Alluminum Q2


JMasal@...
 

It's nice to live in a free country, ain't it? You go Boy... and call me
when it's over so I can touch it.

j.


Rene Robertson <q2robertson@...>
 

Hey guys I just bought a set of plans and will be building a new all alluminum Q2 this winter.  See:
http://www.bcair.com/gallery/Gallery21/index.htm
What do you think?  I love the colour scheme.
Rene
Q2 C-GTCA



__________________________________________________________________
Get the name you've always wanted @ymail.com or @rocketmail.com! Go to http://ca.promos.yahoo.com/jacko/


jon@...
 

Hi Rene,

I spotted that in the last Q-Talk and fell in love. Your note reminded me to get the plans ordered! That said; I have one or two other projects in front of this so you might be me to completion! ;-)

Jon

-----Original Message-----
From: "Rene Robertson" <q2robertson@...>
Sent: Wednesday, November 4, 2009 9:51am
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: [Q-LIST] Alluminum Q2

Hey guys I just bought a set of plans and will be building a new all alluminum Q2 this winter. See:
http://www.bcair.com/gallery/Gallery21/index.htm
What do you think? I love the colour scheme.
Rene
Q2 C-GTCA



__________________________________________________________________
Get the name you've always wanted @ymail.com or @rocketmail.com! Go to http://ca.promos.yahoo.com/jacko/





------------------------------------

Quickie Builders Association WEB site
http://www.quickiebuilders.org

Yahoo! Groups Links


Rene Robertson <q2robertson@...>
 

Hi Jon,
 
Yep, it is a pretty cool little bird in can form.  I have a couple of projects as well, but let the building race begin :)
 
Rene

--- On Wed, 11/4/09, jon@... <jon@...> wrote:


From: jon@... <jon@...>
Subject: RE: [Q-LIST] Alluminum Q2
To: Q-LIST@...
Received: Wednesday, November 4, 2009, 4:21 PM


 




Hi Rene,

I spotted that in the last Q-Talk and fell in love. Your note reminded me to get the plans ordered! That said; I have one or two other projects in front of this so you might be me to completion! ;-)

Jon

-----Original Message-----
From: "Rene Robertson" <q2robertson@ yahoo.ca>
Sent: Wednesday, November 4, 2009 9:51am
To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups. com
Subject: [Q-LIST] Alluminum Q2

Hey guys I just bought a set of plans and will be building a new all alluminum Q2 this winter. See:
http://www.bcair. com/gallery/ Gallery21/ index.htm
What do you think? I love the colour scheme.
Rene
Q2 C-GTCA

____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _
Get the name you've always wanted @ymail.com or @rocketmail. com! Go to http://ca.promos. yahoo.com/ jacko/

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

------------ --------- --------- ------

Quickie Builders Association WEB site
http://www.quickieb uilders.org

Yahoo! Groups Links











__________________________________________________________________
Looking for the perfect gift? Give the gift of Flickr!

http://www.flickr.com/gift/


Isaksson Roger <scratchdeeper@...>
 

Miller cans have better flutter reistance over Bud cans. If you want to build it like a tank, use Fosters Lager, but you may run into weight issues that way. A good middle way is to use Coors, in our community they always comes with approval,...gay or not.... as you can grab them on the fly. !!!??
 
These postings remind me of an old question that I never had a good answer to.
 
Anyone that knows better, and can do some education here please.
 
Assuming:
Same aircraft frame, same dimensions and same calculated strengh.
 
Also assuming we compare the three most common ways of building aircrafts, Aluminum, composite , wood/tube/fabric.
 
I was told once that the Aluminum is by far the lightest, followed by wood/tube/fabric, and very close afterwards composite as the heaviest.
 
True/False?
 
The world wonders.
 
Roger

--- On Wed, 11/4/09, Rene Robertson <q2robertson@...> wrote:


From: Rene Robertson <q2robertson@...>
Subject: [Q-LIST] Alluminum Q2
To: Q-LIST@...
Date: Wednesday, November 4, 2009, 8:51 AM


 



Hey guys I just bought a set of plans and will be building a new all alluminum Q2 this winter.  See:
http://www.bcair. com/gallery/ Gallery21/ index.htm
What do you think?  I love the colour scheme.
Rene
Q2 C-GTCA

____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _
Get the name you've always wanted @ymail.com or @rocketmail. com! Go to http://ca.promos. yahoo.com/ jacko/

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



















[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Jon Finley <jon@...>
 

Hi Roger,

Assuming that cost is not a factor, I would have a hard time believing that
high-tech composites would not be the winner. However; that is only a
guess/opinion.

Jon Finley
N314JF - Q2 - Subaru EJ-22
http://www.finleyweb.net/Q2Subaru.aspx

"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom and dignity.
It is the argument of tyrants and it is the creed of slaves" - William Pitt
in the House of Commons

-----Original Message-----
From: Q-LIST@... [mailto:Q-LIST@...] On Behalf
Of Isaksson Roger
Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2009 3:52 AM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Alluminum Q2

Miller cans have better flutter reistance over Bud cans. If you want to
build it like a tank, use Fosters Lager, but you may run into weight
issues that way. A good middle way is to use Coors, in our community
they always comes with approval,...gay or not.... as you can grab them
on the fly. !!!??

These postings remind me of an old question that I never had a good
answer to.

Anyone that knows better, and can do some education here please.

Assuming:
Same aircraft frame, same dimensions and same calculated strengh.

Also assuming we compare the three most common ways of building
aircrafts, Aluminum, composite , wood/tube/fabric.

I was told once that the Aluminum is by far the lightest, followed by
wood/tube/fabric, and very close afterwards composite as the heaviest.

True/False?

The world wonders.

Roger


britmcman99
 

Yep. that's why all those America's Cup boats are built out of aluminum.
Phil Lankford, Smart Alec...self assured to the point of impudence.

In a message dated 11/5/2009 9:38:39 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
jon@... writes:




Hi Roger,

Assuming that cost is not a factor, I would have a hard time believing that
high-tech composites would not be the winner. However; that is only a
guess/opinion.

Jon Finley
N314JF - Q2 - Subaru EJ-22
_http://www.finleywehttp://www.finlhttp_
(http://www.finleyweb.net/Q2Subaru.aspx)

"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom and dignity.
It is the argument of tyrants and it is the creed of slaves" - William Pitt
in the House of Commons

-----Original Message-----
From: _Q-LIST@... (mailto:Q-LIST@...)
[mailto:_Q-LIST@... (mailto:Q-LIST@...) ] On Behalf
Of Isaksson Roger
Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2009 3:52 AM
To: _Q-LIST@... (mailto:Q-LIST@...)
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Alluminum Q2

Miller cans have better flutter reistance over Bud cans. If you want to
build it like a tank, use Fosters Lager, but you may run into weight
issues that way. A good middle way is to use Coors, in our community
they always comes with approval,... they always c as you can grab them
on the fly. !!!??

These postings remind me of an old question that I never had a good
answer to.

Anyone that knows better, and can do some education here please.

Assuming:
Same aircraft frame, same dimensions and same calculated strengh.

Also assuming we compare the three most common ways of building
aircrafts, Aluminum, composite , wood/tube/fabric.

I was told once that the Aluminum is by far the lightest, followed by
wood/tube/fabric, and very close afterwards composite as the heaviest.

True/False?

The world wonders.

Roger


One Sky Dog
 

Jon and Roger,

When talking wood vs Al. vs composites you have to have more info.
Composites are 2 materials of different properties that when combined have
properties that the constituent parts do not have. Like steel reinforced concrete
is a composite material and airplanes made out of it are heavy. I admit
that there are some heavy glass airplanes out there like the Air Shark a molded
glass vinyl ester resin kit plane from the early days.

If Aluminum is the lightest and best performing then all of the advanced
airframe makers are up to no good selling composite airplanes. Properly
designed and built composite structures outperform metal on both specific
properties and ultimate load carrying.

Regards,

Charlie Johnson
Dragonfly in work, 550 hours in type

In a message dated 11/5/2009 10:38:34 P.M. Mountain Standard Time,
jon@... writes:

Hi Roger,

Assuming that cost is not a factor, I would have a hard time believing that
high-tech composites would not be the winner. However; that is only a
guess/opinion.

Jon Finley
N314JF - Q2 - Subaru EJ-22
http://www.finleyweb.net/Q2Subaru.aspx

"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom and dignity.
It is the argument of tyrants and it is the creed of slaves" - William Pitt
in the House of Commons





-----Original Message-----
From: Q-LIST@... [mailto:Q-LIST@...] On Behalf
Of Isaksson Roger
Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2009 3:52 AM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Alluminum Q2

Miller cans have better flutter reistance over Bud cans. If you want to
build it like a tank, use Fosters Lager, but you may run into weight
issues that way. A good middle way is to use Coors, in our community
they always comes with approval,...gay or not.... as you can grab them
on the fly. !!!??

These postings remind me of an old question that I never had a good
answer to.

Anyone that knows better, and can do some education here please.

Assuming:
Same aircraft frame, same dimensions and same calculated strengh.

Also assuming we compare the three most common ways of building
aircrafts, Aluminum, composite , wood/tube/fabric.

I was told once that the Aluminum is by far the lightest, followed by
wood/tube/fabric, and very close afterwards composite as the heaviest.

True/False?

The world wonders.

Roger


------------------------------------

Quickie Builders Association WEB site
http://www.quickiebuilders.org

Yahoo! Groups Links


Steve <sham@...>
 

I believe they replace those boats every year..and Boeing is going all composite...

----- Original Message -----
From: britmcman@...
To: Q-LIST@...
Sent: Friday, November 06, 2009 2:36 PM
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Alluminum Q2



Yep. that's why all those America's Cup boats are built out of aluminum.
Phil Lankford, Smart Alec...self assured to the point of impudence.




In a message dated 11/5/2009 9:38:39 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
jon@... writes:

Hi Roger,

Assuming that cost is not a factor, I would have a hard time believing that
high-tech composites would not be the winner. However; that is only a
guess/opinion.

Jon Finley
N314JF - Q2 - Subaru EJ-22
_http://www.finleywehttp://www.finlhttp_
(http://www.finleyweb.net/Q2Subaru.aspx)

"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom and dignity.
It is the argument of tyrants and it is the creed of slaves" - William Pitt
in the House of Commons

> -----Original Message-----
> From: _Q-LIST@... (mailto:Q-LIST@...)
[mailto:_Q-LIST@... (mailto:Q-LIST@...) ] On Behalf
> Of Isaksson Roger
> Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2009 3:52 AM
> To: _Q-LIST@... (mailto:Q-LIST@...)
> Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Alluminum Q2
>
> Miller cans have better flutter reistance over Bud cans. If you want to
> build it like a tank, use Fosters Lager, but you may run into weight
> issues that way. A good middle way is to use Coors, in our community
> they always comes with approval,... they always c as you can grab them
> on the fly. !!!??
>
> These postings remind me of an old question that I never had a good
> answer to.
>
> Anyone that knows better, and can do some education here please.
>
> Assuming:
> Same aircraft frame, same dimensions and same calculated strengh.
>
> Also assuming we compare the three most common ways of building
> aircrafts, Aluminum, composite , wood/tube/fabric.
>
> I was told once that the Aluminum is by far the lightest, followed by
> wood/tube/fabric, and very close afterwards composite as the heaviest.
>
> True/False?
>
> The world wonders.
>
> Roger

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Rene Robertson <q2robertson@...>
 

Not a direct comparison, but close; I also own and fly a tube and fabric Rans S10.  The size of the airplane I think is comparable to the Q2.  The Rans S10's empty weight is 492 lbs while my Q2's empty weight was 585 lbs.  Now the main difference here was engine.  The S10 has a Rotax 582 and the Q2 a Revmaster 2165.  The Revmaster is almost exactly 100 lbs more than the Rotax.  So.....if we add 100 lbs to the tube and fabric S10 it would be 592 lbs and very close to the Q2 weight of 585.
 
Rene
Q2 C-GTCA

--- On Fri, 11/6/09, Steve <sham@...> wrote:


From: Steve <sham@...>
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Alluminum Q2
To: Q-LIST@...
Received: Friday, November 6, 2009, 7:31 PM


 



I believe they replace those boats every year..and Boeing is going all composite...

----- Original Message -----
From: britmcman@aol. com
To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups. com
Sent: Friday, November 06, 2009 2:36 PM
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Alluminum Q2

Yep. that's why all those America's Cup boats are built out of aluminum.
Phil Lankford, Smart Alec...self assured to the point of impudence.

In a message dated 11/5/2009 9:38:39 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
jon@finleyweb. net writes:

Hi Roger,

Assuming that cost is not a factor, I would have a hard time believing that
high-tech composites would not be the winner. However; that is only a
guess/opinion.

Jon Finley
N314JF - Q2 - Subaru EJ-22
_http://www.finleywe http://www. finlhttp_
(http://www.finleywe b.net/Q2Subaru. aspx)

"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom and dignity.
It is the argument of tyrants and it is the creed of slaves" - William Pitt
in the House of Commons

-----Original Message-----
From: _Q-LIST@yahoogroups .Q-L_ (mailto:Q-LIST@yahoogroups. com)
[mailto:_Q-LIST@yahoogroups .Q-L_ (mailto:Q-LIST@yahoogroups. com) ] On Behalf
Of Isaksson Roger
Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2009 3:52 AM
To: _Q-LIST@yahoogroups .Q-L_ (mailto:Q-LIST@yahoogroups. com)
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Alluminum Q2

Miller cans have better flutter reistance over Bud cans. If you want to
build it like a tank, use Fosters Lager, but you may run into weight
issues that way. A good middle way is to use Coors, in our community
they always comes with approval,... they always c as you can grab them
on the fly. !!!??

These postings remind me of an old question that I never had a good
answer to.

Anyone that knows better, and can do some education here please.

Assuming:
Same aircraft frame, same dimensions and same calculated strengh.

Also assuming we compare the three most common ways of building
aircrafts, Aluminum, composite , wood/tube/fabric.

I was told once that the Aluminum is by far the lightest, followed by
wood/tube/fabric, and very close afterwards composite as the heaviest.

True/False?

The world wonders.

Roger


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]









__________________________________________________________________
The new Internet Explorer® 8 - Faster, safer, easier. Optimized for Yahoo! Get it Now for Free! at http://downloads.yahoo.com/ca/internetexplorer/

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Jon Finley <jon@...>
 

Now Rene, that makes me chuckle. The Q2 is 30 years old, apparently never underwent "proper design", and is certainly NOT an example of modern "glass" technology.

Jon

-----Original Message-----
From: Q-LIST@... [mailto:Q-LIST@...] On Behalf
Of Rene Robertson
Sent: Saturday, November 07, 2009 8:15 PM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Alluminum Q2

Not a direct comparison, but close; I also own and fly a tube and
fabric Rans S10. The size of the airplane I think is comparable to the
Q2. The Rans S10's empty weight is 492 lbs while my Q2's empty weight
was 585 lbs. Now the main difference here was engine. The S10 has a
Rotax 582 and the Q2 a Revmaster 2165. The Revmaster is almost exactly
100 lbs more than the Rotax. So.....if we add 100 lbs to the tube and
fabric S10 it would be 592 lbs and very close to the Q2 weight of 585.

Rene
Q2 C-GTCA


Mike Perry
 

Hello Roger:

Sorry to be late with this (I was out of town when you posted) but I sat in on an interesting seminar with Cal Poly engineering students this spring. The Professor asked the students to discuss which material is lighter: Aluminum vs. composites vs. wood. The final answer seems to be: it depends (on exactly what you are building). The Q-2 isn't the lightest possible structure for the same strength but it may be the lightest structure you can build with home tools and finish to an extremely smooth surface.

The other comment from the seminar: saying "composite structure" today is like saying "vegetable"; you need to be more specific and there are many different composite structures.

Mike Perry

Isaksson Roger wrote:


[snip]
These postings remind me of an old question that I never had a good answer to.
Anyone that knows better, and can do some education here please.
Assuming:
Same aircraft frame, same dimensions and same calculated strengh.
Also assuming we compare the three most common ways of building aircrafts, Aluminum, composite , wood/tube/fabric.
I was told once that the Aluminum is by far the lightest, followed by wood/tube/fabric, and very close afterwards composite as the heaviest.
True/False?
The world wonders.
Roger



Mark A. Pearson <wlkabout@...>
 

Life (and aircraft construction) is a series of tradeoffs

----- Original Message -----
From: Mike Perry
To: Q-LIST@...
Sent: Monday, November 09, 2009 8:58 PM
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Alluminum Q2



Hello Roger:

Sorry to be late with this (I was out of town when you posted) but I sat
in on an interesting seminar with Cal Poly engineering students this
spring. The Professor asked the students to discuss which material is
lighter: Aluminum vs. composites vs. wood. The final answer seems to
be: it depends (on exactly what you are building). The Q-2 isn't the
lightest possible structure for the same strength but it may be the
lightest structure you can build with home tools and finish to an
extremely smooth surface.

The other comment from the seminar: saying "composite structure" today
is like saying "vegetable"; you need to be more specific and there are
many different composite structures.

Mike Perry

Isaksson Roger wrote:
>
>
> [snip]
> These postings remind me of an old question that I never had a good
> answer to.
>
> Anyone that knows better, and can do some education here please.
>
> Assuming:
> Same aircraft frame, same dimensions and same calculated strengh.
>
> Also assuming we compare the three most common ways of building
> aircrafts, Aluminum, composite , wood/tube/fabric.
>
> I was told once that the Aluminum is by far the lightest, followed by
> wood/tube/fabric, and very close afterwards composite as the heaviest.
>
> True/False?
>
> The world wonders.
>
> Roger
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


Isaksson Roger <scratchdeeper@...>
 

Thanks all,
 
Seems like there is no consensus on one method in particular.
 
Especially in the composite field, the material, and methods have been advancing pretty good the last...lets say 50 years or so.
 
Nowadays, compared with methods in the late 70-s and early -80's, (they hey days of composite aircrafts) , the composite technology have advanced pretty good.
 
No doubt, if the Q's, and Eze's would have been constructed out of owen baked , vaccum applied carbonfiber, compared with wet fiberglass, they would have been lighter, for the same strengh.
 
So I guess it is correct to say that,  what is lightest, composite, aluminum, wood/tube/cloth, can not really be established fully.
 
I do know one thing for sure, in the field of sailing boats, many early fiberglass sailing boats
were thick walled to the point that it was almost absurd.
 
Thin walled ( comparably) fiberglass boats of todays standard are just as strong.
 
I do believe also , however, that the commercial airplane manufacturing industry have been following the composite trend for quite some time, but have not been satisfied  with the weightsavings until only in the recent years , when more sophisticated production methods, epoxies, and fiber material finally will make the whole creation more lightweight.

A proposition that unfortunately for us will be mostly out of reach, because of cost.
 
Were mostly stuck with the fiberglass and brush on (or roll on)  method. It has not change much and it will do us just as it did us did in the -70's.
 
Wonder what ever happened with the development of those nano carbon, They made buckyballs, and the latest development was very promising, where they were able to build up the carbon in endless tubes. As far as I was following that some time ago, the strengh of those fibers would beat most anything on earth.
 
Woulndt that be something.
 
We cut the foam, and put a nanocarbon sock over it, break out a spraycan, and spray it, with some exotic epoxy, let it cure for a half an hour and we're done.
 
Just dreaming of future composit developments.
 
I thankyou all for a good input on this issue.
 
Roger

--- On Mon, 11/9/09, Mark A. Pearson <wlkabout@...> wrote:


From: Mark A. Pearson <wlkabout@...>
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Alluminum Q2
To: Q-LIST@...
Date: Monday, November 9, 2009, 8:07 PM


 



Life (and aircraft construction) is a series of tradeoffs

----- Original Message -----
From: Mike Perry
To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups. com
Sent: Monday, November 09, 2009 8:58 PM
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Alluminum Q2

Hello Roger:

Sorry to be late with this (I was out of town when you posted) but I sat
in on an interesting seminar with Cal Poly engineering students this
spring. The Professor asked the students to discuss which material is
lighter: Aluminum vs. composites vs. wood. The final answer seems to
be: it depends (on exactly what you are building). The Q-2 isn't the
lightest possible structure for the same strength but it may be the
lightest structure you can build with home tools and finish to an
extremely smooth surface.

The other comment from the seminar: saying "composite structure" today
is like saying "vegetable"; you need to be more specific and there are
many different composite structures.

Mike Perry

Isaksson Roger wrote:


[snip]
These postings remind me of an old question that I never had a good
answer to.

Anyone that knows better, and can do some education here please.

Assuming:
Same aircraft frame, same dimensions and same calculated strengh.

Also assuming we compare the three most common ways of building
aircrafts, Aluminum, composite , wood/tube/fabric.

I was told once that the Aluminum is by far the lightest, followed by
wood/tube/fabric, and very close afterwards composite as the heaviest.

True/False?

The world wonders.

Roger