|
Re: Revmaster to o-200 conversion
John Hartley
Rotate and takeoff at 80 mph with reflex full up ~ 1/2 inch. With reflex flat, rotation occurs at around 100.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
John
-------- Original message --------
From: "jay@... [Q-LIST]" <Q-LIST@...> Date: 08/23/2015 8:30 PM (GMT-05:00) To: Q-LIST@... Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] RE: Revmaster to o-200 conversion Thanks John, That is much more illustrative. I think there is a 50-50 chance of it being drag related. Certainly that is a part of the effect and nose gear leg and wheel fairing will help relieve it, but I need to look at your decalage to see what part that may play. To estimate that will have to wait until you are home and can furnish a picture, so maybe we can delay too much more discussion until you are back home again. The description of the behavior as it relates to your reflexor setting is instructive. Thanks for that. At this point, I think modification of the sparrow strainer may not be the most effective way to approach the solution....stand by on that, but let's pick this up when you are back home. Just one more question (well two actually). What airspeed do you indicate at rotation/takeoff, and what reflexor setting are you using at takeoff? Cheers, Jay
|
|
|
|
Re: Revmaster to o-200 conversion
Thanks John,
That is much more illustrative. I think there is a 50-50 chance of it being drag related. Certainly that is a part of the effect and nose gear leg and wheel fairing will help relieve it, but I need to look at your decalage to see what part that may play. To estimate that will have to wait until you are home and can furnish a picture, so maybe we can delay too much more discussion until you are back home again. The description of the behavior as it relates to your reflexor setting is instructive. Thanks for that. At this point, I think modification of the sparrow strainer may not be the most effective way to approach the solution....stand by on that, but let's pick this up when you are back home. Just one more question (well two actually). What airspeed do you indicate at rotation/takeoff, and what reflexor setting are you using at takeoff? Cheers, Jay
|
|
|
|
Re: Revmaster to o-200 conversion
John Hartley
Jay,
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
I'm in the middle of a 10 day shift at work and my plane is in another state. I can't get pictures until I'm off work. Option 2 looks to be the closest. Cutting the throttle seems to have little effect on the tuck. Using the reflex, I can trim it level until around 160mph - at which point the reflex is at its uppermost limit. Above 160, I need to apply aft cyclic (stick, sorry, I'm a chopper pilot) to keep it level. The amount needed increases as speed increases, resulting in a large (basically 100%) amount of aft force required by 200mph. This condition was present with the Revmaster but wasn't seen as an issue because it would never see these speeds. I attached a graph I sketched on my phone that will, hopefully come through and explain the condition a little better. The graph also shows how the same condition is mirrored for speeds less than 130 - being untrimable with reflex below 100 and full aft stick at 80. You may be onto something with your drag moments idea. Aerodynamically, besides changing from the Revmaster cowl to an O-200, the only thing that has changed is the nose gear and nose wheel no longer have a fairing. The nose gear was changed from the flimsy little one that came with the Revmaster setup to the bulky, squared off, heavy one for the O-200. Could it be possible that the large flat plate drag at the nose wheel is contributing to this problem? Thanks for your input/interest. John
-------- Original message --------
From: "jay@... [Q-LIST]" <Q-LIST@...> Date: 08/23/2015 6:07 PM (GMT-05:00) To: Q-LIST@... Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] RE: Revmaster to o-200 conversion John, I am back home now, so I would like to help diagnose what is happening. First, I need some more info. Tuck means different things to different people. Can you tell us, when you say tuck, do you mean: 1. The plane starts a decent at high speed that you cannot arrest with full down elevator, but only can stop by pulling back the throttle and allowing the plane to slow down. ..or.. 2. The plane starts decent at high speed that CAN be corrected by pulling the stick back, but the magnitude of the stick force required to do so is uncomfortably/worryingly large and that correction cannot be trimmed out with elevator trim. ..or.. 3. Neither 1 nor 2....Please describe. Also, as has been asked previously, do you have a reflexor installed? The full up reflexor can be used to achieve the equivalent of almost 2 degrees negative decalage (the equivalent of cutting your canard off and installing with two degrees higher angle of incidence). Experimenting with small reflexor adjustments is the best way to check if the problem is related to incidence/decalage before you start any surgery. The other place to look is at the drag moments. Clearly the problem is related to airspeed, so knowing that tends to narrow down the possibilities and leads me to ask the questions above. A side view of the plane will allow me to estimate your decalage and that would help me also. Cheers, Jay Scheevel Tri-Q, still building
|
|
|
|
Re: Revmaster to o-200 conversion
Gary,
You have a lot of flight experience with the aerodynamics of the Q. I would very much like to hear your opinions on the aerodynamic study that I have just completed, and whether the results square with your personal observations. If you have the time to review, it would be very valuable to myself and the group. Thanks. Cheers, Jay Scheevel Tri-Q, still building
|
|
|
|
Re: Revmaster to o-200 conversion
John,
I am back home now, so I would like to help diagnose what is happening. First, I need some more info. Tuck means different things to different people. Can you tell us, when you say tuck, do you mean: 1. The plane starts a decent at high speed that you cannot arrest with full down elevator, but only can stop by pulling back the throttle and allowing the plane to slow down. ..or.. 2. The plane starts decent at high speed that CAN be corrected by pulling the stick back, but the magnitude of the stick force required to do so is uncomfortably/worryingly large and that correction cannot be trimmed out with elevator trim. ..or.. 3. Neither 1 nor 2....Please describe. Also, as has been asked previously, do you have a reflexor installed? The full up reflexor can be used to achieve the equivalent of almost 2 degrees negative decalage (the equivalent of cutting your canard off and installing with two degrees higher angle of incidence). Experimenting with small reflexor adjustments is the best way to check if the problem is related to incidence/decalage before you start any surgery. The other place to look is at the drag moments. Clearly the problem is related to airspeed, so knowing that tends to narrow down the possibilities and leads me to ask the questions above. A side view of the plane will allow me to estimate your decalage and that would help me also. Cheers, Jay Scheevel Tri-Q, still building
|
|
|
|
Re: Revmaster to o-200 conversion
Paul Buckley
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
John, you say that you have a reflexer, have you
experimented with it during fast cruise to try and trim out the
tuck?
I am having trouble receiving some of my emails so
if you have answered this already, my apologies
Paul B
Embryo TriQ-200
|
|
|
|
Re: Revmaster to o-200 conversion
John, Please do not cut anything yet. You need to fully diagnose this problem before you fix it. You could make things worse. I am traveling this weekend without my computer, so can't do much. Please post a photo of your plane taken from the side, and we can start to break down the problem properly. Jay Scheevel
|
|
|
|
Re: Revmaster to o-200 conversion
Bruce, The strainers lift down pulling the elevator down causing the canard to rise. Try a little up reflexer to reduce lift on the rear wing. Regards, Charlie
On Aug 22, 2015, at 7:55 AM, 'jcrain2@...' jcrain2@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Re: Revmaster to o-200 conversion
Sanjay Dhall <sdhall@...>
John: Sanjay
From: Q-LIST@... [mailto:Q-LIST@...]
Sent: Saturday, August 22, 2015 1:47 PM To: Q-LIST@... Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] RE: Revmaster to o-200 conversion
It sounds one you want the elevator to deflect down more. Be careful loading the sparrow strainer more. I lost the left one in flight and there was enough slop in my dual stick linkage that it flipped me inverted forward/left. The airfoil supports sheared at the trailing edge of the elevator. The sparrow support arms may not be strong enough to take the excess strain. Some one out there knows why it is tucking (Jay). Jerry
On Sat, Aug 22, 2015, 10:10 AM JMasal@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Re: Revmaster to o-200 conversion
John Hartley
Phil, I forgot to mention, I do have reflex and use it for elevator trim. Reflex is up at low speeds ~ 1/2" for landing and takeoff. 130 mph, it's flat. As you go beyond 130 the reflex has to go up again, reaching it's limit of about 1/2" at 160 mph. John Sent via the Samsung Galaxy Note® 4, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone
-------- Original message -------- From: "Phil Lankford britmcman@... [Q-LIST]" <Q-LIST@...> Date: 08/22/2015 3:17 PM (GMT-05:00) To: Q-LIST@... Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] RE: Revmaster to o-200 conversion John: About that 0 degrees incidence you are reporting - please measure twice (or five times plus) before you cut! Make sure you are not getting some type of measurement error. I did not hear you say anything about reflex or settings ( which could influence some of that aircraft attitude in flight). There is a great chance you are already on the right track. I am just allergic to work that involves anything to do with a Q-200 and a SawsAll). Cheers, Phil Lankford.
|
|
|
|
Re: Revmaster to o-200 conversion
|
|
|
|
Re: Revmaster to o-200 conversion
Paul Spackman
You did not mention if you are reflexor equipped.
|
|
|
|
Re: Revmaster to o-200 conversion
John: About that 0 degrees incidence you are reporting - please measure twice (or five times plus) before you cut! Make sure you are not getting some type of measurement error. I did not hear you say anything about reflex or settings ( which could influence some of that aircraft attitude in flight). There is a great chance you are already on the right track. I am just allergic to work that involves anything to do with a Q-200 and a SawsAll). Cheers, Phil Lankford.
On Aug 22, 2015, at 11:41 AM, John Hartley john.hartley1@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Re: Revmaster to o-200 conversion
John Hartley
Gentlemen,
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Thanks for the input. I guess I knew the right answer before I asked the question but was hoping there was something I was overlooking - t-tail or something else. Are there any tricks to removing the canard? Just a saws-all and some guts? What is the appropriate angle I should look for when I remount this sweetheart? John
-------- Original message --------
From: "Jerry Marstall jerrylm1986@... [Q-LIST]" <Q-LIST@...> Date: 08/22/2015 1:46 PM (GMT-05:00) To: Q-LIST@... Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] RE: Revmaster to o-200 conversion It sounds one you want the elevator to deflect down more. Be careful loading the sparrow strainer more. I lost the left one in flight and there was enough slop in my dual stick linkage that it flipped me inverted forward/left. The airfoil supports sheared at the trailing edge of the elevator. The sparrow support arms may not be strong enough to take the excess strain. Some one out there knows why it is tucking (Jay). Jerry
|
|
|
|
Re: Revmaster to o-200 conversion
Jerry Marstall
It sounds one you want the elevator to deflect down more. Be careful loading the sparrow strainer more. I lost the left one in flight and there was enough slop in my dual stick linkage that it flipped me inverted forward/left. The airfoil supports sheared at the trailing edge of the elevator. The sparrow support arms may not be strong enough to take the excess strain. Some one out there knows why it is tucking (Jay). Jerry
|
|
|
|
Re: Revmaster to o-200 conversion
JMasal@...
Bite the bullet.Do what already works (incidence). Dont try to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear... or re-engineer.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
-----Original Message----- From: john.hartley1@... [Q-LIST] To: Q-LIST Sent: Fri, Aug 21, 2015 6:18 pm Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] RE: Revmaster to o-200 conversion Update:
After 14 hours on the new engine, I was experimenting lower power than I expected and an excessive amount of oil coming from the crankcase breather. I found plans for and made a contraption that measures crankcase pressure. Mine was excessively high, leading me to believe I was experiencing some piston blowby. Since I recently jettisoned my second wife and am now single ($), I bought 8 new Superior Millennium cylinders (4 for the Tri-Q200 and 4 for my Cessna 150). The 150's cylinders were shipped to my house and the Quickie's were sent to LYCON for some tweaking. LYCON installed 10:1 NFS pistons and port, polished and flow matched the cylinders. When all 8 cylinders made it home (couple weeks turn around from LYCON) I was able to compare the stock ones to LYCON's. These gentlemen do an extremely nice job. All 8 are installed on their respective aircraft. The master solenoid on the Cessna went bad and is on order, so I haven't flown it yet. I have flown the Q2, however, and it has come to life. It picked up 190 static rpm (2550 vs 2360) turning the same 60x70 Sterba prop and 20 mph indicated (170 vs 150). The engine isn't broken-in so I haven't pushed it too hard yet. In the essence of experimenting/tinkering, I pulled the engine off of the plane today to prep it for its next upgrade - SDS EM5 4F fuel injection and digital ignition. Ross from SDS has been a big help so far and needed only 3 days to build my system (after we hammered out all of the details). The system is supposed to be here Monday. While I've the plane torn down again, I'm going to tackle some of the things that've bugged me for a while. On one of which, I'd appreciate some input. At high speeds, the nose tucks down; the faster the speed, the more the tuck. At 170mph, it's an uncomfortable amount. At 200mph, it's as much as I'm willing to put up with. The thought of removing the canard to increase the incidence (it's the LS1 and was originally installed with 0°) is uncomforting but not insurmountable. I'm thinking that the other approaches would be to increase the size of the sparrow strainers or install the t-tail. Thoughts? John Tri-Q:114 hours Tri-Q200: 16 hours
|
|
|
|
Re: Revmaster to o-200 conversion
|
|
|
|
Re: Key West Trip
|
|
|
|
Re: Key West Trip
Jerry Marstall
Gotcha. Thx
|
|
|
|
Re: Key West Trip
We are planning on the FOD. It's too far for Key West on this trip segment. We are currently in the Michigan's U. P. Sorry for any confusion. Sam Sent via wireless gizmo. On Aug 21, 2015 5:54 PM, "Sam Hoskins" <sam.hoskins@...> wrote:
|
|
|