Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 03:54 AM - Re: static port location on Series 6? (Fox5flyer)
2. 03:54 AM - Re: Toe in Toe Out (Bradley M Webb)
3. 03:54 AM - Re: static port location on Series 6? (Bradley M Webb)
4. 03:57 AM - Re: [Off-topic] Today's flight (Fox5flyer)
5. 04:22 AM - Re: Toe in Toe Out (wwillyard@aol.com)
6. 04:43 AM - Re: Toe in Toe Out (Fox5flyer)
7. 05:49 AM - GPS altitude. WAS: static port location on Series 6? (Michel Verheughe)
8. 06:51 AM - Re: Toe in Toe Out (Lowell Fitt)
9. 08:18 AM - Re: Toe in Toe Out (Marco Menezes)
10. 08:52 AM - Rotec Radial Engine (Don McIntosh)
11. 09:27 AM - Re: Rotec Radial Engine (Alan & Linda Daniels)
12. 11:01 AM - Re: DAR is wrong (Lynn Matteson)
13. 11:51 AM - Re: [Off-topic] Today's flight (Michel Verheughe)
14. 02:08 PM - Re: Got my Airworthiness Certificate! (ron schick)
15. 02:14 PM - Re: GPS altitude. WAS: static port location on Series 6? (Bradley M Webb)
16. 02:32 PM - Re: GPS altitude. WAS: static port location on Series 6? (Bradley M Webb)
17. 02:32 PM - Re: Toe in Toe Out (Cudnohufsky's)
18. 03:08 PM - Re: Rotec Radial Engine (Marco Menezes)
19. 04:34 PM - Re: Toe in Toe Out (Guy Buchanan)
20. 05:16 PM - Re: Rotec Radial Engine (Fox5flyer)
21. 05:36 PM - Re: [Off-topic] Today's flight (James Shumaker)
22. 07:13 PM - Re: Rotec Radial Engine (Marco Menezes)
23. 08:08 PM - Re: Rotec Radial Engine (Richard Rabbers)
24. 08:21 PM - Re: Rotec Radial Engine (Roger Standley)
25. 08:40 PM - Re: Rotec Radial Engine (Don Pearsall)
26. 08:45 PM - Re: Rotec Radial Engine (Roger Standley)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: static port location on Series 6? |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Fox5flyer" <morid@northland.lib.mi.us>
Good primer Bill. Thanks.
Deke
retired (long time) atc
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Bill Hammond <kitfox@itsys3.com>
>
> ATC gets interested if the altitude that you report differs from
> your mode-c by more than 300'. That was true the last time that
> I sat at a radar scope - about 4 hours ago.
>
> Of course, if your encoder is vented to cabin static air, the
> report that ATC derives will show the same thing that your
> altimeter shows. That may or may not be your actual altitude
> above sea level. That is an important consideration if you are
> counting on ATC to keep you out of the rocks or to provide
> vertical separation with other aircraft. So don't think that you
> can bluff your way out of Class A or B airspace by resetting your
> altimeter.
>
> I say that "ATC derives" because encoders are basically stupid.
> They send your pressure altitude to the ATC computers. I have to
> set the ATC computer to the local altimeter setting just like you
> would do in your Kollsman window. The ATC computer then corrects
> the pressure altitude from your mode-c and displays it to the
> controller as an MSL altitude (when below 18,000 in the USA).
> Above 18,000 feet everybody flies at a pressure altitude (Flight
> Level) by setting the altimeter to 29.92. If the local pressure
> is below 29.92, some of the lowest flight levels become unusable
> for separation. They will not be a true 1,000' (or more) above
> 17,000. I'll leave that brain teaser for you to figure out. A
> little note here - the ATC computer is actually set by an array
> of digital altimeter setting indicators. The local pressure
> setting is updated automatically once each minute. In a large
> geographic area, the computer will apply the proper correction to
> your mode-c based upon the adapted altimeter region that you are
> flying. If the automatic altimeter interface fails, I can set
> the altimeter manually. I am required to keep the ATC computer
> within .02 inches of actual local pressure.
>
> Now there's more than you wanted to know.....
>
> Bill Hammond
> Parker, CO
> Series 6 - N913KF
>
> skyflyte@comcast.net wrote:
> > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: skyflyte@comcast.net
> >
> > I have my static source behind the instrument panel, and it seems to
work well until I open the doors! There is also some error when doing a
strong slip to lose altitude. More importantly, the static errors will
effect your altimeter, and our encoder if you are using Mode C. There may
be a conflict between your indicated altitude, and that which is reported to
ATC. I'm not sure how much "off-altitude" you are permitted until the
ATC/FAA becomes interested.
> >
> > -------------- Original message --------------
> > From: "scooby harrington" <scoobytrash@hotmail.com>
> >
> >
> >>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "scooby harrington"
> >>
> >>I am having trouble figuring out where to put my static ports on my
series
> >>6. I have
> >>combed the manual and cant find any reference to it at all, does anyone
know
> >>where
> >>I can find drawings showing where to put static ports?
> >>
> >>I searched the archives and found lots of threads about cabin air being
much
> >>better
> >>than a poorly located static port but no indication where the correct
> >>location is.
> >>
> >>Thanks!
> >>
> >>Scooby
> >>
> >>On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice on how
to
> >>get there! http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=Retirement
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > I have my static source behind the instrument panel, and it seems to
work well until I open the doors! There is also some error when doing a
strong slip to lose altitude. More importantly, the static errors will
effect your altimeter, and our encoder if you are using Mode C. There may be
a conflict between your indicated altitude, and that which is reported to
ATC. I'm not sure how much "off-altitude" you are permitted until the
ATC/FAA becomes interested.
> >
> > -------------- Original message --------------
> > From: "scooby harrington" scoobytrash@hotmail.com
> >
> > -- Kitfox-List message posted by: "scooby harrington"
<SCOOBYTRASH@HOTMAIL.COM>
> >
> > I am having trouble figuring out where to put my static ports on my
series
> > 6. I have
> > combed the manual and cant find any reference to it at all, does anyone
know
> > where
> > I can find drawings showing where to put static ports?
> >
> > I searched the archives and found lots of threads about cabin air being
much
> > better
> > than a poorly located static port but no indication where the correct
> > location is.
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Scooby
> >
> > On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice on how
to
> > get there! http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=R
> > etirement
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
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: "Bradley M Webb" <bmwebb@cox.net>
I'm convinced, and would like to know, as well.
Bradley
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Guy Buchanan
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 1:21 AM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Toe in Toe Out
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Guy Buchanan <bnn@nethere.com>
OK. You've convinced me that I have to get rid of the toe-in. (About 3/4
degree total.) I have covered tube gear. Has anybody bent their covered
tube gear without removing the covering? I really dread getting a wrinkle.
Guy Buchanan
K-IV 1200 / 582 / 99.9% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar.
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: | static port location on Series 6? |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Bradley M Webb" <bmwebb@cox.net>
Interesting, and good points to consider.
Before flight, I set my altimeter to field elevation, and the Kollsman baro
setting is way off (.10 or more). But my altimeter reads very close to what
my GPS says I'm at in flight. Interestingly enough, when I fly for the Air
Force, our GPS reading is significantly off from indicated (by a couple
thousand feet). Now that you mention it, I think it is due to setting 29.92
at 18K'. Hence the GPS would be actual, and the altimeter would be relative.
The only bad point to venting to the cabin (and some mentioned this before),
is that the altimeter jumps around a little. Not much, but I wonder if
that's bad for the mechanism over the long run.
Bradley
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill Hammond
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 10:35 PM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: static port location on Series 6?
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Bill Hammond <kitfox@itsys3.com>
ATC gets interested if the altitude that you report differs from
your mode-c by more than 300'. That was true the last time that
I sat at a radar scope - about 4 hours ago.
Of course, if your encoder is vented to cabin static air, the
report that ATC derives will show the same thing that your
altimeter shows. That may or may not be your actual altitude
above sea level. That is an important consideration if you are
counting on ATC to keep you out of the rocks or to provide
vertical separation with other aircraft. So don't think that you
can bluff your way out of Class A or B airspace by resetting your
altimeter.
I say that "ATC derives" because encoders are basically stupid.
They send your pressure altitude to the ATC computers. I have to
set the ATC computer to the local altimeter setting just like you
would do in your Kollsman window. The ATC computer then corrects
the pressure altitude from your mode-c and displays it to the
controller as an MSL altitude (when below 18,000 in the USA).
Above 18,000 feet everybody flies at a pressure altitude (Flight
Level) by setting the altimeter to 29.92. If the local pressure
is below 29.92, some of the lowest flight levels become unusable
for separation. They will not be a true 1,000' (or more) above
17,000. I'll leave that brain teaser for you to figure out. A
little note here - the ATC computer is actually set by an array
of digital altimeter setting indicators. The local pressure
setting is updated automatically once each minute. In a large
geographic area, the computer will apply the proper correction to
your mode-c based upon the adapted altimeter region that you are
flying. If the automatic altimeter interface fails, I can set
the altimeter manually. I am required to keep the ATC computer
within .02 inches of actual local pressure.
Now there's more than you wanted to know.....
Bill Hammond
Parker, CO
Series 6 - N913KF
skyflyte@comcast.net wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: skyflyte@comcast.net
>
> I have my static source behind the instrument panel, and it seems to work
well until I open the doors! There is also some error when doing a strong
slip to lose altitude. More importantly, the static errors will effect
your altimeter, and our encoder if you are using Mode C. There may be a
conflict between your indicated altitude, and that which is reported to ATC.
I'm not sure how much "off-altitude" you are permitted until the ATC/FAA
becomes interested.
>
> -------------- Original message --------------
> From: "scooby harrington" <scoobytrash@hotmail.com>
>
>
>>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "scooby harrington"
>>
>>I am having trouble figuring out where to put my static ports on my series
>>6. I have
>>combed the manual and cant find any reference to it at all, does anyone
know
>>where
>>I can find drawings showing where to put static ports?
>>
>>I searched the archives and found lots of threads about cabin air being
much
>>better
>>than a poorly located static port but no indication where the correct
>>location is.
>>
>>Thanks!
>>
>>Scooby
>>
>>On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice on how to
>>get there! http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=Retirement
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> I have my static source behind the instrument panel, and it seems to work
well until I open the doors! There is also some error when doing a strong
slip to lose altitude. More importantly, the static errors will effect your
altimeter, and our encoder if you are using Mode C. There may be a conflict
between your indicated altitude, and that which is reported to ATC. I'm not
sure how much "off-altitude" you are permitted until the ATC/FAA becomes
interested.
>
> -------------- Original message --------------
> From: "scooby harrington" scoobytrash@hotmail.com
>
> -- Kitfox-List message posted by: "scooby harrington"
<SCOOBYTRASH@HOTMAIL.COM>
>
> I am having trouble figuring out where to put my static ports on my
series
> 6. I have
> combed the manual and cant find any reference to it at all, does anyone
know
> where
> I can find drawings showing where to put static ports?
>
> I searched the archives and found lots of threads about cabin air being
much
> better
> than a poorly located static port but no indication where the correct
> location is.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Scooby
>
> On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice on how to
> get there! http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=R
> etirement
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: | Re: [Off-topic] Today's flight |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Fox5flyer" <morid@northland.lib.mi.us>
Now that's a runway! How long is it?
Deke
do not archive
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: James Shumaker
<jimshumaker@sbcglobal.net>
>
> Beautiful pictures of snow Micheal.
>
> Did you know that we also have snow in California? Yes, two or three
times a year we get the nearby peaks dusted with the white stuff. So
yesterday we went and played.
>
> http://www.sportflight.com/uploads/Bills_snow_uphill_climb.jpg
>
> This is what we call Sierra Cement, in spring time conditions. Somtimes
referred to as "slop". The runway is quite steep uphill. This is a picture
of taxiing up to the take-off turn around.
>
> Happy winter flying to you :-)
>
> Jim Shumaker
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: Toe in Toe Out |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: wwillyard@aol.com
-----Original Message-----
OK. You've convinced me that I have to get rid of the toe-in. (About 3/4
degree total.) I have covered tube gear. Has anybody bent their covered
tube gear without removing the covering? I really dread getting a wrinkle.
Guy Buchanan
K-IV 1200 / 582 / 99.9% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar.
Guy;
I bent mine after it was covered with no adverse effects.
Bill W.
Classic IV, 912ul
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: Toe in Toe Out |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Fox5flyer" <morid@northland.lib.mi.us>
I've never bent one myself, but this is an old and very well covered topic.
One thing that you need to be careful of when you use your cheater bar is to
twist the whole gear unit, not bend the axle. With some forethought it
shouldn't be difficult to come up with something that will work.
Deke
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Bradley M Webb" <bmwebb@cox.net>
>
> I'm convinced, and would like to know, as well.
>
> Bradley
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Guy Buchanan
> Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 1:21 AM
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Toe in Toe Out
>
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Guy Buchanan <bnn@nethere.com>
>
> OK. You've convinced me that I have to get rid of the toe-in. (About 3/4
> degree total.) I have covered tube gear. Has anybody bent their covered
> tube gear without removing the covering? I really dread getting a wrinkle.
>
>
> Guy Buchanan
> K-IV 1200 / 582 / 99.9% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar.
>
>
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: | GPS altitude. WAS: static port location on Series 6? |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
> From: Bradley M Webb [bmwebb@cox.net]
> But my altimeter reads very close to what my GPS says I'm at in flight.
Bradley, on the PocketFMS forum, we were currently discussing if we should have
a kind of glide slope indicator on the moving map and HSI display. Until someone
dug up a bench testing showing that aviation GPS have, at time, as much as
300 ft. altitude error readings. We immediately put the idea in the wastebin.
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: Toe in Toe Out |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Lowell Fitt" <lcfitt@sbcglobal.net>
Guy,
When I did mine, most of the bend was in the axle. I secured the airplane
per the article in the Kitfox Times and fitted a piece of pipe over a copper
pipe spacer to protect the threads on the axle and bent. I had to shim the
brake calipers afterwords to get them to run parallel to the rotors. Others
have put a large wrench on the weldment and bent the weldment.. I believe
mine was covered at the time.
I made a jig that secured the tail to the hangar floor with anchor bolts. I
still have it and it is available to anyone interested, for shipping.
Lowell
----- Original Message -----
From: "Guy Buchanan" <bnn@nethere.com>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 10:20 PM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Toe in Toe Out
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Guy Buchanan <bnn@nethere.com>
>
> OK. You've convinced me that I have to get rid of the toe-in. (About 3/4
> degree total.) I have covered tube gear. Has anybody bent their covered
> tube gear without removing the covering? I really dread getting a wrinkle.
>
>
> Guy Buchanan
> K-IV 1200 / 582 / 99.9% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar.
>
>
>
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: Toe in Toe Out |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Marco Menezes <msm_9949@yahoo.com>
Whoa up a minute Guy. 3/4 of a degree is not much. That's practically neutral.
IMHO you'll do no more damage to your fox by waiting until you see how it handles
on the ground before reefing on those weldments. You may decide to leave it
alone.
I have about 1 degree of toe in on my model 2. I can't say it's the most forgiving
taildragger I've ever landed, but it really ain't that bad. At least not
on grass. I might change my mind this Spring when I start trying pavement.
Start on grass and skip high speed taxi tests entirely. In my experience, that
part of the envelope is no place to get acquainted with your airplane.
Got my flak jacket on, so have at me.
Guy Buchanan <bnn@nethere.com> wrote:
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Guy Buchanan
OK. You've convinced me that I have to get rid of the toe-in. (About 3/4
degree total.) I have covered tube gear. Has anybody bent their covered
tube gear without removing the covering? I really dread getting a wrinkle.
Guy Buchanan
K-IV 1200 / 582 / 99.9% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar.
Marco Menezes
Model 2 582 N99KX
---------------------------------
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: | Rotec Radial Engine |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Don McIntosh" <don@contractorsnorthwest.com>
What are everyone's thoughts on putting the 110 HP Rotec radial engine on a
Series 7? I know it is 225# which is considerably heavier than a 912S but
it looks like a neat option.
Don
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: Rotec Radial Engine |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Alan & Linda Daniels <aldaniels@fmtc.com>
I like the idea. The weight is less than an O-235, and the CG of the
engine is farther back. I understand the engine is a work of art. It may
be my next Kitfox project. Some are flying and would like to hear from
them.
Don McIntosh wrote:
>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Don McIntosh" <don@contractorsnorthwest.com>
>
>What are everyone's thoughts on putting the 110 HP Rotec radial engine on a
>Series 7? I know it is 225# which is considerably heavier than a 912S but
>it looks like a neat option.
>
>
>
>Don
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: DAR is wrong |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Lynn Matteson <lynnmatt@jps.net>
I guess so, Lowell. He seemed to be right on top of everything else,
but he missed the gun on that call. Incidentally, I just got back from
visiting the good people at the FAA, and got my temporary Repairmen's
Certificate, so I'm good in that respect. The FAA guy told me that
things are changing so fast that it's tough for even them to keep up,
let alone somebody that doesn't work right there in the offices. This
FAA office is right on the Willow Run Airport, where they used to make
the B-25's during the war.
Lynn
Kitfox IV...Jabiru 2200
On Monday, March 13, 2006, at 05:36 PM, Lowell Fitt wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Lowell Fitt" <lcfitt@sbcglobal.net>
>
> Good for you Lynn. I thought DARs were thoroughly knowledgable types
> that
> were accepted because of special experience or training, like the old
> timer
> Tech Counselors that have hung around EAA chapters for several
> lifetimes.
> Sounds not.
>
> Lowell
>
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: [Off-topic] Today's flight |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
On Mar 14, 2006, at 12:58 AM, Mike Chaney wrote:
> I was wondering what that item is in the bottom of the third picture?
> It
> looks as if it is setting on top of your panel.
It's a Garmin iQue M5 PDA with GPS, Mike. The horizontal thing is the
GPS antenna that you fold out. I use it together with the program
PocketFMS. It's my best navigation companion. It is mounted on a handy
bracket, on the panel, and when I leave the plane, I just pull it out
and put it in my pocket. At home, I connect it to my PC and do all my
flight planning.
Here is a better view of it:
http://home.online.no/~michel/tmp/Eikern.jpg
Cheers,
Michel
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: | Got my Airworthiness Certificate! |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "ron schick" <roncarolnikko@hotmail.com>
Congrads John and Lynn. You can taxi test all you want without a license
I think, but don't get caught flying. I Crow hopped a lot before leaving
the field my first time anyway.
Ron NB Ore
do not archive
>From: Lynn Matteson <lynnmatt@jps.net>
>To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Kitfox-List: Got my Airworthiness Certificate!
>Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2006 15:39:09 -0500
>
>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Lynn Matteson <lynnmatt@jps.net>
>
>They tell me that I now have an airplane! I just got my AC, and now
>I'm a real airplane owner, not a project owner. It'll still be a
>project, but I'm that much closer to having something to fly...as soon
>as I get done with flight instruction, that is...and get the 40 hrs
>flown off, etc, etc....
>It's only been 18 and a half months, but it seems like an eternity
>since I drove to Texas and picked up this project, and now it's ready
>for test flying. One of these days I'll clean up the shop, but for now
>it's time to celebrate.
>
>Lynn
>Kitfox IV...Jabiru 2200
>
>
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: | GPS altitude. WAS: static port location on Series 6? |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Bradley M Webb" <bmwebb@cox.net>
Yes, I've heard that too. But was that when the U.S. Military degraded the
GPS signal? It's no longer degraded, and should be within 10 meters (?)
accuracy, IIRC.
Based on the way GPS works, that error is in all 3 dimensions, not just
altitude. GPS doesn't know or care which dimension you're in.
Bradley
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michel
Verheughe
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 8:47 AM
Subject: Kitfox-List: GPS altitude. WAS: static port location on Series 6?
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
> From: Bradley M Webb [bmwebb@cox.net]
> But my altimeter reads very close to what my GPS says I'm at in flight.
Bradley, on the PocketFMS forum, we were currently discussing if we should
have a kind of glide slope indicator on the moving map and HSI display.
Until someone dug up a bench testing showing that aviation GPS have, at
time, as much as 300 ft. altitude error readings. We immediately put the
idea in the wastebin.
Cheers,
Michel
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: | GPS altitude. WAS: static port location on Series 6? |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Bradley M Webb" <bmwebb@cox.net>
Check this page out: http://users.erols.com/dlwilson/gps.html
Bradley
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bradley M Webb
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 5:14 PM
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: GPS altitude. WAS: static port location on Series
6?
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Bradley M Webb" <bmwebb@cox.net>
Yes, I've heard that too. But was that when the U.S. Military degraded the
GPS signal? It's no longer degraded, and should be within 10 meters (?)
accuracy, IIRC.
Based on the way GPS works, that error is in all 3 dimensions, not just
altitude. GPS doesn't know or care which dimension you're in.
Bradley
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michel
Verheughe
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 8:47 AM
Subject: Kitfox-List: GPS altitude. WAS: static port location on Series 6?
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
> From: Bradley M Webb [bmwebb@cox.net]
> But my altimeter reads very close to what my GPS says I'm at in flight.
Bradley, on the PocketFMS forum, we were currently discussing if we should
have a kind of glide slope indicator on the moving map and HSI display.
Until someone dug up a bench testing showing that aviation GPS have, at
time, as much as 300 ft. altitude error readings. We immediately put the
idea in the wastebin.
Cheers,
Michel
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: Toe in Toe Out |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Cudnohufsky's" <7suds@chartermi.net>
All,
Have been following the toe in /out thing and when I built my 4 I had tube
gear and I used the cheater pipe over the axle method to set my gear angle,
it did not take much to get there, I do not remember how much it was out,
not much as I recall, but I set them slightly out and vertical, no regrets,
landed on everything with it. My 2-Cents worth, and starting on grass is a
good idea, but if your track is off it will be a different ride on the
pavement.
Lloyd
----- Original Message -----
From: "Marco Menezes" <msm_9949@yahoo.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 10:15 AM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Toe in Toe Out
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Marco Menezes <msm_9949@yahoo.com>
>
> Whoa up a minute Guy. 3/4 of a degree is not much. That's practically
> neutral. IMHO you'll do no more damage to your fox by waiting until you
> see how it handles on the ground before reefing on those weldments. You
> may decide to leave it alone.
>
> I have about 1 degree of toe in on my model 2. I can't say it's the most
> forgiving taildragger I've ever landed, but it really ain't that bad. At
> least not on grass. I might change my mind this Spring when I start trying
> pavement.
>
> Start on grass and skip high speed taxi tests entirely. In my experience,
> that part of the envelope is no place to get acquainted with your
> airplane.
>
> Got my flak jacket on, so have at me.
>
> Guy Buchanan <bnn@nethere.com> wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Guy Buchanan
>
> OK. You've convinced me that I have to get rid of the toe-in. (About 3/4
> degree total.) I have covered tube gear. Has anybody bent their covered
> tube gear without removing the covering? I really dread getting a wrinkle.
>
>
> Guy Buchanan
> K-IV 1200 / 582 / 99.9% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar.
>
>
> Marco Menezes
> Model 2 582 N99KX
>
> ---------------------------------
>
>
>
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: Rotec Radial Engine |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Marco Menezes <msm_9949@yahoo.com>
Saw the Rotec display at Airventure 2005. It's a work of art and would look great
hanging from a Kitfox, round cowl and all (tho it probably won't fit in the
round cowl we're accustomed to).
do not archive
Alan & Linda Daniels <aldaniels@fmtc.com> wrote:
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Alan & Linda Daniels
I like the idea. The weight is less than an O-235, and the CG of the
engine is farther back. I understand the engine is a work of art. It may
be my next Kitfox project. Some are flying and would like to hear from
them.
Don McIntosh wrote:
>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Don McIntosh"
>
>What are everyone's thoughts on putting the 110 HP Rotec radial engine on a
>Series 7? I know it is 225# which is considerably heavier than a 912S but
>it looks like a neat option.
>
>
>
>Don
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Marco Menezes
Model 2 582 N99KX
---------------------------------
Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.
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: Toe in Toe Out |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Guy Buchanan <bnn@nethere.com>
At 08:15 AM 3/14/2006, you wrote:
>Whoa up a minute Guy. 3/4 of a degree is not much.
Thanks Marco, Bill and the rest who replied. I think Marco's right,
especially since I don't intend to do the first flight, but to let an
experienced Kitfox flyer do it. If they think it squirrelly, it won't take
long to alter. Later I can ground loop it myself! =-O
Guy Buchanan
K-IV 1200 / 582 / 99.9% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar.
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: Rotec Radial Engine |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Fox5flyer" <morid@northland.lib.mi.us>
No, it won't fit the round cowl. There was (or still may be) somebody on
this list who installed one on his Kitfox. Haven't heard anything since.
Deke
----- Original Message -----
From: "Marco Menezes" <msm_9949@yahoo.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 6:05 PM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Rotec Radial Engine
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Marco Menezes <msm_9949@yahoo.com>
>
> Saw the Rotec display at Airventure 2005. It's a work of art and would
look great hanging from a Kitfox, round cowl and all (tho it probably won't
fit in the round cowl we're accustomed to).
>
> do not archive
>
> Alan & Linda Daniels <aldaniels@fmtc.com> wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Alan & Linda Daniels
>
> I like the idea. The weight is less than an O-235, and the CG of the
> engine is farther back. I understand the engine is a work of art. It may
> be my next Kitfox project. Some are flying and would like to hear from
> them.
>
> Don McIntosh wrote:
>
> >--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Don McIntosh"
> >
> >What are everyone's thoughts on putting the 110 HP Rotec radial engine on
a
> >Series 7? I know it is 225# which is considerably heavier than a 912S but
> >it looks like a neat option.
> >
> >
> >
> >Don
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> Marco Menezes
> Model 2 582 N99KX
>
> ---------------------------------
> Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.
>
>
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: [Off-topic] Today's flight |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: James Shumaker <jimshumaker@sbcglobal.net>
Deke
This picture makes it look just a little more interesting than it really is.
It is about 2000 feet to the water which marks the beginning of the runway.
Bit it is uphill, into a mountain, narrow, has trees to dive over on approach
and the snow makes it slippery. The worst part is taxiing up the crowned runway
and no visibility over the nose.
My friend flies his Beech Bonanza into it easily. But he is the only pilot that
does fly in easily.
Jim Shumaker
Fox5flyer <morid@northland.lib.mi.us> wrote:
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Fox5flyer"
Now that's a runway! How long is it?
Deke
do not archive
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: James Shumaker
>
> Beautiful pictures of snow Micheal.
>
> Did you know that we also have snow in California? Yes, two or three
times a year we get the nearby peaks dusted with the white stuff. So
yesterday we went and played.
>
> http://www.sportflight.com/uploads/Bills_snow_uphill_climb.jpg
>
> This is what we call Sierra Cement, in spring time conditions. Somtimes
referred to as "slop". The runway is quite steep uphill. This is a picture
of taxiing up to the take-off turn around.
>
> Happy winter flying to you :-)
>
> Jim Shumaker
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: Rotec Radial Engine |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Marco Menezes <msm_9949@yahoo.com>
I think you're right Deke. If i'm not mistaken there's a picture on Frappr of a
cowl-less Rotec on a Ktifox. In Great Britain maybe??
Marco
do not archive
Fox5flyer <morid@northland.lib.mi.us> wrote:
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Fox5flyer"
No, it won't fit the round cowl. There was (or still may be) somebody on
this list who installed one on his Kitfox. Haven't heard anything since.
Deke
----- Original Message -----
From: "Marco Menezes"
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 6:05 PM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Rotec Radial Engine
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Marco Menezes
>
> Saw the Rotec display at Airventure 2005. It's a work of art and would
look great hanging from a Kitfox, round cowl and all (tho it probably won't
fit in the round cowl we're accustomed to).
>
> do not archive
>
> Alan & Linda Daniels wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Alan & Linda Daniels
>
> I like the idea. The weight is less than an O-235, and the CG of the
> engine is farther back. I understand the engine is a work of art. It may
> be my next Kitfox project. Some are flying and would like to hear from
> them.
>
> Don McIntosh wrote:
>
> >--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Don McIntosh"
> >
> >What are everyone's thoughts on putting the 110 HP Rotec radial engine on
a
> >Series 7? I know it is 225# which is considerably heavier than a 912S but
> >it looks like a neat option.
> >
> >
> >
> >Don
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> Marco Menezes
> Model 2 582 N99KX
>
> ---------------------------------
> Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.
>
>
---------------------------------
Find great deals to the top 10 hottest destinations!
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: Rotec Radial Engine |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Richard Rabbers" <rira1950@yahoo.com>
I'd assumed the photo on the home page of http://www.sportplanellc.com/
is a Rotec.
If not..... sorry.
--------
Richard in SW Michigan
Model 1 / 618 lotus floats (restoration)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=21857#21857
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: | Re: Rotec Radial Engine |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Roger Standley" <taildragon@msn.com>
Maybe someone will remember...some time back, there was a link to video of a Rotec
running on a KitFox.
----- Original Message -----
From: Marco Menezes<mailto:msm_9949@yahoo.com>
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com<mailto:kitfox-list@matronics.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 7:08 PM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Rotec Radial Engine
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Marco Menezes <msm_9949@yahoo.com<mailto:msm_9949@yahoo.com>>
I think you're right Deke. If i'm not mistaken there's a picture on Frappr of
a cowl-less Rotec on a Ktifox. In Great Britain maybe??
Marco
do not archive
Fox5flyer <morid@northland.lib.mi.us<mailto:morid@northland.lib.mi.us>> wrote:
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Fox5flyer"
No, it won't fit the round cowl. There was (or still may be) somebody on
this list who installed one on his Kitfox. Haven't heard anything since.
Deke
----- Original Message -----
From: "Marco Menezes"
To:
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 6:05 PM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Rotec Radial Engine
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Marco Menezes
>
> Saw the Rotec display at Airventure 2005. It's a work of art and would
look great hanging from a Kitfox, round cowl and all (tho it probably won't
fit in the round cowl we're accustomed to).
>
> do not archive
>
> Alan & Linda Daniels wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Alan & Linda Daniels
>
> I like the idea. The weight is less than an O-235, and the CG of the
> engine is farther back. I understand the engine is a work of art. It may
> be my next Kitfox project. Some are flying and would like to hear from
> them.
>
> Don McIntosh wrote:
>
> >--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Don McIntosh"
> >
> >What are everyone's thoughts on putting the 110 HP Rotec radial engine on
a
> >Series 7? I know it is 225# which is considerably heavier than a 912S but
> >it looks like a neat option.
> >
> >
> >
> >Don
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Marco Menezes
> Model 2 582 N99KX
>
> ---------------------------------
> Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
---------------------------------
Find great deals to the top 10 hottest destinations!
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: | Rotec Radial Engine |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Don Pearsall" <donpearsall@comcast.net>
Here is a link from the Rotec site of a KF starting up with a Rotec radial.
http://www.rotecradialengines.com/Clips/startup.mpg
Don Pearsall
----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Roger Standley
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 8:17 PM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Rotec Radial Engine
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Roger Standley" <taildragon@msn.com>
Maybe someone will remember...some time back, there was a link to video of a
Rotec running on a KitFox.
----- Original Message -----
From: Marco Menezes<mailto:msm_9949@yahoo.com>
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com<mailto:kitfox-list@matronics.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 7:08 PM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Rotec Radial Engine
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Marco Menezes
<msm_9949@yahoo.com<mailto:msm_9949@yahoo.com>>
I think you're right Deke. If i'm not mistaken there's a picture on Frappr
of a cowl-less Rotec on a Ktifox. In Great Britain maybe??
Marco
do not archive
Fox5flyer <morid@northland.lib.mi.us<mailto:morid@northland.lib.mi.us>>
wrote:
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Fox5flyer"
No, it won't fit the round cowl. There was (or still may be) somebody on
this list who installed one on his Kitfox. Haven't heard anything since.
Deke
----- Original Message -----
From: "Marco Menezes"
To:
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 6:05 PM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Rotec Radial Engine
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Marco Menezes
>
> Saw the Rotec display at Airventure 2005. It's a work of art and would
look great hanging from a Kitfox, round cowl and all (tho it probably
won't
fit in the round cowl we're accustomed to).
>
> do not archive
>
> Alan & Linda Daniels wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Alan & Linda Daniels
>
> I like the idea. The weight is less than an O-235, and the CG of the
> engine is farther back. I understand the engine is a work of art. It may
> be my next Kitfox project. Some are flying and would like to hear from
> them.
>
> Don McIntosh wrote:
>
> >--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Don McIntosh"
> >
> >What are everyone's thoughts on putting the 110 HP Rotec radial engine
on
a
> >Series 7? I know it is 225# which is considerably heavier than a 912S
but
> >it looks like a neat option.
> >
> >
> >
> >Don
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Marco Menezes
> Model 2 582 N99KX
>
> ---------------------------------
> Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
---------------------------------
Find great deals to the top 10 hottest destinations!
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: Rotec Radial Engine |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Roger Standley" <taildragon@msn.com>
Here is the link:
www.rotecradialengines.com/clips/startup.mpg<http://www.rotecradialengines.com/clips/startup.mpg>
----- Original Message -----
From: Marco Menezes<mailto:msm_9949@yahoo.com>
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com<mailto:kitfox-list@matronics.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 7:08 PM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Rotec Radial Engine
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Marco Menezes <msm_9949@yahoo.com<mailto:msm_9949@yahoo.com>>
I think you're right Deke. If i'm not mistaken there's a picture on Frappr of
a cowl-less Rotec on a Ktifox. In Great Britain maybe??
Marco
do not archive
Fox5flyer <morid@northland.lib.mi.us<mailto:morid@northland.lib.mi.us>> wrote:
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Fox5flyer"
No, it won't fit the round cowl. There was (or still may be) somebody on
this list who installed one on his Kitfox. Haven't heard anything since.
Deke
----- Original Message -----
From: "Marco Menezes"
To:
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 6:05 PM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Rotec Radial Engine
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Marco Menezes
>
> Saw the Rotec display at Airventure 2005. It's a work of art and would
look great hanging from a Kitfox, round cowl and all (tho it probably won't
fit in the round cowl we're accustomed to).
>
> do not archive
>
> Alan & Linda Daniels wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Alan & Linda Daniels
>
> I like the idea. The weight is less than an O-235, and the CG of the
> engine is farther back. I understand the engine is a work of art. It may
> be my next Kitfox project. Some are flying and would like to hear from
> them.
>
> Don McIntosh wrote:
>
> >--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Don McIntosh"
> >
> >What are everyone's thoughts on putting the 110 HP Rotec radial engine on
a
> >Series 7? I know it is 225# which is considerably heavier than a 912S but
> >it looks like a neat option.
> >
> >
> >
> >Don
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Marco Menezes
> Model 2 582 N99KX
>
> ---------------------------------
> Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
---------------------------------
Find great deals to the top 10 hottest destinations!
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! --
|