Login Form

Rutan dessigns and rain

13 years 11 months ago #839 by Lemans
Every time I talk about a Rutan design here in Europe, people give me always the same answer?? Oh, their fast and fly extremely well ..if it??s not raining!
Are quickies really difficult to handle in rainy conditions?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

13 years 11 months ago #840 by admin
Replied by admin on topic Re:Rutan dessigns and rain
Hi Lemans,
I get this question a lot too. I gave an answer to this in the FAQ's for the Q1 .

Early kits used a different airfoil, than the later kits. The original Quickie had a GU airfoil canard. This airfoil was prone to lose lift when contaminated with bugs (or rain). This required significant increase in control stick back pressure to maintain level flight. (Many builders found this very disconcerting!) The contamination issue seemed to be resolved by the installation of vortex generators on the GU canard.

The LS1 canard solved the contamination issue, but it requires a carbon fiber spar.

So if you build a Quickie or Q-2 variant with the older GU airfoil canard, you are prone to the loss of lift due to bug contamination and rain. Lots of guys are still flying with these, but most have opted to attach the vortex generators.

The newer style LS1 airfoil canard, didn't have the loss of lift issue. However, it is a thinner airfoil and therefore requires a different construction technique than the GU canard.

Please let me know if this answers your question.

Warm regards,
Dan Yager

Flying an aeroplane with only a single propeller to keep you in the air. Can you imagine that?

— Captain Picard, from 'Star Trek: The Next Generation' episode 'Booby Trap.'

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

13 years 11 months ago #841 by Lemans
Replied by Lemans on topic Re:Rutan dessigns and rain
Hi Dan,

Sorry about asking the question once again.
So, taking off during rainy days is not a problem thanks to
this new canard airfoil.

I just started to do my pre-construction paperwork.
I??m playing with the idée of building the Q2 for only one
pilot/no passenger.
This ??hybrid?? could possibly fly at a slower min. speed while using a 30 hp lightweight engine. Possibly slow enough to enter the
Ultra light regulations in Europe.
If calculations are pointing into that direction, I will build
such a ??hybrid??.
If not, than it??s going to be a second hand
(or plans build) Q2 and a PPL license.

Regards Lemans

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

12 years 7 months ago #1074 by haiqu
Replied by haiqu on topic Re:Rutan dessigns and rain

The Q1 at 480lb gross really needs a 25hp engine, the original 18-22hp was barely adequate. I like the way you're thinking, but the Q2 is 490lb empty! So really, it will need at least 40hp to fly with a pilot in it, and I don't like your chances of finding a 40hp engine that's much lighter than the original VW 2100. Also, putting a lightweight engine in would be a complete redesign from the weight and balance viewpoint.

The other problems you'll face are that it has a high wing loading — 14.9 lb/sq ft — and a stall of 64mph which exceeds our regulations in Australia by a long way. In fact here the only way to build and fly one is with the Civil Aircraft Safety Authority (CASA) overseeing every step of the build, and by obtaining a full GA PPL first.

Sorry to piss on your fire, but it will never become an ultralight. The Q2 is a high performance aircraft. The Q1 on the other hand can just meet our ultralight regulations, so it might be best to think along those lines.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Moderators: JonMatcho
Time to create page: 0.143 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum