---------------------------------------------------------- Kitfox-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Sun 08/15/04: 35 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 03:01 AM - Re: Broken rudder hinge (Torgeir Mortensen) 2. 04:58 AM - Re: My fuel tank spring loaded drain valve continues to drip (AlbertaIV@aol.com) 3. 06:08 AM - Re: Broken rudder hinge (Jerry Liles) 4. 07:14 AM - Re: Bulging header tank (Lowell Fitt) 5. 07:15 AM - Re: Broken rudder hinge (Floran Higgins) 6. 07:20 AM - Re: Broken rudder hinge (Lowell Fitt) 7. 07:48 AM - Re: Broken rudder hinge (Torgeir Mortensen) 8. 09:50 AM - Re: My fuel tank spring loaded drain valve continues to drip (jimshumaker) 9. 09:52 AM - Re: Bulging header tank (jimshumaker) 10. 10:05 AM - rudder hinge (Shane Sather) 11. 10:41 AM - Re: rudder hinge (AlbertaIV@aol.com) 12. 10:46 AM - Re: My fuel tank spring loaded drain valve continues to drip (AlbertaIV@aol.com) 13. 10:47 AM - John Mcbean (AlbertaIV@aol.com) 14. 11:10 AM - Re: OT: News from the north (Torgeir Mortensen) 15. 11:15 AM - Re: Flaperon Balance (Torgeir Mortensen) 16. 11:28 AM - Re: Broken rudder hinge (Floran Higgins) 17. 11:39 AM - Flapperon friction. (Torgeir Mortensen) 18. 12:05 PM - Re: Broken rudder hinge (Torgeir Mortensen) 19. 01:02 PM - Re: OT: News from the north (Michel Verheughe) 20. 01:37 PM - Re: rudder hinge (Shane Sather) 21. 03:39 PM - Re: Flapperon friction. (kurt schrader) 22. 03:51 PM - Re: Broken rudder hinge (kurt schrader) 23. 04:04 PM - Re: Bulging header tank (kurt schrader) 24. 05:20 PM - Re: Flapperon friction. (Ceashman@aol.com) 25. 06:03 PM - Re: Flapperon friction. (Lowell Fitt) 26. 06:12 PM - Re: rudder hinge (Fox5flyer) 27. 06:12 PM - Re: Flapperon friction. (jimshumaker) 28. 06:20 PM - Re: My fuel tank spring loaded drain valve continues to drip (jimshumaker) 29. 06:24 PM - Re: Flapperon friction. (AlbertaIV@aol.com) 30. 06:28 PM - Re: Flapperon friction. (AlbertaIV@aol.com) 31. 06:37 PM - Re: rudder hinge (AlbertaIV@aol.com) 32. 07:14 PM - Re: Flapperon friction. (jdmcbean) 33. 07:47 PM - PocketFMS (Clem Nichols) 34. 09:56 PM - Re: Flapperon friction. (kurt schrader) 35. 10:27 PM - Re: Broken rudder hinge (kurt schrader) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 03:01:46 AM PST US Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Broken rudder hinge From: Torgeir Mortensen --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Torgeir Mortensen Hi Floran, This is most interesting! Do you really have four threaded rod ends as rudder bearings?? Let's have a guess, it's the two middle (or the two lower) that's shared off ?? Right?? OK., let's jump into it.. Remember the rudder pedal reinforcement. I'll think the problem now is "transferred" to the rudder, especially if the rudder bearing "really" is threaded rod ends. IMO. Torgeir. (Just back from France). On Sat, 14 Aug 2004 14:50:03 -0600, Floran Higgins wrote: > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Floran Higgins" > > I have a 1993 Model 4 Speedster. It has four rod end bearings threaded > into the vertical fin that the rudder is hinged to. During preflight > this morning I discovered that two of the four rod end bearings had > sheared off at the beginning of the threads. > Total time on the aircraft is 891 hrs. > I don't have any idea why these rod end bearings sheared off. I did not > build this airplane, but I have flown it about 500 hrs since I bought > it. It has never been abused since I have had it. > It might be that the shaking the airframe gets when the 912S engine is > started is causing the problem. > This might be something other people might want to check. > Floran H. > > -- Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 04:58:38 AM PST US From: AlbertaIV@aol.com Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: My fuel tank spring loaded drain valve continues to drip --> Kitfox-List message posted by: AlbertaIV@aol.com In a message dated 8/14/04 11:29:20 PM Pacific Daylight Time, jimshumaker@sbcglobal.net writes: > Because water in the wing tanks may be below the level of the wing drain > tube during preflight. After take off the water can then slosh into the > header tank and then into the fuel line. I just drained my wing tanks > yesterday and was surprized to find this. I drained out a full sample tube > of fuel and have not yet emptied the wing tank. > > Jim Shumaker > Jim, I'm reading this with interest because there is always something new to learn about any subject but, I can't make out what you are trying to say. Can you reword the above. Sorry, Don Smythe DO NOT ARCHIVE ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 06:08:24 AM PST US From: Jerry Liles Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Broken rudder hinge --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Jerry Liles I think using rod ends for rudder bearings was a bad idea to begin with. If the threads are exposed, and they probably are, it results in placing bending loads on the threads of the shaft. Threads are stress risers no matter how they are formed and should never be subjected to side or bending loads. Throw in a good dose of engine vibration, a bit of misalignment stress and something is likely to break. My 2 cents. Jerry Liles Torgeir Mortensen wrote: >--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Torgeir Mortensen > >Hi Floran, > >This is most interesting! Do you really have four threaded rod ends as >rudder bearings?? > >Let's have a guess, it's the two middle (or the two lower) that's shared >off ?? Right?? > >OK., let's jump into it.. Remember the rudder pedal reinforcement. I'll >think the problem now is "transferred" to the rudder, especially if the >rudder bearing "really" is threaded rod ends. > > >IMO. > >Torgeir. > >(Just back from France). > > >On Sat, 14 Aug 2004 14:50:03 -0600, Floran Higgins >wrote: > > > >>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Floran Higgins" >> >> I have a 1993 Model 4 Speedster. It has four rod end bearings threaded >>into the vertical fin that the rudder is hinged to. During preflight >>this morning I discovered that two of the four rod end bearings had >>sheared off at the beginning of the threads. >>Total time on the aircraft is 891 hrs. >>I don't have any idea why these rod end bearings sheared off. I did not >>build this airplane, but I have flown it about 500 hrs since I bought >>it. It has never been abused since I have had it. >>It might be that the shaking the airframe gets when the 912S engine is >>started is causing the problem. >>This might be something other people might want to check. >>Floran H. >> >> >> >> > > > > ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 07:14:48 AM PST US From: "Lowell Fitt" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Bulging header tank --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Lowell Fitt" Kurt, I am certainly not an engineer, but the design troubles me a little bit - especially the clunk. It would seem that any movement in the tank, and I would think it would be minimal at the worst would tend to work the welds. For example of you were to pressurize the tank all the welds would be acting sort of hinge-like and possibly work hardening. The good part is that I doubt there would be a catastrophic failure, but rather leaks developing in time. Just a thought. Lowell ----- Original Message ----- From: "kurt schrader" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Bulging header tank > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader > > Hi Bob, > > I might not be describing the joints properly as > "tabs". Only the tabs are welded. If I cut them off, > the tank would fall apart. > > I origionally had 1/2" overlap as part of the tank, > like Tom's appeared to me. This welder wanted all the > overlap on the outside of the tank's main surfaces. > Now the top and bottom extend past the tank joint by > 1/2" vertically. The sides extend aft past the back > by 1/2" too. These extensions or tabs are what he > actually welded. I don't like it as much, but he is > considered the best thin skin welder locally. > > Overall, it might have cost me 1 qt and I lost another > qt of capacity due to working around my seatbelt > attachment mod and header tank sight gauge mod, which > narrowed the sides. > > The tabs do seem to stiffen the tank a little, > especially the bottom. But in keeping with the title > "buldging header tank", my tank gives a good clunk as > it oil-cans when the tank is drained or filled about > 1/2 capacity. Secondary low fuel indicator? :-) > > Kurt S. S-5/NSI turbo > > --- Bob Unternaehrer wrote: > > > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Bob > > Unternaehrer" > > > > You could have made the tanks the size you wanted to > > and cut them off after welding. > > Bob U. > > > __________________________________ > > ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 07:15:53 AM PST US From: "Floran Higgins" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Broken rudder hinge --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Floran Higgins" The top one and the third one down are the ones that sheared. It wasn't two in a row. Floran H. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Torgeir Mortensen" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Broken rudder hinge > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Torgeir Mortensen > > Hi Floran, > > This is most interesting! Do you really have four threaded rod ends as > rudder bearings?? > > Let's have a guess, it's the two middle (or the two lower) that's shared > off ?? Right?? > > OK., let's jump into it.. Remember the rudder pedal reinforcement. I'll > think the problem now is "transferred" to the rudder, especially if the > rudder bearing "really" is threaded rod ends. > > > IMO. > > Torgeir. > > (Just back from France). > > > On Sat, 14 Aug 2004 14:50:03 -0600, Floran Higgins > wrote: > > > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Floran Higgins" > > > > I have a 1993 Model 4 Speedster. It has four rod end bearings threaded > > into the vertical fin that the rudder is hinged to. During preflight > > this morning I discovered that two of the four rod end bearings had > > sheared off at the beginning of the threads. > > Total time on the aircraft is 891 hrs. > > I don't have any idea why these rod end bearings sheared off. I did not > > build this airplane, but I have flown it about 500 hrs since I bought > > it. It has never been abused since I have had it. > > It might be that the shaking the airframe gets when the 912S engine is > > started is causing the problem. > > This might be something other people might want to check. > > Floran H. > > > > > > > -- > Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ > > ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 07:20:14 AM PST US From: "Lowell Fitt" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Broken rudder hinge --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Lowell Fitt" Don, I just checked mine - March 1993 kit delivery. I have three 1/4" rod ends for bearings. Sometime during this period, the change was made from four to three or vice versa. I seem to recall that the lite squared had three - not sure of the size. I do check them at preflight. Lowell ----- Original Message ----- From: Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Broken rudder hinge > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: AlbertaIV@aol.com > > In a message dated 8/14/04 7:43:28 PM Pacific Daylight Time, > CliffH@outdrs.net writes: > > > > If I was just building the airplane, I would put in larger threaded pipes > > into the vertical fin and replace these 3/16 rod end bearings with 1/4 in > > ones. > > > > I have a 95 (September) Classic IV. I will check but think the rudder rod > end threads are already 1/4". Am I wrong? The only place there are 3/16" rod > end threads are in the horiz stabilizer support rods (another problem area). > > Don Smythe > DO NOT ARCHIVE > > ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 07:48:34 AM PST US Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Broken rudder hinge From: Torgeir Mortensen --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Torgeir Mortensen Kind of strange, really, wonder if they was properly aligned? Of course, vibration might also play a role here, however, the "old" setup is much stronger than four 3/16" rod ends. Do you have some pictures of this for us? My friends mod 4 (1050) do not vibrate much in the rudder area during start up, but do vibrate a lot other places. Yup, the engine is 912S. After the "new" choke "start procedure", much of the "rattle" is gone. However, breaking -esp. in a turn, will put lots of bending force on the rod end bearing close to the rudder horn (the two arms connected to the rudder wire). Torgeir On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 08:02:14 -0600, Floran Higgins wrote: > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Floran Higgins" > > The top one and the third one down are the ones that sheared. It wasn't > two > in a row. > Floran H. > ----- Original Message ----- > > ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 09:50:15 AM PST US From: "jimshumaker" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: My fuel tank spring loaded drain valve continues to drip --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "jimshumaker" Sure can Don, I drained my wing tanks the other day via my low point drain which is a gascolator in the engine compartment. The header tank did not drain completly but the drain lines from both tanks were empty. I proved this by aplying light air pressure in a vent tube. The air vented out the other wing tank. I proved this by capping the other vent and applying pressure. this time the pressure built and fuel was forced out the header tank via the gascolator. I then rocked the wings and repeated each test. I then opened a wing drain and filled a sample tube with fuel. That was about 3 ounces. It was time to go home so I have not drained them out completely. So not sure how much is in there. Will let you know the amount after I finish draining. These are 1992 vintage 5 1/2 gallon aluminum wing tanks in a model III. Jim Shumaker ----- Original Message ----- From: Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: My fuel tank spring loaded drain valve continues to drip > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: AlbertaIV@aol.com > > In a message dated 8/14/04 11:29:20 PM Pacific Daylight Time, > jimshumaker@sbcglobal.net writes: > > > > Because water in the wing tanks may be below the level of the wing drain > > tube during preflight. After take off the water can then slosh into the > > header tank and then into the fuel line. I just drained my wing tanks > > yesterday and was surprized to find this. I drained out a full sample tube > > of fuel and have not yet emptied the wing tank. > > > > Jim Shumaker > > > > Jim, > I'm reading this with interest because there is always something new to > learn about any subject but, I can't make out what you are trying to say. Can > you reword the above. > > Sorry, > Don Smythe > DO NOT ARCHIVE > > ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 09:52:06 AM PST US From: "jimshumaker" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Bulging header tank --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "jimshumaker" Lowell is right. It is takes very few flexures to fatigue aluminum. Jim Shumaker ----- Original Message ----- From: "Lowell Fitt" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Bulging header tank > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Lowell Fitt" > > Kurt, I am certainly not an engineer, but the design troubles me a little > bit - especially the clunk. It would seem that any movement in the tank, > and I would think it would be minimal at the worst would tend to work the > welds. For example of you were to pressurize the tank all the welds would > be acting sort of hinge-like and possibly work hardening. The good part is > that I doubt there would be a catastrophic failure, but rather leaks > developing in time. > > Just a thought. > > Lowell > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "kurt schrader" > To: > Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Bulging header tank > > > > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader > > > > > Hi Bob, > > > > I might not be describing the joints properly as > > "tabs". Only the tabs are welded. If I cut them off, > > the tank would fall apart. > > > > I origionally had 1/2" overlap as part of the tank, > > like Tom's appeared to me. This welder wanted all the > > overlap on the outside of the tank's main surfaces. > > Now the top and bottom extend past the tank joint by > > 1/2" vertically. The sides extend aft past the back > > by 1/2" too. These extensions or tabs are what he > > actually welded. I don't like it as much, but he is > > considered the best thin skin welder locally. > > > > Overall, it might have cost me 1 qt and I lost another > > qt of capacity due to working around my seatbelt > > attachment mod and header tank sight gauge mod, which > > narrowed the sides. > > > > The tabs do seem to stiffen the tank a little, > > especially the bottom. But in keeping with the title > > "buldging header tank", my tank gives a good clunk as > > it oil-cans when the tank is drained or filled about > > 1/2 capacity. Secondary low fuel indicator? :-) > > > > Kurt S. S-5/NSI turbo > > > > --- Bob Unternaehrer wrote: > > > > > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Bob > > > Unternaehrer" > > > > > > You could have made the tanks the size you wanted to > > > and cut them off after welding. > > > > Bob U. > > > > > > __________________________________ > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 10:05:46 AM PST US From: "Shane Sather" Subject: Kitfox-List: rudder hinge --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Shane Sather" During my preflight last week I noticed one of the rudder hinges was loose. The bolt had backed off a bit. All the more reason for good preflights for every flight. I think a little Lock Tight will address this issue though. PS I have a 912S and I seem to be able to start it up with not much shake as I prime it good first. The shut down is a different story though, as it can (not always) give a real good shake if I don't shut it down before it runs too slow. Arctic Fox way up North ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 10:41:44 AM PST US From: AlbertaIV@aol.com Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: rudder hinge --> Kitfox-List message posted by: AlbertaIV@aol.com PS I have a 912S and I seem to be able to start it up with not much shake as I prime it good first. The shut down is a different story though, as it can (not always) give a real good shake if I don't shut it down before it runs too slow. Arctic Fox way up North I have the 582 and it used to shake pretty good on shut down. I tried the following and it cut down the shake quite a bit: Throttle up to about 2500 RPM's. Pull the throttle to zero at exactly the same time you kill the mags. Shut down shake was a lot less and might work on the 912's Don Smythe DO NOT ARCHIVE ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 10:46:21 AM PST US From: AlbertaIV@aol.com Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: My fuel tank spring loaded drain valve continues to drip --> Kitfox-List message posted by: AlbertaIV@aol.com In a message dated 8/15/04 9:51:28 AM Pacific Daylight Time, jimshumaker@sbcglobal.net writes: > gascolator. I then rocked the wings and repeated each test. I then opened > a wing drain and filled a sample tube with fuel. That was about 3 ounces. > It was time to go home so I have not drained them out completely. So not > sure how much is in there. Will let you know the amount after I finish > draining. These are 1992 vintage 5 1/2 gallon aluminum wing tanks in a > I was about to say, "it still don't make sense". Then I noticed you have 51/2 gallon alum tanks. That is a horse of a different color. I have the older fiberglass tanks with the fuel outlet toward the rear. If I drain the tanks at a low point then there is no way any fuel is left in the tank. I think it was around 1996 that Skystar moved the fuel outlet fwd on the tank. This was to help prevent fuel starvation during a decent. Don Smythe DO NOT ARCHIVE ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 10:47:47 AM PST US From: AlbertaIV@aol.com Subject: Kitfox-List: John Mcbean --> Kitfox-List message posted by: AlbertaIV@aol.com John, Please contact me off list Thanks, Don Smythe DO NOT ARCHIVE ________________________________ Message 14 ____________________________________ Time: 11:10:57 AM PST US Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: OT: News from the north From: Torgeir Mortensen --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Torgeir Mortensen Hi Michel, Got this one, the trip was "formidable". :).. Thanks Cheers Torgeir. do not archive > Zhen I vill only zay one zing, mon ami: Bon voyage! :-) > > Cheers, > Michel ________________________________ Message 15 ____________________________________ Time: 11:15:16 AM PST US Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Flaperon Balance From: Torgeir Mortensen --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Torgeir Mortensen As always, right on the spot!! Cheers Torgeir. On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 00:35:36 -0700 (PDT), kurt schrader wrote: > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader > > > I think they actually have it backwards. Painting > flight controls can be hazardous, but not likely a > problem painting the counter-weights. > > Since weight is such an issue, aircraft are usually > equiped with just enough weight to balance the control > surface with one coat of paint. If you paint the > surface more, you can unbalance it and allow flutter > to occur. That is because you have too much weight > aft of the hinge line, which is destabilizing. Seldom > is too much weight forward a problem, other than just > being heavy. > > The little bit of paint on the weights is negligable > compared to the weight of all that paint on the > flapperons, and most people paint them. > > Heavy flapperons and light weights are much worse than > heavy weights and light flapperons. > > I think SS gave us enough counter weight for us to > have everything painted. > > Kurt S. S-5, with painted weights and unpainted > flapperons. > > --- Rex & Jan Shaw wrote: > >> I have a Kitfox MKIV Classic Speedster/582. It has >> the counterbalanced >> flaperons. The guys up the club the other day were >> looking at my plane and >> remarked that the weight balance was so critical >> that a coat of paint on >> them would put them out of balance with drastic >> results. I bought the plane >> already made and am not familiar with this aspect. >> Can anyone comment if it >> is this critical ? How are these things setup ? Are >> they actually balanced >> about the hinge line ? Rex. >> rexjan@bigpond.com > > > __________________________________ > > -- Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ ________________________________ Message 16 ____________________________________ Time: 11:28:38 AM PST US From: "Floran Higgins" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Broken rudder hinge --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Floran Higgins" The three upper rod ends are 3/16. A 10-32 nut will fit them. The bottom one is much larger, I did not remove it but I think it is at least 1/4. I believe the bearings were aligned as the rudder was free to move fully in either direction before the bearings broke. I found that I get a much smoother start on cold mornings if I preheat the engine before starting. Floran H. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Torgeir Mortensen" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Broken rudder hinge > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Torgeir Mortensen > > Kind of strange, really, wonder if they was properly aligned? > > Of course, vibration might also play a role here, however, the "old" setup > is much stronger than four 3/16" rod ends. Do you have some pictures of > this for us? > > My friends mod 4 (1050) do not vibrate much in the rudder area during > start up, but do vibrate a lot other places. Yup, the engine is 912S. > > After the "new" choke "start procedure", much of the "rattle" is gone. > > However, breaking -esp. in a turn, will put lots of bending force on the > rod end bearing close to the rudder horn (the two arms connected to the > rudder wire). > > Torgeir > > > On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 08:02:14 -0600, Floran Higgins > wrote: > > > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Floran Higgins" > > > > The top one and the third one down are the ones that sheared. It wasn't > > two > > in a row. > > Floran H. > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 17 ____________________________________ Time: 11:39:09 AM PST US Subject: Kitfox-List: Flapperon friction. From: Torgeir Mortensen --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Torgeir Mortensen Hi Folks, During lot's of flying this summer I found that my aileron (flapperon) have some more friction during flight close to max. take off weight. When the wings is more loaded, they has a slight slope of course. This slope also tend to bend the flapperon "tube" and I'll think this is the reason for a more heavy aileron. Never thought about that, but this must be a known "observation". Does anyone out there have a fix for this, -or, is this something you have to live with? PS. My aileron is "very" light on ground. Torgeir. -- Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ ________________________________ Message 18 ____________________________________ Time: 12:05:26 PM PST US Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Broken rudder hinge From: Torgeir Mortensen --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Torgeir Mortensen Hi Floran, I'll think your findings is very important. Firstly, rod ends is really not designed to take "side loads" or bends. This device shall normally be used for "in line force" I.E. push / pull. Of course, a big size rod end can take some "bending force", but they are really not meant for such purpose in the aviation. As some already has pointed out, this must be treated an important point in the preflight check. Maybe also something for Don's precaution list? Cheers Torgeir. On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 12:14:50 -0600, Floran Higgins wrote: > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Floran Higgins" > > The three upper rod ends are 3/16. A 10-32 nut will fit them. The bottom > one > is much larger, I did not remove it but I think it is at least 1/4. > I believe the bearings were aligned as the rudder was free to move fully > in > either direction before the bearings broke. > I found that I get a much smoother start on cold mornings if I preheat > the > engine before starting. > Floran H. > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Torgeir Mortensen" > To: > Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Broken rudder hinge > > >> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Torgeir Mortensen >> >> >> Kind of strange, really, wonder if they was properly aligned? >> >> Of course, vibration might also play a role here, however, the "old" >> setup >> is much stronger than four 3/16" rod ends. Do you have some pictures of >> this for us? >> >> My friends mod 4 (1050) do not vibrate much in the rudder area during >> start up, but do vibrate a lot other places. Yup, the engine is 912S. >> >> After the "new" choke "start procedure", much of the "rattle" is gone. >> >> However, breaking -esp. in a turn, will put lots of bending force on the >> rod end bearing close to the rudder horn (the two arms connected to the >> rudder wire). >> >> Torgeir >> >> >> On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 08:02:14 -0600, Floran Higgins >> wrote: >> >> > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Floran Higgins" >> >> > >> > The top one and the third one down are the ones that sheared. It >> wasn't >> > two >> > in a row. >> > Floran H. >> > ----- Original Message ----- >> > >> > >> >> > > -- Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ ________________________________ Message 19 ____________________________________ Time: 01:02:58 PM PST US From: Michel Verheughe Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: OT: News from the north --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe Torgeir Mortensen wrote: > Got this one, the trip was "formidable". :).. Oh, l, l, formidable ... you sound almost like Maurice Chevalier, mon ami! :-) About the flapperon friction ... hum, it makes sense and I never thought of it. Now, tell us, did you eat a lot of "bonne cuisine" in France to gain so much weight that you've reached MTOW when flying? :-) Cheers, Michel do not archive ________________________________ Message 20 ____________________________________ Time: 01:37:57 PM PST US From: "Shane Sather" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: rudder hinge --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Shane Sather" I will give it a try next time Don. Thanks Shane ----- Original Message ----- From: Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: rudder hinge > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: AlbertaIV@aol.com > > PS I have a 912S and I seem to be able to start it up with not much shake as > I prime it good first. The shut down is a different story though, as it can > (not always) give a real good shake if I don't shut it down before it runs too > slow. > > Arctic Fox way up North > > I have the 582 and it used to shake pretty good on shut down. I tried > the following and it cut down the shake quite a bit: > Throttle up to about 2500 RPM's. Pull the throttle to zero at exactly > the same time you kill the mags. Shut down shake was a lot less and might work > on the 912's > > Don Smythe > DO NOT ARCHIVE > > ________________________________ Message 21 ____________________________________ Time: 03:39:06 PM PST US From: kurt schrader Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Flapperon friction. --> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader Hi Torgier, I forgot which model you have. Some people have reported binding at those nylon bearings at the inboard ends (under the turtle deck) when they are at heavy weights. It was recommended that they be removed. So far I am not up to that part of testing, so I can not confirm. But then, I don't think you had those bearings on your model, right? Other than that, I think you are right. It is probably the wing bending outboard of the struts that puts a load on the bearings. I still have 3 tight flapperon bearings on mine which make the controls stiff in roll. I haven't found a way to improve on that either. With the quick KF roll rate, it hasn't been a problem. Gives it that "heavy" feel that some like. I compare the feel of mine to a C-180 with a higher roll rate and a stick. Kurt S. S-5/NSI turbo --- Torgeir Mortensen wrote: > Hi Folks, > > During lot's of flying this summer I found that my > aileron (flapperon) have some more friction during > flight close to max. take off weight. When > the wings is more loaded, they has a slight slope of > course. This slope also tend to bend the flapperon > "tube" and I'll think this is the reason > for a more heavy aileron. Never thought about that, > but this must be a known "observation". Does > anyone out there have a fix for this, -or, is > this something you have to live with? > > PS. My aileron is "very" light on ground. > > Torgeir. __________________________________ ________________________________ Message 22 ____________________________________ Time: 03:51:17 PM PST US From: kurt schrader Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Broken rudder hinge --> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader Floran, I think you are right about the vibration. And the others are right about the weakness of threaded rod ends. Since you broke every other one, it may be that the vibrations set up a sine wave in your rudder when it shakes. From what the others said about the 912, the clutch seems the best solution, though not the least expensive. Most small, high compression engines are just going to shake hard at start and shutdown. Those with good techniques seem to make up for some of it. Good catch on preflight! It could have been worse. Thanks for sharing too. Those of us with just 3 bearings won't get as much warning. Kurt S. S-5/NSI turbo --- Floran Higgins wrote: > The three upper rod ends are 3/16. A 10-32 nut will > fit them. The bottom one is much larger, I did not > remove it but I think it is at least 1/4. > I believe the bearings were aligned as the rudder > was free to move fully in either direction before > the bearings broke. I found that I get a much > smoother start on cold mornings if I preheat the > engine before starting. > Floran H. __________________________________ ________________________________ Message 23 ____________________________________ Time: 04:04:35 PM PST US From: kurt schrader Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Bulging header tank --> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader I agree. I don't necessarily like the design I was restrected to by the welder's needs (and my mods). On the other hand, the clunking only occurs when I empty and fill the header tank. After my testing is complete, that will only happen on annuals. Therefore I don't expect a lot of flexing in its lifetime. And it appears to be the tank's front that clunks. That is only welded at the bottom, with the sides and top are formed by bending. So I think it will work out OK in the end, but I'll keep an eye on it. Kurt S. S-5/NSI turbo --- jimshumaker wrote: > Lowell is right. > > It is takes very few flexures to fatigue aluminum. > > Jim Shumaker > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Lowell Fitt" > > > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Lowell Fitt" > > > > > Kurt, I am certainly not an engineer, but the > design troubles me a little > > bit - especially the clunk. It would seem that > any movement in the tank, > > and I would think it would be minimal at the worst > would tend to work the > > welds. For example of you were to pressurize the > tank all the welds would > > be acting sort of hinge-like and possibly work > hardening. The good part is > > that I doubt there would be a catastrophic > failure, but rather leaks > > developing in time. > > > > Just a thought. > > > > Lowell __________________________________ ________________________________ Message 24 ____________________________________ Time: 05:20:09 PM PST US From: Ceashman@aol.com Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Flapperon friction. --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Ceashman@aol.com Kirt. I agree, removing the nylon bearings at the turtledeck seems very frightening to me also. Especially if one were to remove them because of stiffness caused by friction during high wing loadings. Heavy or G forces. In fact I have seen these bearings removed on Kitfoxes at airshows. And I don't understand the reasoning! If in fact there is excessive deformation of the flaperon tube at this point, then there will be extra deformation without the nylon bearing and there will have to be very much reduced flaperon authority and directional control!! I think? Torgier. I have been over gross in my Classic IV 1200, and have not experienced the stiffer/heavier flaperon feeling you mention. It kind of feels like my experiences when I was flying a Cessna 152 alone or when the plane was fully loaded. You don't have that immediate directional response. I would like to know what would be the consequences of removing the turtle deck bearings. If anyone has the answer. Eric Ashman. Atlanta GA e-mail; ceashman@aol.com ________________________________ Message 25 ____________________________________ Time: 06:03:36 PM PST US From: "Lowell Fitt" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Flapperon friction. --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Lowell Fitt" Torgeir, I think this has been addressed by Skystar. The Speedster manual called for cutting the flaperons chordwise at some point - midpoint? and taping the gap with reinforcing tape. I believe this was to eliminate the bending flaperon / friction issue while doing some of the manouvers the Speedster is stressed to do. It is also, I believe one of the reasons the Speedster has two mass balance weights vs. one for the Classic / Model IV-1200. It was later determined that the cutting taping was not necessary and this step was eliminated. The elimination of the Nylon sheet bearing came later and I believe began with the series V. I have talked of several of the later type owners that were interested in ideas on how to close the gap in the turtle deck that was previously neatly closed by the bearing. I also have not noticed any increased stiffness. I do, however, really like the way it flies with just me and fuel on board. As I think of it maybe mine is just stiff in all loadings, because there is friction there, although not enough to help eliminate the ever-present slightly heavy left wing. Lowell ----- Original Message ----- From: "Torgeir Mortensen" Subject: Kitfox-List: Flapperon friction. > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Torgeir Mortensen > > Hi Folks, > > During lot's of flying this summer I found that my aileron (flapperon) > have some more friction during flight close to max. take off weight. When > the wings is more loaded, they has a slight slope of course. This slope > also tend to bend the flapperon "tube" and I'll think this is the reason > for a more heavy aileron. Never thought about that, but this must be a > known "observation". Does anyone out there have a fix for this, -or, is > this something you have to live with? > > PS. My aileron is "very" light on ground. > > Torgeir. > > -- > Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ > > ________________________________ Message 26 ____________________________________ Time: 06:12:21 PM PST US From: "Fox5flyer" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: rudder hinge --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Fox5flyer" With all due respect to the input before mine, my personal opinion is that the broken rudder hinges have nothing to do with engine vibration. It sound like simple misalignment to me. As the rudder moves back and forth any misalignment of those hinges will cause flexing of the rudder and also the rod ends which over time can easily cause something to eventually work harden and break. Darrel ----- Original Message ----- From: "Shane Sather" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: rudder hinge > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Shane Sather" > > I will give it a try next time Don. Thanks > > Shane > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: > Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: rudder hinge > > > > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: AlbertaIV@aol.com > > > > PS I have a 912S and I seem to be able to start it up with not much shake > as > > I prime it good first. The shut down is a different story though, as it > can > > (not always) give a real good shake if I don't shut it down before it runs > too > > slow. > > > > Arctic Fox way up North > > > > I have the 582 and it used to shake pretty good on shut down. I tried > > the following and it cut down the shake quite a bit: > > Throttle up to about 2500 RPM's. Pull the throttle to zero at exactly > > the same time you kill the mags. Shut down shake was a lot less and might > work > > on the 912's > > > > Don Smythe > > DO NOT ARCHIVE > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 27 ____________________________________ Time: 06:12:21 PM PST US From: "jimshumaker" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Flapperon friction. --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "jimshumaker" Torgeir Are you flying a model III? If so that is what I am flying. I have never felt the heavy roll when flying over gross or even when pulling G's. Removing the turtle deck bearing on a III is a no-no, but May be OK on other models. Jim Shumaker ----- Original Message ----- From: "Torgeir Mortensen" Subject: Kitfox-List: Flapperon friction. > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Torgeir Mortensen > > Hi Folks, > > During lot's of flying this summer I found that my aileron (flapperon) > have some more friction during flight close to max. take off weight. When > the wings is more loaded, they has a slight slope of course. This slope > also tend to bend the flapperon "tube" and I'll think this is the reason > for a more heavy aileron. Never thought about that, but this must be a > known "observation". Does anyone out there have a fix for this, -or, is > this something you have to live with? > > PS. My aileron is "very" light on ground. > > Torgeir. > > -- > Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ > > ________________________________ Message 28 ____________________________________ Time: 06:20:52 PM PST US From: "jimshumaker" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: My fuel tank spring loaded drain valve continues to drip --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "jimshumaker" Don As I recall you fly a gray horse :-) My tanks drain to the rear and it is not where they drain from but the fact that the fuel hose comes out the side rather than the bottom that leaves unused fuel in the bottom of the tank. I drained about 5 ounces out of the bottoms of the tanks. That is more than half a cup, or alot more than it takes to fill the fuel lines and the carb bowls. It means that if you ever drained water out of the low point drain then there must be a minimum of two ounces of water left in the tanks to slosh around. Jim Shumaker ----- Original Message ----- From: Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: My fuel tank spring loaded drain valve continues to drip > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: AlbertaIV@aol.com > > In a message dated 8/15/04 9:51:28 AM Pacific Daylight Time, > jimshumaker@sbcglobal.net writes: > > > > gascolator. I then rocked the wings and repeated each test. I then opened > > a wing drain and filled a sample tube with fuel. That was about 3 ounces. > > It was time to go home so I have not drained them out completely. So not > > sure how much is in there. Will let you know the amount after I finish > > draining. These are 1992 vintage 5 1/2 gallon aluminum wing tanks in a > > > > I was about to say, "it still don't make sense". Then I noticed you have > 51/2 gallon alum tanks. That is a horse of a different color. I have the older > fiberglass tanks with the fuel outlet toward the rear. If I drain the tanks > at a low point then there is no way any fuel is left in the tank. I think it > was around 1996 that Skystar moved the fuel outlet fwd on the tank. This was > to help prevent fuel starvation during a decent. > > Don Smythe > DO NOT ARCHIVE > > ________________________________ Message 29 ____________________________________ Time: 06:24:57 PM PST US From: AlbertaIV@aol.com Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Flapperon friction. --> Kitfox-List message posted by: AlbertaIV@aol.com In a message dated 8/15/04 6:04:11 PM Pacific Daylight Time, lcfitt@inreach.com writes: > / friction issue while doing some of the manouvers the Speedster is > stressed > to do. It is also, I believe one of the reasons the Speedster has two mass > balance weights vs. one for the Classic / Model IV-1200. > Lowell, Slight correction. The Classic IV has two balance weights per wing and the instructions called for cutting the flapperons as you mention. I called Skystar on this during the building and they said "NOT" to cut per instructions. Classic IV Sep 95. I further asked if I could leave off one of the balance weights to conserve weight. They said to leave as is with both weights per wing. Don Smythe DO NOT ARCHIVE ________________________________ Message 30 ____________________________________ Time: 06:28:36 PM PST US From: AlbertaIV@aol.com Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Flapperon friction. --> Kitfox-List message posted by: AlbertaIV@aol.com In a message dated 8/15/04 6:13:09 PM Pacific Daylight Time, jimshumaker@sbcglobal.net writes: > > Are you flying a model III? If so that is what I am flying. I have never > felt the heavy roll when flying over gross or even when pulling G's. > Removing the turtle deck bearing on a III is a no-no, but May be OK on other > models. > > Jim Shumaker > Jim, When the conversation came up to remove the turtledeck bearing I believe it included the IV and up or, maybe it was the Classic IV and up. Don Smythe DO NOT ARCHIVE ________________________________ Message 31 ____________________________________ Time: 06:37:14 PM PST US From: AlbertaIV@aol.com Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: rudder hinge --> Kitfox-List message posted by: AlbertaIV@aol.com In a message dated 8/15/04 6:12:56 PM Pacific Daylight Time, morid@northland.lib.mi.us writes: > With all due respect to the input before mine, my personal opinion is that > the broken rudder hinges have nothing to do with engine vibration. It sound > like simple misalignment to me. As the rudder moves back and forth any > misalignment of those hinges will cause flexing of the rudder and also the > rod ends which over time can easily cause something to eventually work > harden and break. > Darrel > > Darrel, I would have to agree. Can't see how engine vibration would cause this. On the other hand, there is no adjustment back there to correct or improve alignment? Sounds like another "something" that the List needs to solve. Recommend everybody get out of bed and run to the airport for a survey of their personal installation and report back. I never get amazed at the new wrinkles that keep coming up that could put us in harms way. Don Smythe DO NOT ARCHIVE ________________________________ Message 32 ____________________________________ Time: 07:14:41 PM PST US From: "jdmcbean" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Flapperon friction. --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "jdmcbean" The flaperon bearing was removed on the Series 6 and tested without the bearing. It was determined at that point that the bearing would not be needed on Series 5 with the 1550 wing only (.065 wall spar thickness) If memory serves me correctly the Model IV's were tested without them.. it became a requirement for the aircraft being shipped to Europe.. by the authorities for JAR/VLA... Lowell you are correct.. it was determined that the cutting was not necessary. Blue Skies John & Debra McBean "The Sky is not the Limit... It's a Playground" -----Original Message----- From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Lowell Fitt Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Flapperon friction. --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Lowell Fitt" Torgeir, I think this has been addressed by Skystar. The Speedster manual called for cutting the flaperons chordwise at some point - midpoint? and taping the gap with reinforcing tape. I believe this was to eliminate the bending flaperon / friction issue while doing some of the manouvers the Speedster is stressed to do. It is also, I believe one of the reasons the Speedster has two mass balance weights vs. one for the Classic / Model IV-1200. It was later determined that the cutting taping was not necessary and this step was eliminated. The elimination of the Nylon sheet bearing came later and I believe began with the series V. I have talked of several of the later type owners that were interested in ideas on how to close the gap in the turtle deck that was previously neatly closed by the bearing. I also have not noticed any increased stiffness. I do, however, really like the way it flies with just me and fuel on board. As I think of it maybe mine is just stiff in all loadings, because there is friction there, although not enough to help eliminate the ever-present slightly heavy left wing. Lowell ----- Original Message ----- From: "Torgeir Mortensen" Subject: Kitfox-List: Flapperon friction. > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Torgeir Mortensen > > Hi Folks, > > During lot's of flying this summer I found that my aileron (flapperon) > have some more friction during flight close to max. take off weight. When > the wings is more loaded, they has a slight slope of course. This slope > also tend to bend the flapperon "tube" and I'll think this is the reason > for a more heavy aileron. Never thought about that, but this must be a > known "observation". Does anyone out there have a fix for this, -or, is > this something you have to live with? > > PS. My aileron is "very" light on ground. > > Torgeir. > > -- > Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ > > ________________________________ Message 33 ____________________________________ Time: 07:47:07 PM PST US From: "Clem Nichols" Subject: Kitfox-List: PocketFMS --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Clem Nichols" I think it was someone on this group who mentioned a few months ago about using the PocketFMS navigation system. If so would you, or anyone else familiar with the system, please contact me off list. I've been trying to synchronize it with my PDA for over a week now, and all I can seem to get is error messages. If it weren't for fear that there's something wrong with my desktop computer, my activesync program or the PDA itself, I'd probably forget about PocketFMS and go directly to something like Anywhere Map. Obviously, I'd hate to spend a few hundred bucks for a different softwear program only to find out that I can't get it to work any better than PocketFMS. I'd appreciate any help offered. Clem Nichols Do Not Archive ________________________________ Message 34 ____________________________________ Time: 09:56:51 PM PST US From: kurt schrader Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Flapperon friction. --> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader John, So does this mean that the bearings should be removed from -5 1550's and newer? Or are they to be taken off only if binding? All I have ever heard about this were rumors. Kurt S. --- jdmcbean wrote: > The flaperon bearing was removed on the Series 6 and > tested without the bearing. It was determined > at that point that the bearing would not be > needed on Series 5 with the 1550 wing only (.065 > wall spar thickness) > > Blue Skies > John & Debra McBean > "The Sky is not the Limit... It's a Playground" __________________________________ ________________________________ Message 35 ____________________________________ Time: 10:27:12 PM PST US From: kurt schrader Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Broken rudder hinge --> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader Floran, The reason I thought you might be right about it being vibration is because you said that the rudder worked freely before. If there was an alignment problem, it should have some over-center or binding that you can feel, unless the mounts were spaced poorly and stressed purely vertically only. You should be able to check both problems when you remount the rudder with new rod ends. If it was a rudder cable stress problem, the top one shouldn't break IMHO. So I suppose bad vibes takes the lead guess for me, unless it was binding and you didn't feel it because it was already assembled. In any case, reassembly should give a pretty good answer as top the cause. Kurt S. --- Floran Higgins wrote: > The top one and the third one down are the ones that > sheared. It wasn't two in a row. > Floran H. __________________________________