---------------------------------------------------------- Kitfox-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Wed 10/04/06: 34 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 12:53 AM - Re: Carb sockets (Jimmie Blackwell) 2. 02:18 AM - Re: Adverse yaw my bad explaination... (Michel Verheughe) 3. 04:24 AM - Re: Alodine spar (Bob Unternaehrer) 4. 05:12 AM - Ref: carb sockets (Larry Martin) 5. 06:44 AM - Re: Re: Buying a KitFox: When folding the wings, how do you brace (Noel Loveys) 6. 06:57 AM - Re: Alodine spar (Noel Loveys) 7. 07:11 AM - Re: Adverse yaw my bad explaination... (Noel Loveys) 8. 08:16 AM - Re: Carb sockets (Richard Rabbers) 9. 08:40 AM - KitFox Rudder Authority (Nick Scholtes) 10. 09:02 AM - Re: Alodine spar (Dave G.) 11. 09:17 AM - Re: KitFox Rudder Authority (flier) 12. 09:37 AM - Re: KitFox Rudder Authority (Guy Buchanan) 13. 09:58 AM - Re: Buying a KitFox: When folding the wings, how do you brace (dcsfoto) 14. 10:02 AM - Re: Annual on Kitfox III (dcsfoto) 15. 10:04 AM - Re: KitFox Rudder Authority (flier) 16. 10:05 AM - Re: Adverse yaw my bad explaination... (Michael Gibbs) 17. 10:19 AM - Re: KitFox Rudder Authority (John Oakley) 18. 10:34 AM - Re: KitFox Rudder Authority (Michel Verheughe) 19. 11:16 AM - Re: KitFox Rudder Authority (Fox5flyer) 20. 11:37 AM - (FLIER@sbcglobal.net) 21. 11:45 AM - Re: KitFox Rudder Authority (Noel Loveys) 22. 12:21 PM - Rudder Authority (Nick Scholtes) 23. 12:23 PM - Re: KitFox Rudder Authority (Guy Buchanan) 24. 12:32 PM - Desert Fox Fly-In (Guy Buchanan) 25. 02:29 PM - Re: Rudder Authority (flier) 26. 03:17 PM - Re: Alodine spar (John Anderson) 27. 03:32 PM - Re: Desert Fox Fly-In (Lowell Fitt) 28. 03:35 PM - Re: Alodine spar (John Anderson) 29. 04:24 PM - The next Kitfox adventure?? (Ben-PA) 30. 04:32 PM - Re: KitFox Rudder Authority (kirk hull) 31. 05:49 PM - Re: Desert Fox Fly-In (Guy Buchanan) 32. 05:58 PM - Re: KitFox Rudder Authority (john perry) 33. 07:16 PM - Re: Rudder Authorityand adverse yaw (Malcolmbru@aol.com) 34. 07:24 PM - Michigan Kitfoxers...or Mich. pilots in general (Lynn Matteson) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 12:53:53 AM PST US From: Jimmie Blackwell Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Carb sockets JBM Industries, Kent, OHIO 330-678-9537 Kaufjm@aol.com wrote: Sorry I missed the address for the USA made Rotax carb replacement sockets. Thanks. ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 02:18:48 AM PST US From: Michel Verheughe Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Adverse yaw my bad explaination... --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe Hello Dave, this is very interesting reading, thank you very much. On Oct 4, 2006, at 12:35 AM, Aerobatics@aol.com wrote: > The CG must be ahead of center of side area .... Indeed, it makes sense. And it also reminds me of the yachting design of the leading of the center of effort (forces by the sails) to the center of lateral plane (wet surface). A properly balanced sailboat will be slightly weather helm (turning into the wind) when no rudder is applied, so that it will eventually come to a stop. The opposite, turning downwind, would be very dangerous. > Now placing the CG way ahead of center of sidearea takes away from > rudder authority. Aha, I understand! A very yaw-stable plane is ... hard to turn. It makes sense. Thank you for educating me, Dave. Another day with something new learnt. Cheers, Michel do not archive ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 04:24:02 AM PST US From: "Bob Unternaehrer" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Alodine spar --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Bob Unternaehrer" Alodine is a Chemical etch and only requires contact and time to get the job done. That being said, I know others believe it is a "corrosion inhibitor", I believe that is wishful thinking. None of the tech sheets make any such claims that I've seen. It is simply an etch for improved paint adhesion and not much more if anything. Dupont recommends the acid wash first then the alodine. Alodine has been on there long enough and your acid prep was good enough when it turns the metal a dark yellow. Self etching epoxy primers do the same thing in one step. That's what I use now. Bob U. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave G." Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2006 10:49 AM Subject: Kitfox-List: Alodine spar > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Dave G." > > I am looking at corrosion resistance on My new spars. I have some alodine > from the local auto parts store. Clearly the instructions assume I will > simply slosh some of this back and forth inside the tube. Other instructions > I have read about alodine seem to want some fairly aggressive scrubbing > first. How have you done it? Thanks. > > ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 05:12:36 AM PST US From: "Larry Martin" Subject: Kitfox-List: Ref: carb sockets ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 06:44:43 AM PST US From: "Noel Loveys" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Re: Buying a KitFox: When folding the wings, how do you brace --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Noel Loveys" I always wrap a bungee chord with large plastic hooks on it around the flaperons... Thanks to these lists I haven't experienced a wing opening in transit. Noel > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of > Richard Rabbers > Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2006 1:32 PM > To: kitfox-list@matronics.com > Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Buying a KitFox: When folding the > wings, how do you brace > > > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Richard Rabbers" > > > > > Tail tow braces - You already found those. They connect > from the bottom VS > > leading edge to the rear strut wing attachment bracket and > keep the wing > > from rotating. > > > Warning based on experience!! > Add redundency of some sort to the tail (wing) bracing, > safety wire, short leash, etc. > ............ imagine looking in the rear view mirror and > watching a wing unfold (on your trailered Kitfox)..... at night! > > It was, more or less OK (far from ideal) until I exited the > road, slowed, the angle of the road increased slightly. > > Thank the Gnomes there were no poles along side before I was > able to slowly come to a stop! > > This happened on my trip home after purchase. I felt very lucky! > > -------- > Richard in SW Michigan > Model 1 / 618 - full-lotus floats (restoration) > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=65498#65498 > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 06:57:49 AM PST US From: "Noel Loveys" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Alodine spar --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Noel Loveys" Scrub and Alumiprep first until water will sheet off the part. (water brake test) rinse and immediately alodine. In a nutshell that's how I did it. Noel > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dave G. > Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2006 1:19 PM > To: kitfox-list@matronics.com > Subject: Kitfox-List: Alodine spar > > > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Dave G." > > I am looking at corrosion resistance on My new spars. I have > some alodine > from the local auto parts store. Clearly the instructions > assume I will > simply slosh some of this back and forth inside the tube. > Other instructions > I have read about alodine seem to want some fairly aggressive > scrubbing > first. How have you done it? Thanks. > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 07:11:52 AM PST US From: "Noel Loveys" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Adverse yaw my bad explaination... Please! Talk about what happens when you add floats and a ventral fin. Noel Still to fly the 'Fox on wheels or skis -----Original Message----- From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Aerobatics@aol.com Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2006 8:05 PM Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Adverse yaw my bad explaination... In a message dated 10/3/2006 4:12:37 P.M. Central Daylight Time, michel@online.no writes: --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe On Oct 3, 2006, at 9:43 PM, Aerobatics@aol.com wrote: > There is a benefit of the forward aerodynamic center, that makes for a > VERY effective rudder This is very interesting, Dave, unfortunately I don't understand what "forward aerodynamic center" is. Could you explain, please? Thanks in advance. Michel PS: I also have gap-sealed rudder. do not archive An arrow keeps straight because of fins on one end and a weight at another. Center of mass ahead of center of area. There is an optimum position for best flight of an arrow.... with that in mind.... If you were to look at a side view of your plane including wheels spinner etc, there is a center of side area . A very simple, yet very effective way of finding that center is to cut a cardboard outline of your plane and find where it balances and poof.... center of side area.. Now like your CG for your wing the same applies to side area. The CG must be ahead of center of side area .... and by how much determines strongly on your yaw stability.... which has an effect on your planes ability to dampen a yaw displacement.... (which could have been initiated by adverse yaw from ailerons) Now placing the CG way ahead of center of side area takes away from rudder authority. So we must look at where the CG will be for the wing and design the "side" accordingly. Note that the rudder and the KF2 is small, but VERY effective, because the Center of side area and CG are close... yet in the KF5 the rudder is much larger, but ... well you know the rest! That' is why moving CG forward on you older model KF helps in Yaw........... We wont even talk about what happens when you add floats! Best, Dave ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 08:16:27 AM PST US Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Carb sockets From: "Richard Rabbers" --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Richard Rabbers" They advertise on barnstormers.com JBM INDUSTRIES Kent, OH USA Telephone: 330-678-9537 Fax: 330-678-4367 E-mail Jbmindustries(at)aol.com Include "Carb Socket" in subject line. Kent, Ohio 44240 USA Jbmindustries(at)aol.com -------- Richard in SW Michigan Model 1 / 618 - full-lotus floats (restoration) Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=65736#65736 ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 08:40:17 AM PST US From: Nick Scholtes Subject: Kitfox-List: KitFox Rudder Authority Guy, Thank you very much with the great reply. You asked where I am located, I'm in Illiniois, about 70 miles SW of Chicago. I really appreciate you comparing the flight characteristics to another airplane, something I can relate to. This type of response is very useful, much better than the "My feet are faster than yours, and if you're not man enough to fly a tailwheel, then you're a wuss" type of replies that seem to be so popular! I am very familiar with the Super Decathlon. If the Model IV flies like a Super Decathlon, then I have no problem with it at all. The problem I have is that the one-and-only KitFox that I have flown, did not handle like a Decathlon at all. It handled like a, well, I don't know what it handled like. Let me describe: Firstly, the whole "you've got to use the rudders on a tailwheel airplane" thing really refers to it's ground handling. And, the KitFox I flew handled superbly on the ground, felt like a Cub. But, in the air, it was a totally different animal. In the air, it was untameable. It just simply wasn't any fun at all. What would happen is, I would get it straight-and-level and coordinated, and then a minor thermal (nothing even noteworthy) would come by, and all of a sudden the ball was slammed all the way to one side. A light tap on opposite rudder, and now the ball was slammed to the other side. 20 seconds of wild oscillations back-and-forth finally got the ball somewhat centered again, only to start the process over again on the next thermal. I have time in a Bonanza V-tail, which was famous for the "Bonanza Boogie", where the nose would oscillate side-to-side in turbulence. The KitFox that I flew was WAY worse than any Bonanza ever could be. So, I guess, after hearing alot of these responses, my question is now different. My question now goes like this: Is the KitFox I flew normal, or is it worse than the average KitFox? This particular plane was ground-looped and repaired twice. Is there a possibility it is somehow bent, or rigged incorrectly? Is it's handling characteristic of the IV-1050, and is the IV-1200 better? I'm sure I could be a "hotshot tailwheel pilot" and tough-it-out, but it flew so crappy that I just didn't see where it was any fun. Any further advice would be appreciated! Best, Nick >Time: 08:18:56 AM PST US >From: Guy Buchanan >Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Buying a KitFox, First Question: Handling of IV-1050 >vs. Handling of IV-1200 > >--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Guy Buchanan > >At 09:16 AM 10/2/2006, you wrote: > > >>I was very "unimpressed" with how the IV-1050 handled in yaw, it sure >>seems to lack yaw stability. >> >> > >My IV has very good authority to the rudder; has adverse yaw roughly >equivalent to a Decathlon, (much more than a 172,) and has a "dead band" in >the middle where it will fly sideways +/- 2 degrees of yaw. I am a neophyte >and have had no trouble flying straight or landing in what I consider >"challenging" conditions. > > >Guy Buchanan >K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar. > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 09:02:35 AM PST US From: "Dave G." Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Alodine spar --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Dave G." ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bob Unternaehrer" Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 8:33 AM Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Alodine spar > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Bob Unternaehrer" > > > Alodine is a Chemical etch and only requires contact and time to get the > job > done. That being said, I know others believe it is a "corrosion > inhibitor", > I believe that is wishful thinking. None of the tech sheets make any such > claims that I've seen. It is simply an etch for improved paint adhesion > and > not much more if anything. Dupont recommends the acid wash first then the > alodine. Alodine has been on there long enough and your acid prep was > good > enough when it turns the metal a dark yellow. Self etching epoxy primers > do the same thing in one step. That's what I use now. Bob U. Perhaps I'll try your way Bob. However I already checked about alodine providing corrosion protection because I had been made aware of the fact that it might not provide protection. It appears that not all Alodine is the same and that it is also known as a chromate conversion process which will increase corrosion protection to a very large degree. It all seems to depend on which product you have. ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 09:17:04 AM PST US From: "flier" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: KitFox Rudder Authority --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "flier" Hey Nick, Kitfox rudder control is pretty much required all the time on the ground or in the air. In smooth stable air no prob -- hands and feet off when trimmed. In thermals or wind you're making rudder adjustments as well as pitch and roll most of the time. A Kitfox is flown like a sports car rather than a sedan. It takes more attention but that's why they're fun. What you describe is typical of folks who have not spent a lot of time in light short-coupled fabric taildraggers. Regards, Ted --- Original Message --- From: Nick Scholtes Subject: Kitfox-List: KitFox Rudder Authority >Guy, > >Thank you very much with the great reply. You asked where I am located, >I'm in Illiniois, about 70 miles SW of Chicago. > >I really appreciate you comparing the flight characteristics to another >airplane, something I can relate to. This type of response is very >useful, much better than the "My feet are faster than yours, and if >you're not man enough to fly a tailwheel, then you're a wuss" type of >replies that seem to be so popular! I am very familiar with the Super >Decathlon. If the Model IV flies like a Super Decathlon, then I have no >problem with it at all. > >The problem I have is that the one-and-only KitFox that I have flown, >did not handle like a Decathlon at all. It handled like a, well, I >don't know what it handled like. Let me describe: Firstly, the whole >"you've got to use the rudders on a tailwheel airplane" thing really >refers to it's ground handling. And, the KitFox I flew handled superbly >on the ground, felt like a Cub. But, in the air, it was a totally >different animal. In the air, it was untameable. It just simply wasn't >any fun at all. What would happen is, I would get it straight-and-level >and coordinated, and then a minor thermal (nothing even noteworthy) >would come by, and all of a sudden the ball was slammed all the way to >one side. A light tap on opposite rudder, and now the ball was slammed >to the other side. 20 seconds of wild oscillations back-and-forth >finally got the ball somewhat centered again, only to start the process >over again on the next thermal. I have time in a Bonanza V-tail, which >was famous for the "Bonanza Boogie", where the nose would oscillate >side-to-side in turbulence. The KitFox that I flew was WAY worse than >any Bonanza ever could be. > >So, I guess, after hearing alot of these responses, my question is now >different. My question now goes like this: Is the KitFox I flew >normal, or is it worse than the average KitFox? This particular plane >was ground-looped and repaired twice. Is there a possibility it is >somehow bent, or rigged incorrectly? Is it's handling characteristic of >the IV-1050, and is the IV-1200 better? I'm sure I could be a "hotshot >tailwheel pilot" and tough-it-out, but it flew so crappy that I just >didn't see where it was any fun. > >Any further advice would be appreciated! > >Best, > >Nick ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 09:37:30 AM PST US From: Guy Buchanan Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: KitFox Rudder Authority --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Guy Buchanan At 08:39 AM 10/4/2006, you wrote: >Thank you very much with the great reply. You asked where I am located, >I'm in Illiniois, about 70 miles SW of Chicago. You're welcome, but I can't be of much help, since I'm in San Diego. Some other listers may be in the area though. >If the Model IV flies like a Super Decathlon, then I have no problem with >it at all. Sorry. I was being very specific at to adverse yaw only. My Kitfox doesn't fly much like a Decathlon otherwise. Using automotive comparisons the Kitfox is a Lotus 7, the Decathlon a light truck, and the Bonanza a BMW 5 series. My experience with the two indicate that the Kitfox has much lighter control forces in all axes, much higher roll rate, somewhat higher yaw rate, and similar pitch rate. Couple this with a lighter wing loading and some days you literally dance your way across the sky. (I fly in all VFR conditions. I think turbulence is fun.) Of course, this dance is conducted only with the fingers and toes, never arms and legs. I do think, however, that if you had no problem with the Decathlon, you'll have no problem with a Kitfox IV. Indeed the only problem you'll have is getting that SEG off your face. (I did all my tailwheel training in a Decathlon.) >The KitFox that I flew was WAY worse than any Bonanza ever could be. No, this doesn't describe my IV. Mine tracks very nicely as long as your feet are on the pedals, even in turbulence. It just doesn't center very well. You can be as much as one ball off and feel nothing in the pedals. (My butt's not attuned to it yet, either.) Other IV's with the thick rudder "option" do center. >I'm sure I could be a "hotshot tailwheel pilot" and tough-it-out, but it >flew so crappy that I just didn't see where it was any fun. Others will have to help you with the comparisons, but "crappy" doesn't describe my IV. Be advised, though, that different people define "crappy" quite differently. I absolutely loath the Cessna 172. It's like driving a Mercedes 240D. Slow, unresponsive, mushy. Yet I know people who just LOVE their 172's. I just scratch my head. Prior to the Kitfox my love was an F33A Bonanza: muscular, responsive; a goes-where-you-want-it-to-go kind of airplane. The controls are well balanced, with suitable forces and enough authority to handle extreme conditions. I also love the Cessna 152. It responds very much like my IV, and nothing like a 172. The Decathlon was OK, but I thought the rudder forces were much too high; out of proportion to the aileron and elevator forces. Hope it helps! Guy Buchanan K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar. ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 09:58:34 AM PST US Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Buying a KitFox: When folding the wings, how do you brace From: "dcsfoto" --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "dcsfoto" if you dont brace the fwd spar you can get some rib damage,that is what I have been told Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=65761#65761 ________________________________ Message 14 ____________________________________ Time: 10:02:56 AM PST US Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Annual on Kitfox III From: "dcsfoto" --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "dcsfoto" talk to the EAA and your FAA office. you can go to a class and get a repairmans certificate to do the inspection on a light sport airplane. The MIII con be operated as a light sport. you might be able to change the certificate to experimental light sport Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=65763#65763 ________________________________ Message 15 ____________________________________ Time: 10:04:44 AM PST US From: "flier" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: KitFox Rudder Authority --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "flier" Good description Guy! --- Original Message --- From: Guy Buchanan Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: KitFox Rudder Authority >--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Guy Buchanan > >At 08:39 AM 10/4/2006, you wrote: >>Thank you very much with the great reply. You asked where I am located, >>I'm in Illiniois, about 70 miles SW of Chicago. > >You're welcome, but I can't be of much help, since I'm in San Diego. Some >other listers may be in the area though. > >>If the Model IV flies like a Super Decathlon, then I have no problem with >>it at all. > >Sorry. I was being very specific at to adverse yaw only. My Kitfox doesn't >fly much like a Decathlon otherwise. Using automotive comparisons the >Kitfox is a Lotus 7, the Decathlon a light truck, and the Bonanza a BMW 5 >series. My experience with the two indicate that the Kitfox has much >lighter control forces in all axes, much higher roll rate, somewhat higher >yaw rate, and similar pitch rate. Couple this with a lighter wing loading >and some days you literally dance your way across the sky. (I fly in all >VFR conditions. I think turbulence is fun.) Of course, this dance is >conducted only with the fingers and toes, never arms and legs. > >I do think, however, that if you had no problem with the Decathlon, you'll >have no problem with a Kitfox IV. Indeed the only problem you'll have is >getting that SEG off your face. (I did all my tailwheel training in a >Decathlon.) > >>The KitFox that I flew was WAY worse than any Bonanza ever could be. > >No, this doesn't describe my IV. Mine tracks very nicely as long as your >feet are on the pedals, even in turbulence. It just doesn't center very >well. You can be as much as one ball off and feel nothing in the pedals. >(My butt's not attuned to it yet, either.) Other IV's with the thick rudder >"option" do center. > >>I'm sure I could be a "hotshot tailwheel pilot" and tough-it-out, but it >>flew so crappy that I just didn't see where it was any fun. > >Others will have to help you with the comparisons, but "crappy" doesn't >describe my IV. Be advised, though, that different people define "crappy" >quite differently. I absolutely loath the Cessna 172. It's like driving a >Mercedes 240D. Slow, unresponsive, mushy. Yet I know people who just LOVE >their 172's. I just scratch my head. Prior to the Kitfox my love was an >F33A Bonanza: muscular, responsive; a goes-where-you- want-it-to-go kind of >airplane. The controls are well balanced, with suitable forces and enough >authority to handle extreme conditions. I also love the Cessna 152. It >responds very much like my IV, and nothing like a 172. The Decathlon was >OK, but I thought the rudder forces were much too high; out of proportion >to the aileron and elevator forces. > >Hope it helps! > > >Guy Buchanan >K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar. > > >_- ===================================================== ===== browse Subscriptions page, FAQ, List >_- ===================================================== ===== Web Forums! >_- ===================================================== ===== >_- ===================================================== ===== Admin. >_- ===================================================== ===== > > ________________________________ Message 16 ____________________________________ Time: 10:05:53 AM PST US From: Michael Gibbs Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Adverse yaw my bad explaination... --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michael Gibbs Dave sez: >The CG must be ahead of center of side area... I think you are referring to the "center of pressure". Having the center of gravity forward of the center of pressure is what produces aerodynamic stability. Mike G. N728KF ________________________________ Message 17 ____________________________________ Time: 10:19:00 AM PST US From: "John Oakley" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: KitFox Rudder Authority characteristic of the IV-1050, and is the IV-1200 better? The 1200 has a tail that is 8 inches taller than the 1050 and does handle a bunch different. John Oakley ________________________________ Message 18 ____________________________________ Time: 10:34:04 AM PST US From: Michel Verheughe Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: KitFox Rudder Authority --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe On Oct 4, 2006, at 7:15 PM, flier wrote: > In thermals or wind you're making rudder adjustments as > well as pitch and roll most of the time. So, it's not just me! :-) What I was wondering is, how much is it necessary to rectify the flight attitude when in turbulence. The longest I have been flying non-stop is three hours. In a normal summer day along the coast, the wet maritime air goes up to nice cumulus, creating thermals. One wing falls a bit, then the other, the tail goes one side, then the other. Still a rookie, I feel I have to correct with the stick and rudder. It is tiresome with time. But is it necessary? How do you, guys, fly in turbulence? Cheers, Michel ________________________________ Message 19 ____________________________________ Time: 11:16:06 AM PST US From: "Fox5flyer" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: KitFox Rudder Authority --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Fox5flyer" Just let it wiggle Michel. By now you probably don't even need to think about the corrections. When I had my M2 several times I turned the stick over to experienced pilots and predictably they were all over the sky, but after a bit of time they settled down and stopped over correcting so much. Even at best, the I, II, and III are wiggly in turbulence. It's the nature of the beast. Deke ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michel Verheughe" Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 1:33 PM Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: KitFox Rudder Authority > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe > > On Oct 4, 2006, at 7:15 PM, flier wrote: > > In thermals or wind you're making rudder adjustments as > > well as pitch and roll most of the time. > > So, it's not just me! :-) > What I was wondering is, how much is it necessary to rectify the flight > attitude when in turbulence. The longest I have been flying non-stop is > three hours. In a normal summer day along the coast, the wet maritime > air goes up to nice cumulus, creating thermals. One wing falls a bit, > then the other, the tail goes one side, then the other. Still a rookie, > I feel I have to correct with the stick and rudder. It is tiresome with > time. But is it necessary? How do you, guys, fly in turbulence? > > Cheers, > Michel > > ________________________________ Message 20 ____________________________________ Time: 11:37:42 AM PST US From: FLIER@sbcglobal.net --> Kitfox-List message posted by: FLIER@sbcglobal.net ________________________________ Message 21 ____________________________________ Time: 11:45:26 AM PST US From: "Noel Loveys" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: KitFox Rudder Authority The floats on my 'Fox (Mod III-A) may have a pendulum effect that helps keep thing under control. I have made coordinated turns with banks approaching 60deg with no problems. I find it easier to land than a Super Cub on floats but it doesn't have the visceral sound that the bigger four stroke engine gives. I have yet to spin... I haven't been high enough for a safe recovery and I'm not so sure I want to with floats on. The altitude, or lack of it has kept me from stalling, except of course when landing. When landing the Cub I did have a bit of a bad habit of always touching my right float first. My float instructor kept telling me to use the rudder pedals. I don't have that problem in the 'Fox. On floats the plane is more manoeuvrable, easier to fly and much more fun than the C172 I trained on. there is a bit of adverse yaw... Probably slightly more than the C172 I did notice before installing a small trim tab on the rudder it was a lot more difficult to keep things straight and I was consistently on the right rudder pedal in straight and level flight. The slightest relaxing of my right foot would cause a good left yaw. As I said a small trim tab has cured that. One of these days I may get around to finding out what those funny round things are for. Noel -----Original Message----- From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Nick Scholtes Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 1:10 PM Subject: Kitfox-List: KitFox Rudder Authority Guy, Thank you very much with the great reply. You asked where I am located, I'm in Illiniois, about 70 miles SW of Chicago. I really appreciate you comparing the flight characteristics to another airplane, something I can relate to. This type of response is very useful, much better than the "My feet are faster than yours, and if you're not man enough to fly a tailwheel, then you're a wuss" type of replies that seem to be so popular! I am very familiar with the Super Decathlon. If the Model IV flies like a Super Decathlon, then I have no problem with it at all. The problem I have is that the one-and-only KitFox that I have flown, did not handle like a Decathlon at all. It handled like a, well, I don't know what it handled like. Let me describe: Firstly, the whole "you've got to use the rudders on a tailwheel airplane" thing really refers to it's ground handling. And, the KitFox I flew handled superbly on the ground, felt like a Cub. But, in the air, it was a totally different animal. In the air, it was untameable. It just simply wasn't any fun at all. What would happen is, I would get it straight-and-level and coordinated, and then a minor thermal (nothing even noteworthy) would come by, and all of a sudden the ball was slammed all the way to one side. A light tap on opposite rudder, and now the ball was slammed to the other side. 20 seconds of wild oscillations back-and-forth finally got the ball somewhat centered again, only to start the process over again on the next thermal. I have time in a Bonanza V-tail, which was famous for the "Bonanza Boogie", where the nose would oscillate side-to-side in turbulence. The KitFox that I flew was WAY worse than any Bonanza ever could be. So, I guess, after hearing alot of these responses, my question is now different. My question now goes like this: Is the KitFox I flew normal, or is it worse than the average KitFox? This particular plane was ground-looped and repaired twice. Is there a possibility it is somehow bent, or rigged incorrectly? Is it's handling characteristic of the IV-1050, and is the IV-1200 better? I'm sure I could be a "hotshot tailwheel pilot" and tough-it-out, but it flew so crappy that I just didn't see where it was any fun. Any further advice would be appreciated! Best, Nick Time: 08:18:56 AM PST US From: Guy Buchanan Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Buying a KitFox, First Question: Handling of IV-1050 vs. Handling of IV-1200 --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Guy Buchanan At 09:16 AM 10/2/2006, you wrote: I was very "unimpressed" with how the IV-1050 handled in yaw, it sure seems to lack yaw stability. My IV has very good authority to the rudder; has adverse yaw roughly equivalent to a Decathlon, (much more than a 172,) and has a "dead band" in the middle where it will fly sideways +/- 2 degrees of yaw. I am a neophyte and have had no trouble flying straight or landing in what I consider "challenging" conditions. Guy Buchanan K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar. ________________________________ Message 22 ____________________________________ Time: 12:21:07 PM PST US From: Nick Scholtes Subject: Kitfox-List: Rudder Authority Ted and Guy, Thank you both, as well as everyone else, for EXCELLENT responses! Ted wrote: Kitfox rudder control is pretty much required all the time on the ground or in the air. In smooth stable air no prob -- hands and feet off when trimmed. In thermals or wind you're making rudder adjustments as well as pitch and roll most of the time. A Kitfox is flown like a sports car rather than a sedan. It takes more attention but that's why they're fun. What you describe is typical of folks who have not spent a lot of time in light short-coupled fabric taildraggers. Ted, I've got alot of time in the Citabria and the Decathlon and even a C-150-TD, but zero time in a KitFox (actually, I've now got 0.9 hours in one!). Would you consider these "light, short-coupled fabric taildraggers"? I guess I was expecting the KitFox to perform alot like these, but it didn't, and maybe my problem is just a mismatch between my expectations and reality. What I'm trying to figure out is whether I should adjust my expectations, or whether that particular airplane is an anomaly. Guy wrote: Mine tracks very nicely as long as your feet are on the pedals, even in turbulence. It just doesn't center very well. You can be as much as one ball off and feel nothing in the pedals. (My butt's not attuned to it yet, either.) Other IV's with the thick rudder "option" do center. I understand your description of "centering" and "tracking". There is a C-150 that I fly alot that doesn't "center" very well, as you describe you can be sitting there and your "butt-ometer" is saying everything is fine, but you look at the ball and you're one ball off-center. But, that airplane is easy to handle, and it "tracks" well, meaning that it kinda' stays where you put it, just a touch of pedal after you look at the ball and all is well. The KitFox that I flew neither "centered" well, nor "tracked" well. It was just all over the place, all of the time. As a matter of fact, on one approach that I did, the owner said, "see how well it comes down when you're slipping it to a landing?" He was right, it was doing a great slip. Problem was, I was trying to fly it straight! I just need to fly more KitFoxes to do some comparisons. So, I'll change my tactic. Instead of asking questions, I just need some stick and rudder time, so I'll ask this: Who out there has a Model IV-1200 that I can take for a ride? I'll pay handsomely for the opportunity. The closer to Chicago the better! Any takers? Thanks everybody! Nick ________________________________ Message 23 ____________________________________ Time: 12:23:10 PM PST US From: Guy Buchanan Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: KitFox Rudder Authority --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Guy Buchanan At 10:33 AM 10/4/2006, you wrote: >It is tiresome with >time. But is it necessary? How do you, guys, fly in turbulence? I tend to correct pitch immediately; the 582 quickly loads up or the EGT peaks. I let the vertical stab handle yaw, but keep my feet on the pedals. (There's much less yaw resistance with your feet on the floor.) I only correct roll and heading when I absolutely have to, (meaning: the plane's going to slide off into a spiral,) and use rudder in concert. As a lifelong sailor I only mind the motion when I bounce my head off the skylight! :'( Guy Buchanan K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar. ________________________________ Message 24 ____________________________________ Time: 12:32:56 PM PST US From: Guy Buchanan Subject: Kitfox-List: Desert Fox Fly-In --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Guy Buchanan All, The Desert Fox site says their fly-in is in 22 days. Unfortunately the site has been stripped to minimums and there's no additional information. Has the Desert Fox site moved? Is there a fly-in coming up? Does anyone know where I might find additional information? Thanks, Guy Buchanan K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar. ________________________________ Message 25 ____________________________________ Time: 02:29:57 PM PST US From: "flier" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Rudder Authority --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "flier" The 'Fox is lighter and more spirited than any of the below. I've flown them all and the Kitfox is more responsive and as a result can require more attention. Regards, Ted --- Original Message --- From: Nick Scholtes list@matronics.com> Subject: Kitfox-List: Rudder Authority >Ted and Guy, > >Thank you both, as well as everyone else, for EXCELLENT responses! > >Ted wrote: > >Kitfox rudder control is pretty much required all the time on the ground >or in the air. In smooth stable air no prob -- hands and feet off when >trimmed. In thermals or wind you're making rudder adjustments as well as >pitch and roll most of the time. A Kitfox is flown like a sports car >rather than a sedan. It takes more attention but that's why they're fun. >What you describe is typical of folks who have not spent a lot of time >in light short-coupled fabric taildraggers. > > >Ted, I've got alot of time in the Citabria and the Decathlon and even a >C-150-TD, but zero time in a KitFox (actually, I've now got 0.9 hours in >one!). Would you consider these "light, short- coupled fabric >taildraggers"? I guess I was expecting the KitFox to perform alot like >these, but it didn't, and maybe my problem is just a mismatch between my >expectations and reality. What I'm trying to figure out is whether I >should adjust my expectations, or whether that particular airplane is an >anomaly. > >Guy wrote: > >Mine tracks very nicely as long as your feet are on the pedals, even in >turbulence. It just doesn't center very well. You can be as much as one >ball off and feel nothing in the pedals. (My butt's not attuned to it >yet, either.) Other IV's with the thick rudder "option" do center. > >I understand your description of "centering" and "tracking". There is a >C-150 that I fly alot that doesn't "center" very well, as you describe >you can be sitting there and your "butt-ometer" is saying everything is >fine, but you look at the ball and you're one ball off-center. But, >that airplane is easy to handle, and it "tracks" well, meaning that it >kinda' stays where you put it, just a touch of pedal after you look at >the ball and all is well. The KitFox that I flew neither "centered" >well, nor "tracked" well. It was just all over the place, all of the >time. As a matter of fact, on one approach that I did, the owner said, >"see how well it comes down when you're slipping it to a landing?" He >was right, it was doing a great slip. Problem was, I was trying to fly >it straight! > >I just need to fly more KitFoxes to do some comparisons. > >So, I'll change my tactic. Instead of asking questions, I just need >some stick and rudder time, so I'll ask this: > >Who out there has a Model IV-1200 that I can take for a ride? I'll pay >handsomely for the opportunity. The closer to Chicago the better! Any >takers? > >Thanks everybody! > >Nick > ________________________________ Message 26 ____________________________________ Time: 03:17:41 PM PST US From: "John Anderson" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Alodine spar --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "John Anderson" I am told by one of our aviation technical staff that in laymens terms it's a neutralizing coating, sort of satisfies the surface neutrons desire to look for another (oxidizing) brother neutron. "Corrosion inhibitor", well its debatable, again he said if undisturbed, yes. Look at the many alloy alodined components that are stored for years before use with no corrosion showing, but one small scratch and it will corrode . The paint over top of raw aluminum alloy is not a corrosion inhibitor, its just a coating, (some etch coatings may be) but by alodining the combination will offer more pertinent protection. From: "Bob Unternaehrer" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Alodine spar --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Bob Unternaehrer" Alodine is a Chemical etch and only requires contact and time to get the job done. That being said, I know others believe it is a "corrosion inhibitor", I believe that is wishful thinking. None of the tech sheets make any such claims that I've seen. It is simply an etch for improved paint adhesion and not much more if anything. Dupont recommends the acid wash first then the alodine. Alodine has been on there long enough and your acid prep was good enough when it turns the metal a dark yellow. Self etching epoxy primers do the same thing in one step. That's what I use now. Bob U. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave G." Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2006 10:49 AM Subject: Kitfox-List: Alodine spar >--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Dave G." > >I am looking at corrosion resistance on My new spars. I have some alodine >from the local auto parts store. Clearly the instructions assume I will >simply slosh some of this back and forth inside the tube. Other instructions >I have read about alodine seem to want some fairly aggressive scrubbing >first. How have you done it? Thanks. > > _________________________________________________________________ Need more speed? Get Xtra Broadband @ http://jetstream.xtra.co.nz/chm/0,,202853-1000,00.html ________________________________ Message 27 ____________________________________ Time: 03:32:47 PM PST US From: "Lowell Fitt" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Desert Fox Fly-In --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Lowell Fitt" The Desert Fox Fly-in has been postponed with a new date in March. Lowell ----- Original Message ----- From: "Guy Buchanan" Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 12:30 PM Subject: Kitfox-List: Desert Fox Fly-In > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Guy Buchanan > > All, > The Desert Fox site says their fly-in is in 22 days. Unfortunately > the site has been stripped to minimums and there's no additional > information. Has the Desert Fox site moved? Is there a fly-in coming up? > Does anyone know where I might find additional information? > > Thanks, > > > Guy Buchanan > K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar. > > > ________________________________ Message 28 ____________________________________ Time: 03:35:49 PM PST US From: "John Anderson" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Alodine spar --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "John Anderson" Sorry, I meant permanent protection.... I am told by one of our aviation technical staff that in laymens terms it's a neutralizing coating, sort of satisfies the surface neutrons desire to look for another (oxidizing) brother neutron. "Corrosion inhibitor", well its debatable, again he said if undisturbed, yes. Look at the many alloy alodined components that are stored for years before use with no corrosion showing, but one small scratch and it will corrode . The paint over top of raw aluminum alloy is not a corrosion inhibitor, its just a coating, (some etch coatings may be) but by alodining the combination will offer more permanent protection. From: "Bob Unternaehrer" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Alodine spar --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Bob Unternaehrer" Alodine is a Chemical etch and only requires contact and time to get the job done. That being said, I know others believe it is a "corrosion inhibitor", I believe that is wishful thinking. None of the tech sheets make any such claims that I've seen. It is simply an etch for improved paint adhesion and not much more if anything. Dupont recommends the acid wash first then the alodine. Alodine has been on there long enough and your acid prep was good enough when it turns the metal a dark yellow. Self etching epoxy primers do the same thing in one step. That's what I use now. Bob U. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave G." Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2006 10:49 AM Subject: Kitfox-List: Alodine spar >--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Dave G." > >I am looking at corrosion resistance on My new spars. I have some alodine >from the local auto parts store. Clearly the instructions assume I will >simply slosh some of this back and forth inside the tube. Other instructions >I have read about alodine seem to want some fairly aggressive scrubbing >first. How have you done it? Thanks. > > _________________________________________________________________ Need more speed? Get Xtra Broadband @ http://jetstream.xtra.co.nz/chm/0,,202853-1000,00.html _________________________________________________________________ Need more speed? Get Xtra Broadband @ http://jetstream.xtra.co.nz/chm/0,,202853-1000,00.html ________________________________ Message 29 ____________________________________ Time: 04:24:15 PM PST US Subject: Kitfox-List: The next Kitfox adventure?? From: "Ben-PA" --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Ben-PA" http://airjourney.com/?fuseaction=journeys.itinerary&id=15 I am not associated with this group. I found the link posted on a Yahoo group. Ben Model 5 EJ-22 -------- Sign up on the Kitfox Frappr Map: http://www.frappr.com/kitfox You can see where fellow Kitfoxers live and pictures of their planes. Be sure to post some pictures of you, your plane, or share the scenery of the Kitfox world. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=65848#65848 ________________________________ Message 30 ____________________________________ Time: 04:32:23 PM PST US From: "kirk hull" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: KitFox Rudder Authority --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "kirk hull" That's why I installed seat belts -----Original Message----- From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Guy Buchanan Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 2:22 PM Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: KitFox Rudder Authority --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Guy Buchanan At 10:33 AM 10/4/2006, you wrote: >It is tiresome with >time. But is it necessary? How do you, guys, fly in turbulence? I tend to correct pitch immediately; the 582 quickly loads up or the EGT peaks. I let the vertical stab handle yaw, but keep my feet on the pedals. (There's much less yaw resistance with your feet on the floor.) I only correct roll and heading when I absolutely have to, (meaning: the plane's going to slide off into a spiral,) and use rudder in concert. As a lifelong sailor I only mind the motion when I bounce my head off the skylight! :'( Guy Buchanan K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar. ________________________________ Message 31 ____________________________________ Time: 05:49:41 PM PST US From: Guy Buchanan Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Desert Fox Fly-In --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Guy Buchanan At 03:30 PM 10/4/2006, you wrote: >The Desert Fox Fly-in has been postponed with a new date in March. > >Lowell Thanks Lowell. Guy Buchanan K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar. Do not archive ________________________________ Message 32 ____________________________________ Time: 05:58:13 PM PST US From: "john perry" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: KitFox Rudder Authority NICK my kitfox is a model 2 and has the small rudder and vertical stabilizer. The plane has never been damaged . When flying in thermals or wind gusts it is no problem at all . just a little up and down and the normal for most small GA aircraft in keeping on the given course. I would think the one you flew might be bent somewhere or it could be was never right to begin with ?. If you are ever in or around Lawton Oklahoma would be more than glad to take you up and let you fly the lady. Sorry about my earlier post did not mean to sound to bad lol . I have flown several foxes and they all flew fine . Take care fly safe fly low fly slow fly fun fly KITFOX John Perry kitofx 2 N718PD 582/ subbie soon Hot PINK Ivo inflight TD/ Straight floats ________________________________ Message 33 ____________________________________ Time: 07:16:57 PM PST US From: Malcolmbru@aol.com Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Rudder Authorityand adverse yaw My first flight in my kf2 was solo but I had 2 hr. taxi time. I lasted 3 min and landed only a little bounce but it seemed to be all over the place in the air. the 2ed time I flew it the right door opened and I was all over the place till I landed. It got really windy in there a couple of times. now I have 15 hr. and 50 landings. and I feal much moor confident now . I find with full flaps I have a little less rudder authority. when I did the weight and balance I found I put my CG a little forword of the middle of its center of CG range by adding the E box and larger battery. wouldent it be cool if I put myCG closer to my senter of side area by adding the 582 w/ e box and larger battery, still learning michigan kit foxer malcolm ________________________________ Message 34 ____________________________________ Time: 07:24:12 PM PST US Subject: Kitfox-List: Michigan Kitfoxers...or Mich. pilots in general From: Lynn Matteson --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Lynn Matteson I just returned from our Chapter 304 EAA meeting, and a guest speaker announced that he has put together a list of all private airstrips in the State of Michigan. It should be ready for publication in about a month. He has been compiling it for over two years. He is meeting with his lawyer to iron out all the legal aspects of such a publication. It will sell for $20. I told him to put me on the list. He said that he contacted hundreds of strip owners, and they were very willing to be added to his list, with very few exceptions. He said that the current Michigan Airport Directory lists about 200+ airports, and his list will provide about 500+ private landing strips. He even had yours, Deke. Hell, he's even got Howland Field on there! He also said that around Napoleon and Brooklyn there are 20-some strips....and added "I don't know how you guys keep from running into one another." When it's done, the list will show nearest town, owners name and phone number, lat and long, length of runway(s), slope (if any), turf or paved, etc. I'll let you all know when he is ready to sell the directory. Lynn Kitfox IV Speedster...Jabiru 2200