---------------------------------------------------------- Kitfox-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Tue 03/14/06: 26 ---------------------------------------------------------- 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 _____________________________________ Time: 03:54:50 AM PST US From: "Fox5flyer" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: static port location on Series 6? --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Fox5flyer" Good primer Bill. Thanks. Deke retired (long time) atc > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Bill Hammond > > 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" > > > > > >>--> 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" > > > > 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 _____________________________________ Time: 03:54:50 AM PST US From: "Bradley M Webb" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Toe in Toe Out --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Bradley M Webb" 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 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 _____________________________________ Time: 03:54:50 AM PST US From: "Bradley M Webb" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: static port location on Series 6? --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Bradley M Webb" 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 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" > > >>--> 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" > > 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 _____________________________________ Time: 03:57:42 AM PST US From: "Fox5flyer" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: [Off-topic] Today's flight --> 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 5 _____________________________________ Time: 04:22:58 AM PST US From: wwillyard@aol.com Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: 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 _____________________________________ Time: 04:43:25 AM PST US From: "Fox5flyer" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Toe in Toe Out --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Fox5flyer" 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" > > 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 > > 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 _____________________________________ Time: 05:49:04 AM PST US From: Michel Verheughe Subject: Kitfox-List: GPS altitude. WAS: static port location on Series 6? --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe > 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 _____________________________________ Time: 06:51:14 AM PST US From: "Lowell Fitt" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Toe in Toe Out --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Lowell Fitt" 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" Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 10:20 PM Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Toe in Toe Out > --> 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. > > > ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 08:18:20 AM PST US From: Marco Menezes Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Toe in Toe Out --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Marco Menezes 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 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 ____________________________________ Time: 08:52:08 AM PST US From: "Don McIntosh" Subject: Kitfox-List: Rotec Radial Engine --> 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 ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 09:27:11 AM PST US From: Alan & Linda Daniels Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Rotec Radial Engine --> 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 > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 11:01:49 AM PST US Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: DAR is wrong From: Lynn Matteson --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Lynn Matteson 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" > > 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 ____________________________________ Time: 11:51:05 AM PST US From: Michel Verheughe Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: [Off-topic] Today's flight --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe 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 ____________________________________ Time: 02:08:31 PM PST US From: "ron schick" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Got my Airworthiness Certificate! --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "ron schick" 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 >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 > >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 ____________________________________ Time: 02:14:26 PM PST US From: "Bradley M Webb" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: GPS altitude. WAS: static port location on Series 6? --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Bradley M Webb" 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 > 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 ____________________________________ Time: 02:32:11 PM PST US From: "Bradley M Webb" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: GPS altitude. WAS: static port location on Series 6? --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Bradley M Webb" 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" 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 > 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 ____________________________________ Time: 02:32:11 PM PST US From: "Cudnohufsky's" <7suds@Chartermi.net> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: 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" Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 10:15 AM Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Toe in Toe Out > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Marco Menezes > > 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 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 ____________________________________ Time: 03:08:48 PM PST US From: Marco Menezes 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. ________________________________ Message 19 ____________________________________ Time: 04:34:07 PM PST US From: Guy Buchanan Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Toe in Toe Out --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Guy Buchanan 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 ____________________________________ Time: 05:16:47 PM PST US From: "Fox5flyer" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Rotec Radial Engine --> 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. > > ________________________________ Message 21 ____________________________________ Time: 05:36:16 PM PST US From: James Shumaker Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: [Off-topic] Today's flight --> Kitfox-List message posted by: James Shumaker 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 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 ____________________________________ Time: 07:13:07 PM PST US From: Marco Menezes Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Rotec Radial Engine --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Marco Menezes 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 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 ____________________________________ Time: 08:08:38 PM PST US Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Rotec Radial Engine From: "Richard Rabbers" --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Richard Rabbers" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 08:21:15 PM PST US From: "Roger Standley" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Rotec Radial Engine --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Roger Standley" 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 To: 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 > 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 > 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 ____________________________________ Time: 08:40:27 PM PST US From: "Don Pearsall" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Rotec Radial Engine --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Don Pearsall" 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" 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 To: 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 > 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 > 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 ____________________________________ Time: 08:45:46 PM PST US From: "Roger Standley" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Rotec Radial Engine --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Roger Standley" Here is the link: www.rotecradialengines.com/clips/startup.mpg ----- Original Message ----- From: Marco Menezes To: 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 > 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 > 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!