Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 02:50 AM - Re: Question on oil (synthetic and 100LL) (Ceashman@aol.com)
2. 04:17 AM - Re: Kitfox IV-1200 BRS mount (Dan Billingsley)
3. 04:31 AM - Re: Re: Annual on Kitfox III (Lynn Matteson)
4. 05:48 AM - Re: Question on oil (synthetic and 100LL) (Rexster)
5. 07:05 AM - Re: Rotax 9XX: TCP, Dip stick, Hydraulic Lock (PWilson)
6. 08:13 AM - Re: Repairmans cert and the FAA... WAS: Annual on Kitfox III (Bradley M Webb)
7. 11:17 AM - Re: Re: Annual on Kitfox III (Don Smythe)
8. 11:25 AM - Re: need landing gear (GRPP)
9. 12:18 PM - Re: Bent Model IV for sale (GRPP)
10. 01:16 PM - Aircraft Model, Engine etc (Lowell Fitt)
11. 03:34 PM - Re: Aircraft Model, Engine etc (John Anderson)
12. 03:42 PM - Re: [Off-topic] Flight to Germany (John Anderson)
13. 05:26 PM - Re: Aircraft Model, Engine etc (Ted Palamarek)
14. 05:44 PM - Re: Aircraft Model, Engine etc (Dan Billingsley)
15. 06:19 PM - Re: Kitfox IV-1200 BRS mount (parahawk)
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: Question on oil (synthetic and 100LL) |
How about this angle to the thread?
We know that Rotax states that the 912 motor requires synthetic (with no 100
LL) or semi synthetic (for when 100 LL) is being used, for reason of lubing
the reduction drive.
But how about if you purchase the TCP lead scavenger fuel additive from John
at Sport Plane LLC / Kitfox. ( side note: John, why don't you have your
S.P.llc catalogue on your Kitfox site ?)
The way I am thinking of this is; If I use the TCP to remove the lead, then
there is no issue with the oil I use and we could use full synthetic.
Any thoughts on this?
Another question. (New topic, KITFOX 912 OIL TANK DIP STICK)
For us who have the 912 with the oil tank behind and above the motor.
Why are we using the new replacement dip stick?
I know that there was a Rotax service memo about this.
This will only load the system more than full and you get a dirty belly or
you get hydraulic lock after the plane sits for a while and gravity drained the
oil to the lowest places.
This happened to me. It is a good thing that I always hand prop a couple of
times with power off. I would hate to think of what would happen if I used the
starter! Could have bent something.
Has anyone had the hydraulic lock problem?
Eric, Atlanta.
Mark,
All I know about this subject is from the Rotax bulletin on preferred oils
and the Rotax seminars.
Synthetics are recommended by them for unleaded fuels only. When using
occasional leaded fuels they recommend a synthetic blend or full mineral if
using 100 LL.
If you would like to read their bulletin on this, follow the links below to
the numbered bulletin. When I change oil, I wipe down the oil tank with a
papertowl and without fail, if I have been using 100LL as in a long cross
country, I get a pasty residue from the tank. It is light gray colored.
With the exception of the gear additive recommended by Rotax because the
engine oil also lubricates the gear box, I am comfortable with their general
recommendations for all four stroke engine types.
It would be good of course to have other data from other engine types to
eliminate the need to extrapolate.
http://www.rotax-owner.com/
SERVICE DOCUMENT RETRIEVAL SYSTEM
SI-18-1997 (2004)
SI-912-016 (2006)
Lowell
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Thompson" <kr2@earthlink.net>
Sent: Friday, September 15, 2006 3:45 AM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Question on oil
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Mark Thompson" <kr2@earthlink.net>
>
> Lowel what do you think about running fully synthetic oil in an air cooled
> VW engine using 100LL,........I hope this is ok because I am fly this
> morning to fuel up again with 100LL,This will be the first flight using
> synthetic oil..............
>
>
>> [Original Message]
>> From: Lowell Fitt <lcfitt@sbcglobal.net>
>> To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
>> Date: 9/10/2006 12:08:14 PM
>> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Question on oil
>>
>> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Lowell Fitt" <lcfitt@sbcglobal.net>
>>
>> Dee,
>>
>> The value in a full synthetic is the higher temps they can tolerate, the
> hit
>> is their inability to keep the lead residues in suspension. If you fly
>> strictly with car gas, the synthetic should be fine. If you occasionally
>> use 100LL then you might want to avoid synthetics. This from the Rotax
> oil
>> recommendation bulletin. The Rotax 912 series engines use the same oil
> in
>> the engine as well as the gear box so they recommend a motorcycle engine
> oil
>> with the gear additive. If your engine is similar, you might want to
> check
>> the Rotax owners association website for info.
>>
>> Lowell
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Kitfox IV-1200 BRS mount |
Attached are some diagrams that BRS sent me when I was looking into a chute. These
however aren't for a soft pak (canister), but they will show how the chords
are mounted. I would think BRS would have the same info for a soft pak...jsut
ask em.
Dan, Mesa
KF-IV 912-s / building
kurt schrader <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com> wrote:
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader
When I looked into installing one, the proceedure was
to have it fire out thru the side of the fuselage just
behind the baggage compartment. This is so if you
have a wing fold over the top, the rocket isn't
blocked.
This installation has to be done before covering
though. The rocket has no problem shooting thru the
fabric, but the chute lines are run up and over the
right side top structure right under the turtledeck.
When the rocket fires, the chute is pulled out thru
the side and the lines rip the fabric up to this
point. Then the turtledeck is ripped lose and the
overhead canopy is torn off too. The shroud lines are
connected to the four corners of the cockpit to wing
structure, so it will hang relatively level from
there.
You will have some damage from its use, but a lot less
than without it.
The alternative is the somewhat aerodynamic hard pack
mounted on top of the cabin, but it sounds like you
already have the soft pack.
A velcroed door built into the turtledeck for the
rocket and parachute to shoot up thru is another
choice. The turtledeck and top canopy are still going
to be torn up a bit though, depending on where you run
the lines to the wing/fuse hard points.
It has been 6 years since I looked into this. Maybe
BRS has some new methods?
Kurt S.
--- parahawk wrote:
> Can anyone help me with info about the best location
> to mount the 1350 softpack BRS and what modifactions
> have to be done to the plexiglass above the rocket.
> Or is there a way to install it outside on top ??
>
> I am looking for ideas.
>
> Thanks a lot
__________________________________________________
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: | Re: Annual on Kitfox III |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Lynn Matteson <lynnmatt@jps.net>
John-
I questioned this "after the 40 hours" on this group...was told not
true...called the FAA...they said come on over and get it, and I
did...during the 40.
Lynn
On Friday, September 15, 2006, at 06:44 PM, John Oakley wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "John Oakley" <john@leptron.com>
>
> Andrew,
> A repairman's Cert. Is required on an experimental, IF you did build
> it you
> only have to request and apply for it after the 40 hours. Otherwise
> you are
> in violation..
>
> John Oakley
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Andrew
> Matthaey
> Sent: Friday, September 15, 2006 1:52 PM
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Re: Annual on Kitfox III
>
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Andrew Matthaey"
> <spaghettiohead@hotmail.com>
>
> Marco - I could be wrong - but a "Repairman's Certificate" is only for
> LSA,
> no? Rich's 'Fox is an Experimental-AB, therefore, the builder does not
> need
> any additional cert's.
>
> Andrew
> KF3
>
>
>> From: Marco Menezes <msm_9949@yahoo.com>
>> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Re: Annual on Kitfox III
>> Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2006 08:15:43 -0700 (PDT)
>>
>> I think Andrew's right that builder can sign off on annual "condition
>> inspection" . . . but only if builder applied for and received FAA
>> "repairman's certificate" for the airplane.
>>
>>
>>
>> Andrew Matthaey <spaghettiohead@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Andrew Matthaey"
>>
>> Hmm...that's a tough call then! The builder, since he is the
>> "manufacturer"
>> can sign off an annual - It might be worth checking out...and heck,
>> if he
>> is
>> alive, then he might get a kick out of seeing the plane he built!
>>
>> Andrew
>> KF3
>>
>>
>>> From: "RichWill"
>>> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
>>> Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Annual on Kitfox III
>>> Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2006 18:25:06 -0700
>>>
>>> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "RichWill"
>>>
>>> How does that work? He can do and/or sign off..yes? I am 2nd owner
>>> and
>>> it's been 14years since the plane was built.. I have address and
>>> name..
>> but
>>> frankly.. Think the guy might have even passed away..
>>>
>>> --------
>>> Semper Fi
>>> 15 ITT
>>> G2 HqCo HqBn
>>> 1st MarDiv
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Read this topic online here:
>>>
>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=61710#61710
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Marco Menezes
>> Model 2 582 N99KX
>>
>> ---------------------------------
>
> _________________________________________________________________
>
>
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: Question on oil (synthetic and 100LL) |
Ceashman,
I don't believe the reduction gear is the reason for the synthetic/se
mi-synthetic oils you mention. Motorcycle oils have an additive that hel
ps prevent the "shearing" of oil for their trannys, so a motorcycle oil
grade oil should be used. The problem is that lead in aviation fuel isn'
t compatable with synthetic oil due to its suspension in the oil. TCP do
esn't eliminate lead. It softens it and "helps" it to leave the engine o
ut the exhaust. I wouldn't use synthetic oil with aviation fuel even wit
h TCP.
On your second question, the higher level of oil required (on dip stic
k) is an answer to some foaming of the oil in the oil tank. If there's e
nough foam instead of liquid oil, you could starve your engine. I don't
believe the higher level will make your engine any more likely to get pa
st the oil pump. The position where the pump stops determines that. Late
r models of Foxes lowered the entire location of the tank to reduce this
tendency. Also, Rotax's choice of oils has to do with ones that don't f
oam as much as others. I use Honda HP4 semi synthetic motorcycle oil and
have 557 trouble free hours.
Just my understanding after taking two Rotax four stroke classes. If y
ou get a chance to take them, they're very good. Eric Tucker does a grea
t job of covering that engine. I hope I got this info right.
Rex in Michigan
-- Ceashman@aol.com wrote:
How about this angle to the thread? We know that Rotax states that the 9
12 motor requires synthetic (with no 100 LL) or semi synthetic (for when
100 LL) is being used, for reason of lubing the reduction drive. But ho
w about if you purchase the TCP lead scavenger fuel additive from John a
t Sport Plane LLC / Kitfox. ( side note: John, why don't you have your S
.P.llc catalogue on your Kitfox site ?)The way I am thinking of this is;
If I use the TCP to remove the lead, then there is no issue with the oi
l I use and we could use full synthetic. Any thoughts on this? Another q
uestion. (New topic, KITFOX 912 OIL TANK DIP STICK)For us who have the 9
12 with the oil tank behind and above the motor. Why are we using the ne
w replacement dip stick? I know that there was a Rotax service memo abou
t this.This will only load the system more than full and you get a dirty
belly or you get hydraulic lock after the plane sits for a while and gr
avity drained the oil to the lowest places.This happened to me. It is a
good thing that I always hand prop a couple of times with power off. I w
ould hate to think of what would happen if I used the starter! Could hav
e bent something. Has anyone had the hydraulic lock problem? Eric, Atlan
ta. Mark,
All I know about this subject is from the Rotax bulletin on preferred oi
ls
and the Rotax seminars.
Synthetics are recommended by them for unleaded fuels only. When using
occasional leaded fuels they recommend a synthetic blend or full mineral
if
using 100 LL.
If you would like to read their bulletin on this, follow the links below
to
the numbered bulletin. When I change oil, I wipe down the oil tank with
a
papertowl and without fail, if I have been using 100LL as in a long cros
s
country, I get a pasty residue from the tank. It is light gray colored.
With the exception of the gear additive recommended by Rotax because the
engine oil also lubricates the gear box, I am comfortable with their gen
eral
recommendations for all four stroke engine types.
It would be good of course to have other data from other engine types to
eliminate the need to extrapolate.
http://www.rotax-owner.com/
SERVICE DOCUMENT RETRIEVAL SYSTEM
SI-18-1997 (2004)
SI-912-016 (2006)
Lowell
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Thompson" <kr2@earthlink.net>
Sent: Friday, September 15, 2006 3:45 AM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Question on oil
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Mark Thompson" <kr2@earthlink.net>
>
> Lowel what do you think about running fully synthetic oil in an air co
oled
> VW engine using 100LL,........I hope this is ok because I am fly this
> morning to fuel up again with 100LL,This will be the first flight usin
g
> synthetic oil..............
>
>
>> [Original Message]
>> From: Lowell Fitt <lcfitt@sbcglobal.net>
>> To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
>> Date: 9/10/2006 12:08:14 PM
>> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Question on oil
>>
>> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Lowell Fitt" <lcfitt@sbcglobal.ne
t>
>>
>> Dee,
>>
>> The value in a full synthetic is the higher temps they can tolerate,
the
> hit
>> is their inability to keep the lead residues in suspension. If you f
ly
>> strictly with car gas, the synthetic should be fine. If you occasion
ally
>> use 100LL then you might want to avoid synthetics. This from the Rot
ax
> oil
>> recommendation bulletin. The Rotax 912 series engines use the same o
il
> in
>> the engine as well as the gear box so they recommend a motorcycle eng
ine
> oil
>> with the gear additive. If your engine is similar, you might want to
> check
>> the Rotax owners association website for info.
>>
>> Lowell
========================
========================
========================
========================
========================
========================
========================
========================
================
<html><P>Ceashman,</P>
<P> I don't believe the reduction gear is the reason for the
synthetic/semi-synthetic oils you mention. Motorcycle oils have an addi
tive that helps prevent the "shearing" of oil for their trannys, so a mo
torcycle oil grade oil should be used. The problem is that lead in aviat
ion fuel isn't compatable with synthetic oil due to its suspension in th
e oil. TCP doesn't eliminate lead. It softens it and "helps" it to leave
the engine out the exhaust. I wouldn't use synthetic oil with aviation
fuel even with TCP.</P>
<P> On your second question, the higher level of oil required (on
dip stick) is an answer to some foaming of the oil in the oil tank. If t
here's enough foam instead of liquid oil, you could starve your engine.
I don't believe the higher level will make your engine any more likely t
o get past the oil pump. The position where the pump stops determines th
at. Later models of Foxes lowered the entire location of the tank to red
uce this tendency. Also, Rotax's choice of oils has to do with ones that
don't foam as much as others. I use Honda HP4 semi synthetic motorcycle
oil and have 557 trouble free hours.</P>
<P> Just my understanding after taking two Rotax four stroke class
es. If you get a chance to take them, they're very good. Eric Tucker doe
s a great job of covering that engine. I hope I got this info right.</P>
<P>Rex in Michigan<BR><BR>-- Ceashman@aol.com wrote:<BR></P>
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2963" name=GENERATOR>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000a0>How about this angle to the thread?</FONT></D
IV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000a0></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000a0>We know that Rotax states that the 912 motor
requires synthetic (with no 100 LL) or semi synthetic (for when 100 LL)
is being used, for reason of lubing the reduction drive.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000a0></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000a0>But how about if you purchase the TCP lead sc
avenger fuel additive from John at Sport Plane LLC / Kitfox. ( side note
: John, why don't you have your S.P.llc catalogue on your Kitfox site ?)
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000a0>The way I am thinking of this is; If I use th
e TCP to remove the lead, then there is no issue with the oil I use and
we could use full synthetic.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000a0></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000a0>Any thoughts on this?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000a0></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000a0><FONT size=3><U>Another question</U>. (New
topic, KITFOX 912 OIL TANK DIP STICK)</FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000a0 size=3>For us who have the 912 with the oil
tank behind and above the motor. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000a0><FONT size=3><U>Why are we using the new re
placement dip stick?</U> </FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000a0 size=3>I know that there was a Rotax servic
e memo about this.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000a0 size=3>This will only load the system more
than full and you get a dirty belly or you get hydraulic lock after the
plane sits for a while and gravity drained the oil to the lowest places.
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000a0 size=3>This happened to me. It is a good th
ing that I always hand prop a couple of times with power off. I would ha
te to think of what would happen if I used the starter! Could have bent
something.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000a0 size=3></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000a0 size=3>Has anyone had the hydraulic lo
ck problem?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000a0 size=3></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000a0 size=3>Eric, Atlanta.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Mark,<BR><BR>All I know about this subject is from the Rotax bullet
in on preferred oils <BR>and the Rotax seminars.<BR><BR>Synthetics are r
ecommended by them for unleaded fuels only. When using <BR>occasio
nal leaded fuels they recommend a synthetic blend or full mineral if <BR
>using 100 LL.<BR><BR>If you would like to read their bulletin on this,
follow the links below to <BR>the numbered bulletin. When I change
oil, I wipe down the oil tank with a <BR>papertowl and without fail, if
I have been using 100LL as in a long cross <BR>country, I get a pasty r
esidue from the tank. It is light gray colored. <BR>With the excep
tion of the gear additive recommended by Rotax because the <BR><BR>engin
e oil also lubricates the gear box, I am comfortable with their general
<BR>recommendations for all four stroke engine types.<BR><BR>It would be
good of course to have other data from other engine types to <BR>elimin
ate the need to extrapolate.<BR><BR><BR>http://www.rotax-owner.com/<BR><
BR>SERVICE DOCUMENT RETRIEVAL SYSTEM<BR><BR><BR><BR>SI-18-1997 &nb
sp; (2004)<BR><BR>SI-912-016 (2006)<BR><BR>Lowell<BR><BR><B
R>----- Original Message ----- <BR>From: "Mark Thompson" <kr2@earthli
nk.net><BR>To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com><BR>Sent: Friday, Sep
tember 15, 2006 3:45 AM<BR>Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Question on oil<BR>
<BR><BR>> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Mark Thompson" <k
r2@earthlink.net><BR>><BR>> Lowel what do you think about runni
ng fully synthetic oil in an air cooled<BR>> VW engine using 100LL,..
......I hope this is ok because I am fly this<BR>> morning to fuel up
again with 100LL,This will be the first flight using<BR>> synthetic
oil..............<BR>><BR>><BR>>> [Original Message]<BR>>
> From: Lowell Fitt <lcfitt@sbcglobal.net><BR>>> To: <
kitfox-list@matronics.com><BR>>> Date: 9/10/2006 12:08:14 PM<BR
>>> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Question on oil<BR>>><BR>>&
gt; --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Lowell Fitt" <lcfitt@sbcgl
obal.net><BR>>><BR>>> Dee,<BR>>><BR>>> The va
lue in a full synthetic is the higher temps they can tolerate, the<BR>&g
t; hit<BR>>> is their inability to keep the lead residues in suspe
nsion. If you fly<BR>>> strictly with car gas, the synthetic
should be fine. If you occasionally<BR>>> use 100LL then yo
u might want to avoid synthetics. This from the Rotax<BR>> oil<
BR>>> recommendation bulletin. The Rotax 912 series engines
use the same oil<BR>> in<BR>>> the engine as well as the gear b
ox so they recommend a motorcycle engine<BR>> oil<BR>>> with th
e gear additive. If your engine is similar, you might want to<BR>&
gt; check<BR>>> the Rotax owners association website for info.<BR>
>><BR>>> Lowell<BR></DIV><PRE><B><FONT face="courier new,c
ourier" color=#000000 size=2>
========================
===========
">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List</A>
========================
===========
tronics.com</A>
========================
===========
ics.com</A>
========================
===========
www.matronics.com/contribution</A>
========================
===========
</B></FONT></PRE>
<pre><b><font size=2 color="#000000" face="courier new,courier">
</b></font></pre></body></html>
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: Rotax 9XX: TCP, Dip stick, Hydraulic Lock |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: PWilson <pwmac@sisna.com>
Hi Eric,
Lots of subjects. Long discussion.
Syn oil:
The purpose of TCP (a fuel additive, not an oil additive) is to keep
the lead deposits from clinging to the valve stems. When this happens
the friction becomes greater than the spring force and the valve
hangs open causing the valve to burn and requiring a top overhaul to
correct. The TCP also helps prevent deposits in the piston rings.
Thus it is very desirable if using leaded fuel. I suppose there might
be some benefit in reducing sludge in the sump but I have never read
of that benefit. The stuff is commonly used in the lyc/cont engines
for the purpose stated. The kind of oil used in the engine is not
relevant to the above discussion
I forget what the oil additive is that Lyc specified for my C172 but
it was not TCP. Sorry. Maybe someone can fill in that detail. I must
say that all the engine issues I had with my Lyc had to do with the
valve sticking other than that Lyc said that for them to warrantee
the engine I had to reduce the oil change intervals and use the oil
additive. They just replaced the jugs to correct the sticking valves
and did not require me to use TCP.
Comments:
IMO, to be safe change the oil at short intervals and use semi syn.
But, is there a real benefit over a high quality petro oil? These
days the petro oil used in cars does not prevent the 200k mile engine
life. If one is using syn to protect against high temps it would be
more logical to get a proper oil cooler. If one likes the easier
starting benefit on syn then use petro with a lower viscosity and/or
a stronger RG battery. If one is using syn to get lower friction I
believe the benefit is very small. If one is using syn to extend the
oil change interval then the user is mistaken as the change interval
actually needs to be shorter.
The arguments for syn/semi syn are very weak when using leaded fuel.
Rotax does not REQUIRE syn with unleaded fuel. It is just one of the
options. Rotax strongly recommends using the motorcycle oil that has
the gear lube. This is applicable with petro, Syn, & semi syn. Not
many oils available in the US have been tested. To bad for us.
I wonder if the latest oil formulation has reduced the sludge
formation. There have been many recalls of autos due to sludge
formation caused by the use of petro oils in engines with high oil
temps. I noticed that Rotax now Requires the use of service grade
"SG" or higher
Dip Stick:
Another change that evolved from the US EPA wherein the oil
chemistry reduced the anti-foam additive because it was contaminating
the cat converters. However, this oil resulted in an improvement in
fuel economy due to additives that reduced friction. This change
applies to all oils including Syn. Rotax has identified some oils
that did not change as they were motorcycle specific and you will
find them on the approved list. Rotax raised the oil level in the dry
sump tank to account for the additional aeration due to foam and they
wanted to avoid any compromise in the lube system. Make me wonder how
such a small change could make a difference? There are oils available
that should not require the new dipstick due to old formulation, but
how long will they be available? Rotax published a new list this week.
Hydraulic lock:
This is caused by non-optimal location of the dry sump tank and the
use of very low viscosity oil. The higher the tank is then gravity
overcomes the ability of the oil pump and other system flow
resistance prevent leakage/drainback into the sump. This is
exacerbated by using very thin oil, especially after a hot shutdown
when using an oil like like 5Wxx (or full syn?). On older engines
wear in the pump creates less resistance to oil draining. I suppose
that one could increase the resistance in the oil line from tank to
pump to lessen this issue. Or add a flapper check valve for the
increased resistance. Beware, any change from the Rotax design
requires testing of oil flow rate and pressure at the pump inlet to
avoid engine failure.
BTW this is a generic issue with all dry sump engines but seems to be
more of an issue with the Rotax. Just be sure to check the oil level
before every flight. And if it is lower than it was when you parked
the plane after a flight then take corrective action. The auto racers
do not have this issue very often due to their use of very high
viscosity oil like SAE 50 and their use of scavenge oil pumps with
high back flow resistance instead of using crankcase pressure like Rotax does.
A 10Wxx or 20Wxx oil would be a recommendation of an action to take
to prevent drain back.
Comments anyone? Please cross post to both lists using the "reply to
All" button.
I hope this helps, Paul
=============================
At 03:49 AM 9/16/2006, you wrote:
>How about this angle to the thread?
>
>We know that Rotax states that the 912 motor requires synthetic
>(with no 100 LL) or semi synthetic (for when 100 LL) is being used,
>for reason of lubing the reduction drive.
>
>But how about if you purchase the TCP lead scavenger fuel additive
>from John at Sport Plane LLC / Kitfox. ( side note: John, why don't
>you have your S.P.llc catalogue on your Kitfox site ?)
>The way I am thinking of this is; If I use the TCP to remove the
>lead, then there is no issue with the oil I use and we could use
>full synthetic.
>
>Any thoughts on this?
>
>Another question. (New topic, KITFOX 912 OIL TANK DIP STICK)
>For us who have the 912 with the oil tank behind and above the motor.
>Why are we using the new replacement dip stick?
>I know that there was a Rotax service memo about this.
>This will only load the system more than full and you get a dirty
>belly or you get hydraulic lock after the plane sits for a while and
>gravity drained the oil to the lowest places.
>This happened to me. It is a good thing that I always hand prop a
>couple of times with power off. I would hate to think of what would
>happen if I used the starter! Could have bent something.
>
>Has anyone had the hydraulic lock problem?
>
>Eric, Atlanta.
>
>
>Mark,
>
>All I know about this subject is from the Rotax bulletin on preferred oils
>and the Rotax seminars.
>
>Synthetics are recommended by them for unleaded fuels only. When using
>occasional leaded fuels they recommend a synthetic blend or full mineral if
>using 100 LL.
>
>If you would like to read their bulletin on this, follow the links below to
>the numbered bulletin. When I change oil, I wipe down the oil tank with a
>papertowl and without fail, if I have been using 100LL as in a long cross
>country, I get a pasty residue from the tank. It is light gray colored.
>With the exception of the gear additive recommended by Rotax because the
>
>engine oil also lubricates the gear box, I am comfortable with their general
>recommendations for all four stroke engine types.
>
>It would be good of course to have other data from other engine types to
>eliminate the need to extrapolate.
>
>
>http://www.rotax-owner.com/
>
>SERVICE DOCUMENT RETRIEVAL SYSTEM
>
>
>SI-18-1997 (2004)
>
>SI-912-016 (2006)
>
>Lowell
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Mark Thompson" <kr2@earthlink.net>
>To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
>Sent: Friday, September 15, 2006 3:45 AM
>Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Question on oil
>
>
> > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Mark Thompson" <kr2@earthlink.net>
> >
> > Lowel what do you think about running fully synthetic oil in an air cooled
> > VW engine using 100LL,........I hope this is ok because I am fly this
> > morning to fuel up again with 100LL,This will be the first flight using
> > synthetic oil..............
> >
> >
> >> [Original Message]
> >> From: Lowell Fitt <lcfitt@sbcglobal.net>
> >> To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
> >> Date: 9/10/2006 12:08:14 PM
> >> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Question on oil
> >>
> >> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Lowell Fitt" <lcfitt@sbcglobal.net>
> >>
> >> Dee,
> >>
> >> The value in a full synthetic is the higher temps they can tolerate, the
> > hit
> >> is their inability to keep the lead residues in suspension. If you fly
> >> strictly with car gas, the synthetic should be fine. If you occasionally
> >> use 100LL then you might want to avoid synthetics. This from the Rotax
> > oil
> >> recommendation bulletin. The Rotax 912 series engines use the same oil
> > in
> >> the engine as well as the gear box so they recommend a motorcycle engine
> > oil
> >> with the gear additive. If your engine is similar, you might want to
> > check
> >> the Rotax owners association website for info.
> >>
> >> Lowell
>
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: Repairmans cert and the FAA... WAS: Annual on Kitfox |
III
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Bradley M Webb" <bmwebb@cox.net>
One thing to note about the FAA: Each FSDO is its own fiefdom, with its own
rules internally. Each interprets the CFRs with heavy doses of opinion. If
one tells you no, chances are another will say yes. That is not to say that
the rule is not the rule, as most CFRs are very cut and dried. But we all
know the grey areas in between, and FSDO interpretation is spotty, at best.
Point being this: when and how you get a certificate depends on the FSDO
you're dealing with, and many times whether the guy is in a good mood or
not. Some are stricter than others.
There's no real point in saying "...my inspector said this...". Each one may
be different.
That being said, you can work within the system by playing your cards right.
If one answer is no, call another FSDO. They might see things differently.
Bradley
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Lynn Matteson
Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2006 7:33 AM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Annual on Kitfox III
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Lynn Matteson <lynnmatt@jps.net>
John-
I questioned this "after the 40 hours" on this group...was told not
true...called the FAA...they said come on over and get it, and I
did...during the 40.
Lynn
On Friday, September 15, 2006, at 06:44 PM, John Oakley wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "John Oakley" <john@leptron.com>
>
> Andrew,
> A repairman's Cert. Is required on an experimental, IF you did build
> it you
> only have to request and apply for it after the 40 hours. Otherwise
> you are
> in violation..
>
> John Oakley
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Andrew
> Matthaey
> Sent: Friday, September 15, 2006 1:52 PM
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Re: Annual on Kitfox III
>
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Andrew Matthaey"
> <spaghettiohead@hotmail.com>
>
> Marco - I could be wrong - but a "Repairman's Certificate" is only for
> LSA,
> no? Rich's 'Fox is an Experimental-AB, therefore, the builder does not
> need
> any additional cert's.
>
> Andrew
> KF3
>
>
>> From: Marco Menezes <msm_9949@yahoo.com>
>> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Re: Annual on Kitfox III
>> Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2006 08:15:43 -0700 (PDT)
>>
>> I think Andrew's right that builder can sign off on annual "condition
>> inspection" . . . but only if builder applied for and received FAA
>> "repairman's certificate" for the airplane.
>>
>>
>>
>> Andrew Matthaey <spaghettiohead@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Andrew Matthaey"
>>
>> Hmm...that's a tough call then! The builder, since he is the
>> "manufacturer"
>> can sign off an annual - It might be worth checking out...and heck,
>> if he
>> is
>> alive, then he might get a kick out of seeing the plane he built!
>>
>> Andrew
>> KF3
>>
>>
>>> From: "RichWill"
>>> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
>>> Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Annual on Kitfox III
>>> Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2006 18:25:06 -0700
>>>
>>> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "RichWill"
>>>
>>> How does that work? He can do and/or sign off..yes? I am 2nd owner
>>> and
>>> it's been 14years since the plane was built.. I have address and
>>> name..
>> but
>>> frankly.. Think the guy might have even passed away..
>>>
>>> --------
>>> Semper Fi
>>> 15 ITT
>>> G2 HqCo HqBn
>>> 1st MarDiv
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Read this topic online here:
>>>
>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=61710#61710
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Marco Menezes
>> Model 2 582 N99KX
>>
>> ---------------------------------
>
> _________________________________________________________________
>
>
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Annual on Kitfox III |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Don Smythe" <dosmythe@cox.net>
I applied for mine at the same time I got the inspection.
Don Smythe
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lynn Matteson" <lynnmatt@jps.net>
> I questioned this "after the 40 hours" on this group...was told not
> true...called the FAA...they said come on over and get it, and I
> did...during the 40.
>
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: need landing gear |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "GRPP" <kevinnickel@goinet.ca>
sorry to hear about your gear. i had a hard landing two weeks ago [Embarassed]
and am getting john to look into getting another right gear built. this may
help us both if they have to set up a jig to make the gear. i am thinking of
upgrading to grove gear and would like any opinions on doing so.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=61961#61961
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: Bent Model IV for sale |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "GRPP" <kevinnickel@goinet.ca>
do you have a right droop tip? interested in your gear how much do you want for
it?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=61965#61965
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: | Aircraft Model, Engine etc |
Attached is the organized data from the engine type survey.
Keep me posted if there are any other that want to be on it.
Lowell
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: | Aircraft Model, Engine etc |
--- MIME Errors - No Plain-Text Section Found ---
A message with no text/plain MIME section was received.
The entire body of the message was removed. Please
resend the email using Plain Text formatting.
HOTMAIL is notorious for only including an HTML section
in their client's default configuration. If you're using
HOTMAIL, please see your email application's settings
and switch to a default mail option that uses "Plain Text".
--- MIME Errors No Plain-Text Section Found ---
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: [Off-topic] Flight to Germany |
Oooh Michel, might just be a wee bit far for even a Fox..Kiwiana. Come in
the big metal one then we can fly around in mine..
From: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: [Off-topic] Flight to Germany
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
On Sep 16, 2006, at 7:27 PM, Rex Shaw wrote:
> When you drop in to see John in New Zealand just duck across to Australia
>it's right next door
... How could I fly to New Zealand to visit John, without stopping at your
place, Rex? :-)
But I would need a lot of time to do that, and I'll have to wait another 9
years, when I retire. The nice thing, though, is that I feel my Kitfox with
its Jabiru is up to it. I mean, it could take such a long voyage. And that's
nice, even if I am mostly flying around my home town.
Next project is Blois, in France, next year. It is the largest European
ultralight aircraft fly-in. But I realise now that we, north Europeans, are
much more depending on the weather than say, Australia or southern US. Had
the German fly-in been one week earlier, no one would have showed up.
Cheers,
Michel
do not archive
_________________________________________________________________
Find the coolest online games @ http://xtramsn.co.nz/gaming
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: | Aircraft Model, Engine etc |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Ted Palamarek" <temco@telusplanet.net>
Lowell
Please include me in the list.
Kitfox model IV-1200
Rotax 912UL with GSC fixed prop
Thanks
Ted Palamarek
Edmonton, Alberta
Canada
DO NOT ARCHIVE
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Lowell Fitt
Sent: September 16, 2006 2:15 PM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Aircraft Model, Engine etc
Attached is the organized data from the engine type survey.
Keep me posted if there are any other that want to be on it.
Lowell
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: Aircraft Model, Engine etc |
Lowell,
Noticed I wasn't on the list... Dan Billingsley, Mesa AZ Kitfox Lite Squared
(Wide Body), TriGear, 912s
Thanks
Lowell Fitt <lcfitt@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Attached is the organized data from the engine type survey.
Keep me posted if there are any other that want to be on it.
Lowell
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: Kitfox IV-1200 BRS mount |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "parahawk" <alfi98596@yahoo.com>
I have not got the BRS yet and my plane is built. BRS tells me they only suitable
chute is the 1350 softpack mounted inside in the baggage area. they sent
a drawing similar to yours but it has the Bridle routed through the fabric to
the outside and around the fuselage and covered with a double sided tape to hold
it agains the fuselage. Seems to me me kind of an unusual procedure, but I
really don't know and probably have to go with their suggestion.
Thanks
Al
--------
Flying is the highest form of life on earth.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=62024#62024
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! --
|