Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 05:31 AM - Re: Current Update (Rick)
2. 05:41 AM - Re: Reduction drive (out put module) ratio (Rick)
3. 08:07 AM - Re: Current Update (JMCBEAN)
4. 08:15 AM - Re: Current Update (JMCBEAN)
5. 10:35 AM - Re: Re: Stick movement (Dave & Wendy Grosvenor)
6. 10:55 AM - Re: Reduction drive (out put module) ratio (kurt schrader)
7. 10:55 AM - Re: Reduction drive (out put module) ratio (kurt schrader)
8. 11:55 AM - Re: Reduction drive (out put module) ratio (kurt schrader)
9. 12:03 PM - Re: Re: Stick movement (kurt schrader)
10. 12:43 PM - "Captive" PAX - WAS: Stick movement (michel)
11. 01:38 PM - EIS engine info system (Jay Fabian)
12. 01:49 PM - Re: Captive PAX - WAS: Stick movement (jeff.hays@aselia.com)
13. 02:49 PM - "PAX and the Stick" (Scott McClintock)
14. 03:33 PM - Re: Cruise Speeds (Paul Seehafer)
15. 03:33 PM - Re: Cruise Speeds (Paul Seehafer)
16. 03:51 PM - Re: Current Update (Paul Seehafer)
17. 04:03 PM - Re: Cruise Speeds (JMCBEAN)
18. 04:04 PM - Re: Current Update (JMCBEAN)
19. 06:02 PM - Cruise Speeds (hausding, sid)
20. 06:10 PM - Re: EIS engine info system (Randy Daughenbaugh)
21. 06:43 PM - Re: EIS engine info system (Jay Fabian)
22. 08:32 PM - Varnishing Ribs (Jimmie Blackwell)
23. 11:55 PM - Re: "Captive" PAX - WAS: Stick movement (martin dovey)
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: "Rick" <turboflyer@comcast.net>
John, dont suppose you could tell us if your the only one not employed by
them?
Rick
-----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: Current Update
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader
<smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
John & Debra,
Soooo. Get your plane pictured in "Sport Aviation"
and you guys are too good for us? :-)
Well, I really hope you stick with us here because you
have always given solid advice and support - and
occasionally corrected some bad advice here abouts
too. Can't wait to hear which business is blessed
with your efforts next. I hope SS keeps the 10-2-Y-B
attitude you brought to them too.
Please keep us all up to date.
Kurt S.
--- JMCBEAN <JDMCBEAN@cableone.net> wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "JMCBEAN"
> <JDMCBEAN@cableone.net>
>
> Good Afternoon Listers:
> As we all know, news travels like a brush fire. I
> wanted to share that as
> of yesterday I am no longer employed by SkyStar.
__________________________________
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
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: | Reduction drive (out put module) ratio |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Rick" <turboflyer@comcast.net>
I think I should get an honest 150 too 160. I plan on 5200 for my max RPM,
so am just doing the math for 5200/2=2600. Power wise,5200 can be reached
easily enough even with the non-turbo engine. The trick is how much prop can
one spin at a tip speed of 2600. Warp should be able to tell us what pitch
RPM combo is best.
Just read the look at this below paragraph. So your saying 3000 for the tip
speed, interesting. 5200/1.8 would give almost 2900 and 1.7 would turn it
3058 at 5200 engine speed. What pitch were you at? Isn't 3000 super sonic
though?
Rick
-----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: Reduction drive (out put module) ratio
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader
<smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
Rick,
What is the actual HP output of your engine? I think
it is a little more than my 143 hp - something right
about 150 hp? Lance gave me a 2.23:1 ratio for mine.
If you have more hp, you could use a little lower
ratio based upon that, but I think the 2:1 might be
too low.
Then again, take a look at this site:
>http://www.bewersdorff.com/computational/prop.html<
Pluging some numbers in, your 2:1 ratio comes closer
to reaching the optimum tip speed, which it says
requires 3,000 rpm or more from the 72" prop around
our range of speeds and altitudes. We best not run
3,000 prop rpm without Lance's backing though. But I
do know that the accelleration picks up very noticably
when I take off at max rpm, rather than even a few 100
rpm lower.
Interesting? I was surprised at the results when I
first tried this. I bet the prop would be noisy.
Kurt S.
__________________________________
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
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: "JMCBEAN" <JDMCBEAN@cableone.net>
Kurt,
Too good...... Don't know about that. Just good enough maybe.. :)
You bet I'll be here !
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: Current Update
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader
<smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
John & Debra,
Soooo. Get your plane pictured in "Sport Aviation"
and you guys are too good for us? :-)
Well, I really hope you stick with us here because you
have always given solid advice and support - and
occasionally corrected some bad advice here abouts
too. Can't wait to hear which business is blessed
with your efforts next. I hope SS keeps the 10-2-Y-B
attitude you brought to them too.
Please keep us all up to date.
Kurt S.
--- JMCBEAN <JDMCBEAN@cableone.net> wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "JMCBEAN"
> <JDMCBEAN@cableone.net>
>
> Good Afternoon Listers:
> As we all know, news travels like a brush fire. I
> wanted to share that as
> of yesterday I am no longer employed by SkyStar.
__________________________________
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
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: "JMCBEAN" <JDMCBEAN@cableone.net>
Rick,
I'm sure there are millions of people that are not employed by them...
Look
at the unemployment :) That's not what your asking. Everyone else is
still there.
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 Rick
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Current Update
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Rick" <turboflyer@comcast.net>
John, dont suppose you could tell us if your the only one not employed by
them?
Rick
-----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: Current Update
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader
<smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
John & Debra,
Soooo. Get your plane pictured in "Sport Aviation"
and you guys are too good for us? :-)
Well, I really hope you stick with us here because you
have always given solid advice and support - and
occasionally corrected some bad advice here abouts
too. Can't wait to hear which business is blessed
with your efforts next. I hope SS keeps the 10-2-Y-B
attitude you brought to them too.
Please keep us all up to date.
Kurt S.
--- JMCBEAN <JDMCBEAN@cableone.net> wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "JMCBEAN"
> <JDMCBEAN@cableone.net>
>
> Good Afternoon Listers:
> As we all know, news travels like a brush fire. I
> wanted to share that as
> of yesterday I am no longer employed by SkyStar.
__________________________________
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
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: Stick movement |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Dave & Wendy Grosvenor" <dwg@iafrica.com>
I made the stick on the passenger side of my aircraft removable. I take it
out when I'm flying alone or if I have a pax who doesn't want to do any
flying.
Dave
----- Original Message -----
From: "kurt schrader" <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Stick movement
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader
<smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
Do not archive.
A friend of mine was talking about an F-16 crash a
while back. It was a 2 seater and the local #1 pilot
was taking the doctor up for a ride. Seems that the
doctor kept hitting the side stick with his leg. When
the pilot yelled "Get off the controls" the doctor
thought he meant the rudders and pushed his legs even
higher and wider causing the plane to roll over into
the ground. The strange thing was that the pilot had
a switch where he could cut off the other stick and he
never switched it off.
Of course our sticks are not electric and tied
together so we can apply force to the other one too.
I just worry about if I'll need all the controls one
day.
Went to the local flying club meeting last night.
They were wondering how high you could bounce a tail
dragger before you went around. Some claimed of 20
foot high bounces... Now I don't feel so bad....
Kurt S.
--- Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no> wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe
> <michel@online.no>
>
> kurt schrader wrote:
> > Has anyone encountered a real problem with this?
> Any
> > solutions tried?
>
> Kurt, I made a kind of "check-list" board that I
> give my passenger on the first
> time. It reads, among other things, that on take-off
> and landing, large
> movement of the stick may occur and that he/she
> should stay clear of it.
> At run-up, I always move my controls to the maximum,
> so that the passenger can
> feel how far it may extend.
> But when flying, I never need to come any near such
> stick movement. Should it
> happen, one day, say in a strong cross-wind, I am
> pretty sure that my strong
> panicking right hand will maybe bruise some flesh
> but get all the way to
> correct the attitude. :-)
>
> Cheers,
> Michel
__________________________________
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: | Reduction drive (out put module) ratio |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
Rick,
Wish I had that much power available now. Maybe after
I get Lance to rebuild it, he'll give me an upgrade
too. I bought the smaller turbo just in case it gave
me a little more TBO. Probably why I get the lower
hp, but I think Lance dropped this option. Like you
mentioned, it may be the valves that go first. I
still need to see which size I have before ordering
the SS ones from you. Too much to do right now.
The first consideration is the strength of the prop.
I don't know if the CAP 140 should ever hit 3000 rpm
in practice. I know Lance builds in a big buffer, but
we don't need to test it without knowing it is
"normal".
According to that web site, "Prop Tip Speed
Calculator", 3000 prop rpm is well below supersonic
for 72". In fact, it is just barely up to the best
power range of 0.88 Mach when we get up to 140 mph
true at 5,000'. 3,150 is the highest rpm we should
use for 0.92 Mach there.
Some seaplane operators use 3000 rpm on their 76"
props. That is within the best usable range, but it
sure is noisy! If we pushed the rpm up there, I think
ours would be more efficient, but noisy too.
Again according to that site, you could swing a 85"
prop at 2600 rpm. Not do-able for us without Storch
gear and big GB bearings.
Up to 17,000' you can still use 3,000 rpm at 140 mph
true for our 72". Those are at standard day temps.
(It works density altitudes in for you too.) So I was
using 3,000 rpm as a safe tip speed range. You would
not likely take off or use that rpm at 17,000'. Or at
least I don't plan to, but it could be done with our
planes. :-)
My dyno readout shows a max of 6,000 engine rpm and
2650 prop. That is over 1,500 egt at that more remote
egt mount Lance uses. Best hp was 143 at 2580 prop or
5750 engine rpm. My torque curve flattens out by 3350
engine rpm, so above that is good enough for cruise, I
figure.
BTW, my max torque is 297. What is yours? 312 or so?
If I use 5200 rpm as max I lose 11 hp. The first
takeoff by my friend, who does his homework, was at
4,000 rpm to give 100 hp. That is what he has and he
wanted to start from a known point to compare with
mine.
Lance's last limitation sheet to me gives wide limits.
Max of 5800 rpm for the turbo and max continuous of
4800 rpm. I set the gage pointer at 5600 max and
redlined it there. I had been using less than max for
takeoff until my last takeoff. The accelertion
difference was very noticable, as I said, from just a
few 100 rpm change. More hp and more efficiency?
I understand that you are not using Lance's higher egt
limits either. His sheet gives a green arc to 1575
and a max of 1600 degrees.
Overall, I think that we are not running the prop tip
any where near most efficient speed, but that we are
all enclined to use safer rpm limits. Same with the
other limitations. We are all trying to stay under
what Lance tested at, even at a loss of hp. Use what
we need and not what we have until necessary.
I agree that you should talk to Warp and Lance too
since he makes the hub, before increasing the prop
rpm. If 3000 works out to be safe, only then regear
to that. I suspect that Lance gave you the higher
gear ratio just to keep that prop rpm down while
absorbing your greater torque.
Kurt S.
--- Rick <turboflyer@comcast.net> wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Rick"
> <turboflyer@comcast.net>
>
> I think I should get an honest 150 too 160. I plan
> on 5200 for my max RPM,
> so am just doing the math for 5200/2=2600. Power
> wise,5200 can be reached
> easily enough even with the non-turbo engine. The
> trick is how much prop can
> one spin at a tip speed of 2600. Warp should be able
> to tell us what pitch
> RPM combo is best.
> Just read the look at this below paragraph. So your
> saying 3000 for the tip
> speed, interesting. 5200/1.8 would give almost 2900
> and 1.7 would turn it
> 3058 at 5200 engine speed. What pitch were you at?
> Isn't 3000 super sonic
> though?
>
> Rick
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com]On
> Behalf Of kurt
> schrader
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Reduction drive (out put
> module) ratio
>
>
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader
> <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
>
> Rick,
>
> What is the actual HP output of your engine? I
> think
> it is a little more than my 143 hp - something right
> about 150 hp? Lance gave me a 2.23:1 ratio for
> mine.
> If you have more hp, you could use a little lower
> ratio based upon that, but I think the 2:1 might be
> too low.
>
> Then again, take a look at this site:
>
> >http://www.bewersdorff.com/computational/prop.html<
>
> Pluging some numbers in, your 2:1 ratio comes closer
> to reaching the optimum tip speed, which it says
> requires 3,000 rpm or more from the 72" prop around
> our range of speeds and altitudes. We best not run
> 3,000 prop rpm without Lance's backing though. But
> I
> do know that the accelleration picks up very
> noticably
> when I take off at max rpm, rather than even a few
> 100
> rpm lower.
>
> Interesting? I was surprised at the results when I
> first tried this. I bet the prop would be noisy.
>
> Kurt S.
>
> __________________________________
> http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
>
>
>
> 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
>
>
>
>
>
__________________________________
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
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 |
|
| Subject: | Reduction drive (out put module) ratio |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
Rick,
Wish I had that much power available now. Maybe after
I get Lance to rebuild it, he'll give me an upgrade
too. I bought the smaller turbo just in case it gave
me a little more TBO. Probably why I get the lower
hp, but I think Lance dropped this option. Like you
mentioned, it may be the valves that go first. I
still need to see which size I have before ordering
the SS ones from you. Too much to do right now.
The first consideration is the strength of the prop.
I don't know if the CAP 140 should ever hit 3000 rpm
in practice. I know Lance builds in a big buffer, but
we don't need to test it without knowing it is
"normal".
According to that web site, "Prop Tip Speed
Calculator", 3000 prop rpm is well below supersonic
for 72". In fact, it is just barely up to the best
power range of 0.88 Mach when we get up to 140 mph
true at 5,000'. 3,150 is the highest rpm we should
use for 0.92 Mach there.
Some seaplane operators use 3000 rpm on their 76"
props. That is within the best usable range, but it
sure is noisy! If we pushed the rpm up there, I think
ours would be more efficient, but noisy too.
Again according to that site, you could swing a 85"
prop at 2600 rpm. Not do-able for us without Storch
gear and big GB bearings.
Up to 17,000' you can still use 3,000 rpm at 140 mph
true for our 72". Those are at standard day temps.
(It works density altitudes in for you too.) So I was
using 3,000 rpm as a safe tip speed range. You would
not likely take off or use that rpm at 17,000'. Or at
least I don't plan to, but it could be done with our
planes. :-)
My dyno readout shows a max of 6,000 engine rpm and
2650 prop. That is over 1,500 egt at that more remote
egt mount Lance uses. Best hp was 143 at 2580 prop or
5750 engine rpm. My torque curve flattens out by 3350
engine rpm, so above that is good enough for cruise, I
figure.
BTW, my max torque is 297. What is yours? 312 or so?
If I use 5200 rpm as max I lose 11 hp. The first
takeoff by my friend, who does his homework, was at
4,000 rpm to give 100 hp. That is what he has and he
wanted to start from a known point to compare with
mine.
Lance's last limitation sheet to me gives wide limits.
Max of 5800 rpm for the turbo and max continuous of
4800 rpm. I set the gage pointer at 5600 max and
redlined it there. I had been using less than max for
takeoff until my last takeoff. The accelertion
difference was very noticable, as I said, from just a
few 100 rpm change. More hp and more efficiency?
I understand that you are not using Lance's higher egt
limits either. His sheet gives a green arc to 1575
and a max of 1600 degrees.
Overall, I think that we are not running the prop tip
any where near most efficient speed, but that we are
all enclined to use safer rpm limits. Same with the
other limitations. We are all trying to stay under
what Lance tested at, even at a loss of hp. Use what
we need and not what we have until necessary.
I agree that you should talk to Warp and Lance too
since he makes the hub, before increasing the prop
rpm. If 3000 works out to be safe, only then regear
to that. I suspect that Lance gave you the higher
gear ratio just to keep that prop rpm down while
absorbing your greater torque.
Kurt S.
__________________________________
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
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: | Reduction drive (out put module) ratio |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
Darn. Tried to stop that first send in time to clean
it up. Ended up with 2 sends. Do not archive this
and if possible, the larger msg from me.
Sorry,
Kurt S.
__________________________________
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
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: Stick movement |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
Good idea Dave. Unfortunately I have the 5 button
stick grip on both sides and it is not as easy to
remove. I have to pull the floorboard and boot first,
then the grip. Disconnect the stick and the electric
the plug, then tie the end off to keep it from jamming
anything. At best, I could do it in an hour.
Instead I restrict my pax to people skinner than me.
Not so hard to do.
Thanks,
Kurt S.
--- Dave & Wendy Grosvenor <dwg@iafrica.com> wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Dave & Wendy
> Grosvenor" <dwg@iafrica.com>
>
> I made the stick on the passenger side of my
> aircraft removable. I take it
> out when I'm flying alone or if I have a pax who
> doesn't want to do any
> flying.
> Dave
__________________________________
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
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: | "Captive" PAX - WAS: Stick movement |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: michel <michel@online.no>
>--- Dave & Wendy Grosvenor <dwg@iafrica.com> wrote:
>I take it out when I'm flying alone or if I have a pax who
>doesn't want to do any flying.
While I understand you, Dave, I feel that, if I should become ill while flying
(I am 56) my passenger should get a fair chance to crash ... not vertically.
As a matter of fact, I always explain the rudiment of the stick and the two
red lines (Vso and Vne) to all my passengers, prior to take-off. They usually
enjoy it, feeling less "captive."
But I am a beginner and I'd like to hear old-timers' opinion on that one.
Cheers,
Michel
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: | EIS engine info system |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Jay Fabian" <experimental208nd@comcast.net>
Does any one out there have the EIS instrument with the 912 engine? I need to replace
my regular Altimeter that is broken.
Any info and cost would help.
thanks
Jay
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 |
|
| Subject: | Captive PAX - WAS: Stick movement |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "jeff.hays@aselia.com" <jeff.hays@aselia.com>
I always worry that the Mig welded control column might be
welded by the same welder as the rudder pedals, so I want
the second stick in case the first breaks off ... :)
Original Message:
-----------------
From: michel michel@online.no
Subject: Kitfox-List: "Captive" PAX - WAS: Stick movement
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: michel <michel@online.no>
>--- Dave & Wendy Grosvenor <dwg@iafrica.com> wrote:
>I take it out when I'm flying alone or if I have a pax who
>doesn't want to do any flying.
While I understand you, Dave, I feel that, if I should become ill while
flying
(I am 56) my passenger should get a fair chance to crash ... not
vertically.
As a matter of fact, I always explain the rudiment of the stick and the two
red lines (Vso and Vne) to all my passengers, prior to take-off. They
usually
enjoy it, feeling less "captive."
But I am a beginner and I'd like to hear old-timers' opinion on that one.
Cheers,
Michel
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 |
|
| Subject: | "PAX and the Stick" |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Scott McClintock <scott_mcclintock@dot.state.ak.us>
DO NOT ARCHIVE
(As a matter of fact, I always explain the rudiment of the stick and the
two
red lines (Vso and Vne) to all my passengers,)
Michel,
It has been my experience that everyone that I've taken up really
appreciates the
opportunity of a quickie flying lesson.
My wife was real apprehensive (read "chicken") to go flying with me in a
plane with
only two seats. The "EXPERIMENTAL" blaring at her as she opened the door
really
did little to reassure her. She pretty well knew that the plane was
"safe" as I flew it home
all the way from "Down South" w/o any problems.
Finally, I got her interested in viewing some of my pilot training
DVD's. This got her interested as
well as causing her to purchase a copy of "The Right-Seat Handbook"
during a trip to the pilot shop.
I didn't push her and finally she gathered up her courage, asking one
day to go for a ride.
When we got to the plane, I showed her what
the flight controls did, how they worked, including the panel
instruments, before even getting into the plane.
Once I got her comfortable with the plane, it was great.
She was really impressed with how fast we got up and away. She is used
to Piper Archers, Sixes
and Caravans so the little Fox was very different for her.
After a lazy climb to 2500AGL, I did some "S" turns, and some other easy
turns.
I offered her the controls, and to my (pleasant) surprise, she gave it a
try.
It was remarkable how well she did, she has a real nice light touch on
the controls and used the rudder
almost instinctively. Nice, well coordinated turns. (thanks SS for
adjustable pedals!)
Anyway, she doesn't hesitate anymore when I offer a ride. She's looking
forward to this summer and some
real exploring! (I suppose I'll be paying for her flying lessons, soon.)
I go through the flight control/panel lesson now with everybody. I just
consider it as part of my PAX briefing now and it
keeps me sharp.
Most friends ASK if they can try her out once trimmed out and cruising
before I can offer so I figure this is a good thing.
They couldn't enjoy this special thrill if I took out the right stick.
I'm hardly an "Old Timer", but if it wasn't for all the people that let
me take the controls over the years, I would have spent a LOT more
time/money on getting my certificate and would have missed out on all
those thrills.
Scott in Nome
DO NOT ARCHIVE
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Cruise Speeds |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Paul Seehafer" <av8rps@tznet.com>
Hi Sid:
But the Avid Speedwing has a sem-symmetrical airfoil that the Kitfox doesn't
have the luxury of, plus was only 24 feet long verses the Kitfox wing of
29'+. So while I agree the Speedwing Avid was a little hotrod, we're not
really comparing apples to apples.
My purpose in asking the question about whether or not the Kitfox IV
Speedster could really do 130-140 mph was to find out if anyone is actually
doing it with their airplane. Apparently there are some owners that are
doing numbers that are close, but I haven't heard of anyone actually
attaining the numbers claimed by the writers and the factory (yet).
Paul Seehafer
----- Original Message -----
From: "hausding, sid" <sidh@charter.net>
Subject: Kitfox-List: Cruise Speeds
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "hausding, sid" <sidh@charter.net>
>
>
> Paul, they get 120mph out of the Avid Speedwing with the 582 Rotax, sounds
> like the Kitfox should get 130 behind the 912......if real clean and
faired
> out.
> Sid
> --------------
>
> Does anyone know if the Model IV 912ul Speedster really could cruise at
130
> mph like they claimed it would?
>
> Previous questions about how to get more speed from our Kitfoxes made me
> think about this. I have articles where independent aviation writers
> claimed 125-140 mph speeds from the Speedster, verified by loran / gps.
And
> then there are other articles whereas the writers claimed to have verified
> 110+ out of the long winged 912ul Model IV. Is this all hipe, or is it
> really possible? Comments or opinions?
>
>
> Paul Seehafer
> Wisconsin
>
>
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Cruise Speeds |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Paul Seehafer" <av8rps@tznet.com>
Hi Lowell:
Thanks for the great info. But I'm curious, 5mph for flaperon trim? How
did you do that?
Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lowell Fitt" <lcfitt@inreach.com>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Cruise Speeds
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Lowell Fitt" <lcfitt@inreach.com>
>
> Not Really, Most of the fairings were added during construction. As I
> recall the hubcaps give about 2 mph and the trim tab - eliminating
flaperon
> trim - adds about 5
>
> Lowell
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "jareds" <jareds@verizon.net>
> To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Cruise Speeds
>
>
> > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: jareds <jareds@verizon.net>
> >
> > Lowell,
> >
> > Thats really impressive. There is hope for my model IV yet!
> > Wing strut,spinner, and some covering on the landing gear is all i've
> > put on so far with a 582.
> > I'm only at 90-95. I'll try some of these.
> > Did you test and evaulate which had the biggest effect?
> >
> > Lowell Fitt wrote:
> >
> > >--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Lowell Fitt" <lcfitt@inreach.com>
> > >
> > >Paul, I have a lot of drag reducing mods on my Model IV and it will
> easily
> > >cruise at 115 mph.
> > >
> > >The mods include Wing Strut fairings, jury strut and horizontal
> stabilizer
> > >strut fairings, internal wingtip nav lights, hubcaps, fully faired
rudder
> > >vertical stabilizer / rudder and horizontal stabilizer / elevator gaps
> and,
> > >according to recent posts, benefit from a 9-1/2" spinner. I do pay a
> drag
> > >penalty in the large 21X12X8 tires.
> > >
> > >Some of the mods can be seen on Sportflight:
> >
>
>http://www.sportflight.com/cgi-bin/uploader.pl?action=view&epoch=1041348095
> > >http://www.sportflight.com/uploads/tip6.jpg
> >
>
>http://www.sportflight.com/cgi-bin/uploader.pl?action=view&epoch=1075488689
> > >
> > >The last photo also shows the pod covering the video camera mount on
the
> > >left wing strut.
> > >
> > >Lowell
> > >
> > >----- Original Message -----
> > >From: "Paul Seehafer" <av8rps@tznet.com>
> > >To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
> > >Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Cruise Speeds
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Paul Seehafer" <av8rps@tznet.com>
> > >>
> > >>Hi Rick:
> > >>
> > >>I'm not trying to make a case against the slow speed of the design.
But
> I
> > >>do think anything we can do to make our airplanes faster makes them
not
> > >>
> > >>
> > >only
> > >
> > >
> > >>more useful for cross country travel, but also more efficient. My
> initial
> > >>question about the Speedsters true cruise speed was really to find out
> if
> > >>the design fine tuned with only 80 hp could really be that fast?
> > >>
> > >>My Lake amphibian isn't a fast airplane either, but it sure is
> versatile.
> > >>And you wouldn't believe how envious some of my float plane buddies
are
> > >>
> > >>
> > >that
> > >
> > >
> > >>fly around at under 100 mph when I can breeze by them 30+ mph faster
> > >>
> > >>
> > >burning
> > >
> > >
> > >>less fuel. And as we all know, the longer the trip, the more benefit
we
> > >>
> > >>
> > >see
> > >
> > >
> > >>from any increase in speed.
> > >>
> > >>Given my druthers, Kitfoxes would go 200 knots. But we know that will
> > >>
> > >>
> > >never
> > >
> > >
> > >>happen. However, if we can get 120+ mph out of our planes it will
make
> > >>
> > >>
> > >all
> > >
> > >
> > >>the difference between it being used as a local puddle jumper, or an
> > >>effective and efficient cross country cruiser.
> > >>
> > >>Paul
> > >>
> > >>----- Original Message -----
> > >>From: <RGray67968@aol.com>
> > >>To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
> > >>Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Cruise Speeds
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: RGray67968@aol.com
> > >>>
> > >>>Hi Gang,
> > >>>Just curious.....why are all you folks worrying about 'how fast' your
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>Kitfox
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>will go? If you want to go 'fast' then why are you flying Kitfoxes?
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>Kitfoxes
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>are great little airplanes to tool around the sky and enjoy the
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >afternoon.
> > >
> > >
> > >>>Nothing more fun than buzzing around checking out the sites and even
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>enjoying an
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>occasional X-country in your Kitfox. If you want to go
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>'fast'....sorry....but
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>you guys are flying the wrong airplane. Enjoy your Kitfox for what it
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >is.
> > >
> > >
> > >>Just
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>my opinion and worth what you paid for it.....smile.
> > >>>Rick Gray in Ohio at the Buffalo Farm - RV6 w 280+ hours - former
> Kitfox
> > >>>owner (and loved every 115 mph flight in my little Kitfox)
> > >>>Oh yea......and you guys need to do a LOT better job with the do not
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>archive
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>- ever search a topic looking for something??? No fun weeding through
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >all
> > >
> > >
> > >>the
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>'junk' to get what you want.
> > >>>do not archive this either :
> > >>>)
> > >>>
> > >>>Paul, they get 120mph out of the Avid Speedwing with the 582 Rotax,
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >sounds
> > >
> > >
> > >>>like the Kitfox should get 130 behind the 912......if real clean and
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>faired
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>out.
> > >>>Sid
> > >>>
> > >>>Does anyone know if the Model IV 912ul Speedster really could cruise
at
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>130
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>mph like they claimed it would?
> > >>>
> > >>>Previous questions about how to get more speed from our Kitfoxes made
> me
> > >>>think about this. I have articles where independent aviation writers
> > >>>claimed 125-140 mph speeds from the Speedster, verified by loran /
gps.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>And
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>then there are other articles whereas the writers claimed to have
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >verified
> > >
> > >
> > >>>110+ out of the long winged 912ul Model IV. Is this all hipe, or is
it
> > >>>really possible? Comments or opinions?
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>Paul Seehafer
> > >>>Wisconsin
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
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: | Re: Current Update |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Paul Seehafer" <av8rps@tznet.com>
John:
It's too bad Skystar is going to be without you. But like someone else
said, when one door closes another opens.
I certainly enjoyed your knowledge of the product line, as well as your
excellent advice here on the list. I do hope you continue to participate.
After all, you do have one majorly coool Kitfox of your own. So kick back
and enjoy the B.S. here with all of the rest of us non-employed by Skystar
guys! :-)
And as I recall, having a father that helped out with the original test
flying of the Avid / Kitfox prototype, and having your own "Kitfox Museum"
of sorts in your garage/hangar certainly qualifies you for hanging with us
"civilian" Kitfox types here on the list. Good luck to you in your future
endeavors...
Paul Seehafer
Central Wisconsin
Knowing you only a little
----- Original Message -----
From: "JMCBEAN" <JDMCBEAN@cableone.net>
Subject: Kitfox-List: Current Update
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "JMCBEAN" <JDMCBEAN@cableone.net>
>
> Good Afternoon Listers:
> As we all know, news travels like a brush fire. I wanted to share that as
> of yesterday I am no longer employed by SkyStar. The parting was on good
> terms. I appreciate all the friendships that I have made both from being
a
> Demonstration Pilot, Sales and Technical Service for SkyStar and being
> personally involved in the Kitfox family with my own build project. I am
> still an active CFI and EAA Technical Couselor and will remain very
involved
> within the Kitfox community and if I can ever be of any help please dont
> hesitate to ask.
>
> May the wind always be on your tail, the sun overhead and the wings of
> destiny take you aloft to dance in the sky
>
> John McBean
> N102YB
>
>
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: "JMCBEAN" <JDMCBEAN@cableone.net>
Paul,
At the Sun-n-Fun Dash 100 the Series 6 (standard wing) was recorded by
the
officials at 119 kts (136.8 mph) Remember that most everyone has their
props pitched for climb or a compromise.... Very few will pitch or for that
matter prop for just the speed.
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 Paul Seehafer
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Cruise Speeds
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Paul Seehafer" <av8rps@tznet.com>
Hi Sid:
But the Avid Speedwing has a sem-symmetrical airfoil that the Kitfox doesn't
have the luxury of, plus was only 24 feet long verses the Kitfox wing of
29'+. So while I agree the Speedwing Avid was a little hotrod, we're not
really comparing apples to apples.
My purpose in asking the question about whether or not the Kitfox IV
Speedster could really do 130-140 mph was to find out if anyone is actually
doing it with their airplane. Apparently there are some owners that are
doing numbers that are close, but I haven't heard of anyone actually
attaining the numbers claimed by the writers and the factory (yet).
Paul Seehafer
----- Original Message -----
From: "hausding, sid" <sidh@charter.net>
Subject: Kitfox-List: Cruise Speeds
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "hausding, sid" <sidh@charter.net>
>
>
> Paul, they get 120mph out of the Avid Speedwing with the 582 Rotax, sounds
> like the Kitfox should get 130 behind the 912......if real clean and
faired
> out.
> Sid
> --------------
>
> Does anyone know if the Model IV 912ul Speedster really could cruise at
130
> mph like they claimed it would?
>
> Previous questions about how to get more speed from our Kitfoxes made me
> think about this. I have articles where independent aviation writers
> claimed 125-140 mph speeds from the Speedster, verified by loran / gps.
And
> then there are other articles whereas the writers claimed to have verified
> 110+ out of the long winged 912ul Model IV. Is this all hipe, or is it
> really possible? Comments or opinions?
>
>
> Paul Seehafer
> Wisconsin
>
>
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 |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "JMCBEAN" <JDMCBEAN@cableone.net>
Thanks Paul !!! You bet I'll be here on the list.....
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 Paul Seehafer
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Current Update
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Paul Seehafer" <av8rps@tznet.com>
John:
It's too bad Skystar is going to be without you. But like someone else
said, when one door closes another opens.
I certainly enjoyed your knowledge of the product line, as well as your
excellent advice here on the list. I do hope you continue to participate.
After all, you do have one majorly coool Kitfox of your own. So kick back
and enjoy the B.S. here with all of the rest of us non-employed by Skystar
guys! :-)
And as I recall, having a father that helped out with the original test
flying of the Avid / Kitfox prototype, and having your own "Kitfox Museum"
of sorts in your garage/hangar certainly qualifies you for hanging with us
"civilian" Kitfox types here on the list. Good luck to you in your future
endeavors...
Paul Seehafer
Central Wisconsin
Knowing you only a little
----- Original Message -----
From: "JMCBEAN" <JDMCBEAN@cableone.net>
Subject: Kitfox-List: Current Update
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "JMCBEAN" <JDMCBEAN@cableone.net>
>
> Good Afternoon Listers:
> As we all know, news travels like a brush fire. I wanted to share that as
> of yesterday I am no longer employed by SkyStar. The parting was on good
> terms. I appreciate all the friendships that I have made both from being
a
> Demonstration Pilot, Sales and Technical Service for SkyStar and being
> personally involved in the Kitfox family with my own build project. I am
> still an active CFI and EAA Technical Couselor and will remain very
involved
> within the Kitfox community and if I can ever be of any help please dont
> hesitate to ask.
>
> May the wind always be on your tail, the sun overhead and the wings of
> destiny take you aloft to dance in the sky
>
> John McBean
> N102YB
>
>
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 |
|
HTML_TAG_EXISTS_TBODY
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "hausding, sid" <sidh@charter.net>
Holy BatMan Paul,
I really didn't realize the speedster and speedwing were that much different
Just assumed without really checking over the years........Oops, my fault
there, and I appreciate your pointing out the difference. Nothing in
common means we (I) can't compare the two. Sorry. Glad to be part of the
discussion and will help when I can. Surprised my buddy from Mikado, Mi.
didn't jump on me for that fau pax! Hey, Darrel, you alive out there? NO
names mentioned here.
Sid
-------------------------
But the Avid Speedwing has a sem-symmetrical airfoil that the Kitfox doesn't
have the luxury of, plus was only 24 feet long verses the Kitfox wing of
29'+. So while I agree the Speedwing Avid was a little hotrod, we're not
really comparing apples to apples.
My purpose in asking the question about whether or not the Kitfox IV
Speedster could really do 130-140 mph was to find out if anyone is actually
doing it with their airplane. Apparently there are some owners that are
doing numbers that are close, but I haven't heard of anyone actually
attaining the numbers claimed by the writers and the factory (yet).
Paul Seehafer
----- Original Message -----
From: "hausding, sid" <sidh@charter.net>
Subject: Kitfox-List: Cruise Speeds
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "hausding, sid" <sidh@charter.net>
>
>
> Paul, they get 120mph out of the Avid Speedwing with the 582 Rotax, sounds
> like the Kitfox should get 130 behind the 912......if real clean and
faired
> out.
> Sid
> --------------
>
> Does anyone know if the Model IV 912ul Speedster really could cruise at
130
> mph like they claimed it would?
>
> Previous questions about how to get more speed from our Kitfoxes made me
> think about this. I have articles where independent aviation writers
> claimed 125-140 mph speeds from the Speedster, verified by loran / gps.
And
> then there are other articles whereas the writers claimed to have verified
> 110+ out of the long winged 912ul Model IV. Is this all hipe, or is it
> really possible? Comments or opinions?
>
>
> Paul Seehafer
> Wisconsin
>
>
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: | EIS engine info system |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Randy Daughenbaugh" <rjdaugh@rapidnet.com>
Jay,
I have one on order. It is the model 2000 for 4 stroke. It monitors two
egt's and two
Head temps. It uses some of the sensors on the rotax engine. I got an
outside air temp probe, but didn't get the fuel flow monitor or the
altimeter- VSI.
$607 + $10 shipping.
Hope it's a good as everyone says.
Randy - Series 5/7 - 912S - this spring!!! (?)
.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jay Fabian
Subject: Kitfox-List: EIS engine info system
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Jay Fabian"
<experimental208nd@comcast.net>
Does any one out there have the EIS instrument with the 912 engine? I need
to replace my regular Altimeter that is broken.
Any info and cost would help.
thanks
Jay
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: EIS engine info system |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Jay Fabian" <experimental208nd@comcast.net>
Randy,
I will need the ALT and VSI also to start with and then I might look at any
extras for it. Just a regular ALT is about $200 ish, so I will have to
justify the extra $$$$ .
Thanks, Plus there is the TASKEM unit. It is actually made two towns away
from me . I will try and get that info also.
Jay
----- Original Message -----
From: "Randy Daughenbaugh" <rjdaugh@rapidnet.com>
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: EIS engine info system
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Randy Daughenbaugh"
<rjdaugh@rapidnet.com>
>
> Jay,
> I have one on order. It is the model 2000 for 4 stroke. It monitors two
> egt's and two
> Head temps. It uses some of the sensors on the rotax engine. I got an
> outside air temp probe, but didn't get the fuel flow monitor or the
> altimeter- VSI.
>
> $607 + $10 shipping.
>
> Hope it's a good as everyone says.
>
> Randy - Series 5/7 - 912S - this spring!!! (?)
> .
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jay Fabian
> To: kitfox list
> Subject: Kitfox-List: EIS engine info system
>
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Jay Fabian"
> <experimental208nd@comcast.net>
>
> Does any one out there have the EIS instrument with the 912 engine? I need
> to replace my regular Altimeter that is broken.
> Any info and cost would help.
>
> thanks
> Jay
>
>
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 |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Jimmie Blackwell" <jablackwell@ev1.net>
Wanted to get your opinions on varnishing wing ribs and other wooden parts in the
wing. I have quick build wings.
How many coats of varnish? and is it necessary to sand between coats?
Thanks
Jimmie
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: | Re: "Captive" PAX - WAS: Stick movement |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "martin dovey" <kitfox.england@ntlworld.com>
My spare stick rides in the plane and can be "plugged in" when
required.
I suspect that the Fox could fly itself to a smoother crash
landing than some of my passengers.
Cheers
Martin Dovey
Kitfox 3.5
G-BTSV
----- Original Message -----
From: "michel" <michel@online.no>
>
> While I understand you, Dave, I feel that, if I should become
ill while flying
> (I am 56) my passenger should get a fair chance to crash ...
not vertically.
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! --
|