Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 05:17 AM - Re: Kitfox Maintenance (Clem Nichols)
2. 05:33 AM - Thank you (Michel Verheughe)
3. 06:54 AM - Re: engine mount mis-alignment (Grant Fluent)
4. 07:26 AM - Re: Opinions on preparing to fly kitfox (Tom Jones)
5. 07:29 AM - Re: 912S surging/rough (John Banes)
6. 07:42 AM - Re: engine mount mis-alignment (Tom Jones)
7. 07:44 AM - Re: New Kitfox Mk4 (Kitfox)
8. 07:44 AM - Re: Temperature on a 582 (John Larsen)
9. 08:11 AM - Re: engine mount mis-alignment (Lowell Fitt)
10. 08:15 AM - Re: engine mount mis-alignment (kurt schrader)
11. 08:16 AM - Re: New Kitfox Mk4 (Lowell Fitt)
12. 08:20 AM - Re: engine mount mis-alignment (Jerry Liles)
13. 08:32 AM - Re: engine mount mis-alignment (Clem Nichols)
14. 09:08 AM - Re: dihedral (Wwillyard@aol.com)
15. 09:08 AM - Re: engine mount mis-alignment (Noel & Yoshie Simmons)
16. 09:43 AM - CLEM--BRS Chute Installation (Barry Huston)
17. 10:03 AM - Re: Back on the list (Marc Arseneault)
18. 10:09 AM - Kitfox 3 parts (Jim Chuk)
19. 10:21 AM - Re: engine mount mis-alignment (Arthur Nation)
20. 10:53 AM - Re: Kitfox 3 parts (Dcecil3@aol.com)
21. 10:55 AM - Re: Kitfox Maintenance (JMCBEAN)
22. 01:30 PM - Re: Kitfox 3 parts (Grant Fluent)
23. 03:00 PM - (Northern Ultralights)
24. 05:32 PM - Re: engine mount mis-alignment (Bob Unternaehrer)
25. 05:33 PM - Re: CLEM--BRS Chute Installation (kurt schrader)
26. 05:36 PM - Re: engine mount mis-alignment (kurt schrader)
27. 06:08 PM - Re: Kitfox Maintenance (Randy Daughenbaugh)
28. 06:35 PM - Re: Gap Seals (kurt schrader)
29. 06:39 PM - Re: Kitfox Maintenance (dwight purdy)
30. 06:56 PM - Kitfox Dream (John E. King)
31. 07:09 PM - REPLY 1 ---BRS Chute Installation (Barry Huston)
32. 07:27 PM - Fitting Wings Model IV Speedster (Jimmie Blackwell)
33. 09:47 PM - Re: engine mount mis-alignment (Jeff Smathers)
34. 11:29 PM - Re: engine mount mis-alignment (kurt schrader)
35. 11:55 PM - Re: REPLY 1 ---BRS Chute Installation (kurt schrader)
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Kitfox Maintenance |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Clem Nichols" <cnichols@scrtc.com>
John:
Indeed you had put out the original information. That's what led to my
question which hasn't been answered. Can a plane which was originally
registered as an amateur-built experimental be somehow reclassified as a
sport plane and therefore come under the new regs which would allow me, with
the 16 hours of training, to do my own annual inspection? Will this 16-hr
training rule only apply to factory-built sport planes or will it also
apply to amateur-built sport planes? Will all amateur built planes continue
to be registered as experimentals even if they fall under the parameters of
a light sport plane? Do you see where I'm coming from? I know I can do the
maintenance on my Model IV. What I'm wondering is will I, when Sport Plane
goes into effect and with the 16 hours training, be able to do my own
annual, even though I didn't build the plane? Your patience and forbearance
with my ignorance is appreciated.
Clem Nichols
----- Original Message -----
From: "JMCBEAN" <JDMCBEAN@cableone.net>
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Kitfox Maintenance
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "JMCBEAN" <JDMCBEAN@cableone.net>
>
> Thought I had put this out once.....
>
> If I bought the aircraft used, I can still do the maintenance ?
>
> Assuming the aircraft you buy is certificated in the experimental
> light-sport aircraft category you can perform the maintenance consistent
> with the manufacturers continuing airworthiness instructions and any
> restrictions in the operating limitations section of the airworthiness
> certificate without specific maintenance training. In order to perform the
> 12-month condition inspection and approve the aircraft for return to
> service, you would need to attend the 16-hour inspection training course
and
> obtain an FAA repairman certificate (light-sport aircraft) with inspection
> privileges.
>
> However, if the aircraft you buy is certificated as an amateur-built
> experimental aircraft then you can perform maintenance on the aircraft but
> cannot approve the aircraft for return to service after a 12-month
condition
> inspection. This is because you are not eligible for the repairman
> certificate under 65.104 on account of the fact that you were not the
> original builder of the aircraft.
>
> Also... try this link http://www.sportpilot.org/nprm/aircraft_maint.html
>
>
> 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 Don Pearsall
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Kitfox Maintenance
>
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Don Pearsall"
<donpearsall@comcast.net>
>
> Clem, maybe John McBean will chime in, as he is the Sport Pilot expert as
he
> worked closely with Ed Downs. As I understand it, if you take a
maintenance
> class, you will be able to do work and annual your Model IV yourself.
> Depending on weight, your Model IV will be able to classify as a sport
> plane.
>
> Don Pearsall
> Seattle, WA
>
>
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 |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
Thank you, everyone, for your congratulations, I am overwhelmed.
Here are a few answers:
Don, I find landing on hard pressed snow with my smooth tyres a real pleasure.
Better than asphalt or grass. No problem to brake or steer. This being said,
living in Norway, I get a lot of practice driving my car on ice/snow but
anyway, I always handle my Kitfox gently, as if it was slippery. Even in the
summer. Girls like gentle touch, you know! :-)
Elbie, that's right, I live in the south of Norway, on the other side of the
Polar Circle. Yes, there is much lift in winter, yesterday I climbed at 1,200
fpm ... and still accelerating! Congratulation of your past birthday, dear
Aquarius! :-)
Takk skal du ha, Torgeir. Raining in the north, sun in the south, isn't it the
usual Norwegian weather? :-) For our American friends: it's not colder in the
north than the south. At least not along the coast. Because of the Gulfstream
that warms the coast all the way to Murmansk, Russia.
Jeff, I am 56 years old. The average Kitfox pilot, I think. When our kids have
their own home, our spouses, their own hobbies, our professional ambitions
won't get much higher and ... it's time to get our own hobbies! :-)
Kurt, I am sorry to hear that you share your birthday with Hitler. On the
bright side, you look much younger and much, much healthier than him ! :-)
Chris, I look forward to meeting you and other British Kifoxers in a warmer
place. Don't know where, don't know when, but we'll meet again, on a sunny day!
:-)
Martin, I know what you mean with "silk winter." But yesterday was different.
As you can see from the windsock, it was calm. But above say, 700 ft AGL, there
was a strong northerly wind. On the ground, my OAT was 6.0 C, but at 1,000 ft,
8.8 C. The cold terrain created an inversion that kept the warmer upper wind
away. I could notice on crosswind that my drift was quite significant. I could
also notice the turbulence between the two layers of air masses.
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: engine mount mis-alignment |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Grant Fluent <gjfpilot@yahoo.com>
Arthur,
I also had to tweak my engine mount a little to get
it to fit (Classic IV 912S). Two of the five mounting
points were off about 1/4".
As for the 912S, IMHO I would stay with your
original plan. If you decide on a different engine,
you'd still have to get your money back from Skystar.
I don't understand why they are having trouble
delivering an engine that is already paid for? When I
heard about your problem and some others, I did not
have an engine and did some checking with the Rotax
service centers to see if getting an engine was a
problem. All of them either had the 912S in stock or
could get one in about a week or two. I purchased my
912S from Leading Edge Air Foils in Wisconsin. It came
in about a week.
Grant Fluent
Newcastle, NE
Classic IV 912S
--- Arthur Nation <anation@w-link.net> wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Arthur Nation
> <anation@w-link.net>
>
> On Friday 13 February 2004 22:58, kurt schrader
> wrote:
>
> Hi Kurt,
> Yes the engine mount is the correct version, I
> think!! Apparently the welding
> process leaves the mounting holes out of alignment.
> I really don't understand
> this as a jig is used. Perhaps the stresses from
> welding distort the frame
> after cooling and release from the jig.
> The firewall holes are near perfect.
> I am really thinking of something besides the 912S
> that I have ordered, but
> don't expect to get.
> How many hrs do you have on yours and do you find
> your plane 'nose-heavy' as
> one other person commented?
> Arthur
>
>
> > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader
> > <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
> >
> > Arthur,
> >
> > I wonder if they just sent an engine mount for the
> > wrong series plane? Is it for the -7 for sure?
> Does
> > the firewall match the plane and it is only the
> mount
> > that is off? Or does nothing match?
> >
> > 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
>
>
>
>
>
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Opinions on preparing to fly kitfox |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Tom Jones <fire_n_ice@direcway.com>
Wow John, sharing airplane rent with an instructor would be some luxury not
found in Central Oregon. I have some feelers out to find a good tailwheel
instructor, so we'll see what developes. Thanks for your insight.
Tom Jones
> Tom,
> IMHO... as an instructor.. I would gladly have helped you rent and
fly the
> tail wheel aircraft.. However, I would have suggested that the two of us
go
> fly something you are a little more familiar with to get back "in the
> groove" It's been eight years.. lets get you back in the seat again. Get
> with someone that teaches tail wheel aircraft to do your re-currency in
the
> tri-gear... If he's doing his job he'll have you landing the tri in
> preparation for the tail wheel training.
>
> Here is some reasoning:
>
> 1.) A brand new student pilot does not bring bad flying habits to the
table.
> So starting that student in a tail wheel aircraft can work out great and
> IMHO.
> 2.) A licensed current pilot (100+ hrs) with no tail wheel experience will
> be comfortable with the aircraft but may have created some bad habits that
> need to be corrected. Or wasn't taught correctly to begin with. Some learn
> to fly in spite of their instruction.
> 3.) A pilot that hasn't flown in some time needs to regain some confidence
> and possibly correct some bad habits that have been learned.
>
> Here's an example... I do several flight reviews throughout the year. My
> job is to evaluate if you have command of the aircraft and that you can
> operate safely within the limitations of your certificate. Most pilots do
> not even realize that they are not landing straight.... And they do not
fly
> the aircraft all the way to the tie downs. They simply stop flying and
> start driving. A tail dragger will have that pilot for breakfast, lunch
and
> dinner. OK, so you say that is why you get training in tail wheels....
This
> is a habit.. and needs to be broken... if you were taught correctly, every
> aircraft is flown from the instant it starts to the instant it stops.....
if
> the winds are howling you better be flying it until it's put away.
>
> OK.. off my soap box...... I would suggest that you get back in the saddle
> with a tri-gear... Let that instructor know that you are going to be
> transitioning to tail wheel aircraft and hopefully he or she will guide
you
> in the correct direction.
>
>
> Blue Skies!!
> John & Debra McBean
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: | 912S surging/rough |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "John Banes" <johnbanes@adelphia.net>
Dave,
A friend who has a Rans with a 912S mentioned that his surged and sounded
rough in a very similar manor. He had install an extension to each carb's
overflow line and extended these lines through the bottom of the cowling.
Once he removed these extensions the engine ran "perfectly".
John
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Dave & Wendy
Grosvenor
Subject: Kitfox-List: 912S surging/rough
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Dave & Wendy Grosvenor"
<dwg@iafrica.com>
I'm still struggling to get my 912S running smoothly. I've pulled off the
carbs and cleaned them out in case there was some dirt in the jets. Up to
4800rpm she runs smoothly. From 4800 to 5200 she surges and sounds rough.
5200 to my max I get in flight of 5400 is smooth again. If I slowly
decrease the throttle from full, as it gets to around the 5000rpm mark the
revs drop rapidly then surge up and down, almost like it's looking for a
happy medium to run at. I have manually balanced the carbs as per the
manual, and done it a few times to be sure. Someone suggested it may be
running too lean, and I tried lowering the clip on the needle fron position
3 to 4. However in position 4 it is definately running too rich, and can be
seen on the plugs. At the current position 3 the plugs look great.
The only other thing I can think of trying is balancing the carbs with a
manometer. Can you make up a simple water manometer for this?
Any suggestions will be appreciated.
Dave
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: engine mount mis-alignment |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Tom Jones <fire_n_ice@direcway.com>
> I guess that I have been too accustomed to having mating parts in various
mechanical apparatus be in almost perfect alignment. Not requiring the use
of a crow-bar to, say, 'adjust the carburetor'!!
Arthur,
If you think that was a chore, you should see how us tube gear people adjust
wheel alignment..
Do not archive
Tom Jones
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: | Re: New Kitfox Mk4 |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Kitfox" <kitfox.england@ntlworld.com>
Thanks Tom,
In all my surfing of the Skystar website I never took the "History" turning
before.
Martin Dovey
Kitfox Mk 3.5 G-BTSV
Kitfox Mk 4.0 G-BZIB
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Jones" <fire_n_ice@direcway.com>
> Martin, from "History" on Skystar's web page:
>
> "The Classic 4 has heavier lift struts and gear legs, as well as beefed up
> carry through tubes in the fuselage, to allow for a higher gross weight
than
> the earlier Model 4 kits. The height of the vertical stabilizer and
rudder
> was increased by 10 inches, and the rudder depth was increased by 2 inches
> to allow for improved handling."
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: Temperature on a 582 |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: John Larsen <jopatco@mindspring.com>
Here is my 2 cents worth. I did a lot of testing at the Avid factory in
solving the 582 cooling problems on the Avid Mk 4. Here is a couple of
observations. Your engine is producing somewhere over1000 degrees in the
combustion chamber and so difference between 180 degrees and 200 degrees
one inch away on the cylinder head doesn't make much if any difference
in engine life. I never liked seeing over 180 degrees, but I once blew a
vent hose and went over 230f. before I could land and there was no
damage to the engine.
I tested a box full on 582 temperature sending units and when placed in
boiling water, found they all were in error on the plus side some as
much as 15 degrees. F. This unit would have the pilot worried at seeing
195, degrees, when actual temperature would have only been 180. What is
is all about is not overheating to the point where you start boiling
you coolant away as then skyrocketing temperatures would ruin the engine.
Bob Robertson wrote:
>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Bob Robertson" <aerocon1@telusplanet.net>
>
>Sounds like it is working just right. There is nothing wrong with the temps
>going up to 180 in a hard extended climb. The manual states that 180 is the
>max allowed temp and you are just getting there. The engine is perfectly
>happy with 160-170 as that is the preferred temps. Those temps just mean
>that you are getting the engine up to the operating temps it was designed to
>operate at.
>Relax and enjoy the flight......
>
>regards
>
>Bob Robertson
>Light Engine Services Ltd.
>Rotax Service Center
>St. Albert, Ab. Can
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: <Tc9008@aol.com>
>To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: Kitfox-List: Temperature on a 582
>
>
>
>
>>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Tc9008@aol.com
>>
>>I have a 97 Model IV w/ 582 water cooled engine. While doing touch and
>>
>>
>goes
>
>
>>on climb out the temp goes to 180. In the pattern it cools back to
>>
>>
>160-170. Is
>
>
>>this a problem that I need to address or is everything ok. The outside
>>
>>
>temp is
>
>
>>50F. Everything else is good and it really runs well.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
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: engine mount mis-alignment |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Lowell Fitt" <lcfitt@inreach.com>
As I recall, I had to tweak - term used by others- a bit on installation,
but with the exception of normal maintenance, the 912 required no further
tweaking, unlike what I hear of other systems :-).
Lowell
----- Original Message -----
From: "kurt schrader" <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: engine mount mis-alignment
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader
<smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
>
> Now I feel bad. My NSI engine came ready on the mount
> and two of us hung it on the plane while holding it up
> ourselves. Everything slipped together with nar more
> than a jiggle. Hung it before covering the plane,
> then removed it and rehung it after covering.
>
> Am I just lucky, or did I do it wrong? Did the rest
> of you NSI users have any trouble? I thought it was
> just SS that had trouble until now.
>
> Kurt S.
>
> --- JMCBEAN <JDMCBEAN@cableone.net> wrote:
> > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "JMCBEAN"
> > <JDMCBEAN@cableone.net>
> >
> > Arthur,
> > I was waiting for some other responses
> > before I piped in. I have installed
> > several engines in aircraft (Cessna, Kitfox, Mooney,
> > Piper, etc..) and I do
> > not believe I have ever had one engine mount that
> > didn't require the list of
> > cuss words to go along with it.
>
> __________________________________
> 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: | Re: engine mount mis-alignment |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
Arthur,
Do not archive.
I am no welder, but I would be embarrassed if I welded
a mount and let it spring that far out coming off the
jig. I wonder if the mounts were stress relieved?
If I were President of SS, I would ask - no beg John
King to do my quality assurance program and be shop
steward. When we get tired of drill sgt John kicking
our be-hinds for sloppy work, we'd send him off on
another well organized gaggle to Alaska, etc to sell
the KitFox dream. Bet there'd be none of this "It
don't fit" stuff going out the door fer sure! Have
you all seen his work? We'd have two more space
shuttles now if John were in charge there.
There would be some others on this list I would beg to
work at SS too. In just a few years of work and
reputation building, NASA would be coming to SS for
their next Rover. The smartest thing I could do as SS
president is listen to you guys on this list and blast
ahead of the competition with your ideas.
Well, in my dreams anyway.
I do believe that the NSI mounts are consistantly
better than you are getting from SS. Lance farms a
lot of work out after he has designed it, but he is
very careful about their quality. The NSI's cowling
is also better. NSI primarily makes parts for Boeing
and other serious companies so NSI quality is standard
practice for them.
I have just begun to do my test flying with my NSI
engine. There are 10.2 hrs total with about 3 of them
flying hrs. With just me and partial tanks, I am very
close to the forward CG limit. That is where I like
it because it gives me the most cargo flexability. It
also make the plane handle very well, but I will
install the elevator gap seal to give me a little more
aft stick for landing. Haven't done any flap landings
yet, but I think I will run out of aft stick unless I
pretrim a little more nose up for slow flight. There
is no stick left to "plant it" on landing otherwise.
But that is near empty and no gap seals.
Though the Soob is heavier than the Rotax, it was
lighter than I thought. I expected the all up wet
weight to be heavier than Lance advertises because
that is usual for engine builders, but I actually came
out a few pounds lighter. If you bought his normally
asperated engine, you could have it mounted and
flyable (without cowl painting) in a week. He says 30
hrs of work. His setup is not built to the turbo
model, last I saw, and that takes additional time for
some modifications.
I suppose you have already prepaid SS for the engine?
Kurt S.
--- Arthur Nation <anation@w-link.net> wrote:
>
> Hi Kurt,
> Yes the engine mount is the correct version, I
> think!! Apparently the welding
> process leaves the mounting holes out of alignment.
> I really don't understand
> this as a jig is used. Perhaps the stresses from
> welding distort the frame
> after cooling and release from the jig.
> The firewall holes are near perfect.
> I am really thinking of something besides the 912S
> that I have ordered, but
> don't expect to get.
> How many hrs do you have on yours and do you find
> your plane 'nose-heavy' as one other person
> commented?
> Arthur
__________________________________
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
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: New Kitfox Mk4 |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Lowell Fitt" <lcfitt@inreach.com>
A minor point here is that there are two versions of the Model IV. The
first has a gross Weight of 1050 lbs. as mentioned later models had a gross
weight of 1200 lbs. This model was discontinued by SS at one point and when
Ed downs returned to the factory, it was resurrected as the Classic IV.
With the exception of several refinements, i.e. alignment adjustable tube
gear etc., it is my belief that the IV-1200 and the Classic IV are
identical.
Lowell
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kitfox" <kitfox.england@ntlworld.com>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: New Kitfox Mk4
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Kitfox" <kitfox.england@ntlworld.com>
>
> Thanks Tom,
> In all my surfing of the Skystar website I never took the "History"
turning
> before.
>
> Martin Dovey
> Kitfox Mk 3.5 G-BTSV
> Kitfox Mk 4.0 G-BZIB
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Tom Jones" <fire_n_ice@direcway.com>
>
>
> > Martin, from "History" on Skystar's web page:
> >
> > "The Classic 4 has heavier lift struts and gear legs, as well as beefed
up
> > carry through tubes in the fuselage, to allow for a higher gross weight
> than
> > the earlier Model 4 kits. The height of the vertical stabilizer and
> rudder
> > was increased by 10 inches, and the rudder depth was increased by 2
inches
> > to allow for improved handling."
>
>
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: | Re: engine mount mis-alignment |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Jerry Liles <wliles@bayou.com>
To help in fitting the motor mount I found a set of drift pins to be
very useful. I made mine out of 1/4" brazing rod to whatever length was
needed. Get some bolts in the center mount and use the drift pins to
line up the rest of the holes then drive the pins out with the mounting
bolts. A little grease on the bolts and pins helps. I also used
ratchet straps to help pull some parts into good alignment before
driving in the pins. You may have to put a slight bevel on the ends of
the bolts to help them go in. This will not hurt the bolts if the bevel
extends beyound the tops of the nuts. Once you have the mount off and
on a few times it'll start lining up without all the fuss. A good
selection of choice words learned during Basic and Advanced Training
also helped.
Jerry Liles
>
>
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: | Re: engine mount mis-alignment |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Clem Nichols" <cnichols@scrtc.com>
Kurt:
I can identify with your comment regarding not enough aft stick on landing.
(I have the NSI EA-81 setup with battery and BRS chute mounted aft of the
CG, but I still seem a little nose-heavy) Can you elaborate on the elevator
gap seal? Can it be purchased or is it necessary to fabricate? Thanks
Clem Nichols
Do Not Archive
----- Original Message -----
From: "kurt schrader" <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: engine mount mis-alignment
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader
<smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
>
> Arthur,
>
> Do not archive.
>
> I am no welder, but I would be embarrassed if I welded
> a mount and let it spring that far out coming off the
> jig. I wonder if the mounts were stress relieved?
>
> If I were President of SS, I would ask - no beg John
> King to do my quality assurance program and be shop
> steward. When we get tired of drill sgt John kicking
> our be-hinds for sloppy work, we'd send him off on
> another well organized gaggle to Alaska, etc to sell
> the KitFox dream. Bet there'd be none of this "It
> don't fit" stuff going out the door fer sure! Have
> you all seen his work? We'd have two more space
> shuttles now if John were in charge there.
>
> There would be some others on this list I would beg to
> work at SS too. In just a few years of work and
> reputation building, NASA would be coming to SS for
> their next Rover. The smartest thing I could do as SS
> president is listen to you guys on this list and blast
> ahead of the competition with your ideas.
>
> Well, in my dreams anyway.
>
> I do believe that the NSI mounts are consistantly
> better than you are getting from SS. Lance farms a
> lot of work out after he has designed it, but he is
> very careful about their quality. The NSI's cowling
> is also better. NSI primarily makes parts for Boeing
> and other serious companies so NSI quality is standard
> practice for them.
>
> I have just begun to do my test flying with my NSI
> engine. There are 10.2 hrs total with about 3 of them
> flying hrs. With just me and partial tanks, I am very
> close to the forward CG limit. That is where I like
> it because it gives me the most cargo flexability. It
> also make the plane handle very well, but I will
> install the elevator gap seal to give me a little more
> aft stick for landing. Haven't done any flap landings
> yet, but I think I will run out of aft stick unless I
> pretrim a little more nose up for slow flight. There
> is no stick left to "plant it" on landing otherwise.
> But that is near empty and no gap seals.
>
> Though the Soob is heavier than the Rotax, it was
> lighter than I thought. I expected the all up wet
> weight to be heavier than Lance advertises because
> that is usual for engine builders, but I actually came
> out a few pounds lighter. If you bought his normally
> asperated engine, you could have it mounted and
> flyable (without cowl painting) in a week. He says 30
> hrs of work. His setup is not built to the turbo
> model, last I saw, and that takes additional time for
> some modifications.
>
> I suppose you have already prepaid SS for the engine?
>
> Kurt S.
>
> --- Arthur Nation <anation@w-link.net> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Kurt,
> > Yes the engine mount is the correct version, I
> > think!! Apparently the welding
> > process leaves the mounting holes out of alignment.
> > I really don't understand
> > this as a jig is used. Perhaps the stresses from
> > welding distort the frame
> > after cooling and release from the jig.
> > The firewall holes are near perfect.
> > I am really thinking of something besides the 912S
> > that I have ordered, but
> > don't expect to get.
> > How many hrs do you have on yours and do you find
> > your plane 'nose-heavy' as one other person
> > commented?
> > Arthur
>
> __________________________________
> http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
>
>
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: Wwillyard@aol.com
In a message dated 2/14/2004 8:25:17 PM Eastern Standard Time,
lcfitt@inreach.com writes:
When I was building SS sent out a service letter on this. The initial
builders manual said to adjust the dihedral so the wings would be even when
folded. I guess someone challenged them on this. Anyway, this was changed
to make the dihedral correct when extended, but due to weldment
inaccuracies, it resulted in one wing high when in the folded position..
Do not archive
Being at least one of those who presented this challenge, it is nice to know
that builder input and questions are taken into consideration.
William Willyard
Classic IV
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: | engine mount mis-alignment |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Noel & Yoshie Simmons" <noel@blueskyaviation.net>
Kurt,
I have installed 5 or so NSI engines and I do the same thing you did and
they are but just a giggle. Other mounts I have done are just the same as
Arthur is explaining, and John is right sometimes it takes two people, one
to really grunt and the other to cuss.
Noel
If you think SS is bad try an AVID!
-----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: engine mount mis-alignment
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader
<smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
Now I feel bad. My NSI engine came ready on the mount
and two of us hung it on the plane while holding it up
ourselves. Everything slipped together with nar more
than a jiggle. Hung it before covering the plane,
then removed it and rehung it after covering.
Am I just lucky, or did I do it wrong? Did the rest
of you NSI users have any trouble? I thought it was
just SS that had trouble until now.
Kurt S.
--- JMCBEAN <JDMCBEAN@cableone.net> wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "JMCBEAN"
> <JDMCBEAN@cableone.net>
>
> Arthur,
> I was waiting for some other responses
> before I piped in. I have installed
> several engines in aircraft (Cessna, Kitfox, Mooney,
> Piper, etc..) and I do
> not believe I have ever had one engine mount that
> didn't require the list of
> cuss words to go along with it.
__________________________________
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
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: | CLEM--BRS Chute Installation |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Barry Huston" <barryehuston@earthlink.net>
Clem and ALL
You mentioned your BRS chute.
I'm in the process of installing a BRS with an upward
discharge.
Interested in harness rigging and turtle deck and roof
attachment thoughts-- pictures ( off list ) -- etc.
Should rivets be removed and replaced with fewer
something to ensure rip away??
Thanks -- Barry ---Model IV - 1200 912
----- Original Message -----
From: "Clem Nichols" <cnichols@scrtc.com>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: engine mount mis-alignment
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Clem Nichols" <cnichols@scrtc.com>
>
> Kurt:
>
> I can identify with your comment regarding not enough aft stick on
landing.
> (I have the NSI EA-81 setup with battery and BRS chute mounted aft of the
> CG, but I still seem a little nose-heavy) Can you elaborate on the
elevator
> gap seal? Can it be purchased or is it necessary to fabricate? Thanks
>
> Clem Nichols
> Do Not Archive
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "kurt schrader" <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
> To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: engine mount mis-alignment
>
>
> > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader
> <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
> >
> > Arthur,
> >
> > Do not archive.
> >
> > I am no welder, but I would be embarrassed if I welded
> > a mount and let it spring that far out coming off the
> > jig. I wonder if the mounts were stress relieved?
> >
> > If I were President of SS, I would ask - no beg John
> > King to do my quality assurance program and be shop
> > steward. When we get tired of drill sgt John kicking
> > our be-hinds for sloppy work, we'd send him off on
> > another well organized gaggle to Alaska, etc to sell
> > the KitFox dream. Bet there'd be none of this "It
> > don't fit" stuff going out the door fer sure! Have
> > you all seen his work? We'd have two more space
> > shuttles now if John were in charge there.
> >
> > There would be some others on this list I would beg to
> > work at SS too. In just a few years of work and
> > reputation building, NASA would be coming to SS for
> > their next Rover. The smartest thing I could do as SS
> > president is listen to you guys on this list and blast
> > ahead of the competition with your ideas.
> >
> > Well, in my dreams anyway.
> >
> > I do believe that the NSI mounts are consistantly
> > better than you are getting from SS. Lance farms a
> > lot of work out after he has designed it, but he is
> > very careful about their quality. The NSI's cowling
> > is also better. NSI primarily makes parts for Boeing
> > and other serious companies so NSI quality is standard
> > practice for them.
> >
> > I have just begun to do my test flying with my NSI
> > engine. There are 10.2 hrs total with about 3 of them
> > flying hrs. With just me and partial tanks, I am very
> > close to the forward CG limit. That is where I like
> > it because it gives me the most cargo flexability. It
> > also make the plane handle very well, but I will
> > install the elevator gap seal to give me a little more
> > aft stick for landing. Haven't done any flap landings
> > yet, but I think I will run out of aft stick unless I
> > pretrim a little more nose up for slow flight. There
> > is no stick left to "plant it" on landing otherwise.
> > But that is near empty and no gap seals.
> >
> > Though the Soob is heavier than the Rotax, it was
> > lighter than I thought. I expected the all up wet
> > weight to be heavier than Lance advertises because
> > that is usual for engine builders, but I actually came
> > out a few pounds lighter. If you bought his normally
> > asperated engine, you could have it mounted and
> > flyable (without cowl painting) in a week. He says 30
> > hrs of work. His setup is not built to the turbo
> > model, last I saw, and that takes additional time for
> > some modifications.
> >
> > I suppose you have already prepaid SS for the engine?
> >
> > Kurt S.
> >
> > --- Arthur Nation <anation@w-link.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Kurt,
> > > Yes the engine mount is the correct version, I
> > > think!! Apparently the welding
> > > process leaves the mounting holes out of alignment.
> > > I really don't understand
> > > this as a jig is used. Perhaps the stresses from
> > > welding distort the frame
> > > after cooling and release from the jig.
> > > The firewall holes are near perfect.
> > > I am really thinking of something besides the 912S
> > > that I have ordered, but
> > > don't expect to get.
> > > How many hrs do you have on yours and do you find
> > > your plane 'nose-heavy' as one other person
> > > commented?
> > > Arthur
> >
> > __________________________________
> > http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
> >
> >
>
>
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Back on the list |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Marc Arseneault" <northernultralights@hotmail.com>
Hello Everyone,
After a few months of being off the list, I have re-joined. For those of you who
don't know me I have a Model IV with a 582 that I purchased almost 3 years ago.
I have done extensive work on it and finally got it back in the air last September.
I flew it until the end of November and after finally getting the hang
of it and landing by myself, I parked it for the winter. I was born and raised
in Sudbury, Ontario Canada where mining is our main industry. The weather
is presently sunny at -25 C but the nice weather is just around the corner asMarch
is the nicest month out of the year to fly and that is when I plan on putting
my plane back up, going soloand finishing my training. I will fly on wheels
this summer from a 2300 foot grass strip that I have rented the property and
plan on going on floats next year. I really miss flying and can't wait! Gary
was nice enough to take me flying a couple of weeks ago and give me
some stick time,but that was just a tease. In Sudbury weare 5 Kitfox owners and
a good buddy of mine is presently building a Lite Square with a 912S. I can't
wait for the day he gets it done so Pete, Gary and I can all go flying/fishing.I
look forward in communicating and hopefully some day meeting some of you
at Oshkoshas wehope to go this year.
<EM>Best Regards,
Marc Arseneault
Ontario Canada
</EM>
Protect your PC - Click here for McAfee.com VirusScan Online
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: "Jim Chuk" <thesupe@hotmail.com>
Hi all. I've been going over my new project and am looking for some parts for
it. Perhaps one of you has converted from a 582 to something else and no longer
needs the parts I'm missing. In particular, I need an oil tank for the oil
injection system, a rear pilots side motor mount for the 582, and a battery
box cover. I probably need other parts as well, but these are the ones that come
to mind at the moment. I haven't really worked on it at all yet, It's been
cold as can be here (-30 this morning). I did go meet Howard Firm and see his
plane. He lives about 25 miles from me. He is going to have a great plane
in the air in not very long. Hope I didn't stay to long, Howard, but I loose
track of time when I'm around airplanes. Thanks, Jim
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: engine mount mis-alignment |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Arthur Nation <anation@w-link.net>
On Sunday 15 February 2004 06:54, Grant Fluent wrote:
do not archive
Grant,
To address the engine delivery problem, please search your e-mails for 'S7
parts' in late Nov-early Dec.
Arthur
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Grant Fluent <gjfpilot@yahoo.com>
>
> Arthur,
> I also had to tweak my engine mount a little to get
> it to fit (Classic IV 912S). Two of the five mounting
> points were off about 1/4".
> As for the 912S, IMHO I would stay with your
> original plan. If you decide on a different engine,
> you'd still have to get your money back from Skystar.
> I don't understand why they are having trouble
> delivering an engine that is already paid for? When I
> heard about your problem and some others, I did not
> have an engine and did some checking with the Rotax
> service centers to see if getting an engine was a
> problem. All of them either had the 912S in stock or
> could get one in about a week or two. I purchased my
> 912S from Leading Edge Air Foils in Wisconsin. It came
> in about a week.
> Grant Fluent
> Newcastle, NE
> Classic IV 912S
>
> --- Arthur Nation <anation@w-link.net> wrote:
> > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Arthur Nation
> > <anation@w-link.net>
> >
> > On Friday 13 February 2004 22:58, kurt schrader
> > wrote:
> >
> > Hi Kurt,
> > Yes the engine mount is the correct version, I
> > think!! Apparently the welding
> > process leaves the mounting holes out of alignment.
> > I really don't understand
> > this as a jig is used. Perhaps the stresses from
> > welding distort the frame
> > after cooling and release from the jig.
> > The firewall holes are near perfect.
> > I am really thinking of something besides the 912S
> > that I have ordered, but
> > don't expect to get.
> > How many hrs do you have on yours and do you find
> > your plane 'nose-heavy' as
> > one other person commented?
> > Arthur
> >
> > > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader
> > > <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
> > >
> > > Arthur,
> > >
> > > I wonder if they just sent an engine mount for the
> > > wrong series plane? Is it for the -7 for sure?
> >
> > Does
> >
> > > the firewall match the plane and it is only the
> >
> > mount
> >
> > > that is off? Or does nothing match?
> > >
> > > 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
>
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: Kitfox 3 parts |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Dcecil3@aol.com
I have a 582 mount but it's the old one that mounts from the bottom it's on
Ebay right now. I do have the Injection bottle and bracket but didn't really
think about selling it but will OBO
Best David Cecil
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: | Kitfox Maintenance |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "JMCBEAN" <JDMCBEAN@cableone.net>
Clem,
This is my understanding... and it does get very confusing.
Your aircraft would fall into the category of Experimental - Light Sport
Aircraft. For this aircraft category that FAA is establishing the second
new repairman certificate-repairman certificate (light-sport aircraft) with
an inspection rating. This repairman certificate would allow the owner of an
experimental light-sport aircraft to perform a condition inspection on his
or her own aircraft consistent with the manufacturer's instructions for
continued airworthiness. This privilege could not be extended to aircraft
not owned and operated by the holder of the repairman certificate. An
applicant for a repairman certificate (light-sport aircraft) with an
inspection rating would be required to complete a 16-hour training course
acceptable to the FAA on the inspection requirements of the particular make
and model intended to be inspected.
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 Clem Nichols
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Kitfox Maintenance
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Clem Nichols" <cnichols@scrtc.com>
John:
Indeed you had put out the original information. That's what led to my
question which hasn't been answered. Can a plane which was originally
registered as an amateur-built experimental be somehow reclassified as a
sport plane and therefore come under the new regs which would allow me, with
the 16 hours of training, to do my own annual inspection? Will this 16-hr
training rule only apply to factory-built sport planes or will it also
apply to amateur-built sport planes? Will all amateur built planes continue
to be registered as experimentals even if they fall under the parameters of
a light sport plane? Do you see where I'm coming from? I know I can do the
maintenance on my Model IV. What I'm wondering is will I, when Sport Plane
goes into effect and with the 16 hours training, be able to do my own
annual, even though I didn't build the plane? Your patience and forbearance
with my ignorance is appreciated.
Clem Nichols
----- Original Message -----
From: "JMCBEAN" <JDMCBEAN@cableone.net>
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Kitfox Maintenance
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "JMCBEAN" <JDMCBEAN@cableone.net>
>
> Thought I had put this out once.....
>
> If I bought the aircraft used, I can still do the maintenance ?
>
> Assuming the aircraft you buy is certificated in the experimental
> light-sport aircraft category you can perform the maintenance consistent
> with the manufacturers continuing airworthiness instructions and any
> restrictions in the operating limitations section of the airworthiness
> certificate without specific maintenance training. In order to perform the
> 12-month condition inspection and approve the aircraft for return to
> service, you would need to attend the 16-hour inspection training course
and
> obtain an FAA repairman certificate (light-sport aircraft) with inspection
> privileges.
>
> However, if the aircraft you buy is certificated as an amateur-built
> experimental aircraft then you can perform maintenance on the aircraft but
> cannot approve the aircraft for return to service after a 12-month
condition
> inspection. This is because you are not eligible for the repairman
> certificate under 65.104 on account of the fact that you were not the
> original builder of the aircraft.
>
> Also... try this link http://www.sportpilot.org/nprm/aircraft_maint.html
>
>
> 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 Don Pearsall
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Kitfox Maintenance
>
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Don Pearsall"
<donpearsall@comcast.net>
>
> Clem, maybe John McBean will chime in, as he is the Sport Pilot expert as
he
> worked closely with Ed Downs. As I understand it, if you take a
maintenance
> class, you will be able to do work and annual your Model IV yourself.
> Depending on weight, your Model IV will be able to classify as a sport
> plane.
>
> Don Pearsall
> Seattle, WA
>
>
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: | Re: Kitfox 3 parts |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Grant Fluent <gjfpilot@yahoo.com>
Hi Jim,
I have a brand new battery box and battery from my
912 firewall forward kit that I'm not going to use.
The battery box is Skystar #49029 and the battery
(Sterling motorcycle #CB16B-A) is #46025. Let me know
if these would work for you.
Grant Fluent
Newcastle, NE
Classic IV 912S
--- Jim Chuk <thesupe@hotmail.com> wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Jim Chuk"
> <thesupe@hotmail.com>
>
> Hi all. I've been going over my new project and am
> looking for some parts for it. Perhaps one of you
> has converted from a 582 to something else and no
> longer needs the parts I'm missing. In particular,
> I need an oil tank for the oil injection system, a
> rear pilots side motor mount for the 582, and a
> battery box cover. I probably need other parts as
> well, but these are the ones that come to mind at
> the moment. I haven't really worked on it at all
> yet, It's been cold as can be here (-30 this
> morning). I did go meet Howard Firm and see his
> plane. He lives about 25 miles from me. He is
> going to have a great plane in the air in not very
> long. Hope I didn't stay to long, Howard, but I
> loose track of time when I'm around airplanes.
> Thanks, Jim
>
>
>
> 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 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 |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Northern Ultralights" <Northernultralights@hotmail.com>
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: | Re: engine mount mis-alignment |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Bob Unternaehrer" <shilocom@c-magic.com>
<<<I don't understand why they are having trouble
delivering an engine that is already paid for?>>>>
MONEY'S Gone!!!!!!!
----- Original Message -----
From: "Grant Fluent" <gjfpilot@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: engine mount mis-alignment
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Grant Fluent <gjfpilot@yahoo.com>
>
> Arthur,
> I also had to tweak my engine mount a little to get
> it to fit (Classic IV 912S). Two of the five mounting
> points were off about 1/4".
> As for the 912S, IMHO I would stay with your
> original plan. If you decide on a different engine,
> you'd still have to get your money back from Skystar.
> I don't understand why they are having trouble
> delivering an engine that is already paid for? When I
> heard about your problem and some others, I did not
> have an engine and did some checking with the Rotax
> service centers to see if getting an engine was a
> problem. All of them either had the 912S in stock or
> could get one in about a week or two. I purchased my
> 912S from Leading Edge Air Foils in Wisconsin. It came
> in about a week.
> Grant Fluent
> Newcastle, NE
> Classic IV 912S
>
>
> --- Arthur Nation <anation@w-link.net> wrote:
> > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Arthur Nation
> > <anation@w-link.net>
> >
> > On Friday 13 February 2004 22:58, kurt schrader
> > wrote:
> >
> > Hi Kurt,
> > Yes the engine mount is the correct version, I
> > think!! Apparently the welding
> > process leaves the mounting holes out of alignment.
> > I really don't understand
> > this as a jig is used. Perhaps the stresses from
> > welding distort the frame
> > after cooling and release from the jig.
> > The firewall holes are near perfect.
> > I am really thinking of something besides the 912S
> > that I have ordered, but
> > don't expect to get.
> > How many hrs do you have on yours and do you find
> > your plane 'nose-heavy' as
> > one other person commented?
> > Arthur
> >
> >
> > > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader
> > > <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
> > >
> > > Arthur,
> > >
> > > I wonder if they just sent an engine mount for the
> > > wrong series plane? Is it for the -7 for sure?
> > Does
> > > the firewall match the plane and it is only the
> > mount
> > > that is off? Or does nothing match?
> > >
> > > 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
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> ---
>
>
---
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: CLEM--BRS Chute Installation |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
Hi Barry,
Do they have the new rockets for the larger chutes?
When I was building mine, they ahd to redesign the
rockets due to the Air Florida accident and none were
available. I could have gotten a used on only if I
picked it up myself and drove home. They became
nontransportable, so I didn't buy the BRS chute.
Second point. BRS said to mount the chute to come out
the right side, then pull up to the cockpit top. This
was due to the chance that a wing might fold back over
the verticle launch chute preventing it from
deploying. Was that idea changed?
Kurt S.
__________________________________
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
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: | engine mount mis-alignment |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
OK Noel,
It is Sunday and I am thankful for NSI too.
Kurt S.
--- Noel & Yoshie Simmons <noel@blueskyaviation.net>
wrote:
>
> Kurt,
>
> I have installed 5 or so NSI engines and I do the
> same thing you did and
> they are but just a giggle. Other mounts I have
> done are just the same as
> Arthur is explaining, and John is right sometimes it
> takes two people, one
> to really grunt and the other to cuss.
>
> Noel
>
> If you think SS is bad try an AVID!
__________________________________
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
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 |
|
| Subject: | Kitfox Maintenance |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Randy Daughenbaugh" <rjdaugh@rapidnet.com>
Clem,
I had a DAR tell me a few weeks ago that I should register my plane as an
experimental because if my health changes and I can't get a physical, I can
always change the plane to sport plane.
I don't know anything more, so treat this as a rumor.
Randy - Series 5/7
.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Clem Nichols
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Kitfox Maintenance
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Clem Nichols" <cnichols@scrtc.com>
John:
Indeed you had put out the original information. That's what led to my
question which hasn't been answered. Can a plane which was originally
registered as an amateur-built experimental be somehow reclassified as a
sport plane and therefore come under the new regs which would allow me, with
the 16 hours of training, to do my own annual inspection? Will this 16-hr
training rule only apply to factory-built sport planes or will it also
apply to amateur-built sport planes? Will all amateur built planes continue
to be registered as experimentals even if they fall under the parameters of
a light sport plane? Do you see where I'm coming from? I know I can do the
maintenance on my Model IV. What I'm wondering is will I, when Sport Plane
goes into effect and with the 16 hours training, be able to do my own
annual, even though I didn't build the plane? Your patience and forbearance
with my ignorance is appreciated.
Clem Nichols
----- Original Message -----
From: "JMCBEAN" <JDMCBEAN@cableone.net>
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Kitfox Maintenance
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "JMCBEAN" <JDMCBEAN@cableone.net>
>
> Thought I had put this out once.....
>
> If I bought the aircraft used, I can still do the maintenance ?
>
> Assuming the aircraft you buy is certificated in the experimental
> light-sport aircraft category you can perform the maintenance consistent
> with the manufacturers continuing airworthiness instructions and any
> restrictions in the operating limitations section of the airworthiness
> certificate without specific maintenance training. In order to perform the
> 12-month condition inspection and approve the aircraft for return to
> service, you would need to attend the 16-hour inspection training course
and
> obtain an FAA repairman certificate (light-sport aircraft) with inspection
> privileges.
>
> However, if the aircraft you buy is certificated as an amateur-built
> experimental aircraft then you can perform maintenance on the aircraft but
> cannot approve the aircraft for return to service after a 12-month
condition
> inspection. This is because you are not eligible for the repairman
> certificate under 65.104 on account of the fact that you were not the
> original builder of the aircraft.
>
> Also... try this link http://www.sportpilot.org/nprm/aircraft_maint.html
>
>
> 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 Don Pearsall
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Kitfox Maintenance
>
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Don Pearsall"
<donpearsall@comcast.net>
>
> Clem, maybe John McBean will chime in, as he is the Sport Pilot expert as
he
> worked closely with Ed Downs. As I understand it, if you take a
maintenance
> class, you will be able to do work and annual your Model IV yourself.
> Depending on weight, your Model IV will be able to classify as a sport
> plane.
>
> Don Pearsall
> Seattle, WA
>
>
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 |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
Hi Clem,
We have talked several times here in the past about
gap seals so there is plenty of stuff in the archives
to expand upon what I remember now. I understand that
the gap seal is worth about 1 extra inch of stick
travel. After installation, you can have the same
stick force as before when you were all the way back,
but now still have an inch to go.
Basically, a number of methods have been used to seal
the gap. I think you can still buy one from Blue Sky,
if I remember correctly. Right Noel? I just don't
see it in the cataloge now. Quick and easy solution.
http://www.blueskyaviation.net/home.html
Another way is to use "SkiSaver Tape".
Here is one site that has it.
http://www.tognar.com/bags.html
You simply take two pieces of tape and stick one over
the other so that the sticky sides are together, but
offset by maybe half. Now you have one sticky side up
and the other down. You run this thru the slot
between the elevator and stab and stick one side to
the top of the stab and the other side to the bottom
of the elevator. But first!!! Pull the elevator all
the way up before you stick that side. That allows
full throw when it is done. The tape forms a
sidewards "S" in the gap.
You can make your own out of foam or rubber glued in
place.
They all work, but I worry about stuff getting stuck
in the gap with some of these solutions, so if you
really want to do it right, try this site.
http://www.wingsandwheels.com/page28.htm
Hope that helps
Kurt S.
__________________________________
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
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: | Kitfox Maintenance |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: dwight purdy <dpurdy@comteck.com>
It is my understanding the FAA does not want the mess of changing
certification. The same would apply to standard certified aircraft.
Dwight
At 08:10 PM 2/14/2004 -0800, you wrote:
>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Don Pearsall" <donpearsall@comcast.net>
>
>Clem, maybe John McBean will chime in, as he is the Sport Pilot expert as he
>worked closely with Ed Downs. As I understand it, if you take a maintenance
>class, you will be able to do work and annual your Model IV yourself.
>Depending on weight, your Model IV will be able to classify as a sport
>plane.
>
>Don Pearsall
>Seattle, WA
>
>
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: "John E. King " <kingjohn@erols.com>
kurt schrader wrote:
>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
>
>
>When we get tired of drill sgt John kicking
>our be-hinds for sloppy work, we'd send him off on
>another well organized gaggle to Alaska, etc to sell
>the KitFox dream.
>
Kurt,
I get the feeling that you might be ready to take your flying machine on
a nice long flying adventure. I have been to Alaska twice and as far
north as one can go in the USA. However, I have not given up on the
Bahamas trip. If I can find at least two other aircraft of any make and
model that want to make the trip, I am out of here. I 'm sick and tired
of the cold weather we are now having in Virginia and the warmer weather
in the Bahamas looks very inviting. Why not give that NSI you fly
behind a real test and lets all head south for some real fun.
--
John King
Warrenton, VA
DO NOT ARCHIVE
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 |
|
| Subject: | REPLY 1 ---BRS Chute Installation |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Barry Huston" <barryehuston@earthlink.net>
Kurt
This unit is for 1200 lbs so believe rocket is OK .
This is the first time I've heard about side discharge,
but heard about the folding wing issue with regard to
the downward discharge and that was in the installation
package.
I went the upward discharge because I'm installing
floats.
This side discharge is of interest if there is any installation
info available.
Thanks ---- Barry
----- Original Message -----
From: "kurt schrader" <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: CLEM--BRS Chute Installation
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader
<smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
>
> Hi Barry,
>
> Do they have the new rockets for the larger chutes?
> When I was building mine, they ahd to redesign the
> rockets due to the Air Florida accident and none were
> available. I could have gotten a used on only if I
> picked it up myself and drove home. They became
> nontransportable, so I didn't buy the BRS chute.
>
> Second point. BRS said to mount the chute to come out
> the right side, then pull up to the cockpit top. This
> was due to the chance that a wing might fold back over
> the verticle launch chute preventing it from
> deploying. Was that idea changed?
>
> Kurt S.
>
> __________________________________
> http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
>
>
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: | Fitting Wings Model IV Speedster |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Jimmie Blackwell" <jablackwell@ev1.net>
I am approaching the most dreaded part of building so far, wing rigging. My
wings are quick builds and all appears well except bottom false ribs protruding
below the rib caps, which I have fixed.
Wondering if any of you have any advice or experience beyond the instructions contained
in the Skystar manual and Service letter 27B pertaining to setting dihedral,
sweep and twist.
My kit and manual are 1994 vintage.
Would appreciate any and all of your thoughts and advice.
Thank you.
Jimmie
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: engine mount mis-alignment |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Jeff Smathers <jsmathers@cybcon.com>
Hi All,
I am waiting for the FAA to comeout in 2 weeks and inspect my Kitfox 5
Outback. I also have the NSI EA-81 and CAP 140 (display now working),
and I have been taxi testing my airplane today, and really enjoying the handling
of the aircraft and the reponse of the NSI engine.
Speaking of bolt - up with the engine and airframe, I thought since they are
aircraft parts they all go together without alignment problems. Mine certainly
did!
My empty weight BTW is Rt 411 lbs. / Lt 391 lbs / Tail 51 lbs. (853 total)
the tail is a bit heavy cause I put a 26 lb. Genesis battery back there...!
my Empty Wt. CG is at 12.73 (Limits 9.96 - 14.75 )
Jeff Smathers Molalla, OR.
kurt schrader wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
>
> Arthur,
>
> Do not archive.
>
> I am no welder, but I would be embarrassed if I welded
> a mount and let it spring that far out coming off the
> jig. I wonder if the mounts were stress relieved?
>
> If I were President of SS, I would ask - no beg John
> King to do my quality assurance program and be shop
> steward. When we get tired of drill sgt John kicking
> our be-hinds for sloppy work, we'd send him off on
> another well organized gaggle to Alaska, etc to sell
> the KitFox dream. Bet there'd be none of this "It
> don't fit" stuff going out the door fer sure! Have
> you all seen his work? We'd have two more space
> shuttles now if John were in charge there.
>
> There would be some others on this list I would beg to
> work at SS too. In just a few years of work and
> reputation building, NASA would be coming to SS for
> their next Rover. The smartest thing I could do as SS
> president is listen to you guys on this list and blast
> ahead of the competition with your ideas.
>
> Well, in my dreams anyway.
>
> I do believe that the NSI mounts are consistantly
> better than you are getting from SS. Lance farms a
> lot of work out after he has designed it, but he is
> very careful about their quality. The NSI's cowling
> is also better. NSI primarily makes parts for Boeing
> and other serious companies so NSI quality is standard
> practice for them.
>
> I have just begun to do my test flying with my NSI
> engine. There are 10.2 hrs total with about 3 of them
> flying hrs. With just me and partial tanks, I am very
> close to the forward CG limit. That is where I like
> it because it gives me the most cargo flexability. It
> also make the plane handle very well, but I will
> install the elevator gap seal to give me a little more
> aft stick for landing. Haven't done any flap landings
> yet, but I think I will run out of aft stick unless I
> pretrim a little more nose up for slow flight. There
> is no stick left to "plant it" on landing otherwise.
> But that is near empty and no gap seals.
>
> Though the Soob is heavier than the Rotax, it was
> lighter than I thought. I expected the all up wet
> weight to be heavier than Lance advertises because
> that is usual for engine builders, but I actually came
> out a few pounds lighter. If you bought his normally
> asperated engine, you could have it mounted and
> flyable (without cowl painting) in a week. He says 30
> hrs of work. His setup is not built to the turbo
> model, last I saw, and that takes additional time for
> some modifications.
>
> I suppose you have already prepaid SS for the engine?
>
> Kurt S.
>
> --- Arthur Nation <anation@w-link.net> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Kurt,
> > Yes the engine mount is the correct version, I
> > think!! Apparently the welding
> > process leaves the mounting holes out of alignment.
> > I really don't understand
> > this as a jig is used. Perhaps the stresses from
> > welding distort the frame
> > after cooling and release from the jig.
> > The firewall holes are near perfect.
> > I am really thinking of something besides the 912S
> > that I have ordered, but
> > don't expect to get.
> > How many hrs do you have on yours and do you find
> > your plane 'nose-heavy' as one other person
> > commented?
> > Arthur
>
> __________________________________
> http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
>
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: engine mount mis-alignment |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
Jeff,
That sounds great! When can we expect pictures in the
completion section of SportFlight?
I wonder why your front end is lighter than mine? I
took several pounds off the NSI firewall forward
package. Only put in one set of brakes too. Drilled
holes in the brake pedals... My instrument panel is
heavy, but it is so close to the CG. Almost all my
add ons are weight aft and I am still at the forward
limit. You must have done something lighter and
better. :-)
But I would suggest moving that battery up later to
allow yourself more aft CG available so you can carry
a bigger load. Hard to move now I know, but it is
where you have the most CG control. Test flying will
tell if it is needed.
Kurt S.
--- Jeff Smathers <jsmathers@cybcon.com> wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Jeff Smathers
> <jsmathers@cybcon.com>
>
> Hi All,
>
> I am waiting for the FAA to comeout in 2 weeks and
> inspect my Kitfox 5
> Outback. I also have the NSI EA-81 and CAP 140
> (display now working),
> and I have been taxi testing my airplane today, and
> really enjoying the handling
> of the aircraft and the reponse of the NSI engine.
>
> Speaking of bolt - up with the engine and airframe,
> I thought since they are
> aircraft parts they all go together without
> alignment problems. Mine certainly
> did!
>
> My empty weight BTW is Rt 411 lbs. / Lt 391 lbs /
> Tail 51 lbs. (853 total)
> the tail is a bit heavy cause I put a 26 lb. Genesis
> battery back there...!
> my Empty Wt. CG is at 12.73 (Limits 9.96 -
> 14.75 )
>
> Jeff Smathers Molalla, OR.
__________________________________
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: REPLY 1 ---BRS Chute Installation |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
OK Barry,
That makes a difference. When I talked to them, they
had your size rocket redesigned, but not mine.
They were the ones who gave me the side firing
instructions and explained what it was for. It was
mounted right behind the baggage area and fired right
thru the side fabric. The straps had to be put in
under the side fabric before covering and up over the
right side turtle deck mounts to the wing attachments.
When you fired the rocket, you would need a new cover
job on the right side, a new turtle deck, a new canopy
and clean underware, but you would land on the wheels.
Where did you get the verticle mount plans?
Kurt S.
--- Barry Huston <barryehuston@earthlink.net> wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Barry Huston"
> <barryehuston@earthlink.net>
>
> Kurt
>
> This unit is for 1200 lbs so believe rocket is OK .
>
> This is the first time I've heard about side
> discharge,
> but heard about the folding wing issue with regard
> to the downward discharge and that was in the
> installation package.
>
> I went the upward discharge because I'm installing
> floats.
>
> This side discharge is of interest if there is any
> installation
> info available.
>
> Thanks ---- Barry
__________________________________
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
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! --
|