CAD Drafts for Bellcrank & Oil Screen Block Off


 

I am having an OnShape day 🙂 ...

This is the bellcrank for the 6-pack mod

This is a draft for the bellcrank in the 6 Pack. Need to print a test piece and then see, designed for a simple 3/8 x 5/8 x 5/32 ball bearing.

And here is the direct link for you to export the CADs if you like ... https://bit.ly/DuckieCADs
--
Robert "TheFrisco" Schmid
(408) 805-5450

www.facebook.com/TheFlyingFriscos
www.theflyingfriscos.com

Love building planes almost as much as flying. Latest completed build is "Loki", a Chinook Plus 2 bush plane.


Jerry Marstall
 

Do you have a printer?
Jerry Marstall 

On Sun, Jun 19, 2022, 12:16 AM Robert Schmid <robert@...> wrote:
I am having an OnShape day 🙂 ...

This is the bellcrank for the 6-pack mod

This is a draft for the bellcrank in the 6 Pack. Need to print a test piece and then see, designed for a simple 3/8 x 5/8 x 5/32 ball bearing.

And here is the direct link for you to export the CADs if you like ... https://bit.ly/DuckieCADs
--
Robert "TheFrisco" Schmid
(408) 805-5450

www.facebook.com/TheFlyingFriscos
www.theflyingfriscos.com

Love building planes almost as much as flying. Latest completed build is "Loki", a Chinook Plus 2 bush plane.


 

Yes I have a 3D printer but not a CNC machine.
--
Robert "TheFrisco" Schmid
(408) 805-5450

www.facebook.com/TheFlyingFriscos
www.theflyingfriscos.com

Love building planes almost as much as flying. Latest completed build is "Loki", a Chinook Plus 2 bush plane.


Jerry Marstall
 

Can't help you there.  Jm


On Sun, Jun 19, 2022, 10:27 AM Robert Schmid <robert@...> wrote:
Yes I have a 3D printer but not a CNC machine.
--
Robert "TheFrisco" Schmid
(408) 805-5450

www.facebook.com/TheFlyingFriscos
www.theflyingfriscos.com

Love building planes almost as much as flying. Latest completed build is "Loki", a Chinook Plus 2 bush plane.


Michael Dunning
 

Robert,

Have you looked at Sam Hoskins' splitter setup? Worth considering before investing the work and weight in the bellcrank version...
7. It's a very good thing to have a splitter in the rudder cables. That way, if the tail spring should break, you still have the rudder. Ditto the differential brakes. 
8. I think the aftermarket intermediate rudder cable bellcrank is unnecessary.
https://samhoskins.blogspot.com/2006/09/how-bout-that-wheel-rudder-my-strong.html
Detail Photo #1
Detail Photo #2
--
-MD
#2827 (still thinking about planning on visualizing how to finish building)


Jim Patillo
 

Hi Michael,

Have you ever landed a Quickie? 

When we created the bell crank in good old KLVK, it was so that you could remove some of the twitchy- ness out of the tail wheel on landing, and ditto for the toe brakes (during the transition from flight to ground handling). This is where Q pilots can get into trouble. 

 By using a 6” bell crank you can create proportional differential between the rudder and tail wheel.  Sam’s splitter solves the broken tail spring issue but does not address the twitchy issue. Correct me if I am wrong Sam, I'm getting old. 😊

Jim
N46JP - Q200
2000 + take off and landings. 

PS. Robert, I just used some basic automotive primer, let it dry and then painted over it with Dark Gray Zolatone. I sprayed the entire main body inside less the tail cone. If I were doing it again, I would stop at the seatbacks for weight savings. Are you back in Watsonville? If so I might be able to stop by Friday or Saturday. Fog permitting. 

 


From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> on behalf of Michael Dunning <dunningme@...>
Sent: Monday, June 20, 2022 2:57:43 PM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] CAD Drafts for Bellcrank & Oil Screen Block Off
 
Robert,

Have you looked at Sam Hoskins' splitter setup? Worth considering before investing the work and weight in the bellcrank version...
7. It's a very good thing to have a splitter in the rudder cables. That way, if the tail spring should break, you still have the rudder. Ditto the differential brakes. 
8. I think the aftermarket intermediate rudder cable bellcrank is unnecessary.
https://samhoskins.blogspot.com/2006/09/how-bout-that-wheel-rudder-my-strong.html
Detail Photo #1
Detail Photo #2
--
-MD
#2827 (still thinking about planning on visualizing how to finish building)


Sam Hoskins
 

When we created the bell crank in good old KLVK, it was so that you could remove some of the twitchy- ness out of the tail wheel on landing, and ditto for the toe brakes (during the transition from flight to ground handling). This is where Q pilots can get into trouble. 
 
 By using a 6” bell crank you can create proportional differential between the rudder and tail wheel.  Sam’s splitter solves the broken tail spring issue but does not address the twitchy issue. Correct me if I am wrong Sam, I'm getting old. 😊
IMHO, properly doing the Gall Alignment takes care of the handling issues. In the history of the Q-2/Q-200, there were a lot of handling issues because the plans didn't takke into account the weight of the aircraft.  If you compare the Q-1 plans with the Q-2 plans you will see that the lifted the wheel pant installation as a cut and paste from the Q-1 plans.

Way back when, the community tried all sorts of fixes for instance, changing deck angles, changing the geometry of the tailwheel bracket, changing the position of the axle in the wheel pants, and most radicaly, converting it to a tricycle gear.  Then David Gall came along and nailed the true problem - the wheel alignment was wrong once the engine was installed and the aircraft was loaded.  He published the fix.  I think he did a white paper on it as well.  When I built a new cannard I incorporated the Gall Alignment at the get go.  It's somewhere here: https://q-list.groups.io/g/main/files/Canard%20-%20%20LS-1%20for%20Q-200/Improved%20LS1%20Instructions-1.pdf

My aircraft handles better than it ever has and the rudder pedals are responsive. At this point, who's aircraft is twitchy or not?  I guess the way we could only tell is to have a meet-up sometime.

Sam


Mike Dwyer
 

If I might add to Sams post.  My tailwheel setup was purely to plans with no mods.  I set up my main wheels with slight toe out and no camber at gross weight.  You can see all the landings on my youtube page.  There was no twitchyness!  I'd propose that the Gaul Wheel alignment is clearly the critical step in getting a Q to roll straight.

Mike Dwyer

Q200 Website: http://goo.gl/V8IrJF


On Thu, Jun 23, 2022 at 10:07 AM Sam Hoskins <sam.hoskins@...> wrote:
When we created the bell crank in good old KLVK, it was so that you could remove some of the twitchy- ness out of the tail wheel on landing, and ditto for the toe brakes (during the transition from flight to ground handling). This is where Q pilots can get into trouble. 
 
 By using a 6” bell crank you can create proportional differential between the rudder and tail wheel.  Sam’s splitter solves the broken tail spring issue but does not address the twitchy issue. Correct me if I am wrong Sam, I'm getting old. 😊
IMHO, properly doing the Gall Alignment takes care of the handling issues. In the history of the Q-2/Q-200, there were a lot of handling issues because the plans didn't takke into account the weight of the aircraft.  If you compare the Q-1 plans with the Q-2 plans you will see that the lifted the wheel pant installation as a cut and paste from the Q-1 plans.

Way back when, the community tried all sorts of fixes for instance, changing deck angles, changing the geometry of the tailwheel bracket, changing the position of the axle in the wheel pants, and most radicaly, converting it to a tricycle gear.  Then David Gall came along and nailed the true problem - the wheel alignment was wrong once the engine was installed and the aircraft was loaded.  He published the fix.  I think he did a white paper on it as well.  When I built a new cannard I incorporated the Gall Alignment at the get go.  It's somewhere here: https://q-list.groups.io/g/main/files/Canard%20-%20%20LS-1%20for%20Q-200/Improved%20LS1%20Instructions-1.pdf

My aircraft handles better than it ever has and the rudder pedals are responsive. At this point, who's aircraft is twitchy or not?  I guess the way we could only tell is to have a meet-up sometime.

Sam


Jim Patillo
 

Good morning Sam and Mike,

To be clear, my plane was never “twitchy”. but we saw planes that were and fixed them with the bell crank mod. Sam taxied my plane in Kansas and knows it tracks like it’s on rails. 

David’s alignment certainly helped and I suspect saved several planes.  I didn’t do his wheel alignment but did splay the mains “wheels/tires”
a couple degrees out. With the tires straight or slightly toed in, the plane becomes a wheel barrow and exacerbates the problem.  If the tires are toe’d out the plane tends to grab better and track straight. Just my opinion.

Like I said way back, I’ve quit trying to convince anyone about anything, to each his own. I just know what works. That’s why they call um’ experimental. 

Jim
N46JP - Q200
2000+ take off and landings without incident. 


From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> on behalf of Mike Dwyer <q200pilot@...>
Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2022 7:15:43 AM
To: main@q-list.groups.io <main@q-list.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] CAD Drafts for Bellcrank & Oil Screen Block Off
 
If I might add to Sams post.  My tailwheel setup was purely to plans with no mods.  I set up my main wheels with slight toe out and no camber at gross weight.  You can see all the landings on my youtube page.  There was no twitchyness!  I'd propose that the Gaul Wheel alignment is clearly the critical step in getting a Q to roll straight.

Mike Dwyer

Q200 Website: http://goo.gl/V8IrJF


On Thu, Jun 23, 2022 at 10:07 AM Sam Hoskins <sam.hoskins@...> wrote:
When we created the bell crank in good old KLVK, it was so that you could remove some of the twitchy- ness out of the tail wheel on landing, and ditto for the toe brakes (during the transition from flight to ground handling). This is where Q pilots can get into trouble. 
 
 By using a 6” bell crank you can create proportional differential between the rudder and tail wheel.  Sam’s splitter solves the broken tail spring issue but does not address the twitchy issue. Correct me if I am wrong Sam, I'm getting old. 😊
IMHO, properly doing the Gall Alignment takes care of the handling issues. In the history of the Q-2/Q-200, there were a lot of handling issues because the plans didn't takke into account the weight of the aircraft.  If you compare the Q-1 plans with the Q-2 plans you will see that the lifted the wheel pant installation as a cut and paste from the Q-1 plans.

Way back when, the community tried all sorts of fixes for instance, changing deck angles, changing the geometry of the tailwheel bracket, changing the position of the axle in the wheel pants, and most radicaly, converting it to a tricycle gear.  Then David Gall came along and nailed the true problem - the wheel alignment was wrong once the engine was installed and the aircraft was loaded.  He published the fix.  I think he did a white paper on it as well.  When I built a new cannard I incorporated the Gall Alignment at the get go.  It's somewhere here: https://q-list.groups.io/g/main/files/Canard%20-%20%20LS-1%20for%20Q-200/Improved%20LS1%20Instructions-1.pdf

My aircraft handles better than it ever has and the rudder pedals are responsive. At this point, who's aircraft is twitchy or not?  I guess the way we could only tell is to have a meet-up sometime.

Sam