Please don't misconstrue what I said.
The GU canard flys just fine and I'm sure Charles Coleman has a nice
plane. In fact I believe the GU to be a very effecient wing and
sitting behind the same HP, its faster than an LS1 canard. As a point
of reference, I flew next to Mark Summers plane (0200-GU) the first
time he ever encountered light rain. The airplane entered a
pronounced nose down attitude which sustained itself until we left
the rain. He could not stop the decent. Mark's comment was he would
not fly the plane again "in rain" until the problem was fixed. Mark
is a very smart guy and engineer at the Livermore Lab. He did a great
deal of investigation of the problem and ultimately designed a set of
VG's that were similar to the ones on Burt Rutan's Voyager. The end
result was astounding. The next time we hit rain there was no issue.
What I said was that; I believe a newbe stands a much better chance
at not breaking his plane in the beginning with more of the obstacles
removed, (a more refined airplane). I've talked with someone I trust
that inspected Charles' plane in Arizona and found it to be in
apparently good condition.
The problem is and will remain; when you drill deep down on this
forum, there are still pilots that do not buy the concept. Just dig a
little deeper and ask how many times in "their learning curves" they
broke their airplanes and what anguish they went through getting them
flying again. Many never flew. Why go through that? There's a perfect
example of what I'm talking about with a fellow Q pilot's plane
sitting in my hangar and another one in Bob Farnam's hangar. BTW,
those that did fly again either fixed the problems or learned to deal
with them and simply accepted their results as the way it is. It
doesn't have to be that way.
I wish Charles Coleman the best in trying to sell his airplane. If
you are new to this, again just be sure you know what you are getting
Regards and Happy New Year!
Jim Patillo N46JP Q200
Not trying to start another verbal contest, just my oppinion.
--- In Q-LIST@..., "instructor_bill"
If the GU canard was really "unsafe" wouldn't the FAA issue an
airworthiness directive to correct rain and bug contamination of
I fly a very technologically advanced airplane... one that doesn't
need all of that sophistication, but it's nice-- really nice. Even
though I know the Wright brothers were able to break the surly
using wing warping, but it simply worked-- it wasn't great (just
best at the time)
That said. I'm probably going to hold out for an airplane that was
built with the major fixes taken care of.
The six-pack would be nice, but not having an LS1 canard could be
real deal breaker for me on 24LM. Additionally, not having the
original logs or plans and having not flown for such a long time is
not confidence inspiring. The account that the engine had been
started with regularity is nice-- but it can't be proven without
real detective work-- occasional fuel receipts and the like. It's
possible (yet highly unlikely) these documents are available
I've got plenty of experience but I'm no test pilot. I've not been
to see the airplane and if I did, I might love it and love to own
but would probably regret the purchase because it really isn't the
airplane I want. I'd prefer to fly half-way 'cross the States to
see and fly an airplane for sale WITH THE OWNER or at least talk
somebody who has flown it and can relate fight quality to me.
Here's the info that Charles gave me. I wish you the best Charles
but maybe this isn't the plane for me.
Bill: Thanks for the call this evening. Here are the notes I've
to other interested parties. Feel free to call or email with
questions. Charles Coleman _____________________________________ I
not the builder, rather the third owner.Airworthiness Cert. July
1990.No spec sheet, but will be happy to answer any specific
questions onequipment.The revmaster 2100D is normally aspirated and
has high altitude heads, ratedat about 69HPThe prop is not constant
speed, but is in-flight adjustable.Empty weight 612, max gross
total fuel 23 gallons (15 main 8 header).Not a lot of room behind
seats but you can get a sleeping bag and asmall tent behind the
pilot. I believe that baggage is limited to 40lbs.Mode C
(has not been certified in the past 24 months but has hada quick
bench check and was told that it is within tolerance).Older Navcom
radio, works fine.Day and night VFR only, no gyro instruments.Has
position lights, cockpit lights, wingtip strobes and landing
I am 5' 7" with an inseam of 29". I have adequate head room for my
torsosize (about 1" clearance with the canopy when closed) but the
rudder pedalsare a few inches too far for my leg length. Ican
accommodate this by rotating my feet forward but it would be
morecomfortable for someone with an inseam of 31 or longer. I do
have theoriginal plans but do have quite a few of the Quickie
Builders Associationnewsletters which Mr. Moss subscribed to. I
some extra brake parts,the vacuum pump (which I removed as there
no vacuum instruments), theoriginal tailwheel, and other
miscellaneous items which I'll give to the newowner. No damage
history that I know of. Lee Moss finished the plane in the late80's
and flew it for about 75 hours until he lost his medical after
beingdiagnosed with Alzheimer's around 1991 or 92. From that time
until 2006 hekept it in his hangar at Apple Valley. He or his
partner would startthe engine every month or so, and did some
modifications from time to time.In 2006 Mr. Moss' Alzheimer's
condition was so advanced that he could nolonger visit the hangar
his family sold the plane to Dustin Shawver ofPhoenix Arizona. The
original logs were not found at that time as Mr. Mosshad thrown
many documents (his wife indicated to me that he had eventhrown
one large check). Dustin and Mr. Moss' hangar partner estimatedthe
total time on the plane as approximately 75 hours at that time,
Dustinestablished new log books for the airframe and engine, did
annualcondition inspection work with an A&P over a period of
and sold theplane to me approximately 18 months ago. Dustin did not
fly the planeduring his brief ownership. After retiring from my
airline job, I intendedto use the plane to commute from my summer
home in Washington to Van Nuys,where we spend the winters, but
shortly after purchasing it I had anabnormal EKG on my medical
and have not been able to get my medicalback. So I have not flown
airplane and probably will not be able to infuture. I did the
condition inspection work along with an A&P lastSpring and had the
inspection in April 2008. (I did a complete replacementof the brake
hardware, flushed and replaced the brake fluid, pulled theengine to
inspect the mags and to replace the starter motor, replaced astrobe
light, replaced the original tailwheel with the suggested retrofit
(more appropriate geometry and softer rubber), replaced the
for theelectric IVO prop. I contacted the Revmaster group at their
Hesperia officeto get a summary of any work Mr. Moss may have had
done there.....theyindicated that the only thing he had done was
installation of highaltitude heads, increasing HP from 64 to about
69. I've also visited theIVO prop office in Los Angeles to get a
history of the propeller. Theyindicated that it was purchased new
Mr. Moss and installed in the early90's. The transponder has not
a formal 24 month check. I did take it to ashop to have a fuse
replaced and the tech quickly checked frequencyresponses. He said
that the responses were within tolerance but could betweaked a bit.
So it is a late 1980s airplane which has been maintained in
airworthycondition, always hangared, with only 85 hours total time,
but has not beenflown since the early 90s. I've put about 10 hours
the Q2 doing taxitests, and have accidentally become airborne
high speed taxi testson 26L at Chino.....flew the length of the
runway in ground effect with nosurprises.Mr. Moss installed a
than normal header tank of 8 gallons.This in addition to the main
tank gives a capacity of about 23 gallons(other Q2s which I've seen
have capacities ranging from 15 gallons to 20gallons). The normal
performance is about 3gph at 150 mph so this planeshould have a
of over 1000 miles plus reserves. Top speed for most Q2sis around
170mph I am free most of the time to show the plane. It is at the
Chino Airport inCalifornia. ONT is the closest commercial
airport .....about 7 miles away.________________________________
fixed the 12V accessory outlet recently......it was a
groundingproblem. Everything works now.
--- In Q-LIST@..., "Jim Patillo"
No intructor_bill you ain't the "fella". This "fella" is from
Sacramento and his name is Nic.
Being new to Quickies, your concerns are legitimate. Jon is
in that the plane will fly and land with a GU canard (VG's),
Revemaster, single brake, T-tail, ect. However all you have to
read the NTSB reports and you will quickly understand why
off with a more refined aircraft might be perfered for a newbe.Maybe
I can state it another way, would you rather snow ski on old
technology or the new ones on the market today. They both work
the new ones can make bad look real good!The
I can't tell you how many times I've seen this senerio play out.
end results are almost always a broken prop, (props) brokenUltimately,
tailspring, broken tail, broken canard, totaled airplane.
you are the authority on your decisions.circuit
BTW Jon, Enzos are good.
--- In Q-LIST@..., "instructor_bill"
Hey there Jim...
Not totally sure if I'm the "fella" you're talking about having
I'm still thinking about it. With the GU canard and single
Hydro brake-- I'm still quite on the fence. I'm hoping to
out to see you, Bob, and the others out in LVK soon.Quickie.
As it stands right now, I'm just learning all I can about the
The Q200, and Suby-Q are most interesting to me so far.
I still have your email somewhere, but may just be giving you a
before I plan to visit one weekend coming up.
--- In Q-LIST@..., "Jim Patillo"
Anybody know anything about N24LM home based in Chino? Who
Charles Coleman appears to be the current owner? Your
I've been contacted by a fella who is interested.