Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 02:20 AM - SV: Static source location (Michel Verheughe)
2. 03:48 AM - Appraisal (Dill Family)
3. 03:54 AM - Static Error (Lmar)
4. 05:02 AM - Phantom X1 For Sale (RV73HL@aol.com)
5. 05:34 AM - Re: OFF TOPIC - Cool Aviation Videos (Bradley M Webb)
6. 05:57 AM - Re: Appraisal (Bradley M Webb)
7. 06:45 AM - Re: Appraisal (Tom Jones)
8. 06:51 AM - Re: Static source location (Blackwell, Rodney)
9. 08:15 AM - Re: Appraisal (Rex Hefferan)
10. 09:12 AM - Re:Appraisal (Dill Family)
11. 09:20 AM - Windows (Dill Family)
12. 09:37 AM - Re: Windows (AMuller589@aol.com)
13. 09:59 AM - Re: Windows (Bradley M Webb)
14. 10:43 AM - Re: Static source location (Michel Verheughe)
15. 12:49 PM - Re: Poly-Fiber DVD Worthwhile? (Lynn Matteson)
16. 12:52 PM - Re: Poly-Fiber DVD Worthwhile? (Lynn Matteson)
17. 12:59 PM - Re: M4/1200 Speedster Fule system (Lynn Matteson)
18. 02:51 PM - Re: Poly-Fiber DVD Worthwhile? (kurt schrader)
19. 02:54 PM - Re: Windows (Colin Durey)
20. 02:55 PM - Re: Static source location (Comp User)
21. 03:27 PM - Static Port (Rex & Jan Shaw)
22. 03:30 PM - Engine Mounts (jablackwell)
23. 04:18 PM - Re: Static source location (jdmcbean)
24. 04:23 PM - Re: Static Port (Alan & Linda Daniels)
25. 06:21 PM - Re: Engine Mounts (RAY Gignac)
26. 07:00 PM - Re: Engine Mounts (Brian Leach)
27. 07:18 PM - Re: Static Port (jdmcbean)
28. 07:36 PM - Re: Engine Mounts (jablackwell)
29. 07:47 PM - Re: Static Port (Alan & Linda Daniels)
30. 07:47 PM - Re: Engine Mounts (James Shumaker)
31. 09:28 PM - Re: Static Port (jdmcbean)
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: | Static source location |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
> From: James Shumaker [jimshumaker@sbcglobal.net]
> Yes there is a problem taking the static pressure from within the cockpit. It
is
> inconsistant, unreliable and inacurate. The static port location as tested by
the
> factory is very good.
Here is my experience: With the 582, I had no static port, the pressure was taken
from the instruments in the cockpit. When I installed the Jabiru - and probably
because of the super-duper-sucking-scoop I made under the cowling - I had
a low pressure in the cockpit and an exaggerated high IAS reading. I then installed
a static port at the place recommended by Skystar (or rather, Denney, for
my model 3).
My conclusion: If you get a reliable reading without a static port, why bother
with it? But, mind you, different ventilation in the cockpit might influence your
pressure and readings.
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: "Dill Family" <Dillfamily@sbcglobal.net>
I am trying to arrive at an honest value of my Model 2 so that I can settle
up with my Dad's estate. At this point, it has a zero time 582, by authorized
Rotax rebuilder. It has a new pre-formed windshield. Due to the need to address
surface rust on the fuselage tubing, the belly fabric was replaced. The balance
of the fabric was tested strong, but has several patches due to mishandling
in storage. A new coat of polytone was required (on what was at that point
an unsightly aircraft) after being treated with rejuvenator. It first flew in
1998, has a total of 220 hours on the airframe and during that time it was ground
looped and repaired. During that repair, the previous owner replace one flaperon,
which, interestingly enough, does not match the other (one is a symmetrical
airfoil, and the other is cambered only on the top. He claimed that no replacement
was available, so he bought one from Avid. He was the guinea pig, it
flew). Also repaired was a flap hingepoint, where the last inch of one rib snapped
off , evidently due to mishandling in storage (suffice it to say I am satisfied
with that repair). Has intercom, transceiver, and basic GPS, no transponder.
Most Skystar SB & SL modifications have been accomplished, with notable
exceptions being rudder pedal reinforcement and fiberglass tanks, mine are metal.
I see a model 2 in Trade-a-Plane with a 65 hour Rotax 532, which he is asking
$16k for. How much will he really get? What is mine worth?
Jeff Dill
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 |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Lmar <my93avid@yahoo.com>
My airspeed had been vented in the cockpit. I could see errors of 5-7mph in airspeed
depending if I had the doors open. I would suggest stalling with the door
open and then closed and note the speed difference. You can also fly level
at a given speed and open the door a bit while looking at the airspeed. I ended
up moving my static source to a crossover tube at the rear of the fuselage
that hold the tow bar (Avid). It provided outside air from bothe sides (equal
in a slip) and is reliable.
Hope this helps,
Larry
---------------------------------
Let fate take it's course directly to your email.
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: | Phantom X1 For Sale |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: RV73HL@aol.com
Due to my double hip implant restriictions, I purchased a Kitfox IV-1200,
and now I am selling my lil Phantom X1. If you know someone who would like to
start off in a Fun Flying Machine, please pass this along:
For Sale..Phantom X1.Built 2001. Rotax 503.DC/DI....TTAE
120 hrs. Elec Start. Radio,Helmet.Always Hangared. $ 10,500.00.. Photos via
email. - Howard Ligon 352 347-3547 ..Ocala, _FL..rv73hl@aol.com_
(mailto:FL..rv73hl@aol.com) <_mailto:rv73hl@aol.com_ (mailto:rv73hl@aol.com) >
Thanks for allowing me to post this...
Howard Ligon
N27RF
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: | OFF TOPIC - Cool Aviation Videos |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Bradley M Webb" <bmwebb@cox.net>
Hi all,
A little history on this for those interested...
Mac lives (plays) about 40 miles from me here in Middle Georgia, USA. A
small town named Andersonville. Civil War buffs might recognize the name
(Excellent site to visit and National cemetery). Out in the middle of
nowhere, Mac owns a terrific shop with his own field (guessing 2000'x600').
As a matter of fact, many fly to the shop in their own planes, landing on
the RC flying field. The first flight on my 1/3 scale Extra 300S was at
Macs. Mac and his brother own a Piper Cub, parked at the field. I had the
pleasure of flying with Mac's brother in it, crop-dusting the local fields.
What a hoot.
This is Mac's second B-29. The first was destroyed a couple years ago due to
some malfunction. It's always a hit at his regular fly-ins. His shop is
awesome, especially considering its location. He really loves airplanes, big
and small.
His web site: http://www.hodgeshobbies.com
I tried to get GPS coords for his field, but not being at work or at the
field, kinda tough. Anyway, drop in. Directions are on his website. Land on
Mac's field, or Souther Field to the NW (full-services). If you fly RC, it'd
be hard to find a better place to spend an afternoon. If you don't fly RC,
drop in anyway. Always a good time.
Take care all,
Bradley
KF2 N1836
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of kitfoxjunky
Subject: Kitfox-List: OFF TOPIC - Cool Aviation Videos
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: kitfoxjunky
<kitfoxjunky@decisionlabs.com>
Hi Guys
I know many homebuilders got the bug with radio control planes. Not sure
how many monitor the hobby still..but the effort put forth is getting so
close to what it takes to create a kit airplane. Check these out....
http://video.helifreak.com/tmp/06261831a52a0d1ecc92dffc909eb037/B2911062004.
wmv
Make sure you watch the last few frames of the above B29 footage.
http://www.rcuniverse.com/magazine/billhempelwildonetwo.cfm
http://www.rcuniverse.com/magazine/billhempelwildtwo.cfm
http://www.rcuniverse.com/magazine/billhempelwildonethree.cfm
Gary Walsh
KF IV Anphib 912S
C-GOOT
www.decisionlabs.com/kitfox
do not archive
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Bradley M Webb" <bmwebb@cox.net>
Hey Jeff,
I'll pipe in just to help give you a baseline.
I bought my KF2 last October. I paid $13.5k for it. Rotax 582UL (grey-head)
w/ ~120 hours on it, running fine, but dubious historical treatment. My
fabric is in good shape, meaning no recover necessary, although the fuse
under the cockpit could use new covering. It has 424 TTSN, built in 1991.
Basic VFR instruments, no Xponder, A/S, Alt, VSI, T&C, Westach dual EGT,
Mitchell volts and fuel pressure, and Skystar water temp, handheld Vertex
radio. No lighting (day VFR).
This one needed rescuing from its previous owner(s). Meaning replacing the
Wal-Mart wiring, re-locating the radiator airbrake, new floors, and general
hardware and clean-up. I had (have) some light corrosion, but nothing too
serious. Basic mis-treatment. I mean this thing had zip-ties holding on
zip-ties. Poor practice by obvious amateurs.
IOW, it was not a pristine example by any means, but it was functional. Not
safe, but functional. I think I got a fair deal, but I should have saved
$1000 after I tore it down. I would think that a good, well-built and
well-maintained KF2 example would pull $14K to $20K range, if no further
work were required, and dependent on equipment.
Just what I got, hope it helps,
Bradley
KF2 N1836
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dill Family
Subject: Kitfox-List: Appraisal
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Dill Family" <Dillfamily@sbcglobal.net>
I am trying to arrive at an honest value of my Model 2 so that I can
settle up with my Dad's estate. At this point, it has a zero time 582, by
authorized Rotax rebuilder. It has a new pre-formed windshield. Due to the
need to address surface rust on the fuselage tubing, the belly fabric was
replaced. The balance of the fabric was tested strong, but has several
patches due to mishandling in storage. A new coat of polytone was required
(on what was at that point an unsightly aircraft) after being treated with
rejuvenator. It first flew in 1998, has a total of 220 hours on the airframe
and during that time it was ground looped and repaired. During that repair,
the previous owner replace one flaperon, which, interestingly enough, does
not match the other (one is a symmetrical airfoil, and the other is cambered
only on the top. He claimed that no replacement was available, so he bought
one from Avid. He was the guinea pig, it flew). Also repaired was a flap
hingepoint, where !
the last inch of one rib snapped off , evidently due to mishandling in
storage (suffice it to say I am satisfied with that repair). Has intercom,
transceiver, and basic GPS, no transponder. Most Skystar SB & SL
modifications have been accomplished, with notable exceptions being rudder
pedal reinforcement and fiberglass tanks, mine are metal.
I see a model 2 in Trade-a-Plane with a 65 hour Rotax 532, which he is
asking $16k for. How much will he really get? What is mine worth?
Jeff Dill
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 |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Tom Jones <nahsikhs@elltel.net>
Jeff,
True story. A year ago I moved from no sales tax Oregon to sales tax
unnamed state. Unnamed State Department of Revenue requires new
residents to pay sales tax on certain items...airplanes included... when
moving to this state. The tax I had to pay on my Classic 4 is 7.7% of
the current value.
The good people at the unnamed state department of revenue happen to
know nothing about airplanes. She asked what my Kitfox was valued at so
I asked her "How do I find out?" She said she would look it up in her
blue book. Of course there was no kitfox listed so she asked, "What is
it similar to?" I replied "Avid Flyer, almost identical". She asked,
"How does $78 thousand dollars sound?"
I remained calm and replied, "78 thousand sounds a little high for my
kitfox. Is the Avid Flyer actually listed at $78,000?" She replied,
"No, but there is an Aviat listed, and that sounds similar to Avid".
I then requested a meeting with the person responsible for collecting
tax on airplanes for unnamed state. I went to his office. He asked
"What is the Airplane valued at?" I replied, "65 hundred dollars". He
said "Okay, that will be $500 and fifty cents. I wrote a check and
considered myself lucky.
So, there you have it. The value of your kitfox what you say it is.
Do not archive.
I will deny it if you tell anyone.
Dill Family wrote:
>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Dill Family" <Dillfamily@sbcglobal.net>
>
> I am trying to arrive at an honest value of my Model 2 so that I can settle
up with my Dad's estate. At this point, it has a zero time 582, by authorized
Rotax rebuilder. It has a new pre-formed windshield. Due to the need to address
surface rust on the fuselage tubing, the belly fabric was replaced. The balance
of the fabric was tested strong, but has several patches due to mishandling
in storage. A new coat of polytone was required (on what was at that point
an unsightly aircraft) after being treated with rejuvenator. It first flew in
1998, has a total of 220 hours on the airframe and during that time it was ground
looped and repaired. During that repair, the previous owner replace one flaperon,
which, interestingly enough, does not match the other (one is a symmetrical
airfoil, and the other is cambered only on the top. He claimed that no
replacement was available, so he bought one from Avid. He was the guinea pig,
it flew). Also repaired was a flap hingepoint, where !
> the last inch of one rib snapped off , evidently due to mishandling in storage
(suffice it to say I am satisfied with that repair). Has intercom, transceiver,
and basic GPS, no transponder. Most Skystar SB & SL modifications have been
accomplished, with notable exceptions being rudder pedal reinforcement and fiberglass
tanks, mine are metal.
> I see a model 2 in Trade-a-Plane with a 65 hour Rotax 532, which he is asking
$16k for. How much will he really get? What is mine worth?
>
>Jeff Dill
>
>
>
>
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: | Static source location |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Blackwell, Rodney" <rblackwell@ppg.com>
Michel, Where did Denny recommend the static port on the model 3? RB
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michel Verheughe
Subject: SV: Kitfox-List: Static source location
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
> From: James Shumaker [jimshumaker@sbcglobal.net]
> Yes there is a problem taking the static pressure from within the cockpit. It
is
> inconsistant, unreliable and inacurate. The static port location as tested by
the
> factory is very good.
Here is my experience: With the 582, I had no static port, the pressure was taken
from the instruments in the cockpit. When I installed the Jabiru - and probably
because of the super-duper-sucking-scoop I made under the cowling - I had
a low pressure in the cockpit and an exaggerated high IAS reading. I then installed
a static port at the place recommended by Skystar (or rather, Denney, for
my model 3).
My conclusion: If you get a reliable reading without a static port, why bother
with it? But, mind you, different ventilation in the cockpit might influence your
pressure and readings.
Cheers,
Michel
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 |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Rex Hefferan <kitfox-m2@earthlink.net>
Good story, thanks for sharing.
I think sales tax such as you described is actually a property tax.
IMO, Whatever they call it I think of it as unfair taxation evidenced by
the fact there is no reliable State documentation for value. If such
documentation existed it would be problematic to keep it accurate and
fair. Therefore it would be unjust.
Rex
<snip>
>I asked her "How do I find out?" She said she would look it up in her
>blue book. Of course there was no kitfox listed so she asked, "What is
>it similar to?" I replied "Avid Flyer, almost identical". She asked,
>"How does $78 thousand dollars sound?"
>
>I remained calm and replied, "78 thousand sounds a little high for my
>kitfox. Is the Avid Flyer actually listed at $78,000?" She replied,
>"No, but there is an Aviat listed, and that sounds similar to Avid".
>
>I then requested a meeting with the person responsible for collecting
>tax on airplanes for unnamed state. I went to his office. He asked
>"What is the Airplane valued at?" I replied, "65 hundred dollars". He
>said "Okay, that will be $500 and fifty cents. I wrote a check and
>considered myself lucky.
>
>So, there you have it. The value of your kitfox what you say it is.
>
>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 |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Dill Family" <Dillfamily@sbcglobal.net>
Thanks to all. I have still not told my state that this thing is in my garage,
partly because I only pseudo-own it, but mostly because I am not sure I can stand
what they will say. A couple of folks have answered me directly and I am getting
the picture, I might not get better than 8000 due to its damage history,
without that it could fetch $13.5k, on a very good day $16K. Temptation would
have me call it even with the estate because I have already given Dad's wife
$4500 and put about that much into it since. First I will have to negotiate with
my conscience, and then his wife.
JRD
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: "Dill Family" <Dillfamily@sbcglobal.net>
My next question is this: Can I simply purchase a sheet of Plexiglas at Home Depot
to replace the windows in my doors? It looks to me like I could. When I drill
out the rivets, a good bit of rivet and shaving will fall into the steel tube.
My plan was to cut a hole in the tubing to shake all the pieces out. I live
close enough to New York to ask it like this > You got a problem with that!
Jeff Dill
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: AMuller589@aol.com
I would think about PETG, Lexan , and unbreakable Acrylic. They are
available in all thicknesses as 4 ft X 8 ft sheets from plastic suppliers in the
yellow pages and cost about 50% to 100% more than acrylic but are bendable cold
with same tools as metal working and won't shatter with rivets. Of course they
will impossible to break for exit if the door doesn't open but with the
Kitfox latches I have seen the door cannot fail closed.
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Bradley M Webb" <bmwebb@cox.net>
I just ordered 2ea 4'x 8'x 1/8" sheets of polycarbonate (Lexan) from Action
Rubber in NC for $68 per sheet. I have full lexan doors, so this gives me
about 1/2 sheet extra (maybe a second front windshield for spare). Both
freighted to my door was slightly less than $200. He's got a lot more. Email
Brandon@actionrubber.net . Best deal I've found. Caught it on ebay.
My local sign shop wanted $180 per sheet, and nearly $230 for tinted.
Scooped my jaw up and ran out. I'm in the wrong business...
Bradley
KF2 N1836
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dill Family
Subject: Kitfox-List: Windows
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Dill Family" <Dillfamily@sbcglobal.net>
My next question is this: Can I simply purchase a sheet of Plexiglas at Home
Depot to replace the windows in my doors? It looks to me like I could. When
I drill out the rivets, a good bit of rivet and shaving will fall into the
steel tube. My plan was to cut a hole in the tubing to shake all the pieces
out. I live close enough to New York to ask it like this > You got a problem
with that!
Jeff Dill
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: | Re: Static source location |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
On Dec 2, 2005, at 3:51 PM, Blackwell, Rodney wrote:
> Michel, Where did Denny recommend the static port on the model 3? RB
>
Rodney, I bought my Kitfox 3, second hand, from a fine airman and
mechanic who had already built two Kitfoxes. At the time, I knew
virtually nothing about homebuilt planes. I read this forum, compared
to what I saw on my plane, and concluded that I was a lucky man who
bought a jewel.
In the extensive documentation (all the way to the details of the size
of each label glued in the cockpit) I got with the plane, there was the
installation notice for the static port.
Since it was not installed in the plane, I concluded that it was part
of the standard installation, yet it was not done on my plane because
the builder - someone who knows much more than me - decided that it was
not necessary.
But, I may be wrong in my conclusion.
Cheers,
Michel
do not archive
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Poly-Fiber DVD Worthwhile? |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Lynn Matteson <lynnmatt@jps.net>
Hope you took the shoes out first. : )
Lynn do not archive
On Tuesday, November 29, 2005, at 08:35 PM, kurt schrader wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader
> <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
>
> Another helpful tip is to rib stitch a shoebox first.
> Someone showed me that trick and I saved all those
> steps. Sure made a mess of one shoebox though.
>
> Kurt S.
>
> --- Lynn Matteson <lynnmatt@jps.net> wrote:
>
>> I'll second the motion for getting the tape JUST >
> for tying that knot....I almost wore out my
>> walkway between the house and workshop trying to
>> learn how to tie that knot.
>>
>> Lynn
>
>
> __________________________________
>
>
Message 16
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Poly-Fiber DVD Worthwhile? |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Lynn Matteson <lynnmatt@jps.net>
That's the reason I chose to rib lace...the old-time look.
On Tuesday, November 29, 2005, at 05:44 PM, Alan & Linda Daniels wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Alan & Linda Daniels
> <aldaniels@fmtc.com>
>
> Button head rivets work great. Rib stitching is great for that old time
> look, but it is state of the art 1915.
Yes, I can't preach enough about using a mask when using MEK....I went
through one mask and started on another during the covering and
painting of my plane.
Lynn
> I know, stop preaching, but just a reminder,
> this stuff we use to cover the planes is very good and it is safe if
> used properly. If you do not take the proper safety measures is can
> really mess up your health. A lot of the old times call it methyl ethyl
> death.
>
> Lynn Matteson wrote:
>
>> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Lynn Matteson <lynnmatt@jps.net>
>>
>> I'll second the motion for getting the tape JUST for tying that
>> knot....I almost wore out my walkway between the house and workshop
>> trying to learn how to tie that knot.
>>
>> Lynn
>> On Tuesday, November 22, 2005, at 11:08 AM, Brett Walmsley wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Brett Walmsley"
>>> <n93hj@numail.org>
>>>
>>> The instuctions on tieing the seine knot are almost worth the price
>>> if
>>> you
>>> don't know how. The book is very hard to follow.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
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: M4/1200 Speedster Fule system |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Lynn Matteson <lynnmatt@jps.net>
I've got the serial number right after you, Ted...ADU-150. I cleaned
and re-sloshed my tanks last year, with instructions from Frank
Miller.They are holding fuel fine so far.
Lynn
On Tuesday, November 29, 2005, at 08:48 PM, flier wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "flier" <flier@sbcglobal.net>
>
> My tanks were from '94, sloshed, and have been perfect ever since.
> Check
> the inside of the tanks with a light and a mirror. If the Kreem looks
> OK,
> fill'em up with gas and let'em set for a couple of weeks to verify
> they're
> not leaking. If not then I'd use'em. I've never had a problem with
> mine.
> My S/N is ADU-149, a Model IV-1200.
>
> Regards,
>
> Ted
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: Poly-Fiber DVD Worthwhile? |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
Lynn,
Shoes? That would explain the bent needles! Now I
can buy straight needles and sell curved ones. :-)
Another trick I learned that works really well is when
you have an obsticle in the way that keeps you from
passing the needle directly from one skin to the
other. Several times braces or other itmes got in my
way. What I learned to do was run the needle in the
proper hole and out the next hole on the same side.
Pull a loop thru and turn the needle around. Next go
from that same advanced hole back diagonally to the
proper hole on the other side that you were
origionally aiming for. When you pull the string, the
loop will pop back into the advanced hole and wrap
around the obsticle. You can't tell from the outside
that there was any problem and it gives the same
strength to the stitch you needed.
Kurt S. S-5/NSI
--- Lynn Matteson <lynnmatt@jps.net> wrote:
> Hope you took the shoes out first. : )
>
> Lynn do not archive
> On Tuesday, November 29, 2005, at 08:35 PM, kurt
> schrader wrote:
>
> > Another helpful tip is to rib stitch a shoebox
first.
> > Someone showed me that trick and I saved all those
> > steps. Sure made a mess of one shoebox though.
> >
> > Kurt S.
Just $16.99/mo. or less.
dsl.yahoo.com
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 |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Colin Durey" <colin@ptclhk.com>
Jeff,
In order to get the rivet debris out of the tube, resist the temptation to
start drilling more holes in the door frame, its fragile enough as it is.
Choose a rivet hole close to a corner point in the frame, drill it out to
the next up rivet size. Tape over all the other rivet holes except one.
Hold the door frame with the over-sized hole at the lowest point. With an
air hose fitted with a blower nozzle, blow air into the open rivet hole at
the highest pressure you have available. The swarf and debris should exit
the larger hole fairly easily.
When finished, rivet your plexiglass/lexan back into place using your
standard rivets, plus a larger one for the exit hole.
This worked for me when I was doing/undoing/doing my windows.
Regards
Colin Durey
Pacific Technology Corporation Ltd
Sydney
+61-418-677073 (M)
+61-2-945466162 (F)
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Dill Family"
> <Dillfamily@sbcglobal.net>
>
> My next question is this: Can I simply purchase a sheet of Plexiglas at
> Home Depot to replace the windows in my doors? It looks to me like I
> could. When I drill out the rivets, a good bit of rivet and shaving will
> fall into the steel tube. My plan was to cut a hole in the tubing to shake
> all the pieces out. I live close enough to New York to ask it like this >
> You got a problem with that!
>
> Jeff Dill
>
>
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: Static source location |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Comp User" <trebla@directinter.net>
I installed a pitot with a static in it. Seems to work fine. Got it at
Aircraft Sprue.
Albert Smith
Message 21
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Rex & Jan Shaw" <rexjan@bigpond.com>
I have heard from a couple of different people that they have had a problem
getting
accurate readings from their instruments because of the location of the
static
port. Is there anything wrong with taking the static pressures from within
the cockpit?
Gary
Hi ! Gary,
I bought my MKIV second hand. It was built by a mechanical
engineer and always registered General Aviation or VH in Australia. This
means it has had to be tested for accuracy and I have that certificate. My
static ports are open to cabin pressure. Now however there is two static
ports about 4" in front of the doors about the level of the bottom of the
panel but they are disconnected. When I went over to Western Australia from
South Australia to pickup up my plane I noticed these were disconnected and
reconnected them. I commented to to the previous owner and builder plus my
friend who is a LAME what I had done and they both nearly had a fit.
Apparently with these ports connected there is some wild readings but with
them disconnected everything is very close. I can't dispute that checking
with the GPS but it still worried me because it just doesn't seem right to
have the ports open to cabin pressure but I've never been game to try
connecting them and flying.
I came across some advice that cabin pressure was no good and finally got
what Skystar say is the correct location on the left side of the fuselage in
front of the horizontal stabiliser and about 2 1/2" up from the bottom
longeron. Now this position worried me too because it was only on one side.
I asked my CFI and he very much felt the same way. I exchanged several
E'mails with Ed Downs and he assured me me there was no problem with only
one port on one side but I still was not convinced and so still use my ports
open to cabin pressure with no problems. Ed also told me that a lot of guys
use this configuration [ open to cabin pressure ] but they get about 6% high
ASI reading. Well I get maybe 2% at 80 knots.
So you will have to just sort all the info you get and decide and/or
experiment for yourself but I feel that a port each side up the back of the
fuselage is the most likely correct situation, however as mine is fine open
to cabin pressure I continue to use it that way at least for the time being.
Rex.
rexjan@bigpond.com
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 |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: " jablackwell" <jablackwell@ev1.net>
I am needing to change the rubber pads where my 912UL connects to
the engine mount,(not sure what the proper name for the pads
are). Anyway, they are showing signs of age (1994 vintage) such
as cracks and an A&P told me that I should change them.
Sure looks like a very involved task. I am not seeing a way to do
this without taking the engine off the mounts, which means
disconnecting throtle and choke cables, exhaust and several other
connections. Am I making this to hard or is this the only way to
do this right?
Sure would like to hear from someone who has changed these pads.
Jimmie
Kitfox Model IV Speedster
Sent via the EV1 webmail system at mail.ev1.net
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: | Static source location |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "jdmcbean" <jdmcbean@cableone.net>
Been watching this thread.. for the record.. the static location for the
Series 5 was flight tested with a calibration boom... and I believe it was
tuft in that area as well.
Having the static on one side will be effected during slips..typically in
that direction..
As for static port in the cockpit.. the A/S will typically read slightly
higher... Lets see... how about another topic just to get juices flowing...
Non-pressurized aircraft, Instrument conditions... Icing.. (YUK, hate this
already) Lets assume the static source if iced over.. time for alternate
static source (which is typically in the cockpit on non-pressurized
aircraft) PULL... what changes should we expect ??
Fly Safe !!
John & Debra McBean
www.sportplanellc.com
"The Sky is not the Limit... It's a Playground"
Message 24
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Alan & Linda Daniels <aldaniels@fmtc.com>
Nothing at all wrong with taking static air from inside. I have found in
all the Kifox's that I have flow or test flown the biggest errors in
airspeed have come from outside static sources. All the ones that I am
aware of from the build group caused huge error - like 15 mph- and had
to be disconnected. You will get a small change in altitude and airspeed
with slips or skids or with doors open, but it is usually within a
couple mph and a few feet. It is totally irrelevant unless you are
shooting a ILS to minimums. In all three I have built I have static just
open behind the instrument panel and am happy with that. On a fast IFR
plane it is a different story but just look out the window on these
great little planes. IMHO
Rex & Jan Shaw wrote:
>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Rex & Jan Shaw" <rexjan@bigpond.com>
>
>I have heard from a couple of different people that they have had a problem
>getting
>accurate readings from their instruments because of the location of the
>static
>port. Is there anything wrong with taking the static pressures from within
>the cockpit?
>
>
>
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: | Re: Engine Mounts |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "RAY Gignac" <KITFOXPILOT@msn.com>
I have been told that you can replace them without removing the engine, but I don't
see how! I supported my engine with a hoist, then installed the new "donuts"
anyways, they went on fine. Do you have the UL or ULS?
Ray
----- Original Message -----
From: jablackwell<mailto:jablackwell@ev1.net>
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com<mailto:kitfox-list@matronics.com>
Sent: Friday, December 02, 2005 6:28 PM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Engine Mounts
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: " jablackwell" <jablackwell@ev1.net<mailto:jablackwell@ev1.net>>
I am needing to change the rubber pads where my 912UL connects to
the engine mount,(not sure what the proper name for the pads
are). Anyway, they are showing signs of age (1994 vintage) such
as cracks and an A&P told me that I should change them.
Sure looks like a very involved task. I am not seeing a way to do
this without taking the engine off the mounts, which means
disconnecting throtle and choke cables, exhaust and several other
connections. Am I making this to hard or is this the only way to
do this right?
Sure would like to hear from someone who has changed these pads.
Jimmie
Kitfox Model IV Speedster
Sent via the EV1 webmail system at mail.ev1.net
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: Engine Mounts |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Brian Leach" <leach@infogen.net.nz>
Hi Jimmie
If you have got the same engine mounts as an Avid you are in for a major
job. When I built my Avid I was supplied with the wrong rubbers (the ones I
got were too thin and did not hold the engine firm enough and after 60 hours
two of the engine rails BROKE OFF just in front of the big mount washers.)
I have just got back in the air after a complete engine rail and rubber
replacement. If your mount is the same (and I think it is ) you have to
remove the engine complete with the ring mount and bolt it on a bench on the
propeller flange, then remove the entire ring mount from the engine . Then
replace the rubbers and fit the ring mount down on to the vertical engine.
You may have to remove all the manifolds and muffler etc etc and take the
front bolts out of the bottom engine rails so you can swing the front of the
rails away from the engine which makes getting the rubbers into the ring
mount much easier. Then fit the completely assembled enging and ring mount
back on the fuselage. If you have the same Dynafocal ring mount as me it is
impossible to replace the rubbers with the engine hanging on a hoist or with
the ring mount still attached to the fuselage. I found it easier to take
the carbs off the manifold sockets and leave all the choke and throttle
cables attached. But if your rubbers are getting cracked and soft don't
delay the agony! If the engine moves too much it puts radial twist on the
mount rails and they WILL break. If I can be of any more help dont't
hesitate to ask.
Brian Leach
New Zealand.
Original Message -----
From: jablackwell <jablackwell@ev1.net>
Subject: Kitfox-List: Engine Mounts
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: " jablackwell" <jablackwell@ev1.net>
>
> I am needing to change the rubber pads where my 912UL connects to
> the engine mount,(not sure what the proper name for the pads
> are). Anyway, they are showing signs of age (1994 vintage) such
> as cracks and an A&P told me that I should change them.
>
> Sure looks like a very involved task. I am not seeing a way to do
> this without taking the engine off the mounts, which means
> disconnecting throtle and choke cables, exhaust and several other
> connections. Am I making this to hard or is this the only way to
> do this right?
>
> Sure would like to hear from someone who has changed these pads.
>
>
> Jimmie
> Kitfox Model IV Speedster
>
> Sent via the EV1 webmail system at mail.ev1.net
>
>
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 |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "jdmcbean" <jdmcbean@cableone.net>
Come on Alan.. you don't shoot ILS to minimums in your Kitfox...
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 Alan & Linda
Daniels
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Static Port
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Alan & Linda Daniels <aldaniels@fmtc.com>
Nothing at all wrong with taking static air from inside. I have found in
all the Kifox's that I have flow or test flown the biggest errors in
airspeed have come from outside static sources. All the ones that I am
aware of from the build group caused huge error - like 15 mph- and had
to be disconnected. You will get a small change in altitude and airspeed
with slips or skids or with doors open, but it is usually within a
couple mph and a few feet. It is totally irrelevant unless you are
shooting a ILS to minimums. In all three I have built I have static just
open behind the instrument panel and am happy with that. On a fast IFR
plane it is a different story but just look out the window on these
great little planes. IMHO
Rex & Jan Shaw wrote:
>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Rex & Jan Shaw" <rexjan@bigpond.com>
>
>I have heard from a couple of different people that they have had a problem
>getting
>accurate readings from their instruments because of the location of the
>static
>port. Is there anything wrong with taking the static pressures from within
>the cockpit?
>
>
Message 28
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Engine Mounts |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: " jablackwell" <jablackwell@ev1.net>
I have the UL
---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: "RAY Gignac" <KITFOXPILOT@msn.com>
>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "RAY Gignac"
<KITFOXPILOT@msn.com>
>
>I have been told that you can replace them without removing the
engine, but I don't see how! I supported my engine with a hoist,
then installed the new "donuts" anyways, they went on fine. Do
you have the UL or ULS?
>
>Ray
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: jablackwell<mailto:jablackwell@ev1.net>
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com<mailto:kitfox-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Friday, December 02, 2005 6:28 PM
> Subject: Kitfox-List: Engine Mounts
>
>
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: " jablackwell"
<jablackwell@ev1.net<mailto:jablackwell@ev1.net>>
>
> I am needing to change the rubber pads where my 912UL connects
to
> the engine mount,(not sure what the proper name for the pads
> are). Anyway, they are showing signs of age (1994 vintage) such
> as cracks and an A&P told me that I should change them.
>
> Sure looks like a very involved task. I am not seeing a way to
do
> this without taking the engine off the mounts, which means
> disconnecting throtle and choke cables, exhaust and several
other
> connections. Am I making this to hard or is this the only way
to
> do this right?
>
> Sure would like to hear from someone who has changed these pads.
>
>
> Jimmie
> Kitfox Model IV Speedster
>
> Sent via the EV1 webmail system at mail.ev1.net
>
>
>
>
>
Sent via the EV1 webmail system at mail.ev1.net
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 |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Alan & Linda Daniels <aldaniels@fmtc.com>
My point exactly. Unless of course you mean ILS - I Land Short. The
kitfox is a great plane, but a lousy IFR platform. It is, however,
without a doubt the greatest toy in the world.
jdmcbean wrote:
>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "jdmcbean" <jdmcbean@cableone.net>
>
>Come on Alan.. you don't shoot ILS to minimums in your Kitfox...
>
>
>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 Alan & Linda
>Daniels
>To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Static Port
>
>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Alan & Linda Daniels <aldaniels@fmtc.com>
>
>Nothing at all wrong with taking static air from inside. I have found in
>all the Kifox's that I have flow or test flown the biggest errors in
>airspeed have come from outside static sources. All the ones that I am
>aware of from the build group caused huge error - like 15 mph- and had
>to be disconnected. You will get a small change in altitude and airspeed
>with slips or skids or with doors open, but it is usually within a
>couple mph and a few feet. It is totally irrelevant unless you are
>shooting a ILS to minimums. In all three I have built I have static just
>open behind the instrument panel and am happy with that. On a fast IFR
>plane it is a different story but just look out the window on these
>great little planes. IMHO
>
>Rex & Jan Shaw wrote:
>
>
>
>>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Rex & Jan Shaw" <rexjan@bigpond.com>
>>
>>I have heard from a couple of different people that they have had a problem
>>getting
>>accurate readings from their instruments because of the location of the
>>static
>>port. Is there anything wrong with taking the static pressures from within
>>the cockpit?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
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: Engine Mounts |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: James Shumaker <jimshumaker@sbcglobal.net>
Jimmie
I just replaced the bottom two mounts on my 912ul Model III. I was surprized
how easy it was. I had to take the muffler off. Then just remove the bolts
and twist the support out of the hole. I did support the engine with a hoist.
The top two will require removing the water hoses on the top. I have not done
them yet because the weather is always so nice I wind up flying instead of
working on the plane.
Jim Shumaker
jablackwell <jablackwell@ev1.net> wrote:
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: " jablackwell"
I am needing to change the rubber pads where my 912UL connects to
the engine mount,(not sure what the proper name for the pads
are). Anyway, they are showing signs of age (1994 vintage) such
as cracks and an A&P told me that I should change them.
Sure looks like a very involved task. I am not seeing a way to do
this without taking the engine off the mounts, which means
disconnecting throtle and choke cables, exhaust and several other
connections. Am I making this to hard or is this the only way to
do this right?
Sure would like to hear from someone who has changed these pads.
Jimmie
Kitfox Model IV Speedster
Sent via the EV1 webmail system at mail.ev1.net
Message 31
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "jdmcbean" <jdmcbean@cableone.net>
That's exactly what I mean't.. although I don't always shoot to minimums..:)
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 Alan & Linda
Daniels
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Static Port
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Alan & Linda Daniels <aldaniels@fmtc.com>
My point exactly. Unless of course you mean ILS - I Land Short. The
kitfox is a great plane, but a lousy IFR platform. It is, however,
without a doubt the greatest toy in the world.
jdmcbean wrote:
>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "jdmcbean" <jdmcbean@cableone.net>
>
>Come on Alan.. you don't shoot ILS to minimums in your Kitfox...
>
>
>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 Alan & Linda
>Daniels
>To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Static Port
>
>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Alan & Linda Daniels
<aldaniels@fmtc.com>
>
>Nothing at all wrong with taking static air from inside. I have found in
>all the Kifox's that I have flow or test flown the biggest errors in
>airspeed have come from outside static sources. All the ones that I am
>aware of from the build group caused huge error - like 15 mph- and had
>to be disconnected. You will get a small change in altitude and airspeed
>with slips or skids or with doors open, but it is usually within a
>couple mph and a few feet. It is totally irrelevant unless you are
>shooting a ILS to minimums. In all three I have built I have static just
>open behind the instrument panel and am happy with that. On a fast IFR
>plane it is a different story but just look out the window on these
>great little planes. IMHO
>
>Rex & Jan Shaw wrote:
>
>
>>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Rex & Jan Shaw" <rexjan@bigpond.com>
>>
>>I have heard from a couple of different people that they have had a
problem
>>getting
>>accurate readings from their instruments because of the location of the
>>static
>>port. Is there anything wrong with taking the static pressures from within
>>the cockpit?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
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! --
|