----------------------------------------------------------
                           Kitfox-List Digest Archive
                                      ---
                     Total Messages Posted Fri 01/12/07: 27
           ----------------------------------------------------------
 
 
Today's Message Index:
----------------------
 
     1. 01:08 AM - Re: Re: Norwegian Stalls  (Michel Verheughe)
     2. 02:59 AM - Re: Re: Norwegian Stalls  (dave)
     3. 04:34 AM - GSC prop  (Fox5flyer)
     4. 05:27 AM - Re: GSC prop  (dave)
     5. 06:44 AM - vertical rib photos  (Lynn Matteson)
     6. 07:00 AM - Re: Re: Norwegian Stalls  (Lowell Fitt)
     7. 08:21 AM - Re: vertical rib photos + Skis   (dave)
     8. 08:35 AM - : King fox Tires first report   (dave)
     9. 09:31 AM - Re: Re: Norwegian Stalls  (Randy Daughenbaugh)
    10. 10:02 AM - Re: Re: Norwegian Stalls  (kerrjohna@comcast.net)
    11. 11:01 AM - Re: Re: Norwegian Stalls  (Guy Buchanan)
    12. 11:13 AM - Re: : King fox Tires first report   (TC)
    13. 11:30 AM - blade departure  (Tew, Stan)
    14. 11:45 AM - Re: vertical rib photos + Skis   (Lynn Matteson)
    15. 12:35 PM - Re: : King fox Tires first report  (kitfoxmike)
    16. 12:54 PM - Re: Re: : King fox Tires first report  (dave)
    17. 01:43 PM - Re: Re: Norwegian Stalls  (Michel Verheughe)
    18. 04:43 PM - Re: : King fox Tires first report  (kitfoxmike)
    19. 04:53 PM - Re: : King fox Tires first report  (Rexinator)
    20. 06:05 PM - Re: Re: : King fox Tires first report  (dave)
    21. 07:20 PM - Re: : King fox Tires first report  (kitfoxmike)
    22. 07:43 PM - Re: Re: : King fox Tires first report  (dave)
    23. 07:48 PM - cont.A65  (dwight purdy)
    24. 08:03 PM - Re: cont.A65  (dave)
    25. 08:50 PM - Re: cont.A65  (ron schick)
    26. 09:30 PM - Re: cont.A65  (Noel Loveys)
    27. 11:31 PM - Re: Re: Norwegian Stalls - OOPS!  (Larry Martin)
 
 
 
________________________________  Message 1  _____________________________________


Time: 01:08:36 AM PST US
From: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Re: Norwegian Stalls

> From: Guy Buchanan [bnn@nethere.com]
> There. Clear as mud.

Thank you, Guy. Clear as spring water. What you wrote is exactly what I was told,
years ago. My posting was only as a comment on Larry who says the center of
pressure of the wing moves forward.

Dave, if you can be bothered to measure accurately the AoA, thank you very much.
The reason I don't do it myself is that I should rig something with a level
and an angle measuring device. Then, we also need to refer to a common definition.
I think AoA are always measured from the cord, which is an imaginary line
going from the leading edge to the trailing one. But ... how do you get then
on a built wing? My idea was to use a water hose and measure the difference at
the two points. arctan(difference/cord) should then give me the AoA. My problem
is that I always think about doing that in the winter, when it is sub-zero
temperature, here! :-)

Cheers,
Michel

do not archive


<pre><b><font size=2 color="#000000" face="courier new,courier">


</b></font></pre></body></html>

________________________________  Message 2  _____________________________________


Time: 02:59:41 AM PST US
From: "dave" <dave@cfisher.com>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Norwegian Stalls


Michel,
I only compared the two with a inclinometer.

I possibly could attach a straight edge to the horiz stab and run it 
forwards under the wing and
note the differences at the front and rear of the wing.
Would this help you ?


Dave

PS how about a wingwalker tied on to top of plane?   Maybe he/she could have 
bird's eye  view to what is causing this mystery noise ?    How about a 
camcorder on tail?


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Michel Verheughe" <michel@online.no>
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2007 4:07 AM
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Re: Norwegian Stalls


>> From: Guy Buchanan [bnn@nethere.com]
>> There. Clear as mud.
>
> Thank you, Guy. Clear as spring water. What you wrote is exactly what I 
> was told, years ago. My posting was only as a comment on Larry who says 
> the center of pressure of the wing moves forward.
>
> Dave, if you can be bothered to measure accurately the AoA, thank you very 
> much. The reason I don't do it myself is that I should rig something with 
> a level and an angle measuring device. Then, we also need to refer to a 
> common definition. I think AoA are always measured from the cord, which is 
> an imaginary line going from the leading edge to the trailing one. But ... 
> how do you get then on a built wing? My idea was to use a water hose and 
> measure the difference at the two points. arctan(difference/cord) should 
> then give me the AoA. My problem is that I always think about doing that 
> in the winter, when it is sub-zero temperature, here! :-)
>
> Cheers,
> Michel
>
> do not archive
>
>
> <pre><b><font size=2 color="#000000" face="courier new,courier">
>
> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List</a>
> href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com</a>
>
> </b></font></pre> 


________________________________  Message 3  _____________________________________


Time: 04:34:07 AM PST US
From: "Fox5flyer" <fox5flyer@i-star.com>
Subject: Kitfox-List: GSC prop



>
> Yes , GSC was told ands got pics.
> said he never seen that before.   > for what that is worth <

I think that is something they all say, but with our litigeous society these
days I can hardly blame them.  Admitting any fault admits guilt and opens
the door to a law suit and it doesn't take many of those to put a company
out of business.  Still, it gives them customer feedback so they can work on
improving the product.

>
> I am not sure that this one was ever over torques Deke, you can see by the
> pics http://www.cfisher.com/gsc/
> that the alum. block have a "healthy gap" and I know that the owner is
very
> aware and has built a close to  25 planes now .

I noticed it had a good gap and that is why I questioned the torque.  The
pics are pretty good, but they aren't nearly as good as the naked eye and
what I saw was what appeared to be damage (rot) at the break visible by the
darker colored wood.  That would easily be explained if the airplane spent a
lot of time outside in a wet enviornment.  I had a GSC that I put about 400
hours on and I trusted it completely, but it was never allowed to soak up
any water.  Near the root, just prior to where it goes into the hub, the
wood is a little rough and appears that it could absorb water if allowed to
soak in long/often enough.  Inside the aluminum hub part of the blade root
is just bare wood so any rain entering the hub (through the hub halves)
would be absorbed, and being trapped in there it would be very difficult for
it to dry out.
I wasn't aware that they were using aluminum sleeves on the newer GSC blade
roots.  Mine was a black plastic type stuff.

>
> I would rule it out to age, moisture fatigue and just bad luck.   Now if
it
> was new well I would lean more on GSC.
> That prop I think had over 300 or 400 hours on it and over 10 years for
> sure.
> Dave

Agreed.  The GSC (IMO) is a good value for the money and performs well, but
it isn't an all-weather prop and takes some care.  I wouldn't even think of
using one on an airplane that sits outside.  That's where the carbon fiber
types excell as they're pretty much impervious to weather, but not
everything.
Fortunately for the pilot, it happened on the ground during taxi.  That has
to be one maximum scare factor when it happens, especially while in flight.
I don't even like to think about it.
Thanks for sharing this with us.
Deke


>
> FYI  I would not condemn your GSC prop over this kinda stuff but I would
> certainly make sure that you keep an eye on the condition, time of service
> in years as well as hours running time .   I think GSC says 500 hours or 5
> years ?   Over all GSC props do work well  I find. Those videos I did in
> snow and short take offs and deadsticking  in the last month was all on a
> GSC.
>
> A few more below,
>
> Here is another GSC problem
> http://www.ultralightnews.com/safety_bulletins/gsc_servicebulletin.htm
>
> another one ( good read )
> http://www.auf.asn.au/airworthiness/gscbladeshed2.pdf
>
> The problem covered in those issues related to failure of wooden blades at
> the glue line adjacent
>
> to the socket and possible crushing of the blade root from deterioration
or
> over tightening of the
>
> bolts resulting in degraded clamping of the blade. This was aggravated by
> deterioration of the
>
> wood from moisture.
>
> A further (very well compiled) report of blade shedding has been received,
> this time involving a
>
> three bladed wooden GSC propeller fitted to a 912 powered Lightwing. The
> owner was
>
> experimenting with methods of improving engine power output and he had
> achieved an RPM
>
> increase from 5,600 to 5,800 RPM on climb. On levelling at 1,000ft, there
> was an almighty bang
>
> and the motor stopped immediately. The aircraft was landed safely and
> subsequent inspection
>
> revealed that all three blades had parted company with the hub.


________________________________  Message 4  _____________________________________


Time: 05:27:01 AM PST US
From: "dave" <dave@cfisher.com>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: GSC prop


I will sum up your comments

--Plane has seen zero rain, dew  -nothing but UV while flying and is 
hanagared the other 100% of time.
condensation in spring / fall ? perhaps a bit in un heated hangar with 
concrete floor.  But wood has a moisture content and can soak up more from 
atmosphere. I would assume there are a few weeks of 100% moisture every year 
plus the humid days in summer.

Yes the owner is a long time builder and pilot , he is 84 and still flys 
often.  He is the second plane to take off  in the coffee break movie clip 
here   http://www.cfisher.com/kitfox/    It is a Kitfox clone called a raven 
which he scratch built  14 years ago and it stronger than ever now with 
brand new 503 this past summer.   He used to make allot props, but now he 
says it easier to just buy one. And like you said the GSC are good value 
ands a good performer.  I have flown with them on floats too and a good 
temporary fix it to cover the tips with urethane tap the last few inches on 
the leading edge of tip.  The tape will erode and it can be replaced.  It 
easier than fixing pitting with epoxy  to those urethane leading edges.

I might have some more blades around the shop and If I do , I will get some 
better  shots.

Dave


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Fox5flyer" <fox5flyer@i-star.com>
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2007 7:32 AM
Subject: Kitfox-List: GSC prop


>
>
>>
>> Yes , GSC was told ands got pics.
>> said he never seen that before.   > for what that is worth <
>
> I think that is something they all say, but with our litigeous society 
> these
> days I can hardly blame them.  Admitting any fault admits guilt and opens
> the door to a law suit and it doesn't take many of those to put a company
> out of business.  Still, it gives them customer feedback so they can work 
> on
> improving the product.
>
>>
>> I am not sure that this one was ever over torques Deke, you can see by 
>> the
>> pics http://www.cfisher.com/gsc/
>> that the alum. block have a "healthy gap" and I know that the owner is
> very
>> aware and has built a close to  25 planes now .
>
> I noticed it had a good gap and that is why I questioned the torque.  The
> pics are pretty good, but they aren't nearly as good as the naked eye and
> what I saw was what appeared to be damage (rot) at the break visible by 
> the
> darker colored wood.  That would easily be explained if the airplane spent 
> a
> lot of time outside in a wet enviornment.  I had a GSC that I put about 
> 400
> hours on and I trusted it completely, but it was never allowed to soak up
> any water.  Near the root, just prior to where it goes into the hub, the
> wood is a little rough and appears that it could absorb water if allowed 
> to
> soak in long/often enough.  Inside the aluminum hub part of the blade root
> is just bare wood so any rain entering the hub (through the hub halves)
> would be absorbed, and being trapped in there it would be very difficult 
> for
> it to dry out.
> I wasn't aware that they were using aluminum sleeves on the newer GSC 
> blade
> roots.  Mine was a black plastic type stuff.
>
>>
>> I would rule it out to age, moisture fatigue and just bad luck.   Now if
> it
>> was new well I would lean more on GSC.
>> That prop I think had over 300 or 400 hours on it and over 10 years for
>> sure.
>> Dave
>
> Agreed.  The GSC (IMO) is a good value for the money and performs well, 
> but
> it isn't an all-weather prop and takes some care.  I wouldn't even think 
> of
> using one on an airplane that sits outside.  That's where the carbon fiber
> types excell as they're pretty much impervious to weather, but not
> everything.
> Fortunately for the pilot, it happened on the ground during taxi.  That 
> has
> to be one maximum scare factor when it happens, especially while in 
> flight.
> I don't even like to think about it.
> Thanks for sharing this with us.
> Deke
>
>
>>
>> FYI  I would not condemn your GSC prop over this kinda stuff but I would
>> certainly make sure that you keep an eye on the condition, time of 
>> service
>> in years as well as hours running time .   I think GSC says 500 hours or 
>> 5
>> years ?   Over all GSC props do work well  I find. Those videos I did in
>> snow and short take offs and deadsticking  in the last month was all on a
>> GSC.
>>
>> A few more below,
>>
>> Here is another GSC problem
>> http://www.ultralightnews.com/safety_bulletins/gsc_servicebulletin.htm
>>
>> another one ( good read )
>> http://www.auf.asn.au/airworthiness/gscbladeshed2.pdf
>>
>> The problem covered in those issues related to failure of wooden blades 
>> at
>> the glue line adjacent
>>
>> to the socket and possible crushing of the blade root from deterioration
> or
>> over tightening of the
>>
>> bolts resulting in degraded clamping of the blade. This was aggravated by
>> deterioration of the
>>
>> wood from moisture.
>>
>> A further (very well compiled) report of blade shedding has been 
>> received,
>> this time involving a
>>
>> three bladed wooden GSC propeller fitted to a 912 powered Lightwing. The
>> owner was
>>
>> experimenting with methods of improving engine power output and he had
>> achieved an RPM
>>
>> increase from 5,600 to 5,800 RPM on climb. On levelling at 1,000ft, there
>> was an almighty bang
>>
>> and the motor stopped immediately. The aircraft was landed safely and
>> subsequent inspection
>>
>> revealed that all three blades had parted company with the hub.
>
>
> 


________________________________  Message 5  _____________________________________


Time: 06:44:15 AM PST US
From: Lynn Matteson <lynnmatt@jps.net>
Subject: Kitfox-List: vertical rib photos


I recently had Michel resize my photos of my vertical rib  
installation, and here is the URL:

  http://home.online.no/~michel/tmp/Lynn/

They are not captioned, but I can answer any questions here or  
privately.

Lynn


________________________________  Message 6  _____________________________________


Time: 07:00:54 AM PST US
From: "Lowell Fitt" <lcfitt@sbcglobal.net>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Norwegian Stalls



>
> No. I think the sound is fabric slapping against the wing tanks.
>
Guy,  when I was building I was watching a couple of guys that were ahead of 
me in the process and the tops of their tanks looked marbelized because of 
the occasional fabric contact with the wing tanks.  Where it touched and 
where it didn't looked entirely different in paint - sort of ugly.

I went to lots of trouble ensuring that there was no paint adhesion on the 
tank top fabric.  I have had others fly close by and evaluate ballooning and 
they said they saw none.  But the real reason for the post is that my stalls 
are virtually silent.  I do, however have the IV wing while Michel has the 
III.

Lowell

>>On Jan 9, 2007, at 6:01 PM, Larry Martin wrote:
>> From Micheal's description, I had the impression that he
>>thought that the nose dropped because the stab stalled.  This is not
>>correct.  The
>>nose drops because the center of pressure on the wing moves forward.
>>
>>... err, you mean 'move aft,' Larry, right? If the center of pressure
>>moves forward and the CoG stays hopefully the same, the moment is then
>>to create a nose-up attitude.
>>This is interesting because years ago, before I started flying for
>>real, I had that discussion with a flight simulator group where I meant
>>to center of pressure (a.k.a center of lift) moved back as the plane
>>slows down, hence the need to pull the stick. My assumption was based
>>on the fact that a sailboats attempting to sail close to the wind (i.e.
>>small AoA) needed to pull something called 'Cunningham hole' in order
>>to make the leading edge stiffer and move the deepest hollow of the
>>sail more forward - a sail being a "soft" airfoil.
>>But I was told that the center of lift never moves on a wing, and that
>>it is usually at about 1/4 of the cord, from the leading edge.
>
> Yes and No. You were correct in stating that the SYSTEM Cl moves back, 
> whereas the wing Cl remains constant before stall. (It moves after stall, 
> quite dramatically.) The reason the SYSTEM Cl moves back when you slow is 
> that down force on the tail diminishes as you slow, (remember lift is 
> proportional to the square of the velocity,) whereas the pitch moment due 
> to mass remains constant. You balance the mass pitch moment by increasing 
> the tail's down force by pulling the elevator up, increasing the tail's 
> negative Cl in direct proportion to the reduction in the square of the 
> velocity.
>
> Too confusing. Try this. I have a "wing" with 40 units of lift. 10 length 
> units behind that "wing" I have a "tail" flying along with -4 units of 
> lift. (It lifts down.) To balance this system my "airplane" weighs 36 
> units and it's CG is 1.11 length units in front of the "wing". Now I 
> instantaneously slow by half. My "wing" and "tail" lift reduce to 10 
> and -1 units respectively. (Lift is proportional to the square of the 
> velocity.) However the weight is still 36 at 1.11 in front of the wing. 
> Now there is a 30 unit moment pitching down. To counteract that I have to 
> increase the "tail" lift back to -4 units. I therefore have to quadruple 
> the Cl by pulling the elevator up. I then have 10 units of lift on the 
> "wing", -4 units of lift on the "tail", and 36 units of weight 1.11 in 
> front of the wing. The system balances about the wing, but I have 36 units 
> of weight versus 14 units of lift and so am accelerating down quite 
> rapidly. (I'll accelerate down until the increased wing angle of attack 
> (Cl) and the increased velocity bring the "wing" lift back to 40 units.) 
> Note that with a "wing" lift of 10 and a "tail" lift of -4, the SYSTEM Cl 
> is instantaneously quite far aft of what it was at equilibrium, when the 
> "wing" lift was 40.
>
> There. Clear as mud.
>
>
> Guy
>
>
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Guy Buchanan" <bnn@nethere.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 8:22 PM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Norwegian Stalls


>
> At 11:27 AM 1/11/2007, you wrote:
>>It makes sense, Guy, but then ... the sound can't be my elevator and
>>horizontal stab stalling, right?


________________________________  Message 7  _____________________________________


Time: 08:21:42 AM PST US
From: "dave" <dave@cfisher.com>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: vertical rib photos  + Skis 


Lynn,  nice pics,

How are the skis working out ?

I got on the King fox tires now .  maybe i souhld make some Kingfox 
compatable Skis ?


Dave

hell these are  a riot


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Lynn Matteson" <lynnmatt@jps.net>
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2007 9:45 AM
Subject: Kitfox-List: vertical rib photos


>
> I recently had Michel resize my photos of my vertical rib  installation, 
> and here is the URL:
>
>  http://home.online.no/~michel/tmp/Lynn/
>
> They are not captioned, but I can answer any questions here or  privately.
>
> Lynn
>
>
> 


________________________________  Message 8  _____________________________________


Time: 08:35:37 AM PST US
From: "dave" <dave@cfisher.com>
Subject: Kitfox-List: : King fox Tires  first report 


This mail never got posted ?

sorry If i missed it .

Dave


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "dave" <dave@cfisher.com>
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2007 10:04 AM
Subject: King fox Tires first report !!


> OK i just in from test flight on the King fox tires.
>
> All i have to say is if you do not have them
>
> GET THEM !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> COW A BUN GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
>
> What a riot !!!!!!
>
> I took off and landed in MUD, MUD with 6 inches water on top with chunks 
> of ice
> temp here 41 F winds  11 knots  --- for referance ..........
>
> Un freaking believable. !!
>
> Thanks for Jim for picking these up for me and I wil get some pics up soon 
> for you guys !!!
>
>
> DAVE
>
>
> yah I excited !!!!!!!!!!!  can you tell ?
>
> 


________________________________  Message 9  _____________________________________


Time: 09:31:51 AM PST US
From: "Randy  Daughenbaugh" <rjdaugh@rapidnet.com>
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Re: Norwegian Stalls


Michel,
I don't think you mean AOA, angle of attack.  AOA is measure relative to the
air.  Hard to measure without the right instruments.

I think you mean angle of incidence?  Someone will step in with the right
term..

Randy

.           

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michel
Verheughe
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2007 2:08 AM
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Re: Norwegian Stalls

> From: Guy Buchanan [bnn@nethere.com]
> There. Clear as mud.

Thank you, Guy. Clear as spring water. What you wrote is exactly what I was
told, years ago. My posting was only as a comment on Larry who says the
center of pressure of the wing moves forward.

Dave, if you can be bothered to measure accurately the AoA, thank you very
much. The reason I don't do it myself is that I should rig something with a
level and an angle measuring device. Then, we also need to refer to a common
definition. I think AoA are always measured from the cord, which is an
imaginary line going from the leading edge to the trailing one. But ... how
do you get then on a built wing? My idea was to use a water hose and measure
the difference at the two points. arctan(difference/cord) should then give
me the AoA. My problem is that I always think about doing that in the
winter, when it is sub-zero temperature, here! :-)

Cheers,
Michel

do not archive


<pre><b><font size=2 color="#000000" face="courier new,courier">

href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List">http://www.matronics.c
om/Navigator?Kitfox-List</a>
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com</a>

</b></font></pre>


________________________________  Message 10  ____________________________________


Time: 10:02:53 AM PST US
From: kerrjohna@comcast.net
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Re: Norwegian Stalls

I believe that is true and the difference between in the angles of the wing incidence
and the horizontal stabilizer incidence is called decalage.  (Designer
stuff)

John Kerr

-------------- Original message -------------- 
From: "Randy Daughenbaugh" <rjdaugh@rapidnet.com> 

> 
> Michel, 
> I don't think you mean AOA, angle of attack. AOA is measure relative to the 
> air. Hard to measure without the right instruments. 
> 
> I think you mean angle of incidence? Someone will step in with the right 
> term.. 
> 
> Randy 
> 
> . 
> 
> -----Original Message----- 
> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com 
> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michel 
> Verheughe 
> Sent: Friday, January 12, 2007 2:08 AM 
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com 
> Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Re: Norwegian Stalls 
> 
> > From: Guy Buchanan [bnn@nethere.com] 
> > There. Clear as mud. 
> 
> Thank you, Guy. Clear as spring water. What you wrote is exactly what I was 
> told, years ago. My posting was only as a comment on Larry who says the 
> center of pressure of the wing moves forward. 
> 
> Dave, if you can be bothered to measure accurately the AoA, thank you very 
> much. The reason I don't do it myself is that I should rig something with a 
> level and an angle measuring device. Then, we also need to refer to a common

> definition. I think AoA are always measured from the cord, which is an 
> imaginary line going from the leading edge to the trailing one. But ... how 
> do you get then on a built wing? My idea was to use a water hose and measure

> the difference at the two points. arctan(difference/cord) should then give 
> me the AoA. My problem is that I always think about doing that in the 
> winter, when it is sub-zero temperature, here! :-) 
> 
> Cheers, 
> Michel 
> 
> do not archive 
> 
> 
> 

> 
> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List">http://www.matronics.c
> om/Navigator?Kitfox-List
> href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
> 
> 

> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
<html><body>
<DIV>I believe that is true and the difference between in the angles of the wing
incidence and the horizontal stabilizer incidence is called decalage.&nbsp;
(Designer stuff)</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>John Kerr</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">-------------- Original message -------------- <BR>From: "Randy Daughenbaugh" &lt;rjdaugh@rapidnet.com&gt; <BR><BR>&gt; --&gt; Kitfox-List message posted by: "Randy Daughenbaugh" <RJDAUGH@RAPIDNET.COM><BR>&gt; <BR>&gt; Michel, <BR>&gt; I don't think you mean AOA, angle of attack. AOA is measure relative to the <BR>&gt; air. Hard to measure without the right instruments. <BR>&gt; <BR>&gt; I think you mean angle of incidence? Someone will step in with the right <BR>&gt; term.. <BR>&gt; <BR>&gt; Randy <BR>&gt; <BR>&gt; . <BR>&gt; <BR>&gt; -----Original Message----- <BR>&gt; From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com <BR>&gt; [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michel <BR>&gt; Verheughe <BR>&gt; Sent: Friday, January 12, 2007 2:08 AM <BR>&gt; To: kitfox-list@matronics.com <BR>&gt; Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Re: Norwegian Stalls <BR>&gt; <BR>&gt; &gt; From: Guy Buchana
 n [bnn
@nethere.com] <BR>&gt; &gt; There. Clear as mud. <BR>&gt; <BR>&gt; Thank you, Guy.
Clear as spring water. What you wrote is exactly what I was <BR>&gt; told,
years ago. My posting was only as a comment on Larry who says the <BR>&gt; center
of pressure of the wing moves forward. <BR>&gt; <BR>&gt; Dave, if you can
be bothered to measure accurately the AoA, thank you very <BR>&gt; much. The
reason I don't do it myself is that I should rig something with a <BR>&gt; level
and an angle measuring device. Then, we also need to refer to a common <BR>&gt;
definition. I think AoA are always measured from the cord, which is an <BR>&gt;
imaginary line going from the leading edge to the trailing one. But ...
how <BR>&gt; do you get then on a built wing? My idea was to use a water hose
and measure <BR>&gt; the difference at the two points. arctan(difference/cord)
should then give <BR>&gt; me the AoA. My problem is that I always think about
doing that in the <BR>&gt; winter, when it is sub-z
 ero te
mperature, here! :-) <BR>&gt; <BR>&gt; Cheers, <BR>&gt; Michel <BR>&gt; <BR>&gt;
do not archive <BR>&gt; <BR>&gt; <BR>&gt; <PRE><B><FONT face="courier new,courier"
color=#000000 size=2>
<BR>&gt; 
<BR>&gt; href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List"&gt;http://www.matronics.c
<BR>&gt; om/Navigator?Kitfox-List</A>
<BR>&gt; href="http://forums.matronics.com"&gt;http://forums.matronics.com</A>
<BR>&gt; 

<pre><b><font size=2 color="#000000" face="courier new,courier">


</b></font></pre></body></html>

________________________________  Message 11  ____________________________________


Time: 11:01:18 AM PST US
From: Guy Buchanan <bnn@nethere.com>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Norwegian Stalls


At 06:59 AM 1/12/2007, you wrote:
>I went to lots of trouble ensuring that there was no paint adhesion on the
>tank top fabric.  I have had others fly close by and evaluate ballooning and
>they said they saw none.  But the real reason for the post is that my stalls
>are virtually silent.  I do, however have the IV wing while Michel has the
>III.

I didn't really expect Michel to take me seriously, it's just the most 
likely thing I could imagine was making the noise he described. I don't 
think anyone has confessed to hearing the same noise but the number of 
variables in that area is infinite.


Guy Buchanan
K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar.

Do not archive


________________________________  Message 12  ____________________________________


Time: 11:13:15 AM PST US
From: "TC" <flier@sbcglobal.net>
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: : King fox Tires  first report 


Got mine mounted and REALLY like the way they look.  I'm sure they're gonna
work great. 

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of dave
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2007 10:33 AM
Subject: Kitfox-List: : King fox Tires first report 


This mail never got posted ?

sorry If i missed it .

Dave


----- Original Message -----
From: "dave" <dave@cfisher.com>
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2007 10:04 AM
Subject: King fox Tires first report !!


> OK i just in from test flight on the King fox tires.
>
> All i have to say is if you do not have them
>
> GET THEM !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> COW A BUN GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
>
> What a riot !!!!!!
>
> I took off and landed in MUD, MUD with 6 inches water on top with chunks 
> of ice
> temp here 41 F winds  11 knots  --- for referance ..........
>
> Un freaking believable. !!
>
> Thanks for Jim for picking these up for me and I wil get some pics up soon

> for you guys !!!
>
>
> DAVE
>
>
> yah I excited !!!!!!!!!!!  can you tell ?
>
> 


________________________________  Message 13  ____________________________________


Time: 11:30:08 AM PST US
Subject: Kitfox-List: blade departure
From: "Tew, Stan" <Stan.Tew@revenue.alabama.gov>

I know of one occurrence of a GSC blade breaking just like the one in
the photos. It happened to my friend Ronnie who was flying an Avid which
is a Kitfox cousin. The difference in the story is that my friend was at
altitude and speed when his failed. The vibration caused by the
imbalance due to lack of the prop blade quickly tore the entire gearbox
off the Rotax 503 engine. It also broke completely 2 of the engine mount
bolts and badly bent the other 2. These 2 bolts are what saved his life
because the engine did not depart the aircraft. This allowed the CG to
remain somewhat intact and enabled him to land the plane. After some
searching of the ground where it happened we recovered the gearbox with
the 2 remaining blades but never found the broken end.


As we all know  "A nose heavy plane is dangerous; a tail heavy plane is
deadly".


________________________________  Message 14  ____________________________________


Time: 11:45:16 AM PST US
From: Lynn Matteson <lynnmatt@jps.net>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: vertical rib photos  + Skis 


Skis are done through the framing stage, primering (will paint later,  
when our non-snow melts), and am ready to rivet on the  
"shoes"...pictures taken as I went...will post some later.

Lynn

On Jan 12, 2007, at 11:18 AM, dave wrote:

>
> Lynn,  nice pics,
>
> How are the skis working out ?
>
> I got on the King fox tires now .  maybe i souhld make some Kingfox  
> compatable Skis ?
>
>
> Dave


________________________________  Message 15  ____________________________________


Time: 12:35:37 PM PST US
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: : King fox Tires first report
From: "kitfoxmike" <kitfoxmike@yahoo.com>


I got mine, keeping them in the box for when my others wear out.  These are identical
to the ones I have now.  So far I have over 1500 landings on these and
still look good.  The only thing to watch for is they have good bite on asphalt
and if you touch down a little to hard you will bounce right back up in the
air, kind of like a basketball.  Generally when I have this happen I just put
a little extra power in, hold the stick steady and use power to land, end up doing
a perfect 3 point on the second try. I guess that's called two landings in
one.  I also put in 8psi air pressure.

--------
kitfoxmike
Do not archive


Read this topic online here:

http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=87134#87134


________________________________  Message 16  ____________________________________


Time: 12:54:30 PM PST US
From: "dave" <dave@cfisher.com>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: : King fox Tires first report


Mike,

These are larger than the original Kitfox tires.
Mine had a gold cart style   16.50 - ??   and 4 ply and about 15 inches tall
These ones stand about 21 inches tall and nearly 10 or 12 " wide.
I was out this am in Mud - no issues at all . was a blast.

I do find that  they were a little slippery due to no treads but so far I 
like them.

I will  get some pics up  soon.


Dave


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "kitfoxmike" <kitfoxmike@yahoo.com>
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2007 3:34 PM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: : King fox Tires first report


>
> I got mine, keeping them in the box for when my others wear out.  These 
> are identical to the ones I have now.  So far I have over 1500 landings on 
> these and still look good.  The only thing to watch for is they have good 
> bite on asphalt and if you touch down a little to hard you will bounce 
> right back up in the air, kind of like a basketball.  Generally when I 
> have this happen I just put a little extra power in, hold the stick steady 
> and use power to land, end up doing a perfect 3 point on the second try. I 
> guess that's called two landings in one.  I also put in 8psi air pressure.
>
> --------
> kitfoxmike
> Do not archive
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=87134#87134
>
>
> 


________________________________  Message 17  ____________________________________


Time: 01:43:53 PM PST US
From: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Norwegian Stalls


On Jan 12, 2007, at 11:58 AM, dave wrote:
> I only compared the two with a inclinometer.
Yes, that would help, Dave, thank you. ... but about wing-walking ... 
no, thank you, I might catch a cold! :-)

On Jan 12, 2007, at 3:59 PM, Lowell Fitt wrote:
> But the real reason for the post is that my stalls are virtually 
> silent.  I do, however have the IV wing while Michel has the III.
Yes, I am pretty sure it is not the wing and the tank, Lowell. It's 
coming from behind.

On Jan 12, 2007, at 6:29 PM, Randy Daughenbaugh wrote:
> I don't think you mean AOA, angle of attack.
Ah! I knew there is a difference between the angle of attack and the 
angle of incidence, Randy. I must have mixed them and you must be 
right, thank you.

On Jan 12, 2007, at 7:02 PM, kerrjohna@comcast.net wrote:
> I believe that is true and the difference between in the angles of the 
> wing incidence and the horizontal stabilizer incidence is called 
> decalage. (Designer stuff)
Thank you, John. I have learnt a new word today. Well, not exactly 
because 'decalage' is  a French word, as in 'dcalage horaire' (time 
difference) but now I know its meaning in English too! :-)

On Jan 12, 2007, at 8:00 PM, Guy Buchanan wrote:
>  I don't think anyone has confessed to hearing the same noise but the 
> number of variables in that area is infinite.
Yes, and that's the reason I feel the noise needs further 
investigation, Guy. But to do that, I'll need a passenger so that 
someone can turn his head and look or feel behind. The only thing is, I 
need a pilot passenger because I don't stall with just anyone. I'll try 
to get my son to fly with me on Sunday.

Cheers,
Michel

do not archive


________________________________  Message 18  ____________________________________


Time: 04:43:41 PM PST US
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: : King fox Tires first report
From: "kitfoxmike" <kitfoxmike@yahoo.com>


Dave,
this is what my tires look like.


do not archive

--------
kitfoxmike
Do not archive


Read this topic online here:

http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=87196#87196


________________________________  Message 19  ____________________________________


Time: 04:53:54 PM PST US
From: Rexinator <rexinator@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: : King fox Tires  first report


Hey Dave,
 Great to hear the tires meet or exceed expectations. So did you have 
any trouble changing the tires? What were the old tires? Did my tips help?

Rex
Colorado


dave wrote:

>
> This mail never got posted ?
>
> sorry If i missed it .
>
> Dave
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "dave" <dave@cfisher.com>
> To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Friday, January 12, 2007 10:04 AM
> Subject: King fox Tires first report !!
>
>
>> OK i just in from test flight on the King fox tires.
>>
>> All i have to say is if you do not have them
>>
>> GET THEM !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>
>> COW A BUN GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
>>
>> What a riot !!!!!!
>>
>> I took off and landed in MUD, MUD with 6 inches water on top with 
>> chunks of ice
>> temp here 41 F winds  11 knots  --- for referance ..........
>>
>> Un freaking believable. !!
>>
>> Thanks for Jim for picking these up for me and I wil get some pics up 
>> soon for you guys !!!
>>
>>
>> DAVE
>>
>>
>> yah I excited !!!!!!!!!!!  can you tell ?
>>
>>


________________________________  Message 20  ____________________________________


Time: 06:05:52 PM PST US
From: "dave" <dave@cfisher.com>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: : King fox Tires first report


Wow Nice looking  !!

Here I got a shot today and I put up a link
top link on left side     http://www.cfisher.com

Top pic is tool I made to bust the bead -- about a minute to do each side of 
each wheel now.
First tire I put the chain around the post on welding table casue it was 
there.
Second tire i put a 2 x 10 on floor by a post in middle of shop and put 
chain around the post and tire on top of board and agaisnt post. Voila !! 
popped right of .
The I went to my make do tire changer -- I have some pics and will find them 
later.
Total time first tire  2 hours including making tools from scrap . And i was 
lucky I got it right the first time.
Second tire less than 5 mins to demount and remount new one.

Bottom pic shows old tires about 15 " tall beside new ones.

And Yes Rex and everyone who responded it was a great help. THANKS !!

I think these tires will go across water, how deep  I not sure. :)


Dave


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "kitfoxmike" <kitfoxmike@yahoo.com>
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2007 7:42 PM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: : King fox Tires first report


>
> Dave,
> this is what my tires look like.
>
>
> do not archive
>
> --------
> kitfoxmike
> Do not archive
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=87196#87196
>
>
> 


________________________________  Message 21  ____________________________________


Time: 07:20:41 PM PST US
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: : King fox Tires first report
From: "kitfoxmike" <kitfoxmike@yahoo.com>


Yup, I really like the looks of the tires on the fox.  Give it a little time and
the tire will actually get a little bit bigger.  Like I said, be ready with
the rudder the first time you land on asphalt.

--------
kitfoxmike
Do not archive


Read this topic online here:

http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=87217#87217


________________________________  Message 22  ____________________________________


Time: 07:43:27 PM PST US
From: "dave" <dave@cfisher.com>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: : King fox Tires first report


I found today that on a grass runway with snow it wanted to weathercock like 
on ice.
just like flying in after a hour of FR rain onto asphault .....  near 
frictionless for yaw   :)

I had mud, water and snow flying today on my short adventure and not 
necessarily in that order  :)

Dave

..
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "kitfoxmike" <kitfoxmike@yahoo.com>
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2007 10:20 PM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: : King fox Tires first report


>
> Yup, I really like the looks of the tires on the fox.  Give it a little 
> time and the tire will actually get a little bit bigger.  Like I said, be 
> ready with the rudder the first time you land on asphalt.
>
> --------
> kitfoxmike
> Do not archive
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=87217#87217
>
>
> 


________________________________  Message 23  ____________________________________


Time: 07:48:45 PM PST US
From: dwight purdy <dpurdy@comteck.com>
Subject: Kitfox-List: cont.A65


Did not get any replies, so what am I doing wrong? Too many questions?

                       Dwight Model ll and lll


Question: Is there a reason why I never see a Kitfox with an A65? My guess 
would be no electric or bad power to weight. How about a c-85?
   I recently picked up a model lll and would like to put a four stroke in 
it. Have not measured the with of either. Can you tell me what needs to be 
done in the way of cowlings? Anyone have pictures of there's ?


Thanks, dwight 


-- 


________________________________  Message 24  ____________________________________


Time: 08:03:35 PM PST US
From: "dave" <dave@cfisher.com>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: cont.A65


Dwight,

off the top of my head you would have a heavy engine

Call John Mc Bean to confirm


Dave
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "dwight purdy" <dpurdy@comteck.com>
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2007 10:48 PM
Subject: Kitfox-List: cont.A65


>
> Did not get any replies, so what am I doing wrong? Too many questions?
>
>                       Dwight Model ll and lll
>
>
> Question: Is there a reason why I never see a Kitfox with an A65? My guess 
> would be no electric or bad power to weight. How about a c-85?
>   I recently picked up a model lll and would like to put a four stroke in 
> it. Have not measured the with of either. Can you tell me what needs to be 
> done in the way of cowlings? Anyone have pictures of there's ?
>
>
> Thanks, dwight
>
> -- 
>
>
> 


________________________________  Message 25  ____________________________________


Time: 08:50:30 PM PST US
From: "ron schick" <roncarolnikko@hotmail.com>
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: cont.A65


I have seen a model IV with a c85.   There was major cowling work as well as 
every other modification.   These are also old technology.  Unless you 
happen accross one very inexpensive you could purchase an HKS or other 4 
stroke more suited for similar cost.  I, bucking the trends, went VW.  Feel 
free to reinvent the wheel if you have more time than money like me.  Ron NB 
Ore


>From: dwight purdy <dpurdy@comteck.com>
>To: "kitfox-list@matronics.com" <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: Kitfox-List: cont.A65
>Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2007 22:48:34 -0500
>
>
>Did not get any replies, so what am I doing wrong? Too many questions?
>
>                       Dwight Model ll and lll
>
>
>Question: Is there a reason why I never see a Kitfox with an A65? My guess 
>would be no electric or bad power to weight. How about a c-85?
>   I recently picked up a model lll and would like to put a four stroke in 
>it. Have not measured the with of either. Can you tell me what needs to be 
>done in the way of cowlings? Anyone have pictures of there's ?
>
>
>Thanks, dwight
>
>
>--
>
>

_________________________________________________________________
Communicate instantly! Use your Hotmail address to sign into Windows Live 
Messenger now. http://get.live.com/messenger/overview


________________________________  Message 26  ____________________________________


Time: 09:30:44 PM PST US
From: "Noel Loveys" <noelloveys@yahoo.ca>
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: cont.A65


You might be right ... Maybe you are the firs to consider putting a Conti
into an early  'Fox.  You may be in uncharted territory.

Noel


> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com 
> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of 
> dwight purdy
> Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2007 12:19 AM
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Kitfox-List: cont.A65
> 
> 
> 
> Did not get any replies, so what am I doing wrong? Too many questions?
> 
>                        Dwight Model ll and lll
> 
> 
> 
> Question: Is there a reason why I never see a Kitfox with an 
> A65? My guess 
> would be no electric or bad power to weight. How about a c-85?
>    I recently picked up a model lll and would like to put a 
> four stroke in 
> it. Have not measured the with of either. Can you tell me 
> what needs to be 
> done in the way of cowlings? Anyone have pictures of there's ?
> 
> 
> Thanks, dwight 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 


________________________________  Message 27  ____________________________________


Time: 11:31:03 PM PST US
From: "Larry Martin" <CrownLJ@verizon.net>
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Re: Norwegian Stalls - OOPS!

"....Kitfox, as you said the wing will stall, which drops the nose due 
to the 
center of pressure moving forward......"Guy,Michel and all,  I'm sorry I 
was thinking faster than I can type.  I should have said that the 
centerof pressure moves forward until the point of the stall, at which 
time it moves aftallowing the nose to drop.  My most humble 
apologies.larry

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       Other Matronics Email List Services
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post A New Message               kitfox-list@matronics.com
UN/SUBSCRIBE                     http://www.matronics.com/subscription
List FAQ                         http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/Kitfox-List.htm
Web Forum Interface To Lists     http://forums.matronics.com
Matronics List Wiki              http://wiki.matronics.com
Full Archive Search Engine       http://www.matronics.com/search
7-Day List Browse                http://www.matronics.com/browse/kitfox-list
Browse Digests                   http://www.matronics.com/digest/kitfox-list
Browse Other Lists               http://www.matronics.com/browse
Live Online Chat!                http://www.matronics.com/chat
Archive Downloading              http://www.matronics.com/archives
Photo Share                      http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
Other Email Lists                http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
Contributions                    http://www.matronics.com/contribution
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the 
generous Contributions of its members.