Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 07:21 AM - oil cooler shutters (Lowell Fitt)
2. 08:11 AM - 582 oil reservoir level (Ron Carroll)
3. 08:36 AM - Re: S-6 fuel tanks (Fred Shiple)
4. 08:47 AM - Re: 582 oil reservoir level (Bruce Harrington)
5. 09:51 AM - Re: 582 oil reservoir level (Michel Verheughe)
6. 09:59 PM - Re: NSI EA-81 and CAP 140 operation questions (kurt schrader)
7. 10:38 PM - Re: Fuel Flow (kurt schrader)
8. 10:41 PM - Re: Spor Pilot Rule (kurt schrader)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | oil cooler shutters |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Lowell Fitt" <lcfitt@inreach.com>
I made a set of oil cooler shutters for a friend. They got lost in the mail and
finally arrived two days after a new wet was made and delivered.
Anyone interested in a set of oil cooler shutters. They fit the Earl's type cooler
supplied by Skystar and require about 1.3" clearance in front of the cooler
for operation. The clearance requirement can be reduced in certain situations.
Photo of my installation - smaller unit than SS supplies:
- http://www.sportflight.com/cgi-bin/uploader.pl?actionview&epoch986482150
If interested please contact me off list at lcfitt@inreach.com for details.
Lowell
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: | 582 oil reservoir level |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Ron Carroll" <RonCarr@Qwest.Net>
I was recently shocked to see the low oil level in my reservoir, which is
mounted on the firewall, inside the engine compartment. I nearly ran out
without knowing it. I know that I will start checking it regularly, based
on tach-time, but wonder if there is some sort of reliable means of
monitoring the level without removing the cowl?
The reason for my surprise was because my last Rotax 2-stroke plane had an
oil injected 503 that seemed to go FOREVER on very little oil. Of course
the reservoir was in constant plain view, so Murphy's law is now in effect.
The adjustment of the oil is per Rotax instructions, but the 582 seems to be
using a lot of oil. However, I've never actually calculated consumption
based on fuel burn. I will!
Ron Carroll - KF3/582
Independence, Oregon
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: S-6 fuel tanks |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Fred Shiple <fredshiple@sbcglobal.net>
Jeff and John, thanks.
Fred
do not archive
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 582 oil reservoir level |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Bruce Harrington" <aerowood@mcsi.net>
Hi Ron,
I always added oil whenever I added fuel. Except once coming back from SkyStar.
Partway to Burns I remembered, then sweat for a while until I calculated I could
make Burns and not have to do an off airport landing.
I think I figured about 2.5 hours per quart of oil for cross countries.
There were 2 marks on my adjustment arm. One would be too rich, the other good.
It took using the wrong one once to open my eyes!
bh
PS: flew the Sonex into Independence Sunday and chatted with the EAA guys.
> I was recently shocked to see the low oil level in my reservoir, which is
> mounted on the firewall, inside the engine compartment. I nearly ran out
> without knowing it. I know that I will start checking it regularly, based
> on tach-time, but wonder if there is some sort of reliable means of
> monitoring the level without removing the cowl?
>
> The reason for my surprise was because my last Rotax 2-stroke plane had an
> oil injected 503 that seemed to go FOREVER on very little oil. Of course
> the reservoir was in constant plain view, so Murphy's law is now in effect.
> The adjustment of the oil is per Rotax instructions, but the 582 seems to be
> using a lot of oil. However, I've never actually calculated consumption
> based on fuel burn. I will!
>
> Ron Carroll - KF3/582
> Independence, Oregon
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 582 oil reservoir level |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
Ron Carroll wrote:
> I was recently shocked to see the low oil level in my reservoir,
This is probably why I like my 582 with the oil mixed in the tanks. I was a
decision made by the previous owner and since I don't know much about engines,
I kept it like that. It sort of feel safer.
Cheers,
Michel
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: NSI EA-81 and CAP 140 operation questions |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
Thanks Vic,
I have been wondering about this ever since I started
flying my plane. (This, as you can tell, is my first
turbo.) Unless I run a good bit of power, this turbo
doesn't move into the boost range on my engine. For
example, during engine runup, it still shows about
5-6" vacuum at 2750 rpm with the prop set for takeoff.
I don't usually pull more power than that on the
ground, except for takeoff, so having the vacuum
reading is still useful for ground ops/tuning. IMHO
Lance gives readings of 16" vacuum for idle, 0-8 lbs
boost in cruise and 10-11 lbs boost at max power for
my engine. I have the small turbo and I think
everyone else here with an NSI turbo has the large
one. They get 4 lbs more boost, according to Lance,
and now I doubt my numbers will match theirs at higher
power.
I chose the smaller turbo for engine reliability. I
figured it would have enough power, even in the high
country.
Still, some are talking of boost numbers around 22-29
lbs. Their engines must be even more powerful than my
data sheet indicates.
After looking at all that, I decided to change my
order and buy the vacuum/boost gauge for my plane. I
believe my engine will always operate withing its
range, but we will see. If mine is boosted 4 lbs less
than the standard here, I shouldn't exceed 25 lbs.
But since this is my first turbo, I could certainly be
wrong.
If Lance's numbers are right, I wouldn't even move off
the peg with a 10-50 lb gauge in cruise. It would
only indicate at the bottom of the scale on takeoff.
In a few weeks I should find out. The plane is down
now for maintenance and the scoop fabrication.
Kurt S.
--- Vic Jacko <vicwj@earthlink.net> wrote:
> Kurt, You would be best served by using an aircraft
> manifold pressure gauge which reads 10 to 50
> inches. IMHO!
>
> Vic
..............
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "kurt schrader" <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
> Ok,
> >
> > I did some looking and went and ordered a VDO
> Boost
> > gauge. Thought I would stay with the same Lance
> motif
> > to make the change easier.
> >
> > I was concerned when you guys talk about 44" etc,
> but
> > then I remembered that you wrote inches and not
> lbs.
> > Fourty four lbs would be some boost!
> >
> > I ordered a 0-30 LB gauge from PepBoys for 37.09
> after
> > tax. Here is a web page of the same thing.
> >
> >
>
<http://www.egauges.com/vdo_mult.asp?Type=Turbo_Boost&Series=Cockpit&Cart=>
> >
> > Now why did I have to go and look that up? I
> wonder
> > if I shouldn't have ordered this one instead? Ha
> ha.
> > It is vacuum and boost. Just found it now. And
> it is
> > cheaper...
> >
> >
>
<http://www.egauges.com/vdo_mult.asp?Type=Turbo_Boost&Series=Vision&Cart=>
> >
> > Kurt S.
__________________________________
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 |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
Rick,
Yes, digital would be nice.
So I guess you haven't asked anyone to help prop start
your NSI engine yet? :-)
Fuel flow is another area I wondered about. Lance's
data sheet for my engine runs up to 19 gal/hr! I
thought it might be reading double, but Lance told me
a while back, that was a good number. To me, that
would be appropriate for well over 300 hp. (?)
Today I had a chance to watch F/F more carefully in
flight and photographed the engine instruments during
full power climbs. (This was due to my EGT's being
good.....today. Only 1350 for full power, set rich!)
My F/F gauge was at 10, which is the upper limit, for
each 4400 rpm climb.
I have been comparing the before and after fuel
quantities with the totalizer for every flight. Yes,
I need to calibrate it. I'll do a ground
check/adjustment of it when I pump it dry for my
maintenence checks coming up. Funny thing is that it
seems to always be about 2 gal short, no matter what
the flight burn.
Well, this plane is probably a little moody. I better
have a word with the builder. :-)
Kurt S.
..............
--- Rick <turboflyer@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> I purchased one of the cheap non TSo ones from
> Spruce. Would love to have
> the new digital with lights but hey need to finish
> this engine.
> I did replace the fuel flow with a JPI and it is
> really nice, accurate and
> gives a lot of information for the buck.
> Yep, not much compares to the fox with a turbo. Love
> the faces when running
> beta on landing. Even the really old farts that
> never get off the bench
> come over and want to know how I put that turbine in
> :).
__________________________________
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Spor Pilot Rule |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
Just got this from the AOPA,
"SPORT PILOT RULE UNEXPECTEDLY RETURNS TO FAA
The FAA has temporarily withdrawn the proposed Sport
Pilot rule from consideration by the federal Office of
Management and Budget. Just before a 90-day review
period expired, FAA Administrator Marion Blakey
ordered the proposal withdrawn so that the agency
could answer questions about its economic costs and
benefits. The questions were raised during the OMB
review, essentially the final step in the approval
process for the new Sport Pilot certificate and
accompanying Light-Sport Aircraft category. AOPA has
supported the Sport Pilot rule in large part because
of the proposal's recognition that a driver's license
is adequate evidence of medical fitness to fly."
Kurt S.
__________________________________
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! --
|