Date   

Firewall with no engine

Jay Scheevel
 

I am into my annual this month. I have set up my engine so that it takes about 1 hour to remove and same to put it back on. I have removed it for 2 of my 3 annuals so far. I generally ask myself why I am doing this as I am removing it, but once I get it off, I feel much better about it, because I can get a really good look at everything on the back of the engine, thus a thorough inspection.

 

For some of you that saw my plane with the engine in place, here is what the firewall looks like without the engine.

 

Cheers,

Jay  Tri-Q2 N8WQ 190 hours.


Re: Dark Past

Jay Scheevel
 

Kevin fixed it:
“Runner runner get-ur-done-er”

Cheers,
Jay


On Oct 4, 2021, at 4:17 PM, Kevin Boddicker <trumanst@...> wrote:

Runner, runner, chicken dinner.
That makes no sense.

Kevin

On Oct 4, 2021, at 1:30 PM, Jay Scheevel <jay@...> wrote:

The N-number for my Tri-Q2 N8WQ has a bit of a dark past (# used to be on a Beech DH-50). Have a look under narrative section:
<image001.png>


Re: Dark Past

J-Dubs
 

Missing the post accident fatality when their boss found out.


Re: Dark Past

Kevin Boddicker
 

Runner, runner, chicken dinner.
That makes no sense.

Kevin

On Oct 4, 2021, at 1:30 PM, Jay Scheevel <jay@...> wrote:

The N-number for my Tri-Q2 N8WQ has a bit of a dark past (# used to be on a Beech DH-50). Have a look under narrative section:
<image001.png>


Re: No Q-tour for October

Kevin Boddicker
 

Maybe we should do a live one.
If I can get EVERYBODY up to DEH, I could have my annual condition inspection done in a weekend!!
YA that’s it!!

Kevin

On Oct 4, 2021, at 12:56 PM, Sam Hoskins <sam.hoskins@...> wrote:

The Q-tour team is taking a rest this month.

That is all.

Sam


Dark Past

Jay Scheevel
 

The N-number for my Tri-Q2 N8WQ has a bit of a dark past (# used to be on a Beech DH-50). Have a look under narrative section:


No Q-tour for October

Sam Hoskins
 

The Q-tour team is taking a rest this month.

That is all.

Sam


Re: Quickie Q1 - Canard

Sam Hoskins
 

David, thank you for taking time to throughly explain the process. 

Sam

On Sun, Oct 3, 2021, 7:14 PM David J. Gall <David@...> wrote:

Eugen,

 

Read the plans as though the following image is a single page. The first paragraph shown here refers to the LAST drawing shown here and a drawing not shown here that is at the bottom of page 5-3; by use of the word “faced” the authors mean the 1.2” dimension that causes the blocks to become parallelograms in top view. This paragraph also refers to the outboard canard cores that are shown on page 5-4 (not shown here).

 

You ask: “Is it correct that the width of the middle segment is 42"?” The answer is “NO.” The second paragraph shown here refers to the FIRST drawing shown here. This is the center section and is only 20” span (width).

 

These blocks are all made from 7” x 14” x 41” blocks that were supplied in the kit; there are extra lines on all these drawings that indicate the joints where blocks need to be glued together to achieve the needed block size before hot-wiring. If you are using source blocks of different sizes, your joint lines may differ, but I point this out to help eliminate the confusion that may be caused by these lines.

 

The third paragraph shown here has no associated drawing. The cut line 20-A-B-C-D-E-23 is shown on the hot-wire templates and should be self-explanatory.

 

The fourth paragraph shown here refers to additional drawings (not shown here) that appear on page 5-3.

 

Finally, the cut line 33-F-G-H-I-32 removes the aft part of the canard center section that will be contained entirely within the fuselage. The templates are the same as are used for the portions of the canard outboard of the fuselage thus requiring this aft part for aerodynamic and structural support of the elevators, but within the fuselage this part is not only not required but would interfere with the elevator control torque tubes if retained, so is cut off along the 33-F-G-H-I-32 line.

 

 

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of Eugen Pilarski
Sent: Sunday, October 3, 2021 1:15 AM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: [Q-List] Quickie Q1 - Canard

 

Hello Q-Groupe,

we are just about to cut the canard out of the foam. What is not clear to me at the moment is why the separation of the rear segments in the middle segment has to take place along line 33-F-G-H-32? For the part of the middle segment where it is connected to the fuselage it is clear, but beyond that? Attached is an excerpt.  The page in the Plans ist 5 - 2. 

 

Is it correct that the width of the middle segment is 42"? 

Best regards

Eugen 



Re: Quickie Q1 - Canard

David J. Gall
 

Eugen,

 

Additional to my last note, see page 10-5. The aft “elevator slot cores” are also removed along the line 33-F-G-H-I-32 for the remainder of the canard beyond the center section, but only AFTER laying up the elevator slots with one BID at plus/minus 45°. This yields a 78” long piece that will be re-attached to the aft edge of the canard after the canard is glassed. Glassing the canard before reattaching this piece creates a shear web from tip to tip just ahead of the trailing edge (hinge line) of the canard. Re-attaching the “elevator slot cores” establishes the aerodynamic fairing of the canard to the elevators outboard of the fuselage, but is not needed internal to the fuselage.

 

 

-David

 

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of Eugen Pilarski
Sent: Sunday, October 3, 2021 1:15 AM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: [Q-List] Quickie Q1 - Canard

 

Hello Q-Groupe,

we are just about to cut the canard out of the foam. What is not clear to me at the moment is why the separation of the rear segments in the middle segment has to take place along line 33-F-G-H-32? For the part of the middle segment where it is connected to the fuselage it is clear, but beyond that? Attached is an excerpt.  The page in the Plans ist 5 - 2. 

 

Is it correct that the width of the middle segment is 42"? 

Best regards

Eugen 



Re: Quickie Q1 - Canard

David J. Gall
 

Eugen,

 

Read the plans as though the following image is a single page. The first paragraph shown here refers to the LAST drawing shown here and a drawing not shown here that is at the bottom of page 5-3; by use of the word “faced” the authors mean the 1.2” dimension that causes the blocks to become parallelograms in top view. This paragraph also refers to the outboard canard cores that are shown on page 5-4 (not shown here).

 

You ask: “Is it correct that the width of the middle segment is 42"?” The answer is “NO.” The second paragraph shown here refers to the FIRST drawing shown here. This is the center section and is only 20” span (width).

 

These blocks are all made from 7” x 14” x 41” blocks that were supplied in the kit; there are extra lines on all these drawings that indicate the joints where blocks need to be glued together to achieve the needed block size before hot-wiring. If you are using source blocks of different sizes, your joint lines may differ, but I point this out to help eliminate the confusion that may be caused by these lines.

 

The third paragraph shown here has no associated drawing. The cut line 20-A-B-C-D-E-23 is shown on the hot-wire templates and should be self-explanatory.

 

The fourth paragraph shown here refers to additional drawings (not shown here) that appear on page 5-3.

 

Finally, the cut line 33-F-G-H-I-32 removes the aft part of the canard center section that will be contained entirely within the fuselage. The templates are the same as are used for the portions of the canard outboard of the fuselage thus requiring this aft part for aerodynamic and structural support of the elevators, but within the fuselage this part is not only not required but would interfere with the elevator control torque tubes if retained, so is cut off along the 33-F-G-H-I-32 line.

 

 

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of Eugen Pilarski
Sent: Sunday, October 3, 2021 1:15 AM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: [Q-List] Quickie Q1 - Canard

 

Hello Q-Groupe,

we are just about to cut the canard out of the foam. What is not clear to me at the moment is why the separation of the rear segments in the middle segment has to take place along line 33-F-G-H-32? For the part of the middle segment where it is connected to the fuselage it is clear, but beyond that? Attached is an excerpt.  The page in the Plans ist 5 - 2. 

 

Is it correct that the width of the middle segment is 42"? 

Best regards

Eugen 



Re: Quickie Q1 - Canard

 

I believe they have you wrap that with fiberglass sheet to create a spar and shear web.


On Sun, Oct 3, 2021, 3:15 AM Eugen Pilarski <interbus@...> wrote:
Hello Q-Groupe,

we are just about to cut the canard out of the foam. What is not clear to me at the moment is why the separation of the rear segments in the middle segment has to take place along line 33-F-G-H-32? For the part of the middle segment where it is connected to the fuselage it is clear, but beyond that? Attached is an excerpt.  The page in the Plans ist 5 - 2. 
 
Is it correct that the width of the middle segment is 42"? 

Best regards

Eugen 


Quickie Q1 - Canard

Eugen Pilarski
 

Hello Q-Groupe,

we are just about to cut the canard out of the foam. What is not clear to me at the moment is why the separation of the rear segments in the middle segment has to take place along line 33-F-G-H-32? For the part of the middle segment where it is connected to the fuselage it is clear, but beyond that? Attached is an excerpt.  The page in the Plans ist 5 - 2. 
 
Is it correct that the width of the middle segment is 42"? 

Best regards

Eugen 


Re: New Group Member

One Sky Dog
 

Laminar flow separation bubble, VG’s disrupt this and are less drag than the separation bubble.

On Friday, October 1, 2021, 11:17 PM, Brent Sherstan <brent.sherstan@...> wrote:

That’s some great info. Thanks Chris!

Brent


Re: New Group Member

Brent Sherstan
 

That’s some great info. Thanks Chris!

Brent


Re: New Group Member

Chris Walterson
 

Brent---------------  If you google " VGs placement on a Dragonfly"  you should get some good information.

 We had a fellow named Nathan Rambo that did some good testing on VGs. They apply to the Dragonfly and the Quickie.

 My VGs are from root to tip and they are spaced 4 inches between pairs. I think they are angled at 15 degrees to the wind.

 I had made a template with slots out of thick plastic to hold about ten pairs in place. Tape down the template, install some clear silicon on the Vg and slide it in place. Do ten pair at a time and then move on.  These are the ones on my Super Quickie -- Take care-------------  Chris



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


Re: New Group Member

Frankenbird Vern
 

I had a few interesting conversations when I trailered the dismantled aircraft back to Oklahoma from Northern Alabama. A few of the curious at the benzine stations wanting to know about "that Cub" and seeing the Maple Leaf symbol asked me if I spoke English or not..  

  My true nature is a bit on the ornery side (on the ground..I am a lot more serious in the air).  I was tempted to use my German or some of the Russian I know to respond, but kept my ornery part under control. 

I was raised partially with my Grandfather who immigrated to the States in 1910 from Dresden. He spoke English but preferred German with me in the Shop. Grandma (she was born and raised American) insisted we speak only English. He and his father were blacksmiths by trade, and my Grandfather in the States found work with the railroad repairing locomotives. His shop both at work and home was a wonderful place for me! 

 My wife, Larisa, is from Russia (born in Uzbekistan, USSR). She is a dual citizen but even after being married for 10 years now we communicate in a mix of both English and Russian languages. 

 It is true a testing of the devises would be of interest to all the Canard family. The aerodynamics involved are a more important factor than in conventional designs. In our case Brent..protecting lift in the GU airfoil is the most serious factor. Since I plan on limiting the energy available at the prop flange to around 110 hp, the efficiency in aerodynamics is what I seek. The Corvair is also limited in the allowable weight of the propeller..so a constant speed or in flight pitch controlled is not going to be possible. 

 I'll be flying the Frankenbird from a flat, wide, and no obstruction runway in Cushing Oklahoma. About 35 miles one way from my home location.  I can keep the fabric from 654MM if you like :-)  Maybe mail them so you can model from them?      


From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> on behalf of Brent Sherstan <brent.sherstan@...>
Sent: Friday, October 1, 2021 12:17 PM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] New Group Member
 

Another interesting tuft test, vortilators vs regular, singular VG’s…

That’s a nice looking Maple Leaf, I may need something like that on my tail!

Brent


Re: New Group Member

Brent Sherstan
 

Another interesting tuft test, vortilators vs regular, singular VG’s…

That’s a nice looking Maple Leaf, I may need something like that on my tail!

Brent


Re: New Group Member

Frankenbird Vern
 

 Camera angles?...but I agree, Jay. Charlie you and Brent locations do look the same or close to the same chord line position. The vortex generators on Brents canard are from another supplier that I remember claimed a stronger laminar attachment. I am not an experienced aerodynamic geek as someone like John Roncz. The simple version on Charlies canard are what I've seen on just about every production machine of course with various sizes involved. I do like the idea of the polycarbonate versions. 

 My Capella XS2 has the small rounded nose aluminum "tee" generators. OUCH to the fingers! You get the picture. Those were added in part because the aircraft at one time lived in Utah and the builder was a STOL enthusiast. Included is a photo of 654MM.. but the vortex generators cannot be seen unfortunatly.

 It will be interesting to see what it will do with the Corvair in the nose. I plan on leaving the generators as they were placed when I bought the aircraft. They are about 25% of Chord..simple things..not vortilators.

 One of my wifes ambitions was to earn her LSA in the Capella. She also wants a seaplane rating..which in this part of Oklahoma is a desirable certification. Mannford is on the shore of one of the large lakes in Eastern Oklahoma, and I have rent access to one of the boat houses in a private home setting.

  The amphibious floats  would be a good fit from Zenith, same as used on the 701 series. I wouldn't mind adding an uncommon (to the Midwest anyway) rating to my Private as well.. 

 Brent..don't get too excited observing the Maple Leaf on the Vertical Stab of 654MM.  The aircraft will be recovered...need to see what is under the fabric. The aircraft does have a damage history.     


From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> on behalf of Jay Scheevel <jay@...>
Sent: Friday, October 1, 2021 9:47 AM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] New Group Member
 

Looks like your along-the-chord placement is not too different from Brent’s.  I think the two-sided ones, like on Brent’s canard are referred to as vortilators, but someone (Vern?) can correct me if I am wrong on that.

 

Cheers,

Jay

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of One Sky Dog via groups.io
Sent: Friday, October 1, 2021 5:59 AM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] New Group Member

 

Ok my memory failed here is my VG’s in flight. Single alternating angles worked fine in light rain. Never sought out heavy rain to test that.

 

 

Inline image

 

I like the small plastic ones 

 

Home 

 

 


Home

Welcome to STOLSPEED Vortex Generators! Please

 



One Sky Dog


 

On Thursday, September 30, 2021, 10:04 PM, Brent Sherstan <brent.sherstan@...> wrote:

Here’s my VG’s, they are definitely aft of the curvature peak. Judging by the tuft testing that Jay shared, I suspect they’d be in dirty air by the time I’m close to stall and not doing anything. Conducting my own tuft testing would be interesting though before I pull them off. And I agree that you want the minimum amount of VG’s as possible, just need to do more testing.

Brent


Re: New Group Member

Jay Scheevel
 

Looks like your along-the-chord placement is not too different from Brent’s.  I think the two-sided ones, like on Brent’s canard are referred to as vortilators, but someone (Vern?) can correct me if I am wrong on that.

 

Cheers,

Jay

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of One Sky Dog via groups.io
Sent: Friday, October 1, 2021 5:59 AM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] New Group Member

 

Ok my memory failed here is my VG’s in flight. Single alternating angles worked fine in light rain. Never sought out heavy rain to test that.

 

 

Inline image

 

I like the small plastic ones 

 

Home 

 

 


Home

Welcome to STOLSPEED Vortex Generators! Please

 



One Sky Dog


 

On Thursday, September 30, 2021, 10:04 PM, Brent Sherstan <brent.sherstan@...> wrote:

Here’s my VG’s, they are definitely aft of the curvature peak. Judging by the tuft testing that Jay shared, I suspect they’d be in dirty air by the time I’m close to stall and not doing anything. Conducting my own tuft testing would be interesting though before I pull them off. And I agree that you want the minimum amount of VG’s as possible, just need to do more testing.

Brent


Re: New Group Member

One Sky Dog
 

Ok my memory failed here is my VG’s in flight. Single alternating angles worked fine in light rain. Never sought out heavy rain to test that.


Inline image

I like the small plastic ones 

On Thursday, September 30, 2021, 10:04 PM, Brent Sherstan <brent.sherstan@...> wrote:

Here’s my VG’s, they are definitely aft of the curvature peak. Judging by the tuft testing that Jay shared, I suspect they’d be in dirty air by the time I’m close to stall and not doing anything. Conducting my own tuft testing would be interesting though before I pull them off. And I agree that you want the minimum amount of VG’s as possible, just need to do more testing.

Brent

1801 - 1820 of 54692