Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 01:44 AM - SV: exhaust fumes (Michel Verheughe)
2. 01:49 AM - A CG question (Michel Verheughe)
3. 02:01 AM - SV: Homebuilder special tailwheel (Michel Verheughe)
4. 03:45 AM - Homebuilder special tailwheel (kitfox@gto.net)
5. 05:25 AM - Re: Homebuilder special tailwheel (Cliffford Begnaud)
6. 05:26 AM - Re: SV: exhaust fumes (jareds)
7. 05:47 AM - SV: Homebuilder special tailwheel (Michel Verheughe)
8. 05:56 AM - Re: SV: exhaust fumes (AlbertaIV@aol.com)
9. 06:17 AM - Re: A CG question (Tom Jones)
10. 06:43 AM - Re: Homebuilder special tailwheel (Jose M. Toro)
11. 07:22 AM - Re: A CG question (u2drvr@dslextreme.com)
12. 07:38 AM - Re: Homebuilder special tailwheel (kitfox@gto.net)
13. 07:46 AM - Re: A CG question (kitfox@gto.net)
14. 08:17 AM - Cliff do you have the Heavy duty HBS? (Harris, Robert)
15. 08:36 AM - tailwheel (joakley@ida.net)
16. 09:27 AM - Re: A CG question (Steve Cooper)
17. 09:52 AM - Re: Homebuilder special tailwheel ()
18. 10:04 AM - Re: Cliff do you have the Heavy duty HBS? (Cliffford Begnaud)
19. 10:06 AM - Re: Homebuilder special tailwheel (Cliffford Begnaud)
20. 10:28 AM - Re: Homebuilder special tailwheel and a questionHomebuilder special tailwheel and a question (George Wells)
21. 11:57 AM - Re: Homebuilder special tailwheel (Michel Verheughe)
22. 11:59 AM - Re: Homebuilder special tailwheel (Michel Verheughe)
23. 12:15 PM - Re: Cliff do you have the Heavy duty HBS? (Michel Verheughe)
24. 12:17 PM - HBS tailwheel going on the model V (Harris, Robert)
25. 12:23 PM - Aviation Products in Ojai,CA 805-646-6042 very helpful (Harris, Robert)
26. 12:28 PM - Re: HBS tailwheel going on the model V (Cliffford Begnaud)
27. 12:29 PM - Re: Homebuilder special tailwheel (Michel Verheughe)
28. 12:53 PM - Re: Homebuilder special tailwheel (Harris, Robert)
29. 12:53 PM - Thanks CliffRe: HBS tailwheel going on the model V (Harris, Robert)
30. 01:20 PM - Re: Homebuilder special tailwheel (Lowell Fitt)
31. 01:20 PM - Re: A CG question (Lowell Fitt)
32. 01:40 PM - Re: A CG question (Michel Verheughe)
33. 02:08 PM - Re: SV: exhaust fumes (jareds)
34. 02:12 PM - Performance of Lyc 0-235 Kitfox (Vic Jacko)
35. 02:59 PM - Re: SV: exhaust fumes (AlbertaIV@aol.com)
36. 04:53 PM - Re: A CG question (Steve Cooper)
37. 05:18 PM - Tailwheel (Rex & Jan Shaw)
38. 05:51 PM - Re: Mosler engine & Avid DVD on Ebay (Jerry Liles)
39. 05:56 PM - Re: Tailwheel (Jose M. Toro)
40. 06:11 PM - Aircraft Survival Gear (Steve Cooper)
41. 06:31 PM - Re: Tailwheel (John Anderson)
42. 06:48 PM - Re: A CG question (Steve Cooper)
43. 08:05 PM - Re: OIL COOLER FAILURE (John King)
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 |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
> From: John Anderson [janderson412@hotmail.com]
> Perhaps closing the cowl inlet off is a better option than the o/let so as
> not to pressurise the cowl.
Yes, closing the inlet might be smarter than the outlet. Here is why:
When installing the Jabiru 2200, I took great care to have a proper air circulation
under the cowling because keeping that engine cool enough has been a challenge
for everyone.
I must have done an excellent job because, in my case, the engine is too cool.
At level, the CHT is hardly over 100 C and I believe the engine trives better
in a warmer operating environment.
So, I installed a cowl flap on the outlet, that I can close from the cockpit. Because
I was afraid of building too much pressure and blow open the cowling, I
covered only 75% of the outlet.
When testing this cowl flap, I can't notice any difference in temperature. I am
quite puzzled because I have been told that, while the Jabiru aircraft (cruising
at 120 MPH) needed only a 1:1.5 inlet/outlet ratio, my slow Kitfox model 3
needed as much as 1:4 ratio. In my mind, closing 75% of that would give a 1:1
ratio, hence less that the fast Jabiru. Yet, no CHT difference is noticed.
The bottom line is then: If I had to do it again, I think I'll look at closing
the inlet, rather than the outlet. It would me mechanically much more complicated,
though.
Cheers,
Michel
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 |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
> From: Tom Jones [tomfromlapine@peoplepc.com]
> Go to this web site http://avstop.com/AC/apgeneral/TERMINOLOGY.html
Thanks, Tom. What I understand from it is that, a plane loaded in standard conditions
should stay within the empty weight CG range.
But I still miss to understand the aero-dynamic principle that says that a MTOW
plane can have a large range (on both sides) than the empty one.
Cheers,
Michel
do not archive
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: | Homebuilder special tailwheel |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
Thanks Cliff, John and Jose.
> From: Clifford Begnaud [shoeless@barefootpilot.com]
> (one grease zerk on the shaft, the wheel is permanently sealed
> and needs no lube)
Oh, are you sure, Cliff? I have a grease nipple on the wheel too.
Othewise, I agree with you and can highly recommend that tailwheel ... so far!
:-)
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Jose M. Toro" <jose_m_toro@yahoo.com>
> Did you replaced just the wheel or the whole assembly?
The whole assembly, Jose. The old Maule had some wear and I felt better replacing
the entire assembly.
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "John Anderson" <janderson412@hotmail.com>
> Where does one get one of these wheels, is it a straight swop? ~j~
From Aircraft Spruce, John. It is a straight swop if you change the whole assembly,
as long as you remember to order the spacing piece if you have a 1 1/4" spring.
You'll also need a longer bolt because the Homebuilder Special has a thicker
aluminium bracket.
If you decide to replace only the 6" tyre, it is also possible, although, as someone
once wrote to this list, you'll have to get a short section of a pipe to
match the slightly larger shaft diameter. Something like 3/8 to 1/2", I think.
Not sure, check it out first. But it shouldn't be a big problem, I believe several
on the list have done it.
Cheers,
Michel
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Homebuilder special tailwheel |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: kitfox@gto.net
Hey guys, Dumb question . -
What is wrong with solid rubber wheel i Have on Model 4 ? I not sure
what brand it is but seems to be ok. Fully casturing and locks
straight ahead.
I do find it breaks to the left turns easier though on the ground.
Sun just came up, off flying . See yous later.
Kirby
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe
<michel@online.no>
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: Homebuilder special tailwheel |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Cliffford Begnaud" <shoeless@barefootpilot.com>
>> (one grease zerk on the shaft, the wheel is permanently sealed
>> and needs no lube)
> Oh, are you sure, Cliff? I have a grease nipple on the wheel too.
Yes, the grease nipple on the wheel is a dummy. It is a sealed bearing. Try
putting some grease in it ;-)
>>> Did you replaced just the wheel or the whole assembly?
>
> The whole assembly, Jose. The old Maule had some wear and I felt better
> replacing the entire assembly.
Yeah, don't replace just the tire... it's the assembly that works so much
better for the kitfox.
cliff
>> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "John Anderson"
>> <janderson412@hotmail.com>
>> Where does one get one of these wheels, is it a straight swop? ~j~
>
> From Aircraft Spruce, John. It is a straight swop if you change the whole
> assembly, as long as you remember to order the spacing piece if you have a
> 1 1/4" spring. You'll also need a longer bolt because the Homebuilder
> Special has a thicker aluminium bracket.
> If you decide to replace only the 6" tyre, it is also possible, although,
> as someone once wrote to this list, you'll have to get a short section of
> a pipe to match the slightly larger shaft diameter. Something like 3/8 to
> 1/2", I think. Not sure, check it out first. But it shouldn't be a big
> problem, I believe several on the list have done it.
>
> Cheers,
> Michel
>
>
>
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: exhaust fumes |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: jareds <jareds@verizon.net>
Extending the firewall sealing strip so that the pressure inside the
engine compartment naturally presses that strip against the cowl has
been the most creative way I've seen on the list. Thanks Ray,
John also mentioned earlier closing off the inlet. My cowl is the p51
radial looking opening. One big O. Will be awefully tough to close
that off without relocating landing lights and just making it look
good. Mines now officially a "ranch" plane and will never make the show
circuit but I'm not sure how to close that off and keep it from looking
so ugly.
I guess the big thing here is that every one of you experienced leakage
from your exhaust system and without proper venting and sealing of the
engine compartment it was a certainty that fumes were going to get into
the cockpit.
Has anyone been succesfull in addressing the core problem?
Michel Verheughe wrote:
>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
>
>
>
>>From: John Anderson [janderson412@hotmail.com]
>>Perhaps closing the cowl inlet off is a better option than the o/let so as
>>not to pressurise the cowl.
>>
>>
>
>Yes, closing the inlet might be smarter than the outlet. Here is why:
>When installing the Jabiru 2200, I took great care to have a proper air circulation
under the cowling because keeping that engine cool enough has been a challenge
for everyone.
>I must have done an excellent job because, in my case, the engine is too cool.
At level, the CHT is hardly over 100 C and I believe the engine trives better
in a warmer operating environment.
>So, I installed a cowl flap on the outlet, that I can close from the cockpit.
Because I was afraid of building too much pressure and blow open the cowling,
I covered only 75% of the outlet.
>When testing this cowl flap, I can't notice any difference in temperature. I am
quite puzzled because I have been told that, while the Jabiru aircraft (cruising
at 120 MPH) needed only a 1:1.5 inlet/outlet ratio, my slow Kitfox model
3 needed as much as 1:4 ratio. In my mind, closing 75% of that would give a 1:1
ratio, hence less that the fast Jabiru. Yet, no CHT difference is noticed.
>The bottom line is then: If I had to do it again, I think I'll look at closing
the inlet, rather than the outlet. It would me mechanically much more complicated,
though.
>
>Cheers,
>Michel
>
>
>
>
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: | Homebuilder special tailwheel |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
> From: kitfox@gto.net
> What is wrong with solid rubber wheel i Have on Model 4 ?
Certainly nothing wrong with it, Kirby. But first: which solid rubber wheel do
you have? Both the Maule and Homebuilder Special are solid rubber or plastic.
Only that the Maule is hard plastic and the Special is soft rubber. The latter
bounces back like a ball. Maule has a pneumatic tailwheel too. But that is maybe
too big a wheel for a Kitfox.
My plane was built by someone else and he did the right thing to get the hard plastic
wheel because, at the time, the plane was flying exclusivery from a grass
field. But now, I am flying from an asphalt field and have a long taxiway to
the holding. The Homebuilder Special gives a much smoother ride on asphalt.
In winter, we use studed tyres, in Norway. When Easter comes, we change to plain
rubber tyres for the summer. The feeling is just like going from Maule to Homebuilder
Special. It feels like the wheel has a better grip on the ground. I
don't know if it IS good but it sure FEELS good! :-)
Cheers,
Michel
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: exhaust fumes |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: AlbertaIV@aol.com
In a message dated 5/10/2005 8:29:42 AM Eastern Standard Time,
jareds@verizon.net writes:
John also mentioned earlier closing off the inlet. My cowl is the p51
radial looking opening. One big O. Will be awefully tough to close
that off without relocating landing lights and just making it look
Jared,
I closed off about 2"-3" of my big "O" by placing a horizontal piece of
half round trim across the bottom portion and then fiberglassing it all in to
match the lip around the big "O". The bottom portion acts as a scoop (boxed
in on the inside of the cowl) for the exhaust heat muff and is directed into
the cockpit via push/pull door.
I'm certainly not an air flow engineer but everything I could find called
for roughly a 3 to 1 ratio for airflow through a cowling. That is, little
"IN" and big "OUT". So if you have 100 sq inches of the big "O" for input air
you need 300 sq in of outlet air. I deleted and glassed in my bottom cowl
outlet on the pilot side and added two side outlets on the cowl. I don't
think I quite achieved 3 to 1 ratio but seems to work just fine.
Don Smythe
Classic IV w/ 582
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: A CG question |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Tom Jones <tomfromlapine@peoplepc.com>
After sleeping on it I notice the empty weight CG has a "Range" and the
operating CG has "Limits". I take it to mean the empty weight CG range
is such that when loaded, the CG will not move past the operating CG
limits.
As an example, I cannot load my kitfox to gross weight or less in any
fashion that moves the CG past Skystar's tested CG limits. So, I would
say it is within an empty CG range. I don't know what that empty CG
range is, just that the plane must be in it.
This is all just my educated guess on the subject and I would be
interested to hear the facts from an expert. My opinion is weight and
balance is a simple subject that is very difficult to explain.
Tom Jones
Michel Verheughe wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
>
>>From: Tom Jones [tomfromlapine@peoplepc.com]
>>Go to this web site http://avstop.com/AC/apgeneral/TERMINOLOGY.html
>
>
> Thanks, Tom. What I understand from it is that, a plane loaded in standard conditions
should stay within the empty weight CG range.
> But I still miss to understand the aero-dynamic principle that says that a MTOW
plane can have a large range (on both sides) than the empty one.
>
> Cheers,
> Michel
>
> do not archive
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Homebuilder special tailwheel |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Jose M. Toro" <jose_m_toro@yahoo.com>
Kirby:
Nothing wrong with the Maule, the Homebuilder Special
is just smoother...I've been told.
Michel:
Did you use the standard one or the heavy duty?
--- kitfox@gto.net wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: kitfox@gto.net
>
> Hey guys, Dumb question . -
>
> What is wrong with solid rubber wheel i Have on
> Model 4 ? I not sure
> what brand it is but seems to be ok. Fully
> casturing and locks
> straight ahead.
> I do find it breaks to the left turns easier though
> on the ground.
>
> Sun just came up, off flying . See yous later.
>
>
> Kirby
>
>
> > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel
> Verheughe
> <michel@online.no>
>
>
>
> browse
> Subscriptions page,
> FAQ,
>
>
>
>
>
>
Jose M. Toro, P.E.
Kitfox II/582->Jabiru 2200
"A slow flight in the Caribbean..."
Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour:
http://tour.mail.yahoo.com/mailtour.html
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: A CG question |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: u2drvr@dslextreme.com
Tom,
Good explanation! I agree 100%. Many airplanes have a zero fuel weight
(ZFW) CG range that guarntees that the actual CG limits will not be
exceeded in flight due to fuel burn or configuration changes.
For example, in the U-2 our ZFW CG limits are 21.0-27.7% MAC. If the
aircraft is within this range with zero fuel, it will stay within the
inflight limits (20.0-30.0%) when the gear is retracted and fuel is
burned.
This is a common thing for airplanes that do not carry cargo and do not
have the ability to move fuel around. When I flew bigger airplanes
(RC-135) we could move fuel around the airplane to manage the CG and had
to monitor it inflight. You would generally run it towards the aft limit
during cruise to increase fuel economy and then run it forward for landing
or air refueling to increase pitch stability. We did not have a ZFW CG
range, just inflight limits and a ground limit to keep it from tipping up
on the tail.
Cheers,
Brian Peck
USAF U-2 Test Pilot
Kitfox V - IO-240B
Tom Jones
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Tom Jones <tomfromlapine@peoplepc.com>
>
> After sleeping on it I notice the empty weight CG has a "Range" and the
> operating CG has "Limits". I take it to mean the empty weight CG range
> is such that when loaded, the CG will not move past the operating CG
> limits.
>
> As an example, I cannot load my kitfox to gross weight or less in any
> fashion that moves the CG past Skystar's tested CG limits. So, I would
> say it is within an empty CG range. I don't know what that empty CG
> range is, just that the plane must be in it.
>
> This is all just my educated guess on the subject and I would be
> interested to hear the facts from an expert. My opinion is weight and
> balance is a simple subject that is very difficult to explain.
> Tom Jones
>
> Michel Verheughe wrote:
>> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
>>
>>>From: Tom Jones [tomfromlapine@peoplepc.com]
>>>Go to this web site http://avstop.com/AC/apgeneral/TERMINOLOGY.html
>>
>>
>> Thanks, Tom. What I understand from it is that, a plane loaded in
>> standard conditions should stay within the empty weight CG range.
>> But I still miss to understand the aero-dynamic principle that says that
>> a MTOW plane can have a large range (on both sides) than the empty one.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Michel
>>
>> do not archive
>
>
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: Homebuilder special tailwheel |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: kitfox@gto.net
Michel,
I have a Maule tailwheel and it the Rubber kind. It comes of yearly to
put on tail-ski. Just grease and go once or twice a year.
I never had it bounce like a ball though. Once in a while i will
stall just over runway and get more of a main gear bounce. I usally
land three points every time but have never noticed the tail bounce.
I land in a pretty well stalled condition.
Studded tires in winter , hmmm I guess it may help in ice in
crosswinds while taxiing or braking. I really don't depend on brakes
to much. You guys not sue skis in winter? Winter flying does not get
much better and plus it gives you many options for landing. I have
solid skis but strip is here at home so i restricted to snow only. I
might build a pair of wheel skis this winter to try out.
Kirby
Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
>
> > From: kitfox@gto.net
> > What is wrong with solid rubber wheel i Have on Model 4 ?
>
> Certainly nothing wrong with it, Kirby. But first: which solid rubber
wheel do you have? Both the Maule and Homebuilder Special are solid
rubber or plastic. Only that the Maule is hard plastic and the Special
is soft rubber. The latter bounces back like a ball. Maule has a
pneumatic tailwheel too. But that is maybe too big a wheel for a
Kitfox.
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: | Re: A CG question |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: kitfox@gto.net
Tom,
My weight and balance gives a Cg limit of 11.37 to 16.00 Aft of the
datum. for Model IV 1050 gross
Emtpy i am at 12.95 aft
At gross 14.16 aft of datum with full front tank ( 9.5 gals) emty
wing tanks and 245 lb passenger and me @ 220 lbs
With full tanks 12 gal us and 170 lb pilot and passenger @ 1000 lbs
13.81 aft of datum.
Kitfox pretty docile, heavier you get the less climb you get.
Hope this helps, Kirby
Kitfox-List message posted by: Tom Jones <tomfromlapine@peoplepc.com>
>
> After sleeping on it I notice the empty weight CG has a "Range" and
the
> operating CG has "Limits". I take it to mean the empty weight CG
range
> is such that when loaded, the CG will not move past the operating
CG
> limits.
>
> As an example, I cannot load my kitfox to gross weight or less in any
> fashion that moves the CG past Skystar's tested CG limits. So, I
would
> say it is within an empty CG range. I don't know what that empty CG
> range is, just that the plane must be in it.
>
> This is all just my educated guess on the subject and I would be
> interested to hear the facts from an expert. My opinion is weight
and
> balance is a simple subject that is very difficult to explain.
> Tom Jones
>
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Cliff do you have the Heavy duty HBS? |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Harris, Robert" <Robert_Harris@intuit.com>
Hey Cliff,
Have you ever had your HBS tail wheel unlock with a hard landing? Have you
had any ground loops with the HBS?
What size are your front tires?
I'd like to put the HBS on my 920lb model V but I'm concerned it will unlock
prematurely?
Also my front tires are very tall and I'm afraid my angle of attack will be
affected.
Robert
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Clifford
Begnaud
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Homebuilder special tailwheel and a question
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Clifford Begnaud"
<shoeless@barefootpilot.com>
Michel,
I've been singing praises of the Homebuilders special tailwheel for years.
It is simply the best all around tailwheel choice for the kitfox. It's low
maintenance (one grease zerk on the shaft, the wheel is permanently sealed
and needs no lube), has cheap tire replacements, and the geometry works
perfect for a kitfox. And for us heavy metal kitfoxes, the light weight is
an added bonus. Also, the HBS allows the tail of the plane to sit lower than
the Maule pneumatic which is helpful for shortfield ops.
Enjoy!
Cliff
S5, Lyc 0-235
Erie, Co
>
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: joakley@ida.net
Hi Kids,
I just installed a new Matco mfg. 8 " tail wheel, 217.00 dollars and it is
great. I live 200 miles from the factory and it was here the next morning.
John Oakley
Message 16
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Steve Cooper" <spdrflyr@earthlink.net>
Ideally, an aircraft flies best when it is balanced in straight & level
un-accelerated flight. In other words, neutral stick and neutral trim.
Then, use the trim as stations change in the aircraft during the course
of the flight (fuel burn for instance) or during the landing.
Steve
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michel
Verheughe
Subject: Kitfox-List: A CG question
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
> From: Tom Jones [tomfromlapine@peoplepc.com]
> Go to this web site http://avstop.com/AC/apgeneral/TERMINOLOGY.html
Thanks, Tom. What I understand from it is that, a plane loaded in
standard conditions should stay within the empty weight CG range.
But I still miss to understand the aero-dynamic principle that says that
a MTOW plane can have a large range (on both sides) than the empty one.
Cheers,
Michel
do not archive
Message 17
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Homebuilder special tailwheel |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: <gjglh@cebridge.net>
Cliff,
Have you removed one of the bearings from the tire. Check and see if there is
a seal on the inside. Many times on some of aou factory equipment we remove
the inner seals. The outside seals are left to keep out dirt.
Gary
On Tue May 10 8:22 , 'Cliffford Begnaud' <shoeless@barefootpilot.com> sent:
>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Cliffford Begnaud"
shoeless@barefootpilot.com>
>
>>> (one grease zerk on the shaft, the wheel is permanently sealed
>>> and needs no lube)
>
>> Oh, are you sure, Cliff? I have a grease nipple on the wheel too.
>
>Yes, the grease nipple on the wheel is a dummy. It is a sealed bearing. Try
>putting some grease in it ;-)
>
>>>> Did you replaced just the wheel or the whole assembly?
>>
>> The whole assembly, Jose. The old Maule had some wear and I felt better
>> replacing the entire assembly.
>
>Yeah, don't replace just the tire... it's the assembly that works so much
>better for the kitfox.
>cliff
>
>>> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "John Anderson"
>>> janderson412@hotmail.com>
>>> Where does one get one of these wheels, is it a straight swop? ~j~
>>
>> From Aircraft Spruce, John. It is a straight swop if you change the whole
>> assembly, as long as you remember to order the spacing piece if you have a
>> 1 1/4" spring. You'll also need a longer bolt because the Homebuilder
>> Special has a thicker aluminium bracket.
>> If you decide to replace only the 6" tyre, it is also possible, although,
>> as someone once wrote to this list, you'll have to get a short section of
>> a pipe to match the slightly larger shaft diameter. Something like 3/8 to
>> 1/2", I think. Not sure, check it out first. But it shouldn't be a big
>> problem, I believe several on the list have done it.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Michel
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Message 18
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Cliff do you have the Heavy duty HBS? |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Cliffford Begnaud" <shoeless@barefootpilot.com>
Robert,
No, it has never unlocked without moving it to the unlock position, whether
it be hard landing or not (who me, do a hard landing?). I've never ground
looped it.
I find the HBS is more responsive than the maule. If you are quick on your
feet, it will save you from a ground loop that might have occurred with
other tailwheels. It is also much nicer when taxiing.
Our kitfox weighs 870 empty, but I don't know why it would unlock on a hard
landing, unless it hit sideways and was moved all the way over to the unlock
position. Of course if that is do-able, it would apply to any tailwheel.
Robert, I do LOTS of off airport landings, many of them on rough surfaces
and the tailwheel has never failed me.
Front tires are 600X6. I plan to install 850X6 tires soon because I WANT the
increased angle of attack. That was one of the reasons I switched to the
HBS. More angle is good for short field ops because the wing of the kitfox
is set at an angle that causes the tailwheel to hit first when doing a true
full stall landing. This is aggravated even more so when landing with power
at high angles of attack for extreme short field landings. So I am trying to
get the plane to sit at as high an angle as possible when on the ground. I
wish I could reduce the wing incidence, relative to the fuselage, by a few
degrees.
Best Regards,
Cliff
ps. I love talking about off airports ops, so bring it on ("almost" no one
else here gives a hoot about this stuff)
> Hey Cliff,
>
> Have you ever had your HBS tail wheel unlock with a hard landing? Have you
> had any ground loops with the HBS?
>
> What size are your front tires?
>
> I'd like to put the HBS on my 920lb model V but I'm concerned it will
> unlock
> prematurely?
>
> Also my front tires are very tall and I'm afraid my angle of attack will
> be
> affected.
>
> Robert
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Clifford
> Begnaud
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Homebuilder special tailwheel and a question
>
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Clifford Begnaud"
> <shoeless@barefootpilot.com>
>
> Michel,
> I've been singing praises of the Homebuilders special tailwheel for years.
> It is simply the best all around tailwheel choice for the kitfox. It's low
> maintenance (one grease zerk on the shaft, the wheel is permanently sealed
> and needs no lube), has cheap tire replacements, and the geometry works
> perfect for a kitfox. And for us heavy metal kitfoxes, the light weight is
> an added bonus. Also, the HBS allows the tail of the plane to sit lower
> than
>
> the Maule pneumatic which is helpful for shortfield ops.
> Enjoy!
> Cliff
> S5, Lyc 0-235
> Erie, Co
>>
>
>
>
Message 19
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Homebuilder special tailwheel |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Cliffford Begnaud" <shoeless@barefootpilot.com>
I have not removed the bearings, this info was per the manufacturer.
cliff
>
>
> Cliff,
> Have you removed one of the bearings from the tire. Check and see if there
> is
> a seal on the inside. Many times on some of aou factory equipment we
> remove
> the inner seals. The outside seals are left to keep out dirt.
>
> Gary
>
> On Tue May 10 8:22 , 'Cliffford Begnaud' <shoeless@barefootpilot.com>
> sent:
>
>>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Cliffford Begnaud"
> shoeless@barefootpilot.com>
>>
>>>> (one grease zerk on the shaft, the wheel is permanently sealed
>>>> and needs no lube)
>>
>>> Oh, are you sure, Cliff? I have a grease nipple on the wheel too.
>>
>>Yes, the grease nipple on the wheel is a dummy. It is a sealed bearing.
>>Try
>>putting some grease in it ;-)
>>
>>>>> Did you replaced just the wheel or the whole assembly?
>>>
>>> The whole assembly, Jose. The old Maule had some wear and I felt better
>>> replacing the entire assembly.
>>
>>Yeah, don't replace just the tire... it's the assembly that works so much
>>better for the kitfox.
>>cliff
>>
>>>> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "John Anderson"
>>>> janderson412@hotmail.com>
>>>> Where does one get one of these wheels, is it a straight swop? ~j~
>>>
>>> From Aircraft Spruce, John. It is a straight swop if you change the
>>> whole
>>> assembly, as long as you remember to order the spacing piece if you have
>>> a
>>> 1 1/4" spring. You'll also need a longer bolt because the Homebuilder
>>> Special has a thicker aluminium bracket.
>>> If you decide to replace only the 6" tyre, it is also possible,
>>> although,
>>> as someone once wrote to this list, you'll have to get a short section
>>> of
>>> a pipe to match the slightly larger shaft diameter. Something like 3/8
>>> to
>>> 1/2", I think. Not sure, check it out first. But it shouldn't be a big
>>> problem, I believe several on the list have done it.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Michel
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
Message 20
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Homebuilder special tailwheel and a questionHomebuilder |
special tailwheel and a question
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "George Wells" <georgewells@adelphia.net>
Aircraft Spruce carrys it plus you may get a better price from Aviation Products
in Ojai,CA 805-646-6042 the mfg. of the wheel assy.
Message 21
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Homebuilder special tailwheel |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
Cliffford Begnaud wrote:
> Yes, the grease nipple on the wheel is a dummy. It is a sealed bearing. Try
> putting some grease in it ;-)
He, he! That's so funny, Cliff! Indeed, I tried to press grease in it and ...
it didn't work. I thought something was wrong with my grease pump or the
bearing was already full of grease from factory. Now I know I don't have to
check my pump! :-)
Cheers,
Michel
do not archive
Message 22
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Homebuilder special tailwheel |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
"Jose M. Toro" wrote:
> Did you use the standard one or the heavy duty?
The standard one, Jose. The heavy duty with double fork is unnecessarily much
heavier, IMHO.
Cheers,
Michel
Message 23
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Cliff do you have the Heavy duty HBS? |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
Cliffford Begnaud wrote:
> I find the HBS is more responsive than the maule.
After only a few touch and go, I can confirm that: the HBS feels more responsive.
> Our kitfox weighs 870 empty, but I don't know why it would unlock on a hard
> landing
Nor do I. I had the Maule and the HBS on a bench and looked closely at them.
They both become free-castoring after a certain angle, not side pressure. The
release mechanism is different between the Maule and HBS but the principle is
exactly the same.
My opinion (based on my Kitfox) is that you cannot unlock the tailwheel with
the pedal. You need to come to the end of the rudder course, then get enough
side pressure so that one of the springs is pulled to the point that the
release mechanism can snap. It happens when you are stopped, press one pedal
and its toe-brake. If you are afraid it would snap too early, increase the
tension of the springs. I have mine quite hard and I need a bit of throttle to
snap the tailwheel in free-castoring and do a nice 180 when parking. I just
love it, it looks so elegant. The unique elegance of the taildragger. (gosh, I
think I am truly in love with my plane! :-)
Cheers,
Michel
Message 24
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | HBS tailwheel going on the model V |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Harris, Robert" <Robert_Harris@intuit.com>
Thanks Cliff,
I'm going to change my model V over to the HBS. After 450 hours my Model II
heavy duty HBS tail wheel on my model II Kitfox wore out and would unlock
with the slightest amount of pressure. This caused me to have several
different ground loops before I replaced it but luckily I never had a wing
tip hit the ground.
I have wanted to switch my model V over to the HBS tail wheel but was not
sure if the 76 lbs of tail weight would be too much for it.
I wonder if a model V/VI can be ground looped without hitting a wing tip
with the HBS tail wheel installed. So far I don't know of any Model V/V's
that have been ground looped without the wing tip hitting.
Robert
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Cliffford
Begnaud
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Cliff do you have the Heavy duty HBS?
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Cliffford Begnaud"
<shoeless@barefootpilot.com>
Robert,
No, it has never unlocked without moving it to the unlock position, whether
it be hard landing or not (who me, do a hard landing?). I've never ground
looped it.
I find the HBS is more responsive than the maule. If you are quick on your
feet, it will save you from a ground loop that might have occurred with
other tailwheels. It is also much nicer when taxiing.
Our kitfox weighs 870 empty, but I don't know why it would unlock on a hard
landing, unless it hit sideways and was moved all the way over to the unlock
position. Of course if that is do-able, it would apply to any tailwheel.
Robert, I do LOTS of off airport landings, many of them on rough surfaces
and the tailwheel has never failed me.
Front tires are 600X6. I plan to install 850X6 tires soon because I WANT the
increased angle of attack. That was one of the reasons I switched to the
HBS. More angle is good for short field ops because the wing of the kitfox
is set at an angle that causes the tailwheel to hit first when doing a true
full stall landing. This is aggravated even more so when landing with power
at high angles of attack for extreme short field landings. So I am trying to
get the plane to sit at as high an angle as possible when on the ground. I
wish I could reduce the wing incidence, relative to the fuselage, by a few
degrees.
Best Regards,
Cliff
ps. I love talking about off airports ops, so bring it on ("almost" no one
else here gives a hoot about this stuff)
> Hey Cliff,
>
> Have you ever had your HBS tail wheel unlock with a hard landing? Have you
> had any ground loops with the HBS?
>
> What size are your front tires?
>
> I'd like to put the HBS on my 920lb model V but I'm concerned it will
> unlock
> prematurely?
>
> Also my front tires are very tall and I'm afraid my angle of attack will
> be
> affected.
>
> Robert
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Clifford
> Begnaud
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Homebuilder special tailwheel and a question
>
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Clifford Begnaud"
> <shoeless@barefootpilot.com>
>
> Michel,
> I've been singing praises of the Homebuilders special tailwheel for years.
> It is simply the best all around tailwheel choice for the kitfox. It's low
> maintenance (one grease zerk on the shaft, the wheel is permanently sealed
> and needs no lube), has cheap tire replacements, and the geometry works
> perfect for a kitfox. And for us heavy metal kitfoxes, the light weight is
> an added bonus. Also, the HBS allows the tail of the plane to sit lower
> than
>
> the Maule pneumatic which is helpful for shortfield ops.
> Enjoy!
> Cliff
> S5, Lyc 0-235
> Erie, Co
>>
>
>
>
Message 25
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Aviation Products in Ojai,CA 805-646-6042 very helpful |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Harris, Robert" <Robert_Harris@intuit.com>
I really like the HBS tail wheel and wanted to put it on my Model V but had
some concerns.
I just called the factory and they said that the heavy duty HBS is what they
make for the "Extra" airplane which they ship to Germany. They also said
that the HBS tail wheels are used on very heavy planes like the "Stinky
Pitts", or something like that, so I'm going to make the switch on my model
V
Robert
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of George Wells
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Homebuilder special tailwheel and a
questionHomebuilder special tailwheel and a question
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "George Wells" <georgewells@adelphia.net>
Aircraft Spruce carrys it plus you may get a better price from Aviation
Products in Ojai,CA 805-646-6042 the mfg. of the wheel assy.
Message 26
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: HBS tailwheel going on the model V |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Cliffford Begnaud" <shoeless@barefootpilot.com>
Well, our first model 5 with 912 was ground looped 3 times without hitting a
wing tip, and that was with the bungee gear. The spring aluminum gear is
more resistant to letting the wing tip touch.
Robert, if you do much off airport ops, you might consider the double fork
HBS. The single is strong and worked fine on our first model 5, but we opted
for the double fork on our heavy fox. But I re-emphasize that this is
because of the amount of off airport ops.
cliff
>
> I wonder if a model V/VI can be ground looped without hitting a wing tip
> with the HBS tail wheel installed. So far I don't know of any Model V/V's
> that have been ground looped without the wing tip hitting.
> Robert
>
>
Message 27
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Homebuilder special tailwheel |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
kitfox@gto.net wrote:
> I have a Maule tailwheel and it the Rubber kind.
Er, yes, Kirby. I guess the Maule has also a rubber wheel. But a hard rubber.
If you hold the tailwheel assembly in your hand and you let it fall a few
inches, does it bounce back? Both wheels are of hard rubber, but the
Homebuilder Special bouces back.
> Studded tires in winter , hmmm I guess it may help in ice in
> crosswinds while taxiing or braking.
Good Lord, no! I was talking about Norwegian cars, Kirby. As far as I know, no
one has studded tyres on planes. I remember once, I drove to the airfield and
it was so icy that I felt driving my car was dangerous. Once there, I fired my
Kitfox and did some touch and go. There was no problem at all on the icy
runway. I guess the difference is that the automobile has traction on the
wheels, while the plane is free-wheeling. In any case, flying a taildragger is
like driving on ice ... the year round! :-)
> You guys not sue skis in winter?
Yes, we do. Most of us have skis for the winter. (incidentally, the word 'ski'
is Norwegian and supposed to be "invented" in the county of Telemark).
I have wheel penetration skis because my airfield is close to the coastline and
we have a long season when there is plenty of snow inland, while it has already
melted here. I need to land on both asphalt and snow.
Here it is:
http://home.online.no/~michel/ski/
But because of that, I can't have ski on the tailwheel. It's not really a
problem, I taxi in the snow with the tail up. I haven't yet tried to land on
deep soft snow, though.
Cheers,
Michel
Message 28
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Homebuilder special tailwheel |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Harris, Robert" <Robert_Harris@intuit.com>
Jose the HBS factory told me that the standard (regular) works great on the
Kitfox. But I think that the heavy duty has sealed bearings and the standard
does not.
Robert
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michel
Verheughe
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Homebuilder special tailwheel
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
"Jose M. Toro" wrote:
> Did you use the standard one or the heavy duty?
The standard one, Jose. The heavy duty with double fork is unnecessarily
much
heavier, IMHO.
Cheers,
Michel
Message 29
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | HBS tailwheel going on the model V |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Harris, Robert" <Robert_Harris@intuit.com>
Thanks Cliff,
That is the best news I've heard this whole year. I'm so happy to hear that
I can ground loop my model V with out a wing tip touching the ground. I
called the factory and they said I can replace the arm for $20 on my heavy
duty double forked HBS and that should fix it.
Robert
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Cliffford
Begnaud
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: HBS tailwheel going on the model V
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Cliffford Begnaud"
<shoeless@barefootpilot.com>
Well, our first model 5 with 912 was ground looped 3 times without hitting a
wing tip, and that was with the bungee gear. The spring aluminum gear is
more resistant to letting the wing tip touch.
Robert, if you do much off airport ops, you might consider the double fork
HBS. The single is strong and worked fine on our first model 5, but we opted
for the double fork on our heavy fox. But I re-emphasize that this is
because of the amount of off airport ops.
cliff
>
> I wonder if a model V/VI can be ground looped without hitting a wing tip
> with the HBS tail wheel installed. So far I don't know of any Model V/V's
> that have been ground looped without the wing tip hitting.
> Robert
>
>
Message 30
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Homebuilder special tailwheel |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Lowell Fitt" <lcfitt@sbcglobal.net>
The bearings that came with my HBS tailwheel were not sealed. ACS has a
sealed bearing upgrade - meaning they sell sealed bearings that fit the
wheel. That I took advantage of.
Lowell
----- Original Message -----
From: <gjglh@cebridge.net>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Homebuilder special tailwheel
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: <gjglh@cebridge.net>
>
>
> Cliff,
> Have you removed one of the bearings from the tire. Check and see if there
> is
> a seal on the inside. Many times on some of aou factory equipment we
> remove
> the inner seals. The outside seals are left to keep out dirt.
>
> Gary
>
> On Tue May 10 8:22 , 'Cliffford Begnaud' <shoeless@barefootpilot.com>
> sent:
>
>>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Cliffford Begnaud"
> shoeless@barefootpilot.com>
>>
>>>> (one grease zerk on the shaft, the wheel is permanently sealed
>>>> and needs no lube)
>>
>>> Oh, are you sure, Cliff? I have a grease nipple on the wheel too.
>>
>>Yes, the grease nipple on the wheel is a dummy. It is a sealed bearing.
>>Try
>>putting some grease in it ;-)
>>
>>>>> Did you replaced just the wheel or the whole assembly?
>>>
>>> The whole assembly, Jose. The old Maule had some wear and I felt better
>>> replacing the entire assembly.
>>
>>Yeah, don't replace just the tire... it's the assembly that works so much
>>better for the kitfox.
>>cliff
>>
>>>> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "John Anderson"
>>>> janderson412@hotmail.com>
>>>> Where does one get one of these wheels, is it a straight swop? ~j~
>>>
>>> From Aircraft Spruce, John. It is a straight swop if you change the
>>> whole
>>> assembly, as long as you remember to order the spacing piece if you have
>>> a
>>> 1 1/4" spring. You'll also need a longer bolt because the Homebuilder
>>> Special has a thicker aluminium bracket.
>>> If you decide to replace only the 6" tyre, it is also possible,
>>> although,
>>> as someone once wrote to this list, you'll have to get a short section
>>> of
>>> a pipe to match the slightly larger shaft diameter. Something like 3/8
>>> to
>>> 1/2", I think. Not sure, check it out first. But it shouldn't be a big
>>> problem, I believe several on the list have done it.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Michel
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
Message 31
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: A CG question |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Lowell Fitt" <lcfitt@sbcglobal.net>
Steve, What you describe can be affected by wing incidence and horizontal
stab incidence, the latter we can control to some extent, at least. The 5
and above with stabilator trim and the IV and below with the forward
adjustment tang on the horizontal stab. This can compensate for an
unbalanced situation and I don't think hands off flying necessarily means a
balanced airplane.
There was a Lancair IV that took some lives because it could not recover
from a flat spin - I'm not an expert in these matters, but I suspect this
particular airplane had an excessively aft CG.
Lowell
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Cooper" <spdrflyr@earthlink.net>
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: A CG question
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Steve Cooper" <spdrflyr@earthlink.net>
>
> Ideally, an aircraft flies best when it is balanced in straight & level
> un-accelerated flight. In other words, neutral stick and neutral trim.
> Then, use the trim as stations change in the aircraft during the course
> of the flight (fuel burn for instance) or during the landing.
>
> Steve
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michel
> Verheughe
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Kitfox-List: A CG question
>
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
>
>> From: Tom Jones [tomfromlapine@peoplepc.com]
>> Go to this web site http://avstop.com/AC/apgeneral/TERMINOLOGY.html
>
> Thanks, Tom. What I understand from it is that, a plane loaded in
> standard conditions should stay within the empty weight CG range.
> But I still miss to understand the aero-dynamic principle that says that
> a MTOW plane can have a large range (on both sides) than the empty one.
>
> Cheers,
> Michel
>
> do not archive
>
>
>
Message 32
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: A CG question |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
Thank you for your feedbacks, Tom, Brian, kirby and Steve.
I understand what you are writing but ... here is what I read from the Italian
builder manual (I don't speak Italian but as it is between French and Spanish,
I get the meaning of it, at least).
It says:
CG limits empty: 30 cm and 40 cm from datum (wing leading edge)
CG limits at MTOW: 25 cm and 45 cm from datum
(those are not the actual values but only as an example).
The question is then: Why is the CG limits at MTOW larger than when the plane
is empty?
I know that, for my Kitfox, the CG at MTOW will move slightly aft from measured
empty. I understand that the mentionned web page explains that a proper CG
limit empty won't put it off-limit once the plane is loaded in a "standard"
way, i.e. the pilot is seating in the seat and not on the top of the
glareshield! :-)
But, do you think it means that, say if the aft limit empty is 40 cm (my
example) it won't be more than 45 cm when loaded? And that it has nothing to do
with aero-dynamic?
Cheers,
Michel
do not archive
Message 33
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: exhaust fumes |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: jareds <jareds@verizon.net>
Best tip yet but one wonders why it would have been engineered so far
off. I only have the little outlet that you and i fought with during
our cooling problem phase and the huge opening seem excessive. Now that
my radiator is so far down in the stream outlet air doesnt matter so as
long as CHT's stay normal (right now around 200) then I'll engineer
something to close it off.
But again I ask the list. What are we doing wrong that we can't cure
the inherant problem of the fumes excaping in the first place?
AlbertaIV@aol.com wrote:
>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: AlbertaIV@aol.com
>
>
>In a message dated 5/10/2005 8:29:42 AM Eastern Standard Time,
>jareds@verizon.net writes:
>
>John also mentioned earlier closing off the inlet. My cowl is the p51
>radial looking opening. One big O. Will be awefully tough to close
>that off without relocating landing lights and just making it look
>
>
>Jared,
> I closed off about 2"-3" of my big "O" by placing a horizontal piece of
>half round trim across the bottom portion and then fiberglassing it all in to
>match the lip around the big "O". The bottom portion acts as a scoop (boxed
>in on the inside of the cowl) for the exhaust heat muff and is directed into
>the cockpit via push/pull door.
> I'm certainly not an air flow engineer but everything I could find called
>for roughly a 3 to 1 ratio for airflow through a cowling. That is, little
>"IN" and big "OUT". So if you have 100 sq inches of the big "O" for input air
>you need 300 sq in of outlet air. I deleted and glassed in my bottom cowl
>outlet on the pilot side and added two side outlets on the cowl. I don't
>think I quite achieved 3 to 1 ratio but seems to work just fine.
>
>Don Smythe
>Classic IV w/ 582
>
>
>
>
Message 34
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Performance of Lyc 0-235 Kitfox |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Vic Jacko" <vicwj@earthlink.net>
Cliff,
You have flown the airplane I built more than I did and you probably have
some pretty accurate numbers as to performance especially against other
aircraft of both Kitfox and Cubs's.
When you get a chance would you please share this info with us?
BTW how many hours on the tac now?
List: As far as I know this is the "lightest" heavy Kitfox in flying
today.
Vic
Builder of N88VJ
Message 35
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: exhaust fumes |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: AlbertaIV@aol.com
In a message dated 5/10/2005 5:12:12 PM Eastern Standard Time,
jareds@verizon.net writes:
But again I ask the list. What are we doing wrong that we can't cure
the inherant problem of the fumes excaping in the first place?
Jared,
At this point, I'm not sure this is an inherent problem. It has been
discussed every now and then but not enough to make it a Kitfox wide problem.
Like I said, I've had a couple different modifications to the cowl and
radiator but I've never had any exhaust fumes in the cockpit, that I could detect
anyway
Don Smythe
Classic IV w/ 582
Message 36
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Steve Cooper" <spdrflyr@earthlink.net>
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michel
Verheughe
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: A CG question
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
Thank you for your feedbacks, Tom, Brian, kirby and Steve.
I understand what you are writing but ... here is what I read from the
Italian
builder manual (I don't speak Italian but as it is between French and
Spanish,
I get the meaning of it, at least).
It says:
CG limits empty: 30 cm and 40 cm from datum (wing leading edge)
CG limits at MTOW: 25 cm and 45 cm from datum
(those are not the actual values but only as an example).
The question is then: Why is the CG limits at MTOW larger than when the
plane
is empty?
I know that, for my Kitfox, the CG at MTOW will move slightly aft from
measured
empty. I understand that the mentionned web page explains that a proper
CG
limit empty won't put it off-limit once the plane is loaded in a
"standard"
way, i.e. the pilot is seating in the seat and not on the top of the
glareshield! :-)
But, do you think it means that, say if the aft limit empty is 40 cm (my
example) it won't be more than 45 cm when loaded? And that it has
nothing to do
with aero-dynamic?
Cheers,
Michel
do not archive
Message 37
| 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>
Did you replaced just the wheel or the whole assembly?
Jose
--- John Anderson <janderson412@hotmail.com> wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "John Anderson"
> <janderson412@hotmail.com>
>
> Where does one get one of these wheels, is it a
> straight swop? ~j~
Just replace the tailwheel. It is P/N 06-03600 from Aircraft Spruce. It is
called a 6" Homebuilders tailwheel My catalogue that is now nearly 12
months old prices it at $26.40.
It comes with what I consider some very poor quality bearings that I did
not use but the catalogue also lists Long life sealed bearings P/N 06-00060
for $11.95. If I was doing this again that is what I would buy. However I am
in Australia and had no chance to work this out first. I couldn't get much
help from Aircraft Spruce.
Anyway the bearings in the wheel are for a 5/8" axle but assuming you have
the Maule SFSA tailwheel assembly which I imagine you have that has a 1/2"
axle. You could just put a sleeve over the axle 1/2" ID 5/8" OD and bolt it
up. Simple ! However as I said I bought the wheel with the original
bearings that I chose not to use so I bought other bearings to suit the 1/2"
axle.
Regards Michel's comments on how brilliant this wheel is I totally agree.
Actually I think it may have been my recomendation that encouraged Michel to
buy it. For you guys that are concerned about ground looping let me say it
improves the handling to the extent that it has to reduce that
possibillitty, believe it or not. That old flat Maule tail wheel is a
shocker and if you are using one do yourself a very big favour and ditch it
now. I thought this soft rubber wheel might wear quickly but in 6 months I
can detect no wear whatsoever. I guess at the price it would not matter
anyway.
Rex.
rexjan@bigpond.com
Message 38
| 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: Mosler engine & Avid DVD on Ebay |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Jerry Liles <wliles@bayou.com>
Sterling,
Didn't you do the Avid promotional tape? I had a copy of the first tape
and loved it but loaned it out and it never came back. I particularly
liked the outtakes at the end of the tape that were taken out of the
second version. It was the best promotional tape for a kitplane that
I've seen.
Jerry Liles
Avid MK IV
Sterling wrote:
>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Sterling" <sterling@pgrb.com>
>
>More about the Mosler 82X engine installation video in a moment...
>
>For your viewing pleasure, I've submitted a DVD on Ebay showing my first flight
in an airplane I built back in 1992ish. The DVD shows my first flight in my
Avid Sportster I named, Felix The Kit. The video was shot totally from a cockpit
perspective with superwide angle lenses using a couple of tiny microcams.
Upon landing the first time, I barely made the runway and hard-bounced a lousy
landing, but I survived. Music accompanies the hair-raising experience as I take
off and land and beat the odds. I flew that sucker on the hottest day in July
many years ago here in Texas. It was windy and nasty. And, I flew it without
an audience. I figured if I crashed and burned, I'd be too darned embarrased
to want to live through the ordeal having to suffer all those indignities. After
I landed, I phoned my dad (WW2 aviator, retired jet jocky and A&P mechanic)
and I told Pop "I had just made my first flight." He said, "Son there is only
one reason why God allows for propellers on an air!
> plane... That's to keep the pilot cool because if that big fan quits in mid-air,
you should see the pilot sweat. AND WHY DID YOU FLY WHEN NOBODY WAS WATCHING?"
(OK, so call me the Village Idiot...)
>
>Also, for anyone contemplating installing a VW based engine in an airplane, I've
added to this DVD the Mosler 82X Installation video that I produced for my
client Mosler Motors, formerly based in North Carolina, and no longer in business.
The installation video highlights the numerous basic steps of installing
their engine in an Avid. It runs a tad over 33 minutes. For more info about the
Mosler engine, see my auction. This segment will help most anyone thinking about
installing a VW engine in an airplane.
>
>My wild ride in my Avid runs about 8 minutes.
>
>Flying an airplane I built was one of the highlights of my life, but the DVD I've
posted on Ebay is grainy as heck, washed out and basically a poor representation
of my professional work in television since 1973. But, it's a hoot and
it has inspired a mess of my friends to get off the sofa, outta the house and
in the garage to finish their own airplane projects. If I were you, don't bid
too much on my DVD. I just need a little money to buy gas for my Pietenpol someday.
I figure selling a couple of these DVDs will let me put some money in my
piggy bank so I can get a few gallons of go-juice for my airplane trip to Brodhead,
WI. next year.
>
>(By the way, I produced Avid Aircraft's marketing videos in late 1980s and early
90s and basically pioneered the use of microcams inside and outside the airplane
in product videos...)
>
> Ebay item number 4549090719
>
>Sterling Brooks
>Knot-2-Shabby Airport & Texas Longhorn Cattle Ranch & Sometimes Digital Video
Studio, but mostly a house-husband & dog sitter/rescuer.
>
>
>-----------------------------------------------
>Scanned by Bayou Internet for all known viruses.
>http://www.bayou.com
>
>
>
>
Message 39
| 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: "Jose M. Toro" <jose_m_toro@yahoo.com>
Rex:
Thanks for the information! If I buy sealed bearings
P/N 06-00060, would I need the sleeve over the axle,
1/2" ID 5/8" OD. Would an aluminum sleeve work?
Regards!
Jose
--- Rex & Jan Shaw <rexjan@bigpond.com> wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Rex & Jan Shaw"
> <rexjan@bigpond.com>
>
> Did you replaced just the wheel or the whole
> assembly?
>
> Jose
> --- John Anderson <janderson412@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "John Anderson"
> > <janderson412@hotmail.com>
> >
> > Where does one get one of these wheels, is it a
> > straight swop? ~j~
>
> Just replace the tailwheel. It is P/N 06-03600 from
> Aircraft Spruce. It is
> called a 6" Homebuilders tailwheel My catalogue
> that is now nearly 12
> months old prices it at $26.40.
> It comes with what I consider some very poor
> quality bearings that I did
> not use but the catalogue also lists Long life
> sealed bearings P/N 06-00060
> for $11.95. If I was doing this again that is what I
> would buy. However I am
> in Australia and had no chance to work this out
> first. I couldn't get much
> help from Aircraft Spruce.
> Anyway the bearings in the wheel are for a 5/8"
> axle but assuming you have
> the Maule SFSA tailwheel assembly which I imagine
> you have that has a 1/2"
> axle. You could just put a sleeve over the axle 1/2"
> ID 5/8" OD and bolt it
> up. Simple ! However as I said I bought the wheel
> with the original
> bearings that I chose not to use so I bought other
> bearings to suit the 1/2"
> axle.
> Regards Michel's comments on how brilliant this
> wheel is I totally agree.
> Actually I think it may have been my recomendation
> that encouraged Michel to
> buy it. For you guys that are concerned about ground
> looping let me say it
> improves the handling to the extent that it has to
> reduce that
> possibillitty, believe it or not. That old flat
> Maule tail wheel is a
> shocker and if you are using one do yourself a very
> big favour and ditch it
> now. I thought this soft rubber wheel might wear
> quickly but in 6 months I
> can detect no wear whatsoever. I guess at the price
> it would not matter
> anyway.
>
> Rex.
> rexjan@bigpond.com
>
>
>
> browse
> Subscriptions page,
> FAQ,
>
>
>
>
>
>
Jose M. Toro, P.E.
Kitfox II/582->Jabiru 2200
"A slow flight in the Caribbean..."
Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour:
http://tour.mail.yahoo.com/mailtour.html
Message 40
| 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: | Aircraft Survival Gear |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Steve Cooper" <spdrflyr@earthlink.net>
1. 8 ea. treble fish hooks. (great for snaring rabbits)
2. 200 yds. of 30 lb test monofilament line.
3. 24" ringed cable saw.
4. Small hand ax
5. Collapsible shovel/pick 4X8" 30 oz.
6. 30 kitchen matches sealed in plastic cigar tubes w/strikers X2
7. Small personal first aid kit. First aid instruction booklet.
8. Large first aid kit stays in luggage compartment
9. Magnesium rod fire starter
10. 48 hours of Light sticks 12 hrs X 4 ea.
11. 3 quarts water.
12. Garrity 200 hour LED flashlight w/colored filters/3 tripple-A cells
13. 1000 hours of light/spare triple-A cells
14. One Kershaw 1650ST Stainless folding knife.
15. One roll Charmin quilted.
16. Cheap Digital camera (to leave a record)
17. Signaling Mirror.
18. Spare double-A batteries for the GPS if I can get it out of the
plane.
19. 7 lbs worth of the most common tools for working on the plane.
20. Spare underclothes, warm jacket, Sleeping Bag and socks.
This is what I carry in my survival day pack. Even If I'm only going
around the pattern I have it with me. The large first aid kit and the
tools stay in the luggage compartment. You never can tell what will
happen. The day pack stays with me in the seat...if I have to bail I can
grab it on my way out of the plane. If the aircraft doesn't burn, I can
return for the ELT, Garmin 196 GPS, and the large First Aid Kit in the
luggage compartment, the tools, the onboard battery and perhaps a little
fuel if the tank(s) are in tact. I will probably utilize part of the
aircraft for shelter until I get my legs under me. If I'm trapped in the
plane, I can use the cable saw or hatchet to cut my way out. I can
possibly use the fabric from the wings to make some sort of a shelter. I
know some of you guys have had specialized training...what am I missing?
I want to be ready just in case it ever happens to me!
Steve Cooper
Avid Mark IV
Jabiru/Tailwheel
Message 41
| 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: "John Anderson" <janderson412@hotmail.com>
I'll be doing what Rex did and use bearings to suit the 1/2" shaft I thing,
simple and better way. ~j~
From: "Jose M. Toro" <jose_m_toro@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Tailwheel
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Jose M. Toro" <jose_m_toro@yahoo.com>
Rex:
Thanks for the information! If I buy sealed bearings
P/N 06-00060, would I need the sleeve over the axle,
1/2" ID 5/8" OD. Would an aluminum sleeve work?
Regards!
Jose
--- Rex & Jan Shaw <rexjan@bigpond.com> wrote:
>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Rex & Jan Shaw"
><rexjan@bigpond.com>
>
>Did you replaced just the wheel or the whole
>assembly?
>
>Jose
>--- John Anderson <janderson412@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "John Anderson"
> > <janderson412@hotmail.com>
> >
> > Where does one get one of these wheels, is it a
> > straight swop? ~j~
>
>Just replace the tailwheel. It is P/N 06-03600 from
>Aircraft Spruce. It is
>called a 6" Homebuilders tailwheel My catalogue
>that is now nearly 12
>months old prices it at $26.40.
> It comes with what I consider some very poor
>quality bearings that I did
>not use but the catalogue also lists Long life
>sealed bearings P/N 06-00060
>for $11.95. If I was doing this again that is what I
>would buy. However I am
>in Australia and had no chance to work this out
>first. I couldn't get much
>help from Aircraft Spruce.
> Anyway the bearings in the wheel are for a 5/8"
>axle but assuming you have
>the Maule SFSA tailwheel assembly which I imagine
>you have that has a 1/2"
>axle. You could just put a sleeve over the axle 1/2"
>ID 5/8" OD and bolt it
>up. Simple ! However as I said I bought the wheel
>with the original
>bearings that I chose not to use so I bought other
>bearings to suit the 1/2"
>axle.
> Regards Michel's comments on how brilliant this
>wheel is I totally agree.
>Actually I think it may have been my recomendation
>that encouraged Michel to
>buy it. For you guys that are concerned about ground
>looping let me say it
>improves the handling to the extent that it has to
>reduce that
>possibillitty, believe it or not. That old flat
>Maule tail wheel is a
>shocker and if you are using one do yourself a very
>big favour and ditch it
>now. I thought this soft rubber wheel might wear
>quickly but in 6 months I
>can detect no wear whatsoever. I guess at the price
>it would not matter
>anyway.
>
>Rex.
>rexjan@bigpond.com
>
>
>browse
>Subscriptions page,
>FAQ,
>
>
Jose M. Toro, P.E.
Kitfox II/582->Jabiru 2200
"A slow flight in the Caribbean..."
Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour:
http://tour.mail.yahoo.com/mailtour.html
Need a new job? Check out XtraMSN Careers http://xtramsn.co.nz/careers
Message 42
| 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: "Steve Cooper" <spdrflyr@earthlink.net>
Yes I agree. An excessively aft CG would not have resulted in a balanced
aircraft...is that not correct? Or is my data incorrect? I'm always open
to information and learning from the more experienced flyers. Please
tell me so I can learn.
-----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: A CG question
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Lowell Fitt" <lcfitt@sbcglobal.net>
Steve, What you describe can be affected by wing incidence and
horizontal
stab incidence, the latter we can control to some extent, at least. The
5
and above with stabilator trim and the IV and below with the forward
adjustment tang on the horizontal stab. This can compensate for an
unbalanced situation and I don't think hands off flying necessarily
means a
balanced airplane.
There was a Lancair IV that took some lives because it could not recover
from a flat spin - I'm not an expert in these matters, but I suspect
this
particular airplane had an excessively aft CG.
Lowell
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Cooper" <spdrflyr@earthlink.net>
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: A CG question
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Steve Cooper"
<spdrflyr@earthlink.net>
>
> Ideally, an aircraft flies best when it is balanced in straight &
level
> un-accelerated flight. In other words, neutral stick and neutral trim.
> Then, use the trim as stations change in the aircraft during the
course
> of the flight (fuel burn for instance) or during the landing.
>
> Steve
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michel
> Verheughe
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Kitfox-List: A CG question
>
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
>
>> From: Tom Jones [tomfromlapine@peoplepc.com]
>> Go to this web site http://avstop.com/AC/apgeneral/TERMINOLOGY.html
>
> Thanks, Tom. What I understand from it is that, a plane loaded in
> standard conditions should stay within the empty weight CG range.
> But I still miss to understand the aero-dynamic principle that says
that
> a MTOW plane can have a large range (on both sides) than the empty
one.
>
> Cheers,
> Michel
>
> do not archive
>
>
>
Message 43
| 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: OIL COOLER FAILURE |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: John King <kingjohne@adelphia.net>
Francisco,
I later reinforced the vertical sides of the mounting bracket (going
from the oil cooler to the engine) with an additional aluminum plates
(one plate per vertical side) using rivets and Hlsol epoxy cement. I
felt it had to be stiffened due to effects of lateral vibration during
start-up and shut down.
--
John King
Warrenton, VA
icaza francisco wrote:
>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: icaza francisco <franicaza@yahoo.com.mx>
>
>John, I also would like to see your photos, if
>possible. This is something Im worried it can happen
>during a flight.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Francisco.
>
>
> --- Giovanni Day <gde01@bellsouth.net> escribi:
>
>
>>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Giovanni Day"
>><gde01@bellsouth.net>
>>
>>I would like to see a photo also. Thanks
>>
>>Giovanni
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
>>[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com]On
>>Behalf Of John King
>>To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
>>Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: OIL COOLER FAILURE
>>
>>
>>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: John King
>><kingjohne@adelphia.net>
>>
>>Barry,
>>
>>Earl's which makes a lot of things for high
>>performance race cars has a
>>mount for their oil coolers. This worked great on
>>both my Model
>>IV-1200/912UL and Series 6/912S engines. It has
>>vibration protection.
>>You have to build an attach bracket to mount it on a
>>912. I have
>>pictures of it if you like.
>>
>>--
>>John King
>>Warrenton, VA
>>
>>
>>Barry wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>
>
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! --
|