---------------------------------------------------------- Kitfox-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Sun 05/16/04: 17 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 02:49 AM - CoG and fair of flying WAS: Avid dropping out in flair (Michel Verheughe) 2. 03:35 AM - OT: Correction: fear of flying (Michel Verheughe) 3. 03:48 AM - Vertical CoG WAS: Ground Loop (Michel Verheughe) 4. 06:00 AM - Re: Ground Loop (John Larsen) 5. 01:04 PM - Re: CG ballast in a bag (Lowell Fitt) 6. 05:14 PM - No Fly'in Today :( (Steve Cooper) 7. 08:36 PM - Rotax (John Balunda) 8. 08:39 PM - How much toe-in is too much? (Randy Daughenbaugh) 9. 08:55 PM - Re: Rotax (John Balunda) 10. 08:59 PM - Re: How much toe-in is too much? (Lowell Fitt) 11. 09:23 PM - Re: Avid dropping out in flair (jimshumaker) 12. 09:45 PM - Re: How much toe-in is too much? (Marc Arseneault) 13. 10:24 PM - Re: How much toe-in is too much? (kurt schrader) 14. 10:27 PM - Re: Avid dropping out in flair (kurt schrader) 15. 10:32 PM - Re: Ground Loop (kurt schrader) 16. 10:41 PM - Re: Vertical CoG WAS: Ground Loop (kurt schrader) 17. 10:51 PM - Re: CoG and fear of flying WAS: Avid dropping out in flair (kurt schrader) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 02:49:54 AM PST US From: Michel Verheughe Subject: Kitfox-List: CoG and fair of flying WAS: Avid dropping out in flair --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe Steve Cooper wrote: > That's it exactly Kurt. You explained it with much greater technical finese > than I was able to. Very good. Yes, excellent explanation, Kurt, thank you. What I missed (and you explained) was that Steve did a main wheel landing as the nose dropped. >...I'm scared to death of the plane. (step aside, Steve, it is now my turn to speak :-) - "Hi, my name is Michel and I am an aerophobe!" (fear of flying) - "Hi Michel!" ... Yes, I said it too and it feels better. I get it each time at preflight. I ask myself: Is this wise? But once the engine runs and I taxi toward holding, I feel fine again as my mind is busy with procedures. I am in control. I think it is healthy to be scared. It makes us think about safety. But panic is not healthy. Once I flew with two other planes and enjoyed it very much. As we separated, going each to a different airfield, I was left alone with my thoughts, having half an hour of direct flight to home in excellent weather. Then I started thinking of what would happen if I felt suddenly ill. That's how my father-in-law died in a car accident, after a heart problem. The thought made me panicking and I instinctively felt like flying lower, closer to the ground and safe landing. Wrong thinking! I understood at once the danger and started ... singing! In all my long distance sailing I have learned that, in a difficult situation, the danger is to freeze. It is so easy to be overwhelmed by the forces of nature and just stand there, doing nothing, while the ship sails toward a dangerous coastline. I found out that I tend to block my breathing and the best way to force oxygen to my brain was ... to sing as loud as I can. Hence the expression: "It ain't over until the scared viking sings!" :-) Cheers, Michel do not archive ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 03:35:02 AM PST US From: Michel Verheughe Subject: Kitfox-List: OT: Correction: fear of flying --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe Oops, a small typo in the title: Is should read "fear" and not "fair!" :-) Michel do not archive ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 03:48:03 AM PST US From: Michel Verheughe Subject: Kitfox-List: Vertical CoG WAS: Ground Loop --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe David & Maria Lumgair wrote: > NOT AT ALL - different planes handle differently - (especially kitfoxes). > It all depends what works for you - Of course, Dave. What would be ideal is to be able to test ground loops to learn how to control them. Of course we can't do that in our real planes because of the cost of repairs. But I can do it in my simulator. But then, it is only a question of how good I can simulate the plane. Of which, I have a question: The vertical position of the CoG. This, as you can imagine, affects a lot the "capsizing" and the wing hitting the ground. I can calculate the separate CoG of the engine and of the pilot's body. But I am not sure about the actual plane. My question is then this: On the total weight of the plane, excluding the engine installation, how much, in percent, are the wings? Right now, I have (in the simulator) the vertical CoG (excluding the fuel tanks) 0.9 ft above the prop shaft (which is my reference point for the model). Does it sound right? Cheers, Michel do not archive ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 06:00:05 AM PST US From: John Larsen Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Ground Loop --> Kitfox-List message posted by: John Larsen Good note Kurt, I had to land in a 90 degree gusting crosswind with my Airdale, and the only way I could get the plane to stick on the runway was to add power on touchddown with a quick wheel landing attitude. kurt schrader wrote: >--> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader > >I know on mine when I use a FWD CG, it will pitch up a >lot with power. At full power - trim in the middle. >No power requires full nose up trim. A go-around >keeps you busy for a moment pushing hard and trimming. > But so far in testing, I have enough elevator on mine >for landing and go-around. Steve was beyond his >control range IMHO. > >FYI This is not confined to KF's. Even in the Boeing >767 I sometimes have to add a burst of power to stop >the descent. This happens in places like Denver when >a crosswind makes the flair ineffective. You flair >and it is as if no lift changed. Crunch. A jab of >power does it, but it is tricky like Steve says. > >If you are hand flying, you can feel people walking >around even in a 400,000 lb AC. > >Kurt S. > >--- Steve Cooper wrote: > > >>Yep! But I'm here to tell you ...it is really tough >>to hit it just right. >>Too much and your floating down the runway...too >>little and KERPLOP! with a lot more inertia to get >>rid of. :) >> >>Steve >> >> >> >>>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Clem Nichols" >>> >>> >>> >>Similar question regarding "dropping out" on >>landing. Would adding in >>some throttle at the last moment give more elevator >>authority allowing the plane to touchdown in the >>proper 3-point attitude? >> >> > > > > >__________________________________ >http://promo.yahoo.com/sbc/ > > > > ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 01:04:41 PM PST US From: "Lowell Fitt" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: CG ballast in a bag --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Lowell Fitt" Leo Rice had an interesting variation on this theme. He mounted a small metal tool box on the bottom of his baggage sack and put a couple of bags of lead shot to get him into the CG envelope. Then when he traveled with his wife as he often did. Out came the shot and in went the luggage. This way he was in balance, but the ballast didn't interfere with the payload. The exception was the pound or two of tool box he always carried. Incidentally, the setup was listed in his aircraft equipment list Lowell ----- Original Message ----- From: "Fox5flyer" Subject: Kitfox-List: CG ballast in a bag > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Fox5flyer" > > To Kurt, Steve, Michel and others. When we find ourselves needing to move > the CG rearward for various reasons (usually heavy engine), none of us want > to add weight that doesn't do anything and we usually try to move things > like battery, elt, wing sweep, etc to compensate, but sometimes it just > isn't enough. There's one thing that I haven't seen mentioned, and that's > adding a canvas tool pouch rolled up and placed in the tail along with the > battery. Most of us carry a few tools anyway, so using them to make the > most of the CG makes sense. I have a small canvas roll-up that I keep > various tools in and placed in in the tail just behind the battery. It's > fairly dead weight so it doesn't even need to be tied down. It just lays > there right above the tailwheel bolt. The nice thing is that tools can be > added or subtracted to put the CG right where you want it. The arm is so > long that it doesn't take much to make a difference. Gaining access to them > simply requires using the fuel tester to remove a few screws on the access > cover, and it give me peace of mind just knowing that they're there if I > when I need them. > Darrel > S5 > Frost tonight in NE Michigan > > ...snip... > > > This kind of "drop" feels a bit different from a > > stall. You can't even get the nose up high enough to > > stall the wing. It comes from the tail reaching the > > end of its ability to hold the nose up as you slow > > down. The wing is still flying, but the nose drops > > out just like it would if you suddenly had the stick > > brake off in your hand. You pitch down slamming onto > > the runway not in control. More up elevator doesn't > > hold the nose up. > > > > With the CG farther back, you can raise the nose > > higher and still be in contol. Then if you do a full > > stall landing, the nose stays up and the plane settles > > down flat, not nosing over, because the tail can still > > hold the nose up. > ...snip > > ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 05:14:21 PM PST US From: "Steve Cooper" Subject: Kitfox-List: No Fly'in Today :( --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Steve Cooper" I was out early...but no flying today :( Winds here in the Antelope Valley were gusting to 2o ~ 25+ all day. It's STILL blow'in out there. That's the bad part about living in the desert. It doesn't look like the wind is going to be letting up anytime soon. The bird is prepped and I'm ready to go. Maybe tomorrow! Steve ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 08:36:45 PM PST US From: "John Balunda" Subject: Kitfox-List: Rotax --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "John Balunda" Just thought I would list what I saw on a government auction , one rotax probably gotten for cheap... http://cgi.govliquidation.com/auction/view?id=368585&convertTo=USD John ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 08:39:08 PM PST US From: "Randy Daughenbaugh" Subject: Kitfox-List: How much toe-in is too much? --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Randy Daughenbaugh" I got a laser level with a magnet base and stuck it on my disc brake rotors. By measuring the distance close to the wheels and out a good distance, I determined that I have about 1.1 degrees of toe-in on each wheel - in other words it is a total of 2.2 degrees, but seems to be evenly split between the two wheels measuring from a centerline on the fuselage. This way of measuring seems to be pretty accurate, but I am going to try some variations on this method to see how consistent it is. I am in the camp that prefers a neutral or slight toe-out alignment. But after following the arguments a while back, I can't remember what a significant amount of toe-in is. Is the 2.2 degrees significant? Thanks, Randy - series 5/7 getting' close! N10NH ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 08:55:03 PM PST US From: "John Balunda" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Rotax --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "John Balunda" After going thru that list more , there is more rotax engines at that auction. > http://cgi.govliquidation.com/auction/view?id=368585&convertTo=USD > > John do not archive ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 08:59:26 PM PST US From: "Lowell Fitt" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: How much toe-in is too much? --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Lowell Fitt" Randy, I think the answer can best be determined as you taxi. Actually, though, I agree strongly with the parallel or toe out is best and would suggest that you shim before you drag a wing tip. Lowell ----- Original Message ----- From: "Randy Daughenbaugh" Subject: Kitfox-List: How much toe-in is too much? > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Randy Daughenbaugh" > > > I got a laser level with a magnet base and stuck it on my disc brake rotors. > By measuring the distance close to the wheels and out a good distance, I > determined that I have about 1.1 degrees of toe-in on each wheel - in other > words it is a total of 2.2 degrees, but seems to be evenly split between the > two wheels measuring from a centerline on the fuselage. This way of > measuring seems to be pretty accurate, but I am going to try some variations > on this method to see how consistent it is. > > I am in the camp that prefers a neutral or slight toe-out alignment. But > after following the arguments a while back, I can't remember what a > significant amount of toe-in is. Is the 2.2 degrees significant? > > Thanks, > Randy - series 5/7 getting' close! N10NH > > ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 09:23:41 PM PST US From: "jimshumaker" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Avid dropping out in flair --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "jimshumaker" Thanks again for the explination Kurt. I had the drop out on landing problem when I first flew my Model III. It was so bad that I could not three point without bouncing. When I requested touch and go at my home airport the tower cleared me for a bounce and go. I became an advocate for wheel landings. After some aerodynamic changes I was able to improve the landing attitude and can now land easily in 500'. Jim Shumaker ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 09:45:15 PM PST US From: "Marc Arseneault" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: How much toe-in is too much? --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Marc Arseneault" Hi Randy, I would say that 1.1 degrees toe in is perfect if there is no weight/nobody in the plane. Keep in mind when you are doing your tests that once you sit in the plane, the weight of yourself and possibly a passenger will give you a greater toe out. Best Regards, Marc Arseneault Ontario Canada From: "Randy Daughenbaugh" rjdaugh@rapidnet.com Reply-To: kitfox-list@matronics.com To: kitfox-list@matronics.com Subject: Kitfox-List: How much toe-in is too much? Date: Sun, 16 May 2004 21:36:26 -0600 -- Kitfox-List message posted by: "Randy Daughenbaugh" rjdaugh@rapidnet.com I got a laser level with a magnet base and stuck it on my disc brake rotors. By measuring the distance close to the wheels and out a good distance, I determined that I have about 1.1 degrees of toe-in on each wheel - in other words it is a total of 2.2 degrees, but seems to be evenly split between the two wheels measuring fr ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 10:24:38 PM PST US From: kurt schrader Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: How much toe-in is too much? --> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader Randy, I met a guy with 3500 hrs of tailwheel time who crunched his new Avid in 15 hrs and hated it so much he refused to rebuild it. From his stories, I got the impression his only problem was toe-in. I lean toward the toe-out camp too. I have mine at about 1.3 total degrees out now (less than a degree each) and it is great on grass. Haven't done pavement with it yet though. This is how significant it looks mathematically. One degree is about 1 foot every 60 feet. 60 mph is 88'/sec and 40 mph is 58+'/sec. Call them 90'/sec and 60'/sec to make it easy. At 2.2 degrees in, your wheels will try to meet in the middle in one second after landing, if you touch down at 60 mph. Even at 40 mph they will try to move 2.2' toward the center in one second. So at 40 mph, I would say that you would be in a ground loop in just over 1 second, if you touched down one wheel first. I think you will be very unhappy with the handling. If you must, try it taxiing on pavement first, then takeoff and land on grass only. I think it would be better to put 2.5 - 3 degrees of shims on both sides. Then you are toe-out on each. Tire wear should be better too. You should be able to measure along the outside tire sidewall just like the disk brake, but it is easier to get to IMHO. Spin the tire first to make sure it doesn't wobble. If the sidewall is smooth, it should give a good reading. I just used a straight edge along the sidewall to align with. You can set your lazer there. I'm tired. Gotta go. :-( Kurt S. --- Randy Daughenbaugh wrote: > ......... > I am in the camp that prefers a neutral or slight > toe-out alignment. But after following the > arguments a while back, I can't remember what a > significant amount of toe-in is. Is the 2.2 degrees > significant? > > Thanks, > Randy - series 5/7 getting' close! N10NH __________________________________ http://promo.yahoo.com/sbc/ ________________________________ Message 14 ____________________________________ Time: 10:27:43 PM PST US From: kurt schrader Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Avid dropping out in flair --> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader Glad you can smile about it Jim. That shows that it is a more common problem than we think individually. Kurt S. --- jimshumaker wrote: > > Thanks again for the explination Kurt. > > I had the drop out on landing problem when I first > flew my Model III. It > was so bad that I could not three point without > bouncing. When I requested > touch and go at my home airport the tower cleared me > for a bounce and go. I > became an advocate for wheel landings. After some > aerodynamic changes I was > able to improve the landing attitude and can now > land easily in 500'. > > Jim Shumaker __________________________________ http://promo.yahoo.com/sbc/ ________________________________ Message 15 ____________________________________ Time: 10:32:18 PM PST US From: kurt schrader Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Ground Loop --> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader John, If you have the time someday, I would be interested in learning how the Airdale stacks up to the KF/Avids it is designed to improve on. We don't hear much about them here as far as I know. What can we add to ours to improve them like Airdale did? Kurt S. --- John Larsen wrote: > > Good note Kurt, I had to land in a 90 degree gusting > crosswind with my > Airdale, and the only way I could get the plane to > stick on the runway > was to add power on touchddown with a quick wheel > landing attitude. __________________________________ http://promo.yahoo.com/sbc/ ________________________________ Message 16 ____________________________________ Time: 10:41:09 PM PST US From: kurt schrader Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Vertical CoG WAS: Ground Loop --> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader Michel, When I went out in my hangar owner's Cub last year, I did intentional ground loops. Spent 20 minutes taxiing and did maybe 3 ground loops at about 7 mph or less near the end of my practice. It wasn't hard. He only had one brake that worked! But I wanted to see if I could stop it once it was started at that safe speed. My conclusion? If my plane taxis and flys that bad, I made a mistake building it. After flying mine now, I am much happier. ;-) Kurt S. --- Michel Verheughe wrote: > ......... > Of course, Dave. What would be ideal is to be able > to test ground loops to > learn how to control them. Of course we can't do > that in our real planes because of the cost of > repairs. .......... __________________________________ http://promo.yahoo.com/sbc/ ________________________________ Message 17 ____________________________________ Time: 10:51:39 PM PST US From: kurt schrader Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: CoG and fear of flying WAS: Avid dropping out in flair --> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader Test flying does it to me too. I find that I can get on with it if I just pick up my checklist and test plan and fly it as I planned it. That focus's me on what I need to be doing next, so I work my plan out in detail before I go fly. I have emergency plans and sometimes altrernate plans in case the wx doesn't let me do "plan A". But I am taking it slowly too..... Kurt S. --- Michel Verheughe wrote: > > Steve Cooper wrote: > > That's it exactly Kurt. You explained it with much > greater technical finese > > than I was able to. Very good. > > Yes, excellent explanation, Kurt, thank you. What I > missed (and you explained) > was that Steve did a main wheel landing as the nose > dropped. > > >...I'm scared to death of the plane. > > (step aside, Steve, it is now my turn to speak :-) > - "Hi, my name is Michel and I am an aerophobe!" > (fear of flying) > - "Hi Michel!" .......... > I understood at once the danger and started singing! __________________________________ http://promo.yahoo.com/sbc/