---------------------------------------------------------- Kitfox-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Fri 10/06/06: 12 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 12:52 AM - Re: NSI Manuals and other Materials (John Anderson) 2. 03:44 AM - Re: Re: KitFox Rudder Authority (Jose M. Toro) 3. 05:39 AM - Re: Sport Pilot: one step closer (Lynn Matteson) 4. 07:18 AM - Re: Sport Pilot: one step closer (Jose M. Toro) 5. 08:24 AM - Re: KitFox Rudder Authority (foxfloatflyer) 6. 08:38 AM - Re: Re: KitFox Rudder Authority (Aerobatics@aol.com) 7. 12:19 PM - Re: Sport Pilot: one step closer (Fred Shiple) 8. 12:35 PM - Re: Sport Pilot: one step closer (Lynn Matteson) 9. 01:14 PM - Re: Sport Pilot: one step closer (Michel Verheughe) 10. 05:58 PM - Re: Sport Pilot: one step closer (Lynn Matteson) 11. 06:34 PM - Re: Re: KitFox Rudder Authority (John Anderson) 12. 06:45 PM - Re: KitFox Rudder Authority (Joel) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 12:52:30 AM PST US From: "John Anderson" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: NSI Manuals and other Materials --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "John Anderson" I have an EA81 Turbo (not NSI) and thrilled with performance, cooling good too after a bit of tweaking. Sump sees a good airflow and couple of cooling tubes through it. Water to oil heat exchange, oil temp 90c and water 95. Lot of work but I'm blown away with performance, good choice for 5 or better as pretty weighty. From: "A Smith" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: NSI Manuals and other Materials --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "A Smith" You should have a dyno run on that engine. Looks like a spread sheet. Comes with teh engine. That will give you some numbers to use. As far as the manuals, that sounds fairly complete. The expierence here in the group will probably be the best manual you have. Here are just a few for starters. It will be heavy. Put your battery in the tail and sweep the wings. It will not cool well without some effort. An oil cooler is a must. Two fuel pumps, think about it very seriously. And remember to keep it light. Drill out your primer so it can get fuel on the first fire up of the day. I vented my gearbox. No more seal problems. Fasten the muffler where it exits the cowl back to the crossover pipe or it will break from vibration. It is an easy fix. I would look over everyones install before even starting. Did I mention to keep it light. It is a great setup with a great sound. Albert 5TD NSI-T/CAP140 _________________________________________________________________ ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 03:44:00 AM PST US From: "Jose M. Toro" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: KitFox Rudder Authority --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Jose M. Toro" John: I'm curious about the control and stability of the DeHavilands. When I was a kid, I used to fly with my father in a DeHaviland Beaver, but never have had the opportunity of being the PIC. Jose --- John Anderson wrote: > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "John Anderson" > > > Agreed........ an airplane design IS full of > compromises... > > Except de Haviland aircraft......that old gent had a > secret when it came to > control and stability... > > > > From: Aerobatics@aol.com > To: kitfox-list@matronics.com > Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: KitFox Rudder > Authority > Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2006 15:07:05 EDT > > > In a message dated 10/5/2006 12:51:34 P.M. Central > Daylight Time, > kerrjohna@comcast.net writes: > It has been interesting to follow this thread as > contributors speak of the > lateral stability and rudder authority. They are > different things and might > be considered counter to one another: the more > stable an aircraft is > laterally the more rudder authority is required to > counter that stability. > The balance of the two is part of design compromise > process and is not > unique to this design. We can all cite designs that > have evolved over time > to accomodate increased power and other changes. > Agreed........ an airplane design IS full of > compromises... > > I have a bit of time in some aerobatic planes Pitts > S2B was amazing not > inherently stable, but not unstable, just very > responsive, I Loved it. > Light controls, point it there, it stays... a > neutral set up. I have a bit > of time in a RV4 and found very much the same > thing... great airplane... > > But so is the KF in what it does...:-) > > Dave > KF2 > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > browse > Subscriptions page, > FAQ, > http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List > > Web Forums! > > > Admin. > > > > > __________________________________________________ ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 05:39:06 AM PST US Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Sport Pilot: one step closer From: Lynn Matteson --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Lynn Matteson Hi Michel- My instructor told me when we first started that when he was done with me, the checkride would be an anti-climax...that I would not have to worry about taking the checkride, because "you WILL pass it...there'll be no doubt". To this end, he has had me holding all the turn maneuvers within 20 feet tolerance, instead of the FAA-required 100 feet. This seemed like impossible at first, but he kept telling me I could do it, and just practice and practice doing it to 20 feet. (once in a while I can actually do it!) He is an American Airlines pilot, and has very little tolerance for sloppy flying. I've even had times I dreaded to go up with him because I knew I'd get my butt reamed for doing something slightly wrong, but it's made me a better pilot because of that fear. Back to the question,Michel. Over here, once the flight instructor is done teaching you, you have to be recommended to take the checkride (also known as the "practical test") via FAA form 8710-11, which has to be signed by an instructor who deems you qualified to take that ride with a Designated Flight Examiner (DFE). There are also SPE's (Sport Pilot Examiners) who give checkrides to only Sport Pilot candidates. So the "recommendation check-ride" is merely my instructors' way of making me jump through all the hoops that the SPE will put me through, including the clearing turns before every maneuver, (which I tend to forget), and doing them to his tighter standards, before he will recommend me. Reading between the lines, I think that my instructor doesn't want to be embarrassed by having me flunk the checkride, and therefore reflect back on his ability to instruct properly. Lynn Kitfox IV Speedster...Jabiru 2200 On Thursday, October 5, 2006, at 05:19 PM, Michel Verheughe wrote: > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe > > On Oct 5, 2006, at 10:22 PM, Lynn Matteson wrote: >> When he got out he said "congrats, you just did your recommendation >> ride in 20-30 mph winds" yeeehawwwwwww!! > > Congrats, cowboy! :-) > Now, to enlighten the ignorance of an European Kitfoxer, ... what is a > "recommendation check-ride?" > > Cheers, > Michel > > do not archive ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 07:18:28 AM PST US From: "Jose M. Toro" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Sport Pilot: one step closer --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Jose M. Toro" Lynn: Just for curiosity, did you make crosswind landings on your pre-checkride? If so, did you make wheel landings? Jose --- "Jose M. Toro" wrote: > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Jose M. Toro" > > > Congratulations Lynn! Will be waiting next week for > feedback from the newest Sport Pilot in the list. > > Jose > > --- Lynn Matteson wrote: > > > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Lynn Matteson > > > > > > I just got my recommendation today from my > > instructor to take the > > checkride next week. We went up and I did all the > > maneuvers asked, all > > the various takeoffs and landings, and when he > said > > "take me home" I > > thought I had flunked the pre-checkride > > checkride....I hadn't. When he > > got out he said "congrats, you just did your > > recommendation ride in > > 20-30 mph winds" yeeehawwwwwww!! > > > > Lynn > > Kitfox IV Speedster...Jabiru 2200 > > > > > > > > browse > > Subscriptions page, > > FAQ, > > http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List > > > > Web Forums! > > > > > > Admin. > > > > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > > > browse > Subscriptions page, > FAQ, > http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List > > Web Forums! > > > Admin. > > > > > __________________________________________________ ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 08:24:08 AM PST US From: "foxfloatflyer" Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: KitFox Rudder Authority Yesterday I had my first aerobatic flight in a Hiperbipe. We flew a number of maneuvers, including this year's Sportsman routine. I flew the plane to and from the practice area and found that it required a little more rudder pressure to yaw the nose than the Cessnas I usually fly. Needless to say, the tiny rudder of the Hiperbipe is sufficient for aerobatics and had enough area that we were climbing in knife-edge flight. The straight-tail 172 I used to own had more rudder response than more modern 172s and of the 4 place Cessnas the Cardinal seemed the most responsive to rudder (pay attention to the elevator) and the 182 the least. First flight of my Kitfox 5 should take place by Halloween. I look forward to comparing flight characteristics of the 'fox to these other aircraft. Joel Mapes ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 08:38:31 AM PST US From: Aerobatics@aol.com Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: KitFox Rudder Authority In a message dated 10/6/2006 10:27:41 A.M. Central Daylight Time, foxfloatflyer@hotmail.com writes: Yesterday I had my first aerobatic flight in a Hiperbipe. We flew a number of maneuvers, including this year's Sportsman routine. I flew the plane to and from the practice area and found that it required a little more rudder pressure to yaw the nose than the Cessnas I usually fly. Needless to say, the tiny rudder of the Hiperbipe is sufficient for aerobatics and had enough area that we were climbing in knife-edge flight. The straight-tail 172 I used to own had more rudder response than more modern 172s and of the 4 place Cessnas the Cardinal seemed the most responsive to rudder (pay attention to the elevator) and the 182 the least. First flight of my Kitfox 5 should take place by Halloween. I look forward to comparing flight characteristics of the 'fox to these other aircraft. Joel Mapes Too cool!! I have seen the hyperbipe fly at Oshkosh a few times very cool..... dont want to sound nitpicking... dont be offended, but it is not the size of the rudder that allowed you to climb.... its the side area if the fuse, especially around the CG.... provided lift the fact that's its a bipe that helps capture the air around fuse, like fences, power and speed. Its kinda like saying, boy can my plane climb because it has a big elevator.... :-) it climbs because of the wing and power. Bottom line, wish I was you in that hyperbipe! Dave KF 2 ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 12:19:14 PM PST US From: Fred Shiple Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Sport Pilot: one step closer Glad to hear things are going so well, Lynn, Good luch with the check ride. Fred ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 12:35:42 PM PST US Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Sport Pilot: one step closer From: Lynn Matteson --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Lynn Matteson Jose- I did do a couple of x-wind landings with the instructor aboard, and no wheel landings, just 3-pointers, and one tail first with power applied to simulate a soft-field landing. His request for a self-criticism after that one had me saying that I needed a little more power, and a little sooner. Now that you mentioned it, Jose, I recall asking him about wheel landings early on during instruction, and he said we'd get to that later. Maybe I'd better mention it to him. : ) Also, the winds along the field were not 20-30, more like 10-15, and when I took the plane home to put it away, they were at a 45 degree angle to the runway, so no problem. At the field where we were doing most of the landings, the wind was about 15 at the runway, and about 45 degrees to it. When we concluded the turn maneuvers, (the last things we did), he asked if I wanted him to be with me when I landed it at home, (and then I could drive him home), him knowing what a bear my field can be at times, and I declined. My field has a row of trees parallel to the north of the runway, and that can screw up the wind that you are planning your landing on. Also, this year there are beans planted on both sides of the runway, so that's a whole lot more forgiving than the corn which will be planted next year. But the fun will come as that corn starts to grow next year, and I have to grow as a pilot right along with it. Lynn On Friday, October 6, 2006, at 10:17 AM, Jose M. Toro wrote: > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Jose M. Toro" > > > Lynn: > > Just for curiosity, did you make crosswind landings on > your pre-checkride? If so, did you make wheel > landings? > > Jose > > --- "Jose M. Toro" wrote: > >> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Jose M. Toro" >> >> >> Congratulations Lynn! Will be waiting next week for >> feedback from the newest Sport Pilot in the list. >> >> Jose >> >> --- Lynn Matteson wrote: >> >>> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Lynn Matteson >>> >>> >>> I just got my recommendation today from my >>> instructor to take the >>> checkride next week. We went up and I did all the >>> maneuvers asked, all >>> the various takeoffs and landings, and when he >> said >>> "take me home" I >>> thought I had flunked the pre-checkride >>> checkride....I hadn't. When he >>> got out he said "congrats, you just did your >>> recommendation ride in >>> 20-30 mph winds" yeeehawwwwwww!! >>> >>> Lynn >>> Kitfox IV Speedster...Jabiru 2200 >>> >>> >>> >>> browse >>> Subscriptions page, >>> FAQ, >>> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List >>> >>> Web Forums! >>> >>> >>> Admin. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> __________________________________________________ >> >> >> browse >> Subscriptions page, >> FAQ, >> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List >> >> Web Forums! >> >> >> Admin. >> >> >> >> >> > > > __________________________________________________ > > ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 01:14:57 PM PST US From: Michel Verheughe Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Sport Pilot: one step closer --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe On Oct 6, 2006, at 2:40 PM, Lynn Matteson wrote: > Over here, once the flight instructor is done teaching you, you have > to be recommended to take the checkride (also known as the "practical > test") via FAA form 8710-11 Thank you for your answers, Rex and Lynn. Just one more question: Are you checked out for one type of aircraft at the time? E.g. my Norwegian ultralight license is valid for the taildragger Kitfox and nosewheel Rans. Any new check-ride will be written in my pilot's logbook, signed by an inspector. Cheers, Michel ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 05:58:34 PM PST US Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Sport Pilot: one step closer From: Lynn Matteson --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Lynn Matteson I'm only going to be checked out for the Kitfox, as far as I know. My endorsement will be for "fixed wing, tailwheel, greater than 87 knots". Based on that, I could fly an Avid, I think, a J-3 Cub, an Aeronca, and some others...BUT...I would need to have a checkride in each of those, and an endorsement by an instructor in order to fly those planes. This is the way I THINK it works. I haven't really looked beyond getting the SP Certificate for now...I'm only interested in flying my Kitfox...the others can wait. : ) Lynn On Friday, October 6, 2006, at 04:14 PM, Michel Verheughe wrote: > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe > > On Oct 6, 2006, at 2:40 PM, Lynn Matteson wrote: >> Over here, once the flight instructor is done teaching you, you have >> to be recommended to take the checkride (also known as the "practical >> test") via FAA form 8710-11 > > Thank you for your answers, Rex and Lynn. > Just one more question: Are you checked out for one type of aircraft > at the time? E.g. my Norwegian ultralight license is valid for the > taildragger Kitfox and nosewheel Rans. Any new check-ride will be > written in my pilot's logbook, signed by an inspector. > > Cheers, > Michel > > ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 06:34:36 PM PST US From: "John Anderson" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: KitFox Rudder Authority --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "John Anderson" Yes, I flew one one (DHC2) crop dusting and have flown a Chipmonk and DH82. Delightfully ballanced. From: "Jose M. Toro" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: KitFox Rudder Authority --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Jose M. Toro" John: I'm curious about the control and stability of the DeHavilands. When I was a kid, I used to fly with my father in a DeHaviland Beaver, but never have had the opportunity of being the PIC. Jose --- John Anderson wrote: > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "John Anderson" > > > Agreed........ an airplane design IS full of > compromises... > > Except de Haviland aircraft......that old gent had a > secret when it came to > control and stability... > > > > From: Aerobatics@aol.com > To: kitfox-list@matronics.com > Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: KitFox Rudder > Authority > Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2006 15:07:05 EDT > > > In a message dated 10/5/2006 12:51:34 P.M. Central > Daylight Time, > kerrjohna@comcast.net writes: > It has been interesting to follow this thread as > contributors speak of the > lateral stability and rudder authority. They are > different things and might > be considered counter to one another: the more > stable an aircraft is > laterally the more rudder authority is required to > counter that stability. > The balance of the two is part of design compromise > process and is not > unique to this design. We can all cite designs that > have evolved over time > to accomodate increased power and other changes. > Agreed........ an airplane design IS full of > compromises... > > I have a bit of time in some aerobatic planes Pitts > S2B was amazing not > inherently stable, but not unstable, just very > responsive, I Loved it. > Light controls, point it there, it stays... a > neutral set up. I have a bit > of time in a RV4 and found very much the same > thing... great airplane... > > But so is the KF in what it does...:-) > > Dave > KF2 > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > browse > Subscriptions page, > FAQ, > http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List > > Web Forums! > > > Admin. > > > > > __________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________ Check out the latest video @ http://xtra.co.nz/streaming ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 06:45:42 PM PST US Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: KitFox Rudder Authority From: "Joel" --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Joel" The pilot of the Hiperbipe indicated that the flat sides of the aircraft and the 200 hp engine provide lots of lift for knife-edge flight. I was surprised at the authority of the small rudder during hammerheads and spins and wrongly attributed that authority to the knife edge performance. -------- Joel Mapes Kitfox 5 912 ULS Aerocomp amphibs Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=66285#66285