Today's Message Index:
----------------------
0. 12:41 AM - List Value... (Matt Dralle)
1. 03:32 AM - Re: Quest for knowledge-new kitfox fan (Eric)
2. 04:27 AM - [Off-topic] Handsome pilots (Michel Verheughe)
3. 04:50 AM - Fuel prices. Was Re: Bluetooth GPS Receiver (Lyle Persels)
4. 05:24 AM - Re: [Off-topic] Handsome pilots (jim)
5. 05:57 AM - line drawing (cirrus10)
6. 06:04 AM - Re: Quest for knowledge-new kitfox fan (Noel Loveys)
7. 06:10 AM - Re: Quest for knowledge-new kitfox fan (kirk hull)
8. 06:14 AM - Re: Quest for knowledge-new kitfox fan (Tom Jones)
9. 07:09 AM - Re: line drawing (Fox5flyer)
10. 07:25 AM - Re: line drawing (84KF)
11. 07:27 AM - Re: Quest for knowledge-new kitfox fan (crazyivan)
12. 07:32 AM - Re: Quest for knowledge-new kitfox fan (Marco Menezes)
13. 08:17 AM - Re: Re: Quest for knowledge-new kitfox fan (Lynn Matteson)
14. 08:28 AM - Re: Original Kitfox prototype (Charles Bloom)
15. 08:34 AM - Re: Quest for knowledge-new kitfox fan (Guy Buchanan)
16. 09:53 AM - Re: Quest for knowledge-new kitfox fan (Rick Daniels)
17. 10:49 AM - Re: Re: Bluetooth GPS Receiver (Michel Verheughe)
18. 11:58 AM - Re: Quest for knowledge-new kitfox fan (Michel Verheughe)
19. 12:06 PM - Re: Quest for knowledge-new kitfox fan (Frank Miles)
20. 12:20 PM - Re: Re: Bluetooth GPS Receiver (Jim Crowder)
21. 12:47 PM - Re: CLASSIC IV FLAPERONS RIG... (PEDRO PEREZ)
22. 12:51 PM - Re: Quest for knowledge-new kitfox fan (wingnut)
23. 01:19 PM - Re: Quest for knowledge-new kitfox fan (Clem Nichols)
24. 03:01 PM - Re: Kitfox prototype 1050 groos (Malcolmbru@aol.com)
25. 03:08 PM - [Off-topic] Gary Algate (Michel Verheughe)
26. 03:19 PM - Re: Kitfox prototype 1050 groos (Dee Young)
27. 03:35 PM - Re: Quest for knowledge-new kitfox fan (Marco Menezes)
28. 04:44 PM - 582 HAC was Re: Quest for knowledge-new kitfox fan (Guy Buchanan)
29. 07:05 PM - Re: Kitfox prototype 1050 groos (Noel Loveys)
30. 07:12 PM - Re: Quest for knowledge-new kitfox fan (floran higgins)
Message 0
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
If you look forward to checking your List email everyday (and a lot of you have
written to say that you do!), then you're probably getting at least 0 or 0 worth
of Entertainment from the Lists each year. You'd pay twice that for a subscription
to some lame magazine or even a dinner out. Isn't the List worth at
least that much to you? Wouldn't it be great if you could pay that same amount
and get a well-managed media source free of advertising, SPAM, and viruses?
Come to think of it, you do...
Won't you please take a minute to make your Contribution today and support YOUR
Lists?
Contribution Page:
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Again, I want to say THANK YOU to everyone that has made a Contribution thus far
during this year's List Fund Raiser!! These Lists are made possible exclusively
through YOUR generosity!!
Thank you for your support!
Matt Dralle
Email List Admin.
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Quest for knowledge-new kitfox fan |
Well put Guy,
accept you were mistaken on one point. It is the Rotax 912 powered Kitfox IV
pilots who are the handsome specimens.
Eric
----- Original Message -----
From: "Guy Buchanan" <bnn@nethere.com>
Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2006 10:41 PM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Quest for knowledge-new kitfox fan
>
> At 04:51 PM 11/16/2006, you wrote:
>>I think the model III is a better deal but need some experienced Kitfox
>>flyers (like yourselves) to tell me why and if one should favor the model
>>IV over the Model III.
>
> Well now. . . I can't speak for the III, but the IV is clearly the BEST
> Kitfox out there. And of the IV's, the ones with 582 are clearly the BEST.
> Of course it isn't just the aircraft. You have to understand that IV
> pilots are a breed apart: handsome, intelligent, witty, and superlative
> pilots. You'll want to think long and hard about whether you have the
> moxie, the chutzpah, the sheer unadulterated machismo required to fly a
> IV. If so come join us. We're an elite group, but friendly to our equals.
> (GD&R)
>
>
> Guy Buchanan
> K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar.
>
> Do not archive
>
>
>
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | [Off-topic] Handsome pilots |
> From: Eric [iworonko@cox.net]
> It is the Rotax 912 powered Kitfox IV
> pilots who are the handsome specimens.
Once upon a time, there was a handsome pilot who walked pass a hangar when a sweet
taildragger said: "Psst, handsome pilot! Fly me and I'll be yours forever!"
But the pilot kept walking without even turning his head.
Then the taildragger said: - "What's wrong with you, Mister? Don't you like me?"
- "No offence, Ma'am" answered the pilot, "but you see, I am a handsome pilot and
I don't have time for ... flying!"
Gnnnn he, he, he! :-)
Cheers,
Michel
do not archive
<pre><b><font size=2 color="#000000" face="courier new,courier">
</b></font></pre></body></html>
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Fuel prices. Was Re: Bluetooth GPS Receiver |
Both 100LL.com and airnav.com solicit price updates from the airport
manager or fbo. In fact, 100LL.com makes a weekly e-mail query of
each airport's information provider(s). Both sites have an ability to
present area fuel costs filtered by date posted.
I'm on the airport management commission for our small airport, I75.
Lyle
On 11 16, 06, at 5:58 PM, Bob Unternaehrer wrote:
> <shilocom@mcmsys.com>
>
> <<<Sorry not to check in for a couple of days to answer you. The easy
> question was what is the source of fuel price data, and the answer
> is that
> it's from www.100LL.com. When updating Anywheremap from their
> download
> site, this can be updated, so what's in my PocketPC is typically as
> recent
> as the last time I hit their site>>>
>
> what I was wondering was how accurate was "their" data and where
> did they
> get it. The only thing I have used is "airnav.com" and that
> dependes on a
> pilot report for fuel prices and can be off a bunch. Bob U.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bob" <dswaim1119@comcast.net>
> To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2006 3:26 PM
> Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Bluetooth GPS Receiver
>
>
>>
>> Sorry not to check in for a couple of days to answer you. The easy
> question was what is the source of fuel price data, and the answer
> is that
> it's from www.100LL.com. When updating Anywheremap from their
> download
> site, this can be updated, so what's in my PocketPC is typically as
> recent
> as the last time I hit their site. Like I wrote, with a tap it'll
> also give
> the prices at the surrounding airports, with distance and bearing
> info. Tap
> on any of the airport designators and instantly go to the info
> about that
> airport. Another two (?) taps and that airport goes into the
> flight plan as
> a destination or way-point. It's a nice feature while in-flight
> and you
> notice that the winds have given you a higher fuel burn than
> planned. I'll
> check every half-hour if bored in-flight and regularly find fuel
> stops that
> are cheaper than I'd planned.
>>
>> Besides that, what did I feel was different? Hmmm. I just went
>> back to
> look at the PocketFMS site and a number of the Anywheremap features
> are now
> also in PocketFMS, which weren't there when I made my decision. The
> live-weather (by XM Satellite) function on Anywheremap is an expensive
> option with additional parts to keep up. It would be a great
> feature when
> the weather is really active. It looks like PocketFMS weather is
> simpler,
> free, and just a download during preflight hookup to the internet.
> I'm VFR
> equipped, so like the PocketFMS weather concept. I can also
> understand why
> you Europeans prefer the PocketFMS, as their mapping is hands-down
> better
> for where you live.
>>
>> AnywhereMap has re-assuring "cones of safety" which are green
>> rings around
> airports to instantly know if you can glide there or not. They get
> bigger
> as you gain altitude and are based on a glide rate that you store
> for your
> airplane description during set-up. Not sure if PocketFMS has that
> one, but
> it's sure nice at night. AnywhereMap can also go straight into an
> approach
> mode that gives localizer displays if you need/want, when the fan
> stops up
> front. Both now have the terrain warning feature. Not sure if
> PocketFMS
> has that one, either.
>>
>> Within the US, AnywhereMap updates the entire country's maps as a
>> really
> simple and fast single download whenever I click on their download
> site.
> Plus, the restricted airpace can pop up where I live as fast as
> somebody in
> the White house wants to change their itinerary, so updates HAVE to
> be right
> EVERY time and I'm not worried (as much) with AnywhereMap, which is
> getting
> their info straight from the Government. In-flight, the ability to
> set up
> the Anywheremap display to show just the features I want to see are
> better
> and PocketFMS appeared more cluttered. For a casual local or VFR
> flight
> without a plan and near our restricted airspace, Anywheremap was
> just easier
> to load and go. When clicking on any nav or airport data,
> AnywhereMap is
> seamless where I found PocketFMS presented too much and had a lot
> that I had
> to wade through. For example, I want to just see ATIS frequencies
> as we're
> flying along, and when I click on an airport don't want to see full
> listings
> of lattit!
>> ude, longitude, and everything else when I just want fuel
>> prices. Same
> with restricted airspace in AnywhereMap, in that with a tap the
> airspace
> boundaries highlight and show effective altitudes, and another tap
> will get
> me to the active times and ATC frequency.
>>
>> Both depend on the BT GPS and PocketPC to be established and need
>> to be
> reset if anything gets disconnected. I still fly with an old back-
> up Garmin
> hiking GPS and real maps, just because I still don't trust Microsoft
> products with my life or license. If PocketPC works for you,
> great, my
> personal use just seemed to lean to AnywhereMap.
>>
>> Bob
>>
>> --------
>> Remember that internet advice may only be worth what you pay.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=75056#75056
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: [Off-topic] Handsome pilots |
hehe, good one......
>> From: Eric [iworonko@cox.net]
>> It is the Rotax 912 powered Kitfox IV
>> pilots who are the handsome specimens.
>>
>
> Once upon a time, there was a handsome pilot who walked pass a hangar when a
sweet taildragger said: "Psst, handsome pilot! Fly me and I'll be yours forever!"
>
> But the pilot kept walking without even turning his head.
>
> Then the taildragger said: - "What's wrong with you, Mister? Don't you like me?"
> - "No offence, Ma'am" answered the pilot, "but you see, I am a handsome pilot
and I don't have time for ... flying!"
>
> Gnnnn he, he, he! :-)
>
> Cheers,
> Michel
>
> do not archive
>
>
> <pre><b><font size=2 color="#000000" face="courier new,courier">
>
>
> </b></font></pre>
good one..........
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Anyone have a source for a line drawing of the 7 for painting/designing
purposes. Thanks.
Regards,
Ed Babovec
Model 6/7, 912S
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Quest for knowledge-new kitfox fan |
There's a bit of a question on the model of my plane. For the sake of
avoiding an argument I'll call it a model II or model III-A.
If wing folding is important to you ( as well as looking good ) model II
&III don't require anything be undone to fold the wings. The down side is
you will get an extra 150 lb. of weight to fly in the model IV.... I think
the flaperon mixing boxes were changed in the model IV to correct for
adverse yaw. Also the vertical stab/rudder is a bit bigger.
When you fold your wings you will need a stand for the tail of the plane
(nose wheel) because folding the wings puts the CG waaaay aft of the mains.
Noel
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Eric
> Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 8:01 AM
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Quest for knowledge-new kitfox fan
>
>
>
> Well put Guy,
> accept you were mistaken on one point. It is the Rotax 912
> powered Kitfox IV
> pilots who are the handsome specimens.
> Eric
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Guy Buchanan" <bnn@nethere.com>
> To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2006 10:41 PM
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Quest for knowledge-new kitfox fan
>
>
> >
> > At 04:51 PM 11/16/2006, you wrote:
> >>I think the model III is a better deal but need some
> experienced Kitfox
> >>flyers (like yourselves) to tell me why and if one should
> favor the model
> >>IV over the Model III.
> >
> > Well now. . . I can't speak for the III, but the IV is
> clearly the BEST
> > Kitfox out there. And of the IV's, the ones with 582 are
> clearly the BEST.
> > Of course it isn't just the aircraft. You have to
> understand that IV
> > pilots are a breed apart: handsome, intelligent, witty, and
> superlative
> > pilots. You'll want to think long and hard about whether
> you have the
> > moxie, the chutzpah, the sheer unadulterated machismo
> required to fly a
> > IV. If so come join us. We're an elite group, but friendly
> to our equals.
> > (GD&R)
> >
> >
> > Guy Buchanan
> > K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar.
> >
> > Do not archive
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Quest for knowledge-new kitfox fan |
You guy just haven't seen the rare and spectacular Subaru powered IV or you
would never say anything like that
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Eric
Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 5:31 AM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Quest for knowledge-new kitfox fan
Well put Guy,
accept you were mistaken on one point. It is the Rotax 912 powered Kitfox IV
pilots who are the handsome specimens.
Eric
----- Original Message -----
From: "Guy Buchanan" <bnn@nethere.com>
Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2006 10:41 PM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Quest for knowledge-new kitfox fan
>
> At 04:51 PM 11/16/2006, you wrote:
>>I think the model III is a better deal but need some experienced Kitfox
>>flyers (like yourselves) to tell me why and if one should favor the model
>>IV over the Model III.
>
> Well now. . . I can't speak for the III, but the IV is clearly the BEST
> Kitfox out there. And of the IV's, the ones with 582 are clearly the BEST.
> Of course it isn't just the aircraft. You have to understand that IV
> pilots are a breed apart: handsome, intelligent, witty, and superlative
> pilots. You'll want to think long and hard about whether you have the
> moxie, the chutzpah, the sheer unadulterated machismo required to fly a
> IV. If so come join us. We're an elite group, but friendly to our equals.
> (GD&R)
>
>
> Guy Buchanan
> K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar.
>
> Do not archive
>
>
>
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Quest for knowledge-new kitfox fan |
Rick, I am a Classic 4 builder, not a flyer yet. I thought a lot about converting
my plane to a Tri Gear after it was finished. I came to the conclusion that
it was beyond my skill and wallet to do that. A later model with the tri gear
option built into the fuselage may be less expensive to convert in the long
run. You probably are planing on getting some expert advise on what the conversion
will involve for a specific plane before you purchase.
Get a copy of the weight and balance sheet and play the weight shifting game on
a computer weight and balance program to see what the conversion will do to it.
Other than that, there are too many variables to suggest what plane will be best
for you. That would be like telling you what woman to marry.
Tom Jones, Ellensburg, WA
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=75239#75239
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: line drawing |
Try Sportflight.com. I seem to remember some drawings there. It's Don
Pearsall's web site dedicated to the Kitfox. Lots of stuff on there
including our pictorial archive.
Deke
----- Original Message -----
From: cirrus10
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 8:57 AM
Subject: Kitfox-List: line drawing
Anyone have a source for a line drawing of the 7 for
painting/designing purposes. Thanks.
Regards,
Ed Babovec
Model 6/7, 912S
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: line drawing |
You might want to check this sight for design ideas.
http://www.schemedesigners.com/Sample-KitFox.htm
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=75251#75251
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Quest for knowledge-new kitfox fan |
I completely agree with Guy...except for the 582 thing. Those 2-stroke pilots
are a breed of their own with big ole' coconuts. Just kidding [Laughing]
Don't know much about the 582 but I love the 912UL (80hp). Smooth, strong, efficient.
Not only are there differences in the Model III and IV but there are differences
in the Model IVs. The later versions (Speedster and Classic)have a larger horizontal
stab and that stab has an airfoil instead of the earlier slab stabs.
--------
Dave
Speedster 912 UL
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=75252#75252
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Quest for knowledge-new kitfox fan |
Hi Rick.
You've made a wise choice in looking at a Kitfox for your next airplane. I think
I speak for (practically) everyone on this list is saying that pound for pound
and dollar for dollar, the KF is the best thing going. We all love our Foxes,
and I certainly love my Model 2.
My only regret is that the MGTOW of the 2 is only 950#. At 535# empty, adding
13 gal fuel and me, that leaves only about 180# for passenger and "stuff." I
hate leaving fuel on the ground. The models 3 and 4, similarly equipped, can be
built to weigh not much more empty but will handle 100 and 250 more lbs of useful
load, respectively, than my M2.
I got a good deal on my airplane ("98% complete") and I love it. But if I could
find a similarly well made classic 4 (1200# gross) project at a good price,
I'd be all over that.
Rick Daniels <rick@rickdaniels.com> wrote:
Greetings list. I am a private pilot (since 1969) gone light sport and
have developed a lot of interest in the Kitfox. Time constraints mandate either
a project already started or one completed. I am going to purchase one
any day now but after reading the posts on this list over the last several days
and searching the archives I find that I need to start asking some questions.
I have found a model III and a Model IV that I am considering purchasing.
I think the model III is a better deal but need some experienced Kitfox flyers
(like yourselves) to tell me why and if one should favor the model IV over the
Model III. The Kitfox website explains the improvements of the model IV over
the Model III very well. I guess my real question is "is there a reason to
stay away from the Model III. I should probably add that I live in western Montana
so mountain flying will be an everyday experience. I don't think I want
to learn new tricks at this stage of my life and
get rated in a taildragger so I plan on converting which ever one I decide to
buy to tri-gear. Would welcome any input in that area as well. (I know "real
aviators fly taildraggers" and all the other clichs but I know where I am comfortable).
Finally, how does one get in touch with a "Merle Williams" Thanks in
advance for your help.
Marco Menezes
Model 2 582 N99KX
---------------------------------
Don't quit your job - take classes online and earn your degree in 1 year. Start
Today
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Quest for knowledge-new kitfox fan |
And if you get the IV without the vertical stab/rudder being airfoiled,
you can do it yourself...a little work, but worth it in my book. And of
course don't overlook the Jabiru 2200, 85 hp engine as an
option....simple, aircooled, low (3300 max) rpm, no adjustable props
yet (ok, maybe that's a drawback), just a simple engine that runs VERY
well, smooth, economical, blah, blah, blah. I may retract some of this
when I get to my first mountain, but for now, it's doing me just right
after 180+ hours of flight time.
Lynn
On Friday, November 17, 2006, at 10:26 AM, crazyivan wrote:
>
> I completely agree with Guy...except for the 582 thing. Those
> 2-stroke pilots are a breed of their own with big ole' coconuts.
> Just kidding [Laughing]
>
> Don't know much about the 582 but I love the 912UL (80hp). Smooth,
> strong, efficient.
>
> Not only are there differences in the Model III and IV but there are
> differences in the Model IVs. The later versions (Speedster and
> Classic)have a larger horizontal stab and that stab has an airfoil
> instead of the earlier slab stabs.
>
> --------
> Dave
> Speedster 912 UL
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=75252#75252
>
>
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Original Kitfox prototype |
Hi Dave, I would REALLY be interested in that -- Since I have model #8
Chuck
> [Original Message]
> From: dave <dave@cfisher.com>
> To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
> Date: 11/15/2006 4:37:09 PM
> Subject: Kitfox-List: Original Kitfox prototype
>
>
> The question is -- Where is the original prototype Kitfox 1 ?
>
> Does anyone know what happened to it .
>
> Maybe it never faired that well ?
>
> If you find out , then you might see why it was built stronger in later
> models.
>
>
> Dave
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "GypsyBeeInnkeepers" <hefferans@gmail.com>
> To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2006 3:15 PM
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Model III-A??
>
>
> > <hefferans@gmail.com>
> >
> > All of this is very interesting to me as my model 2 is S/N 493 and I
will
> > have problems trying to carry most adult sized passengers for more than
> > about an hour long ride if I stay within the 950 gross. If I could
> > increase the gross to 1050 it would make a great deal of difference to
me
> > about keeping this model. It also seems possible that improvements
could
> > have been introduced on the assembly line before the official release
of
> > the model 3 specs. I have not searched for exact measurements for the
> > changes between the model 2 and 3. I have only seen comments like
"larger
> > rudder" and "stronger struts and carry through" without specific
numbers.
> > Does anyone think we can determine at what S/N and above by measuring?
> > Rex
> > Colorado
> >
> > Noel Loveys wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>Thanks Lowell:
> >>
> >>I have had a few answers back from Dee Young. His model II has a gross
> >>weight of 950 and a MTOW of 1050. I always thought the MTOW and gross
> >>were
> >>the same... I'll ask Dee
> >>
> >>In the mean time I'll have a look at my lower strut pass through.
> >>
> >>I'm beginning to think what I actually have is a model 3 beta :-)
> >>
> >>Noel
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>-----Original Message-----
> >>>From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> >>>[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Lowell
Fitt
> >>>Sent: Monday, November 13, 2006 3:59 PM
> >>>To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> >>>Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Model III-A??
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Noel,
> >>>
> >>>I understand that on the IV, it can be changed from the 1050 grwt to
the
> >>>1200 grwt by drilling the lower strut attach brackets and inserting a
> >>>4130 rod threaded at both ends through the carry through tube with
> >>>washers and nuts securing it in place. That strengthens the carry
> >>>through. The rest of the mod is the thicker wall lift struts. This
from
> >>>Frank Miller. Don't know if the present factory would authorize these
> >>>mods.
> >>>
> >>>Lowell
> >>>----- Original Message -----
> >>>From: "Noel Loveys" <noelloveys@yahoo.ca>
> >>>To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
> >>>Sent: Monday, November 13, 2006 7:39 AM
> >>>Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Model III-A??
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>What I understand from the original builder is the kit was
> >>>ordered as one
> >>>
> >>>>model but before it was shipped it was upgraded to the next
> >>>model. I
> >>>
> >>>>understand there were some minor changes made to the
> >>>fuselage frame. As
> >>>>to
> >>>>whether or not those changes included beefing up the spar
> >>>pass throughs I
> >>>
> >>>>don't know.
> >>>>
> >>>>The main concern to me is whether or not I can safely
> >>>increase the MTOW to
> >>>
> >>>>1050 lb. If not what would I have to do to make the
> >>>increase? It may not
> >>>
> >>>>be worth the aggravation ;-)
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>Noel
> >>>>
> >>>>-----Original Message-----
> >>>>From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> >>>>[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf
> >>>Of Bradley M
> >>>>Webb
> >>>>Sent: Monday, November 13, 2006 11:30 AM
> >>>>To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> >>>>Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Model III-A??
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>Could it be that Denney Aircraft was in a "development"
> >>>stage of the 3,
> >>>>and
> >>>>you got an interim model between the 2 and 3? Maybe they
> >>>just started
> >>>
> >>>>marketing the 3, but still had the model 2 paperwork and
> >>>designation?
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>>I guess in which case you could call it one or the other.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>Does the vertical stab size give any clue?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>Bradley
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> _____
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> >>>>[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf
> >>>Of Noel Loveys
> >>>
> >>>>Sent: Monday, November 13, 2006 9:17 AM
> >>>>To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> >>>>Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Model III-A??
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>Lowell:
> >>>>
> >>>>The serial # is 736
> >>>>
> >>>>I just checked the letter of conformity for the plane....
> >>>The first page
> >>>
> >>>>says model 2 the other pages say model 3... Go figure.
> >>>The date was '92
> >>>>I
> >>>>guess that's why TC removed my AULA status.
> >>>>
> >>>>Noel
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>www.aeroelectric.com
> >>>>www.buildersbooks.com
> >>>>www.kitlog.com
> >>>>www.homebuilthelp.com
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> > --
> > Karla and Rex Hefferan
> > Gypsy Bee Innkeepers
> > 719-651-5198 or 719-651-9192
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Quest for knowledge-new kitfox fan |
At 04:51 PM 11/16/2006, you wrote:
>I guess my real question is "is there a reason to stay away from the Model
>III.
Now that I put the silliness out of the way. . .
No I don't think there's any reason to stay away from any Kitfox. They all
did different things well and none were in any way "wrong". If you have
developed a lot of interest in Kitfox, spending $29.95 on Edward S. Downs'
book "Kitfox Pilots Guide" would be an excellent pre-purchase investment. I
believe you can get them from www.kitfoxllc.com. It will tell you the
specific differences between the III and various models of IV's and will
tell you a lot about engine choices, and ground and flight handling. It's
money well spent.
Regarding your statement "I don't think I want to learn new tricks at this
stage of my life and get rated in a taildragger so I plan on converting
which ever one I decide to buy to tri-gear. " I understand, and there are a
bunch of the pilots in the Southwest who have done the same, but I think
you are being too hard on yourself. Learning to fly a taildragger is
probably the best VFR "refresher" you can do. And I have found that
launching and landing a tailwheel IV is just not that hard. (I had a grand
total of 20 hours in a Citabria and 2 hours in a Kitfox when I started
flying mine. It has the narrow bungee gear and the long wings and is still
easier to land than the Citabria. I do both wheel and 3-point landings, and
mostly on pavement.) Sure you have to think about it, but stories about
"taming the wild beast" are grossly exaggerated. (Probably to inflate the
teller's ego!) I just wouldn't make a purchase decision based on whether it
was a taildragger or not. If it's a taildragger get checked out and fly it
like that for a while, then convert it if you still feel uncomfortable.
(No, you won't crash it.) Meanwhile get on YouTube and check out some of
the bush flying videos. You'll then understand the benefits of conventional
gear and one of the strengths of the Kitfox III and IV.
Finally, Murle Williams is at http://murlewilliamsaviation.com/.
Guy
Message 16
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Quest for knowledge-new kitfox fan |
Wow!!!! I'm impressed even with the humor. I did not expect such a
response. Thank you all.
I failed to mention that the III has a "high performance" ea-81
subaru, the IV is a 582 rotax. Am I to understand that the III is a
100mph airplane regardless of engine because of the wing config.? Also,
someone cautioned me about the III's altitude ability which is a real
concern for me in the mountains. Is that because of the airplane or
engine?
Message 17
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Bluetooth GPS Receiver |
Hello Bob,
On Nov 16, 2006, at 10:26 PM, Bob wrote:
> Sorry not to check in for a couple of days to answer you.
Nothing to be sorry for, we are among friends and time is not a topic.
Thank you for your detailed answer. I never tried AnywhereMap and you
gave a nice introduction to it.
From what I read, it makes sense, if you live in the US, to go for
AnywhereMap. I won't discuss here in details the features you exposed,
I guess some have already come in PocketFMS and some may come one day.
After a couple of years on the PocketFMS forum, I came to the
conclusion that we are so many different pilots, with so many different
way to navigate, that it is virtually impossible to have a program that
makes us all happy. And why should it? It is nice to have a variety of
offers so that we can choose what suits us best.
But I would like to say a couple of words about the "cheapest gas"
feature. Because that would be totally impossible in Europe. E.g. when
I fill my plane with AvGas, I have no idea what I will pay for it. It
is only when I get the bill by mail, that I can read what the oil
company is taking for it.
In other words, it says a lot about your country, the USA, where flying
must be a paradise. Not only do you have so many airfields, but what I
call "aero-tourism" is an old tradition. I wish we could have the same
in Europe. Although we try, private entrepreneurism is not as developed
as in your country. For example, at my airfield, we work a lot to build
a club house where eventual visiting pilots could have a place to spend
the night. But everything is so difficult because of so many
regulations.
Now, I can see my good friend Kurt, smiling in the background! He
thinks I am about to change my political opinions! Aren't you, Kurt?
:-) The truth is, I like some ideas of all political sides.
To illustrate my point, just a small aspect of what Europeans
navigation programs are fighting for: The lack of navigational data
base. Until now, we had the USGS NIMA and DAFIF database available, but
not any longer. We shouldn't be angry at our American friends who gave
it to us for free, as the GPS still is. We should thank them for having
made it available for all these years and now ... we have to find our
own way to solve our problems. And the think we should learn from you
is that, your Constitution says that any service rendered by the state,
cannot be sold back to the tax-payers. In Europe, we pay taxes so that
the state can e.g. do geometric surveys ... then we have to pay again
to buy it from the state.
Cheers,
Michel
Do not archive
Message 18
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Quest for knowledge-new kitfox fan |
On Nov 17, 2006, at 6:50 PM, Rick Daniels wrote:
> Am I to understand that the III is a 100mph airplane regardless of
> engine because of the wing config.?
Yes, the undercambered wings, the flaperons and the lexan, Rick. On my
model 3, I have a Jabiru 2200 and I can't use full throttle at level
because I would bust the red line of 100 MPH. But that's not a problem
with me, I like to fly and have no haste to arrive to destination! :-)
> Also, someone cautioned me about the III's altitude ability which is
> a real concern for me in the mountains. Is that because of the
> airplane or engine?
Probably the engine, I can't think of anything that would prevent the
plane itself. In Norway, I fly up to 8,500 ft to pass over the
mountains, both with the original Rotax 582 and the new Jabiru and
never noticed a problem. Incidentally, the Jabiru has an
altitude-compensated Bing carburettor but ... I don't notice a
difference in performance, both engines are quite good.
Cheers,
Michel
Message 19
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Quest for knowledge-new kitfox fan |
Does anyone know if the 582 can be outfitted with an altitude-compensating
carburetor, Bing or otherwise?
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michel
Verheughe
Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 11:57 AM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Quest for knowledge-new kitfox fan
On Nov 17, 2006, at 6:50 PM, Rick Daniels wrote:
> Am I to understand that the III is a 100mph airplane regardless of
> engine because of the wing config.?
Yes, the undercambered wings, the flaperons and the lexan, Rick. On my
model 3, I have a Jabiru 2200 and I can't use full throttle at level
because I would bust the red line of 100 MPH. But that's not a problem
with me, I like to fly and have no haste to arrive to destination! :-)
> Also, someone cautioned me about the III's altitude ability which is
> a real concern for me in the mountains. Is that because of the
> airplane or engine?
Probably the engine, I can't think of anything that would prevent the
plane itself. In Norway, I fly up to 8,500 ft to pass over the
mountains, both with the original Rotax 582 and the new Jabiru and
never noticed a problem. Incidentally, the Jabiru has an
altitude-compensated Bing carburettor but ... I don't notice a
difference in performance, both engines are quite good.
Cheers,
Michel
--
Message 20
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Bluetooth GPS Receiver |
At 11:48 AM 11/17/2006, you wrote:
>And the think we should learn from you is that, your Constitution
>says that any service rendered by the state, cannot be sold back to
>the tax-payers. In Europe, we pay taxes so that the state can e.g.
>do geometric surveys ... then we have to pay again to buy it from the state.
Michael,
I wish this were true. No where have I read it in the constitution
nor have I found it to be true in all practice. We constantly must
struggle to reduce government ill conceived rules, taxes, and fees
that are constantly increasing for those who are deemed to be "able
to pay". The services we receive from government are not
proportional to the taxes and fees we pay, nor should they be. But
what we do pay should at least remain rational.
Jim Crowder
Message 21
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: CLASSIC IV FLAPERONS RIG... |
HELLO: I NEED TO RIG.. MY AILERONS AGAIN...DO ANY OF YOURS HAVE ANY
WAY TO DO IT POINT BY POINT//////// THANKS A MILLION
PEDRO
AGAIN IN THE AIR////
CLASSIC IV WITH VERNER ENGINE
Message 22
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Quest for knowledge-new kitfox fan |
Are you going to get a local A&P to check the plane before you buy? I did with
mine when I bought it and am glad for it. It was a greate comfort. I do wonder
about the available payload on that Model III. The Subaru is a heavy engine and
the III already has a lower gross then the IV.
-Luis
-824KF
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=75316#75316
Message 23
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Quest for knowledge-new kitfox fan |
Rick:
I notice that the Model 3 you're considering has an EA81 Subaru engine
in it. I have a Model 4 with the EA81 in it, and the only thing I don't
like about the plane is that it's basically a one-place plane with an
extra seat in it. By that I mean that the empty weight is 820 pounds,
and the gross weight for the Model 4 is 1200 pounds. With 26 gallons of
fuel on board and my weight of 180 pounds, what this means is I'm only
44 pounds shy of gross weight flying solo. It's my understanding that
the installed weight of the EA81 (at least the one sold by NSI which is
what I have) is about 240 pounds. I don't know what the gross weight of
the Model 3 is, but I'm guessing that the plane you're considering would
not be capable of flying with 2 people in it and more than a teacup of
fuel. It's probably going to be nose-heavy also. I had to add a
5-pound lead ballast to my tail-wheel in order to get the nose up for a
3-point landing. My advice, for what it's worth, is to check the
plane's weight and balance info to find out its empty weight and also
its center of gravity. My preference, without knowing more, would be to
go with the Model IV/582.
For what it's worth
Clem Nichols
----- Original Message -----
From: Rick Daniels
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 11:50 AM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Quest for knowledge-new kitfox fan
Wow!!!! I'm impressed even with the humor. I did not expect such
a response. Thank you all.
I failed to mention that the III has a "high performance" ea-81
subaru, the IV is a 582 rotax. Am I to understand that the III is a
100mph airplane regardless of engine because of the wing config.? Also,
someone cautioned me about the III's altitude ability which is a real
concern for me in the mountains. Is that because of the airplane or
engine?
Message 24
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Kitfox prototype 1050 groos |
I was under the impression that only the original builder could approve
changes like the one we are talking about. I belive the airframe is strong
enough the way it is unles a person plans on flying way over grose all the
time malcolm
Message 25
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | [Off-topic] Gary Algate |
Gary, sorry but my email with the drawing of the skis is bouncing back.
If you read this, please check your email box and send me a message,
thanks.
Michel
do not archive
Message 26
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Kitfox prototype 1050 groos |
Me too.
Do Not Archive.
----- Original Message -----
From: Malcolmbru@aol.com<mailto:Malcolmbru@aol.com>
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com<mailto:kitfox-list@matronics.com>
Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 3:59 PM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Kitfox prototype 1050 groos
I was under the impression that only the original builder could
approve changes like the one we are talking about. I belive the
airframe is strong enough the way it is unles a person plans on flying
way over grose all the time malcolm
www.aeroelectric.com<http://www.aeroelectric.com/>
www.buildersbooks.com<http://www.buildersbooks.com/>
www.homebuilthelp.com<http://www.homebuilthelp.com/>
http://www.matronics.com/contribution<http://www.matronics.com/contributi
on>
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List<http://www.matronics.com/N
avigator?Kitfox-List>
Message 27
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Quest for knowledge-new kitfox fan |
Think so. See http://www.greenskyadventures.com/bing/HACmanorder.htm
Does anyone know if the 582 can be outfitted with an altitude-compensating
carburetor, Bing or otherwise?
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michel
Verheughe
Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 11:57 AM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Quest for knowledge-new kitfox fan
On Nov 17, 2006, at 6:50 PM, Rick Daniels wrote:
> Am I to understand that the III is a 100mph airplane regardless of
> engine because of the wing config.?
Yes, the undercambered wings, the flaperons and the lexan, Rick. On my
model 3, I have a Jabiru 2200 and I can't use full throttle at level
because I would bust the red line of 100 MPH. But that's not a problem
with me, I like to fly and have no haste to arrive to destination! :-)
> Also, someone cautioned me about the III's altitude ability which is
> a real concern for me in the mountains. Is that because of the
> airplane or engine?
Probably the engine, I can't think of anything that would prevent the
plane itself. In Norway, I fly up to 8,500 ft to pass over the
mountains, both with the original Rotax 582 and the new Jabiru and
never noticed a problem. Incidentally, the Jabiru has an
altitude-compensated Bing carburettor but ... I don't notice a
difference in performance, both engines are quite good.
Cheers,
Michel
--
Marco Menezes
Model 2 582 N99KX
---------------------------------
$420,000 Mortgage for $1,399/month - Think You Pay Too Much For Your Mortgage?
Find Out!
Message 28
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Quest for knowledge-new kitfox fan |
I'm changing the subject line Frank so we won't get confused.
At 12:06 PM 11/17/2006, you wrote:
><f.miles.tcp.833@clearwire.net>
>
>Does anyone know if the 582 can be outfitted with an altitude-compensating
>carburetor, Bing or otherwise?
Green Sky has their manual mixture control, HACman, which I've been pleased
with these last three months. It gives about 80F of EGT control which means
I can cruise around at 1150F EGT and then go full rich to come screaming
down the other side without exceeding 1200F. I'm not sure it gives better
altitude, but so far I've attained 12,600' density altitude in my IV which
I and everyone else thinks is currently not putting out its rated horsepower.
Green Sky used to sell the HAC automatic altitude compensator, but
apparently certain parts are no longer available so they devised their
manual system.
Guy Buchanan
K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar.
Message 29
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Kitfox prototype 1050 groos |
I guess the regulations must be a bit different North of the 49th. TC
may
be willing to do it for me because I am an AME intern. From what I
understand is I am also free to change the engine too. One thing to
mention
is I would have to do the fly off again.
Noel
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Malcolmbru@aol.com
Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 7:29 PM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Kitfox prototype 1050 groos
I was under the impression that only the original builder could
approve
changes like the one we are talking about. I belive the airframe is
strong
enough the way it is unles a person plans on flying way over grose all
the
time malcolm
Message 30
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Quest for knowledge-new kitfox fan |
My son had an Avid that had a 582 and we installed altitude compensating
carbs.
They are available from Lockwood.
Floran H.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Frank Miles" <f.miles.tcp.833@clearwire.net>
Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 1:06 PM
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Quest for knowledge-new kitfox fan
<f.miles.tcp.833@clearwire.net>
Does anyone know if the 582 can be outfitted with an altitude-compensating
carburetor, Bing or otherwise?
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michel
Verheughe
Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 11:57 AM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Quest for knowledge-new kitfox fan
On Nov 17, 2006, at 6:50 PM, Rick Daniels wrote:
> Am I to understand that the III is a 100mph airplane regardless of
> engine because of the wing config.?
Yes, the undercambered wings, the flaperons and the lexan, Rick. On my
model 3, I have a Jabiru 2200 and I can't use full throttle at level
because I would bust the red line of 100 MPH. But that's not a problem
with me, I like to fly and have no haste to arrive to destination! :-)
> Also, someone cautioned me about the III's altitude ability which is
> a real concern for me in the mountains. Is that because of the
> airplane or engine?
Probably the engine, I can't think of anything that would prevent the
plane itself. In Norway, I fly up to 8,500 ft to pass over the
mountains, both with the original Rotax 582 and the new Jabiru and
never noticed a problem. Incidentally, the Jabiru has an
altitude-compensated Bing carburettor but ... I don't notice a
difference in performance, both engines are quite good.
Cheers,
Michel
--
--
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|