Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:42 AM - Re: Re: EGT Cold Joint Calibration point (Westberg types). (torgemor)
2. 03:01 AM - Re: 2-blade vs. 3-blade (Jim Burke)
3. 04:40 AM - Re: Hi - Brand New series 5 owner - looking for a little advice : (Clifford Begnaud)
4. 04:48 AM - Re: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 (michel)
5. 05:26 AM - Re: Hi - Brand New series 5 owner - looking for a little advice : (Dee Young)
6. 05:58 AM - Re: 2-blade vs. 3-blade (W Duke)
7. 06:20 AM - Re: Hi - Brand New series 5 owner - looking for a little (Tom Jones)
8. 06:21 AM - Re: 2-blade vs. 3-blade (Gary Algate)
9. 06:35 AM - Re: Re: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 (DPREMGOOD@aol.com)
10. 06:37 AM - Re: 2-blade vs. 3-blade (michel)
11. 06:48 AM - Re: 2-blade vs. 3-blade (Gary Algate)
12. 07:04 AM - Re: 2-blade vs. 3-blade (michel)
13. 07:08 AM - Re: 2-blade vs. 3-blade (Gary Algate)
14. 07:09 AM - Re: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 (Dave & Wendy Grosvenor)
15. 07:24 AM - Re: Thank you (Kerry Skyring)
16. 07:51 AM - looking for a little advice : (hausding, sid)
17. 07:51 AM - Re: Hi - Brand New series 5 owner - looking for a (Paul)
18. 07:51 AM - Re: 912S Starter Issue (Paul)
19. 07:57 AM - Coolant temperature sensor and EIS (Randy Daughenbaugh)
20. 07:57 AM - CONDUCTIVE GREASE (Randy Daughenbaugh)
21. 08:12 AM - Re: Hi - Brand New series 5 owner - looking for a little advice : (Lowell Fitt)
22. 08:52 AM - Re: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 ()
23. 09:05 AM - Re: CONDUCTIVE GREASE (Marc Arseneault)
24. 09:09 AM - Re: CONDUCTIVE GREASE ()
25. 10:05 AM - Re: Coolant temperature sensor and EIS (Wwillyard@aol.com)
26. 11:51 AM - Re: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 (JMCBEAN)
27. 11:54 AM - Re: 2-blade vs. 3-blade (JMCBEAN)
28. 11:57 AM - Re: 2-blade vs. 3-blade (Jim Burke)
29. 12:25 PM - Re: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 (Clifford Begnaud)
30. 12:28 PM - Re: 2-blade vs. 3-blade (Gary Algate)
31. 12:36 PM - Re: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 (Michel Verheughe)
32. 12:40 PM - Re: 2-blade vs. 3-blade (Gary Algate)
33. 12:43 PM - Re: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 (Gary Algate)
34. 01:09 PM - What is that black powder and what do I do about it??` (Dave Savener)
35. 01:26 PM - Re: What is that black powder and what do I do about it??` (Tom Jones)
36. 01:38 PM - Re: What is that black powder and what do I do about it??` (Michel Verheughe)
37. 01:51 PM - European Kitfoxes WAS: Thank you (Michel Verheughe)
38. 02:51 PM - Re: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 ()
39. 03:08 PM - Cowling Cover (Scott McClintock)
40. 04:02 PM - Re: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 (Randy Daughenbaugh)
41. 04:02 PM - Re: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 (u2drvr@dslextreme.com)
42. 04:29 PM - Re: Hi - Brand New series 5 owner - looking for a little advice : (Bruce Lina)
43. 05:02 PM - Re: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 (Clifford Begnaud)
44. 06:00 PM - Re: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 (Vic Jacko)
45. 06:36 PM - Re: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 (Wwillyard@aol.com)
46. 06:48 PM - Re: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 (JMCBEAN)
47. 06:55 PM - Re: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 (JMCBEAN)
48. 07:01 PM - Re: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 (Brian Peck)
49. 07:04 PM - Re: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 (JMCBEAN)
50. 07:50 PM - Re: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 (JMCBEAN)
51. 08:47 PM - Re: Hi - Brand New series 5 owner - looking for a little advice : (davestapa@juno.com)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
kitfox-list <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
| Subject: | Re: EGT Cold Joint Calibration point (Westberg types). |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: torgemor <torgemor@online.no>
Of course, you are right. Temp below 70, indicator always indicate a to high
reading.
(maybe to much of this EGT stuff).
Thanks for correcting me.
Torgeir.
>===== Original Message From dwight purdy <dpurdy@comteck.com> (Westberg
types). =====
>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: dwight purdy <dpurdy@comteck.com>
(Westberg types).
>
>That is not the way I understand it. Try: True EGT temp.= Indicator
>reading - (70-30) = 1160
>
> Think of it as Indicated plus or minus the difference. Plus if it is
>over 70 at cold junction,minus if below 70.
>
> dwight
>
>
>At 01:21 AM 2/19/2004 +0100, you wrote:
>>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Torgeir Mortensen <torgemor@online.no>
>>
>>Hi Folks,
>>
>>
>>I've made an ERROR about the definition Westberg is using for the
>>calibration points they are using.
>>
>>Here it's:
>>
>> >So, remember; the calibration temperature, is the "cold junction"
>> >surrounding temperature that give the most accurate EGT temperature
>> >indicated-, but you most correct for the cold junction temperature.
>>
>>For a "normal" system the above is true, but It's not - for the Westberg
>>70 deg. calibrated version.
>>
>>When Westberg is talklking about CALIBRATION points, (32 and 70) deg.
>>F., this mean, they've MOVED the "cold junction point"! So, actually
>>they are using TWO DIFFERENT cold junction references.
>>
>>Note:
>>
>>If you make a test of your "Westberg 70 deg. F." calibrated indicator,
>>the reading will be 38 deg.F. higher than the values shown in the
>>"temperature/voltage tables" for iron/constantan thermocouples.
>>
>>
>>So, if you have the standard Westberg EGT indicator without a "S" index
>>after the type no., the correction will be:
>>
>>True EGT temp= Ind.reading - (actual cold junction temp - cold
>>junction cal. temp.)
>>
>>If we put in the numbers, say indicated 1200 deg. F., actual cold
>>junction temp (= cockpit temp.) is 30 deg. F., and finally our cold
>>junction cal. temp. = 70 deg. F.
>>
>>We have:
>>
>>True EGT temp.= (1200 - (30 - 70)) deg. F.= (1200 + 40) deg. F = 1240
>>deg. F.
>>
>>So, the correct formula for calculating "true EGT" is:
>>
>>True EGT temp.= Indicator reading - ( cockpit temp. - 70 deg. F.)
>>
>>
>>Well, sorry for the error.
>>
>>
>>Regards
>>
>>
>>Torgeir.
>>
>>
>
>
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: | Re: 2-blade vs. 3-blade |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Jim Burke <jeburke94je@direcway.com>
I have the same question, I'm thinking about upgrading to a two blade 74"
Powerfin prop. I understand it will improve my performance since I have the
wide round cowling on my Kitfox IV.
James E. Burke
(N94JE)
-------Original Message-------
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: Hi - Brand New series 5 owner - looking for a little |
advice :
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Clifford Begnaud" <shoeless@barefootpilot.com>
Phil,
Congrats on your new plane, you made a wise choice ;-)
You may get the record for the longest distance tow of a kitfox.
You could make cradles for the wings, but you may do just fine leaving them
installed. This would require the wing support kit from skystar. It may be
that the seller already has this or you could roll your own.
The elevator & rudder could probably go inside your tow vehicle. As for the
gear, why not just leave it on. It will do it's job and cushion any shocks
to the airframe. However, don't let the tail of the plane sit on the
tailwheel. There is a horizontally oriented hole, 5/16" diameter, in the
fuselage just forward of the tailwheel spring that can be used to rig up a
support for the tail. Of course if you do remove the main landing gear, this
won't be necessary. I have towed a kitfox over 1700 miles, fully assembled,
you can see a picture here: www.barefootpilot.com
Now for the numbered questions:
1) Man, you really know how to start a fight ;-). If it is a 1550 gross
weight kitfox, then consider the 0-235 or I0-240. My personal preference
would be the 0-235 because it will run on gravity fuel flow alone. For
either engine, consider installing a Lightspeed electronic ignition in place
of one of the mags. The Rotax 912s is also an excellent choice. If your
model 5 is a 1400 # gross, don't even consider anything else but the 912s,
period!
If you are more mechanically inclined, the Subaru is a viable option for a
1550 gross airplane, but my personal preference would be to avoid it. I
realize that there are quite a few successful subaru installations out there
that are operating trouble free (for now), but there are very few that have
accumulated an extended operating record. (meaning several thousand hours) I
also worry about being able to replace proprietary parts in the future. With
the Lycoming, Rotax or Continental, you can count on continued support.
Finally, the Subaru installations seem to come out heavy. I'm sure many of
the Subaru owners will come out in it's defense here. I don't have anything
bad to say about them, I just think there are better choices.
One of the factors to consider is the "type" of power produced. The Lycoming
and Continental will produce gobs of torque at low rpm, allowing you to use
a prop optimized for short field work. The Subaru or Rotax will allow the
use of an in-flight adjustable prop thereby achieving greater fuel economy
and good performance in all regimes of flight. But considering the speed
range of the Kitfox you can use a short field prop on a Lycoming 0-235 and
still reach red line at sea level!
You might even consider a Lycoming 0-320. I would discuss this with an
aeronautical engineer first to see if any beef-up would need to be done to
the plane. But it has been suggested here on the list that it's doable, and
I tend to agree.
2) place travel limiters on the elevator (just outside it's maximum
adjustment range), if the trim motor breaks, the plane will still be
controllable. Also, the rudder pedals are prone to breaking at the junction
of the vertical and horizontal tubes. A piece of 4130 wrapped around this
junction and riveted/glued in place will help. Study the design well before
doing this!!
3) No clue
4)curse you for even suggesting such a horrible thing ;-)
5)see #3
6)Falcon Insurance
Best Regards,
Cliff
Erie, CO
Kitfox 5, Lyc 0-235
Kitfox 5 Rotax 912 xtra
do not archive
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: michel <michel@online.no>
>===== Original Message From kurt schrader <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
>Ok, guys. Another wives tale here
Cool, Kurt! But ... I knew that! :-)
Years ago, when my son flew gliders, I asked once why they took water ballast.
- "But ... it surely makes you sink faster, dear beloved son!" I said, in my
ignorance.
- "Not quite so, old man, it makes us fly faster, and that's how we win the
contest!" answered my precious child.
It took me days and years to understand that - although weight, density, temp,
etc. make changes in the AoA - only one angle gives the best (highest)
lift-to-drag ratio.
Thank you for confirming that, Kurt. Anyway, as a rule, I never listen to old
wifes' tales when it comes to aviation and I have my wife's permission to
write this! :-)
Cheers,
Michel
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: Hi - Brand New series 5 owner - looking for a little |
advice :
Seal-Send-Time: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 05:26:00 -0800
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Dee Young" <henrysfork1@msn.com>
Phil, congratulations on the purchase of the plane. I purchased my Model II in
LA. I hauled it home to East Idaho 1,000 miles. I used an enclosed trailer which
worked very well. There are a lot of small items that can blow away if not
packed carefully. The landing gear was not installed nor was the wings. The fuse.
set on the floor of the trailer on carpet and the wings were strapped together
to the side of the trailor and left standing on the leading edge. I made
it home with no damage, that system worked well for me.
Dee Young
Model II
----- Original Message -----
From: Phil Cowley<mailto:pcowley@virtualrcflight.com>
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com<mailto:kitfox-list@matronics.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2004 11:07 PM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Hi - Brand New series 5 owner - looking for a little advice
:
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Phil Cowley" <pcowley@virtualrcflight.com<mailto:pcowley@virtualrcflight.com>>
Hi all,
First off I want to thank this wonderful group for being here. I just
purchased a series 5 that is just ready to cover and finish with engine
installation (not included) & instruments.
I have a bit of a challenge though, as it is 3,000 miles away (I'm in
san Luis Obispo / Santa cruz, California & its in new york state !.
I'm going to tow it home (and all its assorted parts) with a flatbed
utility trailer, probably 18 or 20' in length and 82" wide with tarps
wrapped around the aircraft.
Any ideas on the best way to pack it on the trailer (it's not currently
covered at all). It's currently got its wings, flight surfaces, and gear
on - I'm planning to take them both off and stow. What about the
elevator - will it come off ?
How much work is it to disassemble it (wings off, gear off, elev off ? )
What should I worry about in regards to towing in this type of a
situation. I read something about a fuse bending on the list - should I
be concerned ?
Any other ideas on what I should do in prep for the trip? Has anyone
else done anything like this ?
Does anyone have Drawings of the series 5 (safari - taildragger). If
someone has cad files that would be great !
A couple non travel related questions too:
1) I'd love to talk to any series 5-7 owners about power plants and
installs. I'm leaning towards the Subaru's and like the Ea81 & 82 as
well as the EJ22. Pro's & con's anyone ?
2) If anyone has recommendations on what should be beefed up or modified
in the build, please let me know. I'm planning on beefing up the
elevator trim per the crash stories online - any thoughts ?
3) Anyone know of a good place to get my instruction in a tailwheel in
California ?
4) Has anyone converted a 5 tail dragger to tri gear ? (Gasp.... I know,
I just have never flown one)
5) Does anyone know of a CFI in California who would teach in a
tailwheel kitfox (either mine or his ?)
6) who do you recommend for insurance ? ideas of rates for 2 low time
pilots ( Do I even want to know ?)
Now for the crazy part - I just purchased this aircraft, and have never
actually seen a series 5 in "Real Life". I'm pretty familiar with the
IV's and have sat in a few. If anyone in California is interested in
showing off their airplane I'd love to take a look and talk to you about
it & your experiences.
Thanks again for everyone's time - sorry for the long email and so many
questions
Happy flying & warm regards !
Phil Cowley
831.588.7596
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com<mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com>
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jeff
Smathers
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com<mailto:kitfox-list@matronics.com>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Trying to find 3-View Drawings of a Kitfox 5
Outback
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Jeff Smathers <jsmathers@cybcon.com<mailto:jsmathers@cybcon.com>>
Thanks Tom,
I have the standard tube gear so that will work out perfect!
Thanks for your help, Jeff Smathers
Tom Jones wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Tom Jones <fire_n_ice@direcway.com<mailto:fire_n_ice@direcway.com>>
>
> Jeff, I just noticed the round cowl serries 5 in the painting
templates has
> the tube gear only. If you have the spring gear and don't have access
to a
> photo program, I can probably talk my photo shop expert wife into
putting
> the spring gear onto the round cowl template for you.
> Tom Jones
>
> > I am trying to find a 3-view drawing .jpg , .pdf , or ? of my KF
5
> Outback
> > with
> > the round bump cowl. Even Skystar didn't find one in their
archives. I
> want to
> > give the FAA inspector next week for sign off.
> >
> > I know I saw one at one time with dimensions......hmmmmmm....
> >
> > Any one? Thanks.
> >
> > Jeff Smathers
>
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: 2-blade vs. 3-blade |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: W Duke <n981ms@yahoo.com>
My understanding is: the benefit of 3 blades are better ground clearance and quieter
operation. 2 blades are supposed to be more efficient. It seems to me
a larger diameter 2 blade would be a better choice for more rapid acceleration
and climb.
Maxwell
Ron Carroll <RonCarr@Qwest.Net> wrote:
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Ron Carroll"
Is there any significant difference between a 2 & 3 blade prop?
Advantage/disadvantage of one over the other?
Ron Carroll
KF3/582 - Oregon, USA
RonCarr@Qwest.Net
---------------------------------
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: Hi - Brand New series 5 owner - looking for a little |
advice :
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Tom Jones <fire_n_ice@direcway.com> advice :
Phil,
I moved my classic 4 unassembled across Oregon. I used a 24 foot Ryder
truck. I built cradles to hold/support the wings, leading edge down. If
possible, get the builder to help/advise you while you unassemble and pack
everything. There are some weak points to protect and pack just right.
For tail wheel training check out http://www.ameliareid.com/training.html
Tom Jones, La Pine, OR
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: | 2-blade vs. 3-blade |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Gary Algate" <algate@attglobal.net>
I changed from a 72" x 3 bladed prop to a 70" x 2 bladed prop on my 582. I
did this because the 3 bladed prop combined with my 3:1 C box set up
harmonic vibrations that were damaging the lead screw in the IFA Ivoprop.
When I made the change the differences noted were as follows:
Speed increased by approximately 5 mph
Climb performance was decreased slightly
Noise level in the cockpit was reduced by almost 50% at cruise - it appears
most of the noise was generated by the prop rather than the engine.
The high pitched two stroke engine noise cannot be heard from the ground now
and it sounds like a Continental flying over.
I also tend to float a little longer on final (not much) due to the coarser
pitch setting with the two bladed prop.
Hope this helps
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Gary Algate
Lite2/582
My understanding is: the benefit of 3 blades are better ground clearance
and quieter operation. 2 blades are supposed to be more efficient. It
seems to me a larger diameter 2 blade would be a better choice for more
rapid acceleration and climb.
Maxwell
Ron Carroll <RonCarr@Qwest.Net> wrote:
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Ron Carroll"
Is there any significant difference between a 2 & 3 blade prop?
Advantage/disadvantage of one over the other?
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
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: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: DPREMGOOD@aol.com
Right on, Kurt,
Probably the simplest (and most effective) way to test for L/D max. is
exactly the way you mentioned.
Ideally, one remove the prop, get a tow to altitude and commence testing at
the different speeds. This would provide a more accurate drag polar of the
airframe.
(flame proof suit is on...tight!!)
Take the test points of IAS at the altitudes and rates of descent using a
stopwatch and altitude. (the VSI is not accurate enough for this test).
Convert IAS to TAS for the test points (on ground with your favorite blend of
java)
then plot the graph of TAS (fpm) vs vertical speed (fpm)as mentioned before.
There is allot of good reference material out there on how to plot for L/D
max.
The thing to remember is that your results can vary depending on a couple of
things:
1) The airframe itself.
A kitfox that bristles with antennae, big tundra tires and no fairings on the
struts etc. will have alot more parasite drag than the standard 'speedster'
type with all the fairings.
Also, rigging will be a factor, ie. was there a rolling tendency that needed
correcting with either wing rig or flapperon adjustment? Horizontal stab.
position? (forward C. of G.)
2) instrumentation errors
What was used to take the measurements will have a big impact on the accuracy
of the data.
Ie. was the airspeed indicating system calibrated?
Was the altimeter setting source nearby?
Accurate temperature readings taken during the test points?
3) test procedure
Another biggy.
During a test of this nature, the aircraft has to be in a stable condition
before the readings can be taken. Ie no acceleration / deceleration between the
beginning and end of test point.
Needless to say, you would want to do this in calm conditions.
I mentioned earlier that ideally one would do this with the prop removed and
towed to altitude...right.
One could achieve reasonable results with the prop on the airplane. The 'leap
of faith' method is to climb to altitude, shut down and stop the prop, and
then take the measurements. The drag of the prop blades would skew the results
(additional drag- lower L/D results).
A rotating prop. will create far more drag than a stopped one due to the
induced drag of the prop.
The concept of zero thrust during this test is also feasible, provided the
engine power/propeller thrust values are known for the various airspeed /
altitude test points.
If the zero thrust setting is a WAG, then a miss is as good as a mile
(kilometer).
Regards,
Doug Remoundos
Classic IV
Montreal, Canada
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: | 2-blade vs. 3-blade |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: michel <michel@online.no>
>===== Original Message From "Gary Algate" <algate@attglobal.net>
>I also tend to float a little longer on final (not much) due to the coarser
>pitch setting with the two bladed prop.
Could you elaborate this a bit more, Gary, I am not sure I understand how it
works. TIA,
Michel
do not archive
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: | 2-blade vs. 3-blade |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Gary Algate" <algate@attglobal.net>
With the three bladed prop on final I would fine the prop pitch back give me
6500 rpm WOT so that I was set up for an overshot if necessary. Then I would
throttle back in the circuit and there was a dramatic additional slowing of
the plane due to the additional drag created by the fine pitched prop disc.
With the 2 bladed prop I use the same procedure but this coarser prop offers
far less drag when I throttle back so the final is less steep.
It's not a lot but it was quite noticeable for the first few landings. I
have since compensated by using additional flap and slips when necessary but
it's like most of these problems they usually just go away with time and
experience.
Gary Algate
Lite2/582
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>===== Original Message From "Gary Algate" <algate@attglobal.net> I also
>tend to float a little longer on final (not much) due to the coarser
>pitch setting with the two bladed prop.
Could you elaborate this a bit more, Gary, I am not sure I understand how it
works. TIA,
Michel
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
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: | 2-blade vs. 3-blade |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: michel <michel@online.no>
>===== Original Message From "Gary Algate" <algate@attglobal.net>
>With the 2 bladed prop I use the same procedure but this coarser prop offers
>far less drag when I throttle back so the final is less steep.
Ok, more pitch = less drag, of course. ... sorry, sometimes I am slow! :-)
Cheers,
Michel
do not archive
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: | 2-blade vs. 3-blade |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Gary Algate" <algate@attglobal.net>
No sweat Michel
Gary >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Ok, more pitch = less drag, of course. ... sorry, sometimes I am slow! :-)
Cheers,
Michel
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
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: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Dave & Wendy Grosvenor" <dwg@iafrica.com>
I have just done this test on my Bushbaby, which is essentailly a Kitfox 4
1050. I did glide tests at 5mph increments from 50mph to 80mph, each time
gliding down for 1 minute from 4500ft. After 1 minute, I'd note the height
lost. All done in early morning calm air. I plotted the results on a graph
and found my best L/D to be 10.5:1 at 56 mph IAS (61 mph TAS). Minimum sink
was 500 fpm
at 55 mph IAS, pretty close to the best L/D speed. When I feel enthusiastic
I
will do the test again to try verify the figures.
The graph looks about right with a very sharp peak. That's why the min sink
and best L/D speeds are close together. This is typical of high drag
aircraft. If you look at the L/D curve for a high performance sailplane,
you will see a much flatter graph.
Cheers
Dave
----- Original Message -----
From: "kurt schrader" <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050
<snip>
I forgot how the graph looks, but to test for L/D, you
have to do a series of power off glides. Say you
start at 3,500' and glide to 2,000'. You fly at a
constant airspeed and record the gps ground speed (no
wind for this) or convert to true airspeed, and you
record the time it takes to drop from 3,000 to 2,000.
(You use the first 500' drop to get stable.)
Repeating the test for 75, 70, 65, 60, 55, 50 mph (and
maybe 45 mph for you light weight guys) should give
you a curve. If I remember correctly, you use speed
across the bottom in both mph and feet per minute, and
descent in fpm on the side. Then you can compare the
ft/minute forward against the ft/minute downward.
(The mph scale is so you can use the speed in the
plane instead of ft/min.)
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Kerry Skyring" <kerryskyring@hotmail.com>
>Michel wrote...
>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! :-)
>
Michel you're an inspiration to us all. And just to drop in with a bit of
news of the
Austrian KF 5 Outback - (and Chris I haven't forgotten that I owe you some
photos and
an article.) All fabric work and finishes (polyfibre) are complete. Firewall
on, engine
(912S) on, instrument panel ready for mounting. Battery box mounted, about
to
fit the windscreen, inst. panel cover, turtle deck etc. They're mostly ready
to go.
Cowls all trimmed, just need camlocks etc. So we're getting on with it. Is
late
summer too optimistic?
Michel just to add that when you, Chris and others get together, the
Austrian
Fox will also try to make it.
Kerry
PS and in praise of winter flying. Managed a couple of hours in the
Motorfalke
in January. Density height was about minus 1,000 ft. and there werer 10
knots down
the runway. Felt like l lifted off at walking pace.
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: | looking for a little advice : |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "hausding, sid" <sidh@charter.net>
Phil,
Several years ago I purchased an outstate kit and flew commercial from my
home in Northern Michigan. I took my elderly father along on one of his
last, big adventures and we stopped in Las Vegas to see the sites for
several days. From there we took a bus trip into southern California just
for the heck of it and to see the sites and desert from a 'tourists' view
In southern CA we boarded a train and traveled up the coast of CA gaulking
at all the sites and seeing things we never could have in a car or by plane.
......well worth the time and small expense to enjoy ourselves while
actually making progress towards the destination of getting to Sacremento
We stopped and relaxed, or ate and stayed overnight anytime we cared to, or
found something in particular we wanted to see more of.
The gentleman who was selling the kit was very receptive and helpful by
having already rented and measured a yellow rental van for us to takeover
and use for the return trip. Signing and paying, and it was ours. With
some disassembly of the tail section (unbolting the horizontal stab) we had
no problems fitting the whole enchilada into the van (I believe it was a 20
footer) at an angle. It was on the gear, with wheels installed,
fortunately. The engine was not attached, but traveled quite well in the
factory crate and cardboard box. The factory quick build wings were slung
on the insides of the van from the rub rails and all the other parts were
stacked and strapped down or buffered with the van shipping pads........
everything traveled just fine with no dings or bends or stresses to be found
The kit was only minimally started and nothing was covered.
On the return trip we traveled north to Idaho and the factory home where we
toured the whole shop(s) and almost had time for some local flying. We were
able to travel at our leisure and enjoyed the drive from the West coast back
to northern Michigan as only a father and son could with both of us at our
advanced stages in life (at the time I was 52 and Dad around '82').
Anyway, the point to all this was to tell ya the equipment you are picking
up is pretty well built and strong in assembly. Not to worry about hurting
anything, everything can be fixed in the build process anyway, and just go
do it. An enclosed van type vehicle (rental truck) might be a better choice
than wrapping something in plastic or tarps for such a long trip.........
they have a tendency to come undone and need checking all the time from the
wind and weather. An enclosed vehicle allowed us to crawl into the back end
to check on things anytime and we could actually get back there and stretch
out to nap now and then while underway. Somethings to consider.
Good luck on your delivery and don't worry about the kit parts too much.
There are EAA'ers, AOPA members and many Kitfoxer's along the routes you
will be taking, just put the word out and they will all be glad to assist or
help in any way they can to a fellow flyer...........enjoy.
Hausding, Sid
Alpena, Mi
Avid Speedwing N204S
------------------------------------------------------
First off I want to thank this wonderful group for being here. I just
purchased a series 5 that is just ready to cover and finish with engine
installation (not included) & instruments.
I have a bit of a challenge though, as it is 3,000 miles away (I'm in
san Luis Obispo / Santa cruz, California & its in new york state !.
I'm going to tow it home (and all its assorted parts) with a flatbed
utility trailer, probably 18 or 20' in length and 82" wide with tarps
wrapped around the aircraft.
Any ideas on the best way to pack it on the trailer (it's not currently
covered at all). It's currently got its wings, flight surfaces, and gear
on - I'm planning to take them both off and stow. What about the
elevator - will it come off ?
How much work is it to disassemble it (wings off, gear off, elev off ? )
What should I worry about in regards to towing in this type of a
situation. I read something about a fuse bending on the list - should I
be concerned ?
Any other ideas on what I should do in prep for the trip? Has anyone
else done anything like this ?
Does anyone have Drawings of the series 5 (safari - taildragger). If
someone has cad files that would be great !
A couple non travel related questions too:
1) I'd love to talk to any series 5-7 owners about power plants and
installs. I'm leaning towards the Subaru's and like the Ea81 & 82 as
well as the EJ22. Pro's & con's anyone ?
2) If anyone has recommendations on what should be beefed up or modified
in the build, please let me know. I'm planning on beefing up the
elevator trim per the crash stories online - any thoughts ?
3) Anyone know of a good place to get my instruction in a tailwheel in
California ?
4) Has anyone converted a 5 tail dragger to tri gear ? (Gasp.... I know,
I just have never flown one)
5) Does anyone know of a CFI in California who would teach in a
tailwheel kitfox (either mine or his ?)
6) who do you recommend for insurance ? ideas of rates for 2 low time
pilots ( Do I even want to know ?)
Now for the crazy part - I just purchased this aircraft, and have never
actually seen a series 5 in "Real Life". I'm pretty familiar with the
IV's and have sat in a few. If anyone in California is interested in
showing off their airplane I'd love to take a look and talk to you about
it & your experiences.
Thanks again for everyone's time - sorry for the long email and so many
questions
Happy flying & warm regards !
Phil Cowley
831.588.7596
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: Hi - Brand New series 5 owner - looking for a |
little advice :
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Paul <pwilson@climber.org> little advice :
Hi Phil,
Trailer hauling the plane is something I have a lot of experience with.
Here is what I do and what I recommend:
* Remove the wing. Never move your plane with the wings attached unless you have
a trailer specifically designed for a Kitfox.
* Make an rack lined with carpet to support the wings, leading edge down supported
with styrafoam like the king that comes in packing boxes. Not the loose stuff
but the solid stuff. Use much duct tape to keep the stuff in place. The result
is the wings are fully supported and wont move side to side. The carpet is
used like a sling to carry most of the weight with from the aft spar.
* Dont remove the gear and tires. The fuge wont bend or be damaged if the wings
are off. Its even less of an issue if the engine is at least mounted. Then the
weight would be taken as the fuge is designed, that is by the gear and tires,
For the Fuge used cinch straps to tie the tires to the trailer bed. Use two
straps for each wheel to prevent movement for/aft/side/side. Low pressure in the
tires is good, just make sure the tires are squished somewhat. Same for the
tail wheel. I use big eye bolts attached to the trailer floor. Use two extra
cinch straps to connect the gear to the trailer floor. If the engine is installed
it would be good as the weight on the tail is low. If the engine is not in
place consider something soft to cushion the tail wheel. More styrafoam should
work.
* I assume you have a regular car hauler with dual axles. If so take off the tires
on one axle. and lower the pressure in the remaining tires to soften the ride.
If you have torsion axles it is better than the spring axles. In fact I would
go to the trouble to get a trailer with torsion axles as they ride a huge
amount smoother than old fashioned leaf springs.
* I have always had a cover for the whole thing. In fact I went to the trouble
to make sides/front/rear for the trailer and mounted the wings on the side. I
used 4' high sheets of OSB and 2X4s. The fuge tail and pax compartment will be
higher than 4' and I just got a big tarp that I placed over the thing. These
wood sides will flex a bunch unless you cross brace them. This can be done after
the plane is loaded and secure.
* Loose items like cowls, horizontal or elevator can be bungyed to the trailer
floor using more eyebolts or just wood screws and carpet strips. Or put them in
the tow vehicle if you are using a pickup.
* Last of all drive slow and stay off concrete highways. Go out of the way on your
trip east to find non concrete roads or at least smooth concrete roads.
** Tips: Take all your tools and wood working stuff to avoid a search when you
get to the plane. Take a dozen or so eye bolts with nuts and a drill to install
them. A dozen or so cinch straps - the kind that have a rachet tightener. Take
some nice soft carpet pieces and cut them to fit when you arrive. I use many
strips 12" wide and 4' long. Consider taking the trailer east with the sides
already installed to avoid the hassle when you get there. Easier to pick out
a trailer at home than when you arrive. then you can get the torsion axle setup.
If It were me I would buy the appropriate trailer at home, use it then sell
it for a few bucks less. In fact the total cost would be close to renting on
the east coast. Take this transport issue as a very important thing. Besides you
will get more familiar with towing on the way east. Use much care on attachment/mounting
and traveling. Beware that with only 2 wheels on a 4 wheel trailer
you are changing the dynamics. Just make sure you have plenty of weight on
the hitch, to make the trailer stable. The choice of trailer would be one with
2 3500 pound axles. The trailer will be around 2000 pounds (with sides) and your
cargo will be around 300 pounds so the the two remaining tires should be adequate.
Just lower the pressure for some sidewall bulge, then make sure they
dont get hot after several hundred miles. If you are rich rent or buy a box trailer.
A luxury I am still saving for (The kind used for snowmobiles are most
appropriate). You may not find where you live but consider the weights and choose
wisely. I will probably have one custom made with 3 axles then use only one
axle when the plane is inside.
I hope I did not forget anything. Ask if you have questions.
Anybody want to chime in?
LOL, Paul
=============================
At 11:07 PM -0800 2/19/04, Phil Cowley wrote:
>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Phil Cowley" <pcowley@virtualrcflight.com>
>
>Hi all,
>
>First off I want to thank this wonderful group for being here. I just
>purchased a series 5 that is just ready to cover and finish with engine
>installation (not included) & instruments.
>
>I have a bit of a challenge though, as it is 3,000 miles away (I'm in
>san Luis Obispo / Santa cruz, California & its in new york state !.
>
>I'm going to tow it home (and all its assorted parts) with a flatbed
>utility trailer, probably 18 or 20' in length and 82" wide with tarps
>wrapped around the aircraft.
>
>Any ideas on the best way to pack it on the trailer (it's not currently
>covered at all). It's currently got its wings, flight surfaces, and gear
>on - I'm planning to take them both off and stow. What about the
>elevator - will it come off ?
>
>How much work is it to disassemble it (wings off, gear off, elev off ? )
>
>
>What should I worry about in regards to towing in this type of a
>situation. I read something about a fuse bending on the list - should I
>be concerned ?
>
>Any other ideas on what I should do in prep for the trip? Has anyone
>else done anything like this ?
>
>Does anyone have Drawings of the series 5 (safari - taildragger). If
>someone has cad files that would be great !
>
>A couple non travel related questions too:
>
>1) I'd love to talk to any series 5-7 owners about power plants and
>installs. I'm leaning towards the Subaru's and like the Ea81 & 82 as
>well as the EJ22. Pro's & con's anyone ?
>
>2) If anyone has recommendations on what should be beefed up or modified
>in the build, please let me know. I'm planning on beefing up the
>elevator trim per the crash stories online - any thoughts ?
>
>3) Anyone know of a good place to get my instruction in a tailwheel in
>California ?
>
>4) Has anyone converted a 5 tail dragger to tri gear ? (Gasp.... I know,
>I just have never flown one)
>
>5) Does anyone know of a CFI in California who would teach in a
>tailwheel kitfox (either mine or his ?)
>
>6) who do you recommend for insurance ? ideas of rates for 2 low time
>pilots ( Do I even want to know ?)
>
>Now for the crazy part - I just purchased this aircraft, and have never
>actually seen a series 5 in "Real Life". I'm pretty familiar with the
>IV's and have sat in a few. If anyone in California is interested in
>showing off their airplane I'd love to take a look and talk to you about
>it & your experiences.
>
>Thanks again for everyone's time - sorry for the long email and so many
>questions
>
>Happy flying & warm regards !
>
>Phil Cowley
>831.588.7596
>
--
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 |
|
| Subject: | 912S Starter Issue |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Paul <pwilson@climber.org>
Engine shake for the 912 engine at startup is easy to explain. The two carbs have
different amounts of fuel present in the float chamber.If the chambers are
empty they will fill ad different rates. So one engine bank gets fuel differently
than the other bank. Thus one bank is running less efficiently than the other
causing missing and the resulting shake. Any procedure that allows complete
filling of both carbs before start would minimize this action. One owner had
a return flow tube (to the fuel tank) and he used the electric pump to fill
both carbs before starting. His result was a smooth - no shake start. Another
owner just cranked the engine with the mags off for a period, then when he started
the engine he had no shake. Both methods require a little experimentation
to get the timing down.
Its hard to believe that starters have anything to do with this engine shake issue.
Paul
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: | Coolant temperature sensor and EIS |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Randy Daughenbaugh" <rjdaugh@rapidnet.com>
I am hooking up my 912S to a Grand Rapids EIS. They have you pull the Rotax
head temp sensors from the engine and use their thermocouples for this
purpose. They then say to use one of the Rotax sensors to monitor coolant
temp.
I have two questions: Where is best point to monitor temperature? How do
I mount the sensor to get good thermal contact?
I suspect that near the spider tank is the best location - or on the way to
the radiator. ??
The senso needs to have the body grounded. It is a 10 mm bolt so that is
not a problem - I will just run a ground wire. Should I drill a hole in the
spider tank and mount it that way? I worry about getting a good seal.
Thanks in advance for all advice and suggestions.
Randy - Series 5/7 912S Getting close(?)
.
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: | CONDUCTIVE GREASE |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Randy Daughenbaugh" <rjdaugh@rapidnet.com>
IN the instructions for the electrical hook up, it says you should cover the
electrical connections with "conductive grease" to prevent corrosion.
I have always used Vaseline on battery terminals, but I can't believe that
Vaseline would fit the description "conductive". Do they mean plain old
bearing grease - lithium (or other) soaps - or is there some other product
for this purpose?
Randy
.
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: Hi - Brand New series 5 owner - looking for a little |
advice :
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Lowell Fitt" <lcfitt@inreach.com>
Phil,
For the Tail Wheel training, try Roger Standley. His airplane is based at
Frazer Lake, I don't remember where he teaches out of. Or Robin Reid,
Hillview airport in San Jose.
For the Engine, I would strongly consider the Rotax 912S.
Lowell
----- Original Message -----
From: "Phil Cowley" <pcowley@virtualrcflight.com>
Subject: Kitfox-List: Hi - Brand New series 5 owner - looking for a little
advice :
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Phil Cowley"
<pcowley@virtualrcflight.com>
>
> Hi all,
>
> First off I want to thank this wonderful group for being here. I just
> purchased a series 5 that is just ready to cover and finish with engine
> installation (not included) & instruments.
>
> I have a bit of a challenge though, as it is 3,000 miles away (I'm in
> san Luis Obispo / Santa cruz, California & its in new york state !.
>
> I'm going to tow it home (and all its assorted parts) with a flatbed
> utility trailer, probably 18 or 20' in length and 82" wide with tarps
> wrapped around the aircraft.
>
> Any ideas on the best way to pack it on the trailer (it's not currently
> covered at all). It's currently got its wings, flight surfaces, and gear
> on - I'm planning to take them both off and stow. What about the
> elevator - will it come off ?
>
> How much work is it to disassemble it (wings off, gear off, elev off ? )
>
>
> What should I worry about in regards to towing in this type of a
> situation. I read something about a fuse bending on the list - should I
> be concerned ?
>
> Any other ideas on what I should do in prep for the trip? Has anyone
> else done anything like this ?
>
> Does anyone have Drawings of the series 5 (safari - taildragger). If
> someone has cad files that would be great !
>
> A couple non travel related questions too:
>
> 1) I'd love to talk to any series 5-7 owners about power plants and
> installs. I'm leaning towards the Subaru's and like the Ea81 & 82 as
> well as the EJ22. Pro's & con's anyone ?
>
> 2) If anyone has recommendations on what should be beefed up or modified
> in the build, please let me know. I'm planning on beefing up the
> elevator trim per the crash stories online - any thoughts ?
>
> 3) Anyone know of a good place to get my instruction in a tailwheel in
> California ?
>
> 4) Has anyone converted a 5 tail dragger to tri gear ? (Gasp.... I know,
> I just have never flown one)
>
> 5) Does anyone know of a CFI in California who would teach in a
> tailwheel kitfox (either mine or his ?)
>
> 6) who do you recommend for insurance ? ideas of rates for 2 low time
> pilots ( Do I even want to know ?)
>
> Now for the crazy part - I just purchased this aircraft, and have never
> actually seen a series 5 in "Real Life". I'm pretty familiar with the
> IV's and have sat in a few. If anyone in California is interested in
> showing off their airplane I'd love to take a look and talk to you about
> it & your experiences.
>
> Thanks again for everyone's time - sorry for the long email and so many
> questions
>
> Happy flying & warm regards !
>
> Phil Cowley
> 831.588.7596
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jeff
> Smathers
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Trying to find 3-View Drawings of a Kitfox 5
> Outback
>
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Jeff Smathers <jsmathers@cybcon.com>
>
> Thanks Tom,
>
> I have the standard tube gear so that will work out perfect!
>
> Thanks for your help, Jeff Smathers
>
>
> Tom Jones wrote:
>
> > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Tom Jones <fire_n_ice@direcway.com>
> >
> > Jeff, I just noticed the round cowl serries 5 in the painting
> templates has
> > the tube gear only. If you have the spring gear and don't have access
> to a
> > photo program, I can probably talk my photo shop expert wife into
> putting
> > the spring gear onto the round cowl template for you.
> > Tom Jones
> >
> > > I am trying to find a 3-view drawing .jpg , .pdf , or ? of my KF
> 5
> > Outback
> > > with
> > > the round bump cowl. Even Skystar didn't find one in their
> archives. I
> > want to
> > > give the FAA inspector next week for sign off.
> > >
> > > I know I saw one at one time with dimensions......hmmmmmm....
> > >
> > > Any one? Thanks.
> > >
> > > Jeff Smathers
> >
>
>
> ==
> ==
> ==
> ==
>
>
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: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: <rex@awarenest.com>
All good and definitely personal archive material, but
there's often more to a story. Since we don't always fly
in a no wind, tubulance free environment, what about the
effects of up and down drafts and the experience and
training learned from soaring? As we must all agree, the
more you know the more you should be able to manage a
situation (read: engine out).
Being able to take advantage of updrafts by reading the
weather and terrain effects can make all the difference in
reaching the best landing site.
A lighter aircraft will stay aloft longer and can take
better advantage of updrafts which can stretch that glide.
And for those that don't know, water ballast in gliders is
dumped before landing.
I consider my glider training some of the most enjoyable
and valuable of all my flying experience. It is can be
applied in normal powered flight to your advantage as
well. I highly recommend getting a glider rating. It only
trakes a few hours for an already certified pilot.
Rex
South Park, Colorado
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: | CONDUCTIVE GREASE |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Marc Arseneault" <northernultralights@hotmail.com>
Randy a tube of electrical insulating compound works great and can be purchased
from your local auto parts store.
<EM>Best Regards,
Marc Arseneault
Ontario Canada
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: CONDUCTIVE GREASE |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: <rex@awarenest.com>
I plan on getting some for my off-grid electrical
systems batteries. here's a couple of links to check out.
http://www.sanchem.com/index.html
http://www.radiobooks.com/products/i601.htm
Rex
On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 08:57:49 -0700
"Randy Daughenbaugh" <rjdaugh@rapidnet.com> wrote:
>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Randy Daughenbaugh"
><rjdaugh@rapidnet.com>
>
>
>IN the instructions for the electrical hook up, it says
>you should cover the
>electrical connections with "conductive grease" to
>prevent corrosion.
>
>I have always used Vaseline on battery terminals, but I
>can't believe that
>Vaseline would fit the description "conductive". Do
>they mean plain old
>bearing grease - lithium (or other) soaps - or is there
>some other product
>for this purpose?
>
>Randy
>.
>
>
>Contributions
>other
> http://www.matronics.com/subscription
> http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/Kitfox-List.htm
> http://www.matronics.com/browse/kitfox-list
>http://www.matronics.com/digest/kitfox-list
>
>
Rex
www.awarenest.com
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: Coolant temperature sensor and EIS |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Wwillyard@aol.com
In a message dated 2/20/2004 11:28:47 AM Eastern Standard Time,
rjdaugh@rapidnet.com writes:
> I am hooking up my 912S to a Grand Rapids EIS.
Randy, on my Classic IV, I machined a piece from hex aluminum stock to fit
the out side of the aluminum coolant line from the spider tank to the radiator.
I drilled and taped the adapter for the 10 mm thread. I also drilled and
taped a 6-32 hole on the exterior of the hex adapter so that I could attach the
ground wire (don't drill through to the 10 mm hole). I had the adapter tig
welded to the aluminum coolant line. This location will gives approximately the
same temp readings as the EIS thermocouples on the heads.
William Willyard
Classic IV
Grandville, MI
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: | L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "JMCBEAN" <JDMCBEAN@cableone.net>
Very good Kurt....
Here's one for discussion.... With the ratio be better with a wind milling
prop or a stopped prop ??
Blue Skies!!
John & Debra McBean
A good friend will come and bail you out of jail..
but, a true friend will be sitting in the cell next to you saying,
"Damn...that was fun!"
-----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: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader
<smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
Flame suit on? Check. Bullet bouncer on? Check.
Ok, guys. Another wives tale here and this time it
isn't me with the red face. ;-) Well, at least this
one time anyway....
Actually it is a very common misconception of L/D max
that weight changes it, but it doesn't change with
weight. Got my "Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators"
right here...
L/D max occurs at the same angle of attack under all
weights, unless you change configuration (Flaps, gear,
trim, etc which changes drag) This is another nice
feature of AOA indicators. You can set them for L/D
max indication just like stall indication and you will
always get it right.
The speed for L/D max changes with weight, but the AOA
and the ratio of L/D max does not change. If it is
10:1, it is always 10:1 under any weight. If you go
to the L/D max AOA with an engine failure, you will
glide the same distance no matter what the weight.
That is the hardest part to understand. When you are
heavier, you go down faster and forward faster to keep
the AOA. You go the same distance both down and
forward, but in less time. The angle or ratio doesn't
change.
L/D max is important because it is were you have the
best glide ratio and the best long range cruise. If
the engine quits, or you are low on fuel, going to the
L/D max AOA is the best you can do.
Since we each build a little differently, especially
in drag reduction, our L/D max's will not be the same.
But you can test for it.
I forgot how the graph looks, but to test for L/D, you
have to do a series of power off glides. Say you
start at 3,500' and glide to 2,000'. You fly at a
constant airspeed and record the gps ground speed (no
wind for this) or convert to true airspeed, and you
record the time it takes to drop from 3,000 to 2,000.
(You use the first 500' drop to get stable.)
Repeating the test for 75, 70, 65, 60, 55, 50 mph (and
maybe 45 mph for you light weight guys) should give
you a curve. If I remember correctly, you use speed
across the bottom in both mph and feet per minute, and
descent in fpm on the side. Then you can compare the
ft/minute forward against the ft/minute downward.
(The mph scale is so you can use the speed in the
plane instead of ft/min.)
The graph can also be set up as AOA across the bottom
instead of speed, if you have an AOA indicator.
At one point on the curve you will travel the most
distance forward vs the distance downward. That is
your ratio to look for. But I haven't gotten to this
point in my testing, so I don't remember what the
graph really looks like. But that is how you test for
it.
Sorry. Maybe someone has already done it in their
testing and can fill in. I'd have to go dig up my
archives to find it again, and I don't have the time
right now. There have been some articles about "Zero
Thrust Testing" and L/D test a while back, if anyone
has them.
Kurt S.
__________________________________
http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools
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: | 2-blade vs. 3-blade |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "JMCBEAN" <JDMCBEAN@cableone.net>
As a general rule... a 3 blade prop will be quieter and will climb better.
A two blade will cruise better and be more efficient. This is providing
one is comparing similar props.
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 Ron Carroll
Subject: Kitfox-List: 2-blade vs. 3-blade
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Ron Carroll" <RonCarr@Qwest.Net>
Is there any significant difference between a 2 & 3 blade prop?
Advantage/disadvantage of one over the other?
Ron Carroll
KF3/582 - Oregon, USA
RonCarr@Qwest.Net
Message 28
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 2-blade vs. 3-blade |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Jim Burke <jeburke94je@direcway.com>
Hi Gary, I'm running a 582 with a 68" three blade prop set @ 17degrees pitch
and a 3:1 C box. I was under the impression if I changed to a two bladed
prop I would have to get a longer prop, say a 72-74". The way I read your
e-mail,you are saying your using a shorter two blade prop 70" then was your
three blade prop 72". Is this correct? I want to make sure I do the right
thing when I change my prop this spring.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gary Algate" <algate@attglobal.net>
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: 2-blade vs. 3-blade
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Gary Algate" <algate@attglobal.net>
>
> I changed from a 72" x 3 bladed prop to a 70" x 2 bladed prop on my 582. I
> did this because the 3 bladed prop combined with my 3:1 C box set up
> harmonic vibrations that were damaging the lead screw in the IFA Ivoprop.
>
> When I made the change the differences noted were as follows:
>
> Speed increased by approximately 5 mph
> Climb performance was decreased slightly
> Noise level in the cockpit was reduced by almost 50% at cruise - it
appears
> most of the noise was generated by the prop rather than the engine.
> The high pitched two stroke engine noise cannot be heard from the ground
now
> and it sounds like a Continental flying over.
> I also tend to float a little longer on final (not much) due to the
coarser
> pitch setting with the two bladed prop.
>
> Hope this helps
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> Gary Algate
> Lite2/582
>
> My understanding is: the benefit of 3 blades are better ground clearance
> and quieter operation. 2 blades are supposed to be more efficient. It
> seems to me a larger diameter 2 blade would be a better choice for more
> rapid acceleration and climb.
>
> Maxwell
>
> Ron Carroll <RonCarr@Qwest.Net> wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Ron Carroll"
>
> Is there any significant difference between a 2 & 3 blade prop?
> Advantage/disadvantage of one over the other?
>
> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
>
>
Message 29
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Clifford Begnaud" <shoeless@barefootpilot.com>
I can tell you from first hand experience, it's MUCH better with the prop
stopped.
Cliff
>
> Very good Kurt....
> Here's one for discussion.... With the ratio be better with a wind milling
> prop or a stopped prop ??
>
> Blue Skies!!
> John & Debra McBean
>
do not archive
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 |
|
| Subject: | 2-blade vs. 3-blade |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Gary Algate" <algate@attglobal.net>
John
The noise drop inside my plane was so apparent that everybody that flew in
it before has commented. I went from a 3 blade Ultralight IVOprop to a 2
blade Medium Ivoprop which is considerably wider in chord and much more
robust.
Maybe that is the reason for the noise reduction - I'm not sure but even my
radio works better now with the quieter cabin.
regards
Gary Algate
Lite2/582
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "JMCBEAN" <JDMCBEAN@cableone.net>
As a general rule... a 3 blade prop will be quieter and will climb better.
A two blade will cruise better and be more efficient. This is providing
one is comparing similar props.
Blue Skies!!
John & Debra McBean
"The Sky is not the Limit... It's a Playground"
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
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: | Re: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
JMCBEAN wrote:
> Very good Kurt....
> Here's one for discussion.... With the ratio be better with a wind milling
> prop or a stopped prop ??
Just as a reference: a sailboat will sail slightly faster if the auxiliary
engine's prop is stopped (put in gear). But it would be interesting to know
what it does for a plane. Kurt, any clue?
Cheers,
Michel
do not archive
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: | 2-blade vs. 3-blade |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Gary Algate" <algate@attglobal.net>
Hi Jim
I have in-flight adjustable props so there a lot more flexibility in
choosing the diameter ,
I originally had the three blade "Ultralight" Ivoprop at 72" and this is a
very light weight and flexible prop. When I went to the two blade set up I
also went to the "Medium" Ivoprop which had a much thicker chord and was
also considerably heavier.
I was a little concerned about the increased loads on my C Box so I went for
the slightly smaller diameter at 70". Normally though, in a fixed pitch or
ground adjustable pitch you would go larger in diameter as you stated in
your email.
I have about 200 hours on my 2 blade prop and have had no problems with the
gearbox or the prop.
Have you considered the IVO In flight adjustable prop - I am really happy
with mine and would recommend it for the ease of set up, reasonable cost and
performance increase.
I was thinking about John McBean's comments about noise and in hind sight I
used to cruise at around 85 mph at 5800 rpm whereas now I cruise at 95mph at
5600 so that drop in rpm would probably account for some of the noise
reduction. The only time I notice the engine noise itself is when I go to
fine pitch to land, other than that the sound in the cab is more of a deep
thrumming rather than the high pitch two stroke whine.
Gary Algate
Lite2/582
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Hi Gary, I'm running a 582 with a 68" three blade prop set @ 17degrees pitch
and a 3:1 C box. I was under the impression if I changed to a two bladed
prop I would have to get a longer prop, say a 72-74". The way I read your
e-mail,you are saying your using a shorter two blade prop 70" then was your
three blade prop 72". Is this correct? I want to make sure I do the right
thing when I change my prop this spring.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
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: | L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Gary Algate" <algate@attglobal.net>
Prop stopped is better - but this can be hard to achieve as I often practice
dead stick landings and the 582, even with a 3:1 C box still wind mills
pretty easily until you slow it down to less than 55 mph.
Gary Algate
Lite2/582
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
JMCBEAN wrote:
> Very good Kurt....
> Here's one for discussion.... With the ratio be better with a wind
> milling prop or a stopped prop ??
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
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: | What is that black powder and what do I do about it??` |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Dave Savener" <dsavener@austin.rr.com>
I just finished an annual inspection on my Kitfox II. It has a 532 with single
ignition. 195 total hours.
Black powder came out of the rear spark plug wire connector when I removed it.
It is the type with the metal cover that comes down over the whole spark plug.
I can't see much inside because of the rubber donut about half way up. Both spark
plugs looked just the right color. It runs perfectly with the new plugs,
just like it did before I changed them.
I hate to force the metal jacket off for fear of damaging it.
Any Ideas???
do not archive
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: What is that black powder and what do I do about it??` |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Tom Jones <fire_n_ice@direcway.com>
Dave,
I get that black powder out of the spark plug wire caps on the Rotax engine
in my snowmobile. My theory is the connection between the wire cap and
spark plug is a little loose and vibration wears the connector and plug top
creating the powder. The snowmobile version of sparkplugs are screw top
with aluminum screw on tops. I was thinking the black powder is aluminum
dust. Aircraft sparkplugs should be the solid top version.
Tom Jones.
> I just finished an annual inspection on my Kitfox II. It has a 532 with
single ignition. 195 total hours.
>
> Black powder came out of the rear spark plug wire connector when I removed
it.
> It is the type with the metal cover that comes down over the whole spark
plug.
> I can't see much inside because of the rubber donut about half way up.
Both spark plugs looked just the right color. It runs perfectly with the
new plugs, just like it did before I changed them.
>
> I hate to force the metal jacket off for fear of damaging it.
>
> Any Ideas???
>
> do not archive
Message 36
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: What is that black powder and what do I do about it??` |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
Dave Savener wrote:
> Black powder came out of the rear spark plug wire connector when I removed it.
I had the same with my 582, Dave. I simply replaced the spark plug cap with a
new one. I guess it was a bad contact within the cap.
Cheers,
Michel
Message 37
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | European Kitfoxes WAS: Thank you |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
Kerry Skyring wrote:
> Michel just to add that when you, Chris and others get together, the
> Austrian Fox will also try to make it.
Thank you, Kerry. If the purpose of your email was to make me blush ... you
succeeded! :-)
A European Kitfox meeting, somewhere central in Europe, could be something I'd
dream off, at night, when the wind is howling and the rain, pouring down. But
life has taught me that dreams are usually closer than we imagine.
Antoine de Saint Exupry, the French pioneer airman and author of The Little
Prince, the book that inspired my life, said once: (badly translated from
French) "It is better to have tried and failed than wanted to but didn't dare."
We will meet and it will be fun!
Cheers,
Michel
do not archive
Message 38
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: <rex@awarenest.com>
Years ago, when I was training in a complex aircraft
(Mooney) and simulating engine out, we had a "zero thrust"
setting for the prop/engine MP. This was supposed to be
the same as if gliding with the engine and prop stopped.
Perhaps there are settings for our Kitfoxes?
Rex
M2/582
South Park, Colorado
Message 39
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Scott McClintock <scott_mcclintock@dot.state.ak.us>
Hey Gang,
No takers for the modeling gig so on to plan B.
Anybody have any suggestions as to where I can get a cowling cover for
my Series V with smooth cowl?
Need to keep that engine warm between hops.
Scott in Nome
Message 40
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Randy Daughenbaugh" <rjdaugh@rapidnet.com>
There was an article in the Experimenter (I think) a couple years ago that
talked about the "apparent pitch" of a prop. This can be calculated pretty
simply from airspeed and RPM. - How far ahead do you move with each prop
revolution? I was surprised that in the examples that they showed, the
"apparent pitch" was very close to the pitch from the prop manufacturer. I
would have expected more slippage.
The relevance to Rex's "zero thrust" is that you could calculate the "zero
thrust" engine rpm for any given airspeed. You can then set RPM at the
proper point during your L/D tests. May be the way to go if you don't like
gathering data in silence.
Randy
.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
rex@awarenest.com
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: <rex@awarenest.com>
Years ago, when I was training in a complex aircraft
(Mooney) and simulating engine out, we had a "zero thrust"
setting for the prop/engine MP. This was supposed to be
the same as if gliding with the engine and prop stopped.
Perhaps there are settings for our Kitfoxes?
Rex
M2/582
South Park, Colorado
Message 41
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: u2drvr@dslextreme.com
L/D max not only gives you the max glide range, but also the best angle of
climb. You could do a series of climbs at different speeds all at the same
power setting, and calculate the best angle of climb. This would be L/D
max. The airspeed for L/D max does not depend on power setting...it will
be the same speed at full power, windmilling, or feathered. The glide
distance will certainly be different, but the best glide airspeed will be
the same at the same gross weight.
BP
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader
> <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
>
> Flame suit on? Check. Bullet bouncer on? Check.
>
> Ok, guys. Another wives tale here and this time it
> isn't me with the red face. ;-) Well, at least this
> one time anyway....
>
> Actually it is a very common misconception of L/D max
> that weight changes it, but it doesn't change with
> weight. Got my "Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators"
> right here...
>
> L/D max occurs at the same angle of attack under all
> weights, unless you change configuration (Flaps, gear,
> trim, etc which changes drag) This is another nice
> feature of AOA indicators. You can set them for L/D
> max indication just like stall indication and you will
> always get it right.
>
> The speed for L/D max changes with weight, but the AOA
> and the ratio of L/D max does not change. If it is
> 10:1, it is always 10:1 under any weight. If you go
> to the L/D max AOA with an engine failure, you will
> glide the same distance no matter what the weight.
> That is the hardest part to understand. When you are
> heavier, you go down faster and forward faster to keep
> the AOA. You go the same distance both down and
> forward, but in less time. The angle or ratio doesn't
> change.
>
> L/D max is important because it is were you have the
> best glide ratio and the best long range cruise. If
> the engine quits, or you are low on fuel, going to the
> L/D max AOA is the best you can do.
>
> Since we each build a little differently, especially
> in drag reduction, our L/D max's will not be the same.
> But you can test for it.
>
> I forgot how the graph looks, but to test for L/D, you
> have to do a series of power off glides. Say you
> start at 3,500' and glide to 2,000'. You fly at a
> constant airspeed and record the gps ground speed (no
> wind for this) or convert to true airspeed, and you
> record the time it takes to drop from 3,000 to 2,000.
> (You use the first 500' drop to get stable.)
>
> Repeating the test for 75, 70, 65, 60, 55, 50 mph (and
> maybe 45 mph for you light weight guys) should give
> you a curve. If I remember correctly, you use speed
> across the bottom in both mph and feet per minute, and
> descent in fpm on the side. Then you can compare the
> ft/minute forward against the ft/minute downward.
> (The mph scale is so you can use the speed in the
> plane instead of ft/min.)
>
> The graph can also be set up as AOA across the bottom
> instead of speed, if you have an AOA indicator.
>
> At one point on the curve you will travel the most
> distance forward vs the distance downward. That is
> your ratio to look for. But I haven't gotten to this
> point in my testing, so I don't remember what the
> graph really looks like. But that is how you test for
> it.
>
> Sorry. Maybe someone has already done it in their
> testing and can fill in. I'd have to go dig up my
> archives to find it again, and I don't have the time
> right now. There have been some articles about "Zero
> Thrust Testing" and L/D test a while back, if anyone
> has them.
>
> Kurt S.
>
> __________________________________
> http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools
>
>
Message 42
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Hi - Brand New series 5 owner - looking for a little |
advice :
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Bruce Lina" <airlina@usadatanet.net>
----- Original Message -----
From: "Phil Cowley" <pcowley@virtualrcflight.com>
Subject: Kitfox-List: Hi - Brand New series 5 owner - looking for a little
advice :
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Phil Cowley"
<pcowley@virtualrcflight.com>
>
> Hi all,
>
> First off I want to thank this wonderful group for being here. I just
> purchased a series 5 that is just ready to cover and finish with engine
> installation (not included) & instruments.
>
> I have a bit of a challenge though, as it is 3,000 miles away (I'm in
> san Luis Obispo / Santa cruz, California & its in new york state !.
>
> I'm going to tow it home (and all its assorted parts) with a flatbed
> utility trailer, probably 18 or 20' in length and 82" wide with tarps
> wrapped around the aircraft.
>
> Any ideas on the best way to pack it on the trailer (it's not currently
> covered at all). It's currently got its wings, flight surfaces, and gear
> on - I'm planning to take them both off and stow. What about the
> elevator - will it come off ?
>
> How much work is it to disassemble it (wings off, gear off, elev off ? )
>
>
> What should I worry about in regards to towing in this type of a
> situation. I read something about a fuse bending on the list - should I
> be concerned ?
>
> Any other ideas on what I should do in prep for the trip? Has anyone
> else done anything like this ?
>
> Does anyone have Drawings of the series 5 (safari - taildragger). If
> someone has cad files that would be great !
>
> A couple non travel related questions too:
>
> 1) I'd love to talk to any series 5-7 owners about power plants and
> installs. I'm leaning towards the Subaru's and like the Ea81 & 82 as
> well as the EJ22. Pro's & con's anyone ?
>
> 2) If anyone has recommendations on what should be beefed up or modified
> in the build, please let me know. I'm planning on beefing up the
> elevator trim per the crash stories online - any thoughts ?
>
> 3) Anyone know of a good place to get my instruction in a tailwheel in
> California ?
>
> 4) Has anyone converted a 5 tail dragger to tri gear ? (Gasp.... I know,
> I just have never flown one)
>
> 5) Does anyone know of a CFI in California who would teach in a
> tailwheel kitfox (either mine or his ?)
>
> 6) who do you recommend for insurance ? ideas of rates for 2 low time
> pilots ( Do I even want to know ?)
>
> Now for the crazy part - I just purchased this aircraft, and have never
> actually seen a series 5 in "Real Life". I'm pretty familiar with the
> IV's and have sat in a few. If anyone in California is interested in
> showing off their airplane I'd love to take a look and talk to you about
> it & your experiences.
>
> Thanks again for everyone's time - sorry for the long email and so many
> questions
>
> Happy flying & warm regards !
>
> Phil Cowley
> 831.588.7596
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jeff
> Smathers
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Trying to find 3-View Drawings of a Kitfox 5
> Outback
>
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Jeff Smathers <jsmathers@cybcon.com>
>
> Thanks Tom,
>
> I have the standard tube gear so that will work out perfect!
>
> Thanks for your help, Jeff Smathers
>
>
> Tom Jones wrote:
>
> > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Tom Jones <fire_n_ice@direcway.com>
> >
> > Jeff, I just noticed the round cowl serries 5 in the painting
> templates has
> > the tube gear only. If you have the spring gear and don't have access
> to a
> > photo program, I can probably talk my photo shop expert wife into
> putting
> > the spring gear onto the round cowl template for you.
> > Tom Jones
> >
> > > I am trying to find a 3-view drawing .jpg , .pdf , or ? of my KF
> 5
> > Outback
> > > with
> > > the round bump cowl. Even Skystar didn't find one in their
> archives. I
> > want to
> > > give the FAA inspector next week for sign off.
> > >
> > > I know I saw one at one time with dimensions......hmmmmmm....
> > >
> > > Any one? Thanks.
> > >
> > > Jeff Smathers
> >
>
>
> ==
> ==
> ==
> ==
>
>
Message 43
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Clifford Begnaud" <shoeless@barefootpilot.com>
BP Wrote:
> L/D max not only gives you the max glide range, but also the best angle of
> climb.
Are you sure about this? I would believe "best rate of climb" which is also
"best time to climb" but there is no way that best angle and best glide are
at the same speed on our airplane!
Think of it this way, a helicopter has a best glide speed, BUT it's best
angle of climb is at 0 mph forward speed.
Now take a model 5 with an 80 hp Rotax 912 vs the same plane with a Lycoming
0-360. I guarantee that the best angle of climb speed will be MUCH slower
with Lyc than with the Rotax. Yet they will both have the same best glide
speed. Does this make sense?
Cliff
You could do a series of climbs at different speeds all at the same
> power setting, and calculate the best angle of climb. This would be L/D
> max. The airspeed for L/D max does not depend on power setting...it will
> be the same speed at full power, windmilling, or feathered. The glide
> distance will certainly be different, but the best glide airspeed will be
> the same at the same gross weight.
>
> BP
>
>
> > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader
> > <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
> >
> > Flame suit on? Check. Bullet bouncer on? Check.
> >
> > Ok, guys. Another wives tale here and this time it
> > isn't me with the red face. ;-) Well, at least this
> > one time anyway....
> >
> > Actually it is a very common misconception of L/D max
> > that weight changes it, but it doesn't change with
> > weight. Got my "Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators"
> > right here...
> >
> > L/D max occurs at the same angle of attack under all
> > weights, unless you change configuration (Flaps, gear,
> > trim, etc which changes drag) This is another nice
> > feature of AOA indicators. You can set them for L/D
> > max indication just like stall indication and you will
> > always get it right.
> >
> > The speed for L/D max changes with weight, but the AOA
> > and the ratio of L/D max does not change. If it is
> > 10:1, it is always 10:1 under any weight. If you go
> > to the L/D max AOA with an engine failure, you will
> > glide the same distance no matter what the weight.
> > That is the hardest part to understand. When you are
> > heavier, you go down faster and forward faster to keep
> > the AOA. You go the same distance both down and
> > forward, but in less time. The angle or ratio doesn't
> > change.
> >
> > L/D max is important because it is were you have the
> > best glide ratio and the best long range cruise. If
> > the engine quits, or you are low on fuel, going to the
> > L/D max AOA is the best you can do.
> >
> > Since we each build a little differently, especially
> > in drag reduction, our L/D max's will not be the same.
> > But you can test for it.
> >
> > I forgot how the graph looks, but to test for L/D, you
> > have to do a series of power off glides. Say you
> > start at 3,500' and glide to 2,000'. You fly at a
> > constant airspeed and record the gps ground speed (no
> > wind for this) or convert to true airspeed, and you
> > record the time it takes to drop from 3,000 to 2,000.
> > (You use the first 500' drop to get stable.)
> >
> > Repeating the test for 75, 70, 65, 60, 55, 50 mph (and
> > maybe 45 mph for you light weight guys) should give
> > you a curve. If I remember correctly, you use speed
> > across the bottom in both mph and feet per minute, and
> > descent in fpm on the side. Then you can compare the
> > ft/minute forward against the ft/minute downward.
> > (The mph scale is so you can use the speed in the
> > plane instead of ft/min.)
> >
> > The graph can also be set up as AOA across the bottom
> > instead of speed, if you have an AOA indicator.
> >
> > At one point on the curve you will travel the most
> > distance forward vs the distance downward. That is
> > your ratio to look for. But I haven't gotten to this
> > point in my testing, so I don't remember what the
> > graph really looks like. But that is how you test for
> > it.
> >
> > Sorry. Maybe someone has already done it in their
> > testing and can fill in. I'd have to go dig up my
> > archives to find it again, and I don't have the time
> > right now. There have been some articles about "Zero
> > Thrust Testing" and L/D test a while back, if anyone
> > has them.
> >
> > Kurt S.
> >
> > __________________________________
> > http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools
> >
> >
>
>
Message 44
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Vic Jacko" <vicwj@earthlink.net>
Somewhere I remember the situation whereas the point at which the beat rate
of climb and best angle of climb cross is defined as the "ceiling" of that
particular aircraft. Kurt, please check you Navy book or maybe you
remember without looking.
I also thought I remembered "the best rate of climb is the best glide speed"
depending on altitude I think! The higher you are the slower becomes the
best rate of climb which allows at the ceiling of the aircraft to meet and
cross a little bit the best angle of climb. Maybe I am all wet but that
is what I think remember from ground school.
Keep the clean side while landing!
vic
----- Original Message -----
From: <u2drvr@dslextreme.com>
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: u2drvr@dslextreme.com
>
> L/D max not only gives you the max glide range, but also the best angle of
> climb. You could do a series of climbs at different speeds all at the same
> power setting, and calculate the best angle of climb. This would be L/D
> max. The airspeed for L/D max does not depend on power setting...it will
> be the same speed at full power, windmilling, or feathered. The glide
> distance will certainly be different, but the best glide airspeed will be
> the same at the same gross weight.
>
> BP
>
>
> > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader
> > <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
> >
> > Flame suit on? Check. Bullet bouncer on? Check.
> >
> > Ok, guys. Another wives tale here and this time it
> > isn't me with the red face. ;-) Well, at least this
> > one time anyway....
> >
> > Actually it is a very common misconception of L/D max
> > that weight changes it, but it doesn't change with
> > weight. Got my "Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators"
> > right here...
> >
> > L/D max occurs at the same angle of attack under all
> > weights, unless you change configuration (Flaps, gear,
> > trim, etc which changes drag) This is another nice
> > feature of AOA indicators. You can set them for L/D
> > max indication just like stall indication and you will
> > always get it right.
> >
> > The speed for L/D max changes with weight, but the AOA
> > and the ratio of L/D max does not change. If it is
> > 10:1, it is always 10:1 under any weight. If you go
> > to the L/D max AOA with an engine failure, you will
> > glide the same distance no matter what the weight.
> > That is the hardest part to understand. When you are
> > heavier, you go down faster and forward faster to keep
> > the AOA. You go the same distance both down and
> > forward, but in less time. The angle or ratio doesn't
> > change.
> >
> > L/D max is important because it is were you have the
> > best glide ratio and the best long range cruise. If
> > the engine quits, or you are low on fuel, going to the
> > L/D max AOA is the best you can do.
> >
> > Since we each build a little differently, especially
> > in drag reduction, our L/D max's will not be the same.
> > But you can test for it.
> >
> > I forgot how the graph looks, but to test for L/D, you
> > have to do a series of power off glides. Say you
> > start at 3,500' and glide to 2,000'. You fly at a
> > constant airspeed and record the gps ground speed (no
> > wind for this) or convert to true airspeed, and you
> > record the time it takes to drop from 3,000 to 2,000.
> > (You use the first 500' drop to get stable.)
> >
> > Repeating the test for 75, 70, 65, 60, 55, 50 mph (and
> > maybe 45 mph for you light weight guys) should give
> > you a curve. If I remember correctly, you use speed
> > across the bottom in both mph and feet per minute, and
> > descent in fpm on the side. Then you can compare the
> > ft/minute forward against the ft/minute downward.
> > (The mph scale is so you can use the speed in the
> > plane instead of ft/min.)
> >
> > The graph can also be set up as AOA across the bottom
> > instead of speed, if you have an AOA indicator.
> >
> > At one point on the curve you will travel the most
> > distance forward vs the distance downward. That is
> > your ratio to look for. But I haven't gotten to this
> > point in my testing, so I don't remember what the
> > graph really looks like. But that is how you test for
> > it.
> >
> > Sorry. Maybe someone has already done it in their
> > testing and can fill in. I'd have to go dig up my
> > archives to find it again, and I don't have the time
> > right now. There have been some articles about "Zero
> > Thrust Testing" and L/D test a while back, if anyone
> > has them.
> >
> > Kurt S.
> >
> > __________________________________
> > http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools
> >
> >
>
>
Message 45
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Wwillyard@aol.com
In a message dated 2/20/2004 9:01:25 PM Eastern Standard Time,
vicwj@earthlink.net writes:
I also thought I remembered "the best rate of climb is the best glide speed"
depending on altitude I think!
Looking at a Cessna 172 manual that I have handy the published maximum glide
speed is almost exactly midway between Vx and Vy. I don't know how this
relationship compares for other aircraft.
William Willyard
Classic IV
Grandville MI
Message 46
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "JMCBEAN" <JDMCBEAN@cableone.net>
At the absolute ceiling of the aircraft Vx and Vy will become the same and
the rate and angle of climb will both be zero.
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 Vic Jacko
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Vic Jacko" <vicwj@earthlink.net>
Somewhere I remember the situation whereas the point at which the beat rate
of climb and best angle of climb cross is defined as the "ceiling" of that
particular aircraft. Kurt, please check you Navy book or maybe you
remember without looking.
I also thought I remembered "the best rate of climb is the best glide speed"
depending on altitude I think! The higher you are the slower becomes the
best rate of climb which allows at the ceiling of the aircraft to meet and
cross a little bit the best angle of climb. Maybe I am all wet but that
is what I think remember from ground school.
Keep the clean side while landing!
vic
----- Original Message -----
From: <u2drvr@dslextreme.com>
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: u2drvr@dslextreme.com
>
> L/D max not only gives you the max glide range, but also the best angle of
> climb. You could do a series of climbs at different speeds all at the same
> power setting, and calculate the best angle of climb. This would be L/D
> max. The airspeed for L/D max does not depend on power setting...it will
> be the same speed at full power, windmilling, or feathered. The glide
> distance will certainly be different, but the best glide airspeed will be
> the same at the same gross weight.
>
> BP
>
>
> > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader
> > <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
> >
> > Flame suit on? Check. Bullet bouncer on? Check.
> >
> > Ok, guys. Another wives tale here and this time it
> > isn't me with the red face. ;-) Well, at least this
> > one time anyway....
> >
> > Actually it is a very common misconception of L/D max
> > that weight changes it, but it doesn't change with
> > weight. Got my "Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators"
> > right here...
> >
> > L/D max occurs at the same angle of attack under all
> > weights, unless you change configuration (Flaps, gear,
> > trim, etc which changes drag) This is another nice
> > feature of AOA indicators. You can set them for L/D
> > max indication just like stall indication and you will
> > always get it right.
> >
> > The speed for L/D max changes with weight, but the AOA
> > and the ratio of L/D max does not change. If it is
> > 10:1, it is always 10:1 under any weight. If you go
> > to the L/D max AOA with an engine failure, you will
> > glide the same distance no matter what the weight.
> > That is the hardest part to understand. When you are
> > heavier, you go down faster and forward faster to keep
> > the AOA. You go the same distance both down and
> > forward, but in less time. The angle or ratio doesn't
> > change.
> >
> > L/D max is important because it is were you have the
> > best glide ratio and the best long range cruise. If
> > the engine quits, or you are low on fuel, going to the
> > L/D max AOA is the best you can do.
> >
> > Since we each build a little differently, especially
> > in drag reduction, our L/D max's will not be the same.
> > But you can test for it.
> >
> > I forgot how the graph looks, but to test for L/D, you
> > have to do a series of power off glides. Say you
> > start at 3,500' and glide to 2,000'. You fly at a
> > constant airspeed and record the gps ground speed (no
> > wind for this) or convert to true airspeed, and you
> > record the time it takes to drop from 3,000 to 2,000.
> > (You use the first 500' drop to get stable.)
> >
> > Repeating the test for 75, 70, 65, 60, 55, 50 mph (and
> > maybe 45 mph for you light weight guys) should give
> > you a curve. If I remember correctly, you use speed
> > across the bottom in both mph and feet per minute, and
> > descent in fpm on the side. Then you can compare the
> > ft/minute forward against the ft/minute downward.
> > (The mph scale is so you can use the speed in the
> > plane instead of ft/min.)
> >
> > The graph can also be set up as AOA across the bottom
> > instead of speed, if you have an AOA indicator.
> >
> > At one point on the curve you will travel the most
> > distance forward vs the distance downward. That is
> > your ratio to look for. But I haven't gotten to this
> > point in my testing, so I don't remember what the
> > graph really looks like. But that is how you test for
> > it.
> >
> > Sorry. Maybe someone has already done it in their
> > testing and can fill in. I'd have to go dig up my
> > archives to find it again, and I don't have the time
> > right now. There have been some articles about "Zero
> > Thrust Testing" and L/D test a while back, if anyone
> > has them.
> >
> > Kurt S.
> >
> > __________________________________
> > http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools
> >
> >
>
>
Message 47
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "JMCBEAN" <JDMCBEAN@cableone.net>
An aircraft always achieves maximum glide at a certain angle of attack (CL).
When gliding for maximum range we must always operate at the optimum CL
which produces the maximum L/D ratio. Therefore the heavier aircraft will
have to fly at a higher speed, while the lighter aircraft will fly at a
slower speed. Both aircraft will be at the same angle of attack however. The
ideal instrument for this would be an angle of attack indicator.
The question... would that angle of attack be the same for Vx or Vy..
hmmmmmmm :)
Blue Skies!!
John & Debra McBean
"The Sky is not the Limit... It's a Playground"
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Clifford Begnaud
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Clifford Begnaud"
<shoeless@barefootpilot.com>
BP Wrote:
> L/D max not only gives you the max glide range, but also the best angle of
> climb.
Are you sure about this? I would believe "best rate of climb" which is also
"best time to climb" but there is no way that best angle and best glide are
at the same speed on our airplane!
Think of it this way, a helicopter has a best glide speed, BUT it's best
angle of climb is at 0 mph forward speed.
Now take a model 5 with an 80 hp Rotax 912 vs the same plane with a Lycoming
0-360. I guarantee that the best angle of climb speed will be MUCH slower
with Lyc than with the Rotax. Yet they will both have the same best glide
speed. Does this make sense?
Cliff
You could do a series of climbs at different speeds all at the same
> power setting, and calculate the best angle of climb. This would be L/D
> max. The airspeed for L/D max does not depend on power setting...it will
> be the same speed at full power, windmilling, or feathered. The glide
> distance will certainly be different, but the best glide airspeed will be
> the same at the same gross weight.
>
> BP
>
>
> > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader
> > <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
> >
> > Flame suit on? Check. Bullet bouncer on? Check.
> >
> > Ok, guys. Another wives tale here and this time it
> > isn't me with the red face. ;-) Well, at least this
> > one time anyway....
> >
> > Actually it is a very common misconception of L/D max
> > that weight changes it, but it doesn't change with
> > weight. Got my "Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators"
> > right here...
> >
> > L/D max occurs at the same angle of attack under all
> > weights, unless you change configuration (Flaps, gear,
> > trim, etc which changes drag) This is another nice
> > feature of AOA indicators. You can set them for L/D
> > max indication just like stall indication and you will
> > always get it right.
> >
> > The speed for L/D max changes with weight, but the AOA
> > and the ratio of L/D max does not change. If it is
> > 10:1, it is always 10:1 under any weight. If you go
> > to the L/D max AOA with an engine failure, you will
> > glide the same distance no matter what the weight.
> > That is the hardest part to understand. When you are
> > heavier, you go down faster and forward faster to keep
> > the AOA. You go the same distance both down and
> > forward, but in less time. The angle or ratio doesn't
> > change.
> >
> > L/D max is important because it is were you have the
> > best glide ratio and the best long range cruise. If
> > the engine quits, or you are low on fuel, going to the
> > L/D max AOA is the best you can do.
> >
> > Since we each build a little differently, especially
> > in drag reduction, our L/D max's will not be the same.
> > But you can test for it.
> >
> > I forgot how the graph looks, but to test for L/D, you
> > have to do a series of power off glides. Say you
> > start at 3,500' and glide to 2,000'. You fly at a
> > constant airspeed and record the gps ground speed (no
> > wind for this) or convert to true airspeed, and you
> > record the time it takes to drop from 3,000 to 2,000.
> > (You use the first 500' drop to get stable.)
> >
> > Repeating the test for 75, 70, 65, 60, 55, 50 mph (and
> > maybe 45 mph for you light weight guys) should give
> > you a curve. If I remember correctly, you use speed
> > across the bottom in both mph and feet per minute, and
> > descent in fpm on the side. Then you can compare the
> > ft/minute forward against the ft/minute downward.
> > (The mph scale is so you can use the speed in the
> > plane instead of ft/min.)
> >
> > The graph can also be set up as AOA across the bottom
> > instead of speed, if you have an AOA indicator.
> >
> > At one point on the curve you will travel the most
> > distance forward vs the distance downward. That is
> > your ratio to look for. But I haven't gotten to this
> > point in my testing, so I don't remember what the
> > graph really looks like. But that is how you test for
> > it.
> >
> > Sorry. Maybe someone has already done it in their
> > testing and can fill in. I'd have to go dig up my
> > archives to find it again, and I don't have the time
> > right now. There have been some articles about "Zero
> > Thrust Testing" and L/D test a while back, if anyone
> > has them.
> >
> > Kurt S.
> >
> > __________________________________
> > http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools
> >
> >
>
>
Message 48
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Brian Peck <u2drvr@dslextreme.com>
If you plot total drag vs airspeed on a graph, you get what is called
the drag polar. This will look like a wide U shape because at low speed
drag is high due to induced drag (drag caused by lift) and at high
speed drag is high due to parasite drag (directly related to the
frontal surface area). The lowest point of the U will be L/D max and
this will be the best angle of climb, the maximum endurance airspeed,
and the minimum sink airspeed. If you draw a line from the origin of
the graph tangent to (barely touching) the right side of the U, you
will get the maximum rate of climb speed, the max range cruise speed,
and the max range glide speed. The shape of the curve will generally
remain constant but will shift left or right as the gross weight
changes.
As you climb you lose both lift and power. The max ceiling will occur
when the power required to overcome drag (at L/D max) equals the power
available. The L/D speed will be the same indicated airspeed (not TAS)
at all altitudes
The drag polar is also a thrust required (to maintain 1g level flight)
chart and when you go below L/D max, it takes more power to maintain a
slower speed. In the AF we call this the "backside of the power curve"
and flying in this region can be dangerous because if you lose airspeed
more power will be required and if you don't notice a loss of speed the
aircraft will continue to slow until it stalls. This is very noticeable
in the U-2 when we fly no-flap approaches because we must fly well into
this region due to the very low drag and high aspect ratio of the wing.
Brian Peck
U-2 Test Pilot
On Feb 20, 2004, at 5:57 PM, Vic Jacko wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Vic Jacko" <vicwj@earthlink.net>
>
> Somewhere I remember the situation whereas the point at which the beat
> rate
> of climb and best angle of climb cross is defined as the "ceiling" of
> that
> particular aircraft. Kurt, please check you Navy book or maybe you
> remember without looking.
>
>
> I also thought I remembered "the best rate of climb is the best glide
> speed"
> depending on altitude I think! The higher you are the slower becomes
> the
> best rate of climb which allows at the ceiling of the aircraft to meet
> and
> cross a little bit the best angle of climb. Maybe I am all wet but
> that
> is what I think remember from ground school.
>
> Keep the clean side while landing!
>
> vic
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <u2drvr@dslextreme.com>
> To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050
>
>
>> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: u2drvr@dslextreme.com
>>
>> L/D max not only gives you the max glide range, but also the best
>> angle of
>> climb. You could do a series of climbs at different speeds all at the
>> same
>> power setting, and calculate the best angle of climb. This would be
>> L/D
>> max. The airspeed for L/D max does not depend on power setting...it
>> will
>> be the same speed at full power, windmilling, or feathered. The glide
>> distance will certainly be different, but the best glide airspeed
>> will be
>> the same at the same gross weight.
>>
>> BP
>>
>>
>>> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader
>>> <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
>>>
>>> Flame suit on? Check. Bullet bouncer on? Check.
>>>
>>> Ok, guys. Another wives tale here and this time it
>>> isn't me with the red face. ;-) Well, at least this
>>> one time anyway....
>>>
>>> Actually it is a very common misconception of L/D max
>>> that weight changes it, but it doesn't change with
>>> weight. Got my "Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators"
>>> right here...
>>>
>>> L/D max occurs at the same angle of attack under all
>>> weights, unless you change configuration (Flaps, gear,
>>> trim, etc which changes drag) This is another nice
>>> feature of AOA indicators. You can set them for L/D
>>> max indication just like stall indication and you will
>>> always get it right.
>>>
>>> The speed for L/D max changes with weight, but the AOA
>>> and the ratio of L/D max does not change. If it is
>>> 10:1, it is always 10:1 under any weight. If you go
>>> to the L/D max AOA with an engine failure, you will
>>> glide the same distance no matter what the weight.
>>> That is the hardest part to understand. When you are
>>> heavier, you go down faster and forward faster to keep
>>> the AOA. You go the same distance both down and
>>> forward, but in less time. The angle or ratio doesn't
>>> change.
>>>
>>> L/D max is important because it is were you have the
>>> best glide ratio and the best long range cruise. If
>>> the engine quits, or you are low on fuel, going to the
>>> L/D max AOA is the best you can do.
>>>
>>> Since we each build a little differently, especially
>>> in drag reduction, our L/D max's will not be the same.
>>> But you can test for it.
>>>
>>> I forgot how the graph looks, but to test for L/D, you
>>> have to do a series of power off glides. Say you
>>> start at 3,500' and glide to 2,000'. You fly at a
>>> constant airspeed and record the gps ground speed (no
>>> wind for this) or convert to true airspeed, and you
>>> record the time it takes to drop from 3,000 to 2,000.
>>> (You use the first 500' drop to get stable.)
>>>
>>> Repeating the test for 75, 70, 65, 60, 55, 50 mph (and
>>> maybe 45 mph for you light weight guys) should give
>>> you a curve. If I remember correctly, you use speed
>>> across the bottom in both mph and feet per minute, and
>>> descent in fpm on the side. Then you can compare the
>>> ft/minute forward against the ft/minute downward.
>>> (The mph scale is so you can use the speed in the
>>> plane instead of ft/min.)
>>>
>>> The graph can also be set up as AOA across the bottom
>>> instead of speed, if you have an AOA indicator.
>>>
>>> At one point on the curve you will travel the most
>>> distance forward vs the distance downward. That is
>>> your ratio to look for. But I haven't gotten to this
>>> point in my testing, so I don't remember what the
>>> graph really looks like. But that is how you test for
>>> it.
>>>
>>> Sorry. Maybe someone has already done it in their
>>> testing and can fill in. I'd have to go dig up my
>>> archives to find it again, and I don't have the time
>>> right now. There have been some articles about "Zero
>>> Thrust Testing" and L/D test a while back, if anyone
>>> has them.
>>>
>>> Kurt S.
>>>
>>> __________________________________
>>> http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> _-
> =======================================================================
> _-
> =======================================================================
> _-
> =======================================================================
> _-
> =======================================================================
> >
>
>
Message 49
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "JMCBEAN" <JDMCBEAN@cableone.net>
Your absolutely correct Cliff..... Try and get a prop to stop on a Cessna
150 or 172 sometime... not as easy as one might think.
Blue Skies!!
John & Debra McBean
"The Sky is not the Limit... It's a Playground"
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Clifford Begnaud
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Clifford Begnaud"
<shoeless@barefootpilot.com>
I can tell you from first hand experience, it's MUCH better with the prop
stopped.
Cliff
>
> Very good Kurt....
> Here's one for discussion.... With the ratio be better with a wind milling
> prop or a stopped prop ??
>
> Blue Skies!!
> John & Debra McBean
>
do not archive
Message 50
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "JMCBEAN" <JDMCBEAN@cableone.net>
Touch !! Right out of the aeronautics manual ! I believe as the weight
decreases from gross the curve will move down and slightly left.
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 Brian Peck
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Brian Peck <u2drvr@dslextreme.com>
If you plot total drag vs airspeed on a graph, you get what is called
the drag polar. This will look like a wide U shape because at low speed
drag is high due to induced drag (drag caused by lift) and at high
speed drag is high due to parasite drag (directly related to the
frontal surface area). The lowest point of the U will be L/D max and
this will be the best angle of climb, the maximum endurance airspeed,
and the minimum sink airspeed. If you draw a line from the origin of
the graph tangent to (barely touching) the right side of the U, you
will get the maximum rate of climb speed, the max range cruise speed,
and the max range glide speed. The shape of the curve will generally
remain constant but will shift left or right as the gross weight
changes.
As you climb you lose both lift and power. The max ceiling will occur
when the power required to overcome drag (at L/D max) equals the power
available. The L/D speed will be the same indicated airspeed (not TAS)
at all altitudes
The drag polar is also a thrust required (to maintain 1g level flight)
chart and when you go below L/D max, it takes more power to maintain a
slower speed. In the AF we call this the "backside of the power curve"
and flying in this region can be dangerous because if you lose airspeed
more power will be required and if you don't notice a loss of speed the
aircraft will continue to slow until it stalls. This is very noticeable
in the U-2 when we fly no-flap approaches because we must fly well into
this region due to the very low drag and high aspect ratio of the wing.
Brian Peck
U-2 Test Pilot
On Feb 20, 2004, at 5:57 PM, Vic Jacko wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Vic Jacko" <vicwj@earthlink.net>
>
> Somewhere I remember the situation whereas the point at which the beat
> rate
> of climb and best angle of climb cross is defined as the "ceiling" of
> that
> particular aircraft. Kurt, please check you Navy book or maybe you
> remember without looking.
>
>
> I also thought I remembered "the best rate of climb is the best glide
> speed"
> depending on altitude I think! The higher you are the slower becomes
> the
> best rate of climb which allows at the ceiling of the aircraft to meet
> and
> cross a little bit the best angle of climb. Maybe I am all wet but
> that
> is what I think remember from ground school.
>
> Keep the clean side while landing!
>
> vic
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <u2drvr@dslextreme.com>
> To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050
>
>
>> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: u2drvr@dslextreme.com
>>
>> L/D max not only gives you the max glide range, but also the best
>> angle of
>> climb. You could do a series of climbs at different speeds all at the
>> same
>> power setting, and calculate the best angle of climb. This would be
>> L/D
>> max. The airspeed for L/D max does not depend on power setting...it
>> will
>> be the same speed at full power, windmilling, or feathered. The glide
>> distance will certainly be different, but the best glide airspeed
>> will be
>> the same at the same gross weight.
>>
>> BP
>>
>>
>>> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader
>>> <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
>>>
>>> Flame suit on? Check. Bullet bouncer on? Check.
>>>
>>> Ok, guys. Another wives tale here and this time it
>>> isn't me with the red face. ;-) Well, at least this
>>> one time anyway....
>>>
>>> Actually it is a very common misconception of L/D max
>>> that weight changes it, but it doesn't change with
>>> weight. Got my "Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators"
>>> right here...
>>>
>>> L/D max occurs at the same angle of attack under all
>>> weights, unless you change configuration (Flaps, gear,
>>> trim, etc which changes drag) This is another nice
>>> feature of AOA indicators. You can set them for L/D
>>> max indication just like stall indication and you will
>>> always get it right.
>>>
>>> The speed for L/D max changes with weight, but the AOA
>>> and the ratio of L/D max does not change. If it is
>>> 10:1, it is always 10:1 under any weight. If you go
>>> to the L/D max AOA with an engine failure, you will
>>> glide the same distance no matter what the weight.
>>> That is the hardest part to understand. When you are
>>> heavier, you go down faster and forward faster to keep
>>> the AOA. You go the same distance both down and
>>> forward, but in less time. The angle or ratio doesn't
>>> change.
>>>
>>> L/D max is important because it is were you have the
>>> best glide ratio and the best long range cruise. If
>>> the engine quits, or you are low on fuel, going to the
>>> L/D max AOA is the best you can do.
>>>
>>> Since we each build a little differently, especially
>>> in drag reduction, our L/D max's will not be the same.
>>> But you can test for it.
>>>
>>> I forgot how the graph looks, but to test for L/D, you
>>> have to do a series of power off glides. Say you
>>> start at 3,500' and glide to 2,000'. You fly at a
>>> constant airspeed and record the gps ground speed (no
>>> wind for this) or convert to true airspeed, and you
>>> record the time it takes to drop from 3,000 to 2,000.
>>> (You use the first 500' drop to get stable.)
>>>
>>> Repeating the test for 75, 70, 65, 60, 55, 50 mph (and
>>> maybe 45 mph for you light weight guys) should give
>>> you a curve. If I remember correctly, you use speed
>>> across the bottom in both mph and feet per minute, and
>>> descent in fpm on the side. Then you can compare the
>>> ft/minute forward against the ft/minute downward.
>>> (The mph scale is so you can use the speed in the
>>> plane instead of ft/min.)
>>>
>>> The graph can also be set up as AOA across the bottom
>>> instead of speed, if you have an AOA indicator.
>>>
>>> At one point on the curve you will travel the most
>>> distance forward vs the distance downward. That is
>>> your ratio to look for. But I haven't gotten to this
>>> point in my testing, so I don't remember what the
>>> graph really looks like. But that is how you test for
>>> it.
>>>
>>> Sorry. Maybe someone has already done it in their
>>> testing and can fill in. I'd have to go dig up my
>>> archives to find it again, and I don't have the time
>>> right now. There have been some articles about "Zero
>>> Thrust Testing" and L/D test a while back, if anyone
>>> has them.
>>>
>>> Kurt S.
>>>
>>> __________________________________
>>> http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> _-
> =======================================================================
> _-
> =======================================================================
> _-
> =======================================================================
> _-
> =======================================================================
> >
>
>
Message 51
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Hi - Brand New series 5 owner - looking for a little |
advice :
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: davestapa@juno.com
Phil,
Last October I spent a long weekend with Roger and put 15 hours on
tailwheel airplanes. About 11 hours in a Citabria and 4 in Roger's
Model IV with a 912.(Sure beats driving a 172 around the sky) Had a blast
and would recommend Roger as a CFI. He should be on the list (you out
there Roger?) He teaches at Amelia Reid Aviation at Reid-Hillview, San
Jose.
David Estapa
Woodstock, GA
S5 final assembly
On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 08:09:18 -0800 "Lowell Fitt" <lcfitt@inreach.com>
writes:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Lowell Fitt"
> <lcfitt@inreach.com>
>
> Phil,
>
> For the Tail Wheel training, try Roger Standley. His airplane is
> based at
> Frazer Lake, I don't remember where he teaches out of. Or Robin
> Reid,
> Hillview airport in San Jose.
>
> For the Engine, I would strongly consider the Rotax 912S.
>
> Lowell
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Phil Cowley" <pcowley@virtualrcflight.com>
> To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Kitfox-List: Hi - Brand New series 5 owner - looking for a
> little
> advice :
>
>
> > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Phil Cowley"
> <pcowley@virtualrcflight.com>
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > First off I want to thank this wonderful group for being here. I
> just
> > purchased a series 5 that is just ready to cover and finish with
> engine
> > installation (not included) & instruments.
> >
> > I have a bit of a challenge though, as it is 3,000 miles away (I'm
> in
> > san Luis Obispo / Santa cruz, California & its in new york state
> !.
> >
> > I'm going to tow it home (and all its assorted parts) with a
> flatbed
> > utility trailer, probably 18 or 20' in length and 82" wide with
> tarps
> > wrapped around the aircraft.
> >
> > Any ideas on the best way to pack it on the trailer (it's not
> currently
> > covered at all). It's currently got its wings, flight surfaces,
> and gear
> > on - I'm planning to take them both off and stow. What about the
> > elevator - will it come off ?
> >
> > How much work is it to disassemble it (wings off, gear off, elev
> off ? )
> >
> >
> > What should I worry about in regards to towing in this type of a
> > situation. I read something about a fuse bending on the list -
> should I
> > be concerned ?
> >
> > Any other ideas on what I should do in prep for the trip? Has
> anyone
> > else done anything like this ?
> >
> > Does anyone have Drawings of the series 5 (safari - taildragger).
> If
> > someone has cad files that would be great !
> >
> > A couple non travel related questions too:
> >
> > 1) I'd love to talk to any series 5-7 owners about power plants
> and
> > installs. I'm leaning towards the Subaru's and like the Ea81 & 82
> as
> > well as the EJ22. Pro's & con's anyone ?
> >
> > 2) If anyone has recommendations on what should be beefed up or
> modified
> > in the build, please let me know. I'm planning on beefing up the
> > elevator trim per the crash stories online - any thoughts ?
> >
> > 3) Anyone know of a good place to get my instruction in a
> tailwheel in
> > California ?
> >
> > 4) Has anyone converted a 5 tail dragger to tri gear ? (Gasp.... I
> know,
> > I just have never flown one)
> >
> > 5) Does anyone know of a CFI in California who would teach in a
> > tailwheel kitfox (either mine or his ?)
> >
> > 6) who do you recommend for insurance ? ideas of rates for 2 low
> time
> > pilots ( Do I even want to know ?)
> >
> > Now for the crazy part - I just purchased this aircraft, and have
> never
> > actually seen a series 5 in "Real Life". I'm pretty familiar with
> the
> > IV's and have sat in a few. If anyone in California is interested
> in
> > showing off their airplane I'd love to take a look and talk to you
> about
> > it & your experiences.
> >
> > Thanks again for everyone's time - sorry for the long email and so
> many
> > questions
> >
> > Happy flying & warm regards !
> >
> > Phil Cowley
> > 831.588.7596
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> > [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jeff
> > Smathers
> > To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> > Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Trying to find 3-View Drawings of a
> Kitfox 5
> > Outback
> >
> > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Jeff Smathers
> <jsmathers@cybcon.com>
> >
> > Thanks Tom,
> >
> > I have the standard tube gear so that will work out perfect!
> >
> > Thanks for your help, Jeff Smathers
> >
> >
> > Tom Jones wrote:
> >
> > > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Tom Jones
> <fire_n_ice@direcway.com>
> > >
> > > Jeff, I just noticed the round cowl serries 5 in the painting
> > templates has
> > > the tube gear only. If you have the spring gear and don't have
> access
> > to a
> > > photo program, I can probably talk my photo shop expert wife
> into
> > putting
> > > the spring gear onto the round cowl template for you.
> > > Tom Jones
> > >
> > > > I am trying to find a 3-view drawing .jpg , .pdf , or ? of
> my KF
> > 5
> > > Outback
> > > > with
> > > > the round bump cowl. Even Skystar didn't find one in their
> > archives. I
> > > want to
> > > > give the FAA inspector next week for sign off.
> > > >
> > > > I know I saw one at one time with dimensions......hmmmmmm....
> > > >
> > > > Any one? Thanks.
> > > >
> > > > Jeff Smathers
> > >
> >
> >
> > ==
> > ==
> > ==
> > ==
> >
> >
>
>
>
=
>
=
>
=
>
=
>
>
>
>
>
>
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! --
|