---------------------------------------------------------- Kitfox-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Wed 01/24/07: 47 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 06:04 AM - Re: Fuel Flow, continued. (Noel Loveys) 2. 07:19 AM - Looking for a Kitfox (Don Smythe) 3. 08:06 AM - Re: Fuel Flow, continued. (Lowell Fitt) 4. 08:33 AM - Re: Fuel Flow, continued. (dave) 5. 08:36 AM - Re: Fuel Flow, continued.Fuel Flow, continued. (Michael Gibbs) 6. 08:52 AM - Re: Fuel Flow, continued. (Clint Bazzill) 7. 09:18 AM - Re: Fuel Flow, continued. (Guy Buchanan) 8. 11:46 AM - Inexpensive Tundra Tires for 6"? (Robert Harris) 9. 11:50 AM - Re: Fuel Flow, continued. (Lowell Fitt) 10. 11:59 AM - Re: Looking for a Kitfox (John Disher) 11. 12:21 PM - Re: Fuel Flow, continued. (dave) 12. 12:40 PM - Re: Inexpensive Tundra Tires for 6"? (Alan Daniels) 13. 12:43 PM - Re: Fuel Flow, continued. (Noel Loveys) 14. 12:51 PM - Re: Fuel Flow, continued. (Noel Loveys) 15. 01:03 PM - Re: Looking for a Kitfox (Glenn Horne) 16. 01:13 PM - Re: Fuel Flow, continued. (Guy Buchanan) 17. 02:10 PM - low RPM @ full Throttle (Eric) 18. 02:26 PM - Re: low RPM @ full Throttle (kerrjohna@comcast.net) 19. 02:38 PM - Re: low RPM @ full Throttle (Noel Loveys) 20. 02:53 PM - Re: Fuel Flow, continued. (Lowell Fitt) 21. 02:55 PM - Re: Re: Fuel Flow, continued.Fuel Flow, continued. (Bradley M Webb) 22. 02:59 PM - Re: low RPM @ full Throttle (Lowell Fitt) 23. 03:06 PM - Re: low RPM @ full Throttle (Roger McConnell) 24. 03:10 PM - Re: Fuel Flow, continued. (john perry) 25. 03:13 PM - Re: low RPM @ full Throttle (dave) 26. 03:26 PM - Re: Re: Fuel Flow, continued.Fuel Flow, continued. (Dennis Golden) 27. 03:26 PM - Re: low RPM @ full Throttle (dcsfoto) 28. 04:15 PM - Re: Fuel Flow, continued. (Noel Loveys) 29. 04:23 PM - Re: low RPM @ full Throttle (Lowell Fitt) 30. 04:27 PM - Re: low RPM @ full Throttle (Noel Loveys) 31. 04:35 PM - Re: Fuel Flow, continued. (Lynn Matteson) 32. 05:03 PM - Re: low RPM @ full Throttle (Noel Loveys) 33. 05:20 PM - Re: Looking for a Kitfox (369PL) 34. 05:33 PM - Re: low RPM @ full Throttle (dave) 35. 05:51 PM - Re: low RPM @ full Throttle (kirk hull) 36. 06:18 PM - Re: Fuel Flow, continued. (Randy Daughenbaugh) 37. 06:38 PM - Re: Fuel Flow, continued. (john perry) 38. 06:40 PM - Re: Looking for a Kitfox (helicop) 39. 06:42 PM - Re: low RPM @ full Throttle (ron schick) 40. 06:51 PM - Re: Fuel Flow, continued. (dave) 41. 06:53 PM - Re: low RPM @ full Throttle (Noel Loveys) 42. 07:20 PM - Re: Fuel Flow, continued. (Randy Daughenbaugh) 43. 07:30 PM - Re: Fuel Flow, continued. (Noel Loveys) 44. 07:38 PM - Re: Fuel Flow, continued. (Guy Buchanan) 45. 08:47 PM - insect sprayer (john perry) 46. 10:51 PM - Re: Rust behind battery tray (kurt schrader) 47. 11:00 PM - Re: Tuning a KitFox Airframe (kurt schrader) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 06:04:53 AM PST US From: "Noel Loveys" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Fuel Flow, continued. Lowell was it the left tank that had the cap partially open? What I'm thinking is once the left tank is emptied a bit the vacuum caused by the loose cap will travel along the vent line for the header tank to the top of the right tank. Once the fuel in the right tank is below the level of the vent the vacuum will be broken by air coming in the right forward facing vent. If the right cap was the one partially open, the vacuum would have been ducted to the header tank by both the vent and the right gas line. That could allow fuel to be drawn form the left tank faster than normal. This is just a guess. When you get into fluid dynamics things get a little strange a lot of fast. Noel > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of > Lowell Fitt > Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 2:46 AM > To: kitfox-list@matronics.com > Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Fuel Flow, continued. > > > > > My numbers are similar to Guy's > > Some years ago I used a water manometer to check my airspeed > indicator. It > doesn't take a lot of Delta Water to indicate our airspeeds, > for esample > the delta at 30 mph is .74 inches, 90 is 4.13 inches and 6.18 > inches at 120 > mph. Since our fuel is about .75 the density of water, the > head of our fuel > would be .98", 5.49" and 8.21" at the corresponding airspeeds. > > I had often heard it said that the pressure from the pitot > vents is about > one or so psi. Apparently this is not true as the pressure > at 120 mph would > need to be about .3 psi to maintain a 8.21" column of water. > > What this means, I haven't a clue really. This I do know, On > a flight from > Las Vegas to Ely, Nevada a couple of years ago, I noticed the > right tank had > lost most of it's fuel. The left tank was essentially full. > On landing I > found that the fuel cap on the right tank had been attached > at only one > side. For me, at least, I lost fuel apparently from a > venturi effect and > the low pressure on top of the wing from the mis fit cap > sucking the tank > dry and had apparently very little transfilling from the > pressurized side. > > Lowell > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Guy Buchanan" > To: > Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 3:55 PM > Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Fuel Flow, continued. > > > > > > At 12:56 PM 1/23/2007, you wrote: > >>In the mean time, let's assume that we "loose" our right > wing tank cap > >>(the left one is tight and in place). > >> > >>Would it make any difference in this case? > >> > >>Can we do anything about the situ? > > > > I'm not sure what you're asking, Torgier. I did some calcs > and the dynamic > > pressure at 115 MIAS at sea level equates to about 9" of > static fuel head. > > (Assume the static pressure is the same across the open cap > and at the > > vent pitot tip, a reasonable approximation.) This appears > to mean that as > > long as you're going fast you can empty the left tank. When > the fuel level > > in the left tank/line drops to 9" below that in the right > tank you'll be > > at equilibrium. This will leave nearly the entire left fuel > line and vent > > line full, and the right tank full. Both levels will drop > simultaneously, > > all things being equal, with the left level 9" below the > right. (This > > assumes the top of your header is more than 9" below the > bottom of your > > tanks. I'm pretty sure mine is.) > > > > If you slow down the 9" static fuel head drops as the square of the > > velocity. (E.g. at 57.5 MIAS the head will be 9/4" or > 2.25") If you climb > > the static fuel head drops linearly with the air density. > So if you find > > you're blowing fuel, slow down, climb high, lift the > streaming wing a > > little, and you should be fine. Indeed you should be able > to lift the wing > > enough to stop the leak. > > > > > > Guy Buchanan > > K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 07:19:39 AM PST US From: "Don Smythe" Subject: Kitfox-List: Looking for a Kitfox All, Are there any list members with a Kitfox around the Charleston SC. area. I have a person (now on the list) that's trying to find one to look at. Thanks, Don Smythe Do Not Archive ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 08:06:26 AM PST US From: "Lowell Fitt" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Fuel Flow, continued. Noel It was the right tank that had the fuel cap breach. It was the right tank that I noticed the significantly lower fuel level and by the time I landed, the right tank had lost fuel to the point I could barely see it in the sight gauge. I never felt at risk as the left tank showed nearly full when I noticed the fuel loss with a normal drop thereafter. There may have been some transfilling from the left tank, but that I can't say for sure. The flight was about 210 miles and the duration was about two hours and my lament was that I had lost some expensive fuel - $86 for a two hour flight. The trip took 20.4 gallons (yes I still have the receipt) and a little over 8 gallons was burned in the two hours, leaving somewhat less than 12 gallons lost through the loose fuel cap. Lowell ----- Original Message ----- From: "Noel Loveys" Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 6:03 AM Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Fuel Flow, continued. > > Lowell was it the left tank that had the cap partially open? > > What I'm thinking is once the left tank is emptied a bit the vacuum caused > by the loose cap will travel along the vent line for the header tank to > the > top of the right tank. Once the fuel in the right tank is below the level > of the vent the vacuum will be broken by air coming in the right forward > facing vent. > > If the right cap was the one partially open, the vacuum would have been > ducted to the header tank by both the vent and the right gas line. That > could allow fuel to be drawn form the left tank faster than normal. > > This is just a guess. When you get into fluid dynamics things get a > little > strange a lot of fast. > > Noel > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com >> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of >> Lowell Fitt >> Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 2:46 AM >> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com >> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Fuel Flow, continued. >> >> >> >> >> My numbers are similar to Guy's >> >> Some years ago I used a water manometer to check my airspeed >> indicator. It >> doesn't take a lot of Delta Water to indicate our airspeeds, >> for esample >> the delta at 30 mph is .74 inches, 90 is 4.13 inches and 6.18 >> inches at 120 >> mph. Since our fuel is about .75 the density of water, the >> head of our fuel >> would be .98", 5.49" and 8.21" at the corresponding airspeeds. >> >> I had often heard it said that the pressure from the pitot >> vents is about >> one or so psi. Apparently this is not true as the pressure >> at 120 mph would >> need to be about .3 psi to maintain a 8.21" column of water. >> >> What this means, I haven't a clue really. This I do know, On >> a flight from >> Las Vegas to Ely, Nevada a couple of years ago, I noticed the >> right tank had >> lost most of it's fuel. The left tank was essentially full. >> On landing I >> found that the fuel cap on the right tank had been attached >> at only one >> side. For me, at least, I lost fuel apparently from a >> venturi effect and >> the low pressure on top of the wing from the mis fit cap >> sucking the tank >> dry and had apparently very little transfilling from the >> pressurized side. >> >> Lowell >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Guy Buchanan" >> To: >> Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 3:55 PM >> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Fuel Flow, continued. >> >> >> > >> > At 12:56 PM 1/23/2007, you wrote: >> >>In the mean time, let's assume that we "loose" our right >> wing tank cap >> >>(the left one is tight and in place). >> >> >> >>Would it make any difference in this case? >> >> >> >>Can we do anything about the situ? >> > >> > I'm not sure what you're asking, Torgier. I did some calcs >> and the dynamic >> > pressure at 115 MIAS at sea level equates to about 9" of >> static fuel head. >> > (Assume the static pressure is the same across the open cap >> and at the >> > vent pitot tip, a reasonable approximation.) This appears >> to mean that as >> > long as you're going fast you can empty the left tank. When >> the fuel level >> > in the left tank/line drops to 9" below that in the right >> tank you'll be >> > at equilibrium. This will leave nearly the entire left fuel >> line and vent >> > line full, and the right tank full. Both levels will drop >> simultaneously, >> > all things being equal, with the left level 9" below the >> right. (This >> > assumes the top of your header is more than 9" below the >> bottom of your >> > tanks. I'm pretty sure mine is.) >> > >> > If you slow down the 9" static fuel head drops as the square of the >> > velocity. (E.g. at 57.5 MIAS the head will be 9/4" or >> 2.25") If you climb >> > the static fuel head drops linearly with the air density. >> So if you find >> > you're blowing fuel, slow down, climb high, lift the >> streaming wing a >> > little, and you should be fine. Indeed you should be able >> to lift the wing >> > enough to stop the leak. >> > >> > >> > Guy Buchanan >> > K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar. >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >> >> >> >> > > > ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 08:33:04 AM PST US From: "dave" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Fuel Flow, continued. I have 2 - 6 gals wing tanks and each has it's own shut off. Each tank is a pitot tube cap . They both flow together to a T fitting then a Clear Fuel filter and I can clearly see the fuel flowing throught that filter. Rivht in line after the filter is a Facet pump which I have a manual switch for but only use to transfer fuel to Dash tank ( about 8.5 Gallon and you can see the level in until about 2 gals left and you have to rock the wings to see the fuel slosh around) After the Dash Tank the fuel flows into gascolator then to Fuel pump. I usually fly off the main dash tank only and I only open the independant fuel valves from each wing tank to transfer wing tank fuel as needed to the dash tank . If I was to loose a cap in flight -what would happen ? Is this method ok ? Dave ----- Original Message ----- From: "Lowell Fitt" Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 11:05 AM Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Fuel Flow, continued. > > Noel > > It was the right tank that had the fuel cap breach. It was the right tank > that I noticed the significantly lower fuel level and by the time I > landed, the right tank had lost fuel to the point I could barely see it in > the sight gauge. I never felt at risk as the left tank showed nearly full > when I noticed the fuel loss with a normal drop thereafter. > > There may have been some transfilling from the left tank, but that I can't > say for sure. The flight was about 210 miles and the duration was about > two hours and my lament was that I had lost some expensive fuel - $86 for > a two hour flight. The trip took 20.4 gallons (yes I still have the > receipt) and a little over 8 gallons was burned in the two hours, leaving > somewhat less than 12 gallons lost through the loose fuel cap. > > Lowell > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Noel Loveys" > To: > Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 6:03 AM > Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Fuel Flow, continued. > > >> >> Lowell was it the left tank that had the cap partially open? >> >> What I'm thinking is once the left tank is emptied a bit the vacuum >> caused >> by the loose cap will travel along the vent line for the header tank to >> the >> top of the right tank. Once the fuel in the right tank is below the >> level >> of the vent the vacuum will be broken by air coming in the right forward >> facing vent. >> >> If the right cap was the one partially open, the vacuum would have been >> ducted to the header tank by both the vent and the right gas line. That >> could allow fuel to be drawn form the left tank faster than normal. >> >> This is just a guess. When you get into fluid dynamics things get a >> little >> strange a lot of fast. >> >> Noel >> >> >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com >>> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of >>> Lowell Fitt >>> Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 2:46 AM >>> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com >>> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Fuel Flow, continued. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> My numbers are similar to Guy's >>> >>> Some years ago I used a water manometer to check my airspeed >>> indicator. It >>> doesn't take a lot of Delta Water to indicate our airspeeds, >>> for esample >>> the delta at 30 mph is .74 inches, 90 is 4.13 inches and 6.18 >>> inches at 120 >>> mph. Since our fuel is about .75 the density of water, the >>> head of our fuel >>> would be .98", 5.49" and 8.21" at the corresponding airspeeds. >>> >>> I had often heard it said that the pressure from the pitot >>> vents is about >>> one or so psi. Apparently this is not true as the pressure >>> at 120 mph would >>> need to be about .3 psi to maintain a 8.21" column of water. >>> >>> What this means, I haven't a clue really. This I do know, On >>> a flight from >>> Las Vegas to Ely, Nevada a couple of years ago, I noticed the >>> right tank had >>> lost most of it's fuel. The left tank was essentially full. >>> On landing I >>> found that the fuel cap on the right tank had been attached >>> at only one >>> side. For me, at least, I lost fuel apparently from a >>> venturi effect and >>> the low pressure on top of the wing from the mis fit cap >>> sucking the tank >>> dry and had apparently very little transfilling from the >>> pressurized side. >>> >>> Lowell >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Guy Buchanan" >>> To: >>> Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 3:55 PM >>> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Fuel Flow, continued. >>> >>> >>> > >>> > At 12:56 PM 1/23/2007, you wrote: >>> >>In the mean time, let's assume that we "loose" our right >>> wing tank cap >>> >>(the left one is tight and in place). >>> >> >>> >>Would it make any difference in this case? >>> >> >>> >>Can we do anything about the situ? >>> > >>> > I'm not sure what you're asking, Torgier. I did some calcs >>> and the dynamic >>> > pressure at 115 MIAS at sea level equates to about 9" of >>> static fuel head. >>> > (Assume the static pressure is the same across the open cap >>> and at the >>> > vent pitot tip, a reasonable approximation.) This appears >>> to mean that as >>> > long as you're going fast you can empty the left tank. When >>> the fuel level >>> > in the left tank/line drops to 9" below that in the right >>> tank you'll be >>> > at equilibrium. This will leave nearly the entire left fuel >>> line and vent >>> > line full, and the right tank full. Both levels will drop >>> simultaneously, >>> > all things being equal, with the left level 9" below the >>> right. (This >>> > assumes the top of your header is more than 9" below the >>> bottom of your >>> > tanks. I'm pretty sure mine is.) >>> > >>> > If you slow down the 9" static fuel head drops as the square of the >>> > velocity. (E.g. at 57.5 MIAS the head will be 9/4" or >>> 2.25") If you climb >>> > the static fuel head drops linearly with the air density. >>> So if you find >>> > you're blowing fuel, slow down, climb high, lift the >>> streaming wing a >>> > little, and you should be fine. Indeed you should be able >>> to lift the wing >>> > enough to stop the leak. >>> > >>> > >>> > Guy Buchanan >>> > K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar. >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> > > > ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 08:36:59 AM PST US From: Michael Gibbs Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Fuel Flow, continued.Fuel Flow, continued. Bradley sez: >I set my system up as two totally seperate, redundant systems. I >have no interconnect between tanks. I installed a left-off-right >valve...My header is my lifeline. I'm confused by your description, Bradley. How is this different than the factory set up? Each wing tank normally feeds the header, many builders include an inline valve between each wing tank and the header, and the header is vented to the right wing tank. Can you describe your installation in more detail? Mike G. N728KF ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 08:52:59 AM PST US From: "Clint Bazzill" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Fuel Flow, continued. Looks like you were a victim of Mother Natures Vacuum cleaner. From: "Lowell Fitt" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Fuel Flow, continued. Noel It was the right tank that had the fuel cap breach. It was the right tank that I noticed the significantly lower fuel level and by the time I landed, the right tank had lost fuel to the point I could barely see it in the sight gauge. I never felt at risk as the left tank showed nearly full when I noticed the fuel loss with a normal drop thereafter. There may have been some transfilling from the left tank, but that I can't say for sure. The flight was about 210 miles and the duration was about two hours and my lament was that I had lost some expensive fuel - $86 for a two hour flight. The trip took 20.4 gallons (yes I still have the receipt) and a little over 8 gallons was burned in the two hours, leaving somewhat less than 12 gallons lost through the loose fuel cap. Lowell ----- Original Message ----- From: "Noel Loveys" Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 6:03 AM Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Fuel Flow, continued. > >Lowell was it the left tank that had the cap partially open? > >What I'm thinking is once the left tank is emptied a bit the vacuum caused >by the loose cap will travel along the vent line for the header tank to the >top of the right tank. Once the fuel in the right tank is below the level >of the vent the vacuum will be broken by air coming in the right forward >facing vent. > >If the right cap was the one partially open, the vacuum would have been >ducted to the header tank by both the vent and the right gas line. That >could allow fuel to be drawn form the left tank faster than normal. > >This is just a guess. When you get into fluid dynamics things get a little >strange a lot of fast. > >Noel > > >>-----Original Message----- >>From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com >>[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of >>Lowell Fitt >>Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 2:46 AM >>To: kitfox-list@matronics.com >>Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Fuel Flow, continued. >> >> >> >> >>My numbers are similar to Guy's >> >>Some years ago I used a water manometer to check my airspeed >>indicator. It >>doesn't take a lot of Delta Water to indicate our airspeeds, >>for esample >>the delta at 30 mph is .74 inches, 90 is 4.13 inches and 6.18 >>inches at 120 >>mph. Since our fuel is about .75 the density of water, the >>head of our fuel >>would be .98", 5.49" and 8.21" at the corresponding airspeeds. >> >>I had often heard it said that the pressure from the pitot >>vents is about >>one or so psi. Apparently this is not true as the pressure >>at 120 mph would >>need to be about .3 psi to maintain a 8.21" column of water. >> >>What this means, I haven't a clue really. This I do know, On >>a flight from >>Las Vegas to Ely, Nevada a couple of years ago, I noticed the >>right tank had >>lost most of it's fuel. The left tank was essentially full. >>On landing I >>found that the fuel cap on the right tank had been attached >>at only one >>side. For me, at least, I lost fuel apparently from a >>venturi effect and >>the low pressure on top of the wing from the mis fit cap >>sucking the tank >>dry and had apparently very little transfilling from the >>pressurized side. >> >>Lowell >> >>----- Original Message ----- From: "Guy Buchanan" >>To: >>Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 3:55 PM >>Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Fuel Flow, continued. >> >> >> > >> > At 12:56 PM 1/23/2007, you wrote: >> >>In the mean time, let's assume that we "loose" our right >>wing tank cap >> >>(the left one is tight and in place). >> >> >> >>Would it make any difference in this case? >> >> >> >>Can we do anything about the situ? >> > >> > I'm not sure what you're asking, Torgier. I did some calcs >>and the dynamic >> > pressure at 115 MIAS at sea level equates to about 9" of >>static fuel head. >> > (Assume the static pressure is the same across the open cap >>and at the >> > vent pitot tip, a reasonable approximation.) This appears >>to mean that as >> > long as you're going fast you can empty the left tank. When >>the fuel level >> > in the left tank/line drops to 9" below that in the right >>tank you'll be >> > at equilibrium. This will leave nearly the entire left fuel >>line and vent >> > line full, and the right tank full. Both levels will drop >>simultaneously, >> > all things being equal, with the left level 9" below the >>right. (This >> > assumes the top of your header is more than 9" below the >>bottom of your >> > tanks. I'm pretty sure mine is.) >> > >> > If you slow down the 9" static fuel head drops as the square of the >> > velocity. (E.g. at 57.5 MIAS the head will be 9/4" or >>2.25") If you climb >> > the static fuel head drops linearly with the air density. >>So if you find >> > you're blowing fuel, slow down, climb high, lift the >>streaming wing a >> > little, and you should be fine. Indeed you should be able >>to lift the wing >> > enough to stop the leak. >> > >> > >> > Guy Buchanan >> > K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar. >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >> >> >> >> > > _________________________________________________________________ something more. ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 09:18:56 AM PST US From: Guy Buchanan Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Fuel Flow, continued. At 10:15 PM 1/23/2007, you wrote: >For me, at least, I lost fuel apparently from a venturi effect and >the low pressure on top of the wing from the mis fit cap sucking the tank >dry and had apparently very little transfilling from the pressurized side. That's a tough one to figure out. Yes the wing has low pressure on the top, but we only deal in pressure differentials. The question becomes, where was the higher pressure coming from? In my system the only source is the fuel in the opposite tank, since you can't push fuel uphill with air. Any air that came from a high pressure source would percolate through the fuel in the right tank and exit at the low pressure vent. To generalize that point I don't see how you can push fuel out a cap with a high pressure vapor source. So the question remains, how did you push the fuel out your cap? I confess that from the facts of the case I'm stuck for an answer. One possible answer I can imagine is that you reduced the pressure in the tank so much the fuel vaporized. Is it possible to vaporize 12 gallons of gas in two hours? I confess that's beyond my expertise so someone else will have to figure it out. (It also seems rather unlikely you could generate enough gas exchange with a cracked cap.) Guy Buchanan K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar. ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 11:46:07 AM PST US From: Robert Harris Subject: Kitfox-List: Inexpensive Tundra Tires for 6"? Alan and others,=0AIs Wagaero the place to buy the inexpensive Blimp-Tundra tires and tubes. What size would be equivlant to the Tubeless 26" Alaska B ush Tire for a 6" wheel? Does anyone have any pics of a Fox on huge Bush Ti res? PS Big Rocks and Long Props has a second film DVD out now. Has any one seen it? The first video is great.=0A =0ARobert=0AN200KF 0200 =0ASan Diego =0ADo not Archive=0A=0A=0A =0A_____________________________________________ _______________________________________=0ANeed a quick answer? Get one in m inutes from people who know.=0AAsk your question on www.Answers.yahoo.com ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 11:50:57 AM PST US From: "Lowell Fitt" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Fuel Flow, continued. Guy, I don't know what is happening here, but have a friend that lost a bunch of fuel from a tank with no fuel cap and it was a Cessna with no pitot on the opposite side unless the vent behind the lift strut provides a bit of ram pressure. I don't know how the fuel selector was set. There is one overriding assumption that seems to be common to all the posts and that is that the fuel essentially sits quitely and overflows the tank filler neck because of transfilling. I don't think that is necessarily the case. Based on what I experienced and the tales of others - granted the sample is very small, Consider that my flight was in Central Nevada over the desert and mountains and there is always turbulance there. Lowell ----- Original Message ----- From: "Guy Buchanan" Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 9:17 AM Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Fuel Flow, continued. > > At 10:15 PM 1/23/2007, you wrote: >>For me, at least, I lost fuel apparently from a venturi effect and >>the low pressure on top of the wing from the mis fit cap sucking the tank >>dry and had apparently very little transfilling from the pressurized side. > > That's a tough one to figure out. Yes the wing has low pressure on the > top, but we only deal in pressure differentials. The question becomes, > where was the higher pressure coming from? In my system the only source is > the fuel in the opposite tank, since you can't push fuel uphill with air. > Any air that came from a high pressure source would percolate through the > fuel in the right tank and exit at the low pressure vent. To generalize > that point I don't see how you can push fuel out a cap with a high > pressure vapor source. So the question remains, how did you push the fuel > out your cap? I confess that from the facts of the case I'm stuck for an > answer. > > One possible answer I can imagine is that you reduced the pressure in the > tank so much the fuel vaporized. Is it possible to vaporize 12 gallons of > gas in two hours? I confess that's beyond my expertise so someone else > will have to figure it out. (It also seems rather unlikely you could > generate enough gas exchange with a cracked cap.) > > > Guy Buchanan > K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar. > > > ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 11:59:36 AM PST US From: "John Disher" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Looking for a Kitfox ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 12:21:34 PM PST US From: "dave" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Fuel Flow, continued. Lowell, so if he had his cessna fuel selector at both and he lost on tank only or did he have one tank selected ? Dave On topic My Kitfox fuel system seems to work well -- I have no vent tube on the wing tanks at all. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Lowell Fitt" Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 2:50 PM Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Fuel Flow, continued. > > Guy, I don't know what is happening here, but have a friend that lost a > bunch of fuel from a tank with no fuel cap and it was a Cessna with no > pitot on the opposite side unless the vent behind the lift strut provides > a bit of ram pressure. I don't know how the fuel selector was set. > > There is one overriding assumption that seems to be common to all the > posts and that is that the fuel essentially sits quitely and overflows > the tank filler neck because of transfilling. I don't think that is > necessarily the case. Based on what I experienced and the tales of > others - granted the sample is very small, Consider that my flight was in > Central Nevada over the desert and mountains and there is always > turbulance there. > > Lowell > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Guy Buchanan" > To: > Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 9:17 AM > Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Fuel Flow, continued. > > >> >> At 10:15 PM 1/23/2007, you wrote: >>>For me, at least, I lost fuel apparently from a venturi effect and >>>the low pressure on top of the wing from the mis fit cap sucking the tank >>>dry and had apparently very little transfilling from the pressurized >>>side. >> >> That's a tough one to figure out. Yes the wing has low pressure on the >> top, but we only deal in pressure differentials. The question becomes, >> where was the higher pressure coming from? In my system the only source >> is the fuel in the opposite tank, since you can't push fuel uphill with >> air. Any air that came from a high pressure source would percolate >> through the fuel in the right tank and exit at the low pressure vent. To >> generalize that point I don't see how you can push fuel out a cap with a >> high pressure vapor source. So the question remains, how did you push the >> fuel out your cap? I confess that from the facts of the case I'm stuck >> for an answer. >> >> One possible answer I can imagine is that you reduced the pressure in the >> tank so much the fuel vaporized. Is it possible to vaporize 12 gallons of >> gas in two hours? I confess that's beyond my expertise so someone else >> will have to figure it out. (It also seems rather unlikely you could >> generate enough gas exchange with a cracked cap.) >> >> >> Guy Buchanan >> K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar. >> >> >> >> >> > > > ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 12:40:24 PM PST US From: Alan Daniels Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Inexpensive Tundra Tires for 6"? SkyGeek is were I got mine. They were about $100 less per set than Wagaero and the shipping was free. Desser also has them. I understand that there is a low cost car inner tube that will work instead of using 8:50x6 tubes which are really expensive, if you can get them. Inexpensive is relative. Blimp -tunda tires are less than half of true tundra tires but will still set you back close to a grand. The only downside is that if you run less than about 10 psi you risk slipping the tire on the rim and tearing out the valve stem. That would be a real pain to repair in the field. I have considered making a hole in the tire to put the valve stem out or even pushing the valve stem inside the wheel to prevent the problem. The tires work great and I can't imagine why you would need bigger. I was just on a search for the County Sheriffs Office. Well it really was not a search as they knew were the plane was and just wanted it checked out as it was in a very remote area. It looked like a local flying a Kitfox like plane - Just Aircraft- was doing some practice landings on top of a narrow short ridge and came in a little short and he just could not quite handle that 50% + slope before it leveled off some. It looked like the right gear failed, but other than that it looked not badly damaged, but I was a few hundred feet up in an RV-6. It looked easy to repair but hard to get out. Speaking of Long prop video we had an interesting wreck here this summer at Owyhee reservoir. Seems this guy in a Husky wanted to water sky his plane. Well the spinning tires threw water up on his plane so he set the parking brake and was having a good old time airplane skiing. He decided he wanted to land at the little dirt strip for the call of nature or something and all was going well until he touched down. Seems he forgot to take the parking brake off and went dirty side up. We had another plane get destroyed doing the water landing to beach thing on the reservoir this last summer but I don't have the details on that one. I guess you don't really know what the limit is until you start bending stuff. Robert Harris wrote: > Alan and others, > Is *Wagaero* the place to buy the inexpensive Blimp-Tundra tires and > tubes. *What size* would be equivlant to the Tubeless 26" Alaska Bush > Tire for a 6" wheel? Does anyone have any pics of a Fox on huge Bush > Tires? PS Big Rocks and Long Props has a second film DVD out now. Has > any one seen it? The first video is great. > > Robert > N200KF 0200 > San Diego > Do not Archive > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Don't get soaked. Take a quick peak at the forecast > > with theYahoo! Search weather shortcut. > > * > > > * ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 12:43:41 PM PST US From: "Noel Loveys" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Fuel Flow, continued. Dave if you were to loose a cap in flight ... Your ears would get cold.... Seriously though... You would probably lose the fuel in the tank that lost the cap. And you would have to make another cap. I lost a cap a couple of years ago. I used a chrome feed stem for a toilet and soldered it into a gas cap that I'd removed the plastic from the inside. T removed the rubber sealing ring before soldering the tube in and once in I installed the cap with the tube pointing straight up so I could mark forward on the cap. Then I bent and trimmed the tube to "look right" I used a bit of MEK to remove the mark I made for front. It doesn't leak and it does work total cost was under $5.00 sure wish I had the gear for silver soldering. Big snow storm on here today... There'll be tons of snow to push around with the J5 tomorrow! Still no ice on the bay. So the 'Fox is still on floats. The rebuild kit for my fuel pump should be I tomorrow that will take care of an hour or so. Noel After thought... To archive or not... Not... Do not archive. > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of dave > Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 1:02 PM > To: kitfox-list@matronics.com > Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Fuel Flow, continued. > > > > I have 2 - 6 gals wing tanks and each has it's own shut off. > Each tank is a pitot tube cap . > > They both flow together to a T fitting then a Clear Fuel > filter and I can > clearly see the fuel flowing throught that filter. Rivht in > line after the > filter is a Facet pump which I have a manual switch for but > only use to > transfer fuel to Dash tank ( about 8.5 Gallon and you can > see the level > in until about 2 gals left and you have to rock the wings to > see the fuel > slosh around) After the Dash Tank the fuel flows into > gascolator then to > Fuel pump. > > I usually fly off the main dash tank only and I only open the > independant > fuel valves from each wing tank to transfer wing tank fuel > as needed to > the dash tank . > > If I was to loose a cap in flight -what would happen ? Is > this method ok ? > > > Dave > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Lowell Fitt" > To: > Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 11:05 AM > Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Fuel Flow, continued. > > > > > > > Noel > > > > It was the right tank that had the fuel cap breach. It was > the right tank > > that I noticed the significantly lower fuel level and by the time I > > landed, the right tank had lost fuel to the point I could > barely see it in > > the sight gauge. I never felt at risk as the left tank > showed nearly full > > when I noticed the fuel loss with a normal drop thereafter. > > > > There may have been some transfilling from the left tank, > but that I can't > > say for sure. The flight was about 210 miles and the > duration was about > > two hours and my lament was that I had lost some expensive > fuel - $86 for > > a two hour flight. The trip took 20.4 gallons (yes I still have the > > receipt) and a little over 8 gallons was burned in the two > hours, leaving > > somewhat less than 12 gallons lost through the loose fuel cap. > > > > Lowell > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Noel Loveys" > > To: > > Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 6:03 AM > > Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Fuel Flow, continued. > > > > > > >> > >> Lowell was it the left tank that had the cap partially open? > >> > >> What I'm thinking is once the left tank is emptied a bit > the vacuum > >> caused > >> by the loose cap will travel along the vent line for the > header tank to > >> the > >> top of the right tank. Once the fuel in the right tank is > below the > >> level > >> of the vent the vacuum will be broken by air coming in the > right forward > >> facing vent. > >> > >> If the right cap was the one partially open, the vacuum > would have been > >> ducted to the header tank by both the vent and the right > gas line. That > >> could allow fuel to be drawn form the left tank faster than normal. > >> > >> This is just a guess. When you get into fluid dynamics > things get a > >> little > >> strange a lot of fast. > >> > >> Noel > >> > >> > >> > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com > >>> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of > >>> Lowell Fitt > >>> Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 2:46 AM > >>> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com > >>> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Fuel Flow, continued. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> My numbers are similar to Guy's > >>> > >>> Some years ago I used a water manometer to check my airspeed > >>> indicator. It > >>> doesn't take a lot of Delta Water to indicate our airspeeds, > >>> for esample > >>> the delta at 30 mph is .74 inches, 90 is 4.13 inches and 6.18 > >>> inches at 120 > >>> mph. Since our fuel is about .75 the density of water, the > >>> head of our fuel > >>> would be .98", 5.49" and 8.21" at the corresponding airspeeds. > >>> > >>> I had often heard it said that the pressure from the pitot > >>> vents is about > >>> one or so psi. Apparently this is not true as the pressure > >>> at 120 mph would > >>> need to be about .3 psi to maintain a 8.21" column of water. > >>> > >>> What this means, I haven't a clue really. This I do know, On > >>> a flight from > >>> Las Vegas to Ely, Nevada a couple of years ago, I noticed the > >>> right tank had > >>> lost most of it's fuel. The left tank was essentially full. > >>> On landing I > >>> found that the fuel cap on the right tank had been attached > >>> at only one > >>> side. For me, at least, I lost fuel apparently from a > >>> venturi effect and > >>> the low pressure on top of the wing from the mis fit cap > >>> sucking the tank > >>> dry and had apparently very little transfilling from the > >>> pressurized side. > >>> > >>> Lowell > >>> > >>> ----- Original Message ----- > >>> From: "Guy Buchanan" > >>> To: > >>> Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 3:55 PM > >>> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Fuel Flow, continued. > >>> > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > At 12:56 PM 1/23/2007, you wrote: > >>> >>In the mean time, let's assume that we "loose" our right > >>> wing tank cap > >>> >>(the left one is tight and in place). > >>> >> > >>> >>Would it make any difference in this case? > >>> >> > >>> >>Can we do anything about the situ? > >>> > > >>> > I'm not sure what you're asking, Torgier. I did some calcs > >>> and the dynamic > >>> > pressure at 115 MIAS at sea level equates to about 9" of > >>> static fuel head. > >>> > (Assume the static pressure is the same across the open cap > >>> and at the > >>> > vent pitot tip, a reasonable approximation.) This appears > >>> to mean that as > >>> > long as you're going fast you can empty the left tank. When > >>> the fuel level > >>> > in the left tank/line drops to 9" below that in the right > >>> tank you'll be > >>> > at equilibrium. This will leave nearly the entire left fuel > >>> line and vent > >>> > line full, and the right tank full. Both levels will drop > >>> simultaneously, > >>> > all things being equal, with the left level 9" below the > >>> right. (This > >>> > assumes the top of your header is more than 9" below the > >>> bottom of your > >>> > tanks. I'm pretty sure mine is.) > >>> > > >>> > If you slow down the 9" static fuel head drops as the > square of the > >>> > velocity. (E.g. at 57.5 MIAS the head will be 9/4" or > >>> 2.25") If you climb > >>> > the static fuel head drops linearly with the air density. > >>> So if you find > >>> > you're blowing fuel, slow down, climb high, lift the > >>> streaming wing a > >>> > little, and you should be fine. Indeed you should be able > >>> to lift the wing > >>> > enough to stop the leak. > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > Guy Buchanan > >>> > K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks mostly to > Bob Ducar. > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 14 ____________________________________ Time: 12:51:30 PM PST US From: "Noel Loveys" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Fuel Flow, continued. I've known enough pilots who have lost various quantities of fuel from open gas fillers in flight one thing is for sure the gas does get sucked out. It may, or may not, have something to do with the boundary layers getting broken up around the gas filler. I guess the reason isn't so important especially at the price of gas now days. Fluid dynamics can be spooky. Noel Do not archive > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of > Guy Buchanan > Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 1:47 PM > To: kitfox-list@matronics.com > Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Fuel Flow, continued. > > > > At 10:15 PM 1/23/2007, you wrote: > >For me, at least, I lost fuel apparently from a venturi effect and > >the low pressure on top of the wing from the mis fit cap > sucking the tank > >dry and had apparently very little transfilling from the > pressurized side. > > That's a tough one to figure out. Yes the wing has low > pressure on the top, > but we only deal in pressure differentials. The question > becomes, where was > the higher pressure coming from? In my system the only source > is the fuel > in the opposite tank, since you can't push fuel uphill with > air. Any air > that came from a high pressure source would percolate through > the fuel in > the right tank and exit at the low pressure vent. To > generalize that point > I don't see how you can push fuel out a cap with a high > pressure vapor > source. So the question remains, how did you push the fuel > out your cap? I > confess that from the facts of the case I'm stuck for an answer. > > One possible answer I can imagine is that you reduced the > pressure in the > tank so much the fuel vaporized. Is it possible to vaporize > 12 gallons of > gas in two hours? I confess that's beyond my expertise so > someone else will > have to figure it out. (It also seems rather unlikely you > could generate > enough gas exchange with a cracked cap.) > > > Guy Buchanan > K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar. > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 15 ____________________________________ Time: 01:03:57 PM PST US From: "Glenn Horne" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Looking for a Kitfox Look in Aero Trader. I have one in there for sale. Glenn Horne Suffolk, Virginia ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Disher" Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 2:43 PM Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Looking for a Kitfox ________________________________ Message 16 ____________________________________ Time: 01:13:33 PM PST US From: Guy Buchanan Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Fuel Flow, continued. At 11:50 AM 1/24/2007, you wrote: >There is one overriding assumption that seems to be common to all the posts >and that is that the fuel essentially sits quitely and overflows the tank >filler neck because of transfilling. I don't think that is necessarily the >case. Based on what I experienced and the tales of others - granted the >sample is very small, Consider that my flight was in Central Nevada over >the desert and mountains and there is always turbulance there. But the strange thing is that you ended up with one full tank and one empty tank. Now my system readily cross feeds from one tank to the other, so if I was sloshing fuel out, or siphoning, or whatever, both of my tanks would empty at about the same rate. Next time I fill up I'm going to time how long it takes one full tank to equilibrate across both tanks, just for grins and another data point. Guy ________________________________ Message 17 ____________________________________ Time: 02:10:49 PM PST US From: "Eric" Subject: Kitfox-List: low RPM @ full Throttle Hi Folks, finally started the engine for the firs time since I bought this Speedster rebuild project 1.5 years ago. Set the new GSC blade pitch at 17deg. Pneumatically synched the carbs and at full throttle I was only getting 4200 rpm. So I repitched the blades to 15 deg. (minimum shown in the GSC chart for a 912 UL with a 3 blade 68" prop), now it maxes out at 4300. Any ideas why I cant get anywhere close to max RPM. Could the Rotax RPM gauge be lying to me. Eric N58EW ________________________________ Message 18 ____________________________________ Time: 02:26:05 PM PST US From: kerrjohna@comcast.net Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: low RPM @ full Throttle those guage are notorious for drifting. I recalibrate mine every annual condition inspection. On mine there is a small hole on the back, originally covered by a sticker, into which I stick a small electronic screwdriver to adjust. You will need to do the math for the reduction drive and have access to a digital hand held tachometer. Check your local R/C hobby shop. Using the conversion table you created in doing the math set the prop rpm such that you will be looking for a convenient engine rpm. Then adjust the tach. Best to have the tail tied to your pickup. Don't ask. John Kerr -------------- Original message -------------- From: "Eric" Hi Folks, finally started the engine for the firs time since I bought this Speedster rebuild project 1.5 years ago. Set the new GSC blade pitch at 17deg. Pneumatically synched the carbs and at full throttle I was only getting 4200 rpm. So I repitched the blades to 15 deg. (minimum shown in the GSC chart for a 912 UL with a 3 blade 68" prop), now it maxes out at 4300. Any ideas why I cant get anywhere close to max RPM. Could the Rotax RPM gauge be lying to me. Eric N58EW
those guage are notorious for drifting. I recalibrate mine every annual condition inspection. On mine there is a small hole on the back, originally covered by a sticker, into which I stick a small electronic screwdriver to adjust.  You will need to do the math for the reduction drive and have access to a digital hand held tachometer.  Check your local R/C hobby shop.
 
Using the conversion table you created in doing the math set the prop rpm such that you will be looking for a convenient engine rpm.  Then adjust the tach. Best to have the tail tied to your pickup. Don't ask.
 
John Kerr
 
-------------- Original message --------------
From: "Eric" <iworonko@cox.net>
Hi Folks,
finally started the engine for the firs time since I bought this Speedster rebuild project 1.5 years ago. Set the new GSC blade pitch at 17deg. Pneumatically synched the carbs and at full throttle I was only getting 4200 rpm. So I repitched the blades to 15 deg. (minimum shown in the GSC chart for a 912 UL with a 3 blade 68" prop), now it maxes out at 4300. Any ideas why I cant get anywhere close to max RPM. Could the Rotax RPM gauge be lying to me.
Eric N58EW
________________________________ Message 19 ____________________________________ Time: 02:38:37 PM PST US From: "Noel Loveys" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: low RPM @ full Throttle Mine lied to me... but that was 2 stroke. Check with a digital or optical tach. Noel -----Original Message----- From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Eric Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 6:40 PM Subject: Kitfox-List: low RPM @ full Throttle Hi Folks, finally started the engine for the firs time since I bought this Speedster rebuild project 1.5 years ago. Set the new GSC blade pitch at 17deg. Pneumatically synched the carbs and at full throttle I was only getting 4200 rpm. So I repitched the blades to 15 deg. (minimum shown in the GSC chart for a 912 UL with a 3 blade 68" prop), now it maxes out at 4300. Any ideas why I cant get anywhere close to max RPM. Could the Rotax RPM gauge be lying to me. Eric N58EW ________________________________ Message 20 ____________________________________ Time: 02:53:39 PM PST US From: "Lowell Fitt" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Fuel Flow, continued. Guy and others, I guess my origanal post might be a bit misleading. When I first noticed the low fuel in the right tank, the other tank registered mostly full. This was about an hour into the flight. I have no memory of what the sight gauges looked like on landing after the 12 gallons blew out. Lowell ----- Original Message ----- From: "Guy Buchanan" Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 1:10 PM Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Fuel Flow, continued. > > At 11:50 AM 1/24/2007, you wrote: >>There is one overriding assumption that seems to be common to all the >>posts >>and that is that the fuel essentially sits quitely and overflows the tank >>filler neck because of transfilling. I don't think that is necessarily >>the >>case. Based on what I experienced and the tales of others - granted the >>sample is very small, Consider that my flight was in Central Nevada over >>the desert and mountains and there is always turbulance there. > > But the strange thing is that you ended up with one full tank and one > empty tank. Now my system readily cross feeds from one tank to the other, > so if I was sloshing fuel out, or siphoning, or whatever, both of my tanks > would empty at about the same rate. Next time I fill up I'm going to time > how long it takes one full tank to equilibrate across both tanks, just for > grins and another data point. > > > Guy > > > ________________________________ Message 21 ____________________________________ Time: 02:55:06 PM PST US From: "Bradley M Webb" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Re: Fuel Flow, continued.Fuel Flow, continued. It's not that much different from many of yours, but much different than the Model 2 instructions show. First of all, I have 6gal in the left, 12 gal in the right, and the small aluminum header right behind the firewall. I have no tank interconnect that vents both tanks together. The only vents are the individual caps. I did this mainly to stop siphoning between the tanks while parked. I also have each tank flow to a left-off-right valve near the header tank. The M2 manual shows the shut-offs behind the pilot (SB'd out), and both tanks went to the sides of the header tank. Mine has a single line from the L-O-R valve to the flow sender then to the header. From there, to a firewall shut-off valve, to the FI pump, then to the motor. From the FI/TBI, excess fuel returns to the other side of the header. My header is a closed system, in that it is not vented at all under normal conditions. I did not run the vent up to the wing tank. I have a purge valve to the top to burp it, even in flight. I installed an ACS fuel level switch with an LED in the panel. If that light comes on, my header level is falling, and I open the purge valve to burp it. Both vertical distance and cap vent tube force the bubble out and re-fill the tank. While sitting tail down with half tanks, I get 4-5gph flow to the header. In flight attitude, it's over 10gph. Since I only use 2 gph on my motor, it meets the FAA 150% flow rule by a large margin. Bradley -----Original Message----- From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michael Gibbs Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 11:37 AM Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Fuel Flow, continued.Fuel Flow, continued. Bradley sez: >I set my system up as two totally seperate, redundant systems. I >have no interconnect between tanks. I installed a left-off-right >valve...My header is my lifeline. I'm confused by your description, Bradley. How is this different than the factory set up? Each wing tank normally feeds the header, many builders include an inline valve between each wing tank and the header, and the header is vented to the right wing tank. Can you describe your installation in more detail? Mike G. N728KF ________________________________ Message 22 ____________________________________ Time: 02:59:11 PM PST US From: "Lowell Fitt" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: low RPM @ full Throttle John's advice is right on. I carry an optical tach with me in the cockpit and find that the tach will vary as much as 300 rpm due to temps. I made a knob that is attached on the back of the tach so it can be adjusted in flight. The conversion table is taped to the optical tach. Lowell Another thing to look at and I learned this first hand. Make sure the throttle allows the carbs to go full open at the full throttle position. for the first little while I was flying mine, the throttle full in was holding the carburetor arm a bit from the stop. Lowell ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 2:25 PM Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: low RPM @ full Throttle > those guage are notorious for drifting. I recalibrate mine every annual > condition inspection. On mine there is a small hole on the back, > originally covered by a sticker, into which I stick a small electronic > screwdriver to adjust. You will need to do the math for the reduction > drive and have access to a digital hand held tachometer. Check your local > R/C hobby shop. > > Using the conversion table you created in doing the math set the prop rpm > such that you will be looking for a convenient engine rpm. Then adjust > the tach. Best to have the tail tied to your pickup. Don't ask. > > John Kerr > > -------------- Original message -------------- > From: "Eric" > > Hi Folks, > finally started the engine for the firs time since I bought this Speedster > rebuild project 1.5 years ago. Set the new GSC blade pitch at 17deg. > Pneumatically synched the carbs and at full throttle I was only getting > 4200 rpm. So I repitched the blades to 15 deg. (minimum shown in the GSC > chart for a 912 UL with a 3 blade 68" prop), now it maxes out at 4300. Any > ideas why I cant get anywhere close to max RPM. Could the Rotax RPM gauge > be lying to me. > Eric N58EW > > ________________________________ Message 23 ____________________________________ Time: 03:06:25 PM PST US From: "Roger McConnell" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: low RPM @ full Throttle Eric, First, what are you using to pitch the blades? Are you using the GSC pitch protractor that came with the prop? If you are then I'd say your tach is off. Even static RPM you should be up close to 5500 RPM at 17 degrees. Roger Mac _____ From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Eric Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 4:10 PM Subject: Kitfox-List: low RPM @ full Throttle Hi Folks, finally started the engine for the firs time since I bought this Speedster rebuild project 1.5 years ago. Set the new GSC blade pitch at 17deg. Pneumatically synched the carbs and at full throttle I was only getting 4200 rpm. So I repitched the blades to 15 deg. (minimum shown in the GSC chart for a 912 UL with a 3 blade 68" prop), now it maxes out at 4300. Any ideas why I cant get anywhere close to max RPM. Could the Rotax RPM gauge be lying to me. Eric N58EW ________________________________ Message 24 ____________________________________ Time: 03:10:38 PM PST US From: "john perry" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Fuel Flow, continued. This is getting ridiculous. Do you all not know what makes a wing fly?. if not you need to study it . The area that the filler gas cap is in is in a high suction zone on the wing . If you leave it off then yes your fuel will be sucked out fast and furiously. There should never be a fuel cap left off loose or otherwise. This is part of your PREFLIGHT. If you do not have a written preflight checklist then I would suggest you make one and follow it everyflight . Complacency is the excuse of dead pilots John Perry DO NOT ARCHIVE ________________________________ Message 25 ____________________________________ Time: 03:13:42 PM PST US From: "dave" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: low RPM @ full Throttle What about a tiny tach ? I have found them to be 50 times more consistant than the Rotax tachs. The take the impluse right from spark plus lead same as you would when you use a timing light. How you wire your Rotax tach I think alters the reading as well as electrical load. Tiny tach is small and in my opinion you better off with a 2 1/4" G meter than a Rotax tach. I have both a Rotax tach and a Tiny Tach ....... The Tiny is consistant and the Rotax mightbe the same one out of 100 times and other times 300 to 600 or more off. WHY ? Dave ----- Original Message ----- From: "Lowell Fitt" Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 5:58 PM Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: low RPM @ full Throttle > > John's advice is right on. I carry an optical tach with me in the cockpit > and find that the tach will vary as much as 300 rpm due to temps. I made > a knob that is attached on the back of the tach so it can be adjusted in > flight. The conversion table is taped to the optical tach. > > Lowell > > Another thing to look at and I learned this first hand. Make sure the > throttle allows the carbs to go full open at the full throttle position. > for the first little while I was flying mine, the throttle full in was > holding the carburetor arm a bit from the stop. > > Lowell > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: > Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 2:25 PM > Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: low RPM @ full Throttle > > >> those guage are notorious for drifting. I recalibrate mine every annual >> condition inspection. On mine there is a small hole on the back, >> originally covered by a sticker, into which I stick a small electronic >> screwdriver to adjust. You will need to do the math for the reduction >> drive and have access to a digital hand held tachometer. Check your >> local R/C hobby shop. >> >> Using the conversion table you created in doing the math set the prop rpm >> such that you will be looking for a convenient engine rpm. Then adjust >> the tach. Best to have the tail tied to your pickup. Don't ask. >> >> John Kerr >> >> -------------- Original message -------------- >> From: "Eric" >> >> Hi Folks, >> finally started the engine for the firs time since I bought this >> Speedster rebuild project 1.5 years ago. Set the new GSC blade pitch at >> 17deg. Pneumatically synched the carbs and at full throttle I was only >> getting 4200 rpm. So I repitched the blades to 15 deg. (minimum shown in >> the GSC chart for a 912 UL with a 3 blade 68" prop), now it maxes out at >> 4300. Any ideas why I cant get anywhere close to max RPM. Could the Rotax >> RPM gauge be lying to me. >> Eric N58EW >> >> > > > ________________________________ Message 26 ____________________________________ Time: 03:26:48 PM PST US From: Dennis Golden Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Fuel Flow, continued.Fuel Flow, continued. Bradley M Webb wrote: > > It's not that much different from many of yours, but much different than the > Model 2 instructions show. > > First of all, I have 6gal in the left, 12 gal in the right, and the small > aluminum header right behind the firewall. > > I have no tank interconnect that vents both tanks together. The only vents > are the individual caps. I did this mainly to stop siphoning between the > tanks while parked. > > I also have each tank flow to a left-off-right valve near the header tank. > The M2 manual shows the shut-offs behind the pilot (SB'd out), and both > tanks went to the sides of the header tank. Mine has a single line from the > L-O-R valve to the flow sender then to the header. From there, to a firewall > shut-off valve, to the FI pump, then to the motor. From the FI/TBI, excess > fuel returns to the other side of the header. > > My header is a closed system, in that it is not vented at all under normal > conditions. I did not run the vent up to the wing tank. I have a purge valve > to the top to burp it, even in flight. I installed an ACS fuel level switch > with an LED in the panel. If that light comes on, my header level is > falling, and I open the purge valve to burp it. Both vertical distance and > cap vent tube force the bubble out and re-fill the tank. > > While sitting tail down with half tanks, I get 4-5gph flow to the header. In > flight attitude, it's over 10gph. Since I only use 2 gph on my motor, it > meets the FAA 150% flow rule by a large margin. What engine are you using to get a 2gph fuel burn? > Bradley -- Dennis Golden Golden Consulting Services, Inc. ________________________________ Message 27 ____________________________________ Time: 03:26:53 PM PST US Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: low RPM @ full Throttle From: "dcsfoto" tiny tach are you running a 912 and what model tiny tach are you using thanks Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=90222#90222 ________________________________ Message 28 ____________________________________ Time: 04:15:23 PM PST US From: "Noel Loveys" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Fuel Flow, continued. The more I go over the check lists the more I ask myself the question, "Am I being complacent today?" If I'm nor sure I'll check the list again. I've only flown once without a checklist. That was one time was with a very high time bush pilot in the second seat. I felt as naked as a Jaybird especially as I wasn't thoroughly familiar with the operation of that plane. Going by the list on at least one occasion I have found items that prevented me from flying. In my mind it's a lot better to be down here wishing I was up there than to be up there wishing I was down here! As john said, and I paraphrase ... Use your written checklists. Noel > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of > john perry > Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 7:39 PM > To: kitfox-list@matronics.com > Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Fuel Flow, continued. > > > > This is getting ridiculous. > Do you all not know what makes a wing fly?. if not you need > to study it . > The area that the filler gas cap is in is in a high suction > zone on the wing > . If you leave it off then yes your fuel will be sucked out fast and > furiously. > There should never be a fuel cap left off loose or > otherwise. This is > part of your PREFLIGHT. If you do not have a written > preflight checklist > then I would suggest you make one and follow it everyflight . > > Complacency is the excuse of dead pilots > > John Perry > > DO NOT ARCHIVE > > > > > ________________________________ Message 29 ____________________________________ Time: 04:23:30 PM PST US From: "Lowell Fitt" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: low RPM @ full Throttle Dave, The Tiny Tach has been mentioned before. I just can't get my self to cut another hole in the panel and have a hole with nothing in it. Lowell do not archive ----- Original Message ----- From: "dave" Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 3:13 PM Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: low RPM @ full Throttle > > What about a tiny tach ? > > I have found them to be 50 times more consistant than the Rotax tachs. > The take the impluse right from spark plus lead same as you would when you > use a timing light. > How you wire your Rotax tach I think alters the reading as well as > electrical load. > > Tiny tach is small and in my opinion you better off with a 2 1/4" G meter > than a Rotax tach. > I have both a Rotax tach and a Tiny Tach ....... The Tiny is consistant > and the Rotax mightbe the same one out of 100 times and other times 300 > to 600 or more off. WHY ? > > > Dave > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Lowell Fitt" > To: > Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 5:58 PM > Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: low RPM @ full Throttle > > >> >> John's advice is right on. I carry an optical tach with me in the >> cockpit and find that the tach will vary as much as 300 rpm due to temps. >> I made a knob that is attached on the back of the tach so it can be >> adjusted in flight. The conversion table is taped to the optical tach. >> >> Lowell >> >> Another thing to look at and I learned this first hand. Make sure the >> throttle allows the carbs to go full open at the full throttle position. >> for the first little while I was flying mine, the throttle full in was >> holding the carburetor arm a bit from the stop. >> >> Lowell >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: >> To: >> Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 2:25 PM >> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: low RPM @ full Throttle >> >> >>> those guage are notorious for drifting. I recalibrate mine every annual >>> condition inspection. On mine there is a small hole on the back, >>> originally covered by a sticker, into which I stick a small electronic >>> screwdriver to adjust. You will need to do the math for the reduction >>> drive and have access to a digital hand held tachometer. Check your >>> local R/C hobby shop. >>> >>> Using the conversion table you created in doing the math set the prop >>> rpm such that you will be looking for a convenient engine rpm. Then >>> adjust the tach. Best to have the tail tied to your pickup. Don't ask. >>> >>> John Kerr >>> >>> -------------- Original message -------------- >>> From: "Eric" >>> >>> Hi Folks, >>> finally started the engine for the firs time since I bought this >>> Speedster rebuild project 1.5 years ago. Set the new GSC blade pitch at >>> 17deg. Pneumatically synched the carbs and at full throttle I was only >>> getting 4200 rpm. So I repitched the blades to 15 deg. (minimum shown in >>> the GSC chart for a 912 UL with a 3 blade 68" prop), now it maxes out at >>> 4300. Any ideas why I cant get anywhere close to max RPM. Could the >>> Rotax RPM gauge be lying to me. >>> Eric N58EW >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > ________________________________ Message 30 ____________________________________ Time: 04:27:50 PM PST US From: "Noel Loveys" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: low RPM @ full Throttle My Kitfox tach is way off but at least it's linear It reads about 20% too high.. Imagine take offs at 5120rpm on a R582, 2.58 B box....(Reads 6400rpm) Also imagine the boost in performance when I installed the Tiny Tach. Take offs are now in the realm of 7680 - 7800 rpm on the Kitfox tach. No wonder I couldn't get the plane to climb! It's a wonder I was able to get off the water at all. Noel > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of dave > Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 7:43 PM > To: kitfox-list@matronics.com > Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: low RPM @ full Throttle > > > > What about a tiny tach ? > > I have found them to be 50 times more consistant than the Rotax tachs. > The take the impluse right from spark plus lead same as you > would when you > use a timing light. > How you wire your Rotax tach I think alters the reading as well as > electrical load. > > Tiny tach is small and in my opinion you better off with a 2 > 1/4" G meter > than a Rotax tach. > I have both a Rotax tach and a Tiny Tach ....... The Tiny is > consistant and > the Rotax mightbe the same one out of 100 times and other > times 300 to 600 > or more off. WHY ? > > > Dave > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Lowell Fitt" > To: > Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 5:58 PM > Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: low RPM @ full Throttle > > > > > > > John's advice is right on. I carry an optical tach with me > in the cockpit > > and find that the tach will vary as much as 300 rpm due to > temps. I made > > a knob that is attached on the back of the tach so it can > be adjusted in > > flight. The conversion table is taped to the optical tach. > > > > Lowell > > > > Another thing to look at and I learned this first hand. > Make sure the > > throttle allows the carbs to go full open at the full > throttle position. > > for the first little while I was flying mine, the throttle > full in was > > holding the carburetor arm a bit from the stop. > > > > Lowell > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: > > To: > > Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 2:25 PM > > Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: low RPM @ full Throttle > > > > > >> those guage are notorious for drifting. I recalibrate mine > every annual > >> condition inspection. On mine there is a small hole on the back, > >> originally covered by a sticker, into which I stick a > small electronic > >> screwdriver to adjust. You will need to do the math for > the reduction > >> drive and have access to a digital hand held tachometer. > Check your > >> local R/C hobby shop. > >> > >> Using the conversion table you created in doing the math > set the prop rpm > >> such that you will be looking for a convenient engine rpm. > Then adjust > >> the tach. Best to have the tail tied to your pickup. Don't ask. > >> > >> John Kerr > >> > >> -------------- Original message -------------- > >> From: "Eric" > >> > >> Hi Folks, > >> finally started the engine for the firs time since I bought this > >> Speedster rebuild project 1.5 years ago. Set the new GSC > blade pitch at > >> 17deg. Pneumatically synched the carbs and at full > throttle I was only > >> getting 4200 rpm. So I repitched the blades to 15 deg. > (minimum shown in > >> the GSC chart for a 912 UL with a 3 blade 68" prop), now > it maxes out at > >> 4300. Any ideas why I cant get anywhere close to max RPM. > Could the Rotax > >> RPM gauge be lying to me. > >> Eric N58EW > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 31 ____________________________________ Time: 04:35:16 PM PST US From: Lynn Matteson Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Fuel Flow, continued. Right on, John. Another thing to study might be the lowly insect sprayer....air gets blown over a tube which leads to a liquid in a tank...sound familiar? Some of these newer folks might never have heard of such a contraption, but believe me, they existed at one time. Lynn do not archive On Jan 24, 2007, at 6:09 PM, john perry wrote: > > This is getting ridiculous. > Do you all not know what makes a wing fly?. if not you need to > study it . > The area that the filler gas cap is in is in a high suction zone on > the wing . If you leave it off then yes your fuel will be sucked > out fast and furiously. > There should never be a fuel cap left off loose or otherwise. > This is part of your PREFLIGHT. If you do not have a written > preflight checklist then I would suggest you make one and follow it > everyflight . > > Complacency is the excuse of dead pilots > > John Perry > > DO NOT ARCHIVE > > ________________________________ Message 32 ____________________________________ Time: 05:03:28 PM PST US From: "Noel Loveys" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: low RPM @ full Throttle Lowell: My Tiny Tach was flush mounted on my panel for the trial. I still have the Kitfox tach but I could have removed it and made a plate to fill the hole with a mounting hole for Tiny Tach in it. I find it's easier to follow trends in rpm on the analogue instrument... The digital one is for accuracy. Noel > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of > Lowell Fitt > Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 8:53 PM > To: kitfox-list@matronics.com > Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: low RPM @ full Throttle > > > > > Dave, > > The Tiny Tach has been mentioned before. I just can't get my > self to cut > another hole in the panel and have a hole with nothing in it. > > Lowell > > do not archive > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "dave" > To: > Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 3:13 PM > Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: low RPM @ full Throttle > > > > > > What about a tiny tach ? > > > > I have found them to be 50 times more consistant than the > Rotax tachs. > > The take the impluse right from spark plus lead same as you > would when you > > use a timing light. > > How you wire your Rotax tach I think alters the reading as well as > > electrical load. > > > > Tiny tach is small and in my opinion you better off with a > 2 1/4" G meter > > than a Rotax tach. > > I have both a Rotax tach and a Tiny Tach ....... The Tiny > is consistant > > and the Rotax mightbe the same one out of 100 times and > other times 300 > > to 600 or more off. WHY ? > > > > > > Dave > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Lowell Fitt" > > To: > > Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 5:58 PM > > Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: low RPM @ full Throttle > > > > > > >> > >> John's advice is right on. I carry an optical tach with me in the > >> cockpit and find that the tach will vary as much as 300 > rpm due to temps. > >> I made a knob that is attached on the back of the tach so > it can be > >> adjusted in flight. The conversion table is taped to the > optical tach. > >> > >> Lowell > >> > >> Another thing to look at and I learned this first hand. > Make sure the > >> throttle allows the carbs to go full open at the full > throttle position. > >> for the first little while I was flying mine, the throttle > full in was > >> holding the carburetor arm a bit from the stop. > >> > >> Lowell > >> > >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: > >> To: > >> Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 2:25 PM > >> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: low RPM @ full Throttle > >> > >> > >>> those guage are notorious for drifting. I recalibrate > mine every annual > >>> condition inspection. On mine there is a small hole on the back, > >>> originally covered by a sticker, into which I stick a > small electronic > >>> screwdriver to adjust. You will need to do the math for > the reduction > >>> drive and have access to a digital hand held tachometer. > Check your > >>> local R/C hobby shop. > >>> > >>> Using the conversion table you created in doing the math > set the prop > >>> rpm such that you will be looking for a convenient engine > rpm. Then > >>> adjust the tach. Best to have the tail tied to your > pickup. Don't ask. > >>> > >>> John Kerr > >>> > >>> -------------- Original message -------------- > >>> From: "Eric" > >>> > >>> Hi Folks, > >>> finally started the engine for the firs time since I bought this > >>> Speedster rebuild project 1.5 years ago. Set the new GSC > blade pitch at > >>> 17deg. Pneumatically synched the carbs and at full > throttle I was only > >>> getting 4200 rpm. So I repitched the blades to 15 deg. > (minimum shown in > >>> the GSC chart for a 912 UL with a 3 blade 68" prop), now > it maxes out at > >>> 4300. Any ideas why I cant get anywhere close to max RPM. > Could the > >>> Rotax RPM gauge be lying to me. > >>> Eric N58EW > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Checked by PC Tools AntiVirus (3.1.0.10 - 9.058.016). > http://www.pctools.com/anti-virus/ Checked by PC Tools AntiVirus (3.1.0.10 - 9.058.016). http://www.pctools.com/anti-virus/ ________________________________ Message 33 ____________________________________ Time: 05:20:45 PM PST US Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Looking for a Kitfox From: "369PL" Don I have a kitfox model IV. I live in Taylorsville North Carolina. Warren Miller Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=90261#90261 ________________________________ Message 34 ____________________________________ Time: 05:33:17 PM PST US From: "dave" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: low RPM @ full Throttle Lowell, That is why I said put in a G Meter. The tiny is a surface mount -- or better yet. Run both and recrod the results for your self . Dave ----- Original Message ----- From: "Lowell Fitt" Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 7:23 PM Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: low RPM @ full Throttle > > Dave, > > The Tiny Tach has been mentioned before. I just can't get my self to cut > another hole in the panel and have a hole with nothing in it. > > Lowell > > do not archive > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "dave" > To: > Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 3:13 PM > Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: low RPM @ full Throttle > > >> >> What about a tiny tach ? >> >> I have found them to be 50 times more consistant than the Rotax tachs. >> The take the impluse right from spark plus lead same as you would when >> you use a timing light. >> How you wire your Rotax tach I think alters the reading as well as >> electrical load. >> >> Tiny tach is small and in my opinion you better off with a 2 1/4" G meter >> than a Rotax tach. >> I have both a Rotax tach and a Tiny Tach ....... The Tiny is consistant >> and the Rotax mightbe the same one out of 100 times and other times 300 >> to 600 or more off. WHY ? >> >> >> Dave >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Lowell Fitt" >> To: >> Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 5:58 PM >> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: low RPM @ full Throttle >> >> >>> >>> John's advice is right on. I carry an optical tach with me in the >>> cockpit and find that the tach will vary as much as 300 rpm due to >>> temps. I made a knob that is attached on the back of the tach so it can >>> be adjusted in flight. The conversion table is taped to the optical >>> tach. >>> >>> Lowell >>> >>> Another thing to look at and I learned this first hand. Make sure the >>> throttle allows the carbs to go full open at the full throttle position. >>> for the first little while I was flying mine, the throttle full in was >>> holding the carburetor arm a bit from the stop. >>> >>> Lowell >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: >>> To: >>> Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 2:25 PM >>> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: low RPM @ full Throttle >>> >>> >>>> those guage are notorious for drifting. I recalibrate mine every annual >>>> condition inspection. On mine there is a small hole on the back, >>>> originally covered by a sticker, into which I stick a small electronic >>>> screwdriver to adjust. You will need to do the math for the reduction >>>> drive and have access to a digital hand held tachometer. Check your >>>> local R/C hobby shop. >>>> >>>> Using the conversion table you created in doing the math set the prop >>>> rpm such that you will be looking for a convenient engine rpm. Then >>>> adjust the tach. Best to have the tail tied to your pickup. Don't ask. >>>> >>>> John Kerr >>>> >>>> -------------- Original message -------------- >>>> From: "Eric" >>>> >>>> Hi Folks, >>>> finally started the engine for the firs time since I bought this >>>> Speedster rebuild project 1.5 years ago. Set the new GSC blade pitch at >>>> 17deg. Pneumatically synched the carbs and at full throttle I was only >>>> getting 4200 rpm. So I repitched the blades to 15 deg. (minimum shown >>>> in the GSC chart for a 912 UL with a 3 blade 68" prop), now it maxes >>>> out at 4300. Any ideas why I cant get anywhere close to max RPM. Could >>>> the Rotax RPM gauge be lying to me. >>>> Eric N58EW >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> > > > ________________________________ Message 35 ____________________________________ Time: 05:51:02 PM PST US From: "kirk hull" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: low RPM @ full Throttle Any good shop ( and most A&P ) can test your tach with a laser devise and a piece of reflective tape on the prop. If you are in the Kansas City Missouri area I can check it for you. I need another reason to fly 205AK anyway. >> >> I have found them to be 50 times more consistant than the Rotax tachs. >> The take the impluse right from spark plus lead same as you would when >> you use a timing light. >> How you wire your Rotax tach I think alters the reading as well as >> electrical load. >> >> Tiny tach is small and in my opinion you better off with a 2 1/4" G meter >> than a Rotax tach. >> I have both a Rotax tach and a Tiny Tach ....... The Tiny is consistant >> and the Rotax mightbe the same one out of 100 times and other times 300 >> to 600 or more off. WHY ? >> >> >> Dave >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Lowell Fitt" >> To: >> Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 5:58 PM >> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: low RPM @ full Throttle >> >> >>> >>> John's advice is right on. I carry an optical tach with me in the >>> cockpit and find that the tach will vary as much as 300 rpm due to >>> temps. I made a knob that is attached on the back of the tach so it can >>> be adjusted in flight. The conversion table is taped to the optical >>> tach. >>> >>> Lowell >>> >>> Another thing to look at and I learned this first hand. Make sure the >>> throttle allows the carbs to go full open at the full throttle position. >>> for the first little while I was flying mine, the throttle full in was >>> holding the carburetor arm a bit from the stop. >>> >>> Lowell >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: >>> To: >>> Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 2:25 PM >>> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: low RPM @ full Throttle >>> >>> >>>> those guage are notorious for drifting. I recalibrate mine every annual >>>> condition inspection. On mine there is a small hole on the back, >>>> originally covered by a sticker, into which I stick a small electronic >>>> screwdriver to adjust. You will need to do the math for the reduction >>>> drive and have access to a digital hand held tachometer. Check your >>>> local R/C hobby shop. >>>> >>>> Using the conversion table you created in doing the math set the prop >>>> rpm such that you will be looking for a convenient engine rpm. Then >>>> adjust the tach. Best to have the tail tied to your pickup. Don't ask. >>>> >>>> John Kerr >>>> >>>> -------------- Original message -------------- >>>> From: "Eric" >>>> >>>> Hi Folks, >>>> finally started the engine for the firs time since I bought this >>>> Speedster rebuild project 1.5 years ago. Set the new GSC blade pitch at >>>> 17deg. Pneumatically synched the carbs and at full throttle I was only >>>> getting 4200 rpm. So I repitched the blades to 15 deg. (minimum shown >>>> in the GSC chart for a 912 UL with a 3 blade 68" prop), now it maxes >>>> out at 4300. Any ideas why I cant get anywhere close to max RPM. Could >>>> the Rotax RPM gauge be lying to me. >>>> Eric N58EW >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> > > > ________________________________ Message 36 ____________________________________ Time: 06:18:34 PM PST US From: "Randy Daughenbaugh" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Fuel Flow, continued. Both you guys are right. But if your tanks can cross feed - via header or otherwise - the tank that will empty is the one WITH the cap on. Yes, the fuel is going out of the tank without the good cap seal, but the air going into the system to displace the fuel with be going into the other tank - the one with cap on correctly. So it is the OTHER tank (the one with a good cap!) that will empty first. Torgeir! Help! Randy . -----Original Message----- From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Lynn Matteson Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 5:37 PM Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Fuel Flow, continued. Right on, John. Another thing to study might be the lowly insect sprayer....air gets blown over a tube which leads to a liquid in a tank...sound familiar? Some of these newer folks might never have heard of such a contraption, but believe me, they existed at one time. Lynn do not archive On Jan 24, 2007, at 6:09 PM, john perry wrote: > > This is getting ridiculous. > Do you all not know what makes a wing fly?. if not you need to > study it . > The area that the filler gas cap is in is in a high suction zone on > the wing . If you leave it off then yes your fuel will be sucked > out fast and furiously. > There should never be a fuel cap left off loose or otherwise. > This is part of your PREFLIGHT. If you do not have a written > preflight checklist then I would suggest you make one and follow it > everyflight . > > Complacency is the excuse of dead pilots > > John Perry > > DO NOT ARCHIVE > > ________________________________ Message 37 ____________________________________ Time: 06:38:11 PM PST US From: "john perry" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Fuel Flow, continued. Randy I would dare you to test your theory but then that would probably cause a engine to quit in flight . No you are wrong on this one ,the tank with the lid off will empty first every time . Remember that you are pulling fuel from an opening around 3 inches arcross. and the other tank is feeding a 1/4 inch line , Now which will empty first . John Perry DO NOT ARCHIVE ________________________________ Message 38 ____________________________________ Time: 06:40:50 PM PST US Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Looking for a Kitfox From: "helicop" Mr. Miller: Don posted the message for me. I am new to Sport Aviation, even though I am a licensed pilot. I am interested in the Kitfox enough, that I would like to at least look at one. I have alot to learn, and probably alot of questions. If you would not mind showing me yours, I would be glad to drive up. You can email me at garymail(at)bellsouth.net. I look forward to hearing from you. Thanks again Gary Goss Do not archive Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=90273#90273 ________________________________ Message 39 ____________________________________ Time: 06:42:07 PM PST US From: "ron schick" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: low RPM @ full Throttle Eric I was trying to get up to rpm's when a hobby tach from an RC freind found the problem. My tach was way off. I was turning 6000 rpm's and looking for more. Now at 3500 rpm's it flys great. How many rpm's are you looking for? I'm not used to 912's redline, but you say your at 4300 rpm now. Ron NB Ore do not archive >From: "Eric" >To: >Subject: Kitfox-List: low RPM @ full Throttle >Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2007 16:09:56 -0600 > >Hi Folks, >finally started the engine for the firs time since I bought this Speedster >rebuild project 1.5 years ago. Set the new GSC blade pitch at 17deg. >Pneumatically synched the carbs and at full throttle I was only getting >4200 rpm. So I repitched the blades to 15 deg. (minimum shown in the GSC >chart for a 912 UL with a 3 blade 68" prop), now it maxes out at 4300. Any >ideas why I cant get anywhere close to max RPM. Could the Rotax RPM gauge >be lying to me. >Eric N58EW _________________________________________________________________ Valentines Day -- Shop for gifts that spell L-O-V-E at MSN Shopping http://shopping.msn.com/content/shp/?ctId=8323,ptnrid=37,ptnrdata=24095&tcode=wlmtagline ________________________________ Message 40 ____________________________________ Time: 06:51:22 PM PST US From: "dave" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Fuel Flow, continued. John, I have to agree with you as well. That is why I have a shut off for each tank . Hell , Someone try it and report the findings. Did oned Kitfox just go down recently due to a fuel cap missing? I really think this arguement is getting silly now. I have no idea if GA aircraft have a vent tube or not but I will say if you run on LEFT TANK and it runs dry , your engine stops and Likewise on right. But with fuel selector on both- what happens ? Dave PS when i was in flight school nearly 30 years ago we were taught on walkaround to start at right wing tank , engine , prop around nose to left wing tank , left leading edge , airlerons, flaps etc then fuselage stab. , elevator , rudder etc and when were at the tail we were to inspect the fuel caps from the REAR to ensure they are on and aligned properly. ----- Original Message ----- From: "john perry" Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 9:36 PM Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Fuel Flow, continued. > > Randy > I would dare you to test your theory but then that would probably cause a > engine to quit in flight . No you are wrong on this one ,the tank with the > lid off will empty first every time . Remember that you are pulling fuel > from an opening around 3 inches arcross. and the other tank is feeding a > 1/4 inch line , Now which will empty first . > > John Perry > > DO NOT ARCHIVE > > > ________________________________ Message 41 ____________________________________ Time: 06:53:13 PM PST US From: "Noel Loveys" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: low RPM @ full Throttle Tiny tach is about $60.00. How much is a laser tach?? Noel > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of kirk hull > Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 10:20 PM > To: kitfox-list@matronics.com > Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: low RPM @ full Throttle > > > > Any good shop ( and most A&P ) can test your tach with a > laser devise and a > piece of reflective tape on the prop. If you are in the Kansas City > Missouri area I can check it for you. I need another reason > to fly 205AK > anyway. > >> > >> I have found them to be 50 times more consistant than the > Rotax tachs. > >> The take the impluse right from spark plus lead same as > you would when > >> you use a timing light. > >> How you wire your Rotax tach I think alters the reading as well as > >> electrical load. > >> > >> Tiny tach is small and in my opinion you better off with a > 2 1/4" G meter > > >> than a Rotax tach. > >> I have both a Rotax tach and a Tiny Tach ....... The Tiny > is consistant > >> and the Rotax mightbe the same one out of 100 times and > other times 300 > >> to 600 or more off. WHY ? > >> > >> > >> Dave > >> > >> > >> > >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: "Lowell Fitt" > >> To: > >> Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 5:58 PM > >> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: low RPM @ full Throttle > >> > >> > > >>> > >>> John's advice is right on. I carry an optical tach with > me in the > >>> cockpit and find that the tach will vary as much as 300 > rpm due to > >>> temps. I made a knob that is attached on the back of the > tach so it can > >>> be adjusted in flight. The conversion table is taped to > the optical > >>> tach. > >>> > >>> Lowell > >>> > >>> Another thing to look at and I learned this first hand. > Make sure the > >>> throttle allows the carbs to go full open at the full > throttle position. > > >>> for the first little while I was flying mine, the > throttle full in was > >>> holding the carburetor arm a bit from the stop. > >>> > >>> Lowell > >>> > >>> ----- Original Message ----- > >>> From: > >>> To: > >>> Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 2:25 PM > >>> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: low RPM @ full Throttle > >>> > >>> > >>>> those guage are notorious for drifting. I recalibrate > mine every annual > > >>>> condition inspection. On mine there is a small hole on the back, > >>>> originally covered by a sticker, into which I stick a > small electronic > >>>> screwdriver to adjust. You will need to do the math for > the reduction > >>>> drive and have access to a digital hand held tachometer. > Check your > >>>> local R/C hobby shop. > >>>> > >>>> Using the conversion table you created in doing the math > set the prop > >>>> rpm such that you will be looking for a convenient > engine rpm. Then > >>>> adjust the tach. Best to have the tail tied to your > pickup. Don't ask. > >>>> > >>>> John Kerr > >>>> > >>>> -------------- Original message -------------- > >>>> From: "Eric" > >>>> > >>>> Hi Folks, > >>>> finally started the engine for the firs time since I bought this > >>>> Speedster rebuild project 1.5 years ago. Set the new GSC > blade pitch at > > >>>> 17deg. Pneumatically synched the carbs and at full > throttle I was only > >>>> getting 4200 rpm. So I repitched the blades to 15 deg. > (minimum shown > >>>> in the GSC chart for a 912 UL with a 3 blade 68" prop), > now it maxes > >>>> out at 4300. Any ideas why I cant get anywhere close to > max RPM. Could > >>>> the Rotax RPM gauge be lying to me. > >>>> Eric N58EW > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Checked by PC Tools AntiVirus (3.1.0.10 - 9.058.016). > http://www.pctools.com/anti-virus/ Checked by PC Tools AntiVirus (3.1.0.10 - 9.058.016). http://www.pctools.com/anti-virus/ ________________________________ Message 42 ____________________________________ Time: 07:20:30 PM PST US From: "Randy Daughenbaugh" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Fuel Flow, continued. You are right; I don't want to test it. But what if the fuel cap is just on poorly - only one lug caught - or on backwards? And my cap is less than 2" open cross section. Yours must be the old pre-unleaded type cap. ;-) Another factor (which was mentioned by Lowell) was turbulence. If the plane is bouncing wildly, the main loss mechanism could be due to splashing and our discussion of relative pressure would be rather moot. But someone a couple of months ago reported just what I describe. Their tank that emptied first was the one WITH the cap on. Guy mentioned measuring how fast the two tanks equalize levels. I have checked this and the answer is that it depends. ! As the levels get closer together, it is not surprising that the flow is slower. But when there is significant differential (as in height or pressure differential) the flow is about half a gallon per minute. At that rate, it would not take long to make quite a deficit in your anticipated range. Randy . -----Original Message----- From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of john perry Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 7:36 PM Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Fuel Flow, continued. Randy I would dare you to test your theory but then that would probably cause a engine to quit in flight . No you are wrong on this one ,the tank with the lid off will empty first every time . Remember that you are pulling fuel from an opening around 3 inches arcross. and the other tank is feeding a 1/4 inch line , Now which will empty first . John Perry DO NOT ARCHIVE ________________________________ Message 43 ____________________________________ Time: 07:30:14 PM PST US From: "Noel Loveys" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Fuel Flow, continued. The short answer is any time you are siphoning or blowing fuel out of an aircraft the range is cut down. When both tanks empty you either come down.... or look for a real long ladder. :-) Seriously though without a reasonable place to do a forced approach any loss of fuel can be dangerous. Some GA have their vents under the wings facing forward. Not all aircraft have any kind of header tank. I worked on a Super Cub one time that had two header tanks one in the front and one in the back.... I don't know if that was something particular to that plane, which was a spotter with the Italian air force, or not. As I understand it the reason for the header tank is to allow the plane to access fuel while in different attitudes which may stop fuel flow from the tanks. Noel Do not archive > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of dave > Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 11:21 PM > To: kitfox-list@matronics.com > Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Fuel Flow, continued. > > > > John, I have to agree with you as well. > > That is why I have a shut off for each tank . > > Hell , Someone try it and report the findings. > > Did oned Kitfox just go down recently due to a fuel cap missing? > > I really think this arguement is getting silly now. > I have no idea if GA aircraft have a vent tube or not but I > will say if you > run on LEFT TANK and it runs dry , your engine stops and > Likewise on right. > But with fuel selector on both- what happens ? > > > > Dave > > PS when i was in flight school nearly 30 years ago we were taught on > walkaround to start at right wing tank , engine , prop > around nose to left > wing tank , left leading edge , airlerons, flaps etc then > fuselage stab. , > elevator , rudder etc and when were at the tail we were to > inspect the fuel > caps from the REAR to ensure they are on and aligned properly. > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "john perry" > To: > Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 9:36 PM > Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Fuel Flow, continued. > > > > > > > Randy > > I would dare you to test your theory but then that would > probably cause a > > engine to quit in flight . No you are wrong on this one > ,the tank with the > > lid off will empty first every time . Remember that you > are pulling fuel > > from an opening around 3 inches arcross. and the other tank > is feeding a > > 1/4 inch line , Now which will empty first . > > > > John Perry > > > > DO NOT ARCHIVE > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Checked by PC Tools AntiVirus (3.1.0.10 - 9.058.016). > http://www.pctools.com/anti-virus/ Checked by PC Tools AntiVirus (3.1.0.10 - 9.058.016). http://www.pctools.com/anti-virus/ ________________________________ Message 44 ____________________________________ Time: 07:38:25 PM PST US From: Guy Buchanan Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Fuel Flow, continued. At 04:36 PM 1/24/2007, you wrote: >Right on, John. Another thing to study might be the lowly insect >sprayer....air gets blown over a tube which leads to a liquid in a >tank...sound familiar? Some of these newer folks might never have >heard of such a contraption, but believe me, they existed at one time. Do you remember, Lynn, whether that tube was immersed in the liquid? Or was there just a hole in the cap? Perhaps you could try it both ways and let us know if there's a difference. Guy Buchanan K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar. Do not archive ________________________________ Message 45 ____________________________________ Time: 08:47:38 PM PST US From: "john perry" Subject: Kitfox-List: insect sprayer Guy I will answer that one . The air is blown over a tube that is imersed in the liquid and the liquid is then sucked out . John Perry Do not archive ----- Original Message ----- From: "Guy Buchanan" Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 9:37 PM Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Fuel Flow, continued. > > At 04:36 PM 1/24/2007, you wrote: >>Right on, John. Another thing to study might be the lowly insect >>sprayer....air gets blown over a tube which leads to a liquid in a >>tank...sound familiar? Some of these newer folks might never have >>heard of such a contraption, but believe me, they existed at one time. > > Do you remember, Lynn, whether that tube was immersed in the liquid? Or > was there just a hole in the cap? Perhaps you could try it both ways and > let us know if there's a difference. > > > Guy Buchanan > K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar. > > Do not archive > > > ________________________________ Message 46 ____________________________________ Time: 10:51:29 PM PST US From: kurt schrader Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Rust behind battery tray Before covering my -5 I did a thorough check of the airframe and found bubbles in the powder coating on the front spreader between the bottom engine mounts and the horizontal stab. I decided to pop a 2" bubble and found, sure enough, it was rusted. Cleaned off all the bubbles and it ended up with several feet of rusted surface under the coating. I think it was possible that the frame wasn't properly cleaned before coating, or that it was then left to sit and rust a bit again. In any case, I had to clean and repaint these areas before covering. Kurt S. --- jeff puls wrote: > Colin, > That has always bothered me since I built my Fox. I > remember hearing > rattling noises when I moved powder coated items > like the horizontal > stabilizer and rudder. Of course they were > powdercoated and I couldn't do > anything about it. I ordered a set of powdercoated > wing support brackets so > I could tow my aircraft. As I was fabricating the > supports to fit I tapped > them on the garage floor after I heard rattling. Out > came all sorts of rust. > I don't know if anyone else has experienced that? I > also wonder if the > factory treated the tubing with linseed oil before > they sealed them? I built > my Fox 1993-1996. Jeff Expecting? Get great news right away with email Auto-Check. Try the Yahoo! Mail Beta. ________________________________ Message 47 ____________________________________ Time: 11:00:21 PM PST US From: kurt schrader Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Tuning a KitFox Airframe Before you get too concerned, try flying it with both seats occupied. ;-) Mine rolls slightly left with just me too. Then check the rigging as others said. If the rigging checks out right on, you can either adjust the strut length or add a tab. When adjusting the struts, it is probably safer to adjust the front on in 2 turns on the rising wing and see what it flys like then. "In" to the strut will never run you out of safe threads. Kurt S. S-5 --- Nick Scholtes wrote: > Hi Guys! > > I just recently purchased a KitFox Model IV > Speedster, and flew it home > half-way across the country. During the flight, the > airplane handled > really well, I was totally impressed with how well > it flew! Awesome! ............. > So, what are the various "tweak" adjustments that > are available on the > Model IV, and what do each one of them do? > > Thanks! > > Nick Scholtes ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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.