|
Re: Canard mounting
L.J. French <LFrench@...>
Unfortunately, my canard template is for the LS-1. If someone could cut
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
out a female template for the GU, we would have both for comparisons of all aircraft. Take the hotwire template for cutting the canard at BL48.8 or therabouts - lay it on a piece of fiberboard with the waterline accurately lined up with one straight edge of the board and trace the template, cut it out such that the female portion will accurately rest on the top of the canard. The digital level would be placed on the straight surface on the top which should now represent WL. Does someone else have a better way to quickly provide this reference?? Lynn ----- Original Message -----
From: Jon Finley <finley@...> To: <Q-LIST@...> Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2000 7:26 AM Subject: RE: [Q-LIST] RE: Canard mounting Lynn,show up at Ottawa (depending on which canard they have).needed. Lynn |
|
|
|
Re: Canard mounting
Jon Finley <finley@...>
Lynn,
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
What you describe is what I have for the GU canard although it's accuracy is in question. I will double check it per the core cutting templates and bring with me to Ottawa. Jon -----Original Message----- |
|
|
|
Re: Canard mounting
Hot Wings
It seems to me that the actual WL used in the initial jigging of the
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
aircraft is somewhat irrelevant to the task at hand if I have been following this correctly. What we need to do is establish the "relative" angle of incidences between the main and canard. Additionally it would be nice if there was a quick way of putting a measuring device on the prop flange to determine its orientation to the canard and BL 0. The actual angle that the fuselage has while flying, to me at least, is of secondary concern. A "misalignment" of 3 full inches when the fuselage is initially jigged up is only about 1.2 degrees and is probably as much as anyone would have messed up even if they used the split lines for the water lines. I don't see 1.2 deg making much difference in the drag of the fuselage or it's interaction with the lift of the wing(s). This should simplify the measuring process. Wish I had time to attend Ottawa and help out but I just don't see it happening this year. For sure next year, and I plan to fly..........in my Q ======================================= In a message dated 8/9/00 3:09:51 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
panzera@... writes: << IMHO, the only way to check one of our airplanes, it to make templates from the prototype (or one that we know flys well) and transfer the template locations to the ground. We'd also need a way to reestablish the waterline on each ship being measured. Some of us may not have installed a bubble level into the fueslage at the time of building, and since the initial jigging of the fueslage is arbitrary at best, one simply can't use hard points such as the top of the rudder fin, or the forward edge of the canopy. >> "Think outside the box - but fly in the envelope" <A HREF="http://hometown.aol.com/bd5er/Qpage.html">Q-2 page</A> Leon McAtee |
|
|
|
Re: Canard mounting
Pat Panzera <panzera@...>
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jon Finley" Lynn,it's accuracy is in question. I will double check it per the core cuttingtemplates and bring with me to Ottawa.Accuracy is totally in question, and without it, the whole exercise if for not. The template is of the foam core, and does not allow for the multiple layers of glass, nor the overlapping of it. Then comes the part of aligning a 2 dimensional jig with a 3 dimensional wing. Remember, we have tons of anihedral (sp?) so any misalignment of the jig from being parallel with the fueslage's centerline will throw off any measurements. Additionally, the jig it self must be plumb or you'll get an inaccurate reading.... and with that, the wing being measured must be leveled span-wise. And from what point on an existing Q will you hook or but the tape measure to establish BL48.8? It's not just a matter of walking up to an airplane and plopping down a jig with a level on it. IMHO, the only way to check one of our airplanes, it to make templates from the prototype (or one that we know flys well) and transfer the template locations to the ground. We'd also need a way to reestablish the waterline on each ship being measured. Some of us may not have installed a bubble level into the fueslage at the time of building, and since the initial jigging of the fueslage is arbitrary at best, one simply can't use hard points such as the top of the rudder fin, or the forward edge of the canopy. I'm totally behind the effort, and hope the best for all involved. Pat someoneUnfortunately, my canard template is for the LS-1. If BL48.8 orcould cut waterline accuratelytherabouts - lay it on a piece of fiberboard with the top of thelined up with one straight edge of the board and trace the surfacecanard. The digital level would be placed on the straight reference??on the top there. Are these planes thattemplates for the GU canard? We will plan on measuring all Super Levelshowup at Ottawa (depending on which canard they have). bring them if(digital) that seemed to work the best for me. Could -----<e|-needed.Lynn Pay only 4.5% commission to sell your home!-----|e>-
|
|
|
|
Re: Canard mounting
almedley@...
In a message dated 08/09/00 4:09:55 PM Central Daylight Time,
panzera@... writes: << Accuracy is totally in question, and without it, the whole exercise if for not. The template is of the foam core, and does not allow for the multiple layers of glass, nor the overlapping of it. >> I was concerned about whether my wing and canard were angled properly. To check, I used pieces of poster board. I drew lines parallel with the tops of the boards through the centers of the boards. I used these lines as the water lines as I traced the 48.8 foam cutout template drawings onto the boards. I also traced in the slot cores and the elevators/ailerons. I then cut out the outlines using an exacto knife, thereby producing forms that I could slide over the wing and canard. Naturally, the heights of the cutouts were too small because many layers of glass had been added to the foam. However, the lengths of the cutouts were almost adequate since little glass had been added to the leading edges and none had been added to the trailing edges. It was easy to keep the waterlines oriented correctly. When the tops and bottoms of the forms engaged the airfoils, I would mark the necessary shape modifications with a pencil. Using a motor tool and a sanding drum, I would enlarge the openings as required. Eventually, I was able to slide the forms to the 48.8 positions on the wing and canard. Since the tops of the forms were parallel with the waterlines, it was easy to determine if the angles were the same by using a level. I my case, the wing and canard proved to be at exactly the same angle. This suited me all right, although some builders believe that the canard should be angled upward slightly (1 -2 degrees) relative to the wing. This procedure worked fine for me because I'm building a Tri-Q-200. If you're working with a tail dragger, you would need to slice the canard form from the trailing edge to the edge of the form. The form would be slipped on inside of the wheel pant and then rejoined with duct tape. Al Medley almedley@... |
|
|
|
[Fwd: P factor - VS offset]
Tom Moore <qba321tm@...>
|
|
|
|
[Fwd: P factor - VS offset]
Tom Moore <qba321tm@...>
|
|
|
|
[Fwd: P factor - VS offset]
Tom Moore <qba321tm@...>
|
|
|
|
[Fwd: P factor - VS offset]
Tom Moore <qba321tm@...>
|
|
|
|
[Fwd: P factor - VS offset]
Tom Moore <qba321tm@...>
|
|
|
|
[Fwd: P factor - VS offset]
Tom Moore <qba321tm@...>
|
|
|
|
Re: Aerobatics
terry.l.sickler@...
No problem, Mike. Just wanted to keep the rookies in the clear. I haven't
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
mastered the "Lumchevak", "Checkoslavak" (or how ever you spell it) myself. I am getting a little Christian Eagle time. Wouldn't even think of something like that in a Q. I know only one truly insane test pilot type who HAS done a tail slide in a Q-200, but it scared him so bad he refuses even minor acro in a Q now. The thought the good olde FAA considers a 90 degree bank acro! ~T~ -----Original Message----- |
|
|
|
Re: Aerobatics
Ted VanMeter <tvanmeter@...>
Terry, I had a partner that used to do hammerheads in an Onan powered Q1,
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
and all this at low level. On day he almost killed himself doing one, as opposed to all the other times, and just got back elevator authority in time to level off at 50 feet. He was finally convinced he didn't need to be doing any of that anymore. Ted -----Original Message-----
From: terry.l.sickler@... <terry.l.sickler@...> To: Q-LIST@... <Q-LIST@...> Date: Thursday, August 10, 2000 12:39 PM Subject: [Q-LIST] RE: Aerobatics No problem, Mike. Just wanted to keep the rookies in the clear. I haven'tsomething like that in a Q. I know only one truly insane test pilot type who HAS doneacro in a Q now. The thought the good olde FAA considers a 90 degree bank acro!do
|
|
|
|
Re: Aerobatics
Dave King <KingDWS@...>
At 05:15 PM 8/10/00 -0700, you wrote:
Terry, I had a partner that used to do hammerheads in an Onan powered Q1,With a Onan??? Its comments like this that make me realize just how perfectly, normally boringly, middle of the line sane I am, (when I rem to take my meds). Your friend have an idea of his roll rate or breakout force? Dave |
|
|
|
Dragonfly for sale
Patrick Panzera <panzera@...>
|
|
|
|
Re: Engine Replacement
HawkiDoug@...
In a message dated 8/11/00 1:12:36 PM Central Daylight Time,
panzera@... writes: << Are you thinking about making your header tank > larger since you don't need the room for the mag > box? If I were building from scratch, perhaps. But since it's already installed, no way. :) Pat >> If some one was considering a bigger header tank, they would need to consider the effects it would have on W&B. My 2 cents worth. Doug "Hawkeye" Humble Omaha NE |
|
|
|
Re: Aerobatics
Ted VanMeter <tvanmeter@...>
Maybe I was being a little generous when I said hammerhead. He said he would
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
dive it for speed at full throttle and then pull up and kick the rudder with just enough speed and thrust to get the nose pointing the other direction. He was very young at the time! -----Original Message-----
From: Dave King <KingDWS@...> To: Q-LIST@... <Q-LIST@...> Date: Thursday, August 10, 2000 5:14 PM Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] RE: Aerobatics At 05:15 PM 8/10/00 -0700, you wrote: Terry, I had a partner that used to do hammerheads in an Onan powered Q1,time to level off at 50 feet. He was finally convinced he didn't need to bedoing any of that anymore. TedWith a Onan??? Its comments like this that make me realize just how perfectly, normally boringly, middle of the line sane I am, (when I rem to take my meds). Your friend have an idea of his roll rate or breakout force? Dave To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: Q-LIST-unsubscribe@... Quickie Builders Association WEB site http://web2.airmail.net/qba321tm/q-page1.html |
|
|
|
Engine Replacement
Pat Panzera <panzera@...>
By the way, I've started on the engine mount and have
confirmed that only the ring gear and the starter's snout has to be recessed into the firewall. So the "mag box" is going to be about 1.5" deep, and 12" in diameter. This means that anyone considering the removal of a VW from a Q2, and the installation of a Corvair engine, won't have to remove and shorten the header tank like on an 0-200. http://www.angelfire.com/ca6/kodachrome/images/LaVerne/DCP00526.JPG Pat |
|
|
|
Re: Engine Replacement
Dave Richardson <dave@...>
Are you thinking about making your header tank
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
larger since you don't need the room for the mag box? ----- Original Message -----
From: "Pat Panzera" <panzera@...> To: "Q-List" <q-list@...> Sent: Friday, August 11, 2000 11:41 AM Subject: [Q-LIST] Engine Replacement By the way, I've started on the engine mount and have |
|
|
|
Re: Dragonfly for sale
Jordan Funk <jordan@...>
Gentlemen:Where can I obtain information regarding conversion of a Q1 to a Rotax 503? Is there any literature available, especially anthing regarding performance capabilities with this engine. Also, would any of you Q1 owners care to express an opinion regarding the feasibility/desirability of an HKS 700 engine in a Q1? Thanks, Jordan http://www.angelfire.com/ca2/Dragonfly/ForSale.html |
|
|