Q-talk 23 - LETTERS - HINTS - Q-NEWS
- Category: Q-Talk Articles
- Published: Friday, 31 August 1990 07:11
- Written by Jim Masal
- Hits: 10393
It is my interest to start a regular composite materials column in the QBA newsletter. Having talked to you and received much positive reinforcement, I can't help but be enthused about getting this thing going.
Let me provide a little background about myself. I have only 800 hours into my kit Q-200 since March of '83. I've had distractions: 6 moves, marriage, baby, "honey do's", winterizing the workshop, but have gained a great deal of knowledge during this time. I'm a research and development engineer by profession and have worked in drag reduction and stability, aerodynamics, and the most recent 3 years in composite materials and processing for a branch of the Navy. I've been able to apply a lot of new technology in improving my Q-200.
I grew up around fiberglass boats, Corvettes and structural waterproofing utilizing epoxies and urethanes (Dad's business). I've had more exposure to composites than the average builder and yet found myself to be more ignorant about the subject than I would ever admit.
PROPOSAL: Simply, I've got some real stuff to share. If one knows more of the technical details of the materials he is working with, it is more likely he can produce the best possible product. That's cheap insurance. Even though our manufacturer may have gone "the extra mile" to build in all kinds of safety factors (SF) we may be decreasing their value by less exacting workmanship or taking shortcuts (e.g. have you been substituting biaxial cloth for the UNI cloth because there is so much of it and it saves time? Right!). Do you truly know what kind of SF you have when your butt is hanging out a few thousand feet high in the hot, hazy days of summer - days that could cause your SF's to drop in half! "In half!" you say. Did I get your interest?
I intend to give you the practical, technical information to improve construction methods so as to attain the strongest structures. I will discuss the practical value of heat distortion temperature (HDT), glass transition temperature (Tg) and how these affect SF in varying weather (and why we don't paint our planes red or blue). I can compare materials used in other kits, peel strength, pro's and con's of Peel-Ply, better materials for fuel systems and even refinishing tips. And I'll be glad to answer specific questions that you may write in.
Well, there it is. We can get something good going. Write or call me at home (I'll not be able to return calls). Best time to call is Tues., Thurs. nights. 1800-2100, Sat. 0700-2100, early mornings and evenings preferred.
Mike Bergen, 92-A3 Chester River Drive, Grasonville, MD 21638
Call (301) 827-9386
I just finished reading a pile of old QBA newsletters. You and the Q builders have done a fine job of supporting each other and spreading the word on helpful hints and potential dangers. The newsletters have convinced me to dust off my Q-1 and get it flying again.
Seven years ago I got mine in the air for 10 pattern flights, but poor climb and high vibration convinced me that the Onan would do it to me. I felt like I was risking my life each time I flew. Not exactly what sport aviation is all about.
I've enclosed money for Q-TALK. Thank you guys for the inspiration.
I was wondering about the possibility of having a monthly "HOW BEST TO SOLVE THIS TYPE OF PROBLEM" question with specific answers that were mailed in between newsletters. There's so much good information, sometimes it gets overlooked.
I'm relating this concept to our conversation at OSH regarding getting people involved. I think some people are reluctant to contribute something that's only slightly different, but if asked about something specific, might be more than willing to respond.
Mike Conlin, Conroe, TX
ED. NOTE: I'm up for any idea that will prompt our more timid brethren to set their buns down and pick up a pen and paper. Lemme have some topics.
Here's my new address in Houston. I start an orthopedic surgery residency and will be here 5 years. I am now a civilian.
My Quickie is again flying after a 3 year grounding. I wasn't able to bring it with me while I was a Navy flight surgeon anyway. I bought a "new" Onan from an incomplete project and put it in my Quickie. First engine lasted 220 hrs. and I just decided to quit hassling with the studs backing out, the result of poor engine cooling during the first 100 hours. Through trial and error, I finally came up with a good cooling arrangement (previously described in QBA), but the engine had already suffered.
The "new" engine was not an easy retrofit because it was one of the first engines QAC sold. It had an oil filter and a different propeller extension, which was about 1.5" shorter than my original (serial #420). I ended up having a machine shop construct a new, longer prop shaft. I also removed all flashing from the intake and exhaust valve ports and cylinder heads. I installed the Onan 20 hp heads. The engine runs fine and performance is similar to the original, though it seems to vibrate a bit more. My tach is on the fritz so I am not sure how well it's turning up. Top speed is 122 mph which is consistent with about 3700 rpm on the old engine.
Does anyone know what the difference is with the Onan engines that came with oil filters vs. ones that did not? I retired my original engine and bought an unused one with a filter and I don't want to redesign my baffling to fit the new configuration unless removing the filter affects oil flow.
(ED. NOTE: This is not gospel, but I believe it was only to reduce weight on the heavy end of the airplane. A local Onan repair shop would be able to give you the particulars of oil flow (or maybe just a study of the engine manuals). In any event, the oil filters came off very early in the game.)
I also replaced the center elevator hinge bushing because of severe wear and slop in the hinge. Now the elevator is within tolerance.
I also noted some rust - actually quite a bit - on the old prop shaft and extension. This was hidden because of the way the prop extension was installed with the center bolt and keyway. I like the present, (older) method better (bolts through the shaft perpendicularly) because it leaves the shaft visible for inspection when the prop is removed.
I will be bringing my Quickie to Texas, and I do plan to go for the straight line record of 777 miles by Norm Howell now that the Australian broke my closed course distance record.
Steve Eckrich, Houston, TX
Some update on Q-2296. I have 190 hrs on it and a second paint job. Replaced the tires once (that one degree toe out does scrub the tires a tad). Have shimmed the brake pads but they will have to be replaced soon. Have had a blind encoder installed but the system is not working well. RADAR folks see me at correct altitude, but about every third challenge they read me anywhere from 2500-3500 feet higher, never lower. The avionics folks have bench-checked both the transponder and encoder and tell me they are OK. Any you builders out there have any ideas on that problem? Have replaced the tail wheel twice; now have a soft rubber tail wheel -- much quieter and better traction for ground steering. I've had a FOR SALE sign on it at local fly-ins but no takers. Lots of interested folks with no money!! I admit it's no show stopper but it flies.
ATTENTION, ATTENTION -- take note on what I found on my last annual inspection!!! Both the QSCM3 studs (part of the midspan elevator pivot assembly) were loose. Both the left and right AN363-1032 lock nuts had loosened approximately 3/4 turn. To tighten required a L_O_N_G socket wrench extension and having to grind down a 3/8 socket (made thinner) because of the restricted space caused by the 3 MSP4 cherry rivets used to secure the QCSM2 pivot assembly to the CS16 elevator tube (see page 10-7 & 8 of plans book). They were assembled tight, but here's a theory -- because of flexing of the canard during ground handling and at the same time deflecting the elevators there is a slight chance of minor binding of the pivot stud in the CS17 hinge. That's the best I can come up with.
If anyone has replaced the brake pucks on their Q-2, I would like to see a "how to do it" article.
If you want to buy an unused set of BOREDOM FIGHTER plans, give me a call.
Fred Wemmering, Fayetteville, NC
Some past Q-TALKS refer to wearing of control system pivots, so during my annual condition inspection I pulled my elevators. To my pleasant surprise, I found no wear! I've got about 450 hours on N202SH now.
Sam Hoskins, Carbondale, IL
I had a number of problems with my Revmaster and carb (Edvac) and had to have the engine off and on so many times that I highly recommend the use of an engine test stand.
My engine had been in storage for 4 years and would not start - no spark. Off came the engine. Apparently the points had become oxidized during the long layup. After cleaning them I was only able to get the engine started by spraying fuel directly into the carb. An inspection revealed that the carburetor needle body was rotated so that the fuel port was blocked. Oh well, nobody said it was easy!
Manny Lewis, Scotia, NY
My Revmaster installation still has a hot #4 cylinder (450+ if I leave the power rear full throttle after takeoff). I routed extra air in with a cowling hole and a tube, but it had little apparent effect. Enriching the mixture only brought fouled plugs; although temp did drop 30-40 degrees. Normal cruise temp runs 380-385 degrees on #4 cylinder.
I now have 80 happy, fun filled hours, so the seven and a half years in building was worth it, PLUS the association with other builders in my Chapter 587 which gave me a big boost. Also, Q-TALK has filled a big void in builder information exchange. It's really appreciated.
One more thing. I bought a Long Ranger Loran-C from Gulf Coast Avionics in Tampa, FL for $795 and it works great.
Max Kroll, St. Paul, MN
Add 3 inches to the front tank template and you get 18.7 gallons (My old tank held 13.7). I had to split mine and add baffles last. Note my lip is the same as the canopy lip. Plywood was used as a hard point for the Facit pump (see photo page) and all fittings were glassed on both sides. 3/8" ID copper tube was used. I made an extra port with hose and strainer just in case. Inside tubes were flared with a finger screen wrapped in with safety wire. I painted the inside and around fittings with white sloshing sealer. Flight tested ok ... and yes, you lose knee space.
Dave Naumann, Enterprise, AL
Dear Mr. Masal,
I bought me a Q-2 last year that was built by an A&P who had flown 253 hours on the aircraft. But to this day, I am unable to successfully fly this aircraft due to ground handling characteristics. The builder is trying to teach me and I took 4 hours in a Citabria with no trouble controlling the tail. But I sense I'm still doing something wrong.
A little background on the aircraft. Empty weight is 558 lbs. The Revmaster generates 3200 rpm on takeoff with liftoff at 75-80 mph at about gross with two on board. The aircraft is held in ground effect until 100 mph is reached then climb established at about 600 fpm. Down wind speed is at 120 mph, base 110 and final at 110. Over the threshold is at 90 in ground effect with the throttle cut and working the elevator to stay in ground effect until speed is bled off. The builder says he likes to come in low and with power until over the threshold. I don't think he has really determined the stall speed. I have read different articles by builders that have achieved slow landing speeds in the 75 mph ranges. Are our approach speeds too high?
I really do like this airplane and I am anxious to lick this problem before I think about placing this plane on the market.
Delmar Thaden, Cleburne, TX
ED. NOTE: Q-TALK back issues thoroughly discuss ground handling problems and several items that will improve it. However, these planes are unique taildraggers unto themselves and don't act like others you may fly. For one thing, they don't have very much weight on the tail. For another, as you get into ground effect, the elevator acts like a flap. Imagine landing a Citabria with someone jacking around with the flaps just at touchdown. Freeze the stick and control altitude with power if you must. Faster approaches with power on are preferable to 75 mph even though the plane shouldn't stall that high. Ballerina control on the rudder pedals is a must - quick but gentle footwork.
Installation of fuselage systems is one of the most tiring jobs in the building of any airplane. Builders report that next to being a contortionist, a method of simply tilting and/or adjusting the elevation of the fuselage would be a tremendous help during this phase of construction.
To this end, I've designed and built a jig fixture consisting of a 2x4 isosceles triangular frame with similar uprights at its apexes.
The proportions are such that two of the uprights straddle the fuselage in the main wing area while the third is located just ahead of the firewall. An adapter attaches to the four engine mounts and to a series of matching holes in the upright. In the forward end of the adapter is a series of holes providing 36 radial adjustments in 10-degree increments. Holes in the jig upright provide 11 vertical adjustments in 1 3/4 inch increments.
The aft fuselage support is provided by a sling consisting of a 4 foot length of upholstery webbing with a loop sewn in each end and a 3/4 inch dowel and knotted length of rope installed. The two ropes of the sling enter holes at the top of the two uprights on each side of the rear fuselage and then transverse to the inside of the upright thru two holes about midway down toward the frame. There the ropes are wrapped around large wooden cleats attached to the inside of the uprights. As the fuselage is rotated and locked to the front upright, the sling automatically conforms to the unique fuselage contour at that orientation. Vertical adjustment is accomplished by the ropes that are wrapped around the cleats attached to the uprights.
The jig is not rigid enough to support the fuselage shells for taping. The rigid frames and jig table is utilized for this as well as for internal bulkhead installation. Then that assembly is transferred to the rotating jig for the installation of the main tri-gear, NACA inlets, under-wing cabin air exhaust vents, rudder pedals, instrument panel, fuel tanks and lines, consoles, speed brake, canopy deployment system, the remaining flight controls, etc. The installation of the canard and wing would be one of the last operations in the rotary jig because subsequent rotary adjustments would be attached, the whole assembly can be removed from the jig, inverted and then reinstalled for easy access to the bottom interfaces of the airfoils with the fuselage as well as the nose and main landing gears.
Dick Barbour, Rogers, AR
I have not written anything to QBA for over a year now and feel I owe some input.
Last September the starter pinion gear in my C-85 shattered. Subsequent teardown and inspection of the engine revealed at least $1,500 worth of parts and machining so my friendly engine builder/friend Bill thought it would be great for me to buy and overhaul an 0-200. One thing led to another and soon I'm installing Bill Bertrand's extended engine mount. It seems that Bill's modified mount puts the engine forward about 2 1/2 inches. Gee, what if I move the engine forward enough to put the plane at forward CG under worst conditions? A guy could put an extra gas tank in the baggage compartment! It turned out that on my tail heavy plane I was able to move the engine forward 5 inches. As an aside, we had a mag failure on the way to Oshkosh. It took 10 minutes to put in a new one! The starter is also removable without disturbing anything. Weight and Balance checked good and an 8-gallon tank was fitted as far forward as possible directly behind passenger's backrest. I used a temporarily extended version of my old cowl (now for sale - $150) as a male mold for the new cowling. This worked well and was much less work then a scratch-built cowling. Cooling intake area was reduced from 44 sq. in. to 26 sq. in.
As C-85 pistons and cylinders were near new; I used them on the 0-200. Because the stroke is 1/4 inch longer, however, the compression ratio goes up about 1 1/2 points but clearancing is necessary 1) at the perimeter of the crown, and if C-85 rods are used at 2) the piston skirt to adjacent rod contact point and 3) C-85 rod to opposite cylinder contact point. While clearancing the combustion chamber to piston crown gap (should be over 1/16 inch), I decided to C.C. the combustion chambers. You would be amazed at the variation in volume between cylinders! I also matched intake manifold to intake ports and exhaust ports to exhaust gaskets. Balancing of rods and piston pin assemblies rounded out my amateur "blue print" job. Compression ratio ended up at 7.8 to 1 so premium fuel can be used if mags are not too advanced.
Three other engine modifications were accomplished. The first was a full time ram intake (see picture of integral but removable filter), which connects to Lycoming heat box. The second is the addition of an Oberg oil filter/cooler. This unit has a removable screen and is finned for cooling. Finally, given the inspiration of Ron Whetsten's Tri-Q with composite engine baffles, I made a set for the 0-200 but retained the large plenum area given in the original plans (see picture).
The net result of all these changes was a dramatic improvement in performance. Keeping the original Aymar DeMuth prop (60x60), the RPM at 8,000 ft increased from 2,600 to 3,100 with a cruise speed increase from 155 to 186 MPH. I would guess that almost half of the improvement came from reduced cooling drag although the engine pulls real strong and is smooth and quiet even at these elevated RPM's. At 12,500 feet it was still turning 2,900 RPM at slightly over 6 gallons per hour! Problem - fuel flow problems. Even though my Quickie flows 30 GPH from the fuel line at the carb, it flows only 10.3 GPH out of the float bowl drain plug. This is the amount of gas the needle will allow to flow at its full open position! Symptoms at full throttle: 1) engine roughness 2) EGT excursions (mostly up) and 3) bogging.
With a gravity feed system you should flow 150% of full power consumption (10 GPH for the 0-200 at 2,750 RPM). I'm turning 3,100 RPM so cannot supply adequate fuel. Ram vents are not making up the difference so these will be changed and if ineffective I will have to use electric fuel pumps. More pitch will help (60x64) but will not solve the problem.
Some of you may be concerned about the forward C.G. situation. As long as the reflexor is adjusted so pattern speed is the same as usual, I have plenty of elevator authority for landing (not noticeably faster).
One other change has been to move the pitot tube to the leading edge of the canard at about BL 110. This gives more accurate IAS but I have not done the numbers yet. The old pitot tube location yielded speeds which were about 10% optimistic. Gyros are next.
After your plane is complete "fine tuning" can involve nearly as much work as the original project; it's been a long road but everything you do to improve your Q will make you appreciate it more. If you want to talk call (609) 234-7600 (days).
John Groff, Medford, NJ
From Jim Masal, Editor
I never did like the blunt end of a Quickie, but the easiest solution, the skullcap spinner, was not endorsed by QAC. In fact, one came off in flight on one aircraft and could have done serious damage. The problem seems to be a flimsy attachment method. I liked the look it gave the plane and decided I could improve the attachment. It's hung on for 40 hours with no signs of letting go. Here's what I did:
1. I sealed the center screw hole with a patch of BID on the inside and micro on the outside.
2. I used Johnson Paste Wax on the inside of the spinner several times as a mold release. Then I laid up a 7" strip of BID around the aft inside edge of the spinner with minimal overlap so as not to throw off the prop balance.
3. After cure, I trimmed the glass flush around the aft edge of the spinner, popped out the glassed ring and trimmed the ragged edge to 1 inch all around.
4. Next I tacked the ring to a previously cured 1-ply BID layup with 5-Minute epoxy. Then I wiped a smooth bead of micro around the joint on the inside. Finally I laid up 2 BID inside the "cup" I had created. After cure, I trimmed off all glass that didn't look like an aft spinner bulkhead.
5. I put everything aside until one miserable winter day when I couldn't work outside. I carefully mounted 6 equidistant nutplates around the inside perimeter of the ring using small, flush-head pop rivets. Next, I centered the bulkhead on the prop then marked and drilled the back of the bulkhead for the prop bolts. The bulkhead is held to the front of the prop by the washered prop bolts. Locating the holes exactly will result in a clean-tracking, non-wobbly spinner. Once on the prop, I slid the spinner on then carefully located, marked and drilled holes matching the nutplates around the perimeter of the spinner base.
Nothing to it. But I still scratch my head over how to use the same method to make a forward bulkhead for a large spinner, which would be safer with two. How DO they make those spun aluminum jobs fit so well?
Snooping around Tom Gordy's project one day I noticed a neat "glove compartment". What he did was to make 2 quarter-inch foam sidewalls and a floor that attached to the aft side of the seatback on one end and the next bulkhead on the other. The roof of the box was the bottom of the main wing. He put a door on the cockpit side of this "cavern" and now he can store charts. E6B, pencils, a hairdryer, couple of grapefruit, Vernors ginger ale, quart of Marvel Mystery oil, two tie down hooks and a small boy. Don't anybody be tempted to install an aux tank here though, the fuel may leak to the main wing from the bottom and eat out the foam core just as it did in the one fatality who made a tank out of the neat space on top of this wing.
DRILLING SCREWS AXIALLY
A simple way to "fixture" small screws for axial drilling is to screw a nut onto it (either hex or square) and clamp it head down in a machinist's vise as illustrated.
It doesn't matter whether or not the screw is pressed down firmly against the base of the vise, because the pressure and rotation of the drill itself will simply screw the fastener downward to snug it up. That, of course, assumes both a right-hand screw thread and a right-hand drill.
Federico Strasser, Santiago, Chile
I've convinced Brock that we have supported the Kitplanes Quickie Solution article long enough and stopped sending out copies in June. I am referring requests to you.
I think there are enough Rotax Quickies flying now that someone should put out a new report. I say that because I know that Harry Buskey and Vestal Fulp could probably be talked into making a full report of their conversion. Their 503 engine is the new configuration with the cageless bearings, new gearbox and CDI ignition system with beautiful, large sparkplug gaps of about .035, and TWO big plugs in each cylinder head. Man, they should never foul and you don't have to worry about checking the points or timing. Let's just hope that there has been enough testing to ensure dammed good reliability. I have had three occasions of the .015 plug gap fouling in the 168 hours on Quickie 13VD. These were due to extended descents or glides without clearing the engine on base or final. Since I'm due to check the points and timing in a few hours, I'm thinking about a CDI for my engine.
Brock and I want you to know that we're still with our Quickies in Hangar 115 at Camarillo and enjoy flying, talking and reading about Quickies. Keep the Q-TALKS coming.
Jinx Hawks, Camarillo, CA
ED. NOTE: Starting this issue, I will begin a series describing the details of what several builders have done in installing their Rotax engines. It would be most helpful to hear additional opinions, ideas and reports of actual successes in making this installation. And aaaaawayyyyy we go:
ROTAX ENGINE INSTALLATION - CONSIDERATIONS
When contemplating a change to the more powerful Rotax conversions, strengthening the firewall becomes a very early consideration. Surprisingly enough, Ed Miller, one of the earliest builders to convert to a Rotax 447 had this to say: "I did not strengthen the firewall in any way. No problems so far. Wouldn't be hard to beef thing up a bit if you're still in the building stage." As more background, Ed had a very attractive plane that looked carefully built when he had it at Oshkosh several years ago. He put many cross-country flights on this aircraft and so far as I can tell, this was considered a successful installation. We lost touch with Ed and are unable to get a current status on the bird.
Brock McCaman and Jinx Hawks, who both installed the somewhat higher powered Rotax 503 took a different approach to the firewall issue.
First, these guys removed everything from the firewall that belonged to the Onan. All big holes were filled with plywood and tiny holes with foam and/or micro. The firewall surfaces were sanded and re-glassed over all the patches.
Next the engine side was covered with Fiber Frax material followed by a sheet of aluminum (in place of the heavier stainless). On the backside of the firewall, they added a second firewall stiffner fabricated just as the first one is called out in the plans. This was installed about 4 inches below the plans stiffner. It was checked to insure it did not interfere with rudder pedal travel.
Next, 8 plies of BID were cut so that each would extend in a "U" shape from one side of the fuselage, around and between the stiffners, and onto the opposite side of the fuselage. These plies extend 10 inches along each fuselage side and are fanned out during the layup so as to distribute load over a wider area. Enough width was allowed so that these plies would overlap onto each stiffner.
In a similar manner, 2 smaller "U" layups of 4 plies of 45 degree BID were made between the fuselage sides and each of the 2 lower firewall stiffners. These "pads" were located where the lower engine mount holes would be drilled.
Jinx and Brock did not do elaborate testing of these changes. Much of the design was intuitive, i.e., "it looks about right". To date, their scheme is holding up well and they are both pleased with the results.
Norm Howell essentially duplicated the successful work of Jinx and Brock on his "Ugly Quickling", however he told me that he used fewer than the 8 upper plies. That "looked about right" to him, and his installation is also successful to date. I don't recall if he used 4 or 6 plies, but I'll bet he'll tell us.
In the next issue I'll point out some of the engine mount and attachment considerations. Meanwhile I want you Rotax operators to add your experience to the above discussion as well as to the upcoming issue of the engine mount.
Remember that the Rotax installation provides from 2 to 2.5 times the horsepower of the Onan, so be especially thoughtful when modifying your airframe. Safety, safety, SAFETY!
THE HOMEBUILDERS INTERSECTION
By Paul L. Polashezny
Chairman and Founder of PAA
Once again peace and tranquility have descended on the site of our Fly-In-Convention here at Levi, Wisconsin. The thousands of aircraft owners, spectators and members of the unwashed public have departed, and all that remains are our memories, our impressions, and our eternal gratitude for the volunteers who make possible this great event here at Sampler Field.
The word volunteer expresses it all. From our early years at Rockfish to this year's spectacular Fly-In-Convention at Levi volunteers are the lifeblood of our organization. The air show performers, the ground safety personnel, and even the young men and women manning the concession booths are all volunteers. Although the young people are with us in cooperation with a work release program. They are volunteers in the sense that they elected to serve the PAA rather than to remain in their place of incarceration. I wish that we had space in these pages to name all of those who pitched in, at no cost to our organization, to make this Fly-In-Convention a commercial success. There are, however, a few individuals that deserve special recognition. John Daolauski spent most of his vacation building that magnificent outhouse located on the northeast corner of Paul Street and Tom Avenue directly at air show center. Those thousands of persons standing in line waiting to use the facility were able to bask in the shade of the rose bushes planted by Betty Daolauski and were served refreshments, at a reasonable price, by the aforementioned young volunteers.
The commercial exhibits were, as usual, a great commercial success. However, there was an unfortunate incident. One vendor in the flymarket was found to be selling actual aircraft components. I apologize for this oversight and promise you, our members, that it will never happen again. The major aircraft manufacturers were well represented as usual, but what was even more significant was that even the small companies were able to afford a minimal area to exhibit their products. These "little" people are the life blood of aviation and if we support their products, aviation will prosper, the PAA will prosper, and the small companies will prosper and grow into large companies that will be in a position to lease larger, more expensive spaces at our Fly-In-Convention. That Rutan fellow from California was back again with still another new airplane. Actually, I thought he had given up on single seat, composite homebuilts years ago. He calls this one the ARES which must stand for Always Ready to Engineer Something.
You may have noticed some new vehicles in use on our convention grounds. As a direct result of the kindness directed toward the Russian at last year's convention, the East German Clean Air Commission donated eleven Trabanet automobiles to our organization. Rust-1 through Rust-4 were modified into convertibles before Hans Kanaski broke his power hacksaw. We hope to get the entire fleet in service during the coming winter. Those who are flying Rotax powered aircraft are encouraged to donate fuel for use in these vehicles. You also may have noticed a few other improvements at this year's Fly-In-Convention. The roads have been widened and reinforced to accommodate the armored cars that are required to carry away the money, and runway 36-18 has been lengthened to the extent that a separate VOR is required on each end of the runway.
Another first this year was that the PAA further demonstrated its compassionate nature by sponsoring a bus load of underprivileged Mescalero Apache Indian children. The kids didn't seem to be interested in the air show, but they took great glee in sending messages to each other by beating the wing surfaces of the show aircraft. This program is being re-evaluated. This year I had the great honor to meet Miss Connie Swartz, the world's oldest living airline stewardess. This poor lady has fallen upon hard times in her later years and when her plight became know to our members they opened their hearts and pocketbooks to this fine person. I am proud to report to you that there is quite a tidy sum in the Save-A-Connie Foundation.
The daily air show was the expected showcase of professional excellence. Dwane Colealeski performed his usual magic with the clip-winged Taylorcraft. Few people realized that Dwane's Taylorcraft was not clip-winged until he fast-taxied through the aircraft parking area. There were a number of show planes that were praying for similar incidents on their other side to even them up before their long flight home. Danny Wiliski performed a most amazing low-level aerobatic exhibition. Our admiration was somewhat diminished when we learned that a hornet's nest was discovered underneath his seat. Charles and Joan Polaski treated us to their usual automobile-to-aircraft transfer, but the general public seemed to be more amused by watching them trying to jump start each other's vehicles. Bob Herendiski treated us to his famous 37-turn inverted flat spin, which demonstrated the wisdom of your air show organizers in locating the air show safety line well back from the runway. All but one of his barf bags landed short of the spectators. Our old faithful Ken Brockski, performed in his gyrocopter but this year he presented his new single blade rotor system. His flight might best be described as an aerial jitterbug ballet. Daniel Heliginski and Montaine Malleski flying together as the Polish Connection thrilled us all with their close formation acrobatic routine, a feat made all the more difficult because Montaine was flying a Kitfox and Daniel was in his new Glassair III. The military was also well represented this year. One of the major highlights of our Fly-In-Convention was the arrival of the stealth fighter. It conducted several low fly-bys down the main runway but, being a stealth aircraft, no one was aware of its presence. The Air Force returned home with mixed emotions.
Our Fly-In-Convention is more than just an air show, as attendance at the workshop, the forum tent and the Stage-In-The-Bushes can attest. The highlight of our forum program this year was Father Baliwoski's lecture on how the reading of scriptures can help in entering an IFR holding pattern. He also had some nice things to say about the Christian Eagles. The first evening program at the Stage-In-The-Bushes featured the Mrs. and Miss PAA beauty contests, but again this year, unfortunately, nobody won. The final program at the stage was a one-on-one discussion with the third assistant deputy director of the PAA, as an installment in our "meet the bastards" series. When the third assistant deputy director left, which he did rather quickly, he admitted to learning a great deal, including various new short words. The projectiles and other debris collected from the stage after his departure documented the level of communication that was established between our government and the flying public.
Those that remained through the last day of our Fly-In-Convention were treated to a pit barbecue at the northeast corner of Paul Street and Tom Avenue.
From Ted Kibiuk, Holland Patent, NY
Has anyone experimented with additional air inlet holes to the oil pan section of the Onan engine?
ED. NOTE: Yup, remember Jim Prell's glassing of a toilet paper center cardboard? He mounted the tube to direct air right at the pan but reported to me that he felt it wasn't all that effective. Stripling has an innovative approach but hasn't flown it yet.
More from Ted: My Quickie has an Allen head screw lock to lock her up (see drawing).
When the screw is in all the way, it is flush with the outside fuselage wall and is very inconspicuous.
I've had a flight experience in my Quickie that may have the same cause (and almost the same result) as your Global Quickie accident.
I had taxied to the west end of a 2,300' strip. While doing a 180-degree turn to take off east bound, I let the right main arc through a large puddle of rainwater. The whole top of the right canard was splattered with small water droplets. At the time I was totally ignorant of the effect of contamination on the GU's lift ability. I began the takeoff run and instead of the usual 1,200' takeoff roll, this one took 2,000' to get to 2' high and floating off the end of the runway at 70 mph. I had to hold full left aileron and almost full left rudder just to keep the wings level. Luckily I was over Kansas's flatlands and as I accelerated through 85 mph the moisture disappeared and the control went back to neutral. After that I made a vow to always wear an adult sized diaper while flying a Quickie. I came very close to contaminating the INSIDE of the cockpit with another form of moisture. I'm planning to keep my vortex generators on my Quickie.
ED. NOTE: At the time of my accident, I was fully aware of GU characteristics in rain and carefully avoided any runway puddles because I knew the possibility of what you described. I hope you have educated anyone who didn't.
You can order a PDF or printed copy of Q-talk #23 by using the Q-talk Back Issue Order Page.