Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:01 AM - Re: Hi - Brand New series 5 owner - looking for a little advice : (kurt schrader)
2. 04:04 AM - Re: 2-blade vs. 3-blade (dwight purdy)
3. 04:04 AM - Re: Performance charts, was-L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 (Milt's Kitfox Stuff)
4. 04:13 AM - retuning exhaust (dwight purdy)
5. 04:50 AM - All those readings! WAS: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 (Michel Verheughe)
6. 05:26 AM - Re: Performance charts, was-L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 (Clifford Begnaud)
7. 05:26 AM - Re: Re: : L/D and props (Michel Verheughe)
8. 05:38 AM - Short Field Landings (Tc9008@aol.com)
9. 05:45 AM - Re: Thrust Meter was: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 (kerrjohna@comcast.net)
10. 05:51 AM - Re: CONDUCTIVE GREASE (kerrjohna@comcast.net)
11. 06:40 AM - Re: Short Field Landings (Michel Verheughe)
12. 07:22 AM - Re: CONDUCTIVE GREASE (Bob Unternaehrer)
13. 07:53 AM - Re: CONDUCTIVE GREASE (Lowell Fitt)
14. 08:11 AM - Re: CONDUCTIVE GREASE (KITFOXZ@aol.com)
15. 08:28 AM - Re: Soldered connections - Was - CONDUCTIVE GREASE (Ron Carroll)
16. 08:43 AM - Re: Performance charts / Mountain Flying (JMCBEAN)
17. 09:01 AM - Re: Short Field Landings (Jeff Hays)
18. 09:29 AM - Re: Soldered connections - Was - CONDUCTIVE GREASE (Jeff Hays)
19. 09:51 AM - Re: CONDUCTIVE GREASE (kurt schrader)
20. 10:32 AM - Re: Soldered connections (Torgeir Mortensen)
21. 10:45 AM - Re: CONDUCTIVE GREASE (Dcecil3@aol.com)
22. 11:07 AM - Re: CONDUCTIVE GREASE (Dcecil3@aol.com)
23. 12:46 PM - firewall seal (Comp User)
24. 03:32 PM - Rigging (Flybradair@cs.com)
25. 05:33 PM - Re: Rigging (Bruce Lina)
26. 09:27 PM - Re: All those readings! WAS: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 (Jeff Smathers)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Hi - Brand New series 5 owner - looking for a little |
advice :
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
Phil,
Just another opinion...
I would second the Ryder truck option. I moved my
Series 5 this way (except by U-Haul which was a pretty
poor truck) and the move was without damage. Just
protect everything and strap it all down well. One
bad wind or hail storm and the damage on a trailor
could more than cost a truck rental. 3000 miles gives
a lot of opportunity for such damage.
If you leave it on the wheels, make sure you get a
truck where the door sill is wide enough for the gear.
U-Haul promised me such a truck, then substituted a
smaller one. I got it in by pulling the wheels
together about 2" with a tiedown strap. I spent one
day building good strong ramps for the plane because
the engine was already mounted and it was heavy to
push up.
If the gear, tail, wings and engine are off, a few
people can lift all the pieces up the truck ramp. :-)
Just be careful. But with the other parts off, you
can just leave it on the gear. Nothing will bet hurt
and the gear will bounce the road shocks away. The
plane will be too light, maybe 200 lbs, for any
bending damage.
You can take the plane apart, with someone who knows
how it is built, in a day. First photograph the small
parts you are going to remove. Sometimes bolt
direction, washer count, etc gets confusing. The
pictures back up the building instructions. Next bag
and mark all the little pieces so they don't get lost.
On engines: The earlier KitFoxes can't take any heavy
engines well. Since yours is a S-5, you have more
choices.
Forget about the EJ-22 though. It is a great engine,
but very heavy. I only know of one pilot using it on
the KitFox successfully. I wish I could. It would be
my first choice.
After that, the type of flying you do will determine
the best choices. You will get a lot of proud
opinions here. Each engine has their advantages and
disadvantages and we have different goals. I have the
turbo EA-81 myself for mountain flying. I asked the
EAA help desk at Oshkosh for opinions, and test flew
one with this engine before buying mine. You should
fly with pilots who have candidate engines before you
decide. It is an expensive choice to change your mind
on.
As for strengthing the plane, please see the "KitFox
Safe" site here. Don Smythe keeps it up for all our
safety. It has suggested problems to address based
upon builders' experience.
<http://www.sportflight.com/kfb/kitfoxsafe.htm>
You will need to strengthen the rudder pedals and that
trim mount as you said. Also some add stiffeners to
the wing trailing edges and others add extra
stiffeners to the fuselage bays in the tail. If you
over tighten the fabric, these can bend and buckle on
you.
Check the plane over very carefully for corrosion
before covering. Several of us found corrosion under
the paint on the frame.
Just some moe ideas.
Kurt S.
--- Phil Cowley <pcowley@virtualrcflight.com> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>
> 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...
__________________________________
http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | 2-blade vs. 3-blade |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: dwight purdy <dpurdy@comteck.com>
Forgot to mention that with so much pitch the engine will not to idle till
on roll out. 2700 at flair greatly increases your distance. I have the idle
set way to low at 1700. Do not know if it would land at 2200 so I have to
idle up after the engine drops below 2100. It is a real bother. The prop is
so inefficient at slow speeds I have to taxi at 2700.
At 07:40 PM 2/21/2004 -0500, you wrote:
>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: dwight purdy <dpurdy@comteck.com>
>
>I am flying 2 blade IVO on a Model II 503. It is only a 61 in. Due to the
>reduced hp.caused by the shortened exhaust I had to crank pitch out when
>used as a three blade. Very slow but smooth. As a two blade I have the
>pitch cranked up to almost max. Not as smooth but much better cruise.
> Has anyone ever come up with a good way to get the exhaust back up to
>Rotax specs. for the model 1thru 3?
>
> Dwight
>
>
>At 03:25 PM 2/20/2004 -0800, you wrote:
> >--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Gary Algate" <algate@attglobal.net>
> >
> >John
> >
> >The noise drop inside my plane was so apparent that everybody that flew in
> >it before has commented. I went from a 3 blade Ultralight IVOprop to a 2
> >blade Medium Ivoprop which is considerably wider in chord and much more
> >robust.
> >
> >Maybe that is the reason for the noise reduction - I'm not sure but even my
> >radio works better now with the quieter cabin.
> >
> >regards
> >
> >Gary Algate
> >Lite2/582
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "JMCBEAN" <JDMCBEAN@cableone.net>
> >
> >As a general rule... a 3 blade prop will be quieter and will climb better.
> >A two blade will cruise better and be more efficient. This is providing
> >one is comparing similar props.
> >
> >Blue Skies!!
> >John & Debra McBean
> >"The Sky is not the Limit... It's a Playground"
> ><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
> >
> >
>
>
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Milt's Kitfox Stuff" <flysly@erols.com>
Well said Kurt. Back when "I hauled explosives for the government" we went
into the charts every mission. Even the Strike Eagle, with all its power &
gee wiz avionics could be so loaded down that it would fly about like a man
hole cover if you didn't pay attention. OK, the man hole cover remark is a
bit of a stretch, but the performance was a lot different than it was clean.
Yet even with 25 pound practice bombs we did the charts for every flight;
take off data, CG, divert fuel, pull up point for every dive bomb pass and
so on. If the charts are developed correctly you should know within a few
feet what the airplane can do, even in austere conditions.
Take Care,
Milt
----- Original Message -----
From: "kurt schrader" <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
Subject: RE: Performance charts, was-Kitfox-List: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader
<smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
>
> Sorry,
>
> I have been out of general aviation for decades.
> Charts are a habit. "Every" flight I do at UPS we
> always ask, "Will we make it?" and go into the charts:
> snow, ice, rain, wind, altimeter setting, etc all
> considered. Sometimes it comes pretty close. Six
> inches of snow is pretty close to "No go" even for
> these Boeings.
>
> The ATIS, clearance, approved flight plan changes, and
> t/o data are copied on our flight plans and kept for
> later FAA review for every flight. W&B must also be
> done for every flight. Sometimes we feel like our
> licenses are made out in pencil prepared for quick
> errassure.
>
> My first flight in a 767 was also the captain's first
> flight in one. The passengers had to show us where to
> hang out hats! We took off within 0.005% of the max
> allowable weight for the runway, and landed at Oakland
> with a 30 not crosswind and low ceilings. Our first
> flight.... :-0 We used the charts and I am still here
> with my rear and license in tact.
>
> In my KF usage, I do plan to go off airport and into
> high bush country. It is to be my mountain/bush
> plane, so I do want to prepare, "Will we make it?"
> data to be used later.
>
> That is just me...
>
> Kurt S.
>
> --- JMCBEAN <JDMCBEAN@cableone.net> wrote:
> > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "JMCBEAN"
> > <JDMCBEAN@cableone.net>
> >
> > Cliff,
> > Charts is what we do when the weather is too
> > stinko to go flying........
> > They are also a good base line for reference
> > reasons... If you have to ask
> > "Will I make it".. one shouldn't have been there to
> > begin with and if you
> > are going to try to make it better wait for the best
> > conditions.
> >
> > Blue Skies!!
> > John & Debra McBean
> >
> .............
> > Kurt wrote
> > > I also would like to know the real thrust
> > available
> > > before takeoff, rather than the difficulty of
> > > calculating estimated hp, to figure takeoff
> > > performance at various altitudes on short fields.
> > > The, "Will I make it?" question can become
> > important,
> > > but time consuming and error ridden to answer.
> ............
> > posted by: "Clifford Begnaud"
>
> > Kurt just get out there and fly the darn thing ;-)
> > All the graphs and charts in the world won't help
> ............
> > We don't need no stinkin charts. :-0
> >
> > Cliff
>
> __________________________________
> http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools
>
>
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | retuning exhaust |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: dwight purdy <dpurdy@comteck.com>
I asked this in a previous email yesterday and thought it was worth having
a new subject line.
Has anyone ever come up with a good way to get the exhaust back up to
Rotax specs. for the model 1thru 3?
When I converted from a 532 to a 503 it really became an issue. Could
really use that lost power when carrying a passenger.
dwight
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | All those readings! WAS: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
kurt schrader wrote:
> Over 10:1 is good! A minimum sink of 500'/min is great too.
With all that talk about Vx, Vy and best L/D, I had to test a bit, as I flew
yesterday. I must say that I don't know how you guys can read your speed to the
nearest MPH. My needle is always moving. Ok, there was very light turbulence,
but my readings are, "somewhere around 80" or "somewhere around 60." However,
with the engine idling, I go down at about 400 fpm on my light model 3. That
was with a speed "somewhere on the right hand side of 60." :-)
On the other hand (and with my annual coming soon), I asked the tower for a
radar check and altitude reading and I was right on the spot. Not too bad,
considering that I don't have a static port.
Cheers,
Michel
do not archive
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Clifford Begnaud" <shoeless@barefootpilot.com>
Kurt,
stir, stir, stir ;-)
Actually, I can think of an excellent use for a chart when bush flying, but
not so much for takeoff. The best use would be for landing with different
tailwinds.
Here's the situation; yesterday a friend and I flew into the aforementioned
500' long landing spot at 5400'. This strip is one way in and the other way
out. So if there is any wind, you will either land with a tailwind or
takeoff with a tailwind. Yesterday required landing with a tailwind. We
buzzed the field first to check it's condition and get a feel for the winds,
my guess was about a 5 knot tailwind for landing. Since the field is so long
we decided to go ahead and land there. I knew from previous landings here
that this was doable, but it needed to be done just right. We both landed
safely, but neither of us was really happy with our performance. We didn't
bring the planes in "on the edge" as might have been required in different
circumstances. (this is another topic I'd like to get started)
Anyway, it got me thinking that here's a situation where the chart would not
become completely obsolete in the bush. The reason is that everything is the
same as when landing at an improved runway except the rollout distance. And
in the bush, (on a level field at least) the rollout will normally be less
than at the improved runway, so that becomes your cushion. Of course, even
this chart will be suspect because it's more difficult to duplicate precise
short field landing technique than it is to repeat short field take-off
technique. Also, one would have to do lot's of practice landing with a
tailwind because darn if it ain't harder to "hit the spot" with a tail wind
than with a head wind. ;-) But at least one would have an idea of how much
more room is needed to land with a tailwind if one had a well prepared and
well "practiced" chart.
Best Regards,
Cliff
>
> Sorry,
>
> I have been out of general aviation for decades.
> Charts are a habit. "Every" flight I do at UPS we
> always ask, "Will we make it?" and go into the charts:
> snow, ice, rain, wind, altimeter setting, etc all
> considered. Sometimes it comes pretty close. Six
> inches of snow is pretty close to "No go" even for
> these Boeings.
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: : L/D and props |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
kurt schrader wrote:
> Don't practice things dangerously.
That's where the Norwegian winter comes handy, Kurt. Miles long frozen lakes
give us the chance to switch off the engine and glide down safely, landing
nearly anywhere.
However, this winter has been mild and we need to go inland quite a bit to find
safe lakes. And my skis are ... on their ways, but not finished yet. Let's hope
I get a chance to test them this year. ;-)
Cheers,
Michel
do not archive
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Short Field Landings |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Tc9008@aol.com
I have 10 hrs mostly take offs & landings on a model IV 582. This ac flys
great. I practice short field takeoffs & landings. I'm use to using flaps to slow
my piper down and no flaps to take off. It seems the opposite for the kitfox.
What works best for you guys. I have also come in at 3000rpm and 2000rpm, and
it doesn't seem to make a lot of difference. I would like to have other ideas
from the more experienced.
Thanks
Travis
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: kerrjohna@comcast.net
I am following the L/D discussions with interest. The Ed Kolano articles in the
EAA magazine were very useful in understanding what was going on out there under
the wings. The process also taught me alot about what was going on between
my ears as well.\
John Kerr
Classic IV-912@700hrs+/-
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Randy Daughenbaugh" <rjdaugh@rapidnet.com>
>
>
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader
> <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
>
> "But total drag? You need to have a thrust meter in
> the cockpit or do a good bit of calculating to get
> that graph. :-( "
>
>
> If you glide down, you know what the force is on the plane - equals the
> weight of the plane.
>
> If you set up to be stable at different speeds, you can back out (calculate)
> the drag of your plane at that speed! This will generate the data for
> Brian's curve. It will also tell you what thrust your engine is producing
> at a given speed in level flight.
>
> Interesting discussion!
>
> Randy
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: CONDUCTIVE GREASE |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: kerrjohna@comcast.net
aviation repair people strongly recommend against soldering connections because
of the vibration at attendant failure at the stress riser at the end of each
solder point. obviously there exist differnces of opinion.
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Dcecil3@aol.com
>
> Conductive Grease commonly known in the electrical industry as Pinitrox or
> (Goose #%*#) whichever you prefer is a Conductive / Corrosion inhibitor. It uses
> the grease to Keep out moisture and has filings in it to conduct, it can be
> found at any electrical supply house. Dielectric refers to the insulating value
> of a material at a rated voltage.Dieletcric Grease is use to fill voids and
> has a small insulating value, silicone does not conduct. In High Voltage
> applications we use Dielectric Grease to fill small voids in the insulation so
> static will not build up and cause the cable to fail from the inside out. Now
a
> Little lesson about connections>BUY A TORCH solder connections are the best you
> can get. I mean it's so simple. Skin the wire, slide a heat shrink over it,
> dip it in paste to clean it, a little heat, solder your done( IT took me longer
> to type it than it takes to do it) Solderless connections are for Tractors,
> you know motor quits, you get off, knock the dirt off of you, Bless the
> tractor(Yes that's one" Divine" Tractor) find the loose wire and your back in
> business. If your in a plane and that happens? Solder.I've been in the
> electrical
> industry for 25 Yrs. I'm a Master Electrician, I'm also certifide by American
> Electric Power to work voltage's from 120V to 138KV in addition to being a Ham
> Operator.I have rarely seen a Solder Connection fail.Solder
> Best
> David Cecil
> KF3#950
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Short Field Landings |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
Tc9008@aol.com wrote:
> I would like to have other ideas from the more experienced.
Well, Travis, from the top of my 50 hours in a model 3, I can say ... flaps?
What is that? Oh yeah, that handle in the middle, that I use to hang my handbag
from! :-)
Seriously, I've never used it for landing or take-off. I do both so shortly
that I don't see the use for it. Yesterday I landed on the marks and had to
taxi forward to the exitway, that distance being only 500 feet or so. No, there
was no head winds and no, I didn't even brake. I know because the runway
condition was barren asphalt with patches of ice, the worst condition for
braking. So, who needs to land even slower? How short can a short field be?
But I've tried the flaps to trim at cruise level. It sure pitches the nose
down. It also adds lift. You can easily see that if you remove the flaps a bit
fast, oops, you go down! But my understanding is that, while the Kitfox
flaperons add lift, they don't add much drag. And that is what we are looking
for, on landing, isn't it?
As someone said earlier on the list, air brakes on a Kitfox could be cool, though.
Cheers,
Michel
do not archive
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: CONDUCTIVE GREASE |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Bob Unternaehrer" <shilocom@c-magic.com>
Your right on the dielectric.. People use it incorrectly,,, much like the
word inflamable used to be used for a flamable product. The dielectric
grease tends to prevent what I'd call spurious electrical currents around a
connection which cause corrision. So it's a good thing as long as you don't
actually get it between or inbetwen the connections. I once had trouble
using a similiar product on battery terminls. When it heated up slightly is
would SEEP between the terminal and the connector and cause a dead battery
syndrome. Bob U.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Randy Daughenbaugh" <rjdaugh@rapidnet.com>
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: CONDUCTIVE GREASE
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Randy Daughenbaugh"
<rjdaugh@rapidnet.com>
>
> I suspect that I am worrying too much about this. But in my experience
> "dielectric" means insulator - not "conductive" as specified by Skystar.
>
> The sites that Rex sent say they are for maintaining good contact, but
seem
> to suggest that the mechanism is through corrosion prevention - not
enhanced
> conduction.
>
> Maybe Skystar didn't mean electrical conductive, but heat conductive??
>
> I may go with Robert's suggestion.
>
> Thanks to all.
>
> Randy
>
> .
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert Beck
> To: Kitfox List
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: CONDUCTIVE GREASE
>
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Robert Beck" <trevor@inter.net>
>
> Randy:
>
> The grease you want is called 'Silicon Dielectric Grease', and should be
> available at any Radio Shack or electronic parts store, or some auto parts
> stores. Works well to keep the juice flowing through electrical
connections.
> A 6 or 8oz tube lasts a long time.
>
> Robert Beck
>
>
> > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Randy Daughenbaugh"
> <rjdaugh@rapidnet.com>
> >
> >
> > IN the instructions for the electrical hook up, it says you should cover
> the
> > electrical connections with "conductive grease" to prevent corrosion.
> >
> > I have always used Vaseline on battery terminals, but I can't believe
that
> > Vaseline would fit the description "conductive". Do they mean plain
old
> > bearing grease - lithium (or other) soaps - or is there some other
product
> > for this purpose?
> >
> > Randy
>
>
> ---
>
>
---
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: CONDUCTIVE GREASE |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Lowell Fitt" <lcfitt@inreach.com>
In the old days when Bob Nuchols of Aeroelectrics Connection was on the list
this was his strong opinion. The stress riser at the end of the wicked
solder in the joint would eventually lead to breakage of the wire due to
vibration. It was his opinion that crimped joints are best in aircraft.
Lowell
----- Original Message -----
From: <kerrjohna@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: CONDUCTIVE GREASE
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: kerrjohna@comcast.net
>
> aviation repair people strongly recommend against soldering connections
because of the vibration at attendant failure at the stress riser at the end
of each solder point. obviously there exist differnces of opinion.
> > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Dcecil3@aol.com
> >
> > Conductive Grease commonly known in the electrical industry as Pinitrox
or
> > (Goose #%*#) whichever you prefer is a Conductive / Corrosion inhibitor.
It uses
> > the grease to Keep out moisture and has filings in it to conduct, it can
be
> > found at any electrical supply house. Dielectric refers to the
insulating value
> > of a material at a rated voltage.Dieletcric Grease is use to fill voids
and
> > has a small insulating value, silicone does not conduct. In High Voltage
> > applications we use Dielectric Grease to fill small voids in the
insulation so
> > static will not build up and cause the cable to fail from the inside
out. Now a
> > Little lesson about connections>BUY A TORCH solder connections are the
best you
> > can get. I mean it's so simple. Skin the wire, slide a heat shrink over
it,
> > dip it in paste to clean it, a little heat, solder your done( IT took me
longer
> > to type it than it takes to do it) Solderless connections are for
Tractors,
> > you know motor quits, you get off, knock the dirt off of you, Bless the
> > tractor(Yes that's one" Divine" Tractor) find the loose wire and your
back in
> > business. If your in a plane and that happens? Solder.I've been in the
> > electrical
> > industry for 25 Yrs. I'm a Master Electrician, I'm also certifide by
American
> > Electric Power to work voltage's from 120V to 138KV in addition to being
a Ham
> > Operator.I have rarely seen a Solder Connection fail.Solder
> > Best
> > David Cecil
> > KF3#950
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: CONDUCTIVE GREASE |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: KITFOXZ@aol.com
In a message dated 2/22/2004 8:52:35 AM Eastern Standard Time,
kerrjohna@comcast.net writes:
aviation repair people strongly recommend against soldering connections
because of the vibration at attendant failure at the stress riser at the end of
each solder point. obviously there exist differnces of opinion.
"Aviation repair people" strongly recommend against building your own 747
also. Why? - because the average amateur builder does not have the right tooling
to do so. Solder connections are superb in many instances where vibration
flexing at the end of the solder joint is not a factor. Whether to crimp a
terminal on a wire or to solder it or to do both is a question that will always
be
debated. A "fat" wire that is improperly crimped at the battery post can be
a real headache after time and corrosion have taken their toll. A fat wire
and terminal, improperly crimped, can be saved by proper soldering at the time
of construction. If you don't have the crimp tools to do a fat wire right,
crimping it with something as crude as a hammer and then soldering it can produce
a joint that will last forever. Small wires with clean proper crimps will
last years longer than the airplane. Small wires crimped and soldered will last
forever provided that they do not flex at the stress point. Most agree that
the best way to join small wires is by proper crimping only. Soldering takes
more time and is best used for the big ones.
What is important is that the connection will cary the current that you have
planned for it. A fat wire with a wimpy crimp will heat up as it drops
voltage across the resistive poor joint. Soldering can be the best prevention
for
this. Solder ensures maximum contact with all strands of wire and the
terminal. It also seals out corrosive compounds that can weaken the conductive
properties of the joint over time. Of course, a contaminated, poorly executed
solder joint can be a headache too, so make sure your fat wires and terminals are
clean and the solder is wicked thoroughly into the joint.
John P. Marzluf
Columbus, Ohio
Outback, (out back in the garage)
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Soldered connections - Was - CONDUCTIVE GREASE |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Ron Carroll" <RonCarr@Qwest.Net>
Several years ago I decided to add Mode-C to my transponder. I bought the
encoder and installed it myself. Being an old telephone man I neatly made
a cable with connectors at each end and soldered all of the connections.
I then took the plane to an avionics shop to have the transponder/encoder
signed-off, but there was some sort of problem. As soon as the tech saw the
soldered connections he ripped all of my wiring out and made another
harness, using crimped connectors. He scolded me for soldering and
explained the heat of the soldering iron causes the copper wires to anneal,
resulting in broken wires due to vibration. He said to 'Never use soldered
connections in an airplane!'
Anyone have ideas regarding this?
Ron Carroll
KF3/582 - Oregon
Time: 09:01:58 AM PST US
From: Dcecil3@aol.com
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: CONDUCTIVE GREASE
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Dcecil3@aol.com
<SNIP-SNIP>
Little lesson about connections>BUY A TORCH solder connections are the best
you
can get. I mean it's so simple. Skin the wire, slide a heat shrink over it,
dip it in paste to clean it, a little heat, solder your done( IT took me
longer
to type it than it takes to do it) Solderless connections are for Tractors,
you know motor quits, you get off, knock the dirt off of you, Bless the
tractor(Yes that's one" Divine" Tractor) find the loose wire and your back
in
business. If your in a plane and that happens? Solder.I've been in the
electrical
industry for 25 Yrs. I'm a Master Electrician, I'm also certifide by
American
Electric Power to work voltage's from 120V to 138KV in addition to being a
Ham
Operator.I have rarely seen a Solder Connection fail.Solder
Best
David Cecil
KF3#950
Message 16
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | RE: Performance charts / Mountain Flying |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "JMCBEAN" <JDMCBEAN@cableone.net>
Kurt,
I might add that they are a very good habit. With the Kitfox almost
anywhere is a landing spot that one can get into and out of... If it is a
charted spot (USFS) one can pretty much count on being able to get a Kitfox
in and out if turf and temp conditions are suitable. Although, if one knows
ahead of time that you are going into a questionable strip then having those
charts and knowing how to use them is a very good thing.
Mountain flying really is enjoyable, scenic and dangerous. One needs to
know how to fly their aircraft "on the edge" and do it well. Knowing the
limits of the aircraft and having your own set of personal limits is the
only way to stay safe. The Kitfox will let us get away with things that you
could not get away with in a certificated aircraft....
6" of snow Kurt... don't they have ski's :)
Blue Skies!!
John & Debra McBean
"The Sky is not the Limit... It's a Playground"
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of kurt schrader
Subject: RE: Performance charts, was-Kitfox-List: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader
<smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
Sorry,
I have been out of general aviation for decades.
Charts are a habit. "Every" flight I do at UPS we
always ask, "Will we make it?" and go into the charts:
snow, ice, rain, wind, altimeter setting, etc all
considered. Sometimes it comes pretty close. Six
inches of snow is pretty close to "No go" even for
these Boeings.
The ATIS, clearance, approved flight plan changes, and
t/o data are copied on our flight plans and kept for
later FAA review for every flight. W&B must also be
done for every flight. Sometimes we feel like our
licenses are made out in pencil prepared for quick
errassure.
My first flight in a 767 was also the captain's first
flight in one. The passengers had to show us where to
hang out hats! We took off within 0.005% of the max
allowable weight for the runway, and landed at Oakland
with a 30 not crosswind and low ceilings. Our first
flight.... :-0 We used the charts and I am still here
with my rear and license in tact.
In my KF usage, I do plan to go off airport and into
high bush country. It is to be my mountain/bush
plane, so I do want to prepare, "Will we make it?"
data to be used later.
That is just me...
Kurt S.
--- JMCBEAN <JDMCBEAN@cableone.net> wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "JMCBEAN"
> <JDMCBEAN@cableone.net>
>
> Cliff,
> Charts is what we do when the weather is too
> stinko to go flying........
> They are also a good base line for reference
> reasons... If you have to ask
> "Will I make it".. one shouldn't have been there to
> begin with and if you
> are going to try to make it better wait for the best
> conditions.
>
> Blue Skies!!
> John & Debra McBean
>
.............
> Kurt wrote
> > I also would like to know the real thrust
> available
> > before takeoff, rather than the difficulty of
> > calculating estimated hp, to figure takeoff
> > performance at various altitudes on short fields.
> > The, "Will I make it?" question can become
> important,
> > but time consuming and error ridden to answer.
............
> posted by: "Clifford Begnaud"
> Kurt just get out there and fly the darn thing ;-)
> All the graphs and charts in the world won't help
............
> We don't need no stinkin charts. :-0
>
> Cliff
__________________________________
http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools
Message 17
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Short Field Landings |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Jeff Hays" <jeff.hays@aselia.com>
I agree with Michel about not using the Flaperons for landing, they just
pitch the nose down, and don't help much in the way of producing drag.
I like using the "Stall Down" landing technique mentioned in "Stick and
Rudder" and have been practicing it. Basically just fly a fairly moderate
speed approach not worrying too much about slowing down, then on high
final flaring and slipping to scrub off all the excess speed in such a
way that on short final I end up at minimum airspeed and just plunk it
onto the runway. I found mention of it on the www.supercub.org website,
and got interested, so went back to re-reading Stick and Rudder. It
works well.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Michel
Verheughe
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Short Field Landings
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
Tc9008@aol.com wrote:
> I would like to have other ideas from the more experienced.
Well, Travis, from the top of my 50 hours in a model 3, I can say ... flaps?
What is that? Oh yeah, that handle in the middle, that I use to hang my
handbag
from! :-)
Seriously, I've never used it for landing or take-off. I do both so shortly
that I don't see the use for it. Yesterday I landed on the marks and had to
taxi forward to the exitway, that distance being only 500 feet or so. No,
there
was no head winds and no, I didn't even brake. I know because the runway
condition was barren asphalt with patches of ice, the worst condition for
braking. So, who needs to land even slower? How short can a short field be?
But I've tried the flaps to trim at cruise level. It sure pitches the nose
down. It also adds lift. You can easily see that if you remove the flaps a
bit
fast, oops, you go down! But my understanding is that, while the Kitfox
flaperons add lift, they don't add much drag. And that is what we are
looking
for, on landing, isn't it?
As someone said earlier on the list, air brakes on a Kitfox could be cool,
though.
Cheers,
Michel
do not archive
Message 18
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Soldered connections - Was - CONDUCTIVE GREASE |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Jeff Hays" <jeff.hays@aselia.com>
I worked on the NASA UARS project as a flight assembly tech, it was
the last project that I know that used soldered connectors. The key is
the the wire's must be supported to prevent flexing at the solder
joint for exactly the reason mentioned. Now days there is virtually
no use of soldering whatsoever, as current crimp style connectors work
so well. There are other problems with solder as well, with regard
to flux cleanup, etc.
We inspected all of our solder connections under a microscope, and
I would say a good tech, with good equipment, still ends up reworking
as many as 10-20% of all their solder connections. Soldering is
very tricky, and a solder joint that looks perfect to the naked eye
can be highly flawed under a microscope, with hidden voids, poor
solder adhesion, etc. In order to solder properly the joint must be
meticulously cleaned, soldered very quickly at exactly the right
temperature, and then held motionless while the solder cools. Quite
tricky to do.
Crimping on the other hand can be done properly, by a trained gorilla
using simple hand tools, in the comfort of his living room, while eating
pizza in front of the tv.
You'd be hard pressed to find anybody doing soldering in the Aerospace
industry anymore, it's not really debated at all. It pretty clear that
soldering is a thing of the past for most applications.
With regard to CONDUCTIVE GREASE for battery cables, I wouldn't worry
so much about grease, using any of the products that meets MIL-SPEC
81309 (ACF-50, Corrosion Shield, etc.) can be sprayed over the battery
terminals, and you'll get no corrosion to speak of. I've used it on my
car's batteries terminals for years, and NEVER had any battery terminal
corrosion problems. And thats a vented wet cell, which make a very
corrosive environment.
Jeff Hays
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Ron Carroll
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Soldered connections - Was - CONDUCTIVE GREASE
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Ron Carroll" <RonCarr@Qwest.Net>
Several years ago I decided to add Mode-C to my transponder. I bought the
encoder and installed it myself. Being an old telephone man I neatly made
a cable with connectors at each end and soldered all of the connections.
I then took the plane to an avionics shop to have the transponder/encoder
signed-off, but there was some sort of problem. As soon as the tech saw the
soldered connections he ripped all of my wiring out and made another
harness, using crimped connectors. He scolded me for soldering and
explained the heat of the soldering iron causes the copper wires to anneal,
resulting in broken wires due to vibration. He said to 'Never use soldered
connections in an airplane!'
Anyone have ideas regarding this?
Ron Carroll
KF3/582 - Oregon
Time: 09:01:58 AM PST US
From: Dcecil3@aol.com
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: CONDUCTIVE GREASE
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Dcecil3@aol.com
<SNIP-SNIP>
Little lesson about connections>BUY A TORCH solder connections are the best
you
can get. I mean it's so simple. Skin the wire, slide a heat shrink over it,
dip it in paste to clean it, a little heat, solder your done( IT took me
longer
to type it than it takes to do it) Solderless connections are for Tractors,
you know motor quits, you get off, knock the dirt off of you, Bless the
tractor(Yes that's one" Divine" Tractor) find the loose wire and your back
in
business. If your in a plane and that happens? Solder.I've been in the
electrical
industry for 25 Yrs. I'm a Master Electrician, I'm also certifide by
American
Electric Power to work voltage's from 120V to 138KV in addition to being a
Ham
Operator.I have rarely seen a Solder Connection fail.Solder
Best
David Cecil
KF3#950
Message 19
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: CONDUCTIVE GREASE |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
John,
When is the Outback getting out of the garage and up
flying?
Do not archive.
--- KITFOXZ@aol.com wrote:
>
> John P. Marzluf
> Columbus, Ohio
> Outback, (out back in the garage)
__________________________________
http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools
Message 20
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Soldered connections |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Torgeir Mortensen <torgemor@online.no>
Hi Ron,
Certainly, soldering vs. crimping has all the time been discussed. In
fact, both methods are OK. The recommendations from all those know best,
is "often" based on the time used to make each kind! In an aircraft all
wiring, soldered or crimped, has to be clamped or strapped-, just to
avoid breakage at the "insert" point due to vibration. So the strapping
and clamping is the important step to avoid breakage. What John P.
Marzluf said about this thing is very true. If you ask me, soldering is
the best option, for us builders, -but only if you can do it PROPER. If
you can't solder, then go for the crimp. The crimp method is the
easiest, but the crimping tools is VERY expensive, and you might need a
number of them. Soldering those big connectors, with multiple pins, is a
kind of art, also, you need a steady hand.. Remember, "all" the modern
avionics'- and "all" kind of electronics, is still soldered inside. :)
..
When you are ready to plan for the electronics, connectors used herein,
connector you'll like to add at certain places, for the ease of removal
of "stuff". Try to select same "family" of connectors, this to avoid the
need of all kind of "crimping tools", if this is the one you prefer.
Some prefer to not use connectors, instead they use terminal block's
with ring terminals. IMO. there is no substitute to the crimping method
for ring terminals, except those real big ones. The kind of terminal's
we shall use on an aircraft is, AMP's type PIDG.
(Have been raining for a week up here, last two days snowing, 18 " in 48
h ! Still not possible to go flying. :- ( .. )
Torgeir.
Ron Carroll wrote:
>
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Ron Carroll" <RonCarr@Qwest.Net>
>
> Several years ago I decided to add Mode-C to my transponder. I bought the
> encoder and installed it myself. Being an old telephone man I neatly made
> a cable with connectors at each end and soldered all of the connections.
>
> I then took the plane to an avionics shop to have the transponder/encoder
> signed-off, but there was some sort of problem. As soon as the tech saw the
> soldered connections he ripped all of my wiring out and made another
> harness, using crimped connectors. He scolded me for soldering and
> explained the heat of the soldering iron causes the copper wires to anneal,
> resulting in broken wires due to vibration. He said to 'Never use soldered
> connections in an airplane!'
>
> Anyone have ideas regarding this?
>
> Ron Carroll
> KF3/582 - Oregon
> Time: 09:01:58 AM PST US
> From: Dcecil3@aol.com
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: CONDUCTIVE GREASE
>
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Dcecil3@aol.com
>
> <SNIP-SNIP>
>
> Little lesson about connections>BUY A TORCH solder connections are the best
> you
>
> can get. I mean it's so simple. Skin the wire, slide a heat shrink over it,
> dip it in paste to clean it, a little heat, solder your done( IT took me
> longer
>
> to type it than it takes to do it) Solderless connections are for Tractors,
> you know motor quits, you get off, knock the dirt off of you, Bless the
> tractor(Yes that's one" Divine" Tractor) find the loose wire and your back
> in
> business. If your in a plane and that happens? Solder.I've been in the
> electrical
>
> industry for 25 Yrs. I'm a Master Electrician, I'm also certifide by
> American
>
> Electric Power to work voltage's from 120V to 138KV in addition to being a
> Ham
>
> Operator.I have rarely seen a Solder Connection fail.Solder
> Best
> David Cecil
> KF3#950
>
Message 21
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: CONDUCTIVE GREASE |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Dcecil3@aol.com
I disagree with the Idea that a stress riser is to blame when a solder joint
fails. If you read my whole post the HEAT SHRINK should take care of this, in
addition to bundling the wires correctly. As for vibration there's vibration
in ANY wire that has electricity flowing in it! Ask any Avionics' Repairman if
he uses solderless connection's for your antenna? I'm sure the answer would be
No. The arguments are many but I know which one I'm going to do, and no this
isn't what I read, I see this two or three times each week. Compression
connectors fail for any number of reason's. The wire was'ent clean, the tool used
was one of those cheap one's with the little bolt cutters built in and doesn't
apply the right amount of pressure or the crimp was in the wrong place which
just mashed the connector and through "Vibration" the wire came loose. If your
going to use solderless connections anyway, I recommend going to an Electrical
Supply house and buying a set of "stake on Pliers" under the brand name of
Klien or Thomas & Betts they don't skin the wire all they do is cut and crimp ,
while your there buy some 3M brand connectors and hope for the best
Best to all
David Cecil
KF3#950
Message 22
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: CONDUCTIVE GREASE |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Dcecil3@aol.com
Bob U. Those spurious Currents your refering too are called "Corona"(No not
Beer) At night on some High Voltage Underground Cables that are in the process
of failing you can see what appears to be a Blue Flame in a circle about a
1/2" away from the cable and in time will cut it like a torch.
I think what your referring too is just the process of Electrolysis where
you have two dissimilar metals coming together i.e.: Copper and Aluminum(Thats
why we don't use pencil on Aluminum) Graphite is Corrosive to Aluminum and so
is Copper. The Electricity flowing through the two will cause corrosion at the
point where they terminate, unless you use contact grease. Compression
Connectors are coated with Nickle to help with compatabilty to the device to which
they're attached
Hope I've Bored you enough
Best
David Cecil
KF3#950
Message 23
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Comp User" <trebla@directinter.net>
I am worried about the air leaking in from the engine compartment around the firewall.
It is a tight fit but still leaks at the top corners of the firewall.
Anyone have this problem or mods to stop it?
Albert Smith
5TD NSIT CAP
Still test flying and cold
Message 24
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Flybradair@cs.com
Rigging the controls this weekend, the flaperon angles turned out
good---both deflect the same up, neutral, and down with or without the flaps added,
but
the deflection angle did not turn out properly.
Book says that the maximum deflection angle is 28 degrees up measured from
top of flaperon neutral to bottom of flaperon full up. My deflection angle
measured as the diagram says is 38 degrees up.
I know the control stops can be adjusted to correct this--but it would
require a bolt 1.5 inches long. The one supplied with the kit is 3/4 long.
Also, this would screw up the down deflection angle on the other side, even
though it is at the proper angle of 15 degrees.
As it is set now, the stick moves to an angle of 20 degrees right--20
degrees left. (As measured with a dial level on the bottom side of stick)
If the deflection was shortened, the stick would move 12 degrees right and
12 degrees left.
Can anyone tell me the angle of your stick deflection side to side? (I am
grasping at anything that might help right now)
All other measurements came out correctly;
Flap bellcrank is at 11.5
Right flaperon connect tube is at 32.
Left flaperon connect tube is at 26.
Am I measuring from the right places on the up deflection angle? (Top
neutral to bottom up)
The elevator deflection came out okay---if you don't mind the stick
impacting the instrument panel at the full 39 degrees up!
Anyone else encounter this?
By the way---airplane is painted---pic in sportflight under Building
Process.
Thanks for any info!
Brad Martin
Wichita
5 o-235 l2c
rigging
Message 25
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Bruce Lina" <airlina@usadatanet.net>
----- Original Message -----
From: <Flybradair@cs.com>
Subject: Kitfox-List: Rigging
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Flybradair@cs.com
>
>
> Rigging the controls this weekend, the flaperon angles turned out
> good---both deflect the same up, neutral, and down with or without the
flaps added, but
> the deflection angle did not turn out properly.
>
> Book says that the maximum deflection angle is 28 degrees up measured
from
> top of flaperon neutral to bottom of flaperon full up. My deflection angle
> measured as the diagram says is 38 degrees up.
>
> I know the control stops can be adjusted to correct this--but it would
> require a bolt 1.5 inches long. The one supplied with the kit is 3/4 long.
> Also, this would screw up the down deflection angle on the other side,
even
> though it is at the proper angle of 15 degrees.
>
> As it is set now, the stick moves to an angle of 20 degrees right--20
> degrees left. (As measured with a dial level on the bottom side of stick)
> If the deflection was shortened, the stick would move 12 degrees right
and
> 12 degrees left.
> Can anyone tell me the angle of your stick deflection side to side? (I
am
> grasping at anything that might help right now)
>
> All other measurements came out correctly;
>
> Flap bellcrank is at 11.5
>
> Right flaperon connect tube is at 32.
>
> Left flaperon connect tube is at 26.
>
> Am I measuring from the right places on the up deflection angle? (Top
> neutral to bottom up)
>
> The elevator deflection came out okay---if you don't mind the stick
> impacting the instrument panel at the full 39 degrees up!
>
> Anyone else encounter this?
>
> By the way---airplane is painted---pic in sportflight under Building
> Process.
>
> Thanks for any info!
>
> Brad Martin
> Wichita
> 5 o-235 l2c
> rigging
>
>
Message 26
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: All those readings! WAS: L/D of Kitfox Model 4 1050 |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Jeff Smathers <jsmathers@cybcon.com>
Hi Michael,
Where is your static system hole located?
Jeff Smathers
Michel Verheughe wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
>
> kurt schrader wrote:
> > Over 10:1 is good! A minimum sink of 500'/min is great too.
>
> With all that talk about Vx, Vy and best L/D, I had to test a bit, as I flew
> yesterday. I must say that I don't know how you guys can read your speed to the
> nearest MPH. My needle is always moving. Ok, there was very light turbulence,
> but my readings are, "somewhere around 80" or "somewhere around 60." However,
> with the engine idling, I go down at about 400 fpm on my light model 3. That
> was with a speed "somewhere on the right hand side of 60." :-)
> On the other hand (and with my annual coming soon), I asked the tower for a
> radar check and altitude reading and I was right on the spot. Not too bad,
> considering that I don't have a static port.
>
> Cheers,
> Michel
>
> do not archive
>
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|