Ron, I agree with David's comments about the larger rudder. The tiny little plans rudder will cause a violent scary skid at cruise speed and is fine down to touchdown. Must be a clever design as I

25 Oct 06 Short flight to see if the prop has less vibration than after my last change. The prop was about normal. Vibration in the same RPM range. New Lightspeed Twenty 3G was outstanding. Noise

Thanks David, I appreciate your views, I will stick by what I have done on my Q and feel great about the changes. I guess I differ from some others on this list trying to cram certain changes, (the

David , If your derogatory comments about the Jabiru and the Norton and my lack of a reflexor were NOT meant to suggest that I have poor judgement, then those comments are irrelevant, besides

Thanks for the consideration Mike . We are also in EXPERIMENTAL category fortunately. Peter _____ From: Q-LIST@... [mailto:Q-LIST@...] On Behalf Of Mike Perry Sent:

Ron, I think the ability to adjust camber and toe as you have done is nice, but overkill. The only real requirement is that the worst-case scenario -- max weight, forward CG, steeply crowned runway

Well, I'm glad we have a disagreement about the landing problem (if any) rather than some licensing/regulation issue where we were causing you some other sort of problem. I have read of licensing

Dave, Lubrication is done from inside the tail cone. I need to rent a dwarf to get in there. <g>. Thanks for the idea for actuating the Falkner. Peter _____ From: Q-LIST@...

Cheers Ryan, Thats similar to what i thinks supposed to be going on in mine. Does anyone have a picture of this in a Q2,200,TRI-Q? Austin

David and Peter, I sincerely hope my ramblings on the way I went about my tailwheel control and wheel alignment has not offended anyone, I simply was not pleased with the way others have attacked the

Hey Peter, There are lots of questions still in my mind around the interaction between the postion of the reflexor and elevator and how it influences drag/speed. I'm going to try some testing and

Peter, I never meant to launch a personal attack against you. In my world view, disagreeing with you does not constitute such, but challenging your character does. I do not believe that I maligned

Mike when I say "as long as it is not compulsory" it is a form of Aussie humour like irony. I said it because people get upset if I do not agree with everything or anything to do with the sixpack.

in the last sentence I meant to say: The fact that a few people have mastered landing THIS bird doesn't mean the design is reasonable. (caps only to show correction) (and I'm having trouble

Phil when you say "the trailing edges cross neutral and rise above the trailimg edges" that implies that they were below neutral ie below the trailing edge? Peter PS are you enjoying this?

To Peter Harris, but also for anyone overseas: Why do you say "But I am in favour of most ideas as long as they are not compulsory." What do you mean? These are EXPERIMENTAL aircraft. In the USA

Thanks Dave, 1. That is similar to my experience. With zero deg and an empty main tank there is a significant loss of elevator authority. A good reason to remember to up aelerons for

Bob As I understand it your experience makes sense because by raising the elevator you unload the canard and reduce induced drag and by levelling with raised ailerons there is further reduction in

Hi David, I apologise if my posts on this subject have seemed a bit negative. I should be the last one to discourage experiment and design as it is my main interest and I am always impressed by the

Austin, This is how I made mine. http://ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Q-LIST/photos/browse/7b18 <http://ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Q-LIST/photos/browse/7b18> Ryan