Date   

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$

smeshno1@...
 

 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

smeshno1@...
 

 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$

Phil Lankford
 

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


Re: W and B

Jerry Marstall
 

My battery is where Bruce mounted his.
Jerry 

On Tue, Jul 6, 2021, 8:52 AM Bruce Crain <jcrain2@...> wrote:
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=aol.com@groups.io>
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: W and B

Bruce Crain
 

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$

Sam Hoskins
 

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

victor taylor
 

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

Corbin
 

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@...> 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


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

Brian Hutchinson
 
Edited

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.


Re: W and B

smeshno1@...
 

something over 24 lbs with the rack/hold down.  


From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> on behalf of One Sky Dog via groups.io <Oneskydog@...>
Sent: Monday, July 5, 2021 8:18 AM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] W and B
 
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: W and B

Chris Walterson
 

Jay----------  Great video. I  followed Reg when  I installed the 1.8 turbo in my Dragonfly. 750 hrs airframe and 550 Subaru. Still works great, but you always want more.  I have a video on youtube  " dragonfly geraldton". It's not a Q, but still gets my blood flowing.

Take care----------  Chris


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


Re: W and B

Chris Walterson
 

Charlie----------  I have as much in the back as I can. The rad is under the belly  as far back as the split line.

 I am using a 430 CC amp  17 lb battery installed behind the passenger seat, but against the wing bulkhead. I installed it here because it can be changed without  splitting the aircraft and if needed it can be boosted.

 If I had it to do over again, I would reinforce the tail section near the back bulkhead and make a removable cover large enough to install a battery.  Do the weight and balance and buy the appropriate battery. Easy to boost if need be.

 Another solution I could do would be to install another 17 lb battery  near the back bulkhead and wire it in serious with the other.

 Still thinking.  Take care-------------  Chris


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


Re: W and B

smeshno1@...
 

 Charlie has a valid point, Chris. I'll have the same issue with Frankenbird so you'll have company with this revision. As Charlie points out.. we don't really NEED a heavier battery for the Corvair but the fact is the greater power reserve is good and mass we have to have anyway makes the revision a much better plan. I don't remember if your project is a Q2 base fuselage..but if so adding mass that far aft of the wing now brings the loads to the fuselage come into question, especially since we have a joint of the aft shells that Charlie does not have in the Dragonfly. That is..unless you plan to glass in the joint with a 100 percent scarf so the entire fuselage is bonded; then maybe the added mass and inertia aft would be moot. Dunno about you but Maintenance and Conditional Inspections aught be as painless as possible. Removing the tail makes possible many options. 
Vern     


From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> on behalf of One Sky Dog via groups.io <Oneskydog@...>
Sent: Monday, July 5, 2021 8:18 AM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] W and B
 
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: W and B

Jay Scheevel
 

Hi Chris,

Not sure I can visualize what you are describing below, but no mind. Maybe after Saturday I will understand. In the meantime, here is a little inspiration video for you. Same plane, same engine, same prop as you.
https://youtu.be/JcNPc-gYaIc

Cheers,
Jay

-----Original Message-----
From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of Chris Walterson
Sent: Sunday, July 04, 2021 7:29 PM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] W and B

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: Chris Walterson Q-2 Q-Tour - in progress - July 10 9:00 Central time

Anthony P
 

Great idea, Sam, Chris, and all.

Can't wait!

That side exhaust looks like a tiny turboprop. :)


Re: W and B

One Sky Dog
 

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,

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






1181 - 1200 of 53486