Hello Charlie:
I just seen an RV8 at the Quad City air show last weekend. It's a
real nice 2
seat airplane. About how much is the kit?
snipped
I like the Dragonfly, because it is a cute, cheap airplane, about
$9000 for
the kit.
Charlie Kuss wrote:
Rich,
The RV-8 standard kit is $16,000. The RV-8A (tricycle gear) is
$16,400. Add
about $8,000 for the quickbuild version. One nice thing about the RV
series is that
you don't have to pay the total kit price "up front". The kit is broken
down into 4
sub kits. You can start with the empennage and buy the wing kit when you
finish the
empennage. Complete price breakdowns can be found at:
http://www.vansaircraft.com/public/kitprice.htm
I have no direct experience with the Dragonfly. However, 2 friends own the
Quickie Q-200. The Dragonfly is very similar to the Quickie. I think (not
sure)
that the Dragonfly has better flight characteristics. Quickies have very high
landing speeds (short final at 90 mph), are tricky to land and use up a
lot of
runway. My friends are both airline pilots and they have their hands full
landing
the thing. This may be a consideration if you are not an extremely good
pilot.
I think that one of the Rutan canard (or a variant like the Cozy)
aircraft would
be a much better choice, then the Dragonfly. Dragonflies and Quickies
have rather
low resale values. There is a reason for that.
Charlie Kuss
The Q2 (NOT Quickie, which was a single seat Rutan design for another
company) was designed by a non-engineer, has 65 sq ft of wing and MANY
serious handling and landing problems. The Dragonfly has 100 sq ft, was
designed by a degreed aero engineer and ex-Navy carrier pilot with a bit of
advise from Burt. They are night and day, altho both share a landing quirk
and unfortunately look way too much alike. If you stall them in (or run
into full aft stick 4 ft in the air trying to flare) due to landing too
slow, they will bounce very high due to the long flexible gear legs
(canard). The ONLY response is to add full power and fly out of it. If you
insist on trying to recover it, you WILL break the prop and/or the canard on
the second or third bounce. This has been tested many times and is very
predictable. If you are pre-planned to add FULL power instantly on a bounce
(and fly it on, don't stall it in) you will be just fine. This is a
training issue (primarily, altho due to a handling deficiency). The
Dragonfly has relatively
normal ground handling.
The Q2 (not Quickie) is an extreme handful in the TO/LNDG roll due to
blanking the rudder, unblanking, aileron yaw coupling at low speed, and a
poor tailwheel, etc. Also a VERY high sink rate at engine failure. A young
pilot friend of mine purchased a "TriQ2" which is a conversion to tricycle
gear on a Q2, which solves many of the ground handling issues. I warned him
not to buy it, and when he did, warned him to be VERY careful to train
diligently for engine out landings. He did this, coming back with eyes
wide after chopping the power on the downwind the first time and gliding
like the proverbial manhole cover. WHEN he had his engine failure (take
off) he was able to safely land and altho the A/C was seriously damaged, he
and his passenger walked away. Some sort of a fuel system failure, not
fully diagnosed. Thoroughly spooky aircraft, IMHO. Some folks really like
them. I would not ride in a Q2.
The Q200 is a revised design for the O200 Continental, with a tubular carbon
spar in the
canard and a revised canard airfoil. Better, but still a handful, but at
least a more reliable engine
than the Revmaster "VW" engine, which was banned in Australia due to shoddy
workmanship.
The Dragonfly would be way too heavy with a 13B, since it was designed for a
65 hp VW motor. The RV8 sounds like a much better fit. You get to choose,
it's a free country, sorta.
Bill Freeman
Long EZ builder & pilot
BSME, MSME
The AirCraft Rotary Engine NewsLetter. Powered by Linux.
ACRE NL web site.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/ http://www.linux.org