Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 01:40 AM - Re: NSI idle RPM (Howard Firm)
2. 04:25 AM - Re: I am a bit dissapointed because Aircraft (dwight purdy)
3. 04:50 AM - Re: I am a bit dissapointed because Aircraft Spruce hasn't yet answered to my email. (Dee Young)
4. 06:08 AM - Test (Lowell Fitt)
5. 09:18 AM - Comm antennas and ground planes (Ted Palamarek)
6. 09:39 AM - CorvAircraft> Sport Pilot (Arthur Nation)
7. 11:01 AM - Re:Sport Pilot new rule ()
8. 11:11 AM - Re: NSI idle RPM (kurt schrader)
9. 12:05 PM - Re: NSI idle RPM (Fox5flyer)
10. 12:52 PM - Re: NSI idle RPM (Howard Firm)
11. 04:14 PM - Re: I am a bit dissapointed because Aircraft Spruce hasn't yet answered to my email. ()
12. 04:47 PM - negative 54 (Jim Hakes)
13. 05:09 PM - Re: negative 54 (AlbertaIV@aol.com)
14. 05:34 PM - Re: negative 54 (POP3)
15. 05:38 PM - Re: negative 54 (Don Pearsall)
16. 06:23 PM - Have you tried contacting ACS in Australia? The reps are listed in (Rex & Jan Shaw)
17. 06:34 PM - Re: negative 54 (Fred Shiple)
18. 07:09 PM - Too much seat support? (Randy Daughenbaugh)
19. 07:27 PM - Elevator adjustment (owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com)
20. 07:33 PM - Re: Too much seat support? (Ronald K. Stevens)
21. 07:44 PM - Re: negative 54 (Marc Arseneault)
22. 07:46 PM - Re: Elevator adjustment (Marc Arseneault)
23. 07:54 PM - Re: Too much seat support? (Roger McConnell)
24. 07:58 PM - new life (Jim Hakes)
25. 08:00 PM - Re: Have you tried contacting ACS in Australia? The reps are listed in (Allan Aaron)
26. 08:03 PM - Re: Submerged Kitfox (Jim) (Marc Arseneault)
27. 08:11 PM - Re: Too much seat support? ()
28. 08:19 PM - Re: Elevator adjustment ()
29. 08:26 PM - Re: Too much seat support? (Clifford Begnaud)
30. 08:27 PM - Re: Too much seat support? (Don Pearsall)
31. 08:39 PM - Re: negative 54 (kurt schrader)
32. 09:14 PM - Re: Too much seat support? (kurt schrader)
33. 09:29 PM - Re: Elevator adjustment (Lowell Fitt)
34. 09:39 PM - Re: NSI idle RPM (kurt schrader)
35. 10:18 PM - Re: Comm antennas and ground planes (kurt schrader)
36. 11:38 PM - Rotax 670 (Rex & Jan Shaw)
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: NSI idle RPM |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Howard Firm" <pianome2@mchsi.com>
Yes, it is on both sides.
Howard
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rick" <turboflyer@comcast.net>
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: NSI idle RPM
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Rick" <turboflyer@comcast.net>
>
> Howard is the side vent exhaust on both sides? I think that is a real
winner
> idea. If we try doing anything to the rear botton of the cowl is deflects
> the air down to far away from the radiator. Nice job. I will have to get
> that done befor I fire up the new engine for sure, even if its a temp
rough
> set up.
>
> Rick N656T Model 5 NSI turbo CAP140 with upgrade 1
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: I am a bit dissapointed because Aircraft |
Spruce hasn't yet answered to my email.
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: dwight purdy <dpurdy@comteck.com> Spruce hasn't
yet answered to my email.
Maybe to close to Oshkosh?
Dwight
At 10:16 AM 7/20/2004 +0930, you wrote:
>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Rex & Jan Shaw" <rexjan@bigpond.com>
>
>I am a bit dissapointed because Aircraft Spruce hasn't yet answered to my
>email.
>
>No they haven't answered mine either. I'm in Australia and it's nerve
>wracking enough paying overseas for stuff and waiting and hoping for it to
>come. If one can't get a simple E'mail response it does not instill
>confidence to deal. Aircraft Spruce advertise in a local magazine [ Pacific
>Flyer ] over here, they plainly invite E'mail enquiries on their site and if
>the site info doesn't give sufficient info then surely it is reasonable to
>expect a reply.
> Can anyone subscribe to a reason they don't answer other than that they
>just don't want overseas business despite advertising for it. I really would
>like to know as I feel they are the practical way to get what I want if only
>I can find a way to deal satisfactorilly with them.
> Rex Shaw, Australia.
>rexjan@bigpond.com
>
>
>---
>Version: 6.0.718 / Virus Database: 474 - Release Date: 7/9/2004
---
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: I am a bit dissapointed because Aircraft Spruce hasn't |
yet answered to my email.
Seal-Send-Time: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 05:50:37 -0600
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Dee Young" <henrysfork1@msn.com>
My experience with ACS is exceptional, I usually order through the internet but
sometimes by phone. What are you trying to find out? Maybe someone on the list
can help.
Dee Young
Model II N345DY
Do Not Archive
----- Original Message -----
From: dwight purdy Spruce hasn't yet answered to my email.<mailto:dpurdy@comteck.com>
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com<mailto:kitfox-list@matronics.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2004 5:24 AM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: I am a bit dissapointed because Aircraft Spruce hasn't
yet answered to my email.
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: dwight purdy <dpurdy@comteck.com<mailto:dpurdy@comteck.com>> Spruce hasn't yet answered to my email.
Maybe to close to Oshkosh?
Dwight
At 10:16 AM 7/20/2004 +0930, you wrote:
>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Rex & Jan Shaw" <rexjan@bigpond.com<mailto:rexjan@bigpond.com>>
>
>I am a bit dissapointed because Aircraft Spruce hasn't yet answered to my
>email.
>
>No they haven't answered mine either. I'm in Australia and it's nerve
>wracking enough paying overseas for stuff and waiting and hoping for it to
>come. If one can't get a simple E'mail response it does not instill
>confidence to deal. Aircraft Spruce advertise in a local magazine [ Pacific
>Flyer ] over here, they plainly invite E'mail enquiries on their site and if
>the site info doesn't give sufficient info then surely it is reasonable to
>expect a reply.
> Can anyone subscribe to a reason they don't answer other than that they
>just don't want overseas business despite advertising for it. I really would
>like to know as I feel they are the practical way to get what I want if only
>I can find a way to deal satisfactorilly with them.
> Rex Shaw, Australia.
>rexjan@bigpond.com
>
>
>---
>Version: 6.0.718 / Virus Database: 474 - Release Date: 7/9/2004
---
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 |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Lowell Fitt" <lcfitt@inreach.com>
----- Original Message -----
From: "John E. King " <kingjohn@erols.com>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Com Antenna
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "John E. King " <kingjohn@erols.com>
>
> One of the important characteristics of an antenna design that has not
> been discussed thus far has been the effective antenna pattern. That is
> the propagated signal strength as measured in all directions from the
> antenna. An omni-directional. antenna like the ones we use on out
> aircraft needs to propagate with sufficient strength in all directions.
> Directional antennas propagate in only one direction or in a vary narrow
> beam width. The ground plane, no matter if it is the aircraft structure
> or a symmetrical antenna ground plane will determine the shape of the
> antenna pattern.
>
> In our aircraft we want to propagate the signal as far as possible in
> all directions. In most long distance instances we are communicating
> with destination airports in front of us, so we hope the antenna pattern
> or signal strength is better in that direction. If we are only
> concerned about communicating short distances, say between nearby
> airports and other aircraft, then the antenna pattern or signal strength
> is of a lesser concern.
>
> I saw first hand how ground planes affect signal propagation while
> working with NASA on the Saturn Program. We had an antenna range that
> was used to evaluate space vehicle antenna performance. We would
> measure the propagated signal strength on scaled down Saturn vehicle
> antennas to determine its antenna pattern. The earth was our ground
> plane. On dry summer days we had to wet down the earth surrounding the
> antenna range with lawn sprinklers, so that we would have an adequate
> ground plane. Amazing how much difference that made in signal
propagation.
>
> I have flown with other aircraft where our ability to communicate
adequately was dependent on where we flew relative to one another. At that
time I assumed that I was flying in a relatively low signal strength portion
of their antenna pattern. I concluded that based on the fact that the
signal strength was better in one location than another and that it was
repeatable. One might say that maybe it was my antenna pattern that had low
signal strength areas, however, since I had installed a metallic ground
plane and the other aircraft did not, they are presumed the guilty one. The
antenna pattern becomes more critical when your transmitter or receiver
performance starts to degrade.
>
> --
> John King
> Warrenton, VA
>
>
> Lowell Fitt wrote:
>
> >--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Lowell Fitt" <lcfitt@inreach.com>
> >
> >Don, this is my point exactly. the engineers say this and we do it
> >regardless of what works in practice. I was a HAM radio operator and
> >studied - at least to a point - antenna theory. Yes indeed a "ground
plane"
> >us an essential part of vertical antenna which our whip antenna is. I
guess
> >what I am trying to point out is that the mounting plate Skystar provided
on
> >my airplane plus the electrically continuous tube structure is a
perfectly
> >adequate ground plane and to add an additional ground plane is redundant
and
> >adds another potential failure mode - corrosion between dissimilar
metals.
> >
> >I find no fault with those that added a ground plane, but I question a
> >blanket statement that one is necessary if the statement is intended to
> >imply that a square of metal or mesh or an arrangement of radial wires is
> >essential to the proper function of the com radio.
> >
> >Lowell
> >
> >
> >
>
>
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: | Comm antennas and ground planes |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Ted Palamarek" <temco@telusplanet.net>
Kurt, Michel & List
The coils normally associated with whip type antennas are
primarily used as matching networks (To make it resonant at
the required frequency and approx 50 ohms impedance at the
feed point). In other words your co-ax feed is normally 50
ohms (impedance, made up of inductive and capacitive
reactance - not resistive). Therefore, you want to make the
antenna appear as a 50 ohm RF energy sink. When the antenna
impedance and co-ax impedance are both very close to 50
ohms---you have the greatest transfer of RF power. In this
situation very little if any power is reflected back to the
transmitter. All power reflected back towards the Xmtr is
wasted in heat generation along the co-ax line or in the
power amplifier circuit of the Xmtr. This wasted power is
subtracted from what would normally go out your antenna in a
perfect world.
So, you can load up a barded wire fence with no ground plane
and make it work real well as many Hams have done during
Bunny hunts. The secret to getting the most out of your VHF
is proper matching of the Xmtr/feedline to the antenna. A
VSWR of 1:1 is perfect albeit difficult to achieve. Our
Kitfoxes have enough metal already to act as the ground
plane. The important thing here is to make sure your
connection at the antenna is electrically well made (co-ax
cable braid to airframe) and (centre conductor to the
antenna). Make sure that any powder coating, paint etc is
cleaned away before securing the antenna mechanically ---
this will ensure a good electrical connection for the
braid/shield. To check --- use a digital VOM and you should
be able to measure less than one ohm by doing a continuity
check from the co-ax braid to any part of the aircraft frame
once the antenna is installed. Remember where ever you are
checking co-ax to frame, the frame must also be bare clean
4130 chrome molly tubing. Proper sealing of the antenna
connection against moisture infiltration is mandatory. Any
corrosion will start to increase your VSWR and that's not
good.
I think the list is getting to tied up in ground planes ---
rather than ensuring a good mechanical/electrical connection
at the antenna. As well good grounding procedures for all
the other electrical equipment on board also helps.
Personally, I believe more can be achieved by good
installation techniques rather spending time adding any
ground planes in our Kitfoxes. Non metallic aircraft are a
whole different matter and still a subject of great debate.
Anyway that's one guys opinion after 35+ yrs in the aviation
electronics industry and a current Ham (VE6PQ)
Ted
Edmonton, Ab
--
Subject: Re: SV: Kitfox-List: Com Antenna
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader
<smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
Michel,
A coil ground plane? With such a fine liquid grnd
conductor sliding by just below? I am not a boater,
but that sounds like a waste to me. Maybe it has to
do with corrosion protection? All our Navy HF's used
that big boat and the water as the grnd plane, as far
as I know. Our sailors spare time and paint are the
corrosion protection.
Antenna coils are there to fool the transmitter into
thinking it has a bigger antenna - one that fits, like
John says. The coil absorbs some of the transmitter
power. That helps save the transmitter, but doesn't
put much more signal out since the power is absorbed
by the coil.
Think I'll start an organization for abused radios. I
am not a morning person, so it will be an FM shelter
only. :~)
Kurt S. S-5 w/NSI turno & CAP-140 prop
--- Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no> wrote:
>
> > From: John E. King [kingjohn@erols.com]
> > I believe that the coil at the base of the Marine
> VHF whip antenna is to extend the electrical
> > length of the antenna, otherwise the whip would
> > have to be much longer at those operating
> frequencies.
>
> Well, ... ok, John. I used to think that marine VHF
> antenna were quart wave verticals with built-in
> ground planes, working like the aviation one, in the
> two meters band, only that it is frequency modulate,
> instead of amplitude. I have never seen an external
> ground plane in any sailboat mast but ... I must be
> wrong then.
>
> 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: | CorvAircraft> Sport Pilot |
Corvair engines for homebuilt aircraft <corvaircraft@mylist.net>
List-Id: Corvair engines for homebuilt aircraft <corvaircraft.mylist.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://mylist.net/listinfo/corvaircraft>,
List-Archive: <http://mylist.net/archives/corvaircraft>
List-Post: <mailto:corvaircraft@mylist.net>
List-Help: <mailto:corvaircraft-request@mylist.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://mylist.net/listinfo/corvaircraft>,
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Arthur Nation <anation@w-link.net>
A PDF format is available NOW on the EAA.ORG site.
At pages 34,35 the limits are:
GW 1320 and 1430 for floats/amphib.
AS 120 knot limit
Alt. less than 10,000 ft.
sounds good to me.
Check it out.
do not archive
to UNsubscribe from CorvAircraft, send a message to
CorvAircraft-leave@mylist.net
Other CorvAircraft list info is at http://www.krnet.org/corvaircraft_inst.html
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:Sport Pilot new rule |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: <av8rps@tznet.com>
Just a note;
It appears that amphibs are definitely not sport pilot eligible, as they
only allow re-positionable landing gear on seaplanes. Repositionable
apparently means leaving the gear down airport to airport (the aircraft is
not capable of doing a water landing unless you are on land (sitting still?)
where you physically reposition the landing gear into a position that allows
the airplane to be pushed into the water, and you take off. Obviously
reversing the procedure when you land in the water.
Wow! How did they come up with that one? I don't ever recall seeing an
aircraft like that. Can anyone else enlighten me on this?
Paul S
----- Original Message -----
From: "Arthur Nation" <anation@w-link.net>
Subject: Kitfox-List: CorvAircraft> Sport Pilot Corvair engines for
homebuilt aircraft <corvaircraft@mylist.net>
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Arthur Nation <anation@w-link.net>
>
> A PDF format is available NOW on the EAA.ORG site.
> At pages 34,35 the limits are:
>
> GW 1320 and 1430 for floats/amphib.
> AS 120 knot limit
> Alt. less than 10,000 ft.
> sounds good to me.
> Check it out.
>
>
> do not archive
>
> to UNsubscribe from CorvAircraft, send a message to
> CorvAircraft-leave@mylist.net
> Other CorvAircraft list info is at
http://www.krnet.org/corvaircraft_inst.html
>
>
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 |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
Rick,
All good info.
Oil pressure: That is one of the problems I have been
working on during testing. What engine parameters are
you all showing for the NSI? Mine are:
I am using 20W50 oil and the temps have run from 180
to 235. (All in the green) I hit the high temps on
T/O and full power climbing. If I pull back to idle
before the temps come down to around 210 or less, the
pressure can drop below 30, which I try to keep as my
minimum. (Lance says this is to keep that front
bearing lubed.)
If I use thicker oil, the pressure can reach 90 psi
with the cooler oil temps. I try to keep the pressure
between 30 and 60, which means keeping temps between
180 and 210, or control pressure with RPM.
Is there a 20W60 or higher oil? That would help.
This is probably not a problem except when I stay in
the pattern or do my Vx and Vy testing. Then there is
too little time for the oil to cool enough before I
would like to go to idle. Normal flying, the oil
comes off the high temps in cruise and cools very well
on descent.
Still testing though. All this can change when I add
the radiator scoop since it modifies cowl air flow.
That is why those side vents look good to me too.
As far as coolant temps, I am running cold right now 140 +/- 20F. I hope the scoop
will address that too
as well as all that drag.
On idle RPM and the gear clutch: If you idle below
1800, the clutch has to engage and disengage on each
power stroke, corrrect? With the prop loaded for
cooling, the effect is magnified.
Of course I keep pitch on my prop to cool, but I also
keep the RPM's up for the clutch. I certainly can
pitch it to lower idle RPM's, but I have no pitch
gauge to say what that is. One way I can cross
reference idle RPM's with the rest of you who have a
CAP prop is to use flat pitch RPM for a ref.
One other possibility is to set min flight pitch by
setting higher pitch at say 3000 RPM, then reducing
the pitch to the stop (prop light on). Then reducing
to idle and see what that RPM is. It should be common
to all of us since the pitch lockout should be the
same.
Also flat pitch idle seems to be just about idle
descent rpm for me. The prop can spin faster by the
clutch disengaging, but my idle pitch is not pulling
the plane in flight, nor pulling down engine rpm.
Those are my ref points so far.
Kurt S.
--- Rick <turboflyer@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> If the oil pressure drops too low either the oil is
> too hot, wrong weight,poor oil cooler location or
> flow or some combination. The relief
> valve spring can be shimmed to bring working
> pressure up but as a last resort. I may be missing
> something but flat pitch idle is a non issue. I
> believe you want the engine to idle at some pitch
> that will provide a load and air flow. Maybe 1800
> -200 flat equals out to 1250 at 7.5 or some number,
> not sure.
>
> Rick N656T Model 5 NSI turbo CAP140 with upgrade 1
__________________________________
http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/yahoo/votelifeengine/
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: NSI idle RPM |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Fox5flyer" <morid@northland.lib.mi.us>
Correct Kurt. This was a topic a long time ago that was thrashed severely
and after discussing it with Lance I use a startup and idle RPM of 2000 or
sometimes a little higher, whichever is smoother. I have the throttle set
so that I can reduce idle to 1500 for landing, but as soon as I'm on the
ground I increase it back to 2000. The reason for this is the lower the
idle the more stress is placed on the reduction unit by the tortional
vibration of the power strokes trying to hammer that big prop around. The
higher the rpm the smoother it is. Rotaxes are the same, that's why the
582s clatter so much below 2000. I suspect same goes for the 912. I
wouldn't recommend prolonged idling less than 1500 under any circumstance
(except for short final) while the prop is connected. Too rough on both the
gearbox and prop hub. I've used this procedure since day one and it works
for me.
Just my two cents.
Darrel
> On idle RPM and the gear clutch: If you idle below
> 1800, the clutch has to engage and disengage on each
> power stroke, corrrect? With the prop loaded for
> cooling, the effect is magnified.
>
> Of course I keep pitch on my prop to cool, but I also
> keep the RPM's up for the clutch. I certainly can
> pitch it to lower idle RPM's, but I have no pitch
> gauge to say what that is. One way I can cross
> reference idle RPM's with the rest of you who have a
> CAP prop is to use flat pitch RPM for a ref.
>
> One other possibility is to set min flight pitch by
> setting higher pitch at say 3000 RPM, then reducing
> the pitch to the stop (prop light on). Then reducing
> to idle and see what that RPM is. It should be common
> to all of us since the pitch lockout should be the
> same.
>
> Also flat pitch idle seems to be just about idle
> descent rpm for me. The prop can spin faster by the
> clutch disengaging, but my idle pitch is not pulling
> the plane in flight, nor pulling down engine rpm.
>
> Those are my ref points so far.
>
> Kurt S.
>
> --- Rick <turboflyer@comcast.net> wrote:
> >
> > If the oil pressure drops too low either the oil is
> > too hot, wrong weight,poor oil cooler location or
> > flow or some combination. The relief
> > valve spring can be shimmed to bring working
> > pressure up but as a last resort. I may be missing
> > something but flat pitch idle is a non issue. I
> > believe you want the engine to idle at some pitch
> > that will provide a load and air flow. Maybe 1800
> > -200 flat equals out to 1250 at 7.5 or some number,
> > not sure.
> >
> > Rick N656T Model 5 NSI turbo CAP140 with upgrade 1
>
>
> __________________________________
> http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/yahoo/votelifeengine/
>
>
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: NSI idle RPM |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Howard Firm" <pianome2@mchsi.com>
This all makes sense....I think I will set my minimum idle to 1800...
Howard
----- Original Message -----
From: "Fox5flyer" <morid@northland.lib.mi.us>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: NSI idle RPM
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Fox5flyer" <morid@northland.lib.mi.us>
>
>
> Correct Kurt. This was a topic a long time ago that was thrashed severely
> and after discussing it with Lance I use a startup and idle RPM of 2000 or
> sometimes a little higher, whichever is smoother. I have the throttle set
> so that I can reduce idle to 1500 for landing, but as soon as I'm on the
> ground I increase it back to 2000. The reason for this is the lower the
> idle the more stress is placed on the reduction unit by the tortional
> vibration of the power strokes trying to hammer that big prop around. The
> higher the rpm the smoother it is. Rotaxes are the same, that's why the
> 582s clatter so much below 2000. I suspect same goes for the 912. I
> wouldn't recommend prolonged idling less than 1500 under any circumstance
> (except for short final) while the prop is connected. Too rough on both
the
> gearbox and prop hub. I've used this procedure since day one and it works
> for me.
> Just my two cents.
> Darrel
>
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: I am a bit dissapointed because Aircraft Spruce hasn't |
yet answered to my email.
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: <kirkhull@sbcglobal.net>
Rex I have never gotten a quick responce from Aircraft Spruce even with
questions before the purchase. It usually takes 2 or 3 weeks to hear from
them even inside the USA (Missouri )
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rex & Jan Shaw" <rexjan@bigpond.com>
Subject: Kitfox-List: I am a bit dissapointed because Aircraft Spruce hasn't
yet answered to my email.
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Rex & Jan Shaw" <rexjan@bigpond.com>
>
> I am a bit dissapointed because Aircraft Spruce hasn't yet answered to my
> email.
>
> No they haven't answered mine either. I'm in Australia and it's nerve
> wracking enough paying overseas for stuff and waiting and hoping for it to
> come. If one can't get a simple E'mail response it does not instill
> confidence to deal. Aircraft Spruce advertise in a local magazine [
Pacific
> Flyer ] over here, they plainly invite E'mail enquiries on their site and
if
> the site info doesn't give sufficient info then surely it is reasonable to
> expect a reply.
> Can anyone subscribe to a reason they don't answer other than that they
> just don't want overseas business despite advertising for it. I really
would
> like to know as I feel they are the practical way to get what I want if
only
> I can find a way to deal satisfactorilly with them.
> Rex Shaw, Australia.
> rexjan@bigpond.com
>
>
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 |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Jim Hakes" <jhakes@emily.net>
When flying floats many pilots set the altimeter to zero and not the altitude above
sea level for the surrounding land. That is how I set my altimeter last
Thursday , July 15th.
After my last landing, my Fox came to a stop at negative 54, the deepest part of
the lake.
I was making a glassy landing and made a great approach. Shortly after touch down,
my Fox pulled hard to the starboard and I could not straighten it out. During
this time I opened my door. When the turn was over the nose was slowly
going down. What I did was a water loop. At this point I left my Fox while I
was above water.
I swam for while around my beloved Fox made as hell as it slowly was going under.
A boat came , our minister, so I did not swear, and gave me a float which
I attached the rear handle. He then took me to his house so I could call my wife.
Then the action started with about 5 law enforcements, and emergency staff.
This happened at 9:15 am. I had the Fox back home 12 hours later.
We not know the cause, but the starboard float, Super Floats, was a totaled. I
do not know what started the loop, but most of the damage could have been caused
during the loop. It was completely torn apart. In doing so, it pulled a
spreader from the portside float which caused it to take water on part of it.
Our best idea so far is that I hit something and everything grew from there.
The Fox is one strong plane. The only damage so far is the starboard wing tip
and flapperon from the loop. The FAA inspector came yesterday , good guy and
no hassle, so now I am good to go. The first thing is the 912 and I hope it starts
today.
If any of you have some advice in the area of sunken planes, please share.
Jim Hakes
Model IV
#1664, 912
There is an article in the paper, not completely accurate, at <brainerddispatch.com>
Go to archives and the date is July 16th and the name of the article is
broken glass.
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 |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: AlbertaIV@aol.com
In a message dated 7/20/04 4:48:34 PM Pacific Daylight Time, jhakes@emily.net
writes:
> today.
> If any of you have some advice in the area of sunken planes, please share.
>
> Jim Hakes
> Model IV
> #1664, 912
>
Jim,
I don't have any advice but sure am sorry to hear about your troubles.
Hope everything works out OK.
Don Smythe
DO NOT ARCHIVE
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 |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: POP3 <av8rps@tznet.com>
Jim:
Sorry to hear about your misfortune. What a bummer.
I heard an ultralight forum discussion a while ago where a set of
puddlejumper floats did (from what I can tell the exact) same thing as what
yours did. Investigation at that time indicated the float top had separated
from the bottom section during the landing phase. I'm no expert on
puddlejumpers or on Superfloats, but I do think they are built similarly.
So maybe?
Get that engine going as soon as possible and it might be ok. I helped a
couple guys with sunk boats in the past. Got em going the same afternoon
they sank. Never even knew it happened a week or two later. Also, I fly a
Lake amphib that sank twice in Canada prior to me buying it. Both times
majorly in the boondocks. Yet they flew it home both times. But because of
the engine location, everything but the engine sank while tied to shore.
If you think it will be a while before you get things going, we have a
friend in Ontario with a 912s in a Aerocet model IV amphib that is dying to
lay his hands on a motor mount that he could borrow until his new one came
in. Just a thought if you think you might find your airplane laid up for
some time. You'd be his hero for sure....
Paul Seehafer
Wisconsin
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Hakes" <jhakes@emily.net>
Subject: Kitfox-List: negative 54
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Jim Hakes" <jhakes@emily.net>
>
>
> When flying floats many pilots set the altimeter to zero and not the
altitude above sea level for the surrounding land. That is how I set my
altimeter last Thursday , July 15th.
> After my last landing, my Fox came to a stop at negative 54, the deepest
part of the lake.
> I was making a glassy landing and made a great approach. Shortly after
touch down, my Fox pulled hard to the starboard and I could not straighten
it out. During this time I opened my door. When the turn was over the nose
was slowly going down. What I did was a water loop. At this point I left
my Fox while I was above water.
> I swam for while around my beloved Fox made as hell as it slowly was going
under. A boat came , our minister, so I did not swear, and gave me a float
which I attached the rear handle. He then took me to his house so I could
call my wife. Then the action started with about 5 law enforcements, and
emergency staff.
> This happened at 9:15 am. I had the Fox back home 12 hours later.
> We not know the cause, but the starboard float, Super Floats, was a
totaled. I do not know what started the loop, but most of the damage could
have been caused during the loop. It was completely torn apart. In doing
so, it pulled a spreader from the portside float which caused it to take
water on part of it. Our best idea so far is that I hit something and
everything grew from there.
> The Fox is one strong plane. The only damage so far is the starboard wing
tip and flapperon from the loop. The FAA inspector came yesterday , good
guy and no hassle, so now I am good to go. The first thing is the 912 and I
hope it starts today.
> If any of you have some advice in the area of sunken planes, please share.
>
> Jim Hakes
> Model IV
> #1664, 912
>
> There is an article in the paper, not completely accurate, at
<brainerddispatch.com> Go to archives and the date is July 16th and the
name of the article is broken glass.
>
>
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Don Pearsall" <donpearsall@comcast.net>
Jim,
I sure am glad you made it out OK! You must have been heartbroken seeing
your 'Fox doing its submarine act.
The engine will probably be OK, but your panel electronics may never work
again.
Additionally now you have to worry that water got into the fuselage tubes
and is still there. Maybe there is a way to purge the water out by blowing
in hot air, then more oil.
Good luck, Jim. Now you have another project ahead of you.
Don Pearsall
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: | Have you tried contacting ACS in Australia? The reps are |
listed in
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Rex & Jan Shaw" <rexjan@bigpond.com>
Thanks Jay, to be honest I haven't got a catalogue. I hadn't dealt with them
before. I just used their website. Anyway maybe I jumped in a bit soon
commenting because I now have an answer. Although they didn't answer my
question which I thought was poor they did give me the details of a new rep
they have set up in Australia. That might work even better hopefully. If it
does work properly here in Australia I think apart from the delivery delay
it will be great. They have a huge range, comrehensive website and I now
realise the wonderful catalogue available.
Rex.
rexjan@bigpond.com
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 |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Fred Shiple <fredshiple@sbcglobal.net>
JIm,
Really sorry so hear your news. Glad you are safe. Hope you're back in the air
quickly.
Fred
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: | Too much seat support? |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Randy Daughenbaugh" <rjdaugh@rapidnet.com>
I would like to pose a safety issue to the list. I am getting ready to fly
my fox (!!!!!!!) and getting some pressure from two different people that I
have great respect for, but disagree with on this point. (I always get
worried when I don't agree with someone whom I think knows what they are
talking about.)
I put a planed down 2X4 under the seats. (Series 5) It is supported by the
fuselage cross members and neatly supports the bottom of the fiberglass seat
pan. One purpose is to keep the seats off the controls if the seat were to
give way - on a hard landing maybe?
The comments that I am getting is that I have created a spine crusher
because now there is no "give" or deceleration area. I can see this point,
but....... Well maybe I will wait to see if I get some opinions.
Should I take out my 2X4?
Randy - Series 5/7 912S N10NH - close, real close!
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: | Elevator adjustment |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by:
Hello list,
I cant find in my Classic IV manual the page that
says how many degrees up and down must the elevator
have. I will fly the plane again after a ground loop
repair. I moved the system and Im worried as I see
the elevator in the up position a little bit
"horizontal". Can someone help me?
Thanks in advance,
Francisco Icaza.
La mejor conexin a internet y 25MB extra a tu correo por $100 al mes. http://net.yahoo.com.mx
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: Too much seat support? |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Ronald K. Stevens" <rkstevens@verizon.net>
I too had some concerns as to the strength of the fiberglass seat pans.
I think one list member had his seat pan dislodge upon a firm landing
and the seat pan then pinned the flaperon push-pull tube that runs
underneath the port side seat which subsequently caused an accident. To
keep this particular failure mode from happening in my model 6, I used
some nylon webbing (basically, some 2" tow-strap material) to make
something of a sling that supports the seat pan. I fabricated two
straps for each seat. The straps run fore & aft from the front tube
(that tube that supports the front of the seat pan) to the back tube
(the tube that supports the back of the seat pan). The straps have been
sewn on using heavy some very heavy thread -- more like cord actually --
to the tubes. I had to use a sewing awl to do this. The seat pan is
then supported by the straps. The seat pan -- even if it jumps off of
the support tubes -- or even breaks -- won't be able to restrict the
flaperon push-pull tubes. And, being nylon, the straps have some "give"
to them -- so, hopefully, no back injuries in cause of a hard landing.
Ron
Series 6 -- NSI Turbo -- Cap 140
Randy Daughenbaugh wrote:
>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Randy Daughenbaugh" <rjdaugh@rapidnet.com>
>
>
>I would like to pose a safety issue to the list. I am getting ready to fly
>my fox (!!!!!!!) and getting some pressure from two different people that I
>have great respect for, but disagree with on this point. (I always get
>worried when I don't agree with someone whom I think knows what they are
>talking about.)
>
>I put a planed down 2X4 under the seats. (Series 5) It is supported by the
>fuselage cross members and neatly supports the bottom of the fiberglass seat
>pan. One purpose is to keep the seats off the controls if the seat were to
>give way - on a hard landing maybe?
>
>The comments that I am getting is that I have created a spine crusher
>because now there is no "give" or deceleration area. I can see this point,
>but....... Well maybe I will wait to see if I get some opinions.
>
>Should I take out my 2X4?
>
>Randy - Series 5/7 912S N10NH - close, real close!
>
>
>
>
>
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 |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Marc Arseneault" <northernultralights@hotmail.com>
Hi Jim,
First of all I am sorry to hear about your incident. I flipped mine on water a
few years ago and Ihadverylittle structual damage but I had to replace all of
the instruments. You can get the instruments repaired but I found that it would
cost just a little bit more for new ones. Open up your radio and intercom and
let it dry. Mine worked fine after doing this. I had a 582 therefore draining
the water out of it and starting it ASAP was the best thing to do. I must of
changed the oil in my "E" drive over a dozen times. The best advice I can give
you as for the motor is to call Bob Robertson at Light Engine Services (780)
418-4164 and Bob will be able to help you out and direct you in the right direction.
I would imagine that a four stroke would have to be opened/inspected.
It is very important that your wings drain ASAP. Make sure all of the drain holes
are open and if necessary make more as t
he last thing you want is for your ribs etc...to warp. Remove your wing tips and
let the air dry it ASAP. Mine were ok but I spent alot of time draining everything.
Fuel tanks etc...would also be important to flush when you get a chance
etc... If everything is drained and dried properly, the cost to repair it will
be alot less. Remove all of your upholstry and also let them dry. I hope this
helps Jim and wish you the best of luck. The thing I found the most was to
listen to people who have been through it and talk to the right people and you
will save yourself alot of headaches and money. Alot of people have opinions
on what to do but the bottom line is most haven't been through it and these are
the people that are trying to help but in the end will cost you alot more money
for no reason. I have been there anddone that!
P.S. Drain the oil/water in the motor and call Bob!
Best Regards,
Marc Arseneault
Ontario Canada From: "Jim Hakes" jhakes@emily.net Reply-To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com Subject: Kitfox-List: negative 54 Date: Tue,
20 Jul 2004 18:47:21 -0500 -- Kitfox-List message posted by: "Jim Hakes" jhakes@emily.net
When flying floats many pilots set the altimeter to zero and not
the altitude above sea level for the surrounding land. That is how I set my
altimeter last Thursday , July 15th. After my last landing, my Fox came to a
stop at negative 54, the deepest part of the lake. I was making a glassy landing
and made a great approach. Shortly after touch down, my Fox pulled hard to
the starboard and I could not straighten it out. During this time I opened my
door. When the turn was over the nose was slowly going down. What I did was a
water loop. At this point I left my Fox while I was above water. I swam for while
around my be
loved Fox made as hell as it slowly was going under. A boat came , our minister,
so I did not swear, and gave me a float which I attached the rear handle. He
then took me to his house so I could call my wife. Then the action started with
about 5 law enforcements, and emergency staff. This happened at 9:15 am. I
had the Fox back home 12 hours later. We not know the cause, but the starboard
float, Super Floats, was a totaled. I do not know what started the loop, but
most of the damage could have been caused during the loop. It was completely
torn apart. In doing so, it pulled a spreader from the portside float which caused
it to take water on part of it. Our best idea so far is that I hit something
and everything grew from there. The Fox is one strong plane. The only damage
so far is the starboard wing tip and flapperon from the loop. The FAA inspector
came yesterday , good guy and no hassle, so now I am good to go. The first
thing is the 912 and I hope it starts today. If any
Send junk mail straight into your Recycle Bin with MSN Premium: Join now and
get the first two months FREE*
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: | Elevator adjustment |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Marc Arseneault" <northernultralights@hotmail.com>
Francisco 29 degrees is coming to my mind but I am only 90% sure!
Best Regards,
Marc Arseneault
Ontario Canada
Share a single photo or an entire slide show right inside your e-mail with MSN
Premium: Join now and get the first two months FREE*
Message 23
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Too much seat support? |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Roger McConnell" <rdmac@swbell.net>
Randy,
I just ordered a seat sling from Blue Sky Aviation. When it comes in I'll
be glad to let you know how it works out. It wasn't real expensive. I'm not
sure if a 2X4 is the best way to go. IMHO
Roger Mac
DO NOT ARCHIVE
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Randy
Daughenbaugh
Subject: Kitfox-List: Too much seat support?
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Randy Daughenbaugh"
<rjdaugh@rapidnet.com>
I would like to pose a safety issue to the list. I am getting ready to fly
my fox (!!!!!!!) and getting some pressure from two different people that I
have great respect for, but disagree with on this point. (I always get
worried when I don't agree with someone whom I think knows what they are
talking about.)
I put a planed down 2X4 under the seats. (Series 5) It is supported by the
fuselage cross members and neatly supports the bottom of the fiberglass seat
pan. One purpose is to keep the seats off the controls if the seat were to
give way - on a hard landing maybe?
The comments that I am getting is that I have created a spine crusher
because now there is no "give" or deceleration area. I can see this point,
but....... Well maybe I will wait to see if I get some opinions.
Should I take out my 2X4?
Randy - Series 5/7 912S N10NH - close, real close!
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: "Jim Hakes" <jhakes@emily.net>
This evening at 9:12 the 912 fired up. Big smile on this face. Tomorrow I will
cycle about 5 oil changes and do a compression test. I will also take out the
instruments but that may be useless. Then I am going to the MN Northwest Angle
and stay on our Island for about 12 days.
I am going to take my time after I rid the water and possible rusting of all parts.
I think that I will only have to recover the wing that looped into the water,
otherwise all other parts look great and do not need recovering.
If I was in Cuba I would actually fly it out of there in its current condition.
After all this Fox went thru, being raised from 54 feet, pulled completely under
water for 2 hours, and then dragged on shore, it is one tough bird.
Message 25
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Have you tried contacting ACS in Australia? The reps |
are listed in
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Allan Aaron" <aaaron@tvp.com.au>
Rex
You might also try Wicks Aircraft supplies in Chicago. They don't seem to have
quite as comprehensive an inventory but their service is generally better than
ASS. I've used both and am based in Sydney. If you order lots of different
items, make sure you tell them to ship them all in one go ... don't let them
backorder or the freight charges will kill you.
Allan
-----Original Message-----
From: Rex & Jan Shaw [mailto:rexjan@bigpond.com]
Subject: Kitfox-List: Have you tried contacting ACS in Australia? The
reps are listed in
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Rex & Jan Shaw" <rexjan@bigpond.com>
Thanks Jay, to be honest I haven't got a catalogue. I hadn't dealt with them
before. I just used their website. Anyway maybe I jumped in a bit soon
commenting because I now have an answer. Although they didn't answer my
question which I thought was poor they did give me the details of a new rep
they have set up in Australia. That might work even better hopefully. If it
does work properly here in Australia I think apart from the delivery delay
it will be great. They have a huge range, comrehensive website and I now
realise the wonderful catalogue available.
Rex.
rexjan@bigpond.com
The information transmitted in this email is intended only for the person(s) or
entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential, proprietary and/or
privileged material.
If you are not the intended recipient(s), any retention, review, retransmission,
disclosure, distribution, dissemination, copying, printing, or other use of,
or the taking of any
action in reliance upon, this information is strictly prohibited and without liability
on our part. If you have received this email in error, please contact
the sender by replying
and delete this email from any computer so that it is not recoverable. Technology
Venture Partners does not guarantee the integrity of any emails or attached
files.
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: Submerged Kitfox (Jim) |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Marc Arseneault" <northernultralights@hotmail.com>
Jim,
I was just thinking and I personnaly don't think it is a good idea to run your
motor. The best advice I can give you is to drain it, don't turn it over and call
Bob Robertson ASAP. If you were in salt water this will also make a difference
as to what to do with it. Four strokes are completly different as compared
to two strokes in a situation like this. Personnaly, running it will only cause
more damage.
Best Regards,
Marc Arseneault
Ontario Canada
Open your e-mail without having to worry about viruses with MSN Premium: Join
now and get the first two months FREE*
Message 27
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Too much seat support? |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: <kirkhull@sbcglobal.net>
In one word YES!
The advice you got is correct. In all certified aircraft the seat must be
tested to allow for a certain amount of give.
Also I have never heard of a kitfox seat collapsing on a hard landing. If
anyone else has sean this happen please let me know.
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Randy Daughenbaugh"
<rjdaugh@rapidnet.com>
>
>
> I would like to pose a safety issue to the list. I am getting ready to
fly
> my fox (!!!!!!!) and getting some pressure from two different people that
I
> have great respect for, but disagree with on this point. (I always get
> worried when I don't agree with someone whom I think knows what they are
> talking about.)
>
> I put a planed down 2X4 under the seats. (Series 5) It is supported by
the
> fuselage cross members and neatly supports the bottom of the fiberglass
seat
> pan. One purpose is to keep the seats off the controls if the seat were
to
> give way - on a hard landing maybe?
>
> The comments that I am getting is that I have created a spine crusher
> because now there is no "give" or deceleration area. I can see this
point,
> but....... Well maybe I will wait to see if I get some opinions.
>
> Should I take out my 2X4?
>
> Randy - Series 5/7 912S N10NH - close, real close!
>
>
Message 28
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Elevator adjustment |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: <kirkhull@sbcglobal.net>
My manual is at roosterville international airport but will look tomarrow
and get that info for you
kirk in K.C. MO. Clasic IV
IF I FORGET PLEASE RE SEND to remind me as I am getting forgetfull lately
( 10 month old baby boy need I say more)
> I cant find in my Classic IV manual the page that
> says how many degrees up and down must the elevator
> have. I will fly the plane again after a ground loop
> repair. I moved the system and Im worried as I see
> the elevator in the up position a little bit
> "horizontal". Can someone help me?
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Francisco Icaza.
>
> La mejor conexin a internet y 25MB extra a tu correo por $100 al mes.
http://net.yahoo.com.mx
>
>
Message 29
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Too much seat support? |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Clifford Begnaud" <shoeless@barefootpilot.com>
Randy,
First, I think that your friends are correct, putting a 2x4 under the seat
could be a spine crusher. However, it's likely that the spring aluminum gear
will dissipate much of the energy of a vertical belly crash.
On the other hand, these seats are known to dislodge and could pin down the
control arm. I currently have some nylon climbing webbing under our seat and
I think that is overkill. A piece of dense styrofoam mounted on the fuse
bottom crossmembers can adequately protect the control arm and still provide
some "give" in case of an accident. The type of styrofoam I'm talking about
is often used as molds for items to be made out of fiberglass.
Oh, make sure you NEVER fly your plane without adequately attaching the seat
to the frame!! Most I have seen just use Nylon ties and that seems to be
adequate. Don't ask why I'm so adamant about this, lets just say it could
save your bacon. ;-)
We're flying through Nebraska tomorrow on our way to Lake Superior for
several days of boating and loafing, then on to Oshkosh next Monday. Too bad
we don't have more time, I would really like to stop in and see your plane,
and of course the runway.
Good luck on your first flight.
Best Regards,
Cliff
>
> I would like to pose a safety issue to the list. I am getting ready to
fly
> my fox (!!!!!!!) and getting some pressure from two different people that
I
> have great respect for, but disagree with on this point. (I always get
> worried when I don't agree with someone whom I think knows what they are
> talking about.)
>
> I put a planed down 2X4 under the seats. (Series 5) It is supported by
the
> fuselage cross members and neatly supports the bottom of the fiberglass
seat
> pan. One purpose is to keep the seats off the controls if the seat were
to
> give way - on a hard landing maybe?
>
> The comments that I am getting is that I have created a spine crusher
> because now there is no "give" or deceleration area. I can see this
point,
> but....... Well maybe I will wait to see if I get some opinions.
>
> Should I take out my 2X4?
>
> Randy - Series 5/7 912S N10NH - close, real close!
>
Message 30
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Too much seat support? |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Don Pearsall" <donpearsall@comcast.net>
There has been at least one such accident, where a hard landing jammed the
controls. I wrote about this in the old "Kitfox Builder Newsletter" The
story is at http://www.sportflight.com/kfb/calkins1.html
Don Pearsall
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
kirkhull@sbcglobal.net
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Too much seat support?
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: <kirkhull@sbcglobal.net>
In one word YES!
The advice you got is correct. In all certified aircraft the seat must be
tested to allow for a certain amount of give.
Also I have never heard of a kitfox seat collapsing on a hard landing. If
anyone else has sean this happen please let me know.
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Randy Daughenbaugh"
<rjdaugh@rapidnet.com>
>
>
> I would like to pose a safety issue to the list. I am getting ready
> to
fly
> my fox (!!!!!!!) and getting some pressure from two different people
> that
I
> have great respect for, but disagree with on this point. (I always
> get worried when I don't agree with someone whom I think knows what
> they are talking about.)
>
> I put a planed down 2X4 under the seats. (Series 5) It is supported
> by
the
> fuselage cross members and neatly supports the bottom of the
> fiberglass
seat
> pan. One purpose is to keep the seats off the controls if the seat
> were
to
> give way - on a hard landing maybe?
>
> The comments that I am getting is that I have created a spine crusher
> because now there is no "give" or deceleration area. I can see this
point,
> but....... Well maybe I will wait to see if I get some opinions.
>
> Should I take out my 2X4?
>
> Randy - Series 5/7 912S N10NH - close, real close!
>
>
advertising on the Matronics Forums.
Message 31
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
Jim,
Glad you are unhurt, except for the "hurt" that the
incident carries. I too suspect that you hit
something to cause the float to fail so completely on
smooth water.
I have a friend who went into a local lake with his
2/3rds scale Jenny. (no floats) Naturally he took
more damage than you did, to both him and the plane,
so I am sure you will be flying again much sooner than
he will. Other than being able to log one subsurface
landing, you should get back "on step" pretty quickly.
I bet the float repair/rebuild will be the bigger
holdback.
I am no expert on it either, but I'll tell you what
I've seen. My 2 cents....
If you have it hung from a crane, etc, try tilting it
aggressively nose up and down to drain for a bit.
Give those water drain holes the best chance to work.
See how much you can get done of the below in the next
48 hours to catch the corrosion.
Probably a good idea to seperate all major aircraft
parts to clean it up. That way you can drain each
part on all sides and remove any wayward fish or
debris.
Logbooks and A/C paperwork. Try to dry them out too.
Seems paperwork replacement can take some major time.
As has already been said, your instruments are
probably untrustworthy at best. Just replace them
later.
Radios on board? Little contacts like to hold water
and corrode. All I can think of is to open them, blow
dry them, then put them under some heat, but not over
160 degrees. Or send them in for checkout and repair.
The rest you should go thru ASAP and dry out as
thouroughly as possible. The more qualified hands you
can get on it to dry it initially, the better. Make
sure to check your lift struts for water too.
Before you remove it, drain and clean up the engine.
Change the oil and filter and crank it over with the
plugs out. If you can get the fuselage mounted on
some gear or stable platform, or at least the engine
mounted safely, run it from a 5 gallon gas can,
skipping most of the fuel system. Just get it up to
temp for a while and then attack the rest of the plane
again.
I don't know if the 912 gear box is water tight.
Probably best to drain it and replace the oil anyway,
before you run it.
Certainly you will need to go deeper than an annual on
it, but that is a good checklist to work with. Just
be more thorough on all parts.
Lubricate!
Remove and clean all electrical contacts.
That is my best guess. At least it wasn't saltwater.
You should be back up to speed quite soon, if you
catch the corrosion ASAP. :-)
Yet another reason to like the Fox. They will save
you if they can.
Kurt S. S-5 w/NSI turbo
--- Jim Hakes <jhakes@emily.net> wrote:
> What I did was a water loop.
__________________________________
http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/yahoo/votelifeengine/
Message 32
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Too much seat support? |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
Randy,
I agree with the rest. No 2x4's.
I did as Cliff suggested and used foam on the lower
crossmembers, but wrapped in a thin fiberglass shell
for protection. The seat sits directly on it, then is
fastened down so all support is right there. The idea
was to achieve a 1 G+ cushion to get me on the ground
if the seat broke, but not so strong as to not crush
in a hard hit that you won't fly away from anyway. It
is a backup system, but not a bone crusher.
The straps from BlueSky are a quicker solution and
would be better than the 2x4 too.
I agree with others who added extra ties to the seat
attachments. I make sure to use the 50 Lb rated ties
on mine.
Someone wrapped hose around the seat support tubes to
give an extra bit of clearance from the controls. I
haven't seen it though. Just an idea.
Now that I have said all that, I have read where
Oregon Aero has recently tested aviation seats and
found that a metal slab was less destructive than the
standard aircraft seat. You might give them a call
for info. They made the seats for the new RV-10 based
on this testing. A recent Kitplanes or Sportflight
issue had the article.
Kurt S S-5 w/NSI turbo
--- Clifford Begnaud <shoeless@barefootpilot.com>
wrote:
>
> Randy,
> First, I think that your friends are correct,
> putting a 2x4 under the seat could be a spine
> crusher. However, it's likely that the spring
> aluminum gear will dissipate much of the energy
> of a vertical belly crash.
> On the other hand, these seats are known to dislodge
> and could pin down the
> control arm. I currently have some nylon climbing
> webbing under our seat and
> I think that is overkill. A piece of dense styrofoam
> mounted on the fuse
> bottom crossmembers can adequately protect the
> control arm and still provide
> some "give" in case of an accident. The type of
> styrofoam I'm talking about
> is often used as molds for items to be made out of
> fiberglass.
> Oh, make sure you NEVER fly your plane without
> adequately attaching the seat
> to the frame!! Most I have seen just use Nylon ties
> and that seems to be
> adequate. Don't ask why I'm so adamant about this,
> lets just say it could save your bacon. ;-)
__________________________________
http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/yahoo/votelifeengine/
Message 33
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Elevator adjustment |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Lowell Fitt" <lcfitt@inreach.com>
Francisco,
I don't think there is such a page. I just looked through my manual and at
my airplane and my memory started to get in gear, I think. Maximum up will
be when the elevator horn / rod end at the aft end of the push pull tube is
touching the rudder post. Set that position so the stick clears the seat a
bit so you have no interference at the seat with the elevator full up. That
is the critical position as it is used when landing in the three point. The
full down is established by the 3/8" cross tube just forward of the
assembly. Full down is not as important as it is not used a lot in Kitfox
flying.
Lowell
----- Original Message -----
From: <owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com>
Subject: Kitfox-List: Elevator adjustment
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by:
>
> Hello list,
>
> I cant find in my Classic IV manual the page that
> says how many degrees up and down must the elevator
> have. I will fly the plane again after a ground loop
> repair. I moved the system and Im worried as I see
> the elevator in the up position a little bit
> "horizontal". Can someone help me?
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Francisco Icaza.
>
> La mejor conexin a internet y 25MB extra a tu correo por $100 al mes.
http://net.yahoo.com.mx
>
>
Message 34
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: NSI idle RPM |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
Thanks Darrel,
I came here too late for that discussion, but I was
worried enough about sprag type clutch failures to
quiz Lance about it before buying mine. Same as you
said, 1,800+ rpm is supposed to work.
My first ride in a friends NSI normally asperated KF
IV exposed me to high idle RPM's I thought he was
doing it wrong at first, but the conversation with
Lance changed my mind.
I have another reason that is specific to mine. My
voltage divider diodes don't allow dual battery
charging until above about 2,200 rpm after start.
Then they click in and the rpm doesn't bother them. I
think it is really a voltage issue.
Kurt S. S-5 w/ NSI turbo
Do not archive.
--- Fox5flyer <morid@northland.lib.mi.us> wrote:
>
> Correct Kurt. This was a topic a long time ago that
> was thrashed severely
> and after discussing it with Lance I use a startup
> and idle RPM of 2000 or
> sometimes a little higher, whichever is smoother. I
> have the throttle set
> so that I can reduce idle to 1500 for landing, but
> as soon as I'm on the
> ground I increase it back to 2000. The reason for
> this is the lower the
> idle the more stress is placed on the reduction unit
> by the tortional
> vibration of the power strokes trying to hammer that
> big prop around. The
> higher the rpm the smoother it is. Rotaxes are the
> same, that's why the
> 582s clatter so much below 2000. I suspect same
> goes for the 912. I
> wouldn't recommend prolonged idling less than 1500
> under any circumstance
> (except for short final) while the prop is
> connected. Too rough on both the
> gearbox and prop hub. I've used this procedure
> since day one and it works for me.
> Just my two cents.
> Darrel
__________________________________
http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/yahoo/votelifeengine/
Message 35
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Comm antennas and ground planes |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
Ted,
I agree, but didn't want to go that deep. My concern
was that some made it sound like they didn't ground
the co-ax braid at all on the antenna end. "No ground
plane?"
You hit it right for everyone though. Good
connections are what are necessary and the KitFox is a
fine ground plane. Center conductor to antenna.
Outer sheith to the plane. Make it good. Keep it
dry. Done.
I could argue that the coil's induced impedance is
counter EMF and, though reducing reflective energy,
reduces the signal over the perfect antenna too. But
then, who cares? Ha ha :-) Coils are really just
self absorbed and in need of good therapy, IMHO...
:-)
My comm antenna is a bit hand crafted, so I asked the
local avionics guy to use his SWR meter on it. He
considered it a waste of time. :-( I have tested it
air-to-air up to 70 miles so far and have seen a good
one go line-of-sight to 200 miles. You too, I am
sure.
Back to basic flying.
Kurt S. S-5 w/NSI turbo
Do not archive.
--- Ted Palamarek <temco@telusplanet.net> wrote:
>
> Kurt, Michel & List
>
> The coils normally associated with whip type
> antennas are primarily used as matching
> networks (To make it resonant at
> the required frequency and approx 50 ohms impedance
> at the feed point)......
__________________________________
http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/yahoo/votelifeengine/
Message 36
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Rex & Jan Shaw" <rexjan@bigpond.com>
I wonder how many 2 stroke rotax owners realise that you could have 670cc
instead of 582cc or 618cc etc. and around 100 claimed HP. I didn't. Not that
I'm convinced it's a good idea but if you are even just curious take a look
at http://users3.ev1.net/~bwid/670.htm It also mentions a bit about a
clutch that I knew existed but nothing about.
Rex.
rexjan@bigpond.com
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! --
|