Discussion in 'Rules and Regulations / Flight Safety / Better Pil' started by wanttobuild, Mar 6, 2019.
I need some dual instruction in a gt500 around west kentucky.
I just bought a Quicksilver GT 400.
Congratulations Ben, sincere best wishes for many many hours of fun flying!
We have several members here on HBA that have experience in the Quicksilver family of aircraft. I'm sure you will get a lot of good advice based on their experience.
I have no experience with them, but it is my understanding they are very "rudder-dominant" aircraft, meaning you will be using the rudder as much or more than the other primary controls. That's not a bad thing, but it is somewhat different from the production Cessnas and Pipers.
You know me well enough that it shouldn't surprise you that I am considering some Junker style Ailerons, executed in Chipper style foam and glass.
Now if I didn't have to remodel my house this year.....
Next year I will definitely be ready.
If you just bought a Quicksilver, fly the **** thing as it is. Get some flying hours, have some fun, gain some experience. DO NOT change anything on the GT400 for right now. Just fly the **** thing, and after you get 100 hours on it then you can think about trying to modify something that has been working well for 40 years. Trust me, I know what I am talking about in this one situation.
Junkers ailerons will create NEW and DIFFERENT loads on the structure that it was not designed to handle. For little or no benefit. And the Junkers ailerons by themselves will not "solve" the rudder dominance of that aircraft.
When you get 100 hours in the Quicksilver, I will be happy to show you how to make an easy modification to the Quicksilver to make it less rudder-intensive.
you build your airplane and I will build mine OK?
If you bought it , why mess with it ready to go. Turn a non project into a project.
No problem. I will do just that. My intention was to give you some good advice based on what I know and have been through, and it may have accidentally come across as if I was chastising you. I apologize.
What do you anticipate adding Junkers ailerons will do for you?
Buddy of mine had a GT400 for years. He sold it to a friend who rarely flew it and let my buddy keep flying it, eventually he bought it back. Originally had a 447, he later put a HKS on it.
Get some stick time in almost any ultralight and you'll be good to go in the GT.
Dana, I gather from my studies that Junker style ailerons will give the GT400 outstanding control, they will also provide additional lift. The additional weight that I may incur, will disappear once airborne.
In addition, they are my personal preference.
I do not know where you are getting your information but I would like to add a data point. The B1RD has Junker style ailerons and they do little to nothing to aid roll control. I agree with VB on this one. Learn to fly it as is then work on improvements. If nothing else you need a base line. I would like to know the formula to make the Junker ailerons work when you do put them on. I would also know what makes them not work if not rigged correctly. Keep us informed.
Warning. I am not who I appear to be. I am an on an alien computer. I am not a Russian. You can trust me. I will lurk for any reply.
I stumbled across a build log of a tandem air bike build. IIRC, "question gravity". Informative site. This builder had a chat with Chris Heinz, and came away better informed about Junkers. The airfoil was also a lifting foil. (aileron)
I think (I am a truck driver, so) air will stay connected to this style of aileron. This is part of a still undefined scheme. I still have a year before I will finally execute.
My recently lost love was the EMG6. It was heavily influenced by the Quicksilver.
So, I aint gonna bother with a punch test of the sails. $2700 will fix the gt400 with a new set.
This gets me to the bare bones of the wings, and I have a plan. It involves 1/2in honeycomb ribs, polyfiber and rib stitching.
The foam ailerons will be constructed Chipper style, (chipper aero) with the "axle" if you will, being, oh say 1/2minor 1in major aluminum streamline. That teardrop shape will "key" to the aileron, preventing any slip. Glassed on the bias.
Maybe not for everyone, but it makes me happy.
Lots of work coming on the tail also. That will be the best part, I'm gonna throw the kitchen sink at it.
If you drink lots of SOJU, you will see things more clearly!
I just had a look see at the B1-RD Junkers. They really looks like an Aileron, maybe on separate hinges, but nothing like I have in mind.
I like to have one item do as many things as it can.
Personal preference is a plenty good reason for doing it! Improving the aircraft won't happen.
I have lots of ultralight experience including the GT-400 and in some others with Junkers ailerons....
If he knows of some kind of a diet pill where my weight disappears once airborne, I need to get some of those pills. I'm headed for the IAC world championships I'll take this opportunity to just slip out the door with this thread.
I have two recommendations for anyone buying GT400.
When the engine gets quiet in flight, Loki forbid, immediately input nose down stick to maintain airspeed. It's a lovely flying machine, tough, docile, and well engineered, but it's draggy, and slows down fast when you chop the throttle or the engine stops in cruise flight. Be aware the conditioned reflex to drop the nose, common in a LOT of pilots of ultralight aircraft as a survival tool, is completely wrong in a Gyro.
Two. Your plane, your choice, but making modifications like Junkers ailerons ( which I like in several planes, and would use in a design of my own if it was a good idea ) will ruin resale value. Not like a Quicksilver is an investment toy like a Harley or Corvette ( both known to sell for full retail after X years of ownership, depending on vintage ) but making structural or aerodynamic changes on one basically means you are the last owner before it is scrapped.
Both items off my chest, please keep us updated on your progress.
Victor Bravo, I'm curious as to your future and now declared unwanted suggestion.
But to avoid thread hijack or any appearance of disrespect, I won't ask you to amplify.
Quicksilvers are in my limited experience, "rudder planes" as are most air things I have flown, that have rudders. So I see no real need to change that aspect of them.
Although iirc, operating with the doors off, it's unwise to sideslip a GT400 or GT500 because the cross draft will suck your maps into the void, and possibly your headphones. I wore a helmet so the headphones weren't an issue, but I've heard stories.
GT500's are pretty rare around our neck of the woods wanttobuild....
It's a shame that Mark Smith,up in Mt.Vernon In., passed away.
He was THE ABSOLUTE MAN when it came to Quicksilvers.
Look online and see if Trikite Sails is still open or even Smittys Fiberglass....Mark's nephew ran the fiberglass business and may still possibly have Mark's GT500.
Another option is to find a T-Bird II in the area and fly the left seat.....it will give you experience with the yoke controls and the right handed throttle arrangement of the GT400.
I sold mine a few years ago so I can't help you out with flight hours,unfortunately.
When you fly your GT400.......BE PREPARED TO LEARN THE REASON THE PLANE HAS A RUDDER.
It is very rudder dependant....
And Aesquire is correct....if you slip the GT400 or GT500 with the doors off...loose items tend to go through the prop.
Mark would slip the GT500 so steep that he had me repenting for all of my previous indiscretions in life,and he would be smiling like a kid on Christmas the whole time he was doing it.
He never did buy me a new hat to replace the one that the prop chewed up.....lol
Mark may be gone, but Tri-State Kites is still alive and well.
My buddy's GT400 had no doors, nothing but a tiny nose pod around the pilot's feet to hold the windscreen.
I always thought that if I owned a GT I'd ditch the yoke and put in a jointed stick like Spitfires had.
What makes the GT400 so rudder dominate?
I prefer would prefer to lead with Ailerons and follow with the rudder while watching the string or ball.
High dihedral? Plenty of adverse yaw? The tradition of it's ancestors?
As to lead with ailerons, that's more or less the technique I was taught on a Citabria back in the Iron Age. Others with more experience and training, especially in teaching, may differ.
Ailerons, aileron rigging, dihedral, fuselage and or fin vertical area. All can be or be part of the problem.
Separate names with a comma.