Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:21 AM - Re: Realistic Speed (AlbertaIV@aol.com)
2. 07:08 AM - Re: Props ... the real story (Lowell Fitt)
3. 07:59 AM - Re: Props ... the real story (Rick)
4. 12:35 PM - Re: 582 clutch (Jerry Liles)
5. 12:46 PM - Re: Realistic Speed (Jerry Liles)
6. 01:25 PM - Re: Realistic Speed (kerrjohna@comcast.net)
7. 02:20 PM - Re: Realistic Speed (Graeme Toft)
8. 05:03 PM - RK400 clutch (Rex & Jan Shaw)
9. 05:57 PM - Re: RK400 clutch (Graeme Toft)
10. 07:57 PM - magneto tach? (ron schick)
11. 08:53 PM - Re: CHT Probe (aerocon1@telusplanet.net)
12. 09:03 PM - Re: Realistic Speed (jimshumaker)
13. 11:22 PM - Anybody in Utah? (Steve Cooper)
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: Realistic Speed |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: AlbertaIV@aol.com
In a message dated 4/19/2005 2:25:46 AM Eastern Standard Time,
msm@byterocky.net writes:
No Jim, I'm cruising at 5800 and pulling 6200 when flat out
Should pull just under 6800 flat out (level flight).
Don Smythe
Classic IV w/ 582
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: Props ... the real story |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Lowell Fitt" <lcfitt@sbcglobal.net>
Tim, I flew regularly with two other guys and this is their story. Mark
had a Warp Drive prop and Larry had a GSC. I fly with a Warp. Both Larry
and Mark changed to the PowerFin. Both had segnificant cruise reduction,
but improved climb. They spent a lot of time with pitch adjustment to get
better cruise without sacrificing too much climb. The factory suggested
cutting one inch from each prop blade which they did (I seem to remember
that the factory cut the blades - but not sure). This improved cruise a
bit, but not back to the Warp or GSC numbers. Larry went back to his GSC
and now went to the IVO cockpit adjustable after the GSC needed milling at
the hub - the wood tends to squeeze a bit until the hub halves no longer
have the necessary spacing between them. I talked to Larry a couple of
weeks ago and he mentioned the reason for the IVO was that he wanted the
cruise speed back.
Mark has a IV Speedster now and has a Powerfin on it. He loves the back
country and that may be a reason to want the climb. The creep also moved to
the back country and really doesn't need the cruise either :-).
Lowell
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Kaser" <kaser@cableone.net>
Subject: Kitfox-List: Props ... the real story
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Tim Kaser <kaser@cableone.net>
>
> Since I and my partner purchased a wounded Series IV Kitfox last fall
> (that is just now coming back to life) I have been gleaning propeller
> information from any source that would liberate it. This Kitfox list
> being one of those listened to sources. To date my database contains
> mostly relative stuff like "the prop performed just like I wanted it to"
> or "this prop will improve your climb and cruise." Some testimonials
> can be found at a few of the propeller manufacturers web sites that tout
> its virtues, have little or no real comparison to any specific
> propeller. Yea or Nay. Having said this, I realize that each Kitfox is
> somewhat unique and that numbers will vary.
>
> With that in mind, I've combed the internet till I'm just all Googled
> out trying to find any real hard (greater than the above) numbers that
> might provide me with some enhanced evidence that could clarify the
> selection of a propeller for N316R. So, I'm making my splash on this
> list to see what ripples return. Hope I've said enough cause there's
> no more air left in this wind bag.
>
> I would most certainly entertain any and all comments from anyone that
> can provide glimmers of "the real story"
>
> Note: A beautiful Rotax 912ul adorns the nose of N316R and still awaits
> its blades.
>
> Thank You,
>
> Tim Kaser
> N316R
> KF IV-1200
>
>
>
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: | Props ... the real story |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Rick" <turboflyer@comcast.net>
Just a quick two cents. I know there is an expense involved but if you go
with a CAP in-flight adjustable prop you can extract the best climb and
cruise for you particular engine torque/power capabilities. I like the
reputation and quality of the Warp blades and there are great folks. Now as
to weather or not a particular blade will perform better or worse at a
certain length and pitch that is magic stuff. I think they all have there
sweet spots. I do know with over 500 hours on my set up I wouldnt change
easily to any thing else.
Rick N656T
-----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: Props ... the real story
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Lowell Fitt" <lcfitt@sbcglobal.net>
Tim, I flew regularly with two other guys and this is their story. Mark
had a Warp Drive prop and Larry had a GSC. I fly with a Warp. Both Larry
and Mark changed to the PowerFin. Both had segnificant cruise reduction,
but improved climb. They spent a lot of time with pitch adjustment to get
better cruise without sacrificing too much climb. The factory suggested
cutting one inch from each prop blade which they did (I seem to remember
that the factory cut the blades - but not sure). This improved cruise a
bit, but not back to the Warp or GSC numbers. Larry went back to his GSC
and now went to the IVO cockpit adjustable after the GSC needed milling at
the hub - the wood tends to squeeze a bit until the hub halves no longer
have the necessary spacing between them. I talked to Larry a couple of
weeks ago and he mentioned the reason for the IVO was that he wanted the
cruise speed back.
Mark has a IV Speedster now and has a Powerfin on it. He loves the back
country and that may be a reason to want the climb. The creep also moved to
the back country and really doesn't need the cruise either :-).
Lowell
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Kaser" <kaser@cableone.net>
Subject: Kitfox-List: Props ... the real story
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Tim Kaser <kaser@cableone.net>
>
> Since I and my partner purchased a wounded Series IV Kitfox last fall
> (that is just now coming back to life) I have been gleaning propeller
> information from any source that would liberate it. This Kitfox list
> being one of those listened to sources. To date my database contains
> mostly relative stuff like "the prop performed just like I wanted it to"
> or "this prop will improve your climb and cruise." Some testimonials
> can be found at a few of the propeller manufacturers web sites that tout
> its virtues, have little or no real comparison to any specific
> propeller. Yea or Nay. Having said this, I realize that each Kitfox is
> somewhat unique and that numbers will vary.
>
> With that in mind, I've combed the internet till I'm just all Googled
> out trying to find any real hard (greater than the above) numbers that
> might provide me with some enhanced evidence that could clarify the
> selection of a propeller for N316R. So, I'm making my splash on this
> list to see what ripples return. Hope I've said enough cause there's
> no more air left in this wind bag.
>
> I would most certainly entertain any and all comments from anyone that
> can provide glimmers of "the real story"
>
> Note: A beautiful Rotax 912ul adorns the nose of N316R and still awaits
> its blades.
>
> Thank You,
>
> Tim Kaser
> N316R
> KF IV-1200
>
>
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: Jerry Liles <wliles@bayou.com>
Same same. They work only on the C box. The placement of the starter
on the E box prevents use of the clutch.
Jerry Liles
gary wrote:
>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "gary" <FlyinK@Efortress.com>
>
>
>
>
>>is there an RK400 and an RC400 clutch? do these only work with C-boxes
>>and not E-boxes?
>>
>>Thanks,
>> Gary
>>
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "David Savener" <david_savener@msn.com>
>>To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
>>Sent: Sunday, April 17, 2005 2:58 PM
>>Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: 582 missing
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "David Savener"
>>><david_savener@msn.com>
>>>
>>>I am running the RC400 clutch. I still idle at 2000 rpm but wouldn't
>>>have to. It will idle much slower. That clutch is great. Now that I
>>>have one I won't go back.
>>>
>>>My son has a Seawing with a pusher 582 and a clutch.(It needs the clutch
>>>for water taxiing). Last week we removed his gear box and checked the
>>>clutch after 100 hours of use. It looks just like it did when we
>>>installed it. We couldn't see any wear on the shoes. NO carbon.
>>>Pistons and cylinders looked clean. He has been running it in south
>>>Texas in the salt water and it runs very well. He mixes oil and gas.
>>>
>>>Dave S
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: Guy Buchanan<mailto:bnn@nethere.com>
>>> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com<mailto:kitfox-list@matronics.com>
>>> Sent: Sunday, April 17, 2005 10:20 AM
>>>
>>>
>
>
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Realistic Speed |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Jerry Liles <wliles@bayou.com>
The adjustment is at the mixer bellcrank behind the seat. There are two
rods from the end of the flap handle bellcrank located above the mixer
bellcrank that extend to the ends of the flapperon cranks in the center
of the mixer bellcrank. There are rod ends on either end of these rods
to allow you to adjust the length. I don't have the diagram or airplane
in front of me so I'm not certain whether you need to lengthen or
shorten to raise the flapperons but it should be apparent after a bit of
study. Moving the flap handle while observing should make it clear.
Make certain you do both sides the same amount other wise the stick will
not center side to side in level flight. There should be enough
adjustment to allow the airplane to be trimmed for level flight with the
flap handle.
Jerry Liles
Graeme Toft wrote:
>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Graeme Toft" <msm@byterocky.net>
>
>Thanks Jerry, any idea on where the adjustment point is to correct the
>flapperons. I only have the assembly manual and as it has been photo copied
>over and over again the pictures are just a black mess.
>
>Graeme
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Jerry Liles" <wliles@bayou.com>
>To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Realistic Speed
>
>
>
>
>>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Jerry Liles <wliles@bayou.com>
>>
>>On the Model I the flapperons are the trim. If you cannot trim for
>>level flight with the flapperons they need adjusting. If they are
>>deployed, even a bit, and it sounds like they are, it will increase lift
>>and therefore increase induced drag. Check the tach and adjust the
>>flapperons. You should be able to fly hands off if the airplane is
>>properly rigged. You may also be able to use a prop with a bit more
>>pitch to improve cruise.
>>
>>Jerry Liles
>>
>>Graeme Toft wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Graeme Toft" <msm@byterocky.net>
>>>
>>>Thanks for the comments Jerry. I suppose what triggered my initial email
>>>is
>>>the reports of speed achieved by similar models to my own. I fly with a
>>>group of aircraft and as you have rightly mentioned the low speed
>>>characteristics of the model 1 are great and Im certainly not complianing
>>>about this, but another 5 - 8 knots would allow me to keep up with the
>>>tribe. I have compared speed with a number of other aircraft and my
>>>airspeed
>>>indicator is reasonably accurate. The tacho is an area I havent
>>>investigated
>>>at length but I believe there is some error there. I may have some issues
>>>with the flapperons hanging a bit low on the trailing edge. This is being
>>>offset by using elevator to hold the nose up. Not a lot of pressure
>>>required
>>>but enough between flapperons down and elevators up to give some induced
>>>drag possibly. Any further comments would be appreciated.
>>>
>>>Cheers
>>>Graeme
>>>----- Original Message -----
>>>From: "Jerry Liles" <wliles@bayou.com>
>>>To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
>>>Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Realistic Speed
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Jerry Liles <wliles@bayou.com>
>>>>
>>>>Graeme
>>>>I think 65 kts is not too bad for a Model I. It actually isn't bad for
>>>>later versions with the 582. What you need to do is confirm the
>>>>accuracy of your ASI. Many homebuilts have an ASI that is useful as a
>>>>rate indicator but isn't otherwise terribly accurate, being terrifically
>>>>optimistic or pessimistic. I usually just ignore reports of airspeed
>>>>unless I know the speeds have been properly confirmed. You also need to
>>>>confirm the accuracy of your Tach. Many, if not most, Tachs used in
>>>>these airplanes are even less accurate, often being off by several
>>>>hundred rpm. The Westach on Tootie Mae reads 250 to 300 rpm high when
>>>>indicating 5800rpm. I use an optical tach to find prop rpm and have a
>>>>chart to convert to engine rpms and use that to determine cruise and max
>>>>rpms on the tach. So, as you can see, if your ASI reads low and your
>>>>tach reads high you won't see the speeds you have or get all the
>>>>performance you can. By the way, the Model I is not particularly
>>>>speedy, but it is a blast for short field and low and slow sight seeing
>>>>with the doors open. If it hasn't been built too heavy, almost nothing
>>>>else can touch it for STOL and slow flight. Finally a different prop
>>>>may well improve cruise speed at the expense of STOL performance.
>>>>
>>>>Jerry Liles
>>>>
>>>>Graeme Toft wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Graeme Toft" <msm@byterocky.net>
>>>>>
>>>>>Hi guys, for some time I have read about the speeds that those of you
>>>>>with
>>>>>582's are getting from their early models and am wondering what I can do
>>>>>to my model 1 to achieve similar results. I am flat out getting 65 knots
>>>>>ground speed at 5800 rpm and have faired everything but the wheels. I'm
>>>>>not after miracles but is 75 knots achievable with some further
>>>>>tinkering
>>>>>and if so where do I begin
>>>>>
>>>>>Graeme
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>-----------------------------------------------
>>>>>Scanned by Bayou Internet for all known viruses.
>>>>>http://www.bayou.com
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>-----------------------------------------------
>Scanned by Bayou Internet for all known viruses.
>http://www.bayou.com
>
>
>
>
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Realistic Speed |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: kerrjohna@comcast.net
during the test hours and subsequently, I continued to adjust the rigging to get
"neutral flap" at cruise. I can not absolutely say that I am there because
of the difficulty of measuring the flow of air off the trailing edge of the wing
but feel that I am close. In the end I changed the angle of incidence of the
horizontal assist in arriving at an optimum setting. I now have the adjustment
option of a little reflex as well as good trim options when flying at speeds
other than my normal cruise, usually when flying with other 'Foxes that have
not been concerned about such arcane matters.
John Kerr
-------------- Original message --------------
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Jerry Liles
>
> The adjustment is at the mixer bellcrank behind the seat. There are two
> rods from the end of the flap handle bellcrank located above the mixer
> bellcrank that extend to the ends of the flapperon cranks in the center
> of the mixer bellcrank. There are rod ends on either end of these rods
> to allow you to adjust the length. I don't have the diagram or airplane
> in front of me so I'm not certain whether you need to lengthen or
> shorten to raise the flapperons but it should be apparent after a bit of
> study. Moving the flap handle while observing should make it clear.
> Make certain you do both sides the same amount other wise the stick will
> not center side to side in level flight. There should be enough
> adjustment to allow the airplane to be trimmed for level flight with the
> flap handle.
>
> Jerry Liles
>
> Graeme Toft wrote:
>
> >--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Graeme Toft"
> >
> >Thanks Jerry, any idea on where the adjustment point is to correct the
> >flapperons. I only have the assembly manual and as it has been photo copied
> >over and over again the pictures are just a black mess.
> >
> >Graeme
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Jerry Liles"
> >To:
> >Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Realistic Speed
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Jerry Liles
> >>
> >>On the Model I the flapperons are the trim. If you cannot trim for
> >>level flight with the flapperons they need adjusting. If they are
> >>deployed, even a bit, and it sounds like they are, it will increase lift
> >>and therefore increase induced drag. Check the tach and adjust the
> >>flapperons. You should be able to fly hands off if the airplane is
> >>properly rigged. You may also be able to use a prop with a bit more
> >>pitch to improve cruise.
> >>
> >>Jerry Liles
> >>
> >>Graeme Toft wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Graeme Toft"
> >>>
> >>>Thanks for the comments Jerry. I suppose what triggered my initial email
> >>>is
> >>>the reports of speed achieved by similar models to my own. I fly with a
> >>>group of aircraft and as you have rightly mentioned the low speed
> >>>characteristics of the model 1 are great and Im certainly not complianing
> >>>about this, but another 5 - 8 knots would allow me to keep up with the
> >>>tribe. I have compared speed with a number of other aircraft and my
> >>>airspeed
> >>>indicator is reasonably accurate. The tacho is an area I havent
> >>>investigated
> >>>at length but I believe there is some error there. I may have some issues
> >>>with the flapperons hanging a bit low on the trailing edge. This is being
> >>>offset by using elevator to hold the nose up. Not a lot of pressure
> >>>required
> >>>but enough between flapperons down and elevators up to give some induced
> >>>drag possibly. Any further comments would be appreciated.
> >>>
> >>>Cheers
> >>>Graeme
> >>>----- Original Message -----
> >>>From: "Jerry Liles"
> >>>To:
> >>>Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Realistic Speed
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Jerry Liles
> >>>>
> >>>>Graeme
> >>>>I think 65 kts is not too bad for a Model I. It actually isn't bad for
> >>>>later versions with the 582. What you need to do is confirm the
> >>>>accuracy of your ASI. Many homebuilts have an ASI that is useful as a
> >>>>rate indicator but isn't otherwise terribly accurate, being terrifically
> >>>>optimistic or pessimistic. I usually just ignore reports of airspeed
> >>>>unless I know the speeds have been properly confirmed. You also need to
> >>>>confirm the accuracy of your Tach. Many, if not most, Tachs used in
> >>>>these airplanes are even less accurate, often being off by several
> >>>>hundred rpm. The Westach on Tootie Mae reads 250 to 300 rpm high when
> >>>>indicating 5800rpm. I use an optical tach to find prop rpm and have a
> >>>>chart to convert to engine rpms and use that to determine cruise and max
> >>>>rpms on the tach. So, as you can see, if your ASI reads low and your
> >>>>tach reads high you won't see the speeds you have or get all the
> >>>>performance you can. By the way, the Model I is not particularly
> >>>>speedy, but it is a blast for short field and low and slow sight seeing
> >>>>with the doors open. If it hasn't been built too heavy, almost nothing
> >>>>else can touch it for STOL and slow flight. Finally a different prop
> >>>>may well improve cruise speed at the expense of STOL performance.
> >>>>
> >>>>Jerry Liles
> >>>>
> >>>>Graeme Toft wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Graeme Toft"
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Hi guys, for some time I have read about the speeds that those of you
> >>>>>with
> >>>>>582's are getting from their early models and am wondering what I can do
> >>>>>to my model 1 to achieve similar results. I am flat out getting 65 knots
> >>>>>ground speed at 5800 rpm and have faired everything but the wheels. I'm
> >>>>>not after miracles but is 75 knots achievable with some further
> >>>>>tinkering
> >>>>>and if so where do I begin
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Graeme
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>-----------------------------------------------
> >>>>>Scanned by Bayou Internet for all known viruses.
> >>>>>http://www.bayou.com
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >-----------------------------------------------
> >Scanned by Bayou Internet for all known viruses.
> >http://www.bayou.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
during the test hours and subsequently, I continued to adjust the rigging to get
"neutral flap" at cruise. I can not absolutely say that I am there because of
the difficulty of measuring the flow of air off the trailing edge of the wing
but feel that I am close. In the end I changed the angle of incidence of the
horizontal assist in arriving at an optimum setting. I now have the adjustment
option of a little reflex as well as good trim options when flying at speeds
other than my normal cruise, usually when flying with other 'Foxes that have
not been concerned about such arcane matters.
John Kerr
-------------- Original message --------------
-- Kitfox-List message posted by: Jerry Liles <WLILES@BAYOU.COM>
The adjustment is at the mixer bellcrank behind the seat. There are two
rods from the end of the flap handle bellcrank located above the mixer
bellcrank that extend to the ends of the flapperon cranks in the center
of the mixer bellcrank. There are rod ends on either end of these rods
to allow you to adjust the length. I don't have the diagram or airplane
in front of me so I'm not certain whether you need to lengthen or
shorten to raise the flapperons but it should be apparent after a bit of
study. Moving the flap handle while observing should make it clear.
Make certain you do both sides the same amount other wise the stick will
not center side to side in level flig
ht. There should be enough
adjustment to allow the airplane to be trimmed for level flight with the
flap handle.
Jerry Liles
Graeme Toft wrote:
-- Kitfox-List message posted by: "Graeme Toft" <MSM@BYTEROCKY.NET>
Thanks Jerry, any idea on where the adjustment point is to correct the
flapperons. I only have the assembly manual and as it has been photo copied
over and over again the pictures are just a black mess.
Graeme
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jerry Liles" <WLILES@BAYOU.COM>
To: <KITFOX-LIST@MATRONICS.COM>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Realistic Speed
-- Kitfox-List message posted by: Jerry Liles <WLILES@BAYOU.COM>
On the Model I the flapperons are the tr
im. If you cannot trim for
level flight with the flapperons they need adjusting. If they are
deployed, even a bit, and it sounds like they are, it will increase lift
and therefore increase induced drag. Check the tach and adjust the
flapperons. You should be able to fly hands off if the airplane is
properly rigged. You may also be able to use a prop with a bit more
pitch to improve cruise.
Jerry Liles
Graeme Toft wrote:
-- Kitfox-List message posted by: "Graeme Toft" <MSM@BYTEROCKY.NET>
Thanks for the comments Jerry. I suppose what triggered my initial email
is
the reports of speed achieved by similar models to my own. I fly with a
&
gt;group of aircraft and as you have rightly mentioned the low speed
characteristics of the model 1 are great and Im certainly not complianing
about this, but another 5 - 8 knots would allow me to keep up with the
tribe. I have compared speed with a number of other aircraft and my
airspeed
indicator is reasonably accurate. The tacho is an area I havent
investigated
at length but I believe there is some error there. I may have some issues
with the flapperons hanging a bit low on the trailing edge. This is being
offset by using elevator to hold the nose up. Not a lot of pressure
required
but enough between flapperons down and elevators up to give some induced
drag possibly. Any further comments would be appreciated.
Cheers
Graeme
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jerry Liles" <WLILES@BAYOU.COM>
To: <KITFOX-LIST@MATRONICS.COM>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Realistic Speed
-- Kitfox-List message posted by: Jerry Liles <WLILES@BAYOU.COM>
Graeme
I think 65 kts is not too bad for a Model I. It actually isn't bad for
later versions with the 582. What you need to do is confirm the
accuracy of your ASI. Many homebuilts have an ASI that is useful as a
rate indicator but isn't otherwise terribly accurate, being terrifically
optimistic
or pessimistic. I usually just ignore reports of airspeed
unless I know the speeds have been properly confirmed. You also need to
confirm the accuracy of your Tach. Many, if not most, Tachs used in
these airplanes are even less accurate, often being off by several
hundred rpm. The Westach on Tootie Mae reads 250 to 300 rpm high when
indicating 5800rpm. I use an optical tach to find prop rpm and have a
chart to convert to engine rpms and use that to determine cruise and max
rpms on the tach. So, as you can see, if your ASI reads low and your
tach reads high you won't see the speeds you have or get all the
performance you can. By the way, the Model I is not particularly
speedy, but it is a blast for short field and low and slow si
ght seeing
with the doors open. If it hasn't been built too heavy, almost nothing
else can touch it for STOL and slow flight. Finally a different prop
may well improve cruise speed at the expense of STOL performance.
Jerry Liles
Graeme Toft wrote:
-- Kitfox-List message posted by: "Graeme Toft" <MSM@BYTEROCKY.NET>
Hi guys, for some time I have read about the speeds that those of you
with
582's are getting from their early models and am wondering what I can do
to my model 1 to achieve similar results
. I am flat out getting 65 knots
ground speed at 5800 rpm and have faired everything but the wheels. I'm
not after miracles but is 75 knots achievable with some further
tinkering
and if so where do I begin
Graeme
-----------------------------------------------
Scanned by Bayou Internet for all known viruses.
http://www.bayou.com
-----------------------------------------------
Scanned by Bayou Internet for all known viruses.
http://www.bayou.com
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: Realistic Speed |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Graeme Toft" <msm@byterocky.net>
Thanks Jerry, I'll make the adjustments this week end and post the results
on the list. Should be an interesting exercise. I measured the flapperon
deflection last night and I believe it is out of wack by about 11/2". Thanks
for the description of the adjustment process.
Cheers
Graeme
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jerry Liles" <wliles@bayou.com>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Realistic Speed
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Jerry Liles <wliles@bayou.com>
>
> The adjustment is at the mixer bellcrank behind the seat. There are two
> rods from the end of the flap handle bellcrank located above the mixer
> bellcrank that extend to the ends of the flapperon cranks in the center
> of the mixer bellcrank. There are rod ends on either end of these rods
> to allow you to adjust the length. I don't have the diagram or airplane
> in front of me so I'm not certain whether you need to lengthen or
> shorten to raise the flapperons but it should be apparent after a bit of
> study. Moving the flap handle while observing should make it clear.
> Make certain you do both sides the same amount other wise the stick will
> not center side to side in level flight. There should be enough
> adjustment to allow the airplane to be trimmed for level flight with the
> flap handle.
>
> Jerry Liles
>
> Graeme Toft wrote:
>
>>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Graeme Toft" <msm@byterocky.net>
>>
>>Thanks Jerry, any idea on where the adjustment point is to correct the
>>flapperons. I only have the assembly manual and as it has been photo
>>copied
>>over and over again the pictures are just a black mess.
>>
>>Graeme
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "Jerry Liles" <wliles@bayou.com>
>>To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
>>Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Realistic Speed
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Jerry Liles <wliles@bayou.com>
>>>
>>>On the Model I the flapperons are the trim. If you cannot trim for
>>>level flight with the flapperons they need adjusting. If they are
>>>deployed, even a bit, and it sounds like they are, it will increase lift
>>>and therefore increase induced drag. Check the tach and adjust the
>>>flapperons. You should be able to fly hands off if the airplane is
>>>properly rigged. You may also be able to use a prop with a bit more
>>>pitch to improve cruise.
>>>
>>>Jerry Liles
>>>
>>>Graeme Toft wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Graeme Toft" <msm@byterocky.net>
>>>>
>>>>Thanks for the comments Jerry. I suppose what triggered my initial email
>>>>is
>>>>the reports of speed achieved by similar models to my own. I fly with a
>>>>group of aircraft and as you have rightly mentioned the low speed
>>>>characteristics of the model 1 are great and Im certainly not
>>>>complianing
>>>>about this, but another 5 - 8 knots would allow me to keep up with the
>>>>tribe. I have compared speed with a number of other aircraft and my
>>>>airspeed
>>>>indicator is reasonably accurate. The tacho is an area I havent
>>>>investigated
>>>>at length but I believe there is some error there. I may have some
>>>>issues
>>>>with the flapperons hanging a bit low on the trailing edge. This is
>>>>being
>>>>offset by using elevator to hold the nose up. Not a lot of pressure
>>>>required
>>>>but enough between flapperons down and elevators up to give some induced
>>>>drag possibly. Any further comments would be appreciated.
>>>>
>>>>Cheers
>>>>Graeme
>>>>----- Original Message -----
>>>>From: "Jerry Liles" <wliles@bayou.com>
>>>>To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
>>>>Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Realistic Speed
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Jerry Liles <wliles@bayou.com>
>>>>>
>>>>>Graeme
>>>>>I think 65 kts is not too bad for a Model I. It actually isn't bad for
>>>>>later versions with the 582. What you need to do is confirm the
>>>>>accuracy of your ASI. Many homebuilts have an ASI that is useful as a
>>>>>rate indicator but isn't otherwise terribly accurate, being
>>>>>terrifically
>>>>>optimistic or pessimistic. I usually just ignore reports of airspeed
>>>>>unless I know the speeds have been properly confirmed. You also need
>>>>>to
>>>>>confirm the accuracy of your Tach. Many, if not most, Tachs used in
>>>>>these airplanes are even less accurate, often being off by several
>>>>>hundred rpm. The Westach on Tootie Mae reads 250 to 300 rpm high when
>>>>>indicating 5800rpm. I use an optical tach to find prop rpm and have a
>>>>>chart to convert to engine rpms and use that to determine cruise and
>>>>>max
>>>>>rpms on the tach. So, as you can see, if your ASI reads low and your
>>>>>tach reads high you won't see the speeds you have or get all the
>>>>>performance you can. By the way, the Model I is not particularly
>>>>>speedy, but it is a blast for short field and low and slow sight seeing
>>>>>with the doors open. If it hasn't been built too heavy, almost nothing
>>>>>else can touch it for STOL and slow flight. Finally a different prop
>>>>>may well improve cruise speed at the expense of STOL performance.
>>>>>
>>>>>Jerry Liles
>>>>>
>>>>>Graeme Toft wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Graeme Toft" <msm@byterocky.net>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Hi guys, for some time I have read about the speeds that those of you
>>>>>>with
>>>>>>582's are getting from their early models and am wondering what I can
>>>>>>do
>>>>>>to my model 1 to achieve similar results. I am flat out getting 65
>>>>>>knots
>>>>>>ground speed at 5800 rpm and have faired everything but the wheels.
>>>>>>I'm
>>>>>>not after miracles but is 75 knots achievable with some further
>>>>>>tinkering
>>>>>>and if so where do I begin
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Graeme
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>-----------------------------------------------
>>>>>>Scanned by Bayou Internet for all known viruses.
>>>>>>http://www.bayou.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>-----------------------------------------------
>>Scanned by Bayou Internet for all known viruses.
>>http://www.bayou.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
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: "Rex & Jan Shaw" <rexjan@bigpond.com>
> is there an RK400 and an RC400 clutch? do these only work with C-boxes
> and not E-boxes?
The number is RK400 and the clutch comes from California Power Systems at a
cost of $475. Look up their catalogue online. In this they strictly claim it
is for "C" gearbox's only.
About 6 months ago I contacted them as I have an "E" box [ 3 to 1 ratio ]
and their first response was that it was no good for an "E" box as the
electric starter would not work. They were assuming that the starter was
mounted on the box but in my case the starter is at the rear of the motor so
I advised them this was not an issue. They then told me that in that case
they couldn't see why it would not work with the "E" box as all the parts
were the same. However they had not tried it and therefore if I chose to do
so it would be at my risk. Personally I now feel it would fit and work but
wonder if there is some issue with moment of momentum ratings or such and if
that is a practical problem in my case. I have an IVO 3 blade composite
ground adjustable prop on a 582. Now if this is OK on a "C" box and one can
use the clutch in that case I fail to see why it won't work on the "E" box
considering all the gearbox parts are reported to be the same. Never the
less at this point in time I haven't done it but probably will in the future
if I don't come across some reason why not.
Incidentally I saw a comment that these clutches are a modified Volvo part
but know no more than that or if it is correct.
Rex.
rexjan@bigpond.com
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: RK400 clutch |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Graeme Toft" <msm@byterocky.net>
HI Rex, this sounds good. I have been following it with interest for the
last few days. Keep me posted if you get a result.
Graeme
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rex & Jan Shaw" <rexjan@bigpond.com>
Subject: Kitfox-List: RK400 clutch
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Rex & Jan Shaw" <rexjan@bigpond.com>
>
>> is there an RK400 and an RC400 clutch? do these only work with C-boxes
>> and not E-boxes?
>
> The number is RK400 and the clutch comes from California Power Systems at
> a
> cost of $475. Look up their catalogue online. In this they strictly claim
> it
> is for "C" gearbox's only.
> About 6 months ago I contacted them as I have an "E" box [ 3 to 1 ratio ]
> and their first response was that it was no good for an "E" box as the
> electric starter would not work. They were assuming that the starter was
> mounted on the box but in my case the starter is at the rear of the motor
> so
> I advised them this was not an issue. They then told me that in that case
> they couldn't see why it would not work with the "E" box as all the parts
> were the same. However they had not tried it and therefore if I chose to
> do
> so it would be at my risk. Personally I now feel it would fit and work but
> wonder if there is some issue with moment of momentum ratings or such and
> if
> that is a practical problem in my case. I have an IVO 3 blade composite
> ground adjustable prop on a 582. Now if this is OK on a "C" box and one
> can
> use the clutch in that case I fail to see why it won't work on the "E" box
> considering all the gearbox parts are reported to be the same. Never the
> less at this point in time I haven't done it but probably will in the
> future
> if I don't come across some reason why not.
> Incidentally I saw a comment that these clutches are a modified Volvo
> part
> but know no more than that or if it is correct.
>
> Rex.
>
> rexjan@bigpond.com
>
>
>
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 |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "ron schick" <roncarolnikko@hotmail.com>
I've heard my new babies' first cry, it is the sound of a VW pinned on the
kitfox. Now it dawns on me that I may have a hard time getting a tach on the
engine. Does anyone know of a magneto operated tach? I have a slick 4316 I
think it is. Thanx in advance Ron.
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 |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: aerocon1@telusplanet.net
Roger,
Let us know how you made out with Westach re: the 912 sensors
Bob R
Quoting Donna and Roger McConnell <rdmac@swbell.net>:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Donna and Roger McConnell"
> <rdmac@swbell.net>
>
> John,
> Thanks, I'm calling Westach right now.
> Roger Mac
> DO NOT ARCHIVE
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of jdmcbean
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: CHT Probe
>
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "jdmcbean" <jdmcbean@cableone.net>
>
> Roger,
>
> Been following the thread and just thought this could make it a little
> easier...
>
> I believe the 1" tip is for the CHT and the 1/2" is for the Oil Temp.
> You'll need to replace the VDO sensors that are in the engine.
>
> Westach Temperature Sensor 399S10-1.5L
> 10x1.5 mm thrd 1" Tip
>
> Westach Temperature Sensor 399S10-1.5S
> 10x1.5mm thrd 1/2" Tip
>
> Westach Thermocouple 712-2DWK EGT
> 48" Type K
>
> Fly Safe !!
> John & Debra McBean
> www.sportplanellc.com
> "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 Donna and Roger
> McConnell
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Kitfox-List: CHT Probe
>
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Donna and Roger McConnell"
> <rdmac@swbell.net>
>
>
> Bob,
> You are correct. I looked today and the heads have a counter bore that is
> just big enough to allow for the O.D. of the plug. There is no room for that
> type of sensor. I'm calling Westach tomorrow and see what they recommend for
> a CHT probe on a Rotax engine. I do agree with Steve that I want to monitor
> the health of my engine as much as I can.
> Roger Mac
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bob Robertson
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: CHT Probe
>
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Bob Robertson"
> <aerocontrols@clearwave.ca>
>
> Steve,
>
> There is no way to get a CHT probe under the plug on a 912...There is simply
> no room.
>
> regards
>
> Bob Robertson
> Light Engine Services Ltd.
> Rotax Service Center
> St. Albert, Ab. T8N 1M8
> Ph: (Tech Support) 1-780-418-4164
> Ph: (Order Line) 1-866-418-4164 (TOLL FREE)
> www.rtx-av-engines.ca
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Steve Cooper" <spdrflyr@earthlink.net>
> To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: CHT Probe
>
>
> > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Steve Cooper" <spdrflyr@earthlink.net>
> >
> > If it was my bird and I was risking my butt in it I'd sensor up. That is
> > to say that regardless of what's provided by Rotax, I would install Quad
> > CHT, Quad EGT, AND Coolant Temp. I monitor mine closely. CHT under the
> > plug?...we've been do'in it that way for years. It's accepted method.
> >
> > steve
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> > [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> > AlbertaIV@aol.com
> > To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> > Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: CHT Probe
> >
> > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: AlbertaIV@aol.com
> >
> >
> > In a message dated 4/17/2005 3:30:41 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> > pwilson@climber.org writes:
> >
> >
> > BTW, I think the sensors on the coolant pipe is a good way to go,but
> > its not
> > what Rotax recommends.
> >
> > Thanks Paul
> >
> >
> > Paul,
> > This is something I tried in order to be able to measure in/out
> > water
> > temps at the radiator. I still have the normal coolant temp probe
> > installed.
> > I've always heard it's basically a waste of time to install CHT on a
> > water
> > cooled 582. I simply used the probes as a temporary setup to get the
> > above
> > differential readings. However, it worked so well and I believe it
> > gives maybe
> > more useful information than it did when hooked to the plugs for CHT.
> > I may
> > keep it this way.
> > I offer this disclaimer that I did not intend to suggest different
> > hookup over what's recommended by Rotax. Now, I can't get sued.
> >
> > Don Smythe
> > Classic IV w/ 582
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Realistic Speed |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "jimshumaker" <jimshumaker@sbcglobal.net>
Graeme,
Don is, of course, correct. Also, is there any restriction against cruising
at redline? or is it just temperature restricted.
Jim Shumaker
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Anybody in Utah? |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Steve Cooper" <spdrflyr@earthlink.net>
Is anyone on the list living in Utah?
spdrflyr@earthlink.net
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! --
|