Non-Fatal Q-200 Landing Accident in New Zealand

• 
• 

Details

Category: Safety

Published on Monday, 27 February 2012 16:19

Written by Gary McKirdy

Hits: 132

Here is a link to another Q200 accident in N.Z. for those that have not seen it yet.

http://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/wiki.php?id=141931

 

Other than hitting an obstacle, the only way to do this is to bounce about, usually more than once and usually on landing.

The simple way to prevent that is to bleed all airspeed and extra energy off BEFORE touching down simply by flying low but level with the surface after a gentle flare and making sure your engine (and not your head) is at idle. Physics especially gravity will then take over and a single gentle ground contact be made.

The only thing to be aware of then is running out of runway before stopping, but as you should now be treating every landing as a go around until it most definitely isn't, there is no risk of that happening to you is there? If there is just advance the throttle smoothly and not too quickly to take the engine back out of idle, go round and try again.

Being in good practice at this could save your bacon if the engine ever quit requiring a forced putdown off field so there are two great reasons to be doing it!

Regards,
Gary McKirdy
UK Flight and Tech Counselor

 

 

Quickie Flight Testing and Pilot Training

• 
• 

Details

Category: Safety

Published on Tuesday, 27 December 2011 20:39

Written by Simon Wilson

Hits: 229

Quickie Flight Testing and Pilot Training.

By Simon Wilson

The following article is advice on how best to approach both the test flying and also your own initial training in your Quickie, in order to reduce the risk of injury or damage to yourself, third parties and the aircraft. This article is based on my own experience of flying and operating a wide variety of aircraft types. This is advice, it is therefore up to you whether or not you choose to follow it, however I would say before you commit to either test flying or conversion to type that you talk at length with a suitably experienced Q driver.

The following text is just one way I propose that first flights on high performance aircraft be carried out and is certainly not a panacea to what can be a complicated and sensitive subject. The article will have a UK flavour to it (including spelling) as that is where the majority of my experience comes from and for that I make no apology.

Test Flying Your Quickie

Here in the United Kingdom the Light Aircraft Association (LAA), our equivalent of the EAA is given delegated responsibility by the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) for airworthiness of homebuilt aeroplanes. When a builder submits his paperwork for initial test flying, he has to submit the location where the test flying will take place and who it will be performed by. This is to ensure that the site is suitable and the pilot is suitably qualified to carry out initial test flights. Very rarely in the UK will a builder be permitted to carry out the test flights on their own aeroplane unless they have proven track record of carrying out these flights or extensive experience on type. Normally a test pilot will be recommended by the LAA and will either be fully qualified professional test pilots or pilots who are very experienced on type (such as Gary McKirdy for Quickies) and have flown a number of different examples of the type so they can understand if the particular example they are flying is representative or not. We have an awful lot of restrictions and red tape when it comes to flying in the UK and we could learn a lot from the FAA and EAA, however I believe this is one area where we have got it right. If you’re not suitably experienced or qualified you won’t be doing the test flight, period. Some may disagree with the following statement and that is fine. I believe that a builder really has no place carrying out the initial test flights on their own aeroplane. The reasons for this are as follows;

1. An initial test flight is not the place to be learning to fly your aircraft if you don’t have experience on type! There are a lot of things that can go wrong on a first flight either with the engine or the airframe or both and may require advanced handling techniques to recover the situation safely. If the pilot hasn’t got the experience or the mental capacity to fly the aircraft in normal flight modes at this stage, how can he expect to handle a serious malfunction in what can be a challenging aircraft to fly in normal circumstances?
    
2. Builders can occasionally be too emotionally involved in their aircraft to stand back and really be objective about it. Another pilot who is coming to test the aircraft independently will have a strong sense of self preservation, (not that the owner won’t) but he’ll be more objective and generally cast a fresh pair of eyes over the machine. They are probably less likely to feel pressured into flying it if it’s not quite right. I certainly know from my own experience that it can be difficult to pick up errors in your own work. Sometimes you can’t see the wood for the trees and an independent second pair of eyes will often pick up stuff you have missed. It is also very easy to pressure yourself into flying because you know how long it has taken you to complete and you want to see it in the air as soon as you can. I know, I’ve bought and worn that T-Shirt too and I am sure if we are all brutally honest with ourselves we have all done something similar at some stage in our flying career.
    
3. Builders may not have been keeping in good flying practice whilst building the machine and doing a few hours in another type before you test fly doesn’t really cut it, as it is unlikely you will fly enough hours over a wide enough range of conditions to make the experience worthwhile. Experience takes time to acquire and can’t be bought by doing 5 hours in a Citabria or a Cub a couple of weeks before your first flight on type! Hours mean nothing if you haven’t made the most of them. What you’ve done with your hours is what counts!

However, if you do end up doing the test flying whether it is as an owner/builder or experienced pilot on type doing it for somebody else, here are a few considerations to think about. They are not in any particular order, other than which they came into my head. It is by no means exhaustive!

1. For the first test flight keep it short. Absolutely no more than 15-20 minutes maximum. Don’t bother with recording any figures. Climb straight into the overhead and remain within gliding distance of the into wind runway at all times. It should be a shakedown flight and nothing more. Purely proving serviceability of the aircraft and finding anything that does not work as advertised to be rectified before the next flight.
    
2. Pick an airfield that is large enough to be able to put it back on the runway or land on another runway should something go wrong. Make sure it has a clear undershoot and overshoot if possible.
    
3. Always give yourself a pre-take off emergencies brief. This preconditions your brain to the actions you will take in the conditions of the day should something go wrong with the aircraft during take-off and climb. Always have an abort point worked out so that if you have not achieved a certain speed by that point you will abort no matter what. The abort point should be a really obvious physical marker near the runway that is at an appropriate distance for an abort point for your aircraft type.
    
4. Do it when the airfield is quiet and not many aircraft in the circuit, so as not to get in their way and vice versa.
    
5. Make sure the wind conditions are suitable and there is no turbulence in the air as wind and turbulence make the task more difficult than it needs to be and may even mask some issues with the aircraft. The last hour before sunset is usually best and also means the temperature and therefore density altitude should be lower giving you better performance. Don’t do it just before sunset or the half hour of light after sunset. Just before sunset the sun may be in the wrong place especially if landing on a westerly runway and blind you. Just after sunset, although still light enough to fly, is too dark for a test flight as you lose depth perception with the lower light levels and could misjudge the round out resulting in a heavy landing.
    
6. Don’t do short hops down the runway. By all means do taxy tests and gradually build up speed, but hops down the runway increase the risk of losing control for an unnecessary length of time. Instead get airborne, get into the overhead and get a feel for the aircraft’s slow flight characteristics. Carry out some dummy circuits at height to get a feel for the handling of the aeroplane at circuit speeds. Make sure you also stall it (pitch-buck for a Q) at a suitable height so that you know what it feels like at low speeds before making your first approach.
    
7. Don’t land off your first approach even if it seems perfect! The chances are it won’t be! Go around and do a couple of low approaches if necessary before committing to a landing.
    
8. Finally don’t relax until the engine has stopped and the brakes are on. It is easy to switch off after you have landed thinking you’ve finished, only to do something dumb like run into a taxiway marker and damage the aeroplane because you relaxed and weren’t paying attention!
    
9. For the remainder of the test flights ensure you have a specific programme of tests to be carried out to prove and record performance, reliability and rectify any issues prior to further flights. Create a schedule and stick to it as best as possible although you may need to swap the order to make the most of the weather occasionally.
    
10. Once satisfied with the performance and reliability take the owner up as an observer to help record any further data as required by the test schedule and give them exposure to the operating environment of their aeroplane.

 

Learning to fly your Quickie

As previously stated I have flown a wide number of different aircraft and on a number of occasions I have flown high performance tailwheel aircraft that are either single seat or have no dual controls. Each time I have done this I have carried out rigorous preparation flying in other aircraft gradually working myself up to it. As I have already stated doing 5 hours in a Cub a few weeks before you fly a high performance taildragger, especially a Quickie doesn’t really cut the mustard.

Quickie two seat aircraft should be treated as single seat aircraft when it comes to pilot conversion as very few, if any have full dual controls and by this I mean dual throttle and brakes as well as the flying controls. Not having full dual controls can therefore make life very difficult for an instructor converting a pilot onto an aircraft such as a Quickie. This is why the owner should put in as much preparation as they possibly can before flying their Quickie.

Ideally you should be keeping in current flying practice all the time, however I realise this is very difficult for the majority of pilots due to the expense of it all. What I would say is work it up in stages. Get yourself checked out with an instructor in the last aircraft type you were current in and go through a range of general handling exercises and circuit work until you are up to speed and he is happy that you are safe.

These flying exercises should focus on the general handling techniques that will be required to give you handling confidence for your first flight on type. They should include but not limited to;

• Basic stalling (Pitch-buck in a Quickie)
• Stalling in the final turn
• Approach configuration stall
• Turns and Steep turns
• A couple of dummy circuits at height
• Lots of circuits and landings (all landing techniques suitable to the aircraft type should be practiced in a variety of conditions)
• Emergencies (Practice Forced Landings and Glide Approaches)

The above exercises should be repeated in the higher performance aircraft and your Quickie when you fly it.

Next go and fly with an instructor in a high performance type such as Pitts or RV so that you get used to the high approach and threshold speeds along with twitchy handling. Again you need to go through all the aspects of general handling and circuit work until you are safe in high performance aeroplanes.

You should really aim to get 20-30 hours over a period of a few months in different aircraft types and different environmental conditions to build experience and capacity before your first flight. The 20-30 hours doesn’t need to be with an instructor once you’ve been checked out, but it will consolidate your flying skills in preparation for flying your Quickie so make the most of them and keep practicing those core flying skills. Be self-critical and analyse what went well and what didn’t go so well so that you can improve for next time. It is these qualities that will make you an above average safe pilot.

The final step is to try and get a ride with a pilot who owns the same type of aircraft as you. You might not get to land or take off but the experience, sights, sounds and smells will reduce the unfamiliar sensations when you come to fly your own and will help give you the mental capacity you will need for your first flight. Get him to show you any handling quirks with the aircraft so as they don’t come as surprise and also prove that it is normal for the particular type. Get him to demonstrate a few circuits so you can build a picture of what a circuit looks like, also get him to show you a practice forced landing pattern so that you get a feel for its glide characteristics should the engine fail. This way you might be some way prepared for the first flight in your aircraft. If you can find somebody who is qualified and competent enough to instruct you and give you a full conversion to your aircraft then this is even better.

Once you come to the stage where you are about to conduct that first flight on type ensure you have a programme of air exercises that you will carry out on your first flight and stick to it. The list of exercises I mentioned earlier is a good start although leave off the practice forced landings on the first couple of flights. Talk it all through thoroughly with your Quickie mentor and if possible arrange for them to be there on the day for any advice or moral support they can give, particularly if they a pertinent to the conditions of the day.

Don’t feel pressured into flying. If it’s not right, it’s not right and you shouldn’t fly. Put the aircraft away and come back another time. This can be frustrating at this stage but you need patience and self-discipline. As per the test flying don’t try to land off your first approach, always carry out a low approach and go-around to get a feel for the aircraft as you approach the runway. Also don’t commit yourself to a landing if any subsequent approach is not on parameters as you could be storing up a whole load of problems for the landing.

As stated earlier, get your test flying done by another pilot who is more qualified and experienced on type. The above steps are aimed at a first flight on type after the test flying is complete, as the last thing you need to be worrying about is checking performance figures or handling any potential malfunction.

I know the above seems like a gold plated solution in ideal world, however you really should strive to do most of the things listed above as possible as it will really reduce the risk you are carrying after all the hard work and expense expended on your shiny new aeroplane. I know some of it may seem extra expense when you have completed your plane at considerable cost but what is a couple of thousand Dollars compared to the loss of your aeroplane or even your life? In my opinion doing this is better than any insurance policy. A loss rate of 75% of first flights in 2011 is totally unacceptable, and owners should do everything they can to reduce the risk of injury or damage to themselves, third parties and their aircraft.

This is not an exhaustive article by any means but the advice in it is designed to set you in good stead for the initial test flights of your aircraft as well as your own initial flights on type. If in doubt about anything always ask as there are plenty of highly experienced Q drivers around who will be able to give you the appropriate advice.

Good luck and safe flying.

Learning Things the Hard Way!

• 
• 

Details

Category: Safety

Published on Thursday, 29 December 2011 20:48

Written by Gregory Gomes

Hits: 205

There Are Lessons to be Learned Here. . .

written by Greg Gomez
with comments from UK Tech Counselor Gary McKirdy

[Editor’s Note: On May 5th, 2011 Greg Gomez crashed the 800 hour Q2 built by Jon Finley. Below is an article that Greg sent me describing his experience both searching for the perfect airplane to own, and the subsequent accident. First, I would like to thank Greg for taking the time to not only share his experience so that others can learn from it, but for also having the courage to open himself up to criticism.

It is easy to read through this article with hindsite and find fault. I think a better use of our time would be to reflect on the times that we haven't used the best judgement during our own flying careers. Do any of the issues Greg faced resonate on a personal level with you? I am reminded of the old pilot addage that, "A superior pilot uses his superior judgment to avoid situations that would require the use of his superior skills."

That being said, when I first received Greg’s article I was immediately struck by his unabashed candor and unbridled enthusiasm. I think it clearly illustrates the naiveté of some young individuals interested in purchasing finished Quickies. It should give all of us pause.

Greg was so enthusiastic about owning a shiny new airplane, and so over-confident in his own piloting skills, that he took off (his first solo Q2 flight) from a high altitude airport, on a hot day, with full fuel and a 180 lb. passenger. His final conclusion, even after the crash, is that he couldn’t have made many different choices, and wouldn’t if he had it to do over again.

I also lack any experience flying Quickies, so in the interest of Safety, I had Gary McKirdy read the article and make comments about what he thought might have gone wrong here. Gary McKirdy is a Quickie tech and flight counselor in the UK. Greg Gomez’s original article appears in BLACK, with Gary’s McKirdy's comments in RED.]

I just want to briefly state that I was asked to play “Devil’s Advocate” by Dan when he provided me with the following article. I have undoubtedly been hard on the guy, but I firmly believe that Greg clearly needs a LOUD wake up call. This is especially true because he’s written all of this AFTER having had seven months to reflect on the accident and what lead to it.

I truly hope that he will live long enough to look back as a wiser person at his past naiveté and appreciate being brought to account this way for his own good. My intention is not to scare him off but to thoroughly engage him. IF he still thinks this is a suitable aircraft for him to own and fly. IF he is willing to try to approach the task responsibly in the future, we should encourage him to start making use of all the resources now at his disposal through the excellent Quickie Builders Association website, particularly tech councilors and flight councilors so we can use our combined experience to keep an eye on him as a substitute for his lack of it.

His candid letter should be rewarded. A shout for assistance which is available, ready and willing if he can raise his game and successfully engage us. Dual flight however should only be carried out with somebody with more relevant Q experience than he has for quite some time.

Despite his "years of Quickie research" he was clearly unprepared and already well out of his depth trying to land the Quickie several times unsuccessfully before the alleged stick jam became THE issue in his mind. The stick jam was definitely not THE only issue, and I hope he is capable of looking a little deeper.

In addition, it’s worth mentioning that I believe he is living proof of a very successful EAA marketing campaign to promote experimental aviation in the U.S. He could even be described as a victim of it.

Where do I start? I guess the beginning. Well when I was born......................maybe I’ll start when the story applies to everyone. Reality check in red dude, please take note and take it in good humour!

I am a pilot, I always have been and always will be. There are things that can happen that might change that! Of course, I have not had my license my whole life but I have always had the “itch”. The first pictures I drew were stick figurer airplanes and black blobs with rotors on top (AIRWOLF).

It was only a matter of time until I was up in the air flying. My father was and still is interested in aviation but never really got into full scale by flying all the time and keeping current. I spent my younger years with paper airplanes, white wings, and plastic models.

As I got older, I graduated to RC airplanes and helicopters. I had to look out for myself and when you are young and trying to pay for flight lessons things take longer than they would if you could have everything your way. (That’s life, I guess.) Once college came around, I snagged a job, at my local airport, as a linesmen. With the job came a discount for airplane rental, so it was time for me to fulfill the first step in a life long dream.

There are different types of pilots. Different types of flying make more sense to me than others. When I was growing up everyone suggested that I should become a commercial pilot. But as experimental pilots know it’s just not the same as flying stick and rudder.

This next bit is very interesting, the enthusiasm is nothing but a dream and aspiration, it appears not to fit with the true reality of level of experience and understanding. There is a disturbing detachment for me. I am young and have not been around the aviation scene as long as others. However really connect with the ideals of experimental aviation. Experimental aviation really is getting to the roots of our forefathers. Do it yourself, work on it yourself. Get your hands dirty. By doing everything yourself you know it’s done right, you are saving money and you are making yourself smarter to the point were you are basically a full blown engineer (I use that word loosely). To have apparently never actually done any of this is to use all the words loosely!

Feel the aircraft, use torque tubes and cable for the control surface. Fly low enough to see the awesome sights. Down low you are seconds from a certain unlandable impact due to engine stoppage in a Q too, which is why we prefer to stay high!

Experimentals and Homebuilts have always held a place in my heart because of all options they have to offer. I have been out of school for a few years now, and at first, I was earning next to nothing. The thought of owning my own airplane was not even a possibility.

However, when things changed and higher paying jobs came around, the gears in my head started turning. I like the Cessna 152’s at my local airport, but if I were to fly once or twice a week that might average out to over $600 a month. Wait a second........ that’s for less than 6 hours of flying a month. That and I can’t take it on vacation or Oshkosh. Not to mention, who knows what that plane has been though the hour before you hoped in. Why wouldn’t this apply even more to the far superior bullet proof experimentals then? Any recent data points you can think of?

That all got me thinking. I am not sinking a ton of money into lessons anymore (or at least not right now) as if I was trying to obtain my license. Why don't I just buy a plane? I can afford it, maintain it, a noose is very affordable and easy to maintain too, travel in it, hanger it.

Getting a Cherokee or 152 was not at all appealing to me because I would have to pay some shop an absurd amount of money every time it needed anything. Just what were you gonna need with certified aircraft? Let’s be honest, great, honesty is a noble pursuit a 152 isn’t “flashy” enough either. I want to be THAT guy. All quickie owners know what I’m talking about. So you really just want to be flashy and like all quickie owners, any data points? You turn heads every time you pull it out of the hanger. There is just something about the Quickie that is amazing. For me it fits the bill. It has everything I could ask for: (Maybe too much by the sound of it!)

• Small foot print (great for a community hanger, New Jersey hangers are expensive!)
• Fast.
• Burns hardly or no oil at all. Especially if you believe this and don’t put any in.
• Fast.
• Easy to maintain. Got any data points that might be useful compared to certified aircraft?
• Fast.
• Burns 4 to 5 gallons of fuel per hour.
• Space for a small bag.
• 2 Seater - To share the magic with the people you love.
• And of course the WOW factor.. Trust me, the biggest WOW comes when bystanders witness you being brought down to earth. The bigger the bang the bigger the WOW!

The seed was planted years ago when I saw my First Quickie. I remember seeing the first one in a Photo, and then up close at Oshkosh. I thought it was crazy looking. It turned my head and I guess that's why I like it so much now.

All the years between me first seeing it, to now is a great feeling. As a kid the thought of ever buying your own airplane is daunting. Where am I supposed to get that kind of money? A year or two ago I started making good money at work, and I realized that I was soon going to be able to afford a plane and a Quickie at that. They can be cheap for a reason!

The fall and winter of 2010 is when my mind went into over drive. I had a full time job working computer IT for a Wall Street firm and there was always extra money left over from my paychecks. Even with me putting a fair amount into savings and the money I was spending on rent.

My first concern was price. Not value or suitability then? It just so happens that there was Q2 for sale six hours from me in Canada. I found it on barnstormers. It was $20,000 Canadian. The exchange rate of our declining dollar made it about $21000 US at the time. I could swing that. So in March 2011 I went up one weekend to see it, sit in it, and talk with the owner. I fell in love.

This Quickie had it all. A nice Jabaru 2200 engine, a Lopresti style cowling, a belly board, and the paint condition was a 9.8. I was sold. The only thing left to do was fly in it. Unfortunately, at the time we were unable to go fly because of the icy runway condition, and the fact that the plane didn’t have any insurance. (In Canada, all airplanes must be insured.)

That would have been my plane if it was not for a few things. That you were unable to sort?

I got very familiar with the import and export procedures trying to find a way to get the plane back here and get it all registered. The hardest part was my bank. I have great credit so the loan was a sure thing. There was one snag. My bank had to get the title of the airplane. In Canada their title system is different from what we have here in the states. It is very hard to try to find it or fabricate one. I tried everything. I just couldn't get the correct documents.

My chances of getting this Q2 were fading and I was getting frustrated with weeks of trying to get everything in order. But then a beam of light broke through the clouds. There was an ad on barnstormers for a Subaru Powered Q2. It turned out to be Jon Finley’s.

Jon is well known in the Quickie world and I had previously spent hours on his site reading and researching everything I could about Quickies, in preparation for purchasing one of my own. Not only was Jon selling his for about half the price of the one in Canada, but he also was located in the US, so I didn't have to deal with all the import and export paperwork. The only drawback really? was that I was in NJ and he was in NM. Nevertheless I had to go see this thing. So I bought a commercial airline ticket.

My trip to New Mexico was a nightmare. I bought a connection flight to save money, but the connecting flight left over 20 passengers at the gate because of a delay at a previous airport. To compound the frustration, I was not given a room for the night. It was already 11:00 PM and the new scheduled departure was 5:00AM. I didn’t want to pay for a room to sleep for 4 hours, so I spent the night on a bench outside the airport. (I don’t ever want to be homeless, very lonely). This delay pushed back the WHOLE trip. I left on a Friday and was supposed to be flying back on Saturday night. To get the lowest price for the flight out I had to fly out to NM with Continental airlines, and return on Delta. Delta didn’t care about my issue or that Continental had delays. I had to pay $300 to move my Delta flight up a day so I could take a look at this Quickie. It was just one of these situations that I was stuck in. So in trying to save money it cost money and time, which is also money. There is a lesson here and a pattern.

Finally, I arrived in New Mexico, rented a car, and drove the 30 mins to the Airpark where the plane was based. The first impression was exciting. It had both the requirements and options that I was looking for. The requirement was that the plane be structurally sound. I knew that if the plane was structurally sound it would be flyable. With more than 800 hours this plane appeared to have met the requirement with no problems. A good power plant is a must as well. Jon has been flying a lot with the Subaru EJ-22. Previously, I had done tons of research on auto conversions and Jon Finley’s is one of the most well known Subaru aircraft conversions. Jon’s Quickie had my requirements. So you had already sold it to yourself before you ever saw it, it had already satisfied the flashy test?

Then there were the options I would like to have in a plane: A really nice interior and paint job is always nice to have, but cosmetics could always be changed with less effort than something major. No data points to support this statement yet? You will soon have one however. Finishing can take longer than building or repairing! Also, I would like a Quickie with a clean airframe. That to me means an LS1 canard with none of the dirty vortex generators. Jon’s plane had a GU canard with vortex generators but that was okay. But perhaps with the big heavy Subaru above the GU canard the ground clearance might not be OK when banged around during early flight testing even without unnecessary weight of passenger and full fuel?

It’s not what I preferred but many people have had success with the GU canard. The optional parts could be changed later; I just didn't anticipate being forced to do the changes so soon. Anticipation, Observation, and Communication (and applying them to yourself to help you understand your strengths and weaknesses) are all very useful as a Q pilot. The plane was in good flying condition. . . but cosmetically....not that great.

In my opinion as the pilot of the plane, having everything working is the most important but to your passengers, having the plane look ascetically pleasing both inside and out is just as important. Only if your passengers are too concerned with flashiness over substance before they agree to get in.

Needless to say I figured for the price I could not pass up this opportunity. Jon took me for a flight in the Q2 Sunday AM early before the spring New Mexico Winds really picked up. He showed me the instruments, and let me take the stick. I was connected to the plane instantly. It was super easy to fly.

After a long talk mostly involving the plane and a little bit of life I decided to buy the plane. We shook hands and I handed him a check. Should have asked him to fly with you the first 2 or 3 legs before handing over cheque, even if it meant paying his airline ticket! It was then time to get back to the international airport and head home.

My plan was to go back to New Mexico and eventually fly the plane home with a friend. A few weeks later, I flew out with a friend for some testing and getting a feel for the plane. I had spent nearly a year before going out to see the Quickie researching, reading, emailing, calling, and learning about its tendencies.

I spent all day taxing the plane and EVERYTHING was going great. I literally got in the plane and could taxi it like it was the Super Cub that I train in. A few hours of taxing around the airport. No Issues. Then I decided to high speed taxi. Tracked on rails at 40, 50 and 60.

I had just bought it and at some point had to get it home. We wanted to fly it and see how the plane and I felt. If it was flawless and we had no reservations we were planning to make short hops weather permitting back home.

We went to a very late lunch in a very good mood. When we got back we did another hour of nothing but high speed taxiing. No hiccups, no scares, no weaving down the runway. We got out and the wind was 6KT straight down the runway. We didn’t have a 2 way radio. So he and I had a long talk about if he should go with me. I was wary of him coming but still thought it would be nice to be in contact with someone. He on the other hand was READY no fear and was ready to face whatever the fate was of that day and we actually had a spoken conversation about what we wanted to do should have got it in writing and if we wanted to do it together (little did we know). How would it feel if he had been killed and you survived?

So we did the final inspection and checklist, hopped in, and went.

We were off the ground and I had a bit of a "cobra" purposing and I felt the stick let loose from being stuck. I dismissed that at the time because it was no bother getting it unstuck with a little forward stick. I remember thinking “I’ll have to put some lube on that joint at some point.”

So we flew around for an hour, within gliding distance of the airport We climbed and did descents, low fly-bys, with a known partial jammed elevator and passenger? steep turns and got a feel for the pitch buck at high altitude and low airspeed. The whole time that thing was cake to fly.

It was hot with little airflow (the plane has nothing really going by the way pilot air aside from two small NACA air scoops in the canopy) both of us were a bit air sick after a bit of fun yanking and banking mixed with the heat.

We started practice approaches. Set out glide path and pulled the power. Right to the end of the runway, my confidence was soaring this plane is latterly fantastic and so far I felt immediately one with the plane. I flared and held it and then added full power to go around. I did this 3 times just to get used to the sight picture.

Then it was time to do it for real. The first attempt was way too fast. The mains touched and we were still flying. We were level and skipped like a rock, shallow and very far. (When I was taught tail wheel, I was taught that if I was going to bounce twice then go around.) I added power and went around. No Big Deal. For passenger too?

The second time I was too slow and we were sinking. I added power before the mains touched to cushion the touch down. The mains touched with more vigor (but I would not nearly enough to bend something other than the canard standard landing flex and certainly nothing like Dr. Steve’s solo video). He was much lighter weight. I was on the power and clearly that landing was not “THE” one so we went around.

The 3rd was like the first too fast. I was holding and holding and holding AFT stick to flare and let the plane bleed off speed. I was holding level for a long time with good pressure. I was definitely not just flying with my fingertips. In the excitement of the moment, I knew that I really was holding that plane off with some good muscle. I don’t think I could bend a pivot bolt or elongate the pilot bolt hole with just my arm strength.

When we touched, I was still too fast so I was back on the throttle. That’s when I realized that when I put the power back in and tried making a forward stick input after my long steady flare that I could not move the stick forward.

That was the scariest part. We went back into the purposing maneuver, about 10 to 20 feet off the deck, until the airspeed got back up and the plane stabilized itself. At this point, you would be so nervous and mentally overloaded, responsible for two souls on board, as to not be able to recall what really happened, this account really makes little sense. Going to a bigger airport with rescue services was, however, a very good decision made under stress. Did you or your friend make it? What was his flying experience if any and what was he there to do?

I controlled the plane’s climb and decent with power and reflexor from then on. I made shallow coordinated turns as I gained altitude and again stayed within gliding distance of the airport. Once at altitude I tried really giving the stick a good wiggle to see if I could break free whatever was jamming it remembering that I had a slight elevator catch on takeoff. The counter balance on my side was ok and free but I could not see the passenger side elevator or counter balance. I asked my friend to check and he did.

This is where the biggest mistake was made:

I asked him to try and move the counter balance. He put his hand on it and said it was stuck. I didn’t encourage him to force it free. If I had, I think we would have been alright and would have been able to find a temporary solution.

Flash Forward: He told me after the accident that he was nervous about really giving the counter balance rod a good push. He didn’t know if that could have made something worse and make the elevator completely fall off the plane or something crazy like that. I don’t blame him. Our state of mind and the possibility that something else could happen, makes you really think about everything you do. I don’t know if you have ever been in a real emergency situation but I can tell you it is VERY difficult to make decisions.

I should have told him just push it down. I don’t regret not telling him because I didn’t even know the extent of the situation. Maybe if I could have visually seen the snag, things might have been different. Nevertheless………………………

We had 15 gallons in the plane so we could have fooled around a bit more but being stuck in a plane with just your thoughts about how to fix the situation, mixed with thoughts of what could happen if you didn’t fix the situation made you want to just get on the ground ASAP. It was then when I remember the sticky elevator on take off. Lube was not going to fix this issue. A radio call for assistance in contacting the seller or another Q pilot would have been a good move with all the time 15 gallons on board afforded!

We who exactly? made the decision to fly to the bigger class C Albuquerque international airport about 20 miles away. We though if we had a bigger runway we would have better luck, and we did.

I made the emergency call and the tower cleared the airspace. When I think back on it, that’s when it hit me. This was real and it was happening NOW.

I lowered the power and started our decent. It was a very long (distance) decent, not because we were up crazy high but I made it that way so that I would more or less be level with the runway flying just above it before I pulled the power. I set the reflexor trim aft to kind of act like a flap to slow the plane as much as I could without the help of the elevator. We were flying about 3 feet above the runway, I pulled the power and pretended to hold it off and kept it in the center with my ailerons an rudder.

With no flare I was able to get it to about 100 knots and the mains touched super gently. We had way too much speed for touch down so we skipped like a rock again. We came down again but still too fast. We did bleeding off a bit more airspeed but came in at a shaper angle. So, equal and opposite reaction tells me that with the greater the angle we hit plus the remaining forward momentum we had, we were going back up again even higher...........and we did.

Now we came back down at an even steeper angle, just enough for us to catch the tips of the warp drive prop. However, this time we came down with more force and if I had a stronger canard we would have been up in the air again for another even higher and steeper blow with the ground and greater risk of injury/fire but the energy was transferred into the weakest part of the canard and then released in the form of a break and so that good design let you walk away unassisted!

We came to a sliding halt on the side of the runway. A good outcome, well done.

Everyone was ok. Not even a scratch! We got out and the first thing I did was walk over to the passenger side and give the counter weight a push. Sure enough….I moved it from its pinned position with relative ease and my control was smooth as butter.

Who knows? For all I know the airflow over the canard and all the pressure might have been able to pin it or something.

What is really on my mind is that Jon had a lot of time on the airframe and that it is too unlikely that this would happen to me on my FIRST flight in my super cool new toy without me doing something. Evidence and all signs suggest that I did something, bent something somehow but for the life of me I don’t know what it is. We really didn’t have any substantially hard landing attempts.

Maybe something was wearing after 800 hours and if Jon was flying he would have had to deal with the same problem.

I put the blame on NO ONE. As far as I see it. It just happened and I’m over it.

I keep replaying what happened to us over and over again. There is not a terrible amount of things that I would have changed if I had to do it all over again. I think we made some of the right decisions in the very wrong situation you put yourself in. Some could argue that we didn’t make the right decisions in the first place and that’s what got is in the situation, but they were not there. Why did they need to be there?

The on site airport maintenance service did a great job of taking care of my plane so that there was no more damage.

With the help of Jon and a friend of my boss’ who just so happened to be a retired military pilot and based at the airport (small world) they managed to break down the Quickie. Literally across the street from the airport was a huge pallet company. They were able to make a custom pallet for me and the plane was shipped back to me in NJ on a trailer. Had you been properly Anticipating, Observing and Communicating (honest with yourself), this was the obvious first option you could and should have taken having flown and bought the aircraft.

Upon arrival and disassembling I found to problem. It was a crushed spacer in the stick and elevator connection. That small crushed spacer allowed the counter balance enough play to get jammed under the aux tank. I also noticed that the spacer was hand made. I looks like it was made out of aluminum pipe, Not steel like the plans call for. So you now have a data point that maintenance is just as necessary and important with experimantals like Quickies, after several more data points you may find it even more necessary than with certified aircraft where years of experience on identical aircraft have eliminated most of the possible technical bugs. This will require constant vigilance since you did not build it.

I don’t know how it was crushed, but like I said before, it doesn't matter now, it just has to be fixed.

If I could go back I would have flown alone. There is NO doubt in my mind that I have the capability to pilot the Quickie. The question you really need to honestly ask yourself is do you have the right attitude to both maintain and pilot the unique experimental aircraft and engine combination you have bought. Can you anticipate likely problems before they occur? Are you observant enough to spot them if you fail to anticipate them? Are you honest about your experience base, knowledge and self awareness to be able to learn from mistakes? After your experience so far, is your vision of the future still to be a (the) flashy Quickie pilot?

I would strongly suggest that you should be able to answer yes, yes, yes, yes and no to the above. If not consider selling it to someone who can for your own sake and ours.

The plane is looking good. I now have the opportunity to turn the plane into something that I wanted to have in the first place. The far more important question is can you turn yourself in to the considerate, focused and sober engineer and pilot you are going to need to BE to operate it with any success. So far I am replacing the canard with an LS1. New interior paint, seats, new instrument panel for better knee space and instrument placement (the old one looked like Swiss cheese because John made a few changes over the years), dual rudder pedals with toe breaks (pilots side), new paint and a new tail wheel assembly with the help of Jim Patillo and the bell crank mod.

I want to share my story with everyone. Thanks for doing that, you deserve credit it was a noble intention. It allows me and others to play devils advocate to try to help you and others. I don't know if this will educate, entertain, upset, inspire or maybe all. Well, that's the short story of my experience. And remember your experience to date remains short. I have a lot more feelings and emotions that I can’t put into words. I look forward to a long story of your development and success if you can raise your game to the challenge.

Make no mistake; you are going to need to learn an awful lot very quickly and to progress in bite sized chunks to avoid choking to death. I sincerely wish you the best of luck. My best advice is that your progress should never again be remotely flashy or designed to turn heads.

You should however know that already. Think airmanship always. With a Q everything counts in large amounts.

 

Using the Aileron Reflexor or T-tail on Quickie Aircraft

• 
• 

Details

Category: Safety

Published on Tuesday, 27 December 2011 20:15

Written by Gary McKirdy

Hits: 269

Using the Aileron Reflexor or T-tail on Quickie Aircraft

by Gary McKirdy
1000+hrs on several Q variants in the UK.

There is no intention to discuss here how to build either of these devices, but to provide some useful knowledge and understanding of when and how to use the facility to adjust the ground and flight characteristics of the aircraft.

There is nothing in the original Q.A.C. (Quickie Aircraft Company) supplied Quickie P.O.H. (Pilot Operating Handbook) on this as both these devices came after Q.A.C. had published the P.O.H.

The Quickie design benefits from a full span canard mounted elevator which works when the stick is back to add lift like a flap on a conventional aircraft wing. However, unlike conventional aircraft in a tandem wing you don't have the luxury of a powerful elevator with a large moment arm well aft of the C of G to force the tail up or down.

This C of G location in the case of the Quickie type with two almost equal wing area panels needs to be understood. It is located close to the trailing edge of the elevator on the canard (forward wing) or between 1/4 to 1/3rd the distance from the front of the total mean chord of the two wing panels combined. This is in the same way as the Cof G of a normal wing is usually between 1/4 and 1/3rd mean chord of the single panel. The canard mounted elevator being close to the C of G therefore has little moment arm to control the tail of the aircraft.

The aileron reflexor (often shortened to just reflexor) is so called because its original use was to reflex the ailerons trailing edge up. It came about because the GU canard exhibited a considerable loss of lift if the surface became contaminated with bugs and/or rain so a solution was sought to be able to combat the effect of having to hold significant back stick. The ailerons on the rear wing were provided with a secondary trim function which allowed them, in addition to their normal function of moving in opposite direction as ailerons, to move up or down together like flaperons. With care, this can be used on the ground to produce a tail down pitch authority which can be a significant help, both with tail wheel steering on the tail dragger, usually only after landing by increasing down force and tyre adhesion, or as a means to help lift the nose wheel on take off with the Tri Q, the Tri prefix being short for Tricycle undercarriage.

Unlike the aileron reflexor, The T-tail is not rigged through the ailerons so has no other shared function. It works directly as a mini all flying tail plane fin mounted in the conventional sense. It becomes a third entirely separate flying surface to the canard and main wing.

Both the aileron reflexor and the Le Gare T-Tail were separate developments to provide additional pitch control to overcome the loss of canard lift described. Both the mechanical type aileron reflexor and T-Tail are controlled independently of the canard mounted elevator control circuit, which is driven by the stick. They each therefore require a separate lever.

However it is important to understand that the pitch effect on the aircraft is very interdependent with the canard mounted elevator position in flight. For ease of understanding both the aileron reflexor and T-tail could be considered a second lever operated elevator control! Because of this, the most obvious, natural and safe convention for this additional control would be nose up requires lever aft, like the stick controls an elevator, as it has almost exactly the same effect.

In the tandem wing arrangement you can trim the aircraft in pitch using either the canard mounted elevator trim wheel (nose up command with elevator down) or the aileron reflexor which moves the rear wing mounted ailerons trailing edge up in the same sense as a conventional elevator on a horizontal stabilizer (nose up command with ailerons reflexed trailing edge up on rear wing). The T-Tail works in flight just like a conventional mini all flying tailplane (nose up command with trailing edge up).

It is quicker to dial in a trim change on the aileron reflexor or T-Tail than to use the canard elevator trim wheel which connects to the elevator drive arms through springs and contra rotating chord around a common shaft.

In the Qs both the aileron reflexor system and T-Tail are potentially more powerful than the elevator. They are your friend but need to be properly understood and used appropriately to remain so.

The reason the reflexor or T-Tail is so powerful in flight is simply due to the large moment arm from C of G. This easily outweighs the fact the ailerons and T-tail surfaces are smaller than the elevator.

The Q2 C of G range is from the elevator trailing edge at the root to about 4 inches aft of that measured at the root of the canard.

The ailerons used as the reflexor are 5 feet aft of this C of G location . That is a 15:1 ratio. These figures will not be far from typical for a Q (or Dragonfly). This accounts for why the reflexor is a useful but very powerful tool.

The T-tail is a smaller area than the ailerons but has nearer 3 times the moment arm of the relexor being 13ft from the C of G or a 33:1 ratio. Having flown them both the effect on trim on the ground and in the air was very similar.

There are not many aircraft where you can pre-set and re-set the elevator authority and effective neutral position in flight using another control.

For example you can use the reflexor or T-Tail to set the neutral position of the canard mounted elevator in the approach (visibly aligned neutrally in it’s slot at the canard tip) in order to provide sufficient elevator control for the flare. This is an ideal to ultimately aim for with your set up but it is part of what you need to test during the early test flight stages whether the aircraft is a new build or new to you.

 

Pre test flight installation operational checks.

If you have either the Aileron Reflexor or T-tail fitted, before attempting to test fly the newly built or new to you aircraft you need to ensure 4 things regarding these devices alone.

1. The limits of travel have been correctly set and that the device works in the correct sense. Refer to plans and Q-List and Quickheads source.
2. You, or your test pilot, fully understand the effect of using the operating lever in either direction, and when each may prove to be useful (possibly essential!) throughout the pattern/ circuit.
3. You, or your test pilot, can actually sit in the aircraft with the cushions and clothing intended for test flight and easily reach and operate the lever in full deflection in either direction just in case you are required to! This accessibility should be tested during the installation at the build phase and not left to test just before first flight.
4. Neither you, nor your test pilot, can under any circumstances accidentally knock the lever whilst reaching for something else in a hurry. This requires thought as to optimum location and you must ensure there is adequate friction in the system to help prevent this.

The properly constructed and located mechanically operated reflexor is a very quick and direct means to re-trim in pitch if required. An electric driven aileron reflexor operated by a stick top or panel mounted rocker is much slower and potentially less reliable. I would not recommend this for early test flights as the ability to quickly locate and adjust this trim, for an out of rig surprise on take off for example, might be extremely valuable.

There has been some debate as to whether or not to recommend use the reflexor or T-tail on early test flights.

Nobody in my opinion should be even contemplating test flying a Q without a full knowledge and understanding and ability to operate all the controls built in to the aircraft even if, as is the case with the aileron reflexor and T-Tail, you may have heard them being described as just a trim system!

The simple reason is that to some extent the reflexor or T-tail can be used to compensate for mis-rigging of the canard or main wing found during early flight tests and so this could potentially be of great benefit here to save the day!

Fore thought, pre-planning and good cockpit ergonomics, particularly reflexor/T-Tail set up, will all help provide the ability to rescue a bad out of rig situation. Whilst on the ground, practice reaching for the operating lever until you can do it blindfolded. Whilst solo, the roll trim should also be slightly biased to the pilot side about 1/4 inch trailing edge down on the elevator to help prevent a permanent stick load. Be ready to trim this roll out to neutral once you level off at a safe height.

 

Control position general test flight phase.

On a new build it is not possible to predict the exact position of the contol lever for the aileron reflexor or T-Tail lever on first flight. You should therefore set it near to neutral as taxi speeds are slowly increased. Nevertheless some recommendations can be made:

1. During your planned extensive taxi trials on the longest runway available, if on the tail dragger the tail starts to lift before the lift off speed is achieved, be ready to try bringing the ailerons or T-tail trailing edges up slightly and try another run. It should be possible to approach lift off speed as the tail can be progressively held down so that you know, on lift off, the reflexor or T-tail is in the right ballpark. At any point, if directional control becomes an issue, smoothly pull the power off to stop a prop torque yaw and quickly bring the trailing edges all the way up to aid with tailwheel adhesion and steering. A small glider type pneumatic tyre 200x50 is a great help here but it will require a new tail wheel fork.
2. Whilst the tail dragger levitates from its ground attitude having reached lift off speed usually requiring full aft stick and neutral reflexor for minimum take off distance, the Tri will probably need not just full aft stick but some if not a lot of aileron reflexor pre-set to help initiate the rotation around the main gear. It is because you need to help force the rotation that you also need to quickly check with forward stick at the normal flying attitude to stop over rotation especially if you are already well above flying speed when the nose finally agrees to come up. On the Tri-Q, if you find yourself hurtling through lift off speed with the elevator full down try several more runs with the reflexor or T-Tail trailing edges up a little more each time. It should rotate comfortably before lift off speed. The attitude to aim for is that of the tail dragger on the ground. Some secured weight in the baggage bay within Cof G limits could also help here.
3. In an emergency over-rotation on climb out, DO NOT PULL THE POWER, be ready to quickly reach for the reflexor/T-tail and dial in whatever nose down trim is needed to adjust climb out path to that desired but be careful not to over do it and reverse the climb out path! The sweet spot in between is quite large but it still may require quick reactions to find it in a new aircraft.
   
   This is the only thing I felt could catch out the newbie in a Tri Q in the early test stage in addition to all that has been said about the tail dragger variants. In the air the Q's fly very similar whether nose or tail wheel.
   
   The only other thing which may already be apparent from the above is that the risk of a high energy impact in to the overshoot obstacle is greater with a Tri gear because it can be well through the minimum flying speed before it rotates enough to lift off and that takes a lot of time whilst gobbling concrete at the wrong end of the speed acquisition. You can better gain the first 10mph safely in a Tri doing a J run on to the full strip length.
   
   Furthermore on landing you can be on the brakes much earlier and harder than in a tail dragger and so have the benefit of being able to get in to smaller strips but there in lies a trap for the unwary, YOU WILL NEED TO EXCERCISE GREAT CARE HERE BECAUSE YOU MAY NOT BE ABLE TO GET OUT AGAIN, EXPECT DOUBLE OR EVEN MORE STRIP LENGTH NECESSARY TO DEPART EVEN ON THE SAME DAY.
4. On approach set the reflexor/T-tail to give the chosen approach speed and visually check the position of the canard mounted elevator is near to neutral. This is to ensure sufficient stick authority for the flare. Note that in an already flight tested, adjusted and sorted Q (which yours may not be when first tested!) if the reflexor/T-tail were set at the extremes of travel, the elevator trailing edge position would also change for any given chosen airspeed. This demonstrates the interdependence between either the aileron reflexor or T-tail setting and the position of the canard mounted elevator.
5. After landing the tail dragger, ideally fully held off until it gently settles on at minimum flying speed, or once below the speed at which it could lift off again full tail down application of reflexor/T-tail will assist with tail wheel adhesion to the surface and allow the brakes to be applied harder. This can help significantly with directional control and minimum stopping distance. On the Tri Q, the benefit of the same action is reducing the loads on the nose leg, which increase under heavy braking. However, whichever type gear you have, don’t forget to re-set the lever for take off (add it to your post landing check list) in case you get distracted and forget your checks next flight.

 

Control Position ideal once aircraft is fully sorted.

Assuming you already have the correct reflexor/T-tail neutral position which itself may need a bit of tweeking, if we call the reflexor/T-tail range 1-4 with 1 being full nose down and 4 full nose up then expect something like the following to be an ideal set up. YOU MAY NOT HAVE THIS IDEAL SET UP WHEN IT FIRST HATCHES! A very important part of your initial testing will be to find out.

Fast Taxi tests to lift off speed when forward C of G solo light fuel 3-4

As above but heavier, with more fuel in main tank, ballast in passenger seat or baggage bay 2-3. More aft C of G is now taking the downward load requirement off the reflexor/T-tail.

On climb out FORGET THE POSITION just ease in whatever it takes to quickly trim required climb speed.

On levelling out in the pattern reduce by may be up to 1 point off what it was before so 3 to 2 but slowly ease reflexor/T-Tail lever forward until trimmed straight and level.

Descent to land at reduced power 3, (which should be at least one dummy approach at safe altitude on first flight and more goes at this if T's and P's are O.K.) or whatever it takes to trim the chosen approach speed but VERY IMPORTANT you must then check for sufficient elevator control for the flare so be prepared for whatever reflexor/T-tail position puts the stick in near neutral in pitch position. If it was a long way out you might have to hold a stick load all the way down or trim this load out on the separate elevator trim wheel if you have one.

So nothing is quite as simple as it may seem. When testing a new aircraft you are testing how close everything is to the desired parameters so nobody can really put a numerical value that means anything until the parameters themselves begin to demonstrate falling in to the desired ball park.

 

Performance.

Only after several hours of getting used to the feel of the aileron reflexor, it is possible using the canard mounted elevator pitch trim in conjunction with the aileron reflexor to trim both aircraft flying surfaces trailing edges in the same direction, canard and main wing together by balancing a small move on each surface little by little. For increased camber used for slower flight trim both trailing edges down (think of dropping a bit of flap on both canard and rear wing). For decreased camber higher cruise speed trim both trailing edges up on the elevator and ailerons (less lift induced drag so higher speed). This has to be done carefully by balancing each wing against the other bit by bit on each control device. It is therefore important to ease in a small amount of each a bit at a time. This performance benefit is not as well defined with the T-Tail but still helps.

This is not something to attempt to do in your early test flights.

Fly fast. . . but more importantly fly safe.