Vanguard V2 engine. Structurally I agree with the additional stiffening. My memory of the Onan Q1 I flew years ago was that all things considered the vibration was on par with or a bit less than my O-200 taildragger 150.  It had to be an early build Q1..since I flew it in 1982 from ORK field located in Arkansas. 

 

 Eugen.. the stiffeners could be made with carbon fiber, and doing so will increase the tension strength of the firewall for the engine mount bolts considerably. Just be sure to not have any direct contact with aluminum alloy to the stiffeners (galvanic corrosion). This is a location where we would specify titanium bolts in the bizjet world. No corrosion issues provided no cadmium plated items (tools, washers, cotter pins, ect.) are ever used on the fasteners. Use of Alodine 1200 is also forbidden on titanium. 

 

 I am especially curious to see your engine installation. Your doing great progress and at this pace you'll be test flying soon.  

 

Vern in Mannford (Oklahoma, not Germany)  

 


From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> on behalf of David J. Gall <David@...>
Sent: Tuesday, July 6, 2021 11:48 AM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Q1 Fuselage comes up

 

Eugen,

 

Yes, you understand the plans correctly with regard to the BID. You really should have a PDF of the original plans for reference; the OCR version on the Quickheads site is very well done but sometimes the original layout of the information on the page can help with understanding. You can download from my non-curated repository: https://DavidJGall.com/Q/Quickie/Quickie%20Plans/

 

While you’re building, be sure to notice on page 4-7 the two pieces called “firewall brace” for which the templates are drawn on page 15-2. I cannot find anywhere in the original plans that callout the installation of these parts or their precise location; perhaps it was covered in a QPC but I’m not going searching for it right now. It’s relatively obscure that these are part of the firewall primary structure because the QAC plans left it for the Onan installation chapter (and then never documented it there). I suspect that people who are not installing the original Onan may overlook these pieces. The best reference I can find for these pieces is on page 15 of the Jinx Hawks/Brock McCaman “SuperQuickie Conversion Plans” for installation of a Rotax 503, wherein they refer to these as “existing lower stiffeners.” See the attached picture:

 

It appears to me that the placement of these “firewall brace” pieces was far enough apart to admit the original steel “pie pan” firewall extension that accommodated the aft part of the Onan engine between the braces, yet as near to the aircraft centerline as possible to leave foot room for rudder pedal movement clearance. These braces were, partly, to stiffen the firewall for the lower, center engine mount from the three-point Onan mounting scheme; the Jinx/Brock modifications put four ply BID pads outboard of these braces to support the new four-point mount for the Rotax. If you’re installing anything other than an Onan I would strongly recommend following the SuperQuickie Conversion Plans for firewall and airframe preparation. You can download them here: https://davidjgall.com/Q/Quickie/

 

Keep going with the great build progress!

 

David J. Gall


Re: O-200 with very low hours 80ish had prop strike but supposed to have no Crank damage. 4,000$

Frankenbird Vern
 

 Thrust flanges are prone to cracking after ANY strike, but they don't always fail right away. It's a big unknown WHEN. I've seen a live example that I refused to allow my pilot and friend to fly with. He swapped in a similar engine "great deal" O-200 in front of his Taylorcraft and when I pushed/pulled the prop (right after he landed at the grass strip my aircraft was hangered at, flying over Arkansas swamps!) it moved at least 3/8" in and out of the case. I flew him home in my aircraft..next day we proceeded to swap back the original. 

 That O-200 crankshaft ended up being soup cans, the case was toast as well. 

 Good angels protect some I guess. I'm not that lucky. 

Vern  


From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> on behalf of Jay Scheevel <jay@...>
Sent: Tuesday, July 6, 2021 11:38 AM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] O-200 with very low hours 80ish had prop strike but supposed to have no Crank damage. 4,000$
 

Glad you brought that up Sam. I was going to say the same thing.

 

Jay

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of Sam Hoskins
Sent: Tuesday, July 06, 2021 5:17 AM
To: main@q-list.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] O-200 with very low hours 80ish had prop strike but supposed to have no Crank damage. 4,000$

 

It's not just the crankshaft flange runout that requires inspection after a prop strike. Per Continental the engine should be torn down and properly inspected.

 

Sam 

 

On Tue, Jul 6, 2021, 4:18 AM victor taylor via groups.io <velocityoner=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:

Brain I would be interested in the O-200. Please PM me at 251 three 77 five two one six.

 

Victor Taylor
Irvington Alabama



On Jul 5, 2021, at 22:24, Corbin via groups.io <c_geiser=icloud.com@groups.io> wrote:

I would never ask for a finders fee for helping someone sell their plane or project.  

Corbin



On Jul 5, 2021, at 9:04 PM, Brian Hutchinson via groups.io <brianmh13=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:



[Edited Message Follows]

Wanted to see if I could get a little finder's fee for this 0-200. Guy is clearing out his hanger and said his 0-200 has around 80 original hours had a propstrike from a ground loop when he was learning to fly a tailwheel. Says that the Crank was dialed and looks fine. Is asking 4,000. I think that's probably a pretty good deal if everything checks out. Located in Indiana. The guy lives in Florida and while this engine could be low hours as he said seems a 80ish original hours engine is pretty unheard of. He could be trying to pass off a high time airboat motor? If due diligence is conducted could be a deal though.


--

Corbin 
N121CG


Re: Q1 Fuselage comes up

Frankenbird Vern
 

 David.. Eugen is installing a modified B&S Vanguard V2 engine. Structurally I agree with the additional stiffening. My memory of the Onan Q1 I flew years ago was that all things considered the vibration was on par with or a bit less than my O-200 taildragger 150.  It had to be an early build Q1..since I flew it in 1982 from ORK field located in Arkansas. 

 Eugen.. the stiffeners could be made with carbon fiber, and doing so will increase the tension strength of the firewall for the engine mount bolts considerably. Just be sure to not have any direct contact with aluminum alloy to the stiffeners (galvanic corrosion). This is a location where we would specify titanium bolts in the bizjet world. No corrosion issues provided no cadmium plated items (tools, washers, cotter pins, ect.) are ever used on the fasteners. Use of Alodine 1200 is also forbidden on titanium. 

 I am especially curious to see your engine installation. Your doing great progress and at this pace you'll be test flying soon.  

Vern in Mannford (Oklahoma, not Germany)  


From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> on behalf of David J. Gall <David@...>
Sent: Tuesday, July 6, 2021 11:48 AM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Q1 Fuselage comes up
 

Eugen,

 

Yes, you understand the plans correctly with regard to the BID. You really should have a PDF of the original plans for reference; the OCR version on the Quickheads site is very well done but sometimes the original layout of the information on the page can help with understanding. You can download from my non-curated repository: https://DavidJGall.com/Q/Quickie/Quickie%20Plans/

 

While you’re building, be sure to notice on page 4-7 the two pieces called “firewall brace” for which the templates are drawn on page 15-2. I cannot find anywhere in the original plans that callout the installation of these parts or their precise location; perhaps it was covered in a QPC but I’m not going searching for it right now. It’s relatively obscure that these are part of the firewall primary structure because the QAC plans left it for the Onan installation chapter (and then never documented it there). I suspect that people who are not installing the original Onan may overlook these pieces. The best reference I can find for these pieces is on page 15 of the Jinx Hawks/Brock McCaman “SuperQuickie Conversion Plans” for installation of a Rotax 503, wherein they refer to these as “existing lower stiffeners.” See the attached picture:

 

It appears to me that the placement of these “firewall brace” pieces was far enough apart to admit the original steel “pie pan” firewall extension that accommodated the aft part of the Onan engine between the braces, yet as near to the aircraft centerline as possible to leave foot room for rudder pedal movement clearance. These braces were, partly, to stiffen the firewall for the lower, center engine mount from the three-point Onan mounting scheme; the Jinx/Brock modifications put four ply BID pads outboard of these braces to support the new four-point mount for the Rotax. If you’re installing anything other than an Onan I would strongly recommend following the SuperQuickie Conversion Plans for firewall and airframe preparation. You can download them here: https://davidjgall.com/Q/Quickie/

 

Keep going with the great build progress!

 

David J. Gall


Re: Q1 Fuselage comes up

David J. Gall
 

Eugen,

 

Yes, you understand the plans correctly with regard to the BID. You really should have a PDF of the original plans for reference; the OCR version on the Quickheads site is very well done but sometimes the original layout of the information on the page can help with understanding. You can download from my non-curated repository: https://DavidJGall.com/Q/Quickie/Quickie%20Plans/

 

While you’re building, be sure to notice on page 4-7 the two pieces called “firewall brace” for which the templates are drawn on page 15-2. I cannot find anywhere in the original plans that callout the installation of these parts or their precise location; perhaps it was covered in a QPC but I’m not going searching for it right now. It’s relatively obscure that these are part of the firewall primary structure because the QAC plans left it for the Onan installation chapter (and then never documented it there). I suspect that people who are not installing the original Onan may overlook these pieces. The best reference I can find for these pieces is on page 15 of the Jinx Hawks/Brock McCaman “SuperQuickie Conversion Plans” for installation of a Rotax 503, wherein they refer to these as “existing lower stiffeners.” See the attached picture:

 

It appears to me that the placement of these “firewall brace” pieces was far enough apart to admit the original steel “pie pan” firewall extension that accommodated the aft part of the Onan engine between the braces, yet as near to the aircraft centerline as possible to leave foot room for rudder pedal movement clearance. These braces were, partly, to stiffen the firewall for the lower, center engine mount from the three-point Onan mounting scheme; the Jinx/Brock modifications put four ply BID pads outboard of these braces to support the new four-point mount for the Rotax. If you’re installing anything other than an Onan I would strongly recommend following the SuperQuickie Conversion Plans for firewall and airframe preparation. You can download them here: https://davidjgall.com/Q/Quickie/

 

Keep going with the great build progress!

 

David J. Gall


Re: O-200 with very low hours 80ish had prop strike but supposed to have no Crank damage. 4,000$

Jay Scheevel
 

Glad you brought that up Sam. I was going to say the same thing.

 

Jay

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of Sam Hoskins
Sent: Tuesday, July 06, 2021 5:17 AM
To: main@q-list.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] O-200 with very low hours 80ish had prop strike but supposed to have no Crank damage. 4,000$

 

It's not just the crankshaft flange runout that requires inspection after a prop strike. Per Continental the engine should be torn down and properly inspected.

 

Sam 

 

On Tue, Jul 6, 2021, 4:18 AM victor taylor via groups.io <velocityoner=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:

Brain I would be interested in the O-200. Please PM me at 251 three 77 five two one six.

 

Victor Taylor
Irvington Alabama



On Jul 5, 2021, at 22:24, Corbin via groups.io <c_geiser=icloud.com@groups.io> wrote:

I would never ask for a finders fee for helping someone sell their plane or project.  

Corbin



On Jul 5, 2021, at 9:04 PM, Brian Hutchinson via groups.io <brianmh13=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:



[Edited Message Follows]

Wanted to see if I could get a little finder's fee for this 0-200. Guy is clearing out his hanger and said his 0-200 has around 80 original hours had a propstrike from a ground loop when he was learning to fly a tailwheel. Says that the Crank was dialed and looks fine. Is asking 4,000. I think that's probably a pretty good deal if everything checks out. Located in Indiana. The guy lives in Florida and while this engine could be low hours as he said seems a 80ish original hours engine is pretty unheard of. He could be trying to pass off a high time airboat motor? If due diligence is conducted could be a deal though.


--

Corbin 
N121CG


Re: W and B

Jay Scheevel
 

Chris,

 

Let me know if you want me to calculate your decalage from photos. Decalage will definitely impact how your airplane will fly at different CG loadings. If you want me to do that, please contact me offline and I can get you set up for that. I have done the same thing for a number of people on this list. If you need a refresher on decalage and/or Q200 aerodynamics. You can look at the following:

Decallage Study of flying Q-2's

Q200-Tri-Q200 Aerodynamic Study

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

 

Cheers,

Jay

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of Bruce Crain
Sent: Tuesday, July 06, 2021 6:51 AM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] W and B

 

One of our TriQ 200s had a 9 lb weight way back in the tail.  When flown with two people it had and almost uncontrollable PIO!  The 9 lb weight was removed and the battery was moved forward to just behind the seat back. It flew just fine after that.  Be sure you do calcs for full fuel loaded passengers and luggage to see if you are out of the envelope aft.  

I moved the battery forward in my TriQ200 to the right just beside the passengers calf on the canard and have flown it for years.

Just saying do all the possible loaded configurations not just an empty calc.

Bruce

---------- Original Message ----------
From: "One Sky Dog via groups.io" <Oneskydog@...>
To: <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] W and B
Date: Mon, 5 Jul 2021 13:18:03 +0000 (UTC)

Chris,

 

Can anything be relocated aft of present position? Every pound moved aft no matter where on the airframe makes a difference. Give everything a critical why does it have to be located there.

 

Just a thought before adding dead weight. With my Corvair/Dragonfly I had to locate the battery aft of the wing. It still was not enough so I went to a heavier battery. Odyssey 925 solved wt and bal plus carries more amp hrs. Duel function and it is not a Bob weight on a long arm that suffers inertial effects.

 

Regards,

 

Charlie 




 

On Sunday, July 4, 2021, 7:28 PM, Chris Walterson <dkeats@...> wrote:

  Jay-------  Thanks for the info. I think I may have been using 54.7
for my pilot loading.

 As I said before, I will do a real world weight and balance to make
sure it is correct.

 Let me pass something by the guys. If I need  twenty or more lbs near
the back bulkhead to get the

proper tail wheel load, I was thinking, because I don't exactly have a Q
rudder and stab, why don't I load

closer to the tail wheel. I was thinking of removing  the rudder and
boring a 5/8 hole down the stab, full length.

 My stab has a spar so I  can drill just forward of it. Fill the 5/8
steel pipe with lead , weight it and slide it down the hole with flox

 and epoxi. I could also slide a pipe filled with lead inside the
rudder tube  itself and rivet/ glue it in place.

My rudder is mass balanced, but the lead is at the balance point so it
should not pose a problem.

I could also bend some 3/8 metal to fit inside the tail wheel mount for
maybe 1/2 lb more.

 I think doing something like this i could reduce the actual weight
needed by half.

 I realize pot is legal in Canada, but I didn't really use any, just
thinking in the abstract.

 Any comments appreciated. Now to clean up the garage for next
Saturday. Hopefully a week is long enough.

 Take care-----------------  Chris


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





 


Re: O-200 with very low hours 80ish had prop strike but supposed to have no Crank damage. 4,000$

britmcman99
 

Continental crankshafts are tempered harder than Lycoming crankshafts. They are less likely to deform in a prop strike when compared to that of a Lycoming crankshaft. There is a familiar saying that Lycoming crankshafts tend to bend, Continental crankshafts tend to break. Either engine type needs to be  broken down and inspected. 

Phil 


On Jul 6, 2021, at 4:17 AM, Sam Hoskins <sam.hoskins@...> wrote:


It's not just the crankshaft flange runout that requires inspection after a prop strike. Per Continental the engine should be torn down and properly inspected.

Sam 

On Tue, Jul 6, 2021, 4:18 AM victor taylor via groups.io <velocityoner=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:
Brain I would be interested in the O-200. Please PM me at 251 three 77 five two one six.

Victor Taylor
Irvington Alabama

On Jul 5, 2021, at 22:24, Corbin via groups.io <c_geiser=icloud.com@groups.io> wrote:

I would never ask for a finders fee for helping someone sell their plane or project.  

Corbin

On Jul 5, 2021, at 9:04 PM, Brian Hutchinson via groups.io <brianmh13=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:



[Edited Message Follows]

Wanted to see if I could get a little finder's fee for this 0-200. Guy is clearing out his hanger and said his 0-200 has around 80 original hours had a propstrike from a ground loop when he was learning to fly a tailwheel. Says that the Crank was dialed and looks fine. Is asking 4,000. I think that's probably a pretty good deal if everything checks out. Located in Indiana. The guy lives in Florida and while this engine could be low hours as he said seems a 80ish original hours engine is pretty unheard of. He could be trying to pass off a high time airboat motor? If due diligence is conducted could be a deal though.

--

Corbin 
N121CG

3761 - 3780 of 56079