Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards


Michael
 

Figured I would post these based on today's discussion. Both sets of plans are available on Quickheads for comparison. Turns out my Q2 has the Tri-Q version (not sure why), so worth checking if you have a new or new-to-you Quickie?

QAC Q2/Q200 Belly Board Plans
Tri-Q Belly Board Drag Brake (Option)

The primary difference is in location, geometry, and materials:
  1. The QAC version uses a carbon board originally sold as part of an upgrade kit, while the Tri-Q version uses the foam cut from the fuselage.
  2. From the hinge, the QAC version is a long & tall rectangle, while the Tri-Q version is a narrow & wide rectangle.
  3. The QAC version is located between the canard spar and under the forward part of the fuel tank (see last page of PDF), while the Tri-Q version goes behind the seat back bulkhead in the baggage/landing gear area (see last figure).
Both versions hinge from the rear and "scoop" air up from the front; although Jerry Marstall has flipped his around for reasons he explains. Haven't flown mine yet, so hopefully some experienced Q-drivers can chime in on what (if any) handling differences exist between the two versions...

Hope it helps,
--
-MD
#2827 (still thinking about planning on visualizing how to finish building)


Richard Thomson
 

Hi Michael,

On my TriQ I have similar concerns to those Jerry notes in the mod write up, in fact when I got it, the belly board had been bolted shut and the handle was removed. I have replaced it to the TriQ plan, but it does sit slightly proud, at the corners, so for me Jerry's mod is something I will look to do on mine next year after we have got it flying.

The Triq nose gear fits along the underneath of the Canard, so probably not possible to use the Q2/Q200 Belly board, if you are wondering why there are 2 versions.

Br

Rich T.

On 12/12/2020 18:06, Michael wrote:
Figured I would post these based on today's discussion. Both sets of plans are available on Quickheads for comparison. Turns out my Q2 has the Tri-Q version (not sure why), so worth checking if you have a new or new-to-you Quickie?

QAC Q2/Q200 Belly Board Plans
Tri-Q Belly Board Drag Brake (Option)

The primary difference is in location, geometry, and materials:
  1. The QAC version uses a carbon board originally sold as part of an upgrade kit, while the Tri-Q version uses the foam cut from the fuselage.
  2. From the hinge, the QAC version is a long & tall rectangle, while the Tri-Q version is a narrow & wide rectangle.
  3. The QAC version is located between the canard spar and under the forward part of the fuel tank (see last page of PDF), while the Tri-Q version goes behind the seat back bulkhead in the baggage/landing gear area (see last figure).
Both versions hinge from the rear and "scoop" air up from the front; although Jerry Marstall has flipped his around for reasons he explains. Haven't flown mine yet, so hopefully some experienced Q-drivers can chime in on what (if any) handling differences exist between the two versions...

Hope it helps,
--
-MD
#2827 (still thinking about planning on visualizing how to finish building)


Richard Kaczmarek 3RD
 

From my personal experience of having flown both I prefer the TriQ brake over the forward belly board. The placement does not cause the pitch change that we experienced with Doug's old Q2. We turned our original TriQ board around from the original rear hinge to the front due to seeing it flutter in flight. With the hinge on the front side we no longer ended up with exhaust smells in the cockpit during landings and the plane experienced an overall speed increase (door no longer grabbing air in the fludder) it can also handle being on a servo with a front hinge or even the Van's flap motor so you can see the degrees of deployment. 

Richard 

-------- Original message --------
From: Richard Thomson <richard@...>
Date: 12/12/20 3:28 PM (GMT-05:00)
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

Hi Michael,

On my TriQ I have similar concerns to those Jerry notes in the mod write up, in fact when I got it, the belly board had been bolted shut and the handle was removed. I have replaced it to the TriQ plan, but it does sit slightly proud, at the corners, so for me Jerry's mod is something I will look to do on mine next year after we have got it flying.

The Triq nose gear fits along the underneath of the Canard, so probably not possible to use the Q2/Q200 Belly board, if you are wondering why there are 2 versions.

Br

Rich T.

On 12/12/2020 18:06, Michael wrote:
Figured I would post these based on today's discussion. Both sets of plans are available on Quickheads for comparison. Turns out my Q2 has the Tri-Q version (not sure why), so worth checking if you have a new or new-to-you Quickie?

QAC Q2/Q200 Belly Board Plans
Tri-Q Belly Board Drag Brake (Option)

The primary difference is in location, geometry, and materials:
  1. The QAC version uses a carbon board originally sold as part of an upgrade kit, while the Tri-Q version uses the foam cut from the fuselage.
  2. From the hinge, the QAC version is a long & tall rectangle, while the Tri-Q version is a narrow & wide rectangle.
  3. The QAC version is located between the canard spar and under the forward part of the fuel tank (see last page of PDF), while the Tri-Q version goes behind the seat back bulkhead in the baggage/landing gear area (see last figure).
Both versions hinge from the rear and "scoop" air up from the front; although Jerry Marstall has flipped his around for reasons he explains. Haven't flown mine yet, so hopefully some experienced Q-drivers can chime in on what (if any) handling differences exist between the two versions...

Hope it helps,
--
-MD
#2827 (still thinking about planning on visualizing how to finish building)


Richard Thomson
 

Good idea Richard, Van's flap motor. gives more options. Thanks.

Rich T.

On 12/12/2020 20:54, Richard Kaczmarek 3RD wrote:
From my personal experience of having flown both I prefer the TriQ brake over the forward belly board. The placement does not cause the pitch change that we experienced with Doug's old Q2. We turned our original TriQ board around from the original rear hinge to the front due to seeing it flutter in flight. With the hinge on the front side we no longer ended up with exhaust smells in the cockpit during landings and the plane experienced an overall speed increase (door no longer grabbing air in the fludder) it can also handle being on a servo with a front hinge or even the Van's flap motor so you can see the degrees of deployment. 

Richard 

-------- Original message --------
From: Richard Thomson <richard@...>
Date: 12/12/20 3:28 PM (GMT-05:00)
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

Hi Michael,

On my TriQ I have similar concerns to those Jerry notes in the mod write up, in fact when I got it, the belly board had been bolted shut and the handle was removed. I have replaced it to the TriQ plan, but it does sit slightly proud, at the corners, so for me Jerry's mod is something I will look to do on mine next year after we have got it flying.

The Triq nose gear fits along the underneath of the Canard, so probably not possible to use the Q2/Q200 Belly board, if you are wondering why there are 2 versions.

Br

Rich T.

On 12/12/2020 18:06, Michael wrote:
Figured I would post these based on today's discussion. Both sets of plans are available on Quickheads for comparison. Turns out my Q2 has the Tri-Q version (not sure why), so worth checking if you have a new or new-to-you Quickie?

QAC Q2/Q200 Belly Board Plans
Tri-Q Belly Board Drag Brake (Option)

The primary difference is in location, geometry, and materials:
  1. The QAC version uses a carbon board originally sold as part of an upgrade kit, while the Tri-Q version uses the foam cut from the fuselage.
  2. From the hinge, the QAC version is a long & tall rectangle, while the Tri-Q version is a narrow & wide rectangle.
  3. The QAC version is located between the canard spar and under the forward part of the fuel tank (see last page of PDF), while the Tri-Q version goes behind the seat back bulkhead in the baggage/landing gear area (see last figure).
Both versions hinge from the rear and "scoop" air up from the front; although Jerry Marstall has flipped his around for reasons he explains. Haven't flown mine yet, so hopefully some experienced Q-drivers can chime in on what (if any) handling differences exist between the two versions...

Hope it helps,
--
-MD
#2827 (still thinking about planning on visualizing how to finish building)


Jerry Marstall <jnmarstall@...>
 

My 2-cents. Manual is faster to deploy and bring up.. No needed for incremental use ( no notches in lever). It's either full up or full down.  
Jerry 

-------- Original message --------
From: Richard Thomson <richard@...>
Date: 12/13/20 5:09 AM (GMT-05:00)
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

Good idea Richard, Van's flap motor. gives more options. Thanks.

Rich T.

On 12/12/2020 20:54, Richard Kaczmarek 3RD wrote:
From my personal experience of having flown both I prefer the TriQ brake over the forward belly board. The placement does not cause the pitch change that we experienced with Doug's old Q2. We turned our original TriQ board around from the original rear hinge to the front due to seeing it flutter in flight. With the hinge on the front side we no longer ended up with exhaust smells in the cockpit during landings and the plane experienced an overall speed increase (door no longer grabbing air in the fludder) it can also handle being on a servo with a front hinge or even the Van's flap motor so you can see the degrees of deployment. 

Richard 

-------- Original message --------
From: Richard Thomson <richard@...>
Date: 12/12/20 3:28 PM (GMT-05:00)
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

Hi Michael,

On my TriQ I have similar concerns to those Jerry notes in the mod write up, in fact when I got it, the belly board had been bolted shut and the handle was removed. I have replaced it to the TriQ plan, but it does sit slightly proud, at the corners, so for me Jerry's mod is something I will look to do on mine next year after we have got it flying.

The Triq nose gear fits along the underneath of the Canard, so probably not possible to use the Q2/Q200 Belly board, if you are wondering why there are 2 versions.

Br

Rich T.

On 12/12/2020 18:06, Michael wrote:
Figured I would post these based on today's discussion. Both sets of plans are available on Quickheads for comparison. Turns out my Q2 has the Tri-Q version (not sure why), so worth checking if you have a new or new-to-you Quickie?

QAC Q2/Q200 Belly Board Plans
Tri-Q Belly Board Drag Brake (Option)

The primary difference is in location, geometry, and materials:
  1. The QAC version uses a carbon board originally sold as part of an upgrade kit, while the Tri-Q version uses the foam cut from the fuselage.
  2. From the hinge, the QAC version is a long & tall rectangle, while the Tri-Q version is a narrow & wide rectangle.
  3. The QAC version is located between the canard spar and under the forward part of the fuel tank (see last page of PDF), while the Tri-Q version goes behind the seat back bulkhead in the baggage/landing gear area (see last figure).
Both versions hinge from the rear and "scoop" air up from the front; although Jerry Marstall has flipped his around for reasons he explains. Haven't flown mine yet, so hopefully some experienced Q-drivers can chime in on what (if any) handling differences exist between the two versions...

Hope it helps,
--
-MD
#2827 (still thinking about planning on visualizing how to finish building)


Richard Thomson
 

Already made a new lever with the ratchet, but it's easy enough to lock in or out either end. 

As the rest is already there, manual sounds the easiest option for me with a new bit of leverage sorted out.

Went with the manual reflex for those same reasons, also keeping power consumption low and weight down.

Sometimes 2 cents is worth a fortune Jerry.

Rich T.

On 13/12/2020 12:44, Jerry Marstall wrote:
My 2-cents. Manual is faster to deploy and bring up.. No needed for incremental use ( no notches in lever). It's either full up or full down.  
Jerry 

-------- Original message --------
From: Richard Thomson <richard@...>
Date: 12/13/20 5:09 AM (GMT-05:00)
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

Good idea Richard, Van's flap motor. gives more options. Thanks.

Rich T.

On 12/12/2020 20:54, Richard Kaczmarek 3RD wrote:
From my personal experience of having flown both I prefer the TriQ brake over the forward belly board. The placement does not cause the pitch change that we experienced with Doug's old Q2. We turned our original TriQ board around from the original rear hinge to the front due to seeing it flutter in flight. With the hinge on the front side we no longer ended up with exhaust smells in the cockpit during landings and the plane experienced an overall speed increase (door no longer grabbing air in the fludder) it can also handle being on a servo with a front hinge or even the Van's flap motor so you can see the degrees of deployment. 

Richard 

-------- Original message --------
From: Richard Thomson <richard@...>
Date: 12/12/20 3:28 PM (GMT-05:00)
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

Hi Michael,

On my TriQ I have similar concerns to those Jerry notes in the mod write up, in fact when I got it, the belly board had been bolted shut and the handle was removed. I have replaced it to the TriQ plan, but it does sit slightly proud, at the corners, so for me Jerry's mod is something I will look to do on mine next year after we have got it flying.

The Triq nose gear fits along the underneath of the Canard, so probably not possible to use the Q2/Q200 Belly board, if you are wondering why there are 2 versions.

Br

Rich T.

On 12/12/2020 18:06, Michael wrote:
Figured I would post these based on today's discussion. Both sets of plans are available on Quickheads for comparison. Turns out my Q2 has the Tri-Q version (not sure why), so worth checking if you have a new or new-to-you Quickie?

QAC Q2/Q200 Belly Board Plans
Tri-Q Belly Board Drag Brake (Option)

The primary difference is in location, geometry, and materials:
  1. The QAC version uses a carbon board originally sold as part of an upgrade kit, while the Tri-Q version uses the foam cut from the fuselage.
  2. From the hinge, the QAC version is a long & tall rectangle, while the Tri-Q version is a narrow & wide rectangle.
  3. The QAC version is located between the canard spar and under the forward part of the fuel tank (see last page of PDF), while the Tri-Q version goes behind the seat back bulkhead in the baggage/landing gear area (see last figure).
Both versions hinge from the rear and "scoop" air up from the front; although Jerry Marstall has flipped his around for reasons he explains. Haven't flown mine yet, so hopefully some experienced Q-drivers can chime in on what (if any) handling differences exist between the two versions...

Hope it helps,
--
-MD
#2827 (still thinking about planning on visualizing how to finish building)


Jerry Marstall <jnmarstall@...>
 

To the contrary, I have my reflexer electric and operated by the trim button on my stick. I do not have elevator trim.  I use the reflexer for pitch trim.  I am trimming all the time, depending upon stick pressures. That way I am always flying a trimmed airplane.

-------- Original message --------
From: Richard Thomson <richard@...>
Date: 12/13/20 9:44 AM (GMT-05:00)
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

Already made a new lever with the ratchet, but it's easy enough to lock in or out either end. 

As the rest is already there, manual sounds the easiest option for me with a new bit of leverage sorted out.

Went with the manual reflex for those same reasons, also keeping power consumption low and weight down.

Sometimes 2 cents is worth a fortune Jerry.

Rich T.

On 13/12/2020 12:44, Jerry Marstall wrote:
My 2-cents. Manual is faster to deploy and bring up.. No needed for incremental use ( no notches in lever). It's either full up or full down.  
Jerry 

-------- Original message --------
From: Richard Thomson <richard@...>
Date: 12/13/20 5:09 AM (GMT-05:00)
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

Good idea Richard, Van's flap motor. gives more options. Thanks.

Rich T.

On 12/12/2020 20:54, Richard Kaczmarek 3RD wrote:
From my personal experience of having flown both I prefer the TriQ brake over the forward belly board. The placement does not cause the pitch change that we experienced with Doug's old Q2. We turned our original TriQ board around from the original rear hinge to the front due to seeing it flutter in flight. With the hinge on the front side we no longer ended up with exhaust smells in the cockpit during landings and the plane experienced an overall speed increase (door no longer grabbing air in the fludder) it can also handle being on a servo with a front hinge or even the Van's flap motor so you can see the degrees of deployment. 

Richard 

-------- Original message --------
From: Richard Thomson <richard@...>
Date: 12/12/20 3:28 PM (GMT-05:00)
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

Hi Michael,

On my TriQ I have similar concerns to those Jerry notes in the mod write up, in fact when I got it, the belly board had been bolted shut and the handle was removed. I have replaced it to the TriQ plan, but it does sit slightly proud, at the corners, so for me Jerry's mod is something I will look to do on mine next year after we have got it flying.

The Triq nose gear fits along the underneath of the Canard, so probably not possible to use the Q2/Q200 Belly board, if you are wondering why there are 2 versions.

Br

Rich T.

On 12/12/2020 18:06, Michael wrote:
Figured I would post these based on today's discussion. Both sets of plans are available on Quickheads for comparison. Turns out my Q2 has the Tri-Q version (not sure why), so worth checking if you have a new or new-to-you Quickie?

QAC Q2/Q200 Belly Board Plans
Tri-Q Belly Board Drag Brake (Option)

The primary difference is in location, geometry, and materials:
  1. The QAC version uses a carbon board originally sold as part of an upgrade kit, while the Tri-Q version uses the foam cut from the fuselage.
  2. From the hinge, the QAC version is a long & tall rectangle, while the Tri-Q version is a narrow & wide rectangle.
  3. The QAC version is located between the canard spar and under the forward part of the fuel tank (see last page of PDF), while the Tri-Q version goes behind the seat back bulkhead in the baggage/landing gear area (see last figure).
Both versions hinge from the rear and "scoop" air up from the front; although Jerry Marstall has flipped his around for reasons he explains. Haven't flown mine yet, so hopefully some experienced Q-drivers can chime in on what (if any) handling differences exist between the two versions...

Hope it helps,
--
-MD
#2827 (still thinking about planning on visualizing how to finish building)


smeshno1@...
 

 I like this idea, Jerry. Do tell the parts involved please. Also.. you have an indicator of some sort for reflex 
position for takeoff? My first thoughts are aerodynamics would be improved with your system as well as
constant trim under thumb being an intuitive process.  

 My first CFI was a hard nosed airforce instructor that flew combat in Korea and Viet Nam. 

 He demanded I remain in a trimmed aircraft all the time. Forward hinged belly board also electric
 is another one added to the list of items to track down. 

 Vern    


From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> on behalf of Jerry Marstall <jnmarstall@...>
Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2020 9:26 AM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards
 
To the contrary, I have my reflexer electric and operated by the trim button on my stick. I do not have elevator trim.  I use the reflexer for pitch trim.  I am trimming all the time, depending upon stick pressures. That way I am always flying a trimmed airplane.

-------- Original message --------
From: Richard Thomson <richard@...>
Date: 12/13/20 9:44 AM (GMT-05:00)
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

Already made a new lever with the ratchet, but it's easy enough to lock in or out either end. 

As the rest is already there, manual sounds the easiest option for me with a new bit of leverage sorted out.

Went with the manual reflex for those same reasons, also keeping power consumption low and weight down.

Sometimes 2 cents is worth a fortune Jerry.

Rich T.

On 13/12/2020 12:44, Jerry Marstall wrote:
My 2-cents. Manual is faster to deploy and bring up.. No needed for incremental use ( no notches in lever). It's either full up or full down.  
Jerry 

-------- Original message --------
From: Richard Thomson <richard@...>
Date: 12/13/20 5:09 AM (GMT-05:00)
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

Good idea Richard, Van's flap motor. gives more options. Thanks.

Rich T.

On 12/12/2020 20:54, Richard Kaczmarek 3RD wrote:
From my personal experience of having flown both I prefer the TriQ brake over the forward belly board. The placement does not cause the pitch change that we experienced with Doug's old Q2. We turned our original TriQ board around from the original rear hinge to the front due to seeing it flutter in flight. With the hinge on the front side we no longer ended up with exhaust smells in the cockpit during landings and the plane experienced an overall speed increase (door no longer grabbing air in the fludder) it can also handle being on a servo with a front hinge or even the Van's flap motor so you can see the degrees of deployment. 

Richard 

-------- Original message --------
From: Richard Thomson <richard@...>
Date: 12/12/20 3:28 PM (GMT-05:00)
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

Hi Michael,

On my TriQ I have similar concerns to those Jerry notes in the mod write up, in fact when I got it, the belly board had been bolted shut and the handle was removed. I have replaced it to the TriQ plan, but it does sit slightly proud, at the corners, so for me Jerry's mod is something I will look to do on mine next year after we have got it flying.

The Triq nose gear fits along the underneath of the Canard, so probably not possible to use the Q2/Q200 Belly board, if you are wondering why there are 2 versions.

Br

Rich T.

On 12/12/2020 18:06, Michael wrote:
Figured I would post these based on today's discussion. Both sets of plans are available on Quickheads for comparison. Turns out my Q2 has the Tri-Q version (not sure why), so worth checking if you have a new or new-to-you Quickie?

QAC Q2/Q200 Belly Board Plans
Tri-Q Belly Board Drag Brake (Option)

The primary difference is in location, geometry, and materials:
  1. The QAC version uses a carbon board originally sold as part of an upgrade kit, while the Tri-Q version uses the foam cut from the fuselage.
  2. From the hinge, the QAC version is a long & tall rectangle, while the Tri-Q version is a narrow & wide rectangle.
  3. The QAC version is located between the canard spar and under the forward part of the fuel tank (see last page of PDF), while the Tri-Q version goes behind the seat back bulkhead in the baggage/landing gear area (see last figure).
Both versions hinge from the rear and "scoop" air up from the front; although Jerry Marstall has flipped his around for reasons he explains. Haven't flown mine yet, so hopefully some experienced Q-drivers can chime in on what (if any) handling differences exist between the two versions...

Hope it helps,
--
-MD
#2827 (still thinking about planning on visualizing how to finish building)


Jerry Marstall <jnmarstall@...>
 

Mac server from. ACS.  Yes, there is an indicator for server. You have to figure how you want server to hook to ailerons to reflex.
I dont think electric belly board is of value.

-------- Original message --------
From: smeshno1@...
Date: 12/13/20 10:51 AM (GMT-05:00)
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

 I like this idea, Jerry. Do tell the parts involved please. Also.. you have an indicator of some sort for reflex 
position for takeoff? My first thoughts are aerodynamics would be improved with your system as well as
constant trim under thumb being an intuitive process.  

 My first CFI was a hard nosed airforce instructor that flew combat in Korea and Viet Nam. 

 He demanded I remain in a trimmed aircraft all the time. Forward hinged belly board also electric
 is another one added to the list of items to track down. 

 Vern    


From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> on behalf of Jerry Marstall <jnmarstall@...>
Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2020 9:26 AM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards
 
To the contrary, I have my reflexer electric and operated by the trim button on my stick. I do not have elevator trim.  I use the reflexer for pitch trim.  I am trimming all the time, depending upon stick pressures. That way I am always flying a trimmed airplane.

-------- Original message --------
From: Richard Thomson <richard@...>
Date: 12/13/20 9:44 AM (GMT-05:00)
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

Already made a new lever with the ratchet, but it's easy enough to lock in or out either end. 

As the rest is already there, manual sounds the easiest option for me with a new bit of leverage sorted out.

Went with the manual reflex for those same reasons, also keeping power consumption low and weight down.

Sometimes 2 cents is worth a fortune Jerry.

Rich T.

On 13/12/2020 12:44, Jerry Marstall wrote:
My 2-cents. Manual is faster to deploy and bring up.. No needed for incremental use ( no notches in lever). It's either full up or full down.  
Jerry 

-------- Original message --------
From: Richard Thomson <richard@...>
Date: 12/13/20 5:09 AM (GMT-05:00)
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

Good idea Richard, Van's flap motor. gives more options. Thanks.

Rich T.

On 12/12/2020 20:54, Richard Kaczmarek 3RD wrote:
From my personal experience of having flown both I prefer the TriQ brake over the forward belly board. The placement does not cause the pitch change that we experienced with Doug's old Q2. We turned our original TriQ board around from the original rear hinge to the front due to seeing it flutter in flight. With the hinge on the front side we no longer ended up with exhaust smells in the cockpit during landings and the plane experienced an overall speed increase (door no longer grabbing air in the fludder) it can also handle being on a servo with a front hinge or even the Van's flap motor so you can see the degrees of deployment. 

Richard 

-------- Original message --------
From: Richard Thomson <richard@...>
Date: 12/12/20 3:28 PM (GMT-05:00)
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

Hi Michael,

On my TriQ I have similar concerns to those Jerry notes in the mod write up, in fact when I got it, the belly board had been bolted shut and the handle was removed. I have replaced it to the TriQ plan, but it does sit slightly proud, at the corners, so for me Jerry's mod is something I will look to do on mine next year after we have got it flying.

The Triq nose gear fits along the underneath of the Canard, so probably not possible to use the Q2/Q200 Belly board, if you are wondering why there are 2 versions.

Br

Rich T.

On 12/12/2020 18:06, Michael wrote:
Figured I would post these based on today's discussion. Both sets of plans are available on Quickheads for comparison. Turns out my Q2 has the Tri-Q version (not sure why), so worth checking if you have a new or new-to-you Quickie?

QAC Q2/Q200 Belly Board Plans
Tri-Q Belly Board Drag Brake (Option)

The primary difference is in location, geometry, and materials:
  1. The QAC version uses a carbon board originally sold as part of an upgrade kit, while the Tri-Q version uses the foam cut from the fuselage.
  2. From the hinge, the QAC version is a long & tall rectangle, while the Tri-Q version is a narrow & wide rectangle.
  3. The QAC version is located between the canard spar and under the forward part of the fuel tank (see last page of PDF), while the Tri-Q version goes behind the seat back bulkhead in the baggage/landing gear area (see last figure).
Both versions hinge from the rear and "scoop" air up from the front; although Jerry Marstall has flipped his around for reasons he explains. Haven't flown mine yet, so hopefully some experienced Q-drivers can chime in on what (if any) handling differences exist between the two versions...

Hope it helps,
--
-MD
#2827 (still thinking about planning on visualizing how to finish building)


smeshno1@...
 

 What is the mechanical/drive motor you used?  


From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> on behalf of Jerry Marstall <jnmarstall@...>
Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2020 10:24 AM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards
 
Mac server from. ACS.  Yes, there is an indicator for server. You have to figure how you want server to hook to ailerons to reflex.
I dont think electric belly board is of value.

-------- Original message --------
From: smeshno1@...
Date: 12/13/20 10:51 AM (GMT-05:00)
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

 I like this idea, Jerry. Do tell the parts involved please. Also.. you have an indicator of some sort for reflex 
position for takeoff? My first thoughts are aerodynamics would be improved with your system as well as
constant trim under thumb being an intuitive process.  

 My first CFI was a hard nosed airforce instructor that flew combat in Korea and Viet Nam. 

 He demanded I remain in a trimmed aircraft all the time. Forward hinged belly board also electric
 is another one added to the list of items to track down. 

 Vern    


From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> on behalf of Jerry Marstall <jnmarstall@...>
Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2020 9:26 AM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards
 
To the contrary, I have my reflexer electric and operated by the trim button on my stick. I do not have elevator trim.  I use the reflexer for pitch trim.  I am trimming all the time, depending upon stick pressures. That way I am always flying a trimmed airplane.

-------- Original message --------
From: Richard Thomson <richard@...>
Date: 12/13/20 9:44 AM (GMT-05:00)
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

Already made a new lever with the ratchet, but it's easy enough to lock in or out either end. 

As the rest is already there, manual sounds the easiest option for me with a new bit of leverage sorted out.

Went with the manual reflex for those same reasons, also keeping power consumption low and weight down.

Sometimes 2 cents is worth a fortune Jerry.

Rich T.

On 13/12/2020 12:44, Jerry Marstall wrote:
My 2-cents. Manual is faster to deploy and bring up.. No needed for incremental use ( no notches in lever). It's either full up or full down.  
Jerry 

-------- Original message --------
From: Richard Thomson <richard@...>
Date: 12/13/20 5:09 AM (GMT-05:00)
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

Good idea Richard, Van's flap motor. gives more options. Thanks.

Rich T.

On 12/12/2020 20:54, Richard Kaczmarek 3RD wrote:
From my personal experience of having flown both I prefer the TriQ brake over the forward belly board. The placement does not cause the pitch change that we experienced with Doug's old Q2. We turned our original TriQ board around from the original rear hinge to the front due to seeing it flutter in flight. With the hinge on the front side we no longer ended up with exhaust smells in the cockpit during landings and the plane experienced an overall speed increase (door no longer grabbing air in the fludder) it can also handle being on a servo with a front hinge or even the Van's flap motor so you can see the degrees of deployment. 

Richard 

-------- Original message --------
From: Richard Thomson <richard@...>
Date: 12/12/20 3:28 PM (GMT-05:00)
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

Hi Michael,

On my TriQ I have similar concerns to those Jerry notes in the mod write up, in fact when I got it, the belly board had been bolted shut and the handle was removed. I have replaced it to the TriQ plan, but it does sit slightly proud, at the corners, so for me Jerry's mod is something I will look to do on mine next year after we have got it flying.

The Triq nose gear fits along the underneath of the Canard, so probably not possible to use the Q2/Q200 Belly board, if you are wondering why there are 2 versions.

Br

Rich T.

On 12/12/2020 18:06, Michael wrote:
Figured I would post these based on today's discussion. Both sets of plans are available on Quickheads for comparison. Turns out my Q2 has the Tri-Q version (not sure why), so worth checking if you have a new or new-to-you Quickie?

QAC Q2/Q200 Belly Board Plans
Tri-Q Belly Board Drag Brake (Option)

The primary difference is in location, geometry, and materials:
  1. The QAC version uses a carbon board originally sold as part of an upgrade kit, while the Tri-Q version uses the foam cut from the fuselage.
  2. From the hinge, the QAC version is a long & tall rectangle, while the Tri-Q version is a narrow & wide rectangle.
  3. The QAC version is located between the canard spar and under the forward part of the fuel tank (see last page of PDF), while the Tri-Q version goes behind the seat back bulkhead in the baggage/landing gear area (see last figure).
Both versions hinge from the rear and "scoop" air up from the front; although Jerry Marstall has flipped his around for reasons he explains. Haven't flown mine yet, so hopefully some experienced Q-drivers can chime in on what (if any) handling differences exist between the two versions...

Hope it helps,
--
-MD
#2827 (still thinking about planning on visualizing how to finish building)


Jerry Marstall <jnmarstall@...>
 

For which? The reflexer or belly board?

-------- Original message --------
From: smeshno1@...
Date: 12/13/20 12:40 PM (GMT-05:00)
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

 What is the mechanical/drive motor you used?  


From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> on behalf of Jerry Marstall <jnmarstall@...>
Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2020 10:24 AM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards
 
Mac server from. ACS.  Yes, there is an indicator for server. You have to figure how you want server to hook to ailerons to reflex.
I dont think electric belly board is of value.

-------- Original message --------
From: smeshno1@...
Date: 12/13/20 10:51 AM (GMT-05:00)
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

 I like this idea, Jerry. Do tell the parts involved please. Also.. you have an indicator of some sort for reflex 
position for takeoff? My first thoughts are aerodynamics would be improved with your system as well as
constant trim under thumb being an intuitive process.  

 My first CFI was a hard nosed airforce instructor that flew combat in Korea and Viet Nam. 

 He demanded I remain in a trimmed aircraft all the time. Forward hinged belly board also electric
 is another one added to the list of items to track down. 

 Vern    


From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> on behalf of Jerry Marstall <jnmarstall@...>
Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2020 9:26 AM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards
 
To the contrary, I have my reflexer electric and operated by the trim button on my stick. I do not have elevator trim.  I use the reflexer for pitch trim.  I am trimming all the time, depending upon stick pressures. That way I am always flying a trimmed airplane.

-------- Original message --------
From: Richard Thomson <richard@...>
Date: 12/13/20 9:44 AM (GMT-05:00)
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

Already made a new lever with the ratchet, but it's easy enough to lock in or out either end. 

As the rest is already there, manual sounds the easiest option for me with a new bit of leverage sorted out.

Went with the manual reflex for those same reasons, also keeping power consumption low and weight down.

Sometimes 2 cents is worth a fortune Jerry.

Rich T.

On 13/12/2020 12:44, Jerry Marstall wrote:
My 2-cents. Manual is faster to deploy and bring up.. No needed for incremental use ( no notches in lever). It's either full up or full down.  
Jerry 

-------- Original message --------
From: Richard Thomson <richard@...>
Date: 12/13/20 5:09 AM (GMT-05:00)
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

Good idea Richard, Van's flap motor. gives more options. Thanks.

Rich T.

On 12/12/2020 20:54, Richard Kaczmarek 3RD wrote:
From my personal experience of having flown both I prefer the TriQ brake over the forward belly board. The placement does not cause the pitch change that we experienced with Doug's old Q2. We turned our original TriQ board around from the original rear hinge to the front due to seeing it flutter in flight. With the hinge on the front side we no longer ended up with exhaust smells in the cockpit during landings and the plane experienced an overall speed increase (door no longer grabbing air in the fludder) it can also handle being on a servo with a front hinge or even the Van's flap motor so you can see the degrees of deployment. 

Richard 

-------- Original message --------
From: Richard Thomson <richard@...>
Date: 12/12/20 3:28 PM (GMT-05:00)
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

Hi Michael,

On my TriQ I have similar concerns to those Jerry notes in the mod write up, in fact when I got it, the belly board had been bolted shut and the handle was removed. I have replaced it to the TriQ plan, but it does sit slightly proud, at the corners, so for me Jerry's mod is something I will look to do on mine next year after we have got it flying.

The Triq nose gear fits along the underneath of the Canard, so probably not possible to use the Q2/Q200 Belly board, if you are wondering why there are 2 versions.

Br

Rich T.

On 12/12/2020 18:06, Michael wrote:
Figured I would post these based on today's discussion. Both sets of plans are available on Quickheads for comparison. Turns out my Q2 has the Tri-Q version (not sure why), so worth checking if you have a new or new-to-you Quickie?

QAC Q2/Q200 Belly Board Plans
Tri-Q Belly Board Drag Brake (Option)

The primary difference is in location, geometry, and materials:
  1. The QAC version uses a carbon board originally sold as part of an upgrade kit, while the Tri-Q version uses the foam cut from the fuselage.
  2. From the hinge, the QAC version is a long & tall rectangle, while the Tri-Q version is a narrow & wide rectangle.
  3. The QAC version is located between the canard spar and under the forward part of the fuel tank (see last page of PDF), while the Tri-Q version goes behind the seat back bulkhead in the baggage/landing gear area (see last figure).
Both versions hinge from the rear and "scoop" air up from the front; although Jerry Marstall has flipped his around for reasons he explains. Haven't flown mine yet, so hopefully some experienced Q-drivers can chime in on what (if any) handling differences exist between the two versions...

Hope it helps,
--
-MD
#2827 (still thinking about planning on visualizing how to finish building)


smeshno1@...
 

Reflexer


From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> on behalf of Jerry Marstall <jnmarstall@...>
Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2020 4:25 PM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards
 
For which? The reflexer or belly board?

-------- Original message --------
From: smeshno1@...
Date: 12/13/20 12:40 PM (GMT-05:00)
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

 What is the mechanical/drive motor you used?  


From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> on behalf of Jerry Marstall <jnmarstall@...>
Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2020 10:24 AM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards
 
Mac server from. ACS.  Yes, there is an indicator for server. You have to figure how you want server to hook to ailerons to reflex.
I dont think electric belly board is of value.

-------- Original message --------
From: smeshno1@...
Date: 12/13/20 10:51 AM (GMT-05:00)
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

 I like this idea, Jerry. Do tell the parts involved please. Also.. you have an indicator of some sort for reflex 
position for takeoff? My first thoughts are aerodynamics would be improved with your system as well as
constant trim under thumb being an intuitive process.  

 My first CFI was a hard nosed airforce instructor that flew combat in Korea and Viet Nam. 

 He demanded I remain in a trimmed aircraft all the time. Forward hinged belly board also electric
 is another one added to the list of items to track down. 

 Vern    


From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> on behalf of Jerry Marstall <jnmarstall@...>
Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2020 9:26 AM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards
 
To the contrary, I have my reflexer electric and operated by the trim button on my stick. I do not have elevator trim.  I use the reflexer for pitch trim.  I am trimming all the time, depending upon stick pressures. That way I am always flying a trimmed airplane.

-------- Original message --------
From: Richard Thomson <richard@...>
Date: 12/13/20 9:44 AM (GMT-05:00)
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

Already made a new lever with the ratchet, but it's easy enough to lock in or out either end. 

As the rest is already there, manual sounds the easiest option for me with a new bit of leverage sorted out.

Went with the manual reflex for those same reasons, also keeping power consumption low and weight down.

Sometimes 2 cents is worth a fortune Jerry.

Rich T.

On 13/12/2020 12:44, Jerry Marstall wrote:
My 2-cents. Manual is faster to deploy and bring up.. No needed for incremental use ( no notches in lever). It's either full up or full down.  
Jerry 

-------- Original message --------
From: Richard Thomson <richard@...>
Date: 12/13/20 5:09 AM (GMT-05:00)
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

Good idea Richard, Van's flap motor. gives more options. Thanks.

Rich T.

On 12/12/2020 20:54, Richard Kaczmarek 3RD wrote:
From my personal experience of having flown both I prefer the TriQ brake over the forward belly board. The placement does not cause the pitch change that we experienced with Doug's old Q2. We turned our original TriQ board around from the original rear hinge to the front due to seeing it flutter in flight. With the hinge on the front side we no longer ended up with exhaust smells in the cockpit during landings and the plane experienced an overall speed increase (door no longer grabbing air in the fludder) it can also handle being on a servo with a front hinge or even the Van's flap motor so you can see the degrees of deployment. 

Richard 

-------- Original message --------
From: Richard Thomson <richard@...>
Date: 12/12/20 3:28 PM (GMT-05:00)
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

Hi Michael,

On my TriQ I have similar concerns to those Jerry notes in the mod write up, in fact when I got it, the belly board had been bolted shut and the handle was removed. I have replaced it to the TriQ plan, but it does sit slightly proud, at the corners, so for me Jerry's mod is something I will look to do on mine next year after we have got it flying.

The Triq nose gear fits along the underneath of the Canard, so probably not possible to use the Q2/Q200 Belly board, if you are wondering why there are 2 versions.

Br

Rich T.

On 12/12/2020 18:06, Michael wrote:
Figured I would post these based on today's discussion. Both sets of plans are available on Quickheads for comparison. Turns out my Q2 has the Tri-Q version (not sure why), so worth checking if you have a new or new-to-you Quickie?

QAC Q2/Q200 Belly Board Plans
Tri-Q Belly Board Drag Brake (Option)

The primary difference is in location, geometry, and materials:
  1. The QAC version uses a carbon board originally sold as part of an upgrade kit, while the Tri-Q version uses the foam cut from the fuselage.
  2. From the hinge, the QAC version is a long & tall rectangle, while the Tri-Q version is a narrow & wide rectangle.
  3. The QAC version is located between the canard spar and under the forward part of the fuel tank (see last page of PDF), while the Tri-Q version goes behind the seat back bulkhead in the baggage/landing gear area (see last figure).
Both versions hinge from the rear and "scoop" air up from the front; although Jerry Marstall has flipped his around for reasons he explains. Haven't flown mine yet, so hopefully some experienced Q-drivers can chime in on what (if any) handling differences exist between the two versions...

Hope it helps,
--
-MD
#2827 (still thinking about planning on visualizing how to finish building)


Jerry Marstall
 

It is a single lever that has variable internal friction stops. This means that wherever position the lever, it remains on that position without having to tighten a friction lock.  I quickly discovered I didnt need this feature.  Either I wanted the board down or up. No reason for intermediate positions.  I just looked in ACS to no avail.  Doesn't mean it isn't there. I just didn't find it.


On Sun, Dec 13, 2020, 5:30 PM <smeshno1@...> wrote:
Reflexer


From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> on behalf of Jerry Marstall <jnmarstall@...>
Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2020 4:25 PM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards
 
For which? The reflexer or belly board?

-------- Original message --------
Date: 12/13/20 12:40 PM (GMT-05:00)
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

 What is the mechanical/drive motor you used?  


From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> on behalf of Jerry Marstall <jnmarstall@...>
Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2020 10:24 AM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards
 
Mac server from. ACS.  Yes, there is an indicator for server. You have to figure how you want server to hook to ailerons to reflex.
I dont think electric belly board is of value.

-------- Original message --------
Date: 12/13/20 10:51 AM (GMT-05:00)
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

 I like this idea, Jerry. Do tell the parts involved please. Also.. you have an indicator of some sort for reflex 
position for takeoff? My first thoughts are aerodynamics would be improved with your system as well as
constant trim under thumb being an intuitive process.  

 My first CFI was a hard nosed airforce instructor that flew combat in Korea and Viet Nam. 

 He demanded I remain in a trimmed aircraft all the time. Forward hinged belly board also electric
 is another one added to the list of items to track down. 

 Vern    


From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> on behalf of Jerry Marstall <jnmarstall@...>
Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2020 9:26 AM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards
 
To the contrary, I have my reflexer electric and operated by the trim button on my stick. I do not have elevator trim.  I use the reflexer for pitch trim.  I am trimming all the time, depending upon stick pressures. That way I am always flying a trimmed airplane.

-------- Original message --------
From: Richard Thomson <richard@...>
Date: 12/13/20 9:44 AM (GMT-05:00)
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

Already made a new lever with the ratchet, but it's easy enough to lock in or out either end. 

As the rest is already there, manual sounds the easiest option for me with a new bit of leverage sorted out.

Went with the manual reflex for those same reasons, also keeping power consumption low and weight down.

Sometimes 2 cents is worth a fortune Jerry.

Rich T.

On 13/12/2020 12:44, Jerry Marstall wrote:
My 2-cents. Manual is faster to deploy and bring up.. No needed for incremental use ( no notches in lever). It's either full up or full down.  
Jerry 

-------- Original message --------
From: Richard Thomson <richard@...>
Date: 12/13/20 5:09 AM (GMT-05:00)
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

Good idea Richard, Van's flap motor. gives more options. Thanks.

Rich T.

On 12/12/2020 20:54, Richard Kaczmarek 3RD wrote:
From my personal experience of having flown both I prefer the TriQ brake over the forward belly board. The placement does not cause the pitch change that we experienced with Doug's old Q2. We turned our original TriQ board around from the original rear hinge to the front due to seeing it flutter in flight. With the hinge on the front side we no longer ended up with exhaust smells in the cockpit during landings and the plane experienced an overall speed increase (door no longer grabbing air in the fludder) it can also handle being on a servo with a front hinge or even the Van's flap motor so you can see the degrees of deployment. 

Richard 

-------- Original message --------
From: Richard Thomson <richard@...>
Date: 12/12/20 3:28 PM (GMT-05:00)
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

Hi Michael,

On my TriQ I have similar concerns to those Jerry notes in the mod write up, in fact when I got it, the belly board had been bolted shut and the handle was removed. I have replaced it to the TriQ plan, but it does sit slightly proud, at the corners, so for me Jerry's mod is something I will look to do on mine next year after we have got it flying.

The Triq nose gear fits along the underneath of the Canard, so probably not possible to use the Q2/Q200 Belly board, if you are wondering why there are 2 versions.

Br

Rich T.

On 12/12/2020 18:06, Michael wrote:
Figured I would post these based on today's discussion. Both sets of plans are available on Quickheads for comparison. Turns out my Q2 has the Tri-Q version (not sure why), so worth checking if you have a new or new-to-you Quickie?

QAC Q2/Q200 Belly Board Plans
Tri-Q Belly Board Drag Brake (Option)

The primary difference is in location, geometry, and materials:
  1. The QAC version uses a carbon board originally sold as part of an upgrade kit, while the Tri-Q version uses the foam cut from the fuselage.
  2. From the hinge, the QAC version is a long & tall rectangle, while the Tri-Q version is a narrow & wide rectangle.
  3. The QAC version is located between the canard spar and under the forward part of the fuel tank (see last page of PDF), while the Tri-Q version goes behind the seat back bulkhead in the baggage/landing gear area (see last figure).
Both versions hinge from the rear and "scoop" air up from the front; although Jerry Marstall has flipped his around for reasons he explains. Haven't flown mine yet, so hopefully some experienced Q-drivers can chime in on what (if any) handling differences exist between the two versions...

Hope it helps,
--
-MD
#2827 (still thinking about planning on visualizing how to finish building)


Jerry Marstall
 

Oops I answered the wrong question.  Are you sure you want any suggestions from me?

The reflexer is what used to be called the Mac server.  Has electric position indicator option.

On Sun, Dec 13, 2020, 5:30 PM <smeshno1@...> wrote:
Reflexer


From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> on behalf of Jerry Marstall <jnmarstall@...>
Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2020 4:25 PM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards
 
For which? The reflexer or belly board?

-------- Original message --------
Date: 12/13/20 12:40 PM (GMT-05:00)
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

 What is the mechanical/drive motor you used?  


From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> on behalf of Jerry Marstall <jnmarstall@...>
Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2020 10:24 AM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards
 
Mac server from. ACS.  Yes, there is an indicator for server. You have to figure how you want server to hook to ailerons to reflex.
I dont think electric belly board is of value.

-------- Original message --------
Date: 12/13/20 10:51 AM (GMT-05:00)
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

 I like this idea, Jerry. Do tell the parts involved please. Also.. you have an indicator of some sort for reflex 
position for takeoff? My first thoughts are aerodynamics would be improved with your system as well as
constant trim under thumb being an intuitive process.  

 My first CFI was a hard nosed airforce instructor that flew combat in Korea and Viet Nam. 

 He demanded I remain in a trimmed aircraft all the time. Forward hinged belly board also electric
 is another one added to the list of items to track down. 

 Vern    


From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> on behalf of Jerry Marstall <jnmarstall@...>
Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2020 9:26 AM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards
 
To the contrary, I have my reflexer electric and operated by the trim button on my stick. I do not have elevator trim.  I use the reflexer for pitch trim.  I am trimming all the time, depending upon stick pressures. That way I am always flying a trimmed airplane.

-------- Original message --------
From: Richard Thomson <richard@...>
Date: 12/13/20 9:44 AM (GMT-05:00)
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

Already made a new lever with the ratchet, but it's easy enough to lock in or out either end. 

As the rest is already there, manual sounds the easiest option for me with a new bit of leverage sorted out.

Went with the manual reflex for those same reasons, also keeping power consumption low and weight down.

Sometimes 2 cents is worth a fortune Jerry.

Rich T.

On 13/12/2020 12:44, Jerry Marstall wrote:
My 2-cents. Manual is faster to deploy and bring up.. No needed for incremental use ( no notches in lever). It's either full up or full down.  
Jerry 

-------- Original message --------
From: Richard Thomson <richard@...>
Date: 12/13/20 5:09 AM (GMT-05:00)
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

Good idea Richard, Van's flap motor. gives more options. Thanks.

Rich T.

On 12/12/2020 20:54, Richard Kaczmarek 3RD wrote:
From my personal experience of having flown both I prefer the TriQ brake over the forward belly board. The placement does not cause the pitch change that we experienced with Doug's old Q2. We turned our original TriQ board around from the original rear hinge to the front due to seeing it flutter in flight. With the hinge on the front side we no longer ended up with exhaust smells in the cockpit during landings and the plane experienced an overall speed increase (door no longer grabbing air in the fludder) it can also handle being on a servo with a front hinge or even the Van's flap motor so you can see the degrees of deployment. 

Richard 

-------- Original message --------
From: Richard Thomson <richard@...>
Date: 12/12/20 3:28 PM (GMT-05:00)
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

Hi Michael,

On my TriQ I have similar concerns to those Jerry notes in the mod write up, in fact when I got it, the belly board had been bolted shut and the handle was removed. I have replaced it to the TriQ plan, but it does sit slightly proud, at the corners, so for me Jerry's mod is something I will look to do on mine next year after we have got it flying.

The Triq nose gear fits along the underneath of the Canard, so probably not possible to use the Q2/Q200 Belly board, if you are wondering why there are 2 versions.

Br

Rich T.

On 12/12/2020 18:06, Michael wrote:
Figured I would post these based on today's discussion. Both sets of plans are available on Quickheads for comparison. Turns out my Q2 has the Tri-Q version (not sure why), so worth checking if you have a new or new-to-you Quickie?

QAC Q2/Q200 Belly Board Plans
Tri-Q Belly Board Drag Brake (Option)

The primary difference is in location, geometry, and materials:
  1. The QAC version uses a carbon board originally sold as part of an upgrade kit, while the Tri-Q version uses the foam cut from the fuselage.
  2. From the hinge, the QAC version is a long & tall rectangle, while the Tri-Q version is a narrow & wide rectangle.
  3. The QAC version is located between the canard spar and under the forward part of the fuel tank (see last page of PDF), while the Tri-Q version goes behind the seat back bulkhead in the baggage/landing gear area (see last figure).
Both versions hinge from the rear and "scoop" air up from the front; although Jerry Marstall has flipped his around for reasons he explains. Haven't flown mine yet, so hopefully some experienced Q-drivers can chime in on what (if any) handling differences exist between the two versions...

Hope it helps,
--
-MD
#2827 (still thinking about planning on visualizing how to finish building)


smeshno1@...
 

 Of course, Jerry. You installed a reflex system that to me makes the most intuitive as one pilot to another. What parts were involved?
I presume you retained the offset cam to move both ailerons in sync? What electrical motor and indicator were used and if you have some photo of the system installed that would also be of help. 

Vern  


From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> on behalf of Jerry Gmail <jerrylm1986@...>
Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2020 4:41 PM
To: main@q-list.groups.io <main@q-list.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards
 
Oops I answered the wrong question.  Are you sure you want any suggestions from me?

The reflexer is what used to be called the Mac server.  Has electric position indicator option.

On Sun, Dec 13, 2020, 5:30 PM <smeshno1@...> wrote:
Reflexer


From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> on behalf of Jerry Marstall <jnmarstall@...>
Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2020 4:25 PM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards
 
For which? The reflexer or belly board?

-------- Original message --------
Date: 12/13/20 12:40 PM (GMT-05:00)
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

 What is the mechanical/drive motor you used?  


From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> on behalf of Jerry Marstall <jnmarstall@...>
Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2020 10:24 AM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards
 
Mac server from. ACS.  Yes, there is an indicator for server. You have to figure how you want server to hook to ailerons to reflex.
I dont think electric belly board is of value.

-------- Original message --------
Date: 12/13/20 10:51 AM (GMT-05:00)
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

 I like this idea, Jerry. Do tell the parts involved please. Also.. you have an indicator of some sort for reflex 
position for takeoff? My first thoughts are aerodynamics would be improved with your system as well as
constant trim under thumb being an intuitive process.  

 My first CFI was a hard nosed airforce instructor that flew combat in Korea and Viet Nam. 

 He demanded I remain in a trimmed aircraft all the time. Forward hinged belly board also electric
 is another one added to the list of items to track down. 

 Vern    


From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> on behalf of Jerry Marstall <jnmarstall@...>
Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2020 9:26 AM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards
 
To the contrary, I have my reflexer electric and operated by the trim button on my stick. I do not have elevator trim.  I use the reflexer for pitch trim.  I am trimming all the time, depending upon stick pressures. That way I am always flying a trimmed airplane.

-------- Original message --------
From: Richard Thomson <richard@...>
Date: 12/13/20 9:44 AM (GMT-05:00)
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

Already made a new lever with the ratchet, but it's easy enough to lock in or out either end. 

As the rest is already there, manual sounds the easiest option for me with a new bit of leverage sorted out.

Went with the manual reflex for those same reasons, also keeping power consumption low and weight down.

Sometimes 2 cents is worth a fortune Jerry.

Rich T.

On 13/12/2020 12:44, Jerry Marstall wrote:
My 2-cents. Manual is faster to deploy and bring up.. No needed for incremental use ( no notches in lever). It's either full up or full down.  
Jerry 

-------- Original message --------
From: Richard Thomson <richard@...>
Date: 12/13/20 5:09 AM (GMT-05:00)
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

Good idea Richard, Van's flap motor. gives more options. Thanks.

Rich T.

On 12/12/2020 20:54, Richard Kaczmarek 3RD wrote:
From my personal experience of having flown both I prefer the TriQ brake over the forward belly board. The placement does not cause the pitch change that we experienced with Doug's old Q2. We turned our original TriQ board around from the original rear hinge to the front due to seeing it flutter in flight. With the hinge on the front side we no longer ended up with exhaust smells in the cockpit during landings and the plane experienced an overall speed increase (door no longer grabbing air in the fludder) it can also handle being on a servo with a front hinge or even the Van's flap motor so you can see the degrees of deployment. 

Richard 

-------- Original message --------
From: Richard Thomson <richard@...>
Date: 12/12/20 3:28 PM (GMT-05:00)
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

Hi Michael,

On my TriQ I have similar concerns to those Jerry notes in the mod write up, in fact when I got it, the belly board had been bolted shut and the handle was removed. I have replaced it to the TriQ plan, but it does sit slightly proud, at the corners, so for me Jerry's mod is something I will look to do on mine next year after we have got it flying.

The Triq nose gear fits along the underneath of the Canard, so probably not possible to use the Q2/Q200 Belly board, if you are wondering why there are 2 versions.

Br

Rich T.

On 12/12/2020 18:06, Michael wrote:
Figured I would post these based on today's discussion. Both sets of plans are available on Quickheads for comparison. Turns out my Q2 has the Tri-Q version (not sure why), so worth checking if you have a new or new-to-you Quickie?

QAC Q2/Q200 Belly Board Plans
Tri-Q Belly Board Drag Brake (Option)

The primary difference is in location, geometry, and materials:
  1. The QAC version uses a carbon board originally sold as part of an upgrade kit, while the Tri-Q version uses the foam cut from the fuselage.
  2. From the hinge, the QAC version is a long & tall rectangle, while the Tri-Q version is a narrow & wide rectangle.
  3. The QAC version is located between the canard spar and under the forward part of the fuel tank (see last page of PDF), while the Tri-Q version goes behind the seat back bulkhead in the baggage/landing gear area (see last figure).
Both versions hinge from the rear and "scoop" air up from the front; although Jerry Marstall has flipped his around for reasons he explains. Haven't flown mine yet, so hopefully some experienced Q-drivers can chime in on what (if any) handling differences exist between the two versions...

Hope it helps,
--
-MD
#2827 (still thinking about planning on visualizing how to finish building)


smeshno1@...
 

 I see your point, that this is a drag device intended to slow the approach over the fence. The gain of in runway in sight would be 
also an improvement. All on or all off. 


From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> on behalf of Jerry Gmail <jerrylm1986@...>
Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2020 4:39 PM
To: main@q-list.groups.io <main@q-list.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards
 
It is a single lever that has variable internal friction stops. This means that wherever position the lever, it remains on that position without having to tighten a friction lock.  I quickly discovered I didnt need this feature.  Either I wanted the board down or up. No reason for intermediate positions.  I just looked in ACS to no avail.  Doesn't mean it isn't there. I just didn't find it.

On Sun, Dec 13, 2020, 5:30 PM <smeshno1@...> wrote:
Reflexer


From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> on behalf of Jerry Marstall <jnmarstall@...>
Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2020 4:25 PM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards
 
For which? The reflexer or belly board?

-------- Original message --------
Date: 12/13/20 12:40 PM (GMT-05:00)
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

 What is the mechanical/drive motor you used?  


From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> on behalf of Jerry Marstall <jnmarstall@...>
Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2020 10:24 AM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards
 
Mac server from. ACS.  Yes, there is an indicator for server. You have to figure how you want server to hook to ailerons to reflex.
I dont think electric belly board is of value.

-------- Original message --------
Date: 12/13/20 10:51 AM (GMT-05:00)
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

 I like this idea, Jerry. Do tell the parts involved please. Also.. you have an indicator of some sort for reflex 
position for takeoff? My first thoughts are aerodynamics would be improved with your system as well as
constant trim under thumb being an intuitive process.  

 My first CFI was a hard nosed airforce instructor that flew combat in Korea and Viet Nam. 

 He demanded I remain in a trimmed aircraft all the time. Forward hinged belly board also electric
 is another one added to the list of items to track down. 

 Vern    


From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> on behalf of Jerry Marstall <jnmarstall@...>
Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2020 9:26 AM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards
 
To the contrary, I have my reflexer electric and operated by the trim button on my stick. I do not have elevator trim.  I use the reflexer for pitch trim.  I am trimming all the time, depending upon stick pressures. That way I am always flying a trimmed airplane.

-------- Original message --------
From: Richard Thomson <richard@...>
Date: 12/13/20 9:44 AM (GMT-05:00)
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

Already made a new lever with the ratchet, but it's easy enough to lock in or out either end. 

As the rest is already there, manual sounds the easiest option for me with a new bit of leverage sorted out.

Went with the manual reflex for those same reasons, also keeping power consumption low and weight down.

Sometimes 2 cents is worth a fortune Jerry.

Rich T.

On 13/12/2020 12:44, Jerry Marstall wrote:
My 2-cents. Manual is faster to deploy and bring up.. No needed for incremental use ( no notches in lever). It's either full up or full down.  
Jerry 

-------- Original message --------
From: Richard Thomson <richard@...>
Date: 12/13/20 5:09 AM (GMT-05:00)
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

Good idea Richard, Van's flap motor. gives more options. Thanks.

Rich T.

On 12/12/2020 20:54, Richard Kaczmarek 3RD wrote:
From my personal experience of having flown both I prefer the TriQ brake over the forward belly board. The placement does not cause the pitch change that we experienced with Doug's old Q2. We turned our original TriQ board around from the original rear hinge to the front due to seeing it flutter in flight. With the hinge on the front side we no longer ended up with exhaust smells in the cockpit during landings and the plane experienced an overall speed increase (door no longer grabbing air in the fludder) it can also handle being on a servo with a front hinge or even the Van's flap motor so you can see the degrees of deployment. 

Richard 

-------- Original message --------
From: Richard Thomson <richard@...>
Date: 12/12/20 3:28 PM (GMT-05:00)
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

Hi Michael,

On my TriQ I have similar concerns to those Jerry notes in the mod write up, in fact when I got it, the belly board had been bolted shut and the handle was removed. I have replaced it to the TriQ plan, but it does sit slightly proud, at the corners, so for me Jerry's mod is something I will look to do on mine next year after we have got it flying.

The Triq nose gear fits along the underneath of the Canard, so probably not possible to use the Q2/Q200 Belly board, if you are wondering why there are 2 versions.

Br

Rich T.

On 12/12/2020 18:06, Michael wrote:
Figured I would post these based on today's discussion. Both sets of plans are available on Quickheads for comparison. Turns out my Q2 has the Tri-Q version (not sure why), so worth checking if you have a new or new-to-you Quickie?

QAC Q2/Q200 Belly Board Plans
Tri-Q Belly Board Drag Brake (Option)

The primary difference is in location, geometry, and materials:
  1. The QAC version uses a carbon board originally sold as part of an upgrade kit, while the Tri-Q version uses the foam cut from the fuselage.
  2. From the hinge, the QAC version is a long & tall rectangle, while the Tri-Q version is a narrow & wide rectangle.
  3. The QAC version is located between the canard spar and under the forward part of the fuel tank (see last page of PDF), while the Tri-Q version goes behind the seat back bulkhead in the baggage/landing gear area (see last figure).
Both versions hinge from the rear and "scoop" air up from the front; although Jerry Marstall has flipped his around for reasons he explains. Haven't flown mine yet, so hopefully some experienced Q-drivers can chime in on what (if any) handling differences exist between the two versions...

Hope it helps,
--
-MD
#2827 (still thinking about planning on visualizing how to finish building)


Jerry Marstall <jnmarstall@...>
 

Also, you dont want to wait 3+ secs on a go around for the board to retract.

-------- Original message --------
From: smeshno1@...
Date: 12/14/20 2:16 PM (GMT-05:00)
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

 I see your point, that this is a drag device intended to slow the approach over the fence. The gain of in runway in sight would be 
also an improvement. All on or all off. 


From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> on behalf of Jerry Gmail <jerrylm1986@...>
Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2020 4:39 PM
To: main@q-list.groups.io <main@q-list.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards
 
It is a single lever that has variable internal friction stops. This means that wherever position the lever, it remains on that position without having to tighten a friction lock.  I quickly discovered I didnt need this feature.  Either I wanted the board down or up. No reason for intermediate positions.  I just looked in ACS to no avail.  Doesn't mean it isn't there. I just didn't find it.

On Sun, Dec 13, 2020, 5:30 PM <smeshno1@...> wrote:
Reflexer


From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> on behalf of Jerry Marstall <jnmarstall@...>
Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2020 4:25 PM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards
 
For which? The reflexer or belly board?

-------- Original message --------
Date: 12/13/20 12:40 PM (GMT-05:00)
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

 What is the mechanical/drive motor you used?  


From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> on behalf of Jerry Marstall <jnmarstall@...>
Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2020 10:24 AM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards
 
Mac server from. ACS.  Yes, there is an indicator for server. You have to figure how you want server to hook to ailerons to reflex.
I dont think electric belly board is of value.

-------- Original message --------
Date: 12/13/20 10:51 AM (GMT-05:00)
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

 I like this idea, Jerry. Do tell the parts involved please. Also.. you have an indicator of some sort for reflex 
position for takeoff? My first thoughts are aerodynamics would be improved with your system as well as
constant trim under thumb being an intuitive process.  

 My first CFI was a hard nosed airforce instructor that flew combat in Korea and Viet Nam. 

 He demanded I remain in a trimmed aircraft all the time. Forward hinged belly board also electric
 is another one added to the list of items to track down. 

 Vern    


From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> on behalf of Jerry Marstall <jnmarstall@...>
Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2020 9:26 AM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards
 
To the contrary, I have my reflexer electric and operated by the trim button on my stick. I do not have elevator trim.  I use the reflexer for pitch trim.  I am trimming all the time, depending upon stick pressures. That way I am always flying a trimmed airplane.

-------- Original message --------
From: Richard Thomson <richard@...>
Date: 12/13/20 9:44 AM (GMT-05:00)
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

Already made a new lever with the ratchet, but it's easy enough to lock in or out either end. 

As the rest is already there, manual sounds the easiest option for me with a new bit of leverage sorted out.

Went with the manual reflex for those same reasons, also keeping power consumption low and weight down.

Sometimes 2 cents is worth a fortune Jerry.

Rich T.

On 13/12/2020 12:44, Jerry Marstall wrote:
My 2-cents. Manual is faster to deploy and bring up.. No needed for incremental use ( no notches in lever). It's either full up or full down.  
Jerry 

-------- Original message --------
From: Richard Thomson <richard@...>
Date: 12/13/20 5:09 AM (GMT-05:00)
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

Good idea Richard, Van's flap motor. gives more options. Thanks.

Rich T.

On 12/12/2020 20:54, Richard Kaczmarek 3RD wrote:
From my personal experience of having flown both I prefer the TriQ brake over the forward belly board. The placement does not cause the pitch change that we experienced with Doug's old Q2. We turned our original TriQ board around from the original rear hinge to the front due to seeing it flutter in flight. With the hinge on the front side we no longer ended up with exhaust smells in the cockpit during landings and the plane experienced an overall speed increase (door no longer grabbing air in the fludder) it can also handle being on a servo with a front hinge or even the Van's flap motor so you can see the degrees of deployment. 

Richard 

-------- Original message --------
From: Richard Thomson <richard@...>
Date: 12/12/20 3:28 PM (GMT-05:00)
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Tri-Q vs QAC Belly Boards

Hi Michael,

On my TriQ I have similar concerns to those Jerry notes in the mod write up, in fact when I got it, the belly board had been bolted shut and the handle was removed. I have replaced it to the TriQ plan, but it does sit slightly proud, at the corners, so for me Jerry's mod is something I will look to do on mine next year after we have got it flying.

The Triq nose gear fits along the underneath of the Canard, so probably not possible to use the Q2/Q200 Belly board, if you are wondering why there are 2 versions.

Br

Rich T.

On 12/12/2020 18:06, Michael wrote:
Figured I would post these based on today's discussion. Both sets of plans are available on Quickheads for comparison. Turns out my Q2 has the Tri-Q version (not sure why), so worth checking if you have a new or new-to-you Quickie?

QAC Q2/Q200 Belly Board Plans
Tri-Q Belly Board Drag Brake (Option)

The primary difference is in location, geometry, and materials:
  1. The QAC version uses a carbon board originally sold as part of an upgrade kit, while the Tri-Q version uses the foam cut from the fuselage.
  2. From the hinge, the QAC version is a long & tall rectangle, while the Tri-Q version is a narrow & wide rectangle.
  3. The QAC version is located between the canard spar and under the forward part of the fuel tank (see last page of PDF), while the Tri-Q version goes behind the seat back bulkhead in the baggage/landing gear area (see last figure).
Both versions hinge from the rear and "scoop" air up from the front; although Jerry Marstall has flipped his around for reasons he explains. Haven't flown mine yet, so hopefully some experienced Q-drivers can chime in on what (if any) handling differences exist between the two versions...

Hope it helps,
--
-MD
#2827 (still thinking about planning on visualizing how to finish building)