I just couldn't resist. Today I went flying for the first time in six weeks. Last flight was 6 Jan 07. Today I flew just for the love of it. No tests. No Plan. Just fun. TO was normal from 17. Left

Air foil optimizer, and others I have seen, do not list it as laminar flow, but it does meet a need and it doesn't need VGs to prevent separation when dirty. As designed, it also allows a greater

130 MPH with the 1835cc VW, where did you get that number??? Jon

Sorry, one like one engine and another one proffesses another one. True, the VW have been flown, and you have had as I can see a positive experience with it, in the Q1. I didnt say it

build or fly? After owning and flying for many years it is with great sadness I am offering my pride and joy up for sale 321AQ over 800hr of proven flight time. I am selling only in parts. She is a

i m makeing decision between 1/2 vw ,verner and hks 700 since no body give me any reasonable answer about engine ill waiting untill i need engine i think that sooner or later we find some good choice

Does anyone have any experience with a Global Rotary Power inc. engine? Does anyone have a mount design? How about other engines? Preferably 4 stroke. How about Verner? Same questions. Thanks in

Please check your facts before you post. This has a drawing of the NASA LS(1)-0417 (aka GA (W)-1): http://www.public.iastate.edu/~huhui/paper/2007/AIAA-2007-0275.pdf Maximum thickness is at about

looks like i sterted war here ,ok then ill ask different way what is the best choise of engine for quickie q-1 thanks Jon Finley <jon@...> wrote: Whoa there Roger, where in the

Whoa there Roger, where in the world did the following bit of "fact" come from??? I would certainly agree that a 4 cyl VW is not ideal. However; having flowing behind one in a Q1 for some 300 hours,

A full VW engine is a simple and perfect match for the Q1. 800+fpm climb, 130+mph cruise, 3.6gph fuel use. Super

Onan actually have a history of pretty high hours Q1's. The Onan sold at the time of the kits being manufactured was a 48 Cu Inch Onan, Original HP between 18 and 20, and later tweeked ( by the

No wing that is dirty is laminar flow; however, the GU profile is listed as laminar flow. The LS1 is not. The first key is where the point of maximum thickness appears on the cord. A laminar flow wing

Thank s. Raoul --- jdoyle1941@... wrote: From: "James Doyle" <jdoyle1941@...> To: <Q-LIST@...> Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] carburetors Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 20:44:25

Regarding LS1 vs GU canard, I think it is more accurate to say the GU has laminar flow over a larger portion of the wing surface, not that the LS1 is "not laminar flow." Regarding weight, the

I have not been able to find any figures on either the wings or canards. I am only going on the fact that the LS1 planes seem uniformly heavier than the GU canard planes, even when they have the same

Larry Have you any hard figures that you can quote regarding the relative weights of the GU canard and the LS1 canard? Paul Buckley

The further out from the fuse center, the worst the problem can be due to moment arm. With small control movement (use of aileron in the direction of drift is better), many Q drivers have no problem.

The fuse has a foam core, and is very strong while remaining light. The worst problem I have seen in the Q2 design is the supposed structural wood support under the canopy. Since it only goes between

Thanks for the reponses. I like doing the systems stuff, but don't really like maled molded fiberglass work. I will do some shopping and see what I come up with. Are the taildraggers that prone