---------------------------------------------------------- Kitfox-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Mon 10/23/06: 53 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 02:24 AM - Re: Tailwheel (Michel Verheughe) 2. 02:58 AM - Re: Aluminum "pot scrubbers"...was heat muffs (Dave G.) 3. 03:01 AM - Re: Aluminum "pot scrubbers"...was heat muffs (Dave) 4. 03:14 AM - Re: Tailwheel aka Nosewheels (Dave) 5. 03:32 AM - Re: Show me the FAR... (Ceashman@aol.com) 6. 04:08 AM - Re: First Flight N422NL (Paul Seehafer) 7. 05:16 AM - Re: First Flight N422NL (W Duke) 8. 06:01 AM - Re: Antifreeze- Oil & gear boxes ? (Algate) 9. 06:01 AM - Re: Aluminum "pot scrubbers"...was heat muffs (Lynn Matteson) 10. 06:33 AM - Re: Show me the FAR... (Ben-PA) 11. 07:14 AM - Re: TEST FLYING...WAS-First Flight N422NL (Dan Billingsley) 12. 08:19 AM - -First Flight N422NL (Dee Young) 13. 08:27 AM - Re: Show me the FAR... (kirk hull) 14. 08:41 AM - Don Smythe comments on Warp Angle and Movie (Dave) 15. 08:53 AM - Re: -First Flight N422NL (Fox5flyer) 16. 10:01 AM - Re: Copyright issues WAS: How To Fly a Kitfox (Noel Loveys) 17. 10:03 AM - Re: Montreal? (Noel Loveys) 18. 10:16 AM - Re: Copyright issues WAS: How To Fly a Kitfox (Dave) 19. 10:27 AM - Re: Rebuilding 582's (akflyer) 20. 10:32 AM - Re: Show me the FAR... (kerrjohna@comcast.net) 21. 10:39 AM - Re: Show me the FAR... (Guy Buchanan) 22. 10:39 AM - Re: TEST FLYING...WAS-First Flight N422NL (Guy Buchanan) 23. 10:39 AM - Re: Don Smythe comments on Warp Angle and Movie (Don Smythe) 24. 10:39 AM - Re: Rebuilding 582's (Guy Buchanan) 25. 10:41 AM - Re: need info on 582 rebuilding (akflyer) 26. 11:30 AM - Re: Copyright issues WAS: How To Fly a Kitfox (6440 Auto Parts) 27. 11:34 AM - Re: Show me the FAR... (84KF) 28. 11:53 AM - Re: Show me the FAR... (kirk hull) 29. 02:03 PM - Re: TEST FLYING...WAS-First Flight N422NL (Noel Loveys) 30. 02:51 PM - Re: Guy --- Re: Warp Drive Hub (Noel Loveys) 31. 03:23 PM - Re: Guy --- Re: Warp Drive Hub (Dave) 32. 03:35 PM - Chili fest... (Lynn Matteson) 33. 03:39 PM - Re: Re: need info on 582 rebuilding (Noel Loveys) 34. 03:51 PM - Re: Show me the FAR... (crazyivan) 35. 03:58 PM - Re: Re: Rebuilding 582's (Noel Loveys) 36. 04:08 PM - Re: Don Smythe comments on Warp Angle and Movie (Noel Loveys) 37. 05:02 PM - Re: Rebuilding 582's (Richard Rabbers) 38. 05:29 PM - Re: Guy --- Re: Warp Drive Hub (Noel Loveys) 39. 06:18 PM - Re: Guy --- Re: Warp Drive Hub (Dave) 40. 06:23 PM - Re: Rebuilding 582's (Malcolmbru@aol.com) 41. 06:26 PM - Re: Rebuilding 582's (akflyer) 42. 06:28 PM - Re: Chili fest... (Lynn Matteson) 43. 06:52 PM - Re: Re: Rebuilding 582's air screw (Malcolmbru@aol.com) 44. 06:54 PM - Re: TEST FLYING...WAS-First Flight N422NL (Dan Billingsley) 45. 07:21 PM - Re: Re: need info on 582 rebuilding (john perry) 46. 07:28 PM - Re: Prop Blade Length (crazyivan) 47. 07:44 PM - Re: Re: Prop Blade Length (jdmcbean) 48. 07:57 PM - Re: Re: Prop Blade Length (ron schick) 49. 08:32 PM - Re: Antifreeze- Oil & gear boxes ? (ron schick) 50. 09:13 PM - Re: Show me the FAR... (84KF) 51. 10:13 PM - Re: Re: Prop Blade Length (Richard D'Archangel) 52. 10:30 PM - Re: Re: Rebuilding 582's (Lowell Fitt) 53. 10:30 PM - Re: Don Smythe comments on Warp Angle and Movie (Lowell Fitt) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 02:24:34 AM PST US From: Michel Verheughe Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Tailwheel > From: Lowell Fitt [lcfitt@sbcglobal.net] > No. I wouldn't worry. Thank you, Lowell. Do you think I should remove the wheel axle and inspect the bearings? Should I grease it when opened? Or can I leave it as it is? Thanks in advance. Cheers, Michel
________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 02:58:27 AM PST US From: "Dave G." Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Aluminum "pot scrubbers"...was heat muffs --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Dave G." > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Lowell Fitt" > > Wow, I love this. It is great reading. Right on Lynn. Skystar has > supplied aluminum heat muffs since day one of the 912 series. The Lancair > IV I work on has aluminum heat muffs. Hey, guys they work. The surface > of the exhaust pipe exceeds 300 or they wouldn't change color as they do, > but the aluminum survives. Guys have been using the brass and SS > scrubbers with success. > I should never have used the word burn although I have seen aliminum wool burst into flame. I was actually thinking that it was likely the thin aluminum could turn to powder (oxide) in such an environment. I had visions of it becoming airborn with the rush of air and getting all over and into everything. Probably never happen. ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 03:01:34 AM PST US From: "Dave" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Aluminum "pot scrubbers"...was heat muffs I should have added on rotax 582 2 strokes. The 4 strokes no matter the brand run a higher pipe temp just outside the exhaust. That being said, exhaust heat sheild on the muffler will never see 1200 F or will it ? The muffler would have a reddish glow if so. Dave ----- Original Message ----- From: James Shumaker To: kitfox-list@matronics.com Sent: Sunday, October 22, 2006 9:53 PM Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Aluminum "pot scrubbers"...was heat muffs I have an EGT located (mis-located) in my muffler outlet on a 912. I regularly see 1500 degrees at this point so the pipes could easily still be quite hot at this point. Jim Shumaker ----- Original Message ---- From: Dave To: kitfox-list@matronics.com Sent: Sunday, October 22, 2006 10:48:52 AM Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Aluminum "pot scrubbers"...was heat muffs --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Dave" You will not burn aluminum on a rotax Muffler. Alum melts around 1200 and muffler I doubt is hotter than 300 F or so. 1200f temps will found in the y pipe manifold only and the temp decreases as you travel done the cone to the Muffler. Now lets get some videos done guys and then we can have a contest like who has the best smoke system on their Kitfox :) Dave ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave G." To: Sent: Sunday, October 22, 2006 11:40 AM Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Aluminum "pot scrubbers"...was heat muffs > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Dave G." > > I'm not clear on whether this is a good idea, aluminum will burn under > some circumstances and in the presence of heat and moisture it will > oxidize even if it doesn't burn when you are dealing with very thin stuff. > You might be better off with the stainless. I doubt that heat transfer is > a big part of the function anyway. I figure what you are after is > turbulence and latency in the air's transit through your system. You could > do as well with a series of disks clamped to the pipe if I'm visualising > what you want properly. > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Lynn Matteson" > To: > Sent: Sunday, October 22, 2006 11:59 AM > Subject: Kitfox-List: Aluminum "pot scrubbers"...was heat muffs > > >> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Lynn Matteson >> >> Stop the presses...I just found a product that might do the ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 03:14:08 AM PST US From: "Dave" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Tailwheel aka Nosewheels --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Dave" Lowell, Yes I will has the floats in the shop soon and will inspect the bearings and I will take some pics etc of the bearings. Also I will add that time the wheels are actually in use on the ground that if would take many miles of usage before a failure was likely. Although the wheels are tiny and spin very fast at 40 mph it is only for short spurts of under 10 seconds on take off and landing about the same at over 40 mph plus the minute or two of taxing at a slower speed. A good example of bearing failure is boat trailers. Look at the older ones with those small tires and it summer you use to see them on the side of the freeways allot but not with slower turning larger wheels you see allot less. But these are traveling at high speeds for a long time before they fail. Un- lubricated bearing will fail in time, no doubt about that. I find when on wheels that the spindle on the tailwheel needs greasing more than anything. The tailwheel pivot gets stiff and hard to turn until it gets a few pumps from grease gun. Dave ----- Original Message ----- From: "Lowell Fitt" Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 12:51 AM Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Tailwheel aka Nosewheels > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Lowell Fitt" > > Far be it to me to get into an argument about tail wheel bearings. I just > posted my experience primarily to express frustration in the 5/8" rather > than the 1/2" axle measurement in the ACS supplied bearings and give a > heads-up to anyone planning a bearing replacement. > > However, based on my experience with mine which were probably 70% hard > surface and 30% otherwise and about 3 years old, with your usage you will > have 0, read zero, lubricant in your bearings and they are failing as we > speak. > > On mine the entire interior of the wheel hub was coated with black gunk > presumably the original lubricant which somehow exited the bearings and > deposited itself there, and there was actually dirt - not congealed oil or > grease - on the inner surfaces of the bearings in clumps. These bearings > are not sealed despite the Stainless steel shield. Everything you expose > them to is being used as lubricant whether it be dirt, sand or water. > They will fail, if not catastrophically, they will become noisy, > indicating bearing failure. Jack up the front of your float and spin > them. If after two years in the environment you describe they spin > silently, we will all have witnessed a miracle. Failed bearings on a > tailwheel could be an annoyance. Failed bearings on a nose wheel just > might provide an amazing adventure, but to each his own, I guess. > > Frankly, I love this list especially when someone reports factual > information and there are predictable responses from people who are > opinionating, bragging, or just guessing, as to why the real life > experience is a bunch of you know what. > > Regards, > Lowell > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Dave" > To: > Sent: Sunday, October 22, 2006 6:11 PM > Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Tailwheel aka Nosewheels > > >> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Dave" >> >> Lowell , >> For arguments sake I have the same 6 inch solid tailwheels on the nose >> gear of my Amphibs. I think Gary Walsh has the same ones. I operated >> off of grass and they take a pounding as there little cushioning from the >> solid wheels. >> >> As far as bearings go - well lets see what they get -- Grass, dirt, >> sand, water,sand dirt water,river slime,algae,sand,dirt,mud, dirt,water, >> sand ETC !!! >> And they still ticking ,,,,,,,, I never greased them since in installed 2 >> years ago .Plus they sit in snow as well . >> >> For the record I am going to go full pneumatic wheels when I find one >> that fits the odd sizing for those floats. >> >> >> Dave >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Lowell Fitt" >> To: >> Sent: Sunday, October 22, 2006 8:52 PM >> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Tailwheel >> >> >>> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Lowell Fitt" >>> >>> Michel, >>> >>> No. I wouldn't worry. The grease fitting feeds into the space beteen >>> the bearings - a cylinder shape 1-3/8" by 2 or so inches. It would take >>> a lot of grease before any would be forced into the bearings themselves. >>> I checked mine because it seemed the original noise from the hard rubber >>> in the Maule had returned. It was bearing noise that triggered the >>> replacement. I guess with the single fork, though, if both bearings >>> failed catastrophically the wheel could fall off, but in that case you >>> would have a tail skid. I think a reasonable pre flight would detect >>> any problems. >>> >>> Lowell >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Michel Verheughe" >>> To: >>> Sent: Sunday, October 22, 2006 11:11 AM >>> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Tailwheel >>> >>> >>>> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe >>>> >>>> On Oct 21, 2006, at 11:12 PM, Lowell Fitt wrote: >>>>> Several years ago I opted to change out to the Homebuilders Special >>>>> dual fork tailwheel. I got the immediate quieting that others have >>>>> mentioned. I also ordered the spare sealed bearing as the word was >>>>> that the original bearings were unsealed and un-lubeable. >>>> >>>> Hello Lowell, >>>> One and half year ago, I also changed my Maule tailwheel for a >>>> Homebuilders Special, but not the dual fork, the single fork one. Like >>>> you, I also read that the wheel bearing (not the swivel axle bearing) >>>> couldn't be greased. When installing it, I noticed that there was a >>>> grease nipple on both the swivel and the wheel axle. I tried to grease >>>> both but the wheel one wouldn't accept grease. >>>> ... then I went flying. I have now maybe 100 hours on that tailwheel. >>>> Should I worry? >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Michel >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> > > > ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 03:32:53 AM PST US From: Ceashman@aol.com Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Show me the FAR... Question from Steve/ Can anyone tell me where to find the FAR that says as a PVT Pilot I CANNOT fly my Kitfox V under the new Sport Pilot rules. Hi Steve. This is a heavy question, why don't you ask someone from the EAA. you would probably get the close to perfect answer. It seem that if you ask 5 pilots what the rule is you get 6 different answers... You are asking pilots and not someone close to the rule making! We' pilots are prone to have opinions. Based on first hand experience, on what we have been told by trusted ones, on how we interpret the spoken or written word and then of course there is the "not having the faintest idea of what I am talking about, but I must provide an answer even if I have to pull this one out of my a$$" (I have yet to meet a pilot who does not have an opinion. But then again, opinions are healthy and sometimes funny as long as we can connect to reality) It is a FAA "permission" to alter a "real" aircraft from it's original (and Certified) type design. DNA to Kitfox or other Experimentals My opinion is that the Kitfox is an "unreal" aircraft All the best in your search for the answer. Eric. Atlanta GA. Do Not Archive. ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 04:08:20 AM PST US From: "Paul Seehafer" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: First Flight N422NL --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Paul Seehafer" Congratulations Joel! You've got to be proud. I can hardly wait to see her on floats... Now repitch that prop and keep us up to date on the performance and handling info - we all love that you know. Paul Seehafer Central Wisconsin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joel Mapes" Sent: Saturday, October 21, 2006 11:00 PM Subject: Kitfox-List: First Flight N422NL > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Joel Mapes" > > > It's an airplane! > I just wanted to share my joy with all of you whose encouragement and > advice have kept me working towards this day. A friend of mine who is an > A&P, very experienced pilot and owner of Avian flight center > www.avianflight.com was PIC for the first flight. He reports that the > wing and flaperon rigging are right on but that she needs some right > rudder. She is also apparently under-propped as he could not use more than > 1/2 throttle without exceeding 5800 RPM on the 912 ULS and cruised at a > blistering 55 mph. > > Joel > Model 5 912 ULS GTA CS prop > > _________________________________________________________________ > Find a local pizza place, music store, museum and more.then map the best > route! http://local.live.com?FORM=MGA001 > > > ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 05:16:02 AM PST US From: W Duke Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: First Flight N422NL Congratulations. Maxwell S6/TD/IO240 do not archive Joel Mapes wrote: --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Joel Mapes" It's an airplane! I just wanted to share my joy with all of you whose encouragement and advice have kept me working towards this day. A friend of mine who is an A&P, very experienced pilot and owner of Avian flight center www.avianflight.com was PIC for the first flight. He reports that the wing and flaperon rigging are right on but that she needs some right rudder. She is also apparently under-propped as he could not use more than 1/2 throttle without exceeding 5800 RPM on the 912 ULS and cruised at a blistering 55 mph. Joel Model 5 912 ULS GTA CS prop _________________________________________________________________ Find a local pizza place, music store, museum and morethen map the best route! http://local.live.com?FORM=MGA001 --------------------------------- Get your email and more, right on the new Yahoo.com ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 06:01:57 AM PST US From: "Algate" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Antifreeze- Oil & gear boxes ? Gary I always used Haveline Coolant in my 582 - 75:25 in summer and 50:50 in winter. Water was always distilled. Oil was Pennzoil 2 stroke oil for Air cooled engines. Regards' Gary Algate _____ From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gary Glasgow Sent: Sunday, October 22, 2006 10:48 AM Subject: Kitfox-List: Antifreeze- Oil & gear boxes ? Regarding the Antifreeze issue ( phosphate and silicate free) does anyone have some brand names of acceptable products for our Rotax engines? Same question for the oil used in the injection . Other than the Wt. and Balance issue of the starter being located further forward, why ? or how? is the "E" box different, or better, than the "C" box unit? and will both fit the same motor mounts? Sorry for all the questions, but am trying to not make an expensive mistake with my new toy. Gary ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 06:01:57 AM PST US Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Aluminum "pot scrubbers"...was heat muffs From: Lynn Matteson --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Lynn Matteson Wow, that seems very hot for the outlet of a muffler. I would think that the 1400F or so degrees of exhaust gas temperature would have cooled some by the time the gasses had made their way into the muffler, circulated some and then exited the muffler. But you are seeing 1500F at the muffler outlet? Is it a reliable sensor/gauge? What temp does the 912 recommend for EGT? Lynn On Sunday, October 22, 2006, at 09:53 PM, James Shumaker wrote: > I have an EGT located (mis-located) in my muffler outlet on a 912. I > regularly see 1500 degrees at this point so the pipes could easily > still be quite hot at this point. > > Jim Shumaker > > ----- Original Message ---- > From: Dave > To: kitfox-list@matronics.com > Sent: Sunday, October 22, 2006 10:48:52 AM > Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Aluminum "pot scrubbers"...was heat muffs > > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Dave" > > Youwill not burn aluminum on a rotax Muffler. Alum meltsaround > 1200 > and muffler I doubt is hotter than 300 For so. > 1200f temps willfound in the y pipe manifold only and the temp > decreases > as you travel done the cone to the Muffler. > > Now lets get some videos done guysand then we can have a contest > like who > has the best smoke system on their Kitfox:) > > > Dave ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 06:33:42 AM PST US Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Show me the FAR... From: "Ben-PA" --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Ben-PA" Steve, Check here: http://www.stacheair.com/data/At%20Work9A%20Light%20Sport%20CD/light-sport.html I didn't look through the list, but I think you will find it there. Ben -------- 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=69648#69648 ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 07:14:25 AM PST US From: Dan Billingsley Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: TEST FLYING...WAS-First Flight N422NL Guy, Thanks, that was what I was wondering about. So once you did some high speed taxiing you felt good to go...interesting. I can see how that might happen after you confirm rudder and other authorities. Thanks for being the one and only response. I was looking for quite a bit more discussion on this. I guess no one else ever dealt with the go-no-go question...ha Dan Mesa, AZ 314DW (Building) Guy Buchanan wrote: --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Guy Buchanan At 10:59 AM 10/22/2006, you wrote: >I thought I would throw this topic out there to see how others who have >gone before have dealt with it. I had decided to use a test pilot as I did not trust my take-offs and landings if there was something wrong with the gear. However everyone I talked to suggested I could do it. (I had 250hrs total, 20hrs tail-wheel in a Decathlon.) I flew one hour in Alan Nephew's trike IV and something less than two in Lowell's conventional IV, including a bunch of landings, to get insurance. Then with mine I did the incremental taxi testing, finally running up and down the runway at 55mph on the mains. (That's right, well over stall,) After that I felt comfortable doing the flight test. I won't say it was the right thing to do, but it certainly gave me a thrill! Guy Buchanan K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar. ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 08:19:58 AM PST US From: "Dee Young" Subject: Kitfox-List: -First Flight N422NL I had big plans all the way thru the construction of making the first flight. When the time came I was still a low time pilot with only 22 hrs and at the last minute decided that my not be the best choice. An AG pilot across the field had been watching me during construction. The day it was finished he asked if he could make the first test flight. I thought that was much smarter than I doing it so readily agreed. He found it to be very nice to fly so I was soloed in it the next morning. I must tell you it was a rush and certainly worth the wait. Dee Do not archive ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 08:27:39 AM PST US From: "kirk hull" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Show me the FAR... It all depends on your gross weight . The max gross weight for light sport is 1340. If yours is over that it does not qualify and the FAA has made it clear that it will not let the gross weight be changed. _____ From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ceashman@aol.com Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 5:32 AM Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Show me the FAR... Question from Steve/ Can anyone tell me where to find the FAR that says as a PVT Pilot I CANNOT fly my Kitfox V under the new Sport Pilot rules. Hi Steve. This is a heavy question, why don't you ask someone from the EAA. you would probably get the close to perfect answer. It seem that if you ask 5 pilots what the rule is you get 6 different answers... You are asking pilots and not someone close to the rule making! We' pilots are prone to have opinions. Based on first hand experience, on what we have been told by trusted ones, on how we interpret the spoken or written word and then of course there is the "not having the faintest idea of what I am talking about, but I must provide an answer even if I have to pull this one out of my a$$" (I have yet to meet a pilot who does not have an opinion. But then again, opinions are healthy and sometimes funny as long as we can connect to reality) It is a FAA "permission" to alter a "real" aircraft from it's original (and Certified) type design. DNA to Kitfox or other Experimentals My opinion is that the Kitfox is an "unreal" aircraft All the best in your search for the answer. Eric. Atlanta GA. Do Not Archive. ________________________________ Message 14 ____________________________________ Time: 08:41:22 AM PST US From: "Dave" Subject: Kitfox-List: Don Smythe comments on Warp Angle and Movie --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Dave" Ok Don, I just out in hangar and measured the prop about 6 inches in from tip results were 2 blades about the same and third one out 1/2 to 3/4 degree or so..... At tips all three I would say within 1/4 degree. So you say most of thrust is coming from the 3/4 point out the length of the blade which might be correct but if that is they what about the longer the prop, the better the climbout as a rule ? So , my question is what is the relevance ? And what performance gain is there to be had ? You saw the Trailerpark videos ? http://www.cfisher.com/kitfox/ Takeoffs 4 to 6 seconds What will I gain? thoughts ? I need comments -- are my takes offs OK ? Am I missing something ? Maybe my prop is costing me performance ? How does mine compare to others ? 582 or 912s ? Dave ----- Original Message ----- From: "Don Smythe" Sent: Sunday, October 22, 2006 2:22 PM Subject: Re: Guy --- Re: Kitfox-List: Warp Drive Hub > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Don Smythe" > > Unless we have different Warp protractors, the protractor fits anyplace > you want to put it. I'm saying that my blades started to loose uniformity > during the last 2-3 inches of the tips. The blades from the hub out to > the last couple inches were very uniform. That's why adjusting at the 3/4 > point makes good sense to me. That's the point where the prop is > developing max lift. I would think that it's most important for the props > to be exact in pitch at the 3/4 point. You can set the pitch any place > you want for your own day to day adjusting just use the exact same point > on each blade. I forget the exact number but if you pitch one blade at > 20" from hub (example) and another blade at 21" you have just put in a 1 > degree pitch error between the two blades. Again, I checked this but > forget exactly how much error but enough to stress that the exact distance > from the hub is important. > It is only my theory but the tips of the warp props are thin and narrow > possibly causing a very slight "warp" coming out of the molds. > Ha....That's why they call them Warp props. This is where Warp Drive > told me, "impossible". To check this on any prop is real easy. Next time > you adjust all three props at the tips simply slide the Warp protractor > down the blade to an exact distance from the hub (around 3/4 length) and > record all three numbers. No matter what the angle, they all 3 should > read the same. > > Don Smythe > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Dave" > >> Don, The WARP protractor fits nicely on the tip and I have had good >> success doing it there. are you saying that the blades are not all >> uniform from Root to tip ? I have no checked but I might . Did you > > > ________________________________ Message 15 ____________________________________ Time: 08:53:51 AM PST US From: "Fox5flyer" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: -First Flight N422NL Congrats Dee! And awaaaaayyyy you go... Deke do not archive ----- Original Message ----- From: Dee Young To: kitfox-list@matronics.com Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 11:18 AM Subject: Kitfox-List: -First Flight N422NL I had big plans all the way thru the construction of making the first flight. When the time came I was still a low time pilot with only 22 hrs and at the last minute decided that my not be the best choice. An AG pilot across the field had been watching me during construction. The day it was finished he asked if he could make the first test flight. I thought that was much smarter than I doing it so readily agreed. He found it to be very nice to fly so I was soloed in it the next morning. I must tell you it was a rush and certainly worth the wait. Dee Do not archive ________________________________ Message 16 ____________________________________ Time: 10:01:28 AM PST US From: "Noel Loveys" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Copyright issues WAS: How To Fly a Kitfox --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Noel Loveys" So true.... But you may have to prove in court that you are the one true copyright holder. The sealed registered letter will do that. As in the Case of Dave's videos if he were claiming copyright then he may have to prove that he was the originator of the video if someone else claimed the same thing. Noel > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of > Lowell Fitt > Sent: Sunday, October 22, 2006 1:32 PM > To: kitfox-list@matronics.com > Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Copyright issues WAS: How To Fly a Kitfox > > > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Lowell Fitt" > > > In the United States and countries bound by treaty the > following applies: > > The way in which copyright protection is secured is frequently > misunderstood. No publication or registration or other action in the > Copyright Office is required to secure copyright. (See > following note.) > There are, however, certain definite advantages to registration. See > "Copyright Registration." > > This from: http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.html#wci The Us > Copyright Office. > > In short if a person creates something it is protected. I > guess technically > the video created by Dave is copyrighted automatically if he > claims that > right. > > A photographer ownes the right to each of his thousands of > photographs and > a professional photographer usually puts a note on the photo > to that effect. > To inundate the copyright office with paperwork on every > photo ever taken > would bring that office to a quick halt. > > Lowell > > > ________________________________ Message 17 ____________________________________ Time: 10:03:59 AM PST US From: "Noel Loveys" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Montreal? Back in Newfoundland noelloveys@yahoo.ca What year are you? Noel -----Original Message----- From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Aerobatics@aol.com Sent: Sunday, October 22, 2006 6:16 PM Subject: Kitfox-List: Montreal? Where do you live now? we need to connect off line.... Frankly, I think I remember ... think not sure Dave Patrick KF2 582 BH ________________________________ Message 18 ____________________________________ Time: 10:16:22 AM PST US From: "Dave" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Copyright issues WAS: How To Fly a Kitfox --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Dave" hahaah I am the trailer park trash from the Kitfox trailerpark videos !!! ----- Original Message ----- From: "Noel Loveys" Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 1:00 PM Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Copyright issues WAS: How To Fly a Kitfox > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Noel Loveys" > > So true.... But you may have to prove in court that you are the one true > copyright holder. The sealed registered letter will do that. > > As in the Case of Dave's videos if he were claiming copyright then he may > have to prove that he was the originator of the video if someone else > claimed the same thing. > > Noel > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com >> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of >> Lowell Fitt >> Sent: Sunday, October 22, 2006 1:32 PM >> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com >> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Copyright issues WAS: How To Fly a Kitfox >> >> >> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Lowell Fitt" >> >> >> In the United States and countries bound by treaty the >> following applies: >> >> The way in which copyright protection is secured is frequently >> misunderstood. No publication or registration or other action in the >> Copyright Office is required to secure copyright. (See >> following note.) >> There are, however, certain definite advantages to registration. See >> "Copyright Registration." >> >> This from: http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.html#wci The Us >> Copyright Office. >> >> In short if a person creates something it is protected. I >> guess technically >> the video created by Dave is copyrighted automatically if he >> claims that >> right. >> >> A photographer ownes the right to each of his thousands of >> photographs and >> a professional photographer usually puts a note on the photo >> to that effect. >> To inundate the copyright office with paperwork on every >> photo ever taken >> would bring that office to a quick halt. >> >> Lowell >> >> >> > > > ________________________________ Message 19 ____________________________________ Time: 10:27:35 AM PST US Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Rebuilding 582's From: "akflyer" --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "akflyer" Just to let you know, I just got off the phone putting in the order for all the seals, o-rings, bearings etc, for a crank re-build... YES THEY ARE ROTAX PARTS... I found them at CPS. I downloaded the PDF manual and price list, then call and ordered them. Not quite as bad as one would expect, but I bet there is a cheaper place to get them somewhere, I was just ready to order now and went for it.. All said, the crank parts are $512.66 I am still looking for a source to machine the case for the water pump seal upgrade. OK now I have to get on the soap box just a little... I have been involved in several "certified" aircraft rebuilds and this spring the TOH of a lycoming 0320. I was spose to be the parts grunt and two A&P's (one with AI) were the brains.... I was appalled at the lack of attention to detail by the two monkeys. Con-rod nuts installed upside down (yes they have a right and wrong side), wrong nuts or studs used, using a TQ wrench that had NEVER been calibrated or in most cases not using a TQ wrench at all. The wrong assembly lube used, wrong rod bearings installed.... the list goes on to include just about everything they did....I guess with my QC mentality, my attention to detail is VERY great. If I think I know something by heart I still look it up just so I can pat myself on the back for knowing the right answer all along... but more often than not, it saves my butt...My point in all this is, I trust no one more than myself to work on my aircraft. This goes for for all aspects of the construction. I can tell horor stories all day long but I will quit at this. I will keep you posted on the progress and how the parts look when I get them. Thanks -------- Leni Avid C W/582 1260 full lotus .......DO NOT ARCHIVE..... Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=69709#69709 ________________________________ Message 20 ____________________________________ Time: 10:32:41 AM PST US From: kerrjohna@comcast.net Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Show me the FAR... Steve, while this is not FAR language....If your Kitfox 5 was registered as GWT in excess of 1320# it can not be flown Light Sport. Nor can it be recertified. -------------- Original message -------------- From: Ceashman@aol.com Question from Steve/ Can anyone tell me where to find the FAR that says as a PVT Pilot I CANNOT fly my Kitfox V under the new Sport Pilot rules. Hi Steve. This is a heavy question, why don't you ask someone from the EAA. you would probably get the close to perfect answer. It seem that if you ask 5 pilots what the rule is you get 6 different answers... You are asking pilots and not someone close to the rule making! We' pilots are prone to have opinions. Based on first hand experience, on what we have been told by trusted ones, on how we interpret the spoken or written word and then of course there is the "not having the faintest idea of what I am talking about, but I must provide an answer even if I have to pull this one out of my a$$" (I have yet to meet a pilot who does not have an opinion. But then again, opinions are healthy and sometimes funny as long as we can connect to reality) It is a FAA "permission" to alter a "real" aircraft from it's original (and Certified) type design. DNA to Kitfox or other Experimentals My opinion is that the Kitfox is an "unreal" aircraft All the best in your search for the answer. Eric. Atlanta GA. Do Not Archive.
Steve, while this is not FAR language....If your Kitfox 5 was registered as GWT in excess of 1320# it can not be flown Light Sport. Nor can it be recertified.
 
-------------- Original message --------------
From: Ceashman@aol.com
Question from Steve/ Can anyone tell me where to find the FAR that says as a PVT Pilot I CANNOT fly my Kitfox V under the new Sport Pilot rules.
 
 
Hi Steve.
This is a heavy question, why don't you ask someone from the EAA. you would probably get the close to perfect answer.
 
It seem that if you ask 5 pilots what the rule is you get 6 different answers...
 
You are asking pilots and not someone close to the rule making!
 
We' pilots are prone to have opinions. Based on first hand experience, on what we have been told by trusted ones, on how we interpret the spoken or written word and then of course there is the "not having the faintest idea of what I am talking about, but I must provide an answer even if I have to pull this one out of my a$$"
(I have yet to meet a pilot who does not have an opinion. But then again, opinions are healthy and sometimes funny as long as we can connect to reality)
 
It is a FAA "permission" to alter a "real" aircraft from it's original (and Certified) type design. DNA to Kitfox or other Experimentals
 
My opinion is that the Kitfox is an "unreal" aircraft
 
All the best in your search for the answer.
Eric. Atlanta GA.
 
Do Not Archive.
________________________________ Message 21 ____________________________________ Time: 10:39:11 AM PST US From: Guy Buchanan Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Show me the FAR... --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Guy Buchanan At 09:24 PM 10/22/2006, you wrote: >Can anyone tell me where to find the FAR that says as a PVT Pilot I CANNOT >fly my Kitfox V under the new Sport Pilot rules. (In other words, after my >current medical expires) Please quote only the FAR(s), not articles by >AOPA, EAA, or writersauthors. The FARs are the only things that counts. Steve, Why would you challenge us? I don't care if you want to fly your V as a sport pilot, but the local FSDO might. Why don't you contact them? They'll give you a definitive answer. (Not really, since I understand it depends who you talk to, but at least they may be able to point you to the regs.) Guy Buchanan K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar. Do not archive ________________________________ Message 22 ____________________________________ Time: 10:39:14 AM PST US From: Guy Buchanan Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: TEST FLYING...WAS-First Flight N422NL --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Guy Buchanan At 07:13 AM 10/23/2006, you wrote: >Thanks, that was what I was wondering about. So once you did some high >speed taxiing you felt good to go...interesting. I can see how that might >happen after you confirm rudder and other authorities. Well, "good to go" may be too optimistic. The taxi testing gave me a good feeling the AIRCRAFT was "good to go", at least as far as ground handling during take-off and landing was concerned. (That was my strongest concern.) As the Kitfox IV was a very proven design, and the CG, decalage, dihedral, wing twist, and control throws were well within tolerances, I had little concern for any kind of stability problem during flight. (I did a quick stability check upon leaving the runway and found no problems, but had they surfaced I guess I might have crashed from low altitude, or might have gotten it back on the ground. I flew from a 5000' x 150' runway.) I had run the engine 4 1/2 hours, much of that at high power, in various attitudes, for up to 3/4 hour at a time, so I was not extremely concerned about fuel starvation and engine reliability. (Though I gave a lot of thought to my exit strategy.) I think the largest factor in my flying the first flight was that the Kitfox was a very proven design, and mine was built very close to spec. And speaking very personally, I ultimately did not feel right asking someone else to fly an aircraft I had certified as airworthy, but was unwilling to fly myself. I guess I felt I had some obligation to accept the risk. (Please do not take this as any form of criticism or challenge. I'm speaking ONLY of myself. I did not want to watch my plane shed skin or come apart and kill some uninterested, though helpful, party.) Hope this helps. Ultimately I'd make the decision based on how comfortable I'd feel in the cockpit on that first flight. I was comfortable, and therefore very aware, very conscientious, and very conservative. If you know you're going to be a chocolate mess in the cockpit, it's far better to let someone else give it a go. Then you'll be able to fly it yourself with a much higher comfort level. Good luck! Guy Buchanan K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar. ________________________________ Message 23 ____________________________________ Time: 10:39:14 AM PST US From: "Don Smythe" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Don Smythe comments on Warp Angle and Movie --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Don Smythe" Dave, It was a NASA Engineer that educated me about the max thrust being produced somewhere in the 2/3 range. You are the first one to ever come back and say that he checked the prop and found the same differences that I did. Now, what is the relevance you ask??? I don't have a clue. However, I think that all would agree that the three blades should be adjusted with exactly the same pitch to reduce vibration etc..... If I have a problem adjusting at the tips and getting all blades exactly the same then I should look for a better way. I found that my blades were linear all the way from the hubs to within 2+ inches of the tips. Adjusting at the 2/3 point ensures the blades are all very close and who cares about the last 2 inches (tips) that do very little. BTW, there is no performance gain on picking a spot to adjust the props. Any place is fine as long as you use the exact same spot on each blade except the tips (IMHO) Don Smythe ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave" > Ok Don, I just out in hangar and measured the prop about 6 inches in from > tip > results were 2 blades about the same and third one out 1/2 to 3/4 > degree or so..... > At tips all three I would say within 1/4 degree. ________________________________ Message 24 ____________________________________ Time: 10:39:18 AM PST US From: Guy Buchanan Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Rebuilding 582's --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Guy Buchanan At 12:27 PM 10/23/2006, you wrote: > Leni please don't be put off. Your knowledge and experience do count. > As for those that don't have that then yes by all means don't fiddle. > Just go for a new engine or at least a rebuilt one by some one like Bob > Robertson but don't tell the rest of us what to do with our knowledge and > experience. Rex, I agree with your sentiments but want to add that the reason I often do work myself is because I then KNOW the quality of the work. When you send your engine to a shop you hope the work gets done consistent with that shop's reputation, by the people who made that reputation, and that they're just as good, just as sharp, and just as conscientious as they ever were. Unfortunately "S&%t Happens" and yours may be the one or the first engine that doesn't get done right, and you have no way of knowing until it fails. That's not to say I will do my own rebuild, because I just don't have the expertise and the tools; but I would fully endorse someone else doing so who does. Guy Buchanan K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar. ________________________________ Message 25 ____________________________________ Time: 10:41:38 AM PST US Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: need info on 582 rebuilding From: "akflyer" --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "akflyer" you just have to love what our wonderful court systems have done for aviation. -------- Leni Avid C W/582 1260 full lotus .......DO NOT ARCHIVE..... Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=69718#69718 ________________________________ Message 26 ____________________________________ Time: 11:30:08 AM PST US From: "6440 Auto Parts" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Copyright issues WAS: How To Fly a Kitfox --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "6440 Auto Parts" Where's the trailer park ? All I see are open fields barns farm houses etc. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave" Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 12:15 PM Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Copyright issues WAS: How To Fly a Kitfox > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Dave" > > hahaah I am the trailer park trash from the Kitfox trailerpark videos > !!! > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Noel Loveys" > To: > Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 1:00 PM > Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Copyright issues WAS: How To Fly a Kitfox > > >> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Noel Loveys" >> >> So true.... But you may have to prove in court that you are the one true >> copyright holder. The sealed registered letter will do that. >> >> As in the Case of Dave's videos if he were claiming copyright then he may >> have to prove that he was the originator of the video if someone else >> claimed the same thing. >> >> Noel >> >> >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com >>> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of >>> Lowell Fitt >>> Sent: Sunday, October 22, 2006 1:32 PM >>> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com >>> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Copyright issues WAS: How To Fly a Kitfox >>> >>> >>> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Lowell Fitt" >>> >>> >>> In the United States and countries bound by treaty the >>> following applies: >>> >>> The way in which copyright protection is secured is frequently >>> misunderstood. No publication or registration or other action in the >>> Copyright Office is required to secure copyright. (See >>> following note.) >>> There are, however, certain definite advantages to registration. See >>> "Copyright Registration." >>> >>> This from: http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.html#wci The Us >>> Copyright Office. >>> >>> In short if a person creates something it is protected. I >>> guess technically >>> the video created by Dave is copyrighted automatically if he >>> claims that >>> right. >>> >>> A photographer ownes the right to each of his thousands of >>> photographs and >>> a professional photographer usually puts a note on the photo >>> to that effect. >>> To inundate the copyright office with paperwork on every >>> photo ever taken >>> would bring that office to a quick halt. >>> >>> Lowell >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > ________________________________ Message 27 ____________________________________ Time: 11:34:20 AM PST US Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Show me the FAR... From: "84KF" --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "84KF" It all depends on your gross weight . The max gross weight for light sport is 1340. If yours is over that it does not qualify and the FAA has made it clear that it will not let the gross weight be changed. Yes ,,, this is true.if one wishes to have a true LSA category aircraft. But as I specifically stated my V is, and shall remain Experimental. I repeatI am not attempting to have the Experimental airworthiness certificate changed to a Light-sport Aircraft (LSA) category special airworthiness certificate which , yes have a max gross of 1320. But if you READ the rule @ http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/regulatory/sport_rule.pdf the key words, over and over, are Maximum Takeoff Weight and remember that my question is in regards to Sport pilot limitations, not what determines what can fit into the LSA category. LSA is LSA, Experimental is Experimental. This is where the confusion starts. The mixing of applesoranges. Steve, while this is not FAR language....If your Kitfox 5 was registered as GWT in excess of 1320# it can not be flown Light Sport. I do not wish to be rude, but (the original question is) show me the FAR that says just that. Steve, Why would you challenge us? This is not a challenge. It is an attempt to separate the hearsay and perceived misconceptions from the actually regulations as written. Thanks everyone for the input, keep it coming Steve -------- Steve Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=69729#69729 ________________________________ Message 28 ____________________________________ Time: 11:53:56 AM PST US From: "kirk hull" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Show me the FAR... --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "kirk hull" The FAA is not as picky as your insurance company. You might want to check because your insurance might require a valid medical. -----Original Message----- From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Guy Buchanan Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 11:59 AM Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Show me the FAR... --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Guy Buchanan At 09:24 PM 10/22/2006, you wrote: >Can anyone tell me where to find the FAR that says as a PVT Pilot I CANNOT >fly my Kitfox V under the new Sport Pilot rules. (In other words, after my >current medical expires) Please quote only the FAR(s), not articles by >AOPA, EAA, or writersauthors. The FARs are the only things that counts. Steve, Why would you challenge us? I don't care if you want to fly your V as a sport pilot, but the local FSDO might. Why don't you contact them? They'll give you a definitive answer. (Not really, since I understand it depends who you talk to, but at least they may be able to point you to the regs.) Guy Buchanan K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar. Do not archive ________________________________ Message 29 ____________________________________ Time: 02:03:36 PM PST US From: "Noel Loveys" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: TEST FLYING...WAS-First Flight N422NL My 'Fox is on Aerocet floats. I think that makes it quite a bit more docile. I started off doing hours of step taxiing. After to or three times to the pond I had to lift her off. Getting back on was a lot more fun because the plane required a lot of right rudder. A few more crow hops and I made my first circuit. I found I still had to keep considerable pressure on the right rudder pedal. I since have put a little tab on my rudder and the plane flies straight with no rudder fuss. A bit of practice and I can get it into some pretty small ponds... just as important...I can get out of them too! Noel -----Original Message----- From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dan Billingsley Sent: Sunday, October 22, 2006 3:29 PM Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: TEST FLYING...WAS-First Flight N422NL Awesome Joel! This must be a rewarding time in your life. I appreciate your openness in letting us know you chose to have an experienced pilot do your first flight. As I am still building, I don't think a week goes by that I fight with myself on this somewhat personal topic. As a low-time pilot (85 hrs in C-172's) would I be ready to take on a plane that "fly's before you are ready"? The options are to get some transition training and hope everything feels the same or... have an experienced Kitfoxer or professional test pilot take it up. The rebuttal on this thinking is sometimes posed as "I would never have anyone test-fly a plane that I built". This statement certainly has merrit, however, which is the wise option? I recently looked into life insurance from one of the aviation-savy outfits. I found it interesting (as I was answering preliminary questions over the phone) that he would ask if I will be the test pilot. I said I hadn't decided and he moved on. I am assuming the premium would be higher If I did it. I thought I would throw this topic out there to see how others who have gone before have dealt with it. Dan B. Mesa 314DW Noel Loveys wrote: --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Noel Loveys" I'll never forget my first solo. I don't think I've ever been so nervous. I also won't ever forget my first flight in my Kitfox III-A. The C172 lost all it's appeal in about 5 seconds. The wow factor is still fantastic. Noel > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of ________________________________ Message 30 ____________________________________ Time: 02:51:15 PM PST US From: "Noel Loveys" Subject: RE: Guy --- Re: Kitfox-List: Warp Drive Hub --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Noel Loveys" Most props are designed so the greatest thrust is developed about 2/3 the way out from the centre to the tip of the blades. This is usually the widest part of the blade too. The pitch of the blade should thin as you approach the blade tip as the tip actually travels further per revolution. Because it also travels faster the tips are closer to stalling at their subsoni8c speeds. That's just another reason to expect the tips to be thinner pitch. In the case of Warp blades... These are composite blades and probably do not act the same way wood or metal blades will. I guess it is possible that the tips actually thin out the pitch under load. One thing I'm sure of is Warp themselves specify measuring the prop angle at the tips, for their blades that is the way to do it. Noel > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of > John Anderson > Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 4:10 AM > To: kitfox-list@matronics.com > Subject: Re: Guy --- Re: Kitfox-List: Warp Drive Hub > > > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "John Anderson" > > > Why do Warpdrive insist on measuring at the tip?? I have > always done so as > the instruction says and have a nice smooth prop, 72" 3 blade. John A. > > > From: Guy Buchanan > To: kitfox-list@matronics.com > Subject: Re: Guy --- Re: Kitfox-List: Warp Drive Hub > Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2006 18:17:21 -0700 > > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Guy Buchanan > > At 10:45 AM 10/22/2006, you wrote: > >Don, The WARP protractor fits nicely on the tip and I have had good > >success > >doing it there. are you saying that the blades are not all > uniform from > >Root to tip ? > > Mine was off about 1/2-3/4 degree. I first set the tip, then > shifted to 3/4 > and equalized, trying to hit the mean of all three blades. > That way I could > still use the tip angle as reference. > > > Guy Buchanan > K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar. > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Need more speed? Get Xtra Broadband @ > http://jetstream.xtra.co.nz/chm/0,,202853-1000,00.html > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 31 ____________________________________ Time: 03:23:46 PM PST US From: "Dave" Subject: Re: Guy --- Re: Kitfox-List: Warp Drive Hub --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Dave" Noel, I am going to do some more measuring on the WARP and see what happens if I alter it . No one has commented on the movie but how mine compare with others ? At least I know mine fairly well and any major changes will be easy to detect . I think it would be nice to be able to optimize the prop by comparing and setting all the blade the same which I thought they were al ready. The Warp blades are heavy and I cannot see them twisting any more than a wooden prop. If you want to see twist look at IVOs . They are popular for some reason and I think allot is the price and they do in fact work fairly well. Only way to figure this puzzle out is to do it . and Guy , I sure hope you not more concerned about settings now . :) Dave ----- Original Message ----- From: "Noel Loveys" Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 5:50 PM Subject: RE: Guy --- Re: Kitfox-List: Warp Drive Hub > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Noel Loveys" > > Most props are designed so the greatest thrust is developed about 2/3 the > way out from the centre to the tip of the blades. This is usually the > widest part of the blade too. The pitch of the blade should thin as you > approach the blade tip as the tip actually travels further per revolution. > Because it also travels faster the tips are closer to stalling at their > subsoni8c speeds. That's just another reason to expect the tips to be > thinner pitch. > > In the case of Warp blades... These are composite blades and probably do > not > act the same way wood or metal blades will. I guess it is possible that > the > tips actually thin out the pitch under load. > > One thing I'm sure of is Warp themselves specify measuring the prop angle > at > the tips, for their blades that is the way to do it. > > Noel > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com >> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of >> John Anderson >> Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 4:10 AM >> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com >> Subject: Re: Guy --- Re: Kitfox-List: Warp Drive Hub >> >> >> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "John Anderson" >> >> >> Why do Warpdrive insist on measuring at the tip?? I have >> always done so as >> the instruction says and have a nice smooth prop, 72" 3 blade. John A. >> >> >> From: Guy Buchanan >> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com >> Subject: Re: Guy --- Re: Kitfox-List: Warp Drive Hub >> Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2006 18:17:21 -0700 >> >> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Guy Buchanan >> >> At 10:45 AM 10/22/2006, you wrote: >> >Don, The WARP protractor fits nicely on the tip and I have had good >> >success >> >doing it there. are you saying that the blades are not all >> uniform from >> >Root to tip ? >> >> Mine was off about 1/2-3/4 degree. I first set the tip, then >> shifted to 3/4 >> and equalized, trying to hit the mean of all three blades. >> That way I could >> still use the tip angle as reference. >> >> >> Guy Buchanan >> K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar. >> >> >> >> >> _________________________________________________________________ >> Need more speed? Get Xtra Broadband @ >> http://jetstream.xtra.co.nz/chm/0,,202853-1000,00.html >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > ________________________________ Message 32 ____________________________________ Time: 03:35:37 PM PST US Subject: Kitfox-List: Chili fest... From: Lynn Matteson --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Lynn Matteson Richard- I notice that the Chili fly-in at Allegan is supposed to start at 1 o'clock....that is the Sunday that Daylight "Wasting" Time starts. That means that it will be dark by 6 PM, instead of 7PM, like it is now...well, maybe not dark, but certainly darkening, especially for us newly-minted Sport Pilots who have to have the carriage home by dark. : ) I'm gonna get there earlier, so I can pig out, create some gas for the trip home, and get out of there by 4 or so to avoid turning into a pumpkin. Think maybe the organizers of the event forgot about Daylight Savings Time ending that weekend? Lynn ________________________________ Message 33 ____________________________________ Time: 03:39:52 PM PST US From: "Noel Loveys" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Re: need info on 582 rebuilding Bugbee, then Colby I started in 64 under headmaster Ed Cayley... Ray Lester started in '66. I'll never forget his first Christmas dinner address. He apologized profusely to the residents of Montreal for unleashing the full fury of 150 bohemians on an unsuspecting city. A good guy. Math with Mrs. Mc Clary then Mr. McChonnachie. French with Mrs. G. she could never pronounce my name but that's OK I couldn't pronounce her's either :-) Noel noelloveys@yahoo.ca -----Original Message----- From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Aerobatics@aol.com Sent: Sunday, October 22, 2006 6:09 PM Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: need info on 582 rebuilding In a message dated 10/22/2006 10:58:01 A.M. Central Daylight Time, noelloveys@yahoo.ca writes: Me too. Class of '69 Your Kidding?? Bugbee house then Davis you? Were you there with Mr. Lester as Dean? Dave Patrick ________________________________ Message 34 ____________________________________ Time: 03:51:21 PM PST US Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Show me the FAR... From: "crazyivan" --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "crazyivan" Steve, Your ascertation that the FARs are the end-all-be-all is incorrect. There are laws passed all of the time but the official book of Federal Regulations (CFR which the FARs are part of) are not immediately updated. Here is a link to the final ruling of the Light Sport Aircraft: http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgFinalRule.nsf/c03aa95a6d5f3d57852564720071b601/1d47971728e12ba286256edf004385aa!OpenDocument The law refers to 1320 lbs as "the maximum gross takeoff weight." You can apply any interpretation to that statement that you want, but as was mentioned before, you must check with your FSDO for the official, federal, won't-get-your-butt-a-violation interpretation. Through all of the articles and explanations that have been written over the past few years, 1320 is the max gross takeoff weight that is in your FAA-blessed pilots operating handbook, not the max you ever intend to fly. Personally, a quick call to the FSDO is a lot better than calling an aviation lawyer or having a suspended license. -------- Dave Speedster 912 UL Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=69774#69774 ________________________________ Message 35 ____________________________________ Time: 03:58:39 PM PST US From: "Noel Loveys" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Re: Rebuilding 582's --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Noel Loveys" That's why they pound it into us to use the maintenance manual. Copy the pages for the job check everything off, get it inspected by another set of eyes if you want keep the copied sheets stapled into the technical manuals. In Canada it is actually illegal to use any measuring equipment on an aircraft that is not calibrated. That includes Torque Wrenches, Voltmeters, Barfield testers, micrometers... He** even pressure gauges to inflate tires with nitrogen have to be calibrated. Each tool carries a sticker with the calibration data on it. Yes I have seen guys use "standard torque" by their definition it is snugged with a wrench. I figure if the AMO has to go through the expense of obtaining all the equipment, manuals and the calibration$ the least I can do is use them. I spent a few sleepless nights when a flash light was missing from my boss's tool box. Six weeks later we found it, still turned on, where the pilot who did the final independent inspection left it, under the right floor board of his C185. I set up a shadow board for the AMO and also had an inventory on my tool box. Every tool was locked up before quitting time. I had no problems lending a tool out to other engineers as long as I made a note and left that note in the place the tool was supposed to be. Never lost a tool. Noel > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of akflyer > Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 2:57 PM > To: kitfox-list@matronics.com > Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Rebuilding 582's > > > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "akflyer" > > Just to let you know, I just got off the phone putting in the > order for all the seals, o-rings, bearings etc, for a crank > re-build... YES THEY ARE ROTAX PARTS... I found them at CPS. > I downloaded the PDF manual and price list, then call and > ordered them. Not quite as bad as one would expect, but I > bet there is a cheaper place to get them somewhere, I was > just ready to order now and went for it.. All said, the crank > parts are $512.66 > > I am still looking for a source to machine the case for the > water pump seal upgrade. > > OK now I have to get on the soap box just a little... > I have been involved in several "certified" aircraft rebuilds > and this spring the TOH of a lycoming 0320. I was spose to > be the parts grunt and two A&P's (one with AI) were the > brains.... I was appalled at the lack of attention to detail > by the two monkeys. Con-rod nuts installed upside down (yes > they have a right and wrong side), wrong nuts or studs used, > using a TQ wrench that had NEVER been calibrated or in most > cases not using a TQ wrench at all. The wrong assembly lube > used, wrong rod bearings installed.... the list goes on to > include just about everything they did....I guess with my QC > mentality, my attention to detail is VERY great. If I think > I know something by heart I still look it up just so I can > pat myself on the back for knowing the right answer all > along... but more often than not, it saves my butt...My point > in all this is, I trust no one more than myself to work on my > aircraft. This goes for for all aspects of the construction. > I can tell horor stories! > all day long but I will quit at this. > > I will keep you posted on the progress and how the parts look > when I get them. > > Thanks > > -------- > Leni > Avid C W/582 > 1260 full lotus > > .......DO NOT ARCHIVE..... > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=69709#69709 > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 36 ____________________________________ Time: 04:08:53 PM PST US From: "Noel Loveys" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Don Smythe comments on Warp Angle and Movie --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Noel Loveys" Hoo boy! Just try putting a prop that is two inches longer or shorter for that matter, on your plane before you say the last 2 inches do very little. Don't forget the last two inches travel the fastest and travel the furthest. On seaplanes you will find the most pitting on the tips of the blades where spray erodes the leading edges. On metal blades dressing the pits out to an extent will smooth out the prop and increase thrust. On composite propellers filling the pits with epoxy and then dressing back to the original surfaces will do the same thing. Noel who cares about the last 2 inches (tips) that do very little. ________________________________ Message 37 ____________________________________ Time: 05:02:18 PM PST US Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Rebuilding 582's From: "Richard Rabbers" --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Richard Rabbers" > Con-rod nuts installed upside down (yes they have a right and wrong side) Leni, This statement struck a nerve ! I'd say...if you can't do the work.. (I count myself on this list) .. then DO everything possible within limits - try to get the chance to observe! at the least. Who cares most about an engine? The guy sitting behind it in the air. My only catastrophic engine failure, to date, was an IO-520 and a C-206. In my case, I'd just come from Nassau (90 minutes over water), was just clear of the shore passing over Ft Lauderdale (FLL) - boom .... grrrrrrr - I was on tower freq. - made an urgent request to land (declined declaring emergency, though may have had to if there hadn't been a gap in 9L traffic) ... powered back - not nice engine noise and vibration - short base, then landing... rolled with no power on to the north ramp. - yes, the trucks did roll in for a look... ---------------- On tear-down (~50-60 hours since rebuild) a connecting rod bolt was found to have been installed ' backwards' - excess length had been 'gently' hammering away on the crank case until it finally banged through. I found a rebuilder in the area, and was able to monitor every step of the new work. (the original shop denied responsibility, the rebuild was done for the previous owner) Grrrrrrrrr! Do not archive -------- Richard in SW Michigan Model 1 / 618 - full-lotus floats (restoration) Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=69784#69784 ________________________________ Message 38 ____________________________________ Time: 05:29:15 PM PST US From: "Noel Loveys" Subject: RE: Guy --- Re: Kitfox-List: Warp Drive Hub --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Noel Loveys" What is your static rpm WOT? Should be around 6200 on wheels ..6400 on floats. Noel > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dave > Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 7:53 PM > To: kitfox-list@matronics.com > Subject: Re: Guy --- Re: Kitfox-List: Warp Drive Hub > > > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Dave" > > Noel, > > I am going to do some more measuring on the WARP and see > what happens if I > alter it . > No one has commented on the movie but how mine compare with > others ? At > least I know mine fairly well and any major changes will be > easy to detect . > > I think it would be nice to be able to optimize the prop by > comparing and > setting all the blade the same which I thought they were al ready. > > The Warp blades are heavy and I cannot see them twisting any > more than a > wooden prop. If you want to see twist look at IVOs . They > are popular for > some reason and I think allot is the price and they do in > fact work fairly > well. > > Only way to figure this puzzle out is to do it . and Guy , > I sure hope > you not more concerned about settings now . :) > > Dave > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Noel Loveys" > To: > Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 5:50 PM > Subject: RE: Guy --- Re: Kitfox-List: Warp Drive Hub > > > > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Noel Loveys" > > > > > Most props are designed so the greatest thrust is developed > about 2/3 the > > way out from the centre to the tip of the blades. This is > usually the > > widest part of the blade too. The pitch of the blade > should thin as you > > approach the blade tip as the tip actually travels further > per revolution. > > Because it also travels faster the tips are closer to > stalling at their > > subsoni8c speeds. That's just another reason to expect > the tips to be > > thinner pitch. > > > > In the case of Warp blades... These are composite blades > and probably do > > not > > act the same way wood or metal blades will. I guess it is > possible that > > the > > tips actually thin out the pitch under load. > > > > One thing I'm sure of is Warp themselves specify measuring > the prop angle > > at > > the tips, for their blades that is the way to do it. > > > > Noel > > > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com > >> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of > >> John Anderson > >> Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 4:10 AM > >> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com > >> Subject: Re: Guy --- Re: Kitfox-List: Warp Drive Hub > >> > >> > >> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "John Anderson" > >> > >> > >> Why do Warpdrive insist on measuring at the tip?? I have > >> always done so as > >> the instruction says and have a nice smooth prop, 72" 3 > blade. John A. > >> > >> > >> From: Guy Buchanan > >> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com > >> Subject: Re: Guy --- Re: Kitfox-List: Warp Drive Hub > >> Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2006 18:17:21 -0700 > >> > >> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Guy Buchanan > >> > >> At 10:45 AM 10/22/2006, you wrote: > >> >Don, The WARP protractor fits nicely on the tip and I > have had good > >> >success > >> >doing it there. are you saying that the blades are not all > >> uniform from > >> >Root to tip ? > >> > >> Mine was off about 1/2-3/4 degree. I first set the tip, then > >> shifted to 3/4 > >> and equalized, trying to hit the mean of all three blades. > >> That way I could > >> still use the tip angle as reference. > >> > >> > >> Guy Buchanan > >> K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> _________________________________________________________________ > >> Need more speed? Get Xtra Broadband @ > >> http://jetstream.xtra.co.nz/chm/0,,202853-1000,00.html > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 39 ____________________________________ Time: 06:18:45 PM PST US From: "Dave" Subject: Re: Guy --- Re: Kitfox-List: Warp Drive Hub --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Dave" Same on both counts . if you go for higher static you will run over 7000 WOT and generally too high egts. Over all Warp a decent prop I have found. I will examine what Don brought up and and see if there is any differance. My only beef now is i get about 6900 WOT will static I am just barely 6200. Needle in carbs set full rich. I run about 102 to 103 mph WOT on wheels and about 94 to 95 on Amphibs. I just got a new GSC in 68 inch blade and will try it soon too. I have always found GSC a good performing prop. I heard once the Jimmy Franklin refused to use a Ivo on that Skystar video and used the GSC cause of the flex in a dive might hit the nose cowl. Rumor or truth ? Mythbusters only know for sure LOL Dave ----- Original Message ----- From: "Noel Loveys" Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 8:28 PM Subject: RE: Guy --- Re: Kitfox-List: Warp Drive Hub > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Noel Loveys" > > What is your static rpm WOT? Should be around 6200 on wheels ..6400 on > floats. > > Noel > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com >> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dave >> Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 7:53 PM >> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com >> Subject: Re: Guy --- Re: Kitfox-List: Warp Drive Hub >> >> >> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Dave" >> >> Noel, >> >> I am going to do some more measuring on the WARP and see >> what happens if I >> alter it . >> No one has commented on the movie but how mine compare with >> others ? At >> least I know mine fairly well and any major changes will be >> easy to detect . >> >> I think it would be nice to be able to optimize the prop by >> comparing and >> setting all the blade the same which I thought they were al ready. >> >> The Warp blades are heavy and I cannot see them twisting any >> more than a >> wooden prop. If you want to see twist look at IVOs . They >> are popular for >> some reason and I think allot is the price and they do in >> fact work fairly >> well. >> >> Only way to figure this puzzle out is to do it . and Guy , >> I sure hope >> you not more concerned about settings now . :) >> >> Dave >> >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Noel Loveys" >> To: >> Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 5:50 PM >> Subject: RE: Guy --- Re: Kitfox-List: Warp Drive Hub >> >> >> > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Noel Loveys" >> >> > >> > Most props are designed so the greatest thrust is developed >> about 2/3 the >> > way out from the centre to the tip of the blades. This is >> usually the >> > widest part of the blade too. The pitch of the blade >> should thin as you >> > approach the blade tip as the tip actually travels further >> per revolution. >> > Because it also travels faster the tips are closer to >> stalling at their >> > subsoni8c speeds. That's just another reason to expect >> the tips to be >> > thinner pitch. >> > >> > In the case of Warp blades... These are composite blades >> and probably do >> > not >> > act the same way wood or metal blades will. I guess it is >> possible that >> > the >> > tips actually thin out the pitch under load. >> > >> > One thing I'm sure of is Warp themselves specify measuring >> the prop angle >> > at >> > the tips, for their blades that is the way to do it. >> > >> > Noel >> > >> > >> > >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com >> >> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of >> >> John Anderson >> >> Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 4:10 AM >> >> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com >> >> Subject: Re: Guy --- Re: Kitfox-List: Warp Drive Hub >> >> >> >> >> >> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "John Anderson" >> >> >> >> >> >> Why do Warpdrive insist on measuring at the tip?? I have >> >> always done so as >> >> the instruction says and have a nice smooth prop, 72" 3 >> blade. John A. >> >> >> >> >> >> From: Guy Buchanan >> >> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com >> >> Subject: Re: Guy --- Re: Kitfox-List: Warp Drive Hub >> >> Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2006 18:17:21 -0700 >> >> >> >> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Guy Buchanan >> >> >> >> At 10:45 AM 10/22/2006, you wrote: >> >> >Don, The WARP protractor fits nicely on the tip and I >> have had good >> >> >success >> >> >doing it there. are you saying that the blades are not all >> >> uniform from >> >> >Root to tip ? >> >> >> >> Mine was off about 1/2-3/4 degree. I first set the tip, then >> >> shifted to 3/4 >> >> and equalized, trying to hit the mean of all three blades. >> >> That way I could >> >> still use the tip angle as reference. >> >> >> >> >> >> Guy Buchanan >> >> K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> _________________________________________________________________ >> >> Need more speed? Get Xtra Broadband @ >> >> http://jetstream.xtra.co.nz/chm/0,,202853-1000,00.html >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > ________________________________ Message 40 ____________________________________ Time: 06:23:38 PM PST US From: Malcolmbru@aol.com Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Rebuilding 582's call air screw performances in Arizona Steve batty has rebuilt moor 582s with aftermarket partes and rebuilt moor cranks than anybody I know and he fly's one of them Canadian Kit fox clones malcolm ________________________________ Message 41 ____________________________________ Time: 06:26:55 PM PST US Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Rebuilding 582's From: "akflyer" --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "akflyer" Thanks I will be calling him tomorrow. -------- Leni Avid C W/582 1260 full lotus .......DO NOT ARCHIVE..... Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=69806#69806 ________________________________ Message 42 ____________________________________ Time: 06:28:29 PM PST US Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Chili fest... From: Lynn Matteson --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Lynn Matteson Sorry, list members...this was supposed to be a personal e-mail Lynn do not archive On Monday, October 23, 2006, at 06:38 PM, Lynn Matteson wrote: > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Lynn Matteson > > Richard- > I notice that the Chili fly-in at Allegan is supposed to start at 1 > o'clock....that is the Sunday that Daylight "Wasting" Time starts. > That means that it will be dark by 6 PM, instead of 7PM, like it is > now...well, maybe not dark, but certainly darkening, especially for us > newly-minted Sport Pilots who have to have the carriage home by dark. > : ) > I'm gonna get there earlier, so I can pig out, create some gas for the > trip home, and get out of there by 4 or so to avoid turning into a > pumpkin. Think maybe the organizers of the event forgot about Daylight > Savings Time ending that weekend? > > Lynn > > ________________________________ Message 43 ____________________________________ Time: 06:52:09 PM PST US From: Malcolmbru@aol.com Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Rebuilding 582's air screw Call (632)842-3902 Steve Batty. In Europe the rebuild time is 600 hr's 0n a crank ________________________________ Message 44 ____________________________________ Time: 06:54:54 PM PST US From: Dan Billingsley Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: TEST FLYING...WAS-First Flight N422NL Thanks again Guy...good info to ponder. Dan Guy Buchanan wrote: --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Guy Buchanan At 07:13 AM 10/23/2006, you wrote: >Thanks, that was what I was wondering about. So once you did some high >speed taxiing you felt good to go...interesting. I can see how that might >happen after you confirm rudder and other authorities. Well, "good to go" may be too optimistic. The taxi testing gave me a good feeling the AIRCRAFT was "good to go", at least as far as ground handling during take-off and landing was concerned. (That was my strongest concern.) As the Kitfox IV was a very proven design, and the CG, decalage, dihedral, wing twist, and control throws were well within tolerances, I had little concern for any kind of stability problem during flight. (I did a quick stability check upon leaving the runway and found no problems, but had they surfaced I guess I might have crashed from low altitude, or might have gotten it back on the ground. I flew from a 5000' x 150' runway.) I had run the engine 4 1/2 hours, much of that at high power, in various attitudes, for up to 3/4 hour at a time, so I was not extremely concerned about fuel starvation and engine reliability. (Though I gave a lot of thought to my exit strategy.) I think the largest factor in my flying the first flight was that the Kitfox was a very proven design, and mine was built very close to spec. And speaking very personally, I ultimately did not feel right asking someone else to fly an aircraft I had certified as airworthy, but was unwilling to fly myself. I guess I felt I had some obligation to accept the risk. (Please do not take this as any form of criticism or challenge. I'm speaking ONLY of myself. I did not want to watch my plane shed skin or come apart and kill some uninterested, though helpful, party.) Hope this helps. Ultimately I'd make the decision based on how comfortable I'd feel in the cockpit on that first flight. I was comfortable, and therefore very aware, very conscientious, and very conservative. If you know you're going to be a chocolate mess in the cockpit, it's far better to let someone else give it a go. Then you'll be able to fly it yourself with a much higher comfort level. Good luck! Guy Buchanan K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar. ________________________________ Message 45 ____________________________________ Time: 07:21:23 PM PST US From: "john perry" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: need info on 582 rebuilding MessageHow do you guys come up with this crap when a ? was asked . at least change the heading to suit your post geeeeeee. John Perry tired of the drivel and why not use the DO NOT ARCHIVE DO NOT ARCHIVE ----- Original Message ----- From: Noel Loveys To: kitfox-list@matronics.com Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 5:39 PM Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Re: need info on 582 rebuilding Bugbee, then Colby I started in 64 under headmaster Ed Cayley... Ray Lester started in '66. I'll never forget his first Christmas dinner address. He apologized profusely to the residents of Montreal for unleashing the full fury of 150 bohemians on an unsuspecting city. A good guy. Math with Mrs. Mc Clary then Mr. McChonnachie. French with Mrs. G. she could never pronounce my name but that's OK I couldn't pronounce her's either :-) Noel noelloveys@yahoo.ca -----Original Message----- From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Aerobatics@aol.com Sent: Sunday, October 22, 2006 6:09 PM To: kitfox-list@matronics.com Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: need info on 582 rebuilding In a message dated 10/22/2006 10:58:01 A.M. Central Daylight Time, noelloveys@yahoo.ca writes: Me too. Class of '69 Your Kidding?? Bugbee house then Davis you? Were you there with Mr. Lester as Dean? Dave Patrick href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List">http://www.matron ________________________________ Message 46 ____________________________________ Time: 07:28:24 PM PST US Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Prop Blade Length From: "crazyivan" --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "crazyivan" I just pulled off a 68" GSC wooden prop off of my Speedster with a Rotax 912UL (80hp). I replaced it with a 70" or 72" (I forgot to measure it) IvoProp ultralight. Huge improvement in both takeoff roll, climb, and max straight-and-level speed. It was 2.4 lbs lighter as well. After I get the pitch dialed in, I'll run the numbers by you guys. -------- Dave Speedster 912 UL Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=69813#69813 ________________________________ Message 47 ____________________________________ Time: 07:44:54 PM PST US From: "jdmcbean" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Re: Prop Blade Length --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "jdmcbean" We have sold many 70" Ivo for the 80 hp Rotax... Fly Safe !! John & Debra McBean 208.337.5111 www.kitfoxaircraft.com "It's not how Fast... It's how Fun!" DO NOT ARCHIVE -----Original Message----- From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of crazyivan Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 8:28 PM Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Prop Blade Length --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "crazyivan" I just pulled off a 68" GSC wooden prop off of my Speedster with a Rotax 912UL (80hp). I replaced it with a 70" or 72" (I forgot to measure it) IvoProp ultralight. Huge improvement in both takeoff roll, climb, and max straight-and-level speed. It was 2.4 lbs lighter as well. After I get the pitch dialed in, I'll run the numbers by you guys. -------- Dave Speedster 912 UL Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=69813#69813 ________________________________ Message 48 ____________________________________ Time: 07:57:21 PM PST US From: "ron schick" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Re: Prop Blade Length --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "ron schick" Same with the VW. Barely got over the trees with the GSC and does 92 KTS with the Ivoprop. Ron NB Ore >From: "crazyivan" >To: kitfox-list@matronics.com >Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Prop Blade Length >Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 19:28:06 -0700 > >--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "crazyivan" > >I just pulled off a 68" GSC wooden prop off of my Speedster with a Rotax >912UL (80hp). I replaced it with a 70" or 72" (I forgot to measure it) >IvoProp ultralight. Huge improvement in both takeoff roll, climb, and max >straight-and-level speed. It was 2.4 lbs lighter as well. After I get the >pitch dialed in, I'll run the numbers by you guys. > >-------- >Dave >Speedster 912 UL > > >Read this topic online here: > >http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=69813#69813 > > _________________________________________________________________ Get today's hot entertainment gossip http://movies.msn.com/movies/hotgossip?icid=T002MSN03A07001 ________________________________ Message 49 ____________________________________ Time: 08:32:14 PM PST US From: "ron schick" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Antifreeze- Oil & gear boxes ? --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "ron schick" I don't like changing either of them! Probably changed more wives than oil though. Just don't mix the two types, of oil, or it will jell. Ron NB Or >From: "john perry" >To: >Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Antifreeze- Oil & gear boxes ? Date: Sun, 22 Oct >2006 19:41:56 -0500 > >--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "john perry" > >Not me I play with both . Makes for a interesting time lol . Yep the >dreaded oil thingy has been restarted. . > >John Perry >Kitfox 2 N718PD >pennzoil 2 stroke aircooled oil > >DO NOT ARCHIVE > > >>Well let's face it ... It's that time of the year again :-) >> >>I think most of us more true to our oil than to our ladies... >> >>Noel >>>Pennzoil 2-cycle for air cooled engines. (Unfortunately you've probably >>>started the twice-dreaded 2-cycle oil debate again.) >>> > >>> >>>Guy > >> >> >> > > _________________________________________________________________ Get FREE company branded e-mail accounts and business Web site from Microsoft Office Live http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/mcrssaub0050001411mrt/direct/01/ ________________________________ Message 50 ____________________________________ Time: 09:13:03 PM PST US Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Show me the FAR... From: "84KF" --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "84KF" The law refers to 1320 lbs as "the maximum gross takeoff weight Where???? Even my Special Airworthiness Certificate (Experimental) for the aircraft does not show or have a space for Gross Weight or anything at all for that matter that refers to any type of weight. You can apply any interpretation to that statement that you want No, you cannot. FARs are not open to interpretation. They are written in black and white and mean exactly what the say 1320 is the max gross takeoff weight that is in your FAA-blessed pilots operating handbook, not the max you ever intend to fly There is no such thing as an FAA approved operating handbook for an Experimental, just as there is no TCDS (Type Certificate Data Sheet) There are operating limitations, but even these are not blessed by the FAA applesoranges Sorry if it seems that I dont work and play well with others. It is not my intention to be argumentative. The intent is to promote discussion and education. After 25 years in the business including years of teaching FAA regulations at a PART 147 Maintenance School I have learned that second hand hanger talk is not the most reliable source of factual information. To allYes, I will eventually contact my FSDO but I think we can all agree that as pilots andor maintenance personal we must have a solid and correct understanding of the lawsrules as they apply to us.as written. Judging from the numbers of views of this post topic it would seem there is an interest in clarifying the LSASport pilot rules. Again, I urge one to take the time to read and attempt to understand the ACTUAL rulings http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/regulatory/sport_rule.pdf and I am willing to bet that there are others out there with Series 5 models that have the same question. Thanks, Steve -------- Steve: Former Fi-156 'Storch' driver (...talk about folding wings!!!) New owner, not builder- Kitfox V / 912UL / Warp Dr 3 blade. Thanks to the late great Ray Mudge, Brighton Mi. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=69829#69829 ________________________________ Message 51 ____________________________________ Time: 10:13:00 PM PST US From: "Richard D'Archangel" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Prop Blade Length --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Richard D'Archangel" Ron, Is your ivoprop a 2 or 3 blade prop? Thanks, Dick ron schick wrote: > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "ron schick" > > > Same with the VW. Barely got over the trees with the GSC and does 92 > KTS with the Ivoprop. Ron NB Ore > > >> From: "crazyivan" >> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com >> Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Prop Blade Length >> Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 19:28:06 -0700 >> >> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "crazyivan" >> >> I just pulled off a 68" GSC wooden prop off of my Speedster with a >> Rotax 912UL (80hp). I replaced it with a 70" or 72" (I forgot to >> measure it) IvoProp ultralight. Huge improvement in both takeoff >> roll, climb, and max straight-and-level speed. It was 2.4 lbs >> lighter as well. After I get the pitch dialed in, I'll run the >> numbers by you guys. >> >> -------- >> Dave >> Speedster 912 UL >> >> >> >> >> Read this topic online here: >> >> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=69813#69813 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get today's hot entertainment gossip > http://movies.msn.com/movies/hotgossip?icid=T002MSN03A07001 > > ________________________________ Message 52 ____________________________________ Time: 10:30:06 PM PST US From: "Lowell Fitt" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Rebuilding 582's --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Lowell Fitt" ----- Original Message ----- From: "Noel Loveys" > In Canada it is actually illegal to use any measuring equipment on an > aircraft that is not calibrated. That includes Torque Wrenches, > Voltmeters, > Barfield testers, micrometers... He** even pressure gauges to inflate > tires > with nitrogen have to be calibrated. Each tool carries a sticker with the > calibration data on it. I guess Canada is not the place for me. I'd be in the slammer by now for sure. In the US, experimental aircraft can be maintained and even built by their owners and any old screwdriver or wrench will suffice. I have a pretty cool torque wrench that I calibrated against another torqe wrench and it was right on the money. Maybe there is something I am missing here. Lowell ________________________________ Message 53 ____________________________________ Time: 10:30:06 PM PST US From: "Lowell Fitt" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Don Smythe comments on Warp Angle and Movie --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Lowell Fitt" Well, Since my airplane is just outside the side door, I did the deed. I just checked the prop pitch. I usually pitch my Warp taper at the inboard end of the nickel leading edge - the same as everyone else I have talked to. All checked the same there. And the same to about three inches from the tip, but two inches in, big difference and one was a full bubble witdth flat at the tip. Now, I am not particularly happy with my findings, but I am glad the bulk of the blade is pitched the same as the others. Kudos to Don and his aeronautical engineer friend. Are you suggesting that the terminal two inches is the major player in prop efficiency and smoothness? And a full bubble width - 2 degrees out of pitch is better at the fat of the blade than the final inch or two of the tip? Hoo Boy! Won't argue the merits of blade length here. I thought we were talking about blade pitch and where to put the protracter. Lowell ----- Original Message ----- From: "Noel Loveys" Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 4:08 PM Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Don Smythe comments on Warp Angle and Movie > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Noel Loveys" > > Hoo boy! > > Just try putting a prop that is two inches longer or shorter for that > matter, on your plane before you say the last 2 inches do very little. > Don't forget the last two inches travel the fastest and travel the > furthest. > > On seaplanes you will find the most pitting on the tips of the blades > where > spray erodes the leading edges. On metal blades dressing the pits out to > an > extent will smooth out the prop and increase thrust. On composite > propellers filling the pits with epoxy and then dressing back to the > original surfaces will do the same thing. > > Noel > > > who cares about the last 2 inches (tips) that do very little. > > >