Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 05:25 AM - Re: Re: Coordinated turns to base and final (Lynn Matteson)
2. 06:50 AM - Re: Re: Coordinated turns to base and final (Aerobatics@AOL.COM)
3. 06:53 AM - Re: Re: Coordinated turns to base and final (Aerobatics@aol.com)
4. 06:55 AM - Re: construction manual (Mark Thompson)
5. 07:21 AM - Re: construction manual (D. Fisher)
6. 08:02 AM - Fw: Aerocarb (jeff puls)
7. 08:29 AM - Re: construction manual (Don Pearsall)
8. 08:31 AM - Re: Coordinated turns to base and final (kitfoxmike)
9. 08:54 AM - Re: construction manual (Don Pearsall)
10. 09:11 AM - Re: Re: Coordinated turns to base and final (Guy Buchanan)
11. 09:23 AM - Re: Re: Coordinated turns to base and final (Clem Nichols)
12. 09:30 AM - Re: Coordinated turns to base and final (kitfoxmike)
13. 10:22 AM - Re: GPS. WAS: ASIs (Michel Verheughe)
14. 11:11 AM - Re: construction manual (D. Fisher)
15. 01:59 PM - Re: GPS. WAS: ASIs (Noel Loveys)
16. 02:09 PM - Re: Re: Coordinated turns to base and final (Noel Loveys)
17. 02:52 PM - Re: Coordinated turns to base and final (kitfoxmike)
18. 03:41 PM - Tailwheels (Rex Shaw)
19. 03:52 PM - Re: Re: Coordinated turns to base and final (Noel Loveys)
20. 03:55 PM - Re: construction manual (Randy Daughenbaugh)
21. 04:14 PM - Re: GPS. WAS: ASIs (Noel Loveys)
22. 04:27 PM - Re: Re: Coordinated turns to base and final flying today? (Aerobatics@aol.com)
23. 04:49 PM - Re: Coordinated turns to base and final (kitfoxmike)
24. 06:09 PM - Re: GPS. WAS: ASIs (Jim Corner)
25. 09:27 PM - Re: GPS. WAS: ASIs (Michael Gibbs)
26. 09:27 PM - Re: GPS (Michael Gibbs)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Coordinated turns to base and final |
I slip (if I need to) to within 20-30-50 feet...I'm guessing at that
altitude of course. I've come a long way from hanging on for dear
life when my instructor would take over and slip it in, to doing the
same thing myself, and loving it....this with full (20) flaps. I
always yank the shoulder straps a bit tighter before I do because
pushing on the rudder pedal that hard always pushes me back in the
seat if I don't...I used to grab one of the tubes above the panel for
support. There is a guy who comes in over the trees (with a GA
aircraft) at a nearby strip and slips it down to about 5-10 feet
before letting up and landing...I'm not about to try to match him.
Lynn
On Feb 12, 2007, at 8:52 PM, Noel Loveys wrote:
>
> Is there any one here who uses a slip to loose altitude to a point say
> twenty feet or so above touch down? I've tried both flaps and the
> slip.
> The flaps seem to work better but then again I have those floats
> acting like
> a great pendulum and keeping the plane from slipping effectively.
> Of course
> I also have a smallish rudder and no gap seals.
>
> Noel
>
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Coordinated turns to base and final |
Hope I am not chiming too late
I slip just about every time in my KF2 mostly because I try to position
myself with extra altitude and need to lose some, plus a right rudder slip
affords better vis.
I never use flap other than for take off, sometimes. On landing I can vary
easily the slip on a as needed basis, much like throttle, but without being
dependent on your engine on a critical phase of flight.
Since I slip so often, have become comfortable slipping to just before
contact with terra firma.
The KF2 is one great slipping aircraft.
Personally, I have never liked slipping with flaps.
Please understand, not saying my way is better, just a way that I have
worked out over time that seems to work well.
:-)
Dave KF2
In a message dated 2/13/2007 7:31:45 A.M. Central Standard Time,
lynnmatt@jps.net writes:
I slip (if I need to) to within 20-30-50 feet...I'm guessing at that
altitude of course. I've come a long way from hanging on for dear
life when my instructor would take over and slip it in, to doing the
same thing myself, and loving it....this with full (20=B0) flaps. I
always yank the shoulder straps a bit tighter before I do because
pushing on the rudder pedal that hard always pushes me back in the
seat if I don't...I used to grab one of the tubes above the panel for
support. There is a guy who comes in over the trees (with a GA
aircraft) at a nearby strip and slips it down to about 5-10 feet
before letting up and landing...I'm not about to try to match him.
Lynn
On Feb 12, 2007, at 8:52 PM, Noel Loveys wrote:
>
> Is there any one here who uses a slip to loose altitude to a point say
> twenty feet or so above touch down? I've tried both flaps and the
> slip.
> The flaps seem to work better but then again I have those floats
> acting like
> a great pendulum and keeping the plane from slipping effectively.
> Of course
> I also have a smallish rudder and no gap seals.
>
> Noel
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Coordinated turns to base and final |
In a message dated 2/12/2007 7:55:04 P.M. Central Standard Time,
noelloveys@yahoo.ca writes:
Is there any one here who uses a slip to loose altitude to a point say
twenty feet or so above touch down? I've tried both flaps and the slip.
The flaps seem to work better but then again I have those floats acting like
a great pendulum and keeping the plane from slipping effectively. Of course
I also have a smallish rudder and no gap seals.
Noel
Oh I forgot, gap seals for me made a huge difference...have them on elevator
and rudder try it youll love it!
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | construction manual |
I have my original weight and balance sheet,if you like I can fax it or
scan and email it to you,you would have to white out my no#s and then you
would have a blank form,also you could comepair your n#s with mine.
Regards MarkN61AC
> [Original Message]
> From: parahawk <alfi98596@yahoo.com>
> To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
> Date: 2/12/2007 10:03:49 PM
> Subject: Kitfox-List: construction manual
>
>
> Can I get a downloadable version for the KF IV-1200 anywhere ??
> Mine came without the weight and balance sheet and I understand that the
manual has a sample and instructions.
> Thanks
> do not archive
>
> --------
> Flying is the highest form of life on earth.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=94620#94620
>
>
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: construction manual |
I have several different excel files that you could use.
Just level and weigh your plane , punch in the numbers.
Done
Dave
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Thompson" <kr2@earthlink.net>
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 9:55 AM
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: construction manual
>
> I have my original weight and balance sheet,if you like I can fax it or
> scan and email it to you,you would have to white out my no#s and then you
> would have a blank form,also you could comepair your n#s with mine.
> Regards MarkN61AC
>
>
>> [Original Message]
>> From: parahawk <alfi98596@yahoo.com>
>> To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
>> Date: 2/12/2007 10:03:49 PM
>> Subject: Kitfox-List: construction manual
>>
>>
>> Can I get a downloadable version for the KF IV-1200 anywhere ??
>> Mine came without the weight and balance sheet and I understand that the
> manual has a sample and instructions.
>> Thanks
>> do not archive
>>
>> --------
>> Flying is the highest form of life on earth.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=94620#94620
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
This is exciting to me!!! I love these Aerocarbs. What do you guys think??
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ernie Stanley" <estanley@columbus.rr.com>
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2007 7:09 PM
Subject: Fw: Aerocarb
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Sonex Aircraft, LLC" <info@sonexaircraft.com>
> To: "Ernie Stanley" <estanley@columbus.rr.com>
> Sent: Monday, February 12, 2007 9:42 AM
> Subject: Re: Aerocarb
>
>
>> Hello Ernie-
>>
>> Yes, you could most definitely convert any of the Rotax Series to use an
>> AeroCarb.
>>
>> There have been a number of AeroCarbs sold for this purpose and we
>> continue
>> to await any word on specific improvements made to performance and fuel
>> burn.
>>
>> For the 80 hp we would recommend the ACV-C03 (32mm) and for the 100 and
>> 120hp, we would recommend the ACV-C04(35mm) AeroCarb.
>>
>> --
>> Thank you,
>> Jeremy Monnett
>> General Manager
>> Sonex Aircraft, LLC
>> www.sonexaircraft.com
>> Tel (Info/Orders): 920.231.8297
>> Tel (Tech Line): 920.230.8324
>> Fax: 920.426.8333
>> E-mail: info@sonexaircraft.com
>>
>> This email message and all attachments may contain legally privileged and
>> confidential information intended solely for the use of the addressee.
>> If
>> you are not the intended recipient, stop reading this message and delete
>> it
>> from your system. Any unauthorized reading, distribution, copying or
>> other
>> use of this message or its attachments is strictly prohibited.
>>
>>
>>> Would it be possible to convert a 912UL 80 hp engine to Aerocarb?
>>> Please
>>> advise.
>>>
>>> Ernie S. Stanley
>>> 10852 Township Rd 15 NW
>>> Thornville, OH 43076
>>> Phone: 740 246-5220
>>> Fax: 740 246-4227
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | construction manual |
Good Morning
I am glad you had a good time and no broken legs or arms.
No irons, just the changes in the way we do things for subscribing. I am
assuming you are following Matt's emails and examples.
My daughter is getting married and I have to help with the plans and $$.
Everything is so expensive I can't believe it.
OK You got it. Have a great week. Could you acknowledge this email so I know
you got it. I suspect you have not gotten many of my emails to you.
Don
Don Pearsall
Sound Appraisal
Seattle, WA USA
425-392.4627
FAX 425-557-0107
donpearsall@comcast.net
http://www.soundappraisal.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of parahawk
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2007 6:56 PM
Subject: Kitfox-List: construction manual
Can I get a downloadable version for the KF IV-1200 anywhere ??
Mine came without the weight and balance sheet and I understand that the
manual has a sample and instructions.
Thanks
do not archive
--------
Flying is the highest form of life on earth.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=94620#94620
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Coordinated turns to base and final |
Noel,
I slip all the way down to about 5 ft off the ground, I remember back when doing
my check ride and the guy said, I want to see a slip to land, this is not required,
but I did a slip and straightened out about 20ft off, the guy said, I
told you to slip to land, so I redid and held off to about 5 ft off the ground,
his response was, much better.
Now, let me explain something here, when coming in you decend, the yaw will go
right, when in a left pattern you have right raw normally from the decent, the
amount depends on your decent, mine is usually better than 800ft per minute(I
do short approaches). If you do a 30degree bank on a left turn you have a greater
chance of being coordinated because you are use the putting in left rudder
for the adverse yaw and such. Going to a greater bank turn will require you
to put in more left rudder, to keep straight no bank you will need to put in
left rudder, this is normal.
Now make right traffic, this is where it can get confusing, you have the normal
left yaw from decending. Now if you do the 30degree bank you can run yourself
into trouble, because your use to a right rudder input for a right turn, but
you look down and see the ball going left, so you have to input some left rudder,
very unusual and different, in fact you are now in a skid, very dangerous.
If you increase your bank in the right traffic you will find that the ball
will now be more centered, in my opinion more safe. Now if you go to a steeper
bank you will find you need a slight right rudder into the turn.
What I'm trying to say here is in right traffic be very aware of your ball(what
a pun) or you will end up in a skid(or an inflight ground loop) the tail will
come around the outside. In this case you need to be aware of spin awarness
not how to handle a spin because you will be upside down and spining to the ground
with no way to recover. Big thing keep that ball in the center at all times.
except for landing and taking off.
Don't be keeping the ball in center on touch down or you will be squaling all over
the runway, do it after lift off and you'll end up in the right side of the
field. will explain later if you need explainations of this one.
--------
kitfoxmike
model IV, 1200
speedster
912ul
Do not archive
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=94732#94732
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | construction manual |
Oops, sorry list members. That last email was supposed to go to Deke
privately. Just ignore. I don't know how I managed to send to the list, but
I am not responsible for anything before my 3rd cup of coffee.
Don Pearsall
Don Not Archive.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Don Pearsall
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 8:28 AM
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: construction manual
Good Morning
I am glad you had a good time and no broken legs or arms.
No irons, just the changes in the way we do things for subscribing. I am
assuming you are following Matt's emails and examples.
My daughter is getting married and I have to help with the plans and $$.
Everything is so expensive I can't believe it.
OK You got it. Have a great week. Could you acknowledge this email so I know
you got it. I suspect you have not gotten many of my emails to you.
Don
Don Pearsall
Sound Appraisal
Seattle, WA USA
425-392.4627
FAX 425-557-0107
donpearsall@comcast.net
http://www.soundappraisal.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of parahawk
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2007 6:56 PM
Subject: Kitfox-List: construction manual
Can I get a downloadable version for the KF IV-1200 anywhere ??
Mine came without the weight and balance sheet and I understand that the
manual has a sample and instructions.
Thanks
do not archive
--------
Flying is the highest form of life on earth.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=94620#94620
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Coordinated turns to base and final |
At 11:38 PM 2/12/2007, you wrote:
>It was my understanding that a coordinated steady state turn at 60
>degrees translates to a 2g load factor.
Only if you're maintaining altitude. It can be less if you descend,
or more if you ascend during the turn.
Guy Buchanan
K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar.
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Coordinated turns to base and final |
My situation is just the opposite because from inside the cockpit my prop
(attached to a Subaru EA81) is rotating in a counter-clockwise direction,
unlike with a conventional airplane engine. This may very well be why I've
never noticed this problem in flying a Cessna, for example, because I don't
recall flying into any fields with a right-hand pattern. It would be
interesting to check it out sometime. Next time up in the Kitfox I
certainly intend to do some descending turns to the right to see if it's as
difficult to stay coordinated as it is with a descending turn to the left.
Clem Nichols
Do Not Archive
----- Original Message -----
From: "kitfoxmike" <customtrans@qwest.net>
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 10:30 AM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Coordinated turns to base and final
>
> Noel,
> I slip all the way down to about 5 ft off the ground, I remember back when
> doing my check ride and the guy said, I want to see a slip to land, this
> is not required, but I did a slip and straightened out about 20ft off, the
> guy said, I told you to slip to land, so I redid and held off to about 5
> ft off the ground, his response was, much better.
>
> Now, let me explain something here, when coming in you decend, the yaw
> will go right, when in a left pattern you have right raw normally from the
> decent, the amount depends on your decent, mine is usually better than
> 800ft per minute(I do short approaches). If you do a 30degree bank on a
> left turn you have a greater chance of being coordinated because you are
> use the putting in left rudder for the adverse yaw and such. Going to a
> greater bank turn will require you to put in more left rudder, to keep
> straight no bank you will need to put in left rudder, this is normal.
>
> Now make right traffic, this is where it can get confusing, you have the
> normal left yaw from decending. Now if you do the 30degree bank you can
> run yourself into trouble, because your use to a right rudder input for a
> right turn, but you look down and see the ball going left, so you have to
> input some left rudder, very unusual and different, in fact you are now in
> a skid, very dangerous. If you increase your bank in the right traffic
> you will find that the ball will now be more centered, in my opinion more
> safe. Now if you go to a steeper bank you will find you need a slight
> right rudder into the turn.
>
> What I'm trying to say here is in right traffic be very aware of your
> ball(what a pun) or you will end up in a skid(or an inflight ground loop)
> the tail will come around the outside. In this case you need to be aware
> of spin awarness not how to handle a spin because you will be upside down
> and spining to the ground with no way to recover. Big thing keep that
> ball in the center at all times. except for landing and taking off.
>
> Don't be keeping the ball in center on touch down or you will be squaling
> all over the runway, do it after lift off and you'll end up in the right
> side of the field. will explain later if you need explainations of this
> one.
>
> --------
> kitfoxmike
> model IV, 1200
> speedster
> 912ul
> Do not archive
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=94732#94732
>
>
>
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Coordinated turns to base and final |
Yup,
And when I come in on a short and do a steep turn base to final over the runway
I don't pull up to flare until I have leveled out, that's when it gets real fun
and a speedster makes it even funner. I can make that plane level out in a
heartbeat, very fun and then I'm leveling and flairing and then landing. Usually
there is nothing out there faster than me in the pattern. Learned to do this
stuff at a class C airport. Talk about excitement. Fly in and have a 737
on your butt with 3 miles out when you touch down. Not for the faint at heart
let me say.
--------
kitfoxmike
model IV, 1200
speedster
912ul
Do not archive
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=94755#94755
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: GPS. WAS: ASIs |
On Feb 13, 2007, at 4:51 AM, Jim Corner wrote:
> Your final comments I believe apply to Loran coverage at the poles.
Well, I don't think so, Jim, Loran C is a hyperbolic system and you
only need to be within range of the stations. Nothing to do with the
poles. I think our friend Noel was mistaking GPS for many other
satellites, like communication ones, which are indeed geostationary
over the equator. Such as broadcasting satellites and the INMARSAT
maritime communication satellites.
In Norway, which goes up to latitude 72 N on mainland (hello Torgeir!
:-) TV sateliites and INMARSAT are not covering those latitudes. Even
here, in the south, all TV dishes are nearly horizontal.
The GPS, pretty much like its predecessor, the Transit Satellite
System, is making a birdcage around the earth. I think the GPS doesn't
have true polar orbits but the Transit had. And because of that, the
frequency of a fix opportunity was actually greater the further north
or south, one would come.
Noel, of course Loran C is much better than Decca, which was 1943
technology and phased out a few years ago. Decca and Loran C are very
reliable as a relative positioning system. I.e. fishermen could come
back and fetch their nets in the thickest fog if the had plotted the
position. But it was not too accurate as absolute position, i.e.
relative to latitude and longitude. Something to do with lower
frequencies that are influenced by land masses, etc.
The Omega system was also working on a very low frequency and therefore
not so accurate. But it was the first system to use the idea of a
differential signal. It meant that existing maritime VHF coastal
stations were registering the current offset and sent it back to the
ships as to increase the accuracy of their position.
WAAS is also a differential system and while it is only covering North
America, differential GPS has been used for a long time in e.g. Europe.
But then, it was only a local service that you had to subscribe to.
E.g. in the North Sea offshore industry, they use differential GPS
where a correction is sent to the platforms or pipe-laying vessels. The
problem is: There isn't really a standard format as for WAAS.
Sorry to be a bit lengthy on the subject but I have worked with
maritime navigation systems for many years. The bottom line is: All of
them beat the old sextant! :-)
Cheers,
Michel
do not archive
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: construction manual |
I am not resposbible after my third cup :)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Don Pearsall" <donpearsall@comcast.net>
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 11:52 AM
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: construction manual
> <donpearsall@comcast.net>
>
> Oops, sorry list members. That last email was supposed to go to Deke
> privately. Just ignore. I don't know how I managed to send to the list,
> but
> I am not responsible for anything before my 3rd cup of coffee.
>
> Don Pearsall
>
> Don Not Archive.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Don Pearsall
> Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 8:28 AM
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: construction manual
>
> <donpearsall@comcast.net>
>
> Good Morning
> I am glad you had a good time and no broken legs or arms.
> No irons, just the changes in the way we do things for subscribing. I am
> assuming you are following Matt's emails and examples.
>
> My daughter is getting married and I have to help with the plans and $$.
> Everything is so expensive I can't believe it.
>
> OK You got it. Have a great week. Could you acknowledge this email so I
> know
> you got it. I suspect you have not gotten many of my emails to you.
>
> Don
>
> Don Pearsall
> Sound Appraisal
> Seattle, WA USA
> 425-392.4627
> FAX 425-557-0107
> donpearsall@comcast.net
> http://www.soundappraisal.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of parahawk
> Sent: Monday, February 12, 2007 6:56 PM
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Kitfox-List: construction manual
>
>
> Can I get a downloadable version for the KF IV-1200 anywhere ??
> Mine came without the weight and balance sheet and I understand that the
> manual has a sample and instructions.
> Thanks
> do not archive
>
> --------
> Flying is the highest form of life on earth.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=94620#94620
>
>
>
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
I guess you can't believe everything you are told. That includes the GPS
constellations being geostationary. The site says it is a 12 hr orbit.
They don't go into accuracies or more directly inaccuracies in any specific
part of the world. After all you really don't want Bin Laden's crew using
GPS against yourself.
Noel
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> Guy Buchanan
> Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 3:35 AM
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: GPS. WAS: ASIs
>
>
>
> At 06:01 PM 2/12/2007, you wrote:
> >All satellites in the GPS constellation are in geostationary
> orbit. By
> >definition that means they must also be directly over the
> equator. The
> >further away form the equator you are the greater the angle
> of incidence of
> >any signal reaching your receiver. The greater the angle of
> incidence the
> >greater the possibility of error both vertical and horizontal.
>
> GPS orbit altitude: 10,988 nautical miles (Geo is about
> 22,300 statute miles.)
>
> Ref: http://www.losangeles.af.mil/smc/pa/fact_sheets/gps_fs.htm
>
>
> Guy Buchanan
> K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar.
>
> Do not archive
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 16
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Coordinated turns to base and final |
When I was training in the C172 ( no further comment) my instructor had me
do slips right down to just about the final flare. On the C it is not
recommended to slip while using flaps. As a side note I could land that 172
pretty darn short using full flaps. A couple or three hundred feet over a
fifty foot obstacle. Roll out was also short. I used to try to touch in
the middle of the intersecting runway so I cloud see how much room I used.
The C was short but not any where near the 'Fox on floats. Once the floats
touch it doesnt drift too far on step. On the other hand It doesn't take a
calendar to time a take off either.
Noel
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> Lynn Matteson
> Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 9:53 AM
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Coordinated turns to base and final
>
>
>
> I slip (if I need to) to within 20-30-50 feet...I'm guessing
> at that
> altitude of course. I've come a long way from hanging on for dear
> life when my instructor would take over and slip it in, to doing the
> same thing myself, and loving it....this with full (20) flaps. I
> always yank the shoulder straps a bit tighter before I do because
> pushing on the rudder pedal that hard always pushes me back in the
> seat if I don't...I used to grab one of the tubes above the
> panel for
> support. There is a guy who comes in over the trees (with a GA
> aircraft) at a nearby strip and slips it down to about 5-10 feet
> before letting up and landing...I'm not about to try to match him.
>
> Lynn
>
> On Feb 12, 2007, at 8:52 PM, Noel Loveys wrote:
> >
> > Is there any one here who uses a slip to loose altitude to
> a point say
> > twenty feet or so above touch down? I've tried both flaps and the
> > slip.
> > The flaps seem to work better but then again I have those floats
> > acting like
> > a great pendulum and keeping the plane from slipping effectively.
> > Of course
> > I also have a smallish rudder and no gap seals.
> >
> > Noel
> >
>
>
>
>
>
Message 17
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Coordinated turns to base and final |
I really like doing short approaches, today I was practicing all kinds of things,
one of which is where I turn base to final up higher and short, while on the
base to final I leave in the left bank and just put in right rudder and slip
down to the runway, way fun.
--------
kitfoxmike
model IV, 1200
speedster
912ul
Do not archive
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=94827#94827
Message 18
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Hi Rex, I was thinking of going with a Pneumatic tire. Trying to achieve
abit of a better ride.
Jim
Hi ! Jim,
sorry I was mentioning that the ACS Homebuilders 6" soft
rubber tailwheel handled better and made far less noise. I guess this
distracted from your aim of a better ride. However the fact is it does
also give a better ride. I have not experienced a pneumatic tailwheel in
a Kitfox to compare but I feel you would be delighted with the change to
the Homebuilders wheel. Anyway it's your choice but I wanted to let you
know what can be achieved without going all the way to pneumatic. When I
was looking at it to go pneumatic I could not find a suitable wheel to
fit on the Maule SFSA axle assembly between the axle and arm. Therefore
I would have needed to change the whole tailwheel assembly at much
greater expense. Due to the minimal expense of the Homebuiler soft
rubber wheel it was worth a go and I was very pleasantly surprised.
Another point is I have had my fair share of punctures from those
original buffed down 2 ply ATV front tyres so the Homebuilders wheel
appealed because it cannot puncture. Nor is it going to pull of the rim
like I've seen pneumatic tailwheel tyres do.
I expect if you go pneumatic you will be delighted with the
improvement over the Maule SFSA but I do think you may not be much
different to a Homebuilders wheel and you will have had to go to more
trouble, spend more money, be puncture prone and have a tyre that can
come off the rim. Anyway if you go pneumatic let us know what you think.
Rex.
Message 19
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Coordinated turns to base and final |
Thanks mike:
My normal decent is around 500'/min. Sometimes more ( hills and the like)
sometimes less (glassy water).
As I have said in earlier posts, close to the ground I have other things on
my mind other than watching the ball. When I round out I like to keep my
eyes outside the plane. Before rounding out I will usually grab one last
look at the ASI just to make sure I'm not too close to stall before flaring.
On take off the same thing is true. Once in the air I usually drop my nose
a bit to build airspeed and when I start my climb out I'll set it up for
about 55-60 mph climb.
On floats the 'Fox requires you become real friendly with the rudder pedals.
So much so, that now I'm not aware of rudder inputs. I do remember the
first few high speed taxis though so there are definitely rudder inputs
being made.
I also installed a trim tab on the plane because I found I would get back
from a couple of hours flying and my right foot would be just about numb and
my right ankle and leg would be very stiff. The holes were already drilled
in the rudder so riveting a piece of 024 was very easy I used trial and
error to set the bend on the tab and it improved the way the plane behaved
quite a bit.
Noel
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> kitfoxmike
> Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 1:01 PM
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Coordinated turns to base and final
>
>
> <customtrans@qwest.net>
>
> Noel,
> I slip all the way down to about 5 ft off the ground, I
> remember back when doing my check ride and the guy said, I
> want to see a slip to land, this is not required, but I did a
> slip and straightened out about 20ft off, the guy said, I
> told you to slip to land, so I redid and held off to about 5
> ft off the ground, his response was, much better.
>
> Now, let me explain something here, when coming in you
> decend, the yaw will go right, when in a left pattern you
> have right raw normally from the decent, the amount depends
> on your decent, mine is usually better than 800ft per
> minute(I do short approaches). If you do a 30degree bank on
> a left turn you have a greater chance of being coordinated
> because you are use the putting in left rudder for the
> adverse yaw and such. Going to a greater bank turn will
> require you to put in more left rudder, to keep straight no
> bank you will need to put in left rudder, this is normal.
>
> Now make right traffic, this is where it can get confusing,
> you have the normal left yaw from decending. Now if you do
> the 30degree bank you can run yourself into trouble, because
> your use to a right rudder input for a right turn, but you
> look down and see the ball going left, so you have to input
> some left rudder, very unusual and different, in fact you are
> now in a skid, very dangerous. If you increase your bank in
> the right traffic you will find that the ball will now be
> more centered, in my opinion more safe. Now if you go to a
> steeper bank you will find you need a slight right rudder
> into the turn.
>
> What I'm trying to say here is in right traffic be very aware
> of your ball(what a pun) or you will end up in a skid(or an
> inflight ground loop) the tail will come around the outside.
> In this case you need to be aware of spin awarness not how to
> handle a spin because you will be upside down and spining to
> the ground with no way to recover. Big thing keep that ball
> in the center at all times. except for landing and taking off.
>
> Don't be keeping the ball in center on touch down or you will
> be squaling all over the runway, do it after lift off and
> you'll end up in the right side of the field. will explain
> later if you need explainations of this one.
>
> --------
> kitfoxmike
> model IV, 1200
> speedster
> 912ul
> Do not archive
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=94732#94732
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 20
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | construction manual |
Man, where is a list janitor when you need one?
Randy
Do not archive
.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Don Pearsall
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 9:53 AM
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: construction manual
Oops, sorry list members. That last email was supposed to go to Deke
privately. Just ignore. I don't know how I managed to send to the list, but
I am not responsible for anything before my 3rd cup of coffee.
Don Pearsall
Don Not Archive.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Don Pearsall
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 8:28 AM
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: construction manual
Good Morning
I am glad you had a good time and no broken legs or arms.
No irons, just the changes in the way we do things for subscribing. I am
assuming you are following Matt's emails and examples.
My daughter is getting married and I have to help with the plans and $$.
Everything is so expensive I can't believe it.
OK You got it. Have a great week. Could you acknowledge this email so I know
you got it. I suspect you have not gotten many of my emails to you.
Don
Don Pearsall
Sound Appraisal
Seattle, WA USA
425-392.4627
FAX 425-557-0107
donpearsall@comcast.net
http://www.soundappraisal.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of parahawk
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2007 6:56 PM
Subject: Kitfox-List: construction manual
Can I get a downloadable version for the KF IV-1200 anywhere ??
Mine came without the weight and balance sheet and I understand that the
manual has a sample and instructions.
Thanks
do not archive
--------
Flying is the highest form of life on earth.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=94620#94620
Message 21
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Michel:
You are right I was confused, not the first or last time. I was of the idea
that the GPS constellations were interspersed between the com sats.... One
of which is making background noise for me at this very minute.
As for the sextant... If you have a good clear sky.... If you have a good
watch then at least you don't need batteries :-) Just don't ever ask me to
shoot a fix for you! You may find yourself in much warmer climes speaking a
strange language. Come to think of it if you throw a dart at a spinning
globe you will probably get a better fix than I can give you with a sextant.
Noel
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> Michel Verheughe
> Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 2:52 PM
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: GPS. WAS: ASIs
>
>
>
> On Feb 13, 2007, at 4:51 AM, Jim Corner wrote:
> > Your final comments I believe apply to Loran coverage at the poles.
>
> Well, I don't think so, Jim, Loran C is a hyperbolic system and you
> only need to be within range of the stations. Nothing to do with the
> poles. I think our friend Noel was mistaking GPS for many other
> satellites, like communication ones, which are indeed geostationary
> over the equator. Such as broadcasting satellites and the INMARSAT
> maritime communication satellites.
> In Norway, which goes up to latitude 72 N on mainland (hello Torgeir!
> :-) TV sateliites and INMARSAT are not covering those latitudes. Even
> here, in the south, all TV dishes are nearly horizontal.
>
> The GPS, pretty much like its predecessor, the Transit Satellite
> System, is making a birdcage around the earth. I think the
> GPS doesn't
> have true polar orbits but the Transit had. And because of that, the
> frequency of a fix opportunity was actually greater the further north
> or south, one would come.
>
> Noel, of course Loran C is much better than Decca, which was 1943
> technology and phased out a few years ago. Decca and Loran C are very
> reliable as a relative positioning system. I.e. fishermen could come
> back and fetch their nets in the thickest fog if the had plotted the
> position. But it was not too accurate as absolute position, i.e.
> relative to latitude and longitude. Something to do with lower
> frequencies that are influenced by land masses, etc.
>
> The Omega system was also working on a very low frequency and
> therefore
> not so accurate. But it was the first system to use the idea of a
> differential signal. It meant that existing maritime VHF coastal
> stations were registering the current offset and sent it back to the
> ships as to increase the accuracy of their position.
>
> WAAS is also a differential system and while it is only
> covering North
> America, differential GPS has been used for a long time in
> e.g. Europe.
> But then, it was only a local service that you had to subscribe to.
> E.g. in the North Sea offshore industry, they use differential GPS
> where a correction is sent to the platforms or pipe-laying
> vessels. The
> problem is: There isn't really a standard format as for WAAS.
>
> Sorry to be a bit lengthy on the subject but I have worked with
> maritime navigation systems for many years. The bottom line
> is: All of
> them beat the old sextant! :-)
>
> Cheers,
> Michel
>
> do not archive
>
>
>
>
>
Message 22
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Coordinated turns to base and final flying today? |
In a message dated 2/13/2007 4:54:28 P.M. Central Standard Time,
customtrans@qwest.net writes:
I really like doing short approaches, today I was practicing all kinds of
things, one of which is where I turn base to final up higher and short, while
on the base to final I leave in the left bank and just put in right rudder and
slip down to the runway, way fun.
I live 100 miles S of Chicago .... we got 10 inches of snow gusts to
59 MPH huge drifts low of 0 F tonite ..........
Dave KF 2
Message 23
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Coordinated turns to base and final |
Noel,
To help you feel better, once you get close to flairing, you DO NOT want to have
a centered ball, you look out the window and square the airplane to the landing
spot, for you it's an emaginary line on your flight path. Centering your
ball on landing can and will put you into a ground loop if not corrected fast
enough, and if using the round donuts you can wear them out faster than you should.
I have about 2000 landings on my tires and they still look good.
Next on take off you use right rudder for taking off to keep squared but on lift
off I generally let the ball go to the right off center just a tad so that you
don't end up flying off to the right, very desasterous when you have a parallel
runway, like I do. I see it all the time, a plane takes off and vears to
the right, they are holding center on the ball, It's bad enough that the nose
is pitched up and you can't see in front of you, to find out that tower is holding
traffic on the right runway because people generally drift over to the right
after taking off on the left runway. I find that letting the ball go to
the right a little and the nose of the airplane to yaw to the left puts the airplane
on a nice straight path out off the runway.
hope this helps.
--------
kitfoxmike
model IV, 1200
speedster
912ul
Do not archive
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=94871#94871
Message 24
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: GPS. WAS: ASIs |
On 13-Feb-07, at 11:22 AM, Michel Verheughe wrote:
Michel, the reason I suspected he was referring to loran is that I
think you will find that the nearest Loran station or slave is a
long, long way from the poles.
Canada doesn't have any mid continent stations and the coastal
stations are at lower latitudes.
>
> On Feb 13, 2007, at 4:51 AM, Jim Corner wrote:
>> Your final comments I believe apply to Loran coverage at the poles.
>
> Well, I don't think so, Jim, Loran C is a hyperbolic system and you
> only need to be within range of the stations. Nothing to do with
> the poles. I think our friend Noel was mistaking GPS for many other
> satellites, like communication ones, which are indeed geostationary
> over the equator. Such as broadcasting satellites and the INMARSAT
> maritime communication satellites.
> I
>
As I understand it, the main difference between WAAS and what
commonly called differential GPS is that WAAS broadcasts its
corrections via stationary satellites where differential GPS
stations communicated error signals directly to a special receiver,
thus useable over a much smaller range, but perhaps more accurate.
> WAAS is also a differential system and while it is only covering
> North America, differential GPS has been used for a long time in
> e.g. Europe. But then, it was only a local service that you had to
> subscribe to. E.g. in the North Sea offshore industry, they use
> differential GPS where a correction is sent to the platforms or
> pipe-laying vessels. The problem is: There isn't really a standard
> format as for WAAS.
>
> Sorry to be a bit lengthy on the subject but I have worked with
> maritime navigation systems for many years. The bottom line is: All
> of them beat the old sextant! :-)
I have to agree the old sextant was difficult in turbulence, as was
transposing time differentials from the loran scope to the charts!
My nav experience was in the early 60's in P2V7's over the Pacific
Cheers
JIm
KF2- 582 1100+ hrs
do not archive
Message 25
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: GPS. WAS: ASIs |
Noel sez:
>All satellites in the GPS constellation are in
>geostationary orbit. By definition that means
>they must also be directly over the equator.
Noel, you are a one-man dis-information machine.
:-) According to Wikipedia
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Positioning_System>:
"...The GPS design calls for 24 SVs [satellites]
to be distributed equally among six circular
orbital planes. The orbital planes are centered
on the Earth, not rotating with respect to the
distant stars. The six planes have approximately
55 inclination (tilt relative to Earth's
equator) and are separated by 60 right ascension
of the ascending node (angle along the equator
from a reference point to the orbit's
intersection).
"Orbiting at an altitude of approximately 20,200
kilometers (12,600 miles or 10,900 nautical
miles; orbital radius of 26,600 km (16,500 mi or
14,400 NM)), each SV makes two complete orbits
each sidereal day, so it passes over the same
location on Earth once each day. The orbits are
arranged so that at least six satellites are
always within line of sight from almost anywhere
on Earth.
"As of January 2007, there are 29 actively
broadcasting satellites in the GPS constellation.
The additional satellites improve the precision
of GPS receiver calculations by providing
redundant measurements. With the increased number
of satellites, the constellation was changed to a
nonuniform arrangement. Such an arrangement was
shown to improve reliability and availability of
the system, relative to a uniform system, when
multiple satellites fail."
Mike G.
N728KF
Message 26
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Lynn sez:
>I put in my tail number but [FlightAware] couldn't find it...I only
>had to squawk/ident once during a recent flight, and that was on
>1200, so I guess that doesn't count.
Yeah, it only works when you have a discrete transponder code
assigned, such as when you are receiving en-route flight-following,
radar service at a "big" airport, or are IFR. 1200 doesn't show up,
even if you were asked to ident.
>My 296 unit is supposed to be capable of downloading data recorded...
My understanding was that Garmin was working on Mac versions of all
of their software, not just new products, but you've called them and
I haven't. :-) You would think that what basically amounts to some
text transferred over USB would be pretty straightforward, but who
knows?
If you don't feel like waiting, there are a number of options for
running (ewww) Windoze on your Mac. PowerPC Macs can run Microsoft's
VirtualPC (not fast, but I've used it successfully for some other
device control purposes) while Intel Macs can use Boot Camp or
Parallels Desktop (fast and capable). The downside to either
solution is that you have to cough up some $$$ for a copy of Windoze.
Mike G.
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|