---------------------------------------------------------- Kitfox-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Fri 02/20/04: 51 ---------------------------------------------------------- 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 _____________________________________ Time: 12:42:05 AM PST US From: torgemor kitfox-list Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Re: EGT Cold Joint Calibration point (Westberg types). --> Kitfox-List message posted by: torgemor 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 (Westberg types). ===== >--> Kitfox-List message posted by: dwight purdy (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 >> >>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 _____________________________________ Time: 03:01:30 AM PST US From: Jim Burke Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: 2-blade vs. 3-blade --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Jim Burke 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 _____________________________________ Time: 04:40:24 AM PST US From: "Clifford Begnaud" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Hi - Brand New series 5 owner - looking for a little advice : --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Clifford Begnaud" 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 _____________________________________ Time: 04:48:53 AM PST US From: michel Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 --> Kitfox-List message posted by: michel >===== Original Message From kurt schrader >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 _____________________________________ Time: 05:26:21 AM PST US From: "Dee Young" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: 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" 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 To: 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" > 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 > 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 > > > 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 _____________________________________ Time: 05:58:25 AM PST US From: W Duke Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: 2-blade vs. 3-blade --> Kitfox-List message posted by: W Duke 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 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 _____________________________________ Time: 06:20:24 AM PST US From: "Tom Jones advice" : Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Hi - Brand New series 5 owner - looking for a little advice : --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Tom Jones 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 _____________________________________ Time: 06:21:59 AM PST US From: "Gary Algate" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: 2-blade vs. 3-blade --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Gary Algate" 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 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 _____________________________________ Time: 06:35:05 AM PST US From: DPREMGOOD@aol.com Subject: Re: RE: Kitfox-List: 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 ____________________________________ Time: 06:37:27 AM PST US From: michel Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: 2-blade vs. 3-blade --> Kitfox-List message posted by: michel >===== Original Message From "Gary Algate" >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 ____________________________________ Time: 06:48:37 AM PST US From: "Gary Algate" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: 2-blade vs. 3-blade --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Gary Algate" 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" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 07:04:43 AM PST US From: michel Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: 2-blade vs. 3-blade --> Kitfox-List message posted by: michel >===== Original Message From "Gary Algate" >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 ____________________________________ Time: 07:08:44 AM PST US From: "Gary Algate" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: 2-blade vs. 3-blade --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Gary Algate" No sweat Michel Gary >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ok, more pitch = less drag, of course. ... sorry, sometimes I am slow! :-) Cheers, Michel <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< ________________________________ Message 14 ____________________________________ Time: 07:09:04 AM PST US From: "Dave & Wendy Grosvenor" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Dave & Wendy Grosvenor" 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" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 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 ____________________________________ Time: 07:24:10 AM PST US From: "Kerry Skyring" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Thank you --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Kerry Skyring" >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 ____________________________________ Time: 07:51:43 AM PST US From: "hausding, sid" Subject: Kitfox-List: looking for a little advice : --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "hausding, sid" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 07:51:48 AM PST US From: "Paul little advice" : Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Hi - Brand New series 5 owner - looking for a little advice : --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Paul 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" > >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 ____________________________________ Time: 07:51:48 AM PST US From: Paul Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: 912S Starter Issue --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Paul 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 ____________________________________ Time: 07:57:39 AM PST US From: "Randy Daughenbaugh" Subject: Kitfox-List: Coolant temperature sensor and EIS --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Randy Daughenbaugh" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 07:57:39 AM PST US From: "Randy Daughenbaugh" Subject: Kitfox-List: CONDUCTIVE GREASE --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Randy Daughenbaugh" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 08:12:01 AM PST US From: "Lowell Fitt" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Hi - Brand New series 5 owner - looking for a little advice : --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Lowell Fitt" 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" Subject: Kitfox-List: Hi - Brand New series 5 owner - looking for a little advice : > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Phil Cowley" > > 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 > > 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 > > > > 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 ____________________________________ Time: 08:52:24 AM PST US From: Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 --> Kitfox-List message posted by: 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 ____________________________________ Time: 09:05:45 AM PST US From: "Marc Arseneault" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: CONDUCTIVE GREASE --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Marc Arseneault" Randy a tube of electrical insulating compound works great and can be purchased from your local auto parts store. Best Regards, Marc Arseneault Ontario Canada ________________________________ Message 24 ____________________________________ Time: 09:09:35 AM PST US From: Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: CONDUCTIVE GREASE --> Kitfox-List message posted by: 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" wrote: >--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Randy Daughenbaugh" > > > >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 ____________________________________ Time: 10:05:01 AM PST US From: Wwillyard@aol.com Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: 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 ____________________________________ Time: 11:51:14 AM PST US From: "JMCBEAN" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "JMCBEAN" 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 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 ____________________________________ Time: 11:54:48 AM PST US From: "JMCBEAN" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: 2-blade vs. 3-blade --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "JMCBEAN" 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" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 11:57:22 AM PST US From: Jim Burke Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: 2-blade vs. 3-blade --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Jim Burke 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" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: 2-blade vs. 3-blade > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Gary Algate" > > 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 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 ____________________________________ Time: 12:25:17 PM PST US From: "Clifford Begnaud" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Clifford Begnaud" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 12:28:11 PM PST US From: "Gary Algate" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: 2-blade vs. 3-blade --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Gary Algate" 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" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 12:36:39 PM PST US From: Michel Verheughe Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe 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 ____________________________________ Time: 12:40:41 PM PST US From: "Gary Algate" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: 2-blade vs. 3-blade --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Gary Algate" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 12:43:51 PM PST US From: "Gary Algate" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Gary Algate" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 01:09:05 PM PST US From: "Dave Savener" Subject: Kitfox-List: What is that black powder and what do I do about it??` --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Dave Savener" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 01:26:07 PM PST US From: Tom Jones Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: What is that black powder and what do I do about it??` --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Tom Jones 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 ____________________________________ Time: 01:38:53 PM PST US From: Michel Verheughe Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: What is that black powder and what do I do about it??` --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe 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 ____________________________________ Time: 01:51:07 PM PST US From: Michel Verheughe Subject: Kitfox-List: European Kitfoxes WAS: Thank you --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe 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 ____________________________________ Time: 02:51:35 PM PST US From: Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 --> Kitfox-List message posted by: 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 ____________________________________ Time: 03:08:10 PM PST US From: Scott McClintock Subject: Kitfox-List: Cowling Cover --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Scott McClintock 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 ____________________________________ Time: 04:02:14 PM PST US From: "Randy Daughenbaugh" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Randy Daughenbaugh" 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: 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 ____________________________________ Time: 04:02:14 PM PST US Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 From: u2drvr@dslextreme.com --> 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 > > > 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 ____________________________________ Time: 04:29:52 PM PST US From: "Bruce Lina" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Hi - Brand New series 5 owner - looking for a little advice : --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Bruce Lina" ----- Original Message ----- From: "Phil Cowley" Subject: Kitfox-List: Hi - Brand New series 5 owner - looking for a little advice : > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Phil Cowley" > > 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 > > 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 > > > > 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 ____________________________________ Time: 05:02:11 PM PST US From: "Clifford Begnaud" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Clifford Begnaud" 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 > > > > > > 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 ____________________________________ Time: 06:00:37 PM PST US From: "Vic Jacko" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Vic Jacko" 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: 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 > > > > > > 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 ____________________________________ Time: 06:36:27 PM PST US From: Wwillyard@aol.com Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: 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 ____________________________________ Time: 06:48:43 PM PST US From: "JMCBEAN" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "JMCBEAN" 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" 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: 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 > > > > > > 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 ____________________________________ Time: 06:55:39 PM PST US From: "JMCBEAN" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "JMCBEAN" 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" 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 > > > > > > 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 ____________________________________ Time: 07:01:16 PM PST US From: Brian Peck Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Brian Peck 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" > > 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: > To: > 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 >>> >>> >>> 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 ____________________________________ Time: 07:04:38 PM PST US From: "JMCBEAN" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "JMCBEAN" 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" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 07:50:24 PM PST US From: "JMCBEAN" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "JMCBEAN" 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 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" > > 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: > To: > 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 >>> >>> >>> 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 ____________________________________ Time: 08:47:18 PM PST US Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Hi - Brand New series 5 owner - looking for a little advice : From: davestapa@juno.com --> 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" writes: > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Lowell Fitt" > > > 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" > To: > Subject: Kitfox-List: Hi - Brand New series 5 owner - looking for a > little > advice : > > > > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Phil Cowley" > > > > > 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 > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > == > > == > > == > > == > > > > > > > = > = > = > = > > > > > >