Login Form

QuickTalk 22 - LETTERS

An "odd ode" from a poetic members of the COVENTRY AEROPLANE CLUB, England, submitted by Don Johnson:

A queer bird is the Quickie as it sits upon the grass,

With one wing on its beak and the other on its ass!

In this somewhat queer position it is difficult to tell

Which way it flies, but when it does it goes like BLOODY HELL!

Keep your pants down!

My plane GOGKN and all future Q-2 types in Britain have at last been given Permit to Fly approval by the British C.A.A. and our homebuilt organization The Popular Flying Assn.

From Marc Zeitlin

12/23/83: Most of my comments either about the kit or interacting with QAC have been expressed in letters already, however I have been very happy with the quality of the kit materials and the depth of the instruction manual (through the instrument panel where I am now). If anyone would like to disagree, I suggest they get a copy of the KR-1 or Monerai instructions. I have also been very pleased with my dealer, Bruce Patten of Quickie Northeast Inc.

RE: Q-2 flight characteristics. I find it very interesting to read the varying reports on ground and air handling of the Q-2's. It flies like a dream, it's a monster, it's a rocket, it's a tortoise, it's a baby on the ground, all it does is ground loop, it lifts off in 400', it never lifts off, it land in 1200', it can't land in less than 4000', any pilot can fly it, if you don't have 4000 hrs in F-15's don't go near it. I am sure ALL of these things are true and all this attests to the variability of the builder and the construction. I must assume that the factory did not lie in their performance claims [a very shaky assumption, in our opinion - ED], and that therefore any aircraft that does not perform close to specs has not been built to specs. As an aeronautical engineer, I know that ALMOST identical MIGHT be good enough but sometimes isn't.

2-24-84: Bob Lane must've had a severe case of the lowdown, slowed-down, plane builder blues when he penned what he thought might make a country western hit tune. Some of his verses herewith:

Oh Lord won't you get me a homebuilt Q-2

I hoped for an airplane and bank account too

It seems I can't have both no matter what I do

But Lord I keep adding to my homebuilt Q-2

Oh Lord won't you get me a plane just for fun

Ads always tell us most efficient bar none

But I'm 90 pounds over, whatever have I done

Oh Lord won't you get me a plane and some sun

Oh Lord won't you get me a plane I can use

Cheers from Mojave when I'm cryin' the blues

A designer with smiles and maybe good news

And now my wife tells me: I finish or she sues

Oh Lord won't you get me a plane that's complete

I'd hoped I could finish before gray haired and beat

With back strain and mind strain, won't settle for defeat

But Lord there's no dealers with a kit that's complete

Oh Lord can't they invent an easy airplane

I thought I bought a "quickie" but sandin keeps me in pain

I cut and I jig but it all seems in vain

Oh Lord can't you find me an E-Z airplane

At this tiny old airpatch it's space that I lack

And this bug spattered front wing, it's up she can't hack

Things sure do look scary, so Lord can you tell

Is there ANY place close a bent airplane would sell?

After reading the last issue of QUICKTALK, I couldn't help this sinking feeling in my stomach. Here I sit with a Q-200 under construction in my garage and the great majority of what I read is how unpredictable (to say the least) this airplane is on the ground!

I have physically seen 2 Q-2's -- both flown by people who fly for a living. They have no troubles at all. One even flies out of a 2900' grass strip and used only 2000 to 2500' of it! So the question is: Are we under trained for the type of craft we are attempting to fly? Are WE building glitches into our projects and putting the blame on the original product? OR --- are the product tolerances so critical that it shouldn't be available to the first time builder?

Let's hear from the recreational (fly around the area - take a trip a couple times a year) pilots who aren't having trouble. Remember, we're supposed to be having fun not scaring ourselves to death.

Ted Fox #2855

From Marc Waddelow #2873

I intend to use my Q-2 for long distance flying so high speed and IFR capability are important. I was having some trouble figuring out where to put all those gauges I just "had" to have. Enter the Space Shuttle. As an engineer with a NASA contractor, I am in daily contact with one of the most advanced avionic systems ever developed. So, I designed "DFIS" (dee-fiss), Digital Flight Instrumentation System. A 5" CRT will display all non-critical data (engine temps, fuel quantities etc.) and several computed values (time to fuel empty, VOR radials). I will keep the standard 6-instrument cluster for critical data. This will free up a lot of panel space for dual navcoms, transponder etc. Multiple screens will select special functions such as navigation (automatic triangulation on 2 VOR's) and checklists. A fault detection system will monitor all data for any out of limit conditions and annunciate these with a message line on the screen and an alert tone thru the intercom system. I have completed the hardware design and have written the software. [He was to show me the prototype system early in May 85 but we didn't link up at a recent air show - ED.] The all up weight should be about 14 lbs with power requirements 2-3 amps and will occupy a 7" wide column in the center of the panel.

Question: a builder told me it was common practice to use micro/polyester resin mix for finishing Variezes. Claim was that it is much easier to sand. Is this a recommended practice, I don't subscribe to the canard pusher?

Can anyone supply diagrams of a belly flap mechanism?

Bob Falkiner, Ontario, Canada

ED. NOTE: Finishing filler is not structural so it might be worth trying but we don't know whether RAF has ever recommended this.

Although a first time subscriber, I have read the past issues and have gotten much information from them. I started my Q-2/200 in Aug. 84 and have completed through the wing compiling 360 hrs to this point. I have the following weights to add to your data:

Ailerons -----------------1.58 and 1.56 lbs

Rudder -------------------0.87

Vertical Fin -------------4.25 with 1 com. antenna

Wing core to 9-4 --------24.25 with 1 nav. antenna

Wing complete to 9-9 ----36.0 with ailerons & light conduit

Dennis K. Rose #2867, Watsonville, CA letter *******

ED. NOTE: Yours is one of a rare weight report we get these days even though we're still interested and guys still want to know. We have had NO reports on the new canard. Keep these coming in as you progress so we can compare with your final aircraft empty weight. Thanks.

I finally have my Q-2 back in the air and flown off. I damaged the airplane in a 10 mph crosswind when I ran out of directional control (see QUICKTALK #18). I repaired and modified the plane and now have 8.5 hrs since then, 41 total. I'm sure I have not adequately solved the problem, but so far, the airplane's handling on the ground appears to be something I can get used to and live with.

In QUICKTALK #20 you referred to a possible shift in Sheehan's attitude toward helping builders - I think because you and the rest of us would like to see this happen. Don't hold your breath!

In QUICKTALK #18 you printed my letter to Gene and his reply. Although he indicated a willingness to help in his letter, that letter is the last I ever heard from Sheehan. In that letter, Gene referred to Builder Tips in QAC Newsletter #20. The Builder Tip dealing with moving the axles forward was a loose foldout within the newsletter and I did not receive it until after the accident (it was included with Gene's reply to my letter above). This does not mean that if I had received the BT, I would have complied with a BUILDER TIP [calling it only a tip downplays what we feel is a very important action, but it's only another trick that QAC used to issue an improvement without admitting to a design flaw. EDITOR]

In further correspondence, none of the direct questions I asked (such as my ground angle of attack was 9 degrees - what is yours? Should I increase the rudder area? How about dual brakes? etc.) were answered. In a deliberate display of friendliness, I went to the effort of providing Gene with a description of how the canard and wheelpants instructions could be improved so that a builder can control the eventual location of the main wheel axles (currently, the plans leave the eventual location of the axles to chance and this is inadequate - especially for a first time builder. The next time a builder is concerned with axle location is described in the Owner's Manual, and probably occurs out at the airport while doing a weight and balance. This is a little late in the game for something obviously critical in Gene's mind). The letter describing a more controlled way to mount the wheel pants was unanswered as were the questions.

I want to thank you for the good work being done by yourself and others through the QBA newsletter. Maybe collectively we can come up with working solutions to more of the airplane's problems (not only those associated with directional control on the ground), and some of the Revmaster engine problems.

Any QBA member who would like more information on: 1. Moving the mains forward and aligning the axles, 2. Building in a set ground angle of attack, 3. Installing dual brakes, 4. A simple rudder trim installation, 5. Redesign of the tailwheel pivot and fork, 6. A one pass (rather than trim and fit) cutout method for the fuselage to accept the main wing and canard installation, should feel free to write or call me.

Don Ismari, 3601 Cherokee Ave., Las Vegas, NV 89121 (702) 451-0839

ED. NOTE: Maybe Don didn't get a reply because he didn't send a stamped, self-addressed envelope. Rules is rules, ya know, and QAC can't be throwing its money around! QUICKTALK is around because we recognize that 1) QAC doesn't admit to errors, IF it's wrong, they didn't have anything to do with it (I recall on my Mojave visit commenting to Gene on seeing Quickie prototype N77Q that I couldn't possibly believe it weighed 240 lbs unless I put it on the scales myself. You should have heard the answer to that one!) And 2) QAC sometimes suffers from the NIH syndrome (Not Invented Here) i.e. if it's a good idea and they didn't come up with it you probably won't hear about it (unless, of course, there's money to be made off of it). Then again, maybe your ideas weren't so hot. Who knows, but at least here we can decided for ourselves.

I am the Australian distributor for the Q-2 but we have had more than our share of problems getting orders filled. Now we have 5 Q-2 and Q-200's ready to fly but we desperately need some real goddamn U.S. of A. help. Our Department of Aviation won't let us fly them until we submit "Histories of Safe Operations" from American owner-operators. We have sufficient data for the original VW powered Q-2, but now require histories from owners who have Q-2/Q-200 aircraft with:

a. the new canard and spar

b. the 0-200 installation, and

c. the T-tail modification.

We require evidence of at least 600 hrs flown on various aircraft for each of these modifications. For example, 6 aircraft having all the mods and an average of 100 hrs each would be sufficient. However if only 2 have the T-tail, another 400 hrs data is required.

John Buchanan, 3 Cumberland Ave., Lamberts Beach, MACKAY, QLD 4741 AUSTRALIA

ED. NOTE: Can we help these guys to fly? I have a copy of this form I can send you on request. It's about 2/3 of a page (15-20 minutes of your time).



I ordered a Duncan rotary engine 16 months ago, full payment up front, but do not now have any semblance of an operation engine. I have a block but little else and this took over a year to get. I have made repeated contact both by phone and in writing to determine the status of my engine and accessories. Each time the reply (never written and always at my expense) was that the items would be delivered in a matter of days. The original engine was promised in 3-4 weeks! I am missing carburetor and manifold, reduction drive unit, starter, ignition, radiator, etc. I have been in personal contact with at least 6 other purchasers who have the same story. I believe there must be an engine out there that is running, but I have not heard of one so I cannot verify whether Mr. Duncan's performance claims are valid.

I am becoming very doubtful whether I will ever see the parts due me. I suspect there are more than 6 disheartened Duncan engine owners out there and am concerned that more unsuspecting individuals will be added to the list. Mr. Duncan has received a lot of free advertising from recent articles in both SPORT AVIATION and HOMEBUILT magazines. You owe yourself and your wallet a quick note to me before buying a Duncan Rotary. I have begun serious consideration of legal action against Mr. Duncan.

Duncan is still producing engines and some parts. His shipment and order filling priorities are hit and miss where the "squeaky wheel gets the grease". He does not have any realistic production schedule, he cannot seem to in any way inform customers when they can expect their parts, nor does he give them the option of a partial refund. I believe a professional manager would be the only way to straighten out what appears to be a disorganized and directionless company.

Anyone interested in obtaining more information can contact me through QUICKTALK to avoid giving out my name and prejudicing any chance I have at all of getting the rest of my engine. Jim Masal will forward any letters to me and I will contact you directly.


QBA 2792

ED. NOTE: Somebody look up in the dictionary and remind me of the common word for somebody who repeatedly tells you things that don't turn out to be true. Of course these people always have GREAT reasons to justify it. As we say in the country "you bin warned". See last QUICKTALK for a similar commentary.

You guys getting a screw-job should write EAA-HQ if you are members RIGHT NOW. Request that the EAA start protecting its dues paying members instead of its commercial advertisers by denying them exhibit space at EAA events, free advertising or even paid advertising if a sufficient number of members can substantiate consumer mistreatment. Proberezny is proud of his ability to flex his muscles for us with the FAA but we also need the protection of OUR organization from business scoundrels. WRITE NOW and maybe the ball can start rolling at OSHKOSH.

You can order a PDF or printed copy of QuickTalk #22 by using the Q-talk Back Issue Order Page.