Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 01:59 AM - Re: Avid skis (Michel Verheughe)
2. 02:02 AM - Unfriendly ATC WAS: First Flight N913KF (Michel Verheughe)
3. 04:08 AM - Re: Avid skis (gene m. calkins)
4. 05:29 AM - Re: Avid skis (Jerry Liles)
5. 06:50 AM - Re: Another 'Latest update' Re: Newbie flaperon problrm - Now Pr... (Lowell Fitt)
6. 07:37 AM - Re: First Flight N913KF (Grant Fluent)
7. 07:40 AM - Re: Skis (Grant Fluent)
8. 07:57 AM - Re: Another 'Latest update' Re: Newbie flaperon problrm - Now Pr... (Wwillyard@aol.com)
9. 08:25 AM - Re: Unfriendly ATC WAS: First Flight N913KF (Ron Carroll)
10. 08:31 AM - Re: insurance price adjustment (kurt schrader)
11. 08:39 AM - Re: insurance price adjustment (kurt schrader)
12. 08:50 AM - Re: Bird Strike (kurt schrader)
13. 08:58 AM - Re: Avid skis (JMCBEAN)
14. 09:07 AM - Re: Avid skis (kurt schrader)
15. 09:10 AM - Re: Skis (kurt schrader)
16. 09:12 AM - Re: insurance price adjustment (kurt schrader)
17. 09:16 AM - Re: Avid skis (Michel Verheughe)
18. 09:18 AM - Re: Avid skis (Dee Young)
19. 09:19 AM - Re: Skis (Michel Verheughe)
20. 09:19 AM - Re: First Flight N913KF (kurt schrader)
21. 09:55 AM - Re: Another 'Latest update' Re: Newbie flaperon problrm - Now Pr... (Ron Carroll)
22. 10:12 AM - Re: insurance price adjustment (JMCBEAN)
23. 10:28 AM - FW: Intercooler for turbo possible and more.... (Don Pearsall)
24. 10:35 AM - Intercooler for turbo (dmorisse)
25. 10:52 AM - Re: Skis (dmorisse)
26. 11:24 AM - Test for the dummy (Rick)
27. 11:50 AM - CG question (Jeff Smathers)
28. 01:16 PM - Re: First Flight N913KF (Clifford Begnaud)
29. 01:58 PM - Re: First Flight N913KF (Torgeir Mortensen)
30. 02:04 PM - Wheels & skis (sid)
31. 02:06 PM - OK City (JMCBEAN)
32. 02:07 PM - Re: Short flight (Torgeir Mortensen)
33. 02:12 PM - Re: Another 'Latest update' Re: Newbie flaperon problrm - (Torgeir Mortensen)
34. 02:27 PM - Re: CG question (Rick)
35. 02:34 PM - Do Not Archive (dmorisse)
36. 02:45 PM - Re: Unfriendly ATC (Michel Verheughe)
37. 03:19 PM - Re: CG question (John Anderson)
38. 03:35 PM - Re: Unfriendly ATC (Kitfox)
39. 04:15 PM - Re: Another 'Latest update' Re: Newbie flaperon problrm - Now Pr... (cnichols)
40. 04:54 PM - Reduction drive Ratio with 72in 3XWarp blades (Rick)
41. 05:24 PM - Re: OK City (Clifford Begnaud)
42. 05:31 PM - Sport Pilot Status (jblackwell)
43. 05:36 PM - Re: CG question (Jeff Smathers)
44. 06:16 PM - Re: Skis (Grant Fluent)
45. 06:28 PM - Re: Propeller (Torgeir Mortensen)
46. 07:02 PM - Re: Rotax Engine Sale (Arthur Nation)
47. 07:10 PM - Re: Avid skis (John Larsen)
48. 07:11 PM - Re: Avid skis (John Larsen)
49. 07:23 PM - Re: CG question (Rick)
50. 08:44 PM - Re: Another 'Latest update' Re: Newbie flaperon problrm - Now Pr... (Floran Higgins)
51. 09:09 PM - Re: Re: Propeller (RiteAngle3@aol.com)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
Jerry Liles wrote:
> Avid seems to be moving at present and may not be in business much
> longer. I doubt you will get a reply. I suggest you contact Steve
> Winder at Airdale. If anyone can help you he can.
Thanks Jerry. But the script they are using at Airdale to send a request is not
working. It sends back a "404 error" message. Do you have a direct email
address for Jerry Liles or even a phone number?
Thanks in advance,
Michel
do not archive
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Unfriendly ATC WAS: First Flight N913KF |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
Ron Carroll wrote:
> My wife and I were shocked at what had gone on,
Good Lord! This is shocking, Ron! Is Chico a commercial airport? I can't
imagine professional pilots finding themselves in such a messy (and dangerous)
communication.
Cheers,
Michel
do not archive!
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "gene m. calkins" <calkinsgm@charter.net>
Michel This what I found on Airdale Steve Winder Ph. # 208-459-6254
Email ukav8r@mindspring.com hope this helps. Gene N99GC
do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michel Verheughe" <michel@online.no>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Avid skis
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
>
> Jerry Liles wrote:
> > Avid seems to be moving at present and may not be in business much
> > longer. I doubt you will get a reply. I suggest you contact Steve
> > Winder at Airdale. If anyone can help you he can.
>
> Thanks Jerry. But the script they are using at Airdale to send a request
is not
> working. It sends back a "404 error" message. Do you have a direct email
> address for Jerry Liles or even a phone number?
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Michel
>
> do not archive
>
>
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Jerry Liles <wliles@bayou.com>
Try Steve Winder at this address:
ukav8r@ <mailto:ukav8r@mindspring.com>mindspring.com
<mailto:ukav8r@mindspring.com>
I've used it before. Unless Steve is on leave in Blighty he'll get back
to you promptly.
Jerry Liles
Michel Verheughe wrote:
>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
>
>Jerry Liles wrote:
>
>
>>Avid seems to be moving at present and may not be in business much
>>longer. I doubt you will get a reply. I suggest you contact Steve
>>Winder at Airdale. If anyone can help you he can.
>>
>>
>
>Thanks Jerry. But the script they are using at Airdale to send a request is not
>working. It sends back a "404 error" message. Do you have a direct email
>address for Jerry Liles or even a phone number?
>
>Thanks in advance,
>
>Michel
>
>do not archive
>
>
>
>
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Another 'Latest update' Re: Newbie flaperon problrm - |
Now Pr...
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Lowell Fitt" <lcfitt@inreach.com>
Bill,
At the risk of possibly raising a storm, I feel I have to report on the
experience of a couple of friends I frequently fly with. Consider that both
had 912 UL engines. One went from the GSC to a Powerfin and is now back to
the GSC. The other went from a Warp to the Powerfin. He still flies behind
the Powerfin but had a devil of a time blending climb with cruise
performance. What he finally did was to adjust the prop to give him redline
at full throttle in level flight. Both clipped 1" from each blade - factory
modified. If they tried to adjust for cruise with the longer blade, there
was too much drag on the prop and they couldn't get the RPMs up. The GSC
guy felt frustrated and quit the experiment and the Warp guy has remarkable
climb, but still lost a little bit in cruise.
My thinking on this is that the Powerfin prop is like a paddle at the root
of the blade and all this effort is masked by the round cowl of the Model
IV. I think the smooth cowl of the 5 and above pretty much eliminates this
problem.
Anyway, this is what these two would tell you. Neither is on the list.
Lowell
----- Original Message -----
From: <Wwillyard@aol.com>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Another 'Latest update' Re: Newbie flaperon
problrm - Now Pr...
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Wwillyard@aol.com
>
> In a message dated 12/4/2003 11:24:01 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> RonCarr@qwest.net writes:
> Now that I feel the plane will be alright, I will go ahead and buy a new
> 3-blade prop for it. I would like to ask for opinions regarding various
3-blade
> props on the market. I don't want to make a mistake now, I'd rather take
> advise from those much more experienced.
>
> I can't speak for the 582, but I have the three blade powerfin on my 912
and
> have no complaints. Nice people to work with, quality product. Tried the
> three blade GSC, it was poorly balanced, would not hold tracking and
required
> constant re-torqueing of the hub.
>
> Bill W.
>
>
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: First Flight N913KF |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Grant Fluent <gjfpilot@yahoo.com>
Congratulations Bill! I enjoyed reading about your
first flight. I recently read a quote from Wilbur
Wright that is worth sharing:
"If you are looking for perfect safety, you will do
well to sit on a fence and watch the birds; but if you
really wish to learn, you must mount a machine and
become acqainted with its tricks by actual trial."
Grant Fluent
Newcastle, NE
Classic IV 912S
do not archive
--- Bill Hammond <kitfox@itsys3.com> wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Bill Hammond
> <kitfox@itsys3.com>
>
> Following is another, albeit wordy, story of a first
> flight in a
> brand new Kitfox.
>
> 12/5/03 - Denver Colorado
> The morning has started cold. Temperature is 9
> degrees
> Fahrenheit as I leave my house at 4:45am to drive to
> work at
> Denver International Airport. I am a supervisor in
> the FAA
> approach control. I need to get to work by 5:30 to
> set the
> arrival flow for all the airliners inbound from the
> east coast.
>
> But, my mind is elsewhere. I am thinking of the
> Kitfox Series 6
> that I have been building for the last two years.
> It is sitting
> in a hangar at FTG Front Range airport - about seven
> miles away
> from DEN and tucked into a corner below the Class B
> airspace.
> N913KF had been issued her airworthiness certificate
> on 11/10/03.
> About five hours were showing on the Hobbs meter
> as a result of
> engine runup and taxi testing. Would today be the
> day? I felt
> that the aircraft was ready, but was I? I had never
> been
> airborne in a Kitfox. I have logged over 4500 hours
> in the last
> 27 years, but all of it was in production aircraft.
> I have been
> keeping current in an Aeronca Champ while I have
> been building
> the Kitfox. I felt capable. I had consulted with
> my EAA chapter
> flight advisor. I had confidence in the aircraft
> construction
> and rigging after the taxi tests, but that first
> flight in a new
> aircraft is an awfully big step.
>
> At the approach control, I check the weather,
> NOTAMS, and airport
> conditions before setting the day's arrival rate.
> It is good
> VFR, only a slight breeze from the southeast, and
> all the runways
> and taxiways are open. I call Denver Center and
> tell them to
> give me a flow for four runways, visual approaches,
> land south
> and east with no restrictions. I can almost see the
> Traffic
> Management Coordinator smile - even though he is 60
> miles away in
> Longmont Colorado. I have just given him the
> permission to throw
> 160 airplanes per hour at me and my approach
> controllers. No
> other airport in the world can eat aluminum like DEN
> can! The
> folks at Denver Center know that it will be
> impossible for them
> to find enough aircraft to meet this demand, but
> they will
> certainly come close for short periods. I can only
> imagine how
> the airlines' bean counters will be smiling - along
> with the
> 30,000 people that will travel through DEN today
> without any
> delays or cancellations. I think to myself - gee,
> this decision
> made by me, a lowly government employee, will have a
> positive
> economic impact on a whole bunch of people today. I
> hope that
> they keep paying their taxes so I can keep drawing
> my salary. I
> also hope to make it hard on the flight crews to try
> and use the
> excuse "Ladies and gentlemen, we have an ATC
> delay...." There's
> nothing like good VFR to make all out lives easier.
> And these
> light winds are favorable for a taildragger....
> Enough, back to
> business.
>
> The first morning inbound rush is down and at the
> gates when I am
> joined in the Tracon by another supervisor. Would
> he mind if I
> skipped out today and went flying? He is agreeable,
> but the 9
> degree temperature makes the thought a little
> uncomfortable. I
> decide to get a session of proficiency time working
> final
> approach during the next rush. MAybe it will warm
> up.
>
> I key up 123.85, set my radar scope the way that I
> like it and
> buckle in. Final approach can be like a roller
> coaster ride.
> There are times of great buildup followed by a wild
> ride until it
> ends. Unlike a video game, you can't hit pause and
> you can't ask
> anyone to stop. Just like they tell you at the
> carnival "keep
> your hands and feet inside the ride until it comes
> to a complete
> stop." Away we go. "United 44 heavy, approach,
> reduce speed to
> 170 then descend and maintain 8,000." "Skywest 7036
> turn right
> heading 080, traffic two o'clock 3 miles on final a
> Boeing 737.
> Report traffic in sight." "Frontier 583 turn right
> heading 140,
> maintain 170 knots to JETSN, clear for visual
> approach runway 16
> right." "United 1403 contact tower won tree fife
> point tree
> (135.3) So long."
>
> It is a pretty smooth session today. My turns are
> timely,
> spacing is good, the lineup is aesthetically
> pleasing on the
> radar scope. I am feeling pretty self confident.
> What is the
> wind? One six zero at eight - that is a fine wind
> for a first
> flight. I'm outta here! As the last airliners are
> sent to
> tower, I combine my radar position to another
> controller, sign
> for the leave, and drive to FTG. This will be the
> day after all.
>
> The temperature is now about 35 and N913KF does not
> protest as I
> pull the cowl off and give a preflight as if my life
> depended on
> it, because it does. The airport Crash-Fire-Rescue
> crew comes to
> the hangar at my invitation as I explain what I am
> going to do,
> show them how to work the door latches, and where
> the master and
> ignition switches are located. They offer to stand
> by for the
> flight and I heartily agree. Self preservation has
> a way of
> hedging all bets. Two friends from work drive up to
> witness the
> event. I am not sure if they are here for support
> or to manage a
> betting pool whose outcome is determined by my
> ultimate success.
> The Rotax 912S starts in the cold air, but is
> reluctant to
> smooth out for the first 30 seconds. Finally, it
> purrs its
> cadence and I start the long taxi to runway 17.
>
> By the time I get to the runway, the engine
> temperatures are
> normal and everything feels right. Out come the
> checklists as I
> prepare to make my own personal history. Finally,
> it is time.
> No excuses. In the words of astronaut Gus Grissom I
> mumble to
> myself the test pilot's prayer - "O Lord, please
> don't let me
> f*** up!" The throttle moves forward. Before I can
> get it to
> the stop, the tail has come up. Oh Yah!! Tracking
> is straight as
> the airplane very quickly gets light on the wheels.
> Now,
> according to my script, I am supposed to make note
> of the
> indicated airspeed so that I will have it as a basis
> later for
> the landing approach. I confess, I missed it. By
> the time I
> look down at the airspeed, I am already in the air!
> Ed Downs was
>
=== message truncated ===
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Grant Fluent <gjfpilot@yahoo.com>
Michel,
I built a pair of ski dollies when I was 1/2 owner
in an Aeronca Chief with skis. If you're interested, I
have pictures.
Grant Fluent
Newcastle, NE
Classic IV 912S
--- Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no> wrote:
> This is very nice, Darrel, you did an excellent job.
> But I already have this
> kind of skis. The problem is, if I use them:
>
> 1) I'll need a dolly to put the plane on in order to
> get it in the hangar.
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Another 'Latest update' Re: Newbie flaperon problrm - |
Now Pr...
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Wwillyard@aol.com
In a message dated 12/7/2003 9:53:35 AM Eastern Standard Time,
lcfitt@inreach.com writes:
Bill,
At the risk of possibly raising a storm, I feel I have to report on the
experience of a couple of friends I frequently fly with. Consider that both
had 912 UL engines. One went from the GSC to a Powerfin and is now back to
the GSC. The other went from a Warp to the Powerfin. He still flies behind
the Powerfin but had a devil of a time blending climb with cruise
performance. What he finally did was to adjust the prop to give him redline
at full throttle in level flight. Both clipped 1" from each blade - factory
modified. If they tried to adjust for cruise with the longer blade, there
was too much drag on the prop and they couldn't get the RPMs up. The GSC
guy felt frustrated and quit the experiment and the Warp guy has remarkable
climb, but still lost a little bit in cruise.
My thinking on this is that the Powerfin prop is like a paddle at the root
of the blade and all this effort is masked by the round cowl of the Model
IV. I think the smooth cowl of the 5 and above pretty much eliminates this
problem.
Anyway, this is what these two would tell you. Neither is on the list.
Lowell
Lowell
There may be some truth to the round cowl effect although I have nothing to
base this on other than talk on the list. Unlike what appears to be the goal
of a number of Kitfox builders, speed at cruse was not a concern and for this
reason I went 68" to the 70" diameter with the Powerfin. I chose this prop over
the warp drive largely because of its weight. There may be better choices
but compared to the GSC, this has proven to be a very low maintenance prop for
me. I dialed my prop into give me what I felt was a comfortable cruse speed at
5500 RPM. With this setting I indicate about 88 to 89 MPH and can easily
exceed engine red line in level flight. When I tried to achieve higher curse
speeds, with either prop, I found that I would start to have low fuel indications
at the header tank when the wing tanks were less than half full do to the
somewhat negative angle of attack to maintain level flight. My prior Cessna
flight time and the very sensitive rudder on the Kitfox also resulted in frequently
poor flight coordination during this phase of testing which may have
contributed to the fuel flow problem. As a result I decided that I wanted a cruse
speed that would have the bottom side of the wing approximately level with the
horizon. With my current prop setting I can achieve the published climb
performance figures and that makes me happy.
The bottom line is I fly because I love to fly so if it takes me a little
longer to get to my destination (should I actually have a destination) so much
the better.
Bill W. N20736
DO NOT ARCHIVE
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Unfriendly ATC WAS: First Flight N913KF |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Ron Carroll" <RonCarr@Qwest.Net>
Michel, understand that this happened several years ago (about 1990), and is not
typical of how things really are, especially today. This experience was just
something that has been on our minds for a long time, and is now dismissed.
The system works and has our trust. It has always seemed to me that controllers
should have the experience of being PIC to more fully understand & appreciate
what's going on. Obviously I'm wrong.
BTW, Chico Muni is a pretty low use Class-D airport.
Ron Carroll
do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: Michel Verheughe
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, December 07, 2003 2:00 AM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Unfriendly ATC WAS: First Flight N913KF
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
Ron Carroll wrote:
> My wife and I were shocked at what had gone on,
Good Lord! This is shocking, Ron! Is Chico a commercial airport? I can't
imagine professional pilots finding themselves in such a messy (and dangerous)
communication.
Cheers,
Michel
do not archive!
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: insurance price adjustment |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
Oops - Allow me to clarify/reword Bob,
What they said was that for the first 40 hrs, anyone
other than the builder would always be considered a
"passenger" even if the were a solo test pilot with a
gazillion hrs of KF experience. Until the 40 hrs were
up, only the builder would be insured, and then only
if you had at least 20 hrs in the same model and with
the same engine.
I have Avemco now, but only hull, not in motion. They
started me out with all-but-flying hull insurance for
$250, which would haved cover my ground testing. Then
last year they raised me to $500, not in motion, hull
only. I checked with Falcon and with EAA this year.
Don't think I checked AOPA too, but I might have.
So far, I decided to get my 20 hrs and then go back to
Falcon, unless I hear of a better offer. Thanks to
C.B. Cook's info, I might try Avemco again, then go
for the 9% reduction, if I can.
Kurt S.
--- Bob Unternaehrer <shilocom@c-magic.com> wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Bob
> Unternaehrer" <shilocom@c-magic.com>
>
> <<I tried to add my friend "the brave pilot" who did
> the
> first test flight on my plane. The insurance
> company
> said that all other people, beside myself, are
> considered "passengers" until the 40 hrs are
> complete,
> thus illegal and uninsured people>>
>
> I thought that passengers were not allowed untill
> after the 40 hours,,, thus
> insurance would probably be void if carrying a
> passenger Bob U.
__________________________________
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: insurance price adjustment |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
Thanks for the info Charles,
I have Avemco now, but will try them again to see if I
can get some "reasonable" coverage for the first 20
hrs. I am only worried about hull and liability
anyway. Not much concerned about covering myself.
I tried to get them to cover my test pilot, but was
told they would not cover any pilot, other than the
builder, for the testing period.
It may be the different agents that each of us talks
to that varies in the reply too.
Kurt S.
--- charles b cook <cookflys@juno.com> wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: charles b cook
> <cookflys@juno.com>
>
> Roger
> The insurance company that told me of the price
> adjustment was Avemco.
> The way the salesperson explained it the insurance
> companies are trying
> to prevent you from cancelling insurance and going
> to another carrier.
> You would have got a 9% price break if your aircraft
> and you had flown 20
> hrs when you first applied. It doesn't cost anything
> to call and see
> maybe Falcon and others do the same.
>
> As far as covering the test pilot even if he/she is
> on your policy during
> the first 20/40 hrs of flying with them flying solo
> some carriers will
> not give medical, hull, or protect you from a law
> suit if your aircraft
> hurts the test pilot. (The best friends relatives
> can sue you.)
> Charles
__________________________________
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
Jimmie,
My 2 cents only...
If you are near done, just patch the rudder and get it
finished. Then fly it and fix it later.
If you have a ways to go and have the time, redo the
rudder and make yourself proud. It is nicer knowing
everything is "right and pretty" on the first flight.
In my case, I have a belly patch. (Screwdrivers
always land pointy end first when dropped from the
inside, don't they?) It was near done and still flys
good.
Kurt S.
> So now I am
> trying to decide whether to patch this hole and
> forever be reminded of this now deceased critter or
> to recover the whole rudder.
> Jimmie
__________________________________
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "JMCBEAN" <JDMCBEAN@cableone.net>
I have been hesitant to say anything........ I have had several customers
call about the status of Avid, have heard some talk about it and have had
potential customers come to Skystar for a tour after they went to Avid.
The bottom line of what I have heard is that Avid is out of business... the
hanger in MT is empty and people are looking for the assets which seem to be
"on the move".
Blue Skies!!
John & Debra McBean
"The Sky is not the Limit... It's a Playground"
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Jerry Liles
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Avid skis
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Jerry Liles <wliles@bayou.com>
Did you try the Avid Aircraft site?
http://avidair.com/
I just went back and it's all there.
I don't think Airdale has the skis but Steve Winder is familiar with
them and may even know where there is a set available. It is possible
that Airdale will make them. Send Steve a query. His emali address is
on the site.
Jerry Liles
Bob Unternaehrer wrote:
>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Bob Unternaehrer"
<shilocom@c-magic.com>
>
>I can't find the "avid site" that has the buttons you describe... I get
the
>airdale homepage and the links on the left with none called "OPTIONS" Can
>you give me a link please.
>
>Bob U.
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Michel Verheughe" <michel@online.no>
>To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Avid skis
>
>
>>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
>>
>>Jerry Liles wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Go to the Avid site. On the right hand side click on options. On the
>>>options page under Options and Accessories click on Wheel penetration
>>>skis.
>>>
>>>
>>Thank you, Jerry. It looks like the kind that can be mounted on bungee
>>
>>
>gears.
>
>
>>I'll write at once and inquest.
>>
>>Cheers,
>>Michel
>>
>>do not archive
>>
>>
>>---
>>[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>---
>[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
>
>
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
It would be historically funny if Avid and SS were
rejoined under new ownership.
Kurt S.
--- JMCBEAN <JDMCBEAN@cableone.net> wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "JMCBEAN"
> <JDMCBEAN@cableone.net>
>
> I have been hesitant to say anything........ I have
> had several customers
> call about the status of Avid, have heard some talk
> about it and have had
> potential customers come to Skystar for a tour after
> they went to Avid.
>
> The bottom line of what I have heard is that Avid is
> out of business... the
> hanger in MT is empty and people are looking for the
> assets which seem to be
> "on the move".
>
> Blue Skies!!
> John & Debra McBean
> "The Sky is not the Limit... It's a Playground"
__________________________________
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
What a great set of skis Darrel! I am saving your
message to my "things to do" list.
Kurt S.
--- dmorisse <morid@northland.lib.mi.us> wrote:
>
> Although the airplane is long gone to another flier,
> I built my own skis to
> fit the bungee gear. I used a set of snowmobile
> plastic skis...
__________________________________
Message 16
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | insurance price adjustment |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
John,
Did they add them as a pilot/test pilot during the
test period, or just after?
Kurt S.
--- JMCBEAN <JDMCBEAN@cableone.net> wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "JMCBEAN"
> <JDMCBEAN@cableone.net>
>
> Kurt,
> I use AOPA and the insurance is through AIG.
> They didn't have a problem
> adding someone to the insurance as a pilot. Still
> can't carry them as a
> passenger.
>
> I agree that the insurance is well out of control.
> More to come on that
> issue.
>
> Blue Skies!!
> John & Debra McBean
__________________________________
Message 17
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
"gene m. calkins" wrote:
> Michel This what I found on Airdale Steve Winder Ph. # 208-459-6254
> Email ukav8r@mindspring.com hope this helps. Gene N99GC
Thank you, Gene and Jerry. My email is sent, I'll let you know the result.
Today I went for a short Kitfox flight and my hangar neighbour, a Renagate
owner, is also interested in such "wheel penetration snow skis." We'll see.
Cheers,
Michel
Message 18
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Seal-Send-Time: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 09:18:46 -0800
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Dee Young" <henrysfork1@msn.com>
True Story John, I drive by there frequently, never anyone around. The plane is
still on the tower and that's about it.
Dee Young
Model II
do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: JMCBEAN
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, December 07, 2003 8:58 AM
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Avid skis
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "JMCBEAN" <JDMCBEAN@cableone.net>
I have been hesitant to say anything........ I have had several customers
call about the status of Avid, have heard some talk about it and have had
potential customers come to Skystar for a tour after they went to Avid.
The bottom line of what I have heard is that Avid is out of business... the
hanger in MT is empty and people are looking for the assets which seem to be
"on the move".
Blue Skies!!
John & Debra McBean
"The Sky is not the Limit... It's a Playground"
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Jerry Liles
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Avid skis
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Jerry Liles <wliles@bayou.com>
Did you try the Avid Aircraft site?
http://avidair.com/
I just went back and it's all there.
I don't think Airdale has the skis but Steve Winder is familiar with
them and may even know where there is a set available. It is possible
that Airdale will make them. Send Steve a query. His emali address is
on the site.
Jerry Liles
Bob Unternaehrer wrote:
>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Bob Unternaehrer"
<shilocom@c-magic.com>
>
>I can't find the "avid site" that has the buttons you describe... I get
the
>airdale homepage and the links on the left with none called "OPTIONS" Can
>you give me a link please.
>
>Bob U.
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Michel Verheughe" <michel@online.no>
>To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Avid skis
>
>
>>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
>>
>>Jerry Liles wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Go to the Avid site. On the right hand side click on options. On the
>>>options page under Options and Accessories click on Wheel penetration
>>>skis.
>>>
>>>
>>Thank you, Jerry. It looks like the kind that can be mounted on bungee
>>
>>
>gears.
>
>
>>I'll write at once and inquest.
>>
>>Cheers,
>>Michel
>>
>>do not archive
>>
>>
>>---
>>[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>---
>[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
>
>
Message 19
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
Grant Fluent wrote:
> I built a pair of ski dollies when I was 1/2 owner
> in an Aeronca Chief with skis. If you're interested, I
> have pictures.
Thanks for the offer, Grant. I'll see first what comes out of the "wheel
penetration" thing and if not, I'll contact you for your ski dollies. One thing
is for sure, snow will not prevent me to fly! :-)
Cheers,
Michel
do not archive
Message 20
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: First Flight N913KF |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
Congrats Bill!
Glad it went so well. These KF's really do surprise
you with their smooth, quick performance, don't they?
Wish I could get off work that easily. :-)
After flying to another large airport for 2 months and
often being assigned 3 different runways between
approach and landing, I returned to Denver as "UPS
2804" last Spring. Made it known to tower that it was
a pleasure to be working with professionals again.
Kurt S.
--- Bill Hammond <kitfox@itsys3.com> wrote:
>
> Following is another, albeit wordy, story of a first
> flight in a
> brand new Kitfox.
__________________________________
Message 21
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Another 'Latest update' Re: Newbie flaperon problrm - |
Now Pr...
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Ron Carroll" <RonCarr@Qwest.Net>
Bill, your message to Lowell states that you use a 70" Powerfin Prop. I am using
a Powerfin with 2-blades, measuring 70" diameter. However, I must dial in
an excessive amount of pitch in order to absorb my 582's power. I don't know
whether to go to a longer 2-blade, or change to a 3-blade.
Do you have a 2 or 3-blade configuration, and what is your engine? It may be that
you have a larger engine, accounting for the nearly 90 MPH cruise at 5500.
According to the Powerfin tech, my 2-blade 70" prop is not long enough for a 582.
My question to the list has generated so many different opinions that I'm
not sure what to do. I can order 2 new longer blades from Powerfin to replace
my existing blades (about $300), or buy 1 shorter blade, a 3-blade hub, and send
my two in to be shortened & matched to the new one (about $410). The only
reason I haven't bought 2 new blades (the least expensive route) is because I've
heard that the 3-blades are smoother and give best all-round performance.
At 5500 I only get about 75 MPH, a tad short of your 88.
Ron Carroll
do not archive
#################
Lowell
There may be some truth to the round cowl effect although I have nothing to
base this on other than talk on the list. Unlike what appears to be the goal
of a number of Kitfox builders, speed at cruse was not a concern and for this
reason I went 68" to the 70" diameter with the Powerfin. I chose this prop over
the warp drive largely because of its weight. There may be better choices
but compared to the GSC, this has proven to be a very low maintenance prop for
me. I dialed my prop into give me what I felt was a comfortable cruse speed at
5500 RPM. With this setting I indicate about 88 to 89 MPH and can easily
exceed engine red line in level flight. When I tried to achieve higher curse
speeds, with either prop, I found that I would start to have low fuel indications
at the header tank when the wing tanks were less than half full do to the
somewhat negative angle of attack to maintain level flight. My prior Cessna
flight time and the very sensitive rudder on the Kitfox also resulted in frequently
poor flight coordination during this phase of testing which may have
contributed to the fuel flow problem. As a result I decided that I wanted a cruse
speed that would have the bottom side of the wing approximately level with the
horizon. With my current prop setting I can achieve the published climb
performance figures and that makes me happy.
The bottom line is I fly because I love to fly so if it takes me a little
longer to get to my destination (should I actually have a destination) so much
the better.
Bill W. N20736
Message 22
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | insurance price adjustment |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "JMCBEAN" <JDMCBEAN@cableone.net>
I didn't specify one way or the other. Like any other policy I simply added
them by name. For example I could have added you to the policy and I would
have needed to supply them with your qualifications. I did quite a bit of
shopping for rates.... AVEMCO was ridiculously high... Through AOPA, who is
a broker and will shop the insurance with various underwriters, was still
higher then I would have expected considering my type specific experience.
FALCON was within $10 of AIG and I have been with AIG for several years so I
stayed with them. Liability is not that bad but the hull insurance is
terrible.
By the way.. for those that are shopping for insurance.. there are only a
handful of Underwriters (approx 8 - 10). Usually when you contact someone
like AOPA they will send it to most of them for a quote. AVEMCO is there
own underwriter.
Blue Skies!!
John & Debra McBean
"The Sky is not the Limit... It's a Playground"
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of kurt schrader
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: insurance price adjustment
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader
<smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
John,
Did they add them as a pilot/test pilot during the
test period, or just after?
Kurt S.
--- JMCBEAN <JDMCBEAN@cableone.net> wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "JMCBEAN"
> <JDMCBEAN@cableone.net>
>
> Kurt,
> I use AOPA and the insurance is through AIG.
> They didn't have a problem
> adding someone to the insurance as a pilot. Still
> can't carry them as a
> passenger.
>
> I agree that the insurance is well out of control.
> More to come on that
> issue.
>
> Blue Skies!!
> John & Debra McBean
__________________________________
Message 23
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | FW: Intercooler for turbo possible and more.... |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Don Pearsall" <donpearsall@comcast.net>
Sent to old address by mistake...
____________________________
From: "Rick" <turboflyer@comcast.net>
Subject: Intercooler for turbo possible and more....
For those that may be interested I have done a bit of research. It would
seem that an intercooler is a real possibility for our turbo Subaru engines.
Yes, even though we run a fuel air mixture to the turbo compressor and into
the intake manifold. The main problem associated with this set up is turbo
lag, but in our application were not shifting gears so it is really a
non-issue. The size recommended for the 1.8 making roughly 150HP would be
2.25x10x6 in. I still have to get my engine back together so I do not know
exactly where it will go but there are several real possibilities and all
with relatively short runs.
I have also found a source for those stainless valves and a shop that does
the work. My heads are there now. Contact them direct at www.ramengines.com
Ron is the owner and a real nice fellow. Get your check books out its a
candy store. Check out the roller rockers at the bottom of the page, they
will be on my new heads along with an oil pan that belongs on an airplane
engine.
Rick
Message 24
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Intercooler for turbo |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "dmorisse" <morid@northland.lib.mi.us>
Bounced from sending to old List.
Darrel Morisse
List Janitor
From: "Rick" <turboflyer@comcast.net>
Subject: Intercooler for turbo possible and more....
For those that may be interested I have done a bit of research. It would
seem that an intercooler is a real possibility for our turbo Subaru
engines.
Yes, even though we run a fuel air mixture to the turbo compressor and into
the intake manifold. The main problem associated with this set up is turbo
lag, but in our application were not shifting gears so it is really a
non-issue. The size recommended for the 1.8 making roughly 150HP would be
2.25x10x6 in. I still have to get my engine back together so I do not know
exactly where it will go but there are several real possibilities and all
with relatively short runs.
I have also found a source for those stainless valves and a shop that does
the work. My heads are there now. Contact them direct at www.ramengines.com
Ron is the owner and a real nice fellow. Get your check books out its a
candy store. Check out the roller rockers at the bottom of the page, they
will be on my new heads along with an oil pan that belongs on an airplane
engine.
Rick
Message 25
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "dmorisse" <morid@northland.lib.mi.us>
> I built a pair of ski dollies when I was 1/2 owner
> in an Aeronca Chief with skis. If you're interested, I
> have pictures.
>
> Grant Fluent
> Newcastle, NE
> Classic IV 912S
Grant, would you mind posting those pics on Sportflight.com?
Darrel
Message 26
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Test for the dummy |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Rick" <turboflyer@comcast.net>
test
Message 27
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Jeff Smathers <jsmathers@cybcon.com>
Hi Rick,
I am nearing completion on my KF5 with the NSI Subaru EA-81 and CAP140
and will be weighing the aircraft in a few days...I was wondering what is your
CG limits and weight on your aircraft?
John McBean said the CG was 9.96 to 14.75 ( one degree fwd wing sweep ).
Is that what you are using?
Thanks, Jeff Smathers
Rick wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Rick" <turboflyer@comcast.net>
>
> test
>
Message 28
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: First Flight N913KF |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Clifford Begnaud" <shoeless@barefootpilot.com>
Bill,
Congrats on your first flight!!
Sorry this response is so late, my wife Patti and I just got back from
Oklahoma City (yes we flew there in our model 5 kitfox)
I look forward to flying with you soon and seeing your new plane. Stan S.
told me that you were about ready to fly, so welcome to the Colorado kitfox
family.
The kitfox population has been exploding along the front range. There should
be a model 7 flying in Longmont any day now.
See ya soon,
Cliff
Erie, Co
S5, Lyc 0-235 250 hours
S5, Rotax 912 1000 hours
S5 Lyc. 0-290 0 hours
Message 29
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: First Flight N913KF |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Torgeir Mortensen <torgemor@online.no>
> Bill Hammond wrote:
> So, now I have 36 minutes of Kitfox time in my log book.
A big Congratulation..
Torgeir.
Message 30
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "sid" <sid@i2k.com>
Michel, I have some pictures of homemade wheel-though skiis that were
somewhat copied from the Avid idea. Not the best in construction, but he
wasn't done with them when he took the pictures..........will give you some
more ideas on constructing your own. Not too hard.
Sid
send me your address and I can send the pictures direct to you. sid@i2k.com
----------------
> Michel I got pictures of the skis you wanted to see. They are in
www.sportflight.com under add on/mods. they are made in Wisconsin but I
think anyone can make them. they are made with square tubing with a nylon
bottom. I will buy a set when I find his name and phone number again. Gene
N99GC
>
>
Message 31
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "JMCBEAN" <JDMCBEAN@cableone.net>
What were you doing in OK City...... Did you get in trouble ???
Blue Skies!!
John & Debra McBean
"The Sky is not the Limit... It's a Playground"
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Clifford Begnaud
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: First Flight N913KF
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Clifford Begnaud"
<shoeless@barefootpilot.com>
Bill,
Congrats on your first flight!!
Sorry this response is so late, my wife Patti and I just got back from
Oklahoma City (yes we flew there in our model 5 kitfox)
I look forward to flying with you soon and seeing your new plane. Stan S.
told me that you were about ready to fly, so welcome to the Colorado kitfox
family.
The kitfox population has been exploding along the front range. There should
be a model 7 flying in Longmont any day now.
See ya soon,
Cliff
Erie, Co
S5, Lyc 0-235 250 hours
S5, Rotax 912 1000 hours
S5 Lyc. 0-290 0 hours
Message 32
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Short flight |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Torgeir Mortensen <torgemor@online.no>
> Gary Algate wrote:
>
> Feel free to bounce me any time (That also was a joke) See what I
> mean????????????????????????
OK. OK., but now I'm really down... :) ..
No problem at all..
Torgeir.
do not archive
Message 33
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Another 'Latest update' Re: Newbie flaperon problrm - |
Now Pr...
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Torgeir Mortensen <torgemor@online.no>
Isn't such stuff of value for the archive??
I'll say YES.
Torgeir.
Ron Carroll wrote:
>
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Ron Carroll" <RonCarr@Qwest.Net>
>
> Bill, your message to Lowell states that you use a 70" Powerfin Prop. I am using
a Powerfin with 2-blades, measuring 70" diameter. However, I must dial
in an excessive amount of pitch in order to absorb my 582's power. I don't know
whether to go to a longer 2-blade, or change to a 3-blade.
>
> Do you have a 2 or 3-blade configuration, and what is your engine? It may be
that you have a larger engine, accounting for the nearly 90 MPH cruise at 5500.
>
> According to the Powerfin tech, my 2-blade 70" prop is not long enough for a
582. My question to the list has generated so many different opinions that I'm
not sure what to do. I can order 2 new longer blades from Powerfin to replace
my existing blades (about $300), or buy 1 shorter blade, a 3-blade hub, and
send my two in to be shortened & matched to the new one (about $410). The only
reason I haven't bought 2 new blades (the least expensive route) is because
I've heard that the 3-blades are smoother and give best all-round performance.
At 5500 I only get about 75 MPH, a tad short of your 88.
>
> Ron Carroll
> #################
> Lowell
>
> There may be some truth to the round cowl effect although I have nothing to
> base this on other than talk on the list. Unlike what appears to be the goal
> of a number of Kitfox builders, speed at cruse was not a concern and for this
> reason I went 68" to the 70" diameter with the Powerfin. I chose this prop over
> the warp drive largely because of its weight. There may be better choices
> but compared to the GSC, this has proven to be a very low maintenance prop for
> me. I dialed my prop into give me what I felt was a comfortable cruse speed at
> 5500 RPM. With this setting I indicate about 88 to 89 MPH and can easily
> exceed engine red line in level flight. When I tried to achieve higher curse
> speeds, with either prop, I found that I would start to have low fuel indications
> at the header tank when the wing tanks were less than half full do to the
> somewhat negative angle of attack to maintain level flight. My prior Cessna
> flight time and the very sensitive rudder on the Kitfox also resulted in frequently
> poor flight coordination during this phase of testing which may have
> contributed to the fuel flow problem. As a result I decided that I wanted a cruse
> speed that would have the bottom side of the wing approximately level with the
> horizon. With my current prop setting I can achieve the published climb
> performance figures and that makes me happy.
>
> The bottom line is I fly because I love to fly so if it takes me a little
> longer to get to my destination (should I actually have a destination) so much
> the better.
>
> Bill W. N20736
>
Message 34
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Rick" <turboflyer@comcast.net>
One degree forward on long wing C.G., most forward 10.35 most aft 12.57 ,
empty weight 978lbs. Empty weight CG is 8.81. My radiator is mounted aft of
pilot not factory location, weight in tail and heavy RG35 battery aft also.
Also have the gap seal on the hozstab and plenty of authority on landing
even at gross and some on a hot day. By the way you caused me to gain 40lbs.
I had in my mind 938, hate it when I do that. :)
Rick
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Jeff
Smathers
Subject: Kitfox-List: CG question
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Jeff Smathers <jsmathers@cybcon.com>
Hi Rick,
I am nearing completion on my KF5 with the NSI Subaru EA-81 and CAP140
and will be weighing the aircraft in a few days...I was wondering what is
your
CG limits and weight on your aircraft?
John McBean said the CG was 9.96 to 14.75 ( one degree fwd wing sweep ).
Is that what you are using?
Thanks, Jeff Smathers
Rick wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Rick" <turboflyer@comcast.net>
>
> test
>
Message 35
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "dmorisse" <morid@northland.lib.mi.us>
Just a reminder that before using the term Do Not Archive, please consider
whether the post would be of interest to the List. Obviously such replies
as "Congratulations" or "Way to Go" or other personal comments between two
people would warrent the use of it, but if the information is of general
value to the list, then let it ride. As Don P. said, "If you need to use
the term Do Not Archive, then maybe it shouldn't have been sent in the
first place." This is a common sense/judgement call folks and is purely
meant to reduce archive clutter.
Probably more valuable to the archives is to delete all but essential
information of the original post when replying to a message.
Thanks for your cooperation.
Darrel
List Janitor
Message 36
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Unfriendly ATC |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
Ron Carroll wrote:
> Michel, understand that this happened several years ago (about 1990), and is
not typical
> of how things really are, especially today.
Oh, I do understand, Ron! I know virtually nothing about US air traffic control
but, due to my profession, I know very well the US Coast Guards, and if your
country expect the same discipline in the air as at sea, the US ATC system must
be a model for the rest of the world. It only makes your experience even more shocking.
> It has always seemed to me that controllers should have the experience of being
PIC
> to more fully understand & appreciate what's going on. Obviously I'm wrong.
As I would encourage any PIC to visit an ATC working space, it would make sense
that our controllers also have an experience of the workload of a pilot. But in
the big picture of air traffic control, we, the fleas of the sky, are nothing
compared to the "heavies." And I suppose that a dialogue between "heavy" pilots
and ATC guys is going on all the time.
Cheers,
Michel
Message 37
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "John Anderson" <janderson412@hotmail.com>
I'll be interested to see what you weigh in at Jeff, I have almost the same config
as you (Series 5 and EA81T) Just about to weigh too.
John A.
From: Jeff Smathers <JSMATHERS@CYBCON.COM>
Subject: Kitfox-List: CG question
-- Kitfox-List message posted by: Jeff Smathers <JSMATHERS@CYBCON.COM>
Hi Rick,
I am nearing completion on my KF5 with the NSI Subaru EA-81 and CAP140
and will be weighing the aircraft in a few days...I was wondering what is your
CG limits and weight on your aircraft?
John McBean said the CG was 9.96 to 14.75 ( one degree fwd wing sweep ).
Is that what you are using?
Thanks,Jeff Smathers
Rick wrote:
-- Kitfox-List message posted by: "Rick" <TURBOFLYER@COMCAST.NET>
test
With <a href="http://g.msn.com/8HMBENNZ/2752??PS=">Xtra Jetstream - you can surf the net and talk on the phone!
Message 38
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Unfriendly ATC |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Kitfox" <Kitfox@chrisbates.co.uk>
To add fuel to the fire, quite a few of the military ATC people in the UK
used to be 'failed' military pilots but, to be quite frank the military are
the best ATC people we have, very helpful, friendly and above all
professional. We have some good 'civilian' controllers but quite often they
can be unhelpful and abrupt. We currently have an ongoing investigation as
quite often we are denied access through controlled airspace at the whim of
certain ATC areas when it appears not much is going on. In total contrast
some ATC's are extremely helpful. You get to know who they are when you hear
them on the air and avoid talking to them like the plague.
My favourite is when you call up and offer information to let them know
you're doing something outside their airspace like crossing the end of their
ILS, out of simple courteousy, only for them to give you a hard time,
subsequently we avoid talking to certain controllers which must, in the long
term, make life frustrating when they see an unidentified blip outside of
their jurisdiction and are not sure what it is doing!
Michel, good to here you are getting on so well with your Fox.
Chris
MKII UK
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michel Verheughe" <michel@online.no>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Unfriendly ATC
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
>
> Ron Carroll wrote:
> > Michel, understand that this happened several years ago (about 1990),
and is not typical
> > of how things really are, especially today.
>
> Oh, I do understand, Ron! I know virtually nothing about US air traffic
control
> but, due to my profession, I know very well the US Coast Guards, and if
your
> country expect the same discipline in the air as at sea, the US ATC system
must
> be a model for the rest of the world. It only makes your experience even
more shocking.
>
> > It has always seemed to me that controllers should have the experience
of being PIC
> > to more fully understand & appreciate what's going on. Obviously I'm
wrong.
>
> As I would encourage any PIC to visit an ATC working space, it would make
sense
> that our controllers also have an experience of the workload of a pilot.
But in
> the big picture of air traffic control, we, the fleas of the sky, are
nothing
> compared to the "heavies." And I suppose that a dialogue between "heavy"
pilots
> and ATC guys is going on all the time.
>
> Cheers,
> Michel
>
>
Message 39
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Another 'Latest update' Re: Newbie flaperon problrm - |
Now Pr...
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "cnichols" <cnichols@scrtc.com>
To quote Tony Bingelis from one of his books, "Use as long a prop as you can
for as long as you can." It's my understanding that the most efficient prop
is one with only a single blade. Randy Schlitter (hey, just because he
builds a different airplane doesn't mean he's nuts) says in his promotional
material that he's never seen a 3-blade prop perform better than a 2-blade
one. Apparently the only reason to go to a 3-blade prop is if you don't
have enough clearance to use a 2-blade prop long enough to give you the
proper bite. The only thing I don't understand from the above has to do
with the maximum amount of pitch which can be dialed in. Obviously at some
point the blade's "angle of attack" would become too great for efficient
flying, or so it would appear to me.
Clem Nichols
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ron Carroll" <RonCarr@qwest.net>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Another 'Latest update' Re: Newbie flaperon
problrm - Now Pr...
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Ron Carroll" <RonCarr@Qwest.Net>
>
> Bill, your message to Lowell states that you use a 70" Powerfin Prop. I
am using a Powerfin with 2-blades, measuring 70" diameter. However, I must
dial in an excessive amount of pitch in order to absorb my 582's power. I
don't know whether to go to a longer 2-blade, or change to a 3-blade.
>
> Do you have a 2 or 3-blade configuration, and what is your engine? It may
be that you have a larger engine, accounting for the nearly 90 MPH cruise at
5500.
>
> According to the Powerfin tech, my 2-blade 70" prop is not long enough for
a 582. My question to the list has generated so many different opinions
that I'm not sure what to do. I can order 2 new longer blades from Powerfin
to replace my existing blades (about $300), or buy 1 shorter blade, a
3-blade hub, and send my two in to be shortened & matched to the new one
(about $410). The only reason I haven't bought 2 new blades (the least
expensive route) is because I've heard that the 3-blades are smoother and
give best all-round performance. At 5500 I only get about 75 MPH, a tad
short of your 88.
>
> Ron Carroll
> do not archive
> #################
> Lowell
>
> There may be some truth to the round cowl effect although I have nothing
to
> base this on other than talk on the list. Unlike what appears to be the
goal
> of a number of Kitfox builders, speed at cruse was not a concern and for
this
> reason I went 68" to the 70" diameter with the Powerfin. I chose this prop
over
> the warp drive largely because of its weight. There may be better choices
> but compared to the GSC, this has proven to be a very low maintenance prop
for
> me. I dialed my prop into give me what I felt was a comfortable cruse
speed at
> 5500 RPM. With this setting I indicate about 88 to 89 MPH and can easily
> exceed engine red line in level flight. When I tried to achieve higher
curse
> speeds, with either prop, I found that I would start to have low fuel
indications
> at the header tank when the wing tanks were less than half full do to the
> somewhat negative angle of attack to maintain level flight. My prior
Cessna
> flight time and the very sensitive rudder on the Kitfox also resulted in
frequently
> poor flight coordination during this phase of testing which may have
> contributed to the fuel flow problem. As a result I decided that I wanted
a cruse
> speed that would have the bottom side of the wing approximately level with
the
> horizon. With my current prop setting I can achieve the published climb
> performance figures and that makes me happy.
>
> The bottom line is I fly because I love to fly so if it takes me a little
> longer to get to my destination (should I actually have a destination) so
much
> the better.
>
> Bill W. N20736
>
>
Message 40
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Reduction drive Ratio with 72in 3XWarp blades |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Rick" <turboflyer@comcast.net>
John hurry and weigh that baby, spank her on the butt and get her back in
the air. Interested in seeing what numbers you pull with the redrive ratio
change. You sure about the 1.9 or is it actually 2.12. The info I have so
far tells me the optimum thrust made by our blade combination is obtained
with 16.5 degrees pitch at about 2650RPMs. I am going to hold off on the
removal of mine until I get some feed back from you. I may have hear you
wrong. 5200/1.9 would give 2736 so maybe you were looking for a lower RPM.
Rick
Message 41
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Clifford Begnaud" <shoeless@barefootpilot.com>
John,
Yeah, I'm in trouble alright, but not with the FAA. Patti has been riding
our neighbors horses and has caught a serious case of "horse on the brain".
She's taking lessons, and spending weekends grooming the neighbors horses
etc. This weekend was the National Reining Horse association Futurity in OK
city. So we went to see the finals and freestyle competition. It was most
impressive to see what these people can get a horse do.
I complain about it, but I really like horses also and see us owning some in
the future. Now we have to find property where can have horses AND a private
runway ;-)
Cliff
>
> What were you doing in OK City...... Did you get in trouble ???
>
> Blue Skies!!
> John & Debra McBean
> "The Sky is not the Limit... It's a Playground"
Message 42
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Sport Pilot Status |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "jblackwell" <jblackwell@totalaccess.net>
Just wondering if anyone has heard any news as to why DOT is holding on to he Sportpilot
ruling. EAA does not seem to know or is not at liberty to reveil what
is going on. Thought maybe some of you may have heard something.
Thanks
Jimmie
Message 43
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Jeff Smathers <jsmathers@cybcon.com>
40lbs! What did you hang on those bracket mounts I sent you?
...and thanks for the CG data.
Jeff Smathers
Rick wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Rick" <turboflyer@comcast.net>
>
> One degree forward on long wing C.G., most forward 10.35 most aft 12.57 ,
> empty weight 978lbs. Empty weight CG is 8.81. My radiator is mounted aft of
> pilot not factory location, weight in tail and heavy RG35 battery aft also.
> Also have the gap seal on the hozstab and plenty of authority on landing
> even at gross and some on a hot day. By the way you caused me to gain 40lbs.
> I had in my mind 938, hate it when I do that. :)
>
> Rick
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Jeff
> Smathers
> To: turboflyer@comcast.net; kitfox-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Kitfox-List: CG question
>
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Jeff Smathers <jsmathers@cybcon.com>
>
> Hi Rick,
>
> I am nearing completion on my KF5 with the NSI Subaru EA-81 and CAP140
> and will be weighing the aircraft in a few days...I was wondering what is
> your
>
> CG limits and weight on your aircraft?
>
> John McBean said the CG was 9.96 to 14.75 ( one degree fwd wing sweep ).
> Is that what you are using?
>
> Thanks, Jeff Smathers
>
> Rick wrote:
>
> > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Rick" <turboflyer@comcast.net>
> >
> > test
> >
>
Message 44
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Grant Fluent <gjfpilot@yahoo.com>
Hello All,
I posted a picture of my ski dollies on the
Sportflight website under "Gotta Haves".
Grant Fluent
Newcastle, NE
Classic IV 912S
do not archive
--- dmorisse <morid@northland.lib.mi.us> wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "dmorisse"
> <morid@northland.lib.mi.us>
>
> > I built a pair of ski dollies when I was 1/2
> owner
> > in an Aeronca Chief with skis. If you're
> interested, I
> > have pictures.
> >
> > Grant Fluent
> > Newcastle, NE
> > Classic IV 912S
>
> Grant, would you mind posting those pics on
> Sportflight.com?
> Darrel
>
>
>
> Contributions
> any other
> Forums.
>
> http://www.matronics.com/chat
>
> http://www.matronics.com/subscription
> http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/Kitfox-List.htm
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
>
>
>
>
Message 45
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Torgeir Mortensen <torgemor@online.no>
> cnichols wrote:
>
> To quote Tony Bingelis from one of his books, "Use as long a prop as you can
> for as long as you can." It's my understanding that the most efficient prop
> is one with only a single blade. Randy Schlitter (hey, just because he
> builds a different airplane doesn't mean he's nuts) says in his promotional
> material that he's never seen a 3-blade prop perform better than a 2-blade
> one. Apparently the only reason to go to a 3-blade prop is if you don't
> have enough clearance to use a 2-blade prop long enough to give you the
> proper bite. The only thing I don't understand from the above has to do
> with the maximum amount of pitch which can be dialed in. Obviously at some
> point the blade's "angle of attack" would become too great for efficient
> flying, or so it would appear to me.
Interesting this, but the reason why to choose the three blade over the
two, in general terms, might be:
Better thrust - give better acceleration - shorter take off distance -
and better climb.
A three blade is better suited for our "STOL" aircraft.
Also, but not often mentioned, a three blade give more friction when
backing off power, kind of air brake. Something not to be forgotten.
And lastly, less vibration in general.
If you like a more economical and more "efficient" propeller then select
the two blade, further a two blade will even be better at high altitude.
Torgeir.
Message 46
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Rotax Engine Sale |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Arthur Nation <anation@w-link.net>
On Saturday 06 December 2003 18:03, Roger McConnell wrote:
Hang in there Roger.
I have heard that a little more incentive for SkyStar to do something is
forthcoming.
do not archive
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Roger McConnell" <rdmac@swbell.net>
>
> You would think that SkyStar would take advantage of this and get
> us our engines. I've been waiting for mine for over a year.
>
> do not archive
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Steve Gandy
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Kitfox-List: Rotax Engine Sale
>
>
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Steve Gandy" <s.gandy@comcast.net>
>
> Copied this off of yesterdays EAA newsletter for anyone interested
>
> Rotax Announces End-of-Year Engine Sale
> Rotax has announced a never-before-offered, end-of-year sale for its
> two- and four-stroke engines. Interested buyers can save up to $393 on
> various two-stroke models, or up to $1,661 on various four-stroke
> models. However, the Rotax 447 and Rotax 914 engines are exempted from
> this offer.
>
> This offer is good on existing engines in the inventory of any of Kodiak
> Research's North American distributors and is valid on any engines paid
> for by December 24, 2003. For more information, contact your local Rotax
> distributor or Lockwood Aviation Supply, 800/527-6829.
>
> Steve Gandy
> s.gandy@comcast.net
> Aeronca L-3C N48540
> Kitfox 6 N540KF (Building)
>
>
Message 47
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: John Larsen <jopatco@mindspring.com>
That because the plane doesn't belong to Avid, but to the owner of
Airdale. He has had to sue to get it back.
Dee Young wrote:
>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Dee Young" <henrysfork1@msn.com>
>
>True Story John, I drive by there frequently, never anyone around. The plane is
still on the tower and that's about it.
>
>Dee Young
>Model II
>
>do not archive
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: JMCBEAN
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> Sent: Sunday, December 07, 2003 8:58 AM
> Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Avid skis
>
>
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "JMCBEAN" <JDMCBEAN@cableone.net>
>
> I have been hesitant to say anything........ I have had several customers
> call about the status of Avid, have heard some talk about it and have had
> potential customers come to Skystar for a tour after they went to Avid.
>
> The bottom line of what I have heard is that Avid is out of business... the
> hanger in MT is empty and people are looking for the assets which seem to be
> "on the move".
>
> Blue Skies!!
> John & Debra McBean
> "The Sky is not the Limit... It's a Playground"
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Jerry Liles
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Avid skis
>
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Jerry Liles <wliles@bayou.com>
>
> Did you try the Avid Aircraft site?
> http://avidair.com/
> I just went back and it's all there.
>
> I don't think Airdale has the skis but Steve Winder is familiar with
> them and may even know where there is a set available. It is possible
> that Airdale will make them. Send Steve a query. His emali address is
> on the site.
>
> Jerry Liles
>
> Bob Unternaehrer wrote:
>
> >--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Bob Unternaehrer"
> <shilocom@c-magic.com>
> >
> >I can't find the "avid site" that has the buttons you describe... I get
> the
> >airdale homepage and the links on the left with none called "OPTIONS" Can
> >you give me a link please.
> >
> >Bob U.
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Michel Verheughe" <michel@online.no>
> >To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
> >Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Avid skis
> >
> >
> >>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
> >>
> >>Jerry Liles wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>Go to the Avid site. On the right hand side click on options. On the
> >>>options page under Options and Accessories click on Wheel penetration
> >>>skis.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>Thank you, Jerry. It looks like the kind that can be mounted on bungee
> >>
> >>
> >gears.
> >
> >
> >>I'll write at once and inquest.
> >>
> >>Cheers,
> >>Michel
> >>
> >>do not archive
> >>
> >>
> >>---
> >>[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >---
> >[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
Message 48
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: John Larsen <jopatco@mindspring.com>
That because the plane doesn't belong to Avid, but to the owner of
Airdale. He has had to sue in the attempt to get it back.
Dee Young wrote:
>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Dee Young" <henrysfork1@msn.com>
>
>True Story John, I drive by there frequently, never anyone around. The plane is
still on the tower and that's about it.
>
>Dee Young
>Model II
>
>do not archive
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: JMCBEAN
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> Sent: Sunday, December 07, 2003 8:58 AM
> Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Avid skis
>
>
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "JMCBEAN" <JDMCBEAN@cableone.net>
>
> I have been hesitant to say anything........ I have had several customers
> call about the status of Avid, have heard some talk about it and have had
> potential customers come to Skystar for a tour after they went to Avid.
>
> The bottom line of what I have heard is that Avid is out of business... the
> hanger in MT is empty and people are looking for the assets which seem to be
> "on the move".
>
> Blue Skies!!
> John & Debra McBean
> "The Sky is not the Limit... It's a Playground"
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Jerry Liles
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Avid skis
>
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Jerry Liles <wliles@bayou.com>
>
> Did you try the Avid Aircraft site?
> http://avidair.com/
> I just went back and it's all there.
>
> I don't think Airdale has the skis but Steve Winder is familiar with
> them and may even know where there is a set available. It is possible
> that Airdale will make them. Send Steve a query. His emali address is
> on the site.
>
> Jerry Liles
>
> Bob Unternaehrer wrote:
>
> >--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Bob Unternaehrer"
> <shilocom@c-magic.com>
> >
> >I can't find the "avid site" that has the buttons you describe... I get
> the
> >airdale homepage and the links on the left with none called "OPTIONS" Can
> >you give me a link please.
> >
> >Bob U.
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Michel Verheughe" <michel@online.no>
> >To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
> >Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Avid skis
> >
> >
> >>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
> >>
> >>Jerry Liles wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>Go to the Avid site. On the right hand side click on options. On the
> >>>options page under Options and Accessories click on Wheel penetration
> >>>skis.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>Thank you, Jerry. It looks like the kind that can be mounted on bungee
> >>
> >>
> >gears.
> >
> >
> >>I'll write at once and inquest.
> >>
> >>Cheers,
> >>Michel
> >>
> >>do not archive
> >>
> >>
> >>---
> >>[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >---
> >[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
Message 49
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Rick" <turboflyer@comcast.net>
Would you believe they went to mount part of the new header tank.
do no archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Jeff
Smathers
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: CG question
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Jeff Smathers <jsmathers@cybcon.com>
40lbs! What did you hang on those bracket mounts I sent you?
...and thanks for the CG data.
Jeff Smathers
Rick wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Rick" <turboflyer@comcast.net>
>
> One degree forward on long wing C.G., most forward 10.35 most aft 12.57 ,
> empty weight 978lbs. Empty weight CG is 8.81. My radiator is mounted aft
of
> pilot not factory location, weight in tail and heavy RG35 battery aft
also.
> Also have the gap seal on the hozstab and plenty of authority on landing
> even at gross and some on a hot day. By the way you caused me to gain
40lbs.
> I had in my mind 938, hate it when I do that. :)
>
> Rick
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Jeff
> Smathers
> To: turboflyer@comcast.net; kitfox-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Kitfox-List: CG question
>
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Jeff Smathers <jsmathers@cybcon.com>
>
> Hi Rick,
>
> I am nearing completion on my KF5 with the NSI Subaru EA-81 and CAP140
> and will be weighing the aircraft in a few days...I was wondering what is
> your
>
> CG limits and weight on your aircraft?
>
> John McBean said the CG was 9.96 to 14.75 ( one degree fwd wing sweep ).
> Is that what you are using?
>
> Thanks, Jeff Smathers
>
> Rick wrote:
>
> > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Rick" <turboflyer@comcast.net>
> >
> > test
> >
>
Message 50
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Another 'Latest update' Re: Newbie flaperon problrm - |
Now Pr...
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Floran Higgins" <CliffH@outdrs.net>
I have been following this discussion on props with some interest so I
thought I would put in my 2-cents worth.
When I bought my model 4 Speedster it was already built . It had a 912 UL
and came with a GSC two bladed in-flight adjustable prop and a GSC three
bladed ground adjustable prop. The in-flight adjustable gave very good
performance but it had a vibration in it that I didn't like. I removed it
and installed the three bladed prop. Although It lost some performance the
three bladed was so much smoother I preferred it.
I removed the 912 UL and installed a 912 ULS. I installed a GSC three bladed
ground adjustable prop. This setup has just about the same performance that
I had with the other engine and the in-flight adjustable prop.
I am old fashioned enough that I think an airplane with a round cowl should
have a wooden three bladed prop. I just prefer the looks of it.
I am now retired and am not in that big of a hurry to get someplace. The
performance I am getting with this setup satisfies me completely.
Floran H.
----- Original Message -----
From: "cnichols" <cnichols@scrtc.com>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Another 'Latest update' Re: Newbie flaperon
problrm - Now Pr...
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "cnichols" <cnichols@scrtc.com>
>
> To quote Tony Bingelis from one of his books, "Use as long a prop as you
can
> for as long as you can." It's my understanding that the most efficient
prop
> is one with only a single blade. Randy Schlitter (hey, just because he
> builds a different airplane doesn't mean he's nuts) says in his
promotional
> material that he's never seen a 3-blade prop perform better than a 2-blade
> one. Apparently the only reason to go to a 3-blade prop is if you don't
> have enough clearance to use a 2-blade prop long enough to give you the
> proper bite. The only thing I don't understand from the above has to do
> with the maximum amount of pitch which can be dialed in. Obviously at som
e
> point the blade's "angle of attack" would become too great for efficient
> flying, or so it would appear to me.
>
> Clem Nichols
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ron Carroll" <RonCarr@qwest.net>
> To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Another 'Latest update' Re: Newbie flaperon
> problrm - Now Pr...
>
>
> > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Ron Carroll" <RonCarr@Qwest.Net>
> >
> > Bill, your message to Lowell states that you use a 70" Powerfin Prop. I
> am using a Powerfin with 2-blades, measuring 70" diameter. However, I
must
> dial in an excessive amount of pitch in order to absorb my 582's power. I
> don't know whether to go to a longer 2-blade, or change to a 3-blade.
> >
> > Do you have a 2 or 3-blade configuration, and what is your engine? It
may
> be that you have a larger engine, accounting for the nearly 90 MPH cruise
at
> 5500.
> >
> > According to the Powerfin tech, my 2-blade 70" prop is not long enough
for
> a 582. My question to the list has generated so many different opinions
> that I'm not sure what to do. I can order 2 new longer blades from
Powerfin
> to replace my existing blades (about $300), or buy 1 shorter blade, a
> 3-blade hub, and send my two in to be shortened & matched to the new one
> (about $410). The only reason I haven't bought 2 new blades (the least
> expensive route) is because I've heard that the 3-blades are smoother and
> give best all-round performance. At 5500 I only get about 75 MPH, a tad
> short of your 88.
> >
> > Ron Carroll
> > do not archive
> > #################
> > Lowell
> >
> > There may be some truth to the round cowl effect although I have nothing
> to
> > base this on other than talk on the list. Unlike what appears to be the
> goal
> > of a number of Kitfox builders, speed at cruse was not a concern and for
> this
> > reason I went 68" to the 70" diameter with the Powerfin. I chose this
prop
> over
> > the warp drive largely because of its weight. There may be better
choices
> > but compared to the GSC, this has proven to be a very low maintenance
prop
> for
> > me. I dialed my prop into give me what I felt was a comfortable cruse
> speed at
> > 5500 RPM. With this setting I indicate about 88 to 89 MPH and can
easily
> > exceed engine red line in level flight. When I tried to achieve higher
> curse
> > speeds, with either prop, I found that I would start to have low fuel
> indications
> > at the header tank when the wing tanks were less than half full do to
the
> > somewhat negative angle of attack to maintain level flight. My prior
> Cessna
> > flight time and the very sensitive rudder on the Kitfox also resulted in
> frequently
> > poor flight coordination during this phase of testing which may have
> > contributed to the fuel flow problem. As a result I decided that I
wanted
> a cruse
> > speed that would have the bottom side of the wing approximately level
with
> the
> > horizon. With my current prop setting I can achieve the published climb
> > performance figures and that makes me happy.
> >
> > The bottom line is I fly because I love to fly so if it takes me a
little
> > longer to get to my destination (should I actually have a destination)
so
> much
> > the better.
> >
> > Bill W. N20736
> >
> >
>
>
Message 51
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: RiteAngle3@aol.com
Long two bladed prop tips often get to close to speed of sound so the large
engines that need the RPM for power use the three blades so they can turn max
RPM for engine. Those of you that are good in math figure the difference in
tip speeds at 2800 RPM on a 76" & a 72" prop, you will be amazed. Those of you
that live near a seaplane base just listen to the Cessna amphibians taking
off! Then compare the diameter of the two bladed props and the three bladed
props. It will be very evident the 3 blades are much quieter~ on the same engine.
Ground clearance is also a factor on some aircraft. The WW II prop planes
needed the blades to absorb the power developed and still have the prop short
enough so the pilot could lift the tail on take off. Look at the pitch on the
early Spitfires that had the fixed pitch wood props on them~~Took forever to
get moving, but once they did the did pretty well. Thankfully constant speed, or
controllable pitch props helped immensely.
I had a manually controllable Beech Roby prop on my old Funk (85 HP Cont.
engine) in the early '60's, was amazing it even speed it up at 7500 ft and above!
Elbie
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|