My Quickie Tri-Q200 Rebuild Project

[Jon Matcho]

I recently came upon one of those "in the right place at the right time" deals and was encouraged by several people in the know (particularly Phil Lankford -- thank you!) to pull the trigger and pick this deal up.  Part of the reasoning was to shortcut the flying aspect of this hobby considering my life's unintended distractions these past several years.

Until this year I hadn't given Quickie's much serious thought, but after researching I am now convinced they are the most underrated and under-appreciated aircraft in the Rutan-inspired canard fleet (more on that in a future article).  This particular aircraft was built by Earnest Martin, a master-builder who finished the interior as though it was the exterior.  Even the hidden areas passed my "will I get stabbed" test for clean glass work.

Unfortunately the 2nd owner (I am now the 3rd) experienced a collapsed nose gear on landing, causing a prop-strike on what was previously a sweet MT constant speed propeller.  There is also some damage under the cowl, but appears limited to the airbox.  I have not yet removed the engine, but have gone through the process of trailering it from an outdoor tie-down and into a hanger.  While I had several helping hands, this is something I can imagine doing alone (assuming all gear is in place) within 1 hours time in the future.

I need to remove the engine and get it checked out, remove the gear and verify the integrity of the firewall mounting points, repair the cowling, and give a good "once-over" all around.  Attached are a few low resolution pictures, including one from when Earnest flew the plane to Rough River in 2006.

I hope to have it flying in 2015!

[DaveAnderson]

Cool!

[Jon Matcho]

Here it is, grazing, trying to be like a Long-EZ.  Tomorrow the cowling is coming off for the first time and hopefully the engine will cooperate when I ask it to leave the airframe behind.  The broken gear needs to come off after that, and fingers are crossed for no structural damage.

[Jon Matcho]

Today the cowl was removed for the first time since I acquired this project.  Until now I took it on faith that there was an engine in there rather than a bunch of bricks.  Turns out I was right, but it wasn't the polished and shiny masterpiece from my dreams, having more oxidation and corrosion than I expected.

So there I stood, with the thought of me being able to restore the engine on my own fleeing from my mind.  Dollars started adding up once again... until, later, I received some additional motivational advice from a repairman who had built these engines before.  His advice was simply, "You can do it", and so that is now my plan -- to carefully remove the engine, and then bring it back to my shop for further assessment and education. 

I think perhaps I was distracted by the oxidized engine baffling and rust trails from the screws and rivets, all of which can be fixed.  At least I'll have a good set of patterns for new baffling if this doesn't clean up.

Any and all advice, tips, and tomatoes are welcome.

[Kent Ashton]

It looks like it was sprayed with seawater!  I would suspect rust in the cylinders.  As a prop-strike engine, you probably want to take it apart anyway.

I have rebuilt a couple of Lycomings.  They are pretty simple.  I see that Continental has a Service Bulletin.

http://www.tcmlink.com/pdf2/sb96-11b.pdf

[Jon Matcho]

On 10/18/2014 at 3:36 PM, kent ashton said:

It looks like it was sprayed with seawater!

I am hoping it's rainwater coming in, soaking that black hard fabric stuff, and then the rivets and screws rusting.

Quote

I would suspect rust in the cylinders.

I hope not!

Quote

As a prop-strike engine, you probably want to take it apart anyway.

Yes, and it will be quite the learning experience (hopefully all the learning happens on the ground).

Quote

I have rebuilt a couple of Lycomings.  They are pretty simple.

That's what I've been told by a few that have done so -- thanks for the encouragement!

Quote

I see that Continental has a Service Bulletin.

Thanks, I filed that away. I also have the engine manual and a video from the original builder. He's also available and has been quite helpful.

[Jon Matcho]

Today we lifted the engine, removed the bottom cowl and propeller.  I was very happy to find that there was zero damage to any metal parts on the bottom of the engine.  Attached are some pictures. 

Instead of removing the engine to get at the gear, it looks like I can remove and install the new gear before removing the engine.  All suggestions and comments are welcome.

  

[CutieDarkFae]

I cannot offer sensible, helpful suggestions I fear.  I can however offer comments.  Such as: Ouch!  I'm glad no metal parts got hurt.  May this be simpler and cheaper to repair than you expected, but not so simple/cheap to make you worry.

Oh, I can also offer chocolate

[Kent Ashton]

Very minimal damage there.

You should collect the manuals and begin disassembling the engine for inspection or get it to someone who can. There are good internet sources for Lycoming. I have not looked for Conti manuals but i expect they're online. Here is a good lycoming page that will give you the idea. See his Engine --> lycoming info. --> building the Superior SL-360 (3rd item) here

http://www.meyette.us/RV-7Ahome.htm

[Kent Ashton]

Here is a more direct url for the Lycoming build

http://www.meyette.us/SuperiorTextPics.htm

[Jon Matcho]

Thanks Kent.  It would be nice to have a shiny pile of new engine parts ready for assembly!

I do have the Continental O-200 manual along with a binder full of ADs and service bulletins from the original builder, who was very good at everything to do with this airplane.  These are the two ends of the spectrum for the advice I have been given:

• Follow the Continental service bulletin for prop strikes (complete disassembly and magnetic particle inspection of most all rotating parts), to...
• "It's a wood prop", just change the oil and start the engine.

I do worry that some of the fiberglass bits are now in the carb, so that needs to get cleaned out at the very least.  My next step is to go back, remove the landing gear and send back for a replacement (possibly with match-drilled holes).

The MT constant speed prop and accessories will be removed as well (the MT prop and hub alone was 25+ pounds!).  I am looking at a fixed pitch Prince, Catto, or Hertzler as a replacement.

[Kent Ashton]

[*]"It's a wood prop", just change the oil and start the engine.t.

The other consideration is that your engine looks like it sat a while without any preservation. Could have had old, acidy oil. It is surprising how much they can rust inside. See this thread

http://forum.canardaviation.com/showpost.php?p=69231&postcount=40

[Jon Matcho]

I suppose that's possible (I'm guessing you might have had detonation in the 4th picture).  

For 95% of its life the plane and engine were babied, and then the second owner took over but still performed regular maintenance.  It was always hangared until the incident, where it ended up sitting on the tarmac for ~2 months.  

At this point I am looking to get the engine sent out to an engine builder to bring everything back to tolerances.  I am also more inclined at this point to let them reassemble as well, and I'll "just bolt it on" when I get it back.

[Jon Matcho]

On 10/18/2014 at 3:36 PM, kent ashton said:

It looks like it was sprayed with seawater!  I would suspect rust in the cylinders.  As a prop-strike engine, you probably want to take it apart anyway.

I spoke with the original builder today. He said that the cylinder oxidation was from a daily fog that rolled into his airport. The cylinders and pistons were replaced with new Continental jugs and Lightspeed pistons 600 hours ago so I'm hopeful that rust never happened in there, but I shall see.

I am shopping for tear down, inspect, and rebuild prices now and have a shop in mind at this point. If the inspection shows more parts need to be replaced than I can afford at the moment, I'll take back into my shop and begin rebuilding myself.

[Jon Matcho]

I am learning. Today we (my uncle, new member 'Unc Tom', and I) managed to remove the front baffling and airbox. That silicone/RTV is sure stubborn stuff! I learned how carb heat actually works in the process. While not a lot got done, and the engine certainly didn't come off, the complexity and anxiety of it all is going down with each session. Attached are some pictures.

My plan at this point is to:

1. Send the engine out to be torn down and inspected ($)
2. Anticipate needing several replacement parts ($ or $$)
3. Have them assemble and test the engine for me ($)

Total is $$$ to $$$$ and I would only save one $ (approx $2,500) assembling by myself.  I feel I am learning enough by connecting and disconnecting the engine myself, so don't feel I'd be losing anything here.  On the contrary, I am much more confident in their ability to build the engine right than mine at this point.  I'd also have to buy another tool or two.

Also, the combination alternator drive/prop hub (I know not likely the right words here) needs an additional 2-3" extension to fit a fixed pitch prop (to clear the cowling).  The prior prop was a heavy MT constant speed.  What should I be asking when looking at prop extensions from Saber?

Let me know what y'all think.  I still don't know how best to remove the engine.

[Kent Ashton]

A Harbor Freight/Craigslist engine hoist is good for removing an engine. You can set it on an old tire.

[Jon Matcho]

Thanks Kent... we're using a borrowed hoist.  My questions are more to do with an approach and any wisdom to impart for disconnecting the engine from the airframe (wires, lines, etc.)

[Jon Matcho]

Any thoughts on moving the belt-driven alternator to a gear-driven setup behind the engine?
 

 

Benefits would be:

1. Single-piece prop extension would result
2. Fewer metal parts, less weight
3. Reduces the moment arm slightly

Cons would be:

1. Nearly impossible to access without removing the engine (which is the situation w/starter anyway)
2. It works now.
3. There's nothing wrong with adding a prop extension to this setup (that's really a question)

[Kent Ashton]

You might check that your engine mount allows for the other alternator.  Unnecessary changes tend to snowball.  

One thing about those Denso alternators:  You can buy them from a junkyard for $15, install new bearings and brushes fairly easily and modify them for an external regulator.  There are many versions though, and you have to pin down the actual Lester number so you get one that fits your mounts.  I am running one on my LEZ now; just enjoy doing that sort of thing.  Here is one way:  I think some of his instructions can be improved on.

http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/georger/Alternator.htm

Or keep the internal regulator and use Nuckolls instructions for regulating them

http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Adapting_IR_Alternators_to_Aircraft.pdf

Or just get a new one overnighted from B&C if that one goes out.

[Jon Matcho]

Thanks Kent, good stuff.  There's likely room in the rear as that was what the location the original plans called for (a 12A B&C actually, with mention of an upgrade to a 35A).

The propeller connection is more of an unknown to me.  Until then I just need to get the engine off...

[Kent Ashton]

On 11/7/2014 at 3:13 PM, Jon Matcho said:

The propeller connection is more of an unknown to me.  Until then I just need to get the engine off...

With a Google Images search, I don't see many (any, actually) O-200 tractor aircraft using prop extensions.  As you know, they are used on pushers to put the prop back into cleaner air.  If you are just using a short extension to clear the cowl, it probably won't hurt but it probably won't do anything aerodynamically either.  They are pricey but you'd have to balance that against the work of rebuilding and repainting your cowls.

I would enter a permanent search in Ebay motors, Aircraft parts for "prop extension" and you might get lucky.  Ebay will email you any items that pop up.

[Jon Matcho]

4" extensions are standard on all RVs I think.

The Q200 plans call for a 5" extension, which of course the cowl currently fits.  The only reasons I know of relate to allowing the cowl shape to be a bit more aerodynamic and possibly improved engine cooling options.  I also don't want to redo the cowl at this point.

I'll take another look tomorrow...

[Jon Matcho]

Attached are a couple examples of other builders' installations of forward-mounted alternators on their O-200 engines.

I plan to use (keep) this approach at this point.

[Jon Matcho]

It's been a long while since I reported anything about my progress, which has been essentially suspended.  I am now making a push to get the project into my soon-to-be operational workshop, and make the decisions to move forward.  I actually have to re-read this thread to make sure I'm not forgetting anything.

I was on and off the fence about keeping the plane exactly as it was, but have since decided to NOT refurbish the MT propeller as I could buy at least 2 high-end props for the same price to refurbish.  The MT hub is excessively heavy for this tiny plane, so it's coming off and I'll have to do a new Weight & Balance when ready.  The engine still needs to be rebuilt.

Progress...