Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:28 AM - Finally, I flew my airplane (1Dill Family)
2. 03:59 AM - Re: Wanted Model 4 radiator speed faring (Lynn Matteson)
3. 04:21 AM - Re: Starting problems (also: I passed my check ride!) (kitfoxjunky)
4. 05:52 AM - Re: Finally, I flew my airplane (Jim_and_Lucy Chuk)
5. 09:24 AM - Re: Finally, I flew my airplane (Guy Buchanan)
6. 10:02 AM - Re: Model 4 door gas strut parts (Giovanni Day)
7. 11:00 AM - Re: FW: NSI normal asperated oil blowoff (Margaret Hastedt)
8. 11:04 AM - Re: Re: $100 hamburger Not build related (Lowell Fitt)
9. 12:22 PM - Re: Re: $100 hamburger Not build related (john oakley)
10. 02:29 PM - Re: Finally, I flew my airplane (jeff puls)
11. 02:35 PM - Re: NSI normal asperated oil blowoff (Michael Logan)
12. 06:45 PM - Re: NSI normal asperated oil blowoff (kurt schrader)
13. 07:14 PM - Re: FW: NSI normal asperated oil blowoff (kurt schrader)
14. 07:14 PM - Re: VW Kitfox Flyers (kentk)
15. 07:49 PM - Re: Re: VW Kitfox Flyers (kurt schrader)
16. 09:12 PM - gascolator question (clemwehner)
17. 09:49 PM - Question on proper list reply protocol (tleed)
18. 10:04 PM - barb-tite fittings (clemwehner)
19. 11:51 PM - Re: gascolator question (Michel Verheughe)
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: | Finally, I flew my airplane |
Until recently, my aircraft insurance had a make and model clause
that, in practice, would have restricted me to 2 hours of instruction in
my own airplane, and that had to wait until somebody else flew 5 hours
in it due to phase 1 restrictions in its airworthiness certificate. This
contributed to a quagmire that kept me from flying it myself for the
last six months. Within the last two weeks, I was successful in
convincing my insurance company to include similar models and all I had
to do was shake the bushes for somebody willing and able to instruct in
a different aircraft. On Jul 9th I took a direct flight to San Jose, CA
to take some instruction in a Kitfox IV from Roger Standley, one of the
few people I found with a waiver to instruct commercially in an Kitfox.
I logged 14 landings and caught the mid-day flight back. With the
instruction, I now met the insurance requirements to fly my own
airplane, which I did twice on the next day.
The airplane flew well with regard to rigging and each flight was
about an hour. The flap handle needs adjusting. It needs a forward stop
to prevent selecting too much in that direction where the effect is
diminished roll rate and nose up pitch. It also needs a tightened or
redesigned friction lock because it does not always stay where it is
put.
The winds were light, but the temperature was extremely hot and I
had to run the heater to keep the engine temp under control and pattern
work was not possible. I basically hovered above Brainard airport and
landed each time on the sod. I changed spark plugs between flights
because of an occasional skip in the engine. This left the engine
running strong for the second takeoff, but by the end of the flight, the
skip was back. Right now I am suspecting fouling due to running 100LL
but remain open to suggestions about other causes.
I am happy to have it in the air. I knew it would be slow and it
didn't let me down. It was the worst performing Kitfox I have been in so
far, even compared to the Model I with the same engine. My indicated
airspeed was less than 70 MPH at 5800 rpm. I suppose the airspeed
indicator could be out of whack, but that would be wishful thinking.
Maybe I should sell half to somebody who want to log lots of time! Next
time I will take my GPS to compare.
Thanks to all who helped me get to this point,
Jeff Dill
N767JD, Rebuilt Model II/582
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: Wanted Model 4 radiator speed faring |
Had one but gave it away...sorry, Giovanni...
Lynn Matteson
Grass Lake, Michigan
Kitfox IV Speedster w/Jabiru 2200
flying w/369+ hrs
do not archive
On Jul 9, 2007, at 6:46 PM, Giovanni Day wrote:
>
> Wanted Model 4 radiator speed faring in good condition. Maybe one
> of you jabaru converts will have one? Thanks
>
> --------
> _______________________________________
> Giovanni Day
> Model 4 speedster 912
>
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: Starting problems (also: I passed my check ride!) |
I think you flooded it. I had a similar experience..but I was on a lake
and it was getting dark. I resorted to pulling the plugs and drying them
out. Then it started immediately. If the engine is already warm, cranking
it with the choke out can easily flood it.
Gary Walsh
KF IV Anphib 912S
C-GOOT
www.decisionlabs.com/kitfox
do not archive
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: | Finally, I flew my airplane |
Hi Jeff, good to hear you were able to finally fly your plane. I read that
you were flying over Brainard airport, is that the Brainard in Minnesota?
If so, I live up in Chisholm, less than 100 miles NE of you. What were your
EGT temps on your plane durring flight? It sounds like you were running
real rich. Were the plugs real black when you took them out? If it is
jetted for winter time it woould be rich especially on a hot day. Well have
fun with it, on another note, I picked up my Jabiru 2200 CC engine monday
evening. It's the first time I've seen one up close, and boy what a work of
art. If it flys as nice as it looks, it will really be something.
Jim Chuk
Avid Mk IV 582 (for now)
Chisholm Mn
>From: "1Dill Family" <1Dillfamily@comcast.net>
>To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: Kitfox-List: Finally, I flew my airplane
>Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 03:27:13 -0400
>
> Until recently, my aircraft insurance had a make and model clause
>that, in practice, would have restricted me to 2 hours of instruction in my
>own airplane, and that had to wait until somebody else flew 5 hours in it
>due to phase 1 restrictions in its airworthiness certificate. This
>contributed to a quagmire that kept me from flying it myself for the last
>six months. Within the last two weeks, I was successful in convincing my
>insurance company to include similar models and all I had to do was shake
>the bushes for somebody willing and able to instruct in a different
>aircraft. On Jul 9th I took a direct flight to San Jose, CA to take some
>instruction in a Kitfox IV from Roger Standley, one of the few people I
>found with a waiver to instruct commercially in an Kitfox. I logged 14
>landings and caught the mid-day flight back. With the instruction, I now
>met the insurance requirements to fly my own airplane, which I did twice on
>the next day.
> The airplane flew well with regard to rigging and each flight was
>about an hour. The flap handle needs adjusting. It needs a forward stop to
>prevent selecting too much in that direction where the effect is diminished
>roll rate and nose up pitch. It also needs a tightened or redesigned
>friction lock because it does not always stay where it is put.
> The winds were light, but the temperature was extremely hot and I had
>to run the heater to keep the engine temp under control and pattern work
>was not possible. I basically hovered above Brainard airport and landed
>each time on the sod. I changed spark plugs between flights because of an
>occasional skip in the engine. This left the engine running strong for the
>second takeoff, but by the end of the flight, the skip was back. Right now
>I am suspecting fouling due to running 100LL but remain open to suggestions
>about other causes.
> I am happy to have it in the air. I knew it would be slow and it
>didn't let me down. It was the worst performing Kitfox I have been in so
>far, even compared to the Model I with the same engine. My indicated
>airspeed was less than 70 MPH at 5800 rpm. I suppose the airspeed indicator
>could be out of whack, but that would be wishful thinking. Maybe I should
>sell half to somebody who want to log lots of time! Next time I will take
>my GPS to compare.
>
>Thanks to all who helped me get to this point,
>Jeff Dill
>N767JD, Rebuilt Model II/582
_________________________________________________________________
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: Finally, I flew my airplane |
At 12:27 AM 7/11/2007, you wrote:
>On Jul 9th I took a direct flight to San Jose, CA to take some
>instruction in a Kitfox IV from Roger Standley, one of the few
>people I found with a waiver to instruct commercially in an Kitfox.
>I logged 14 landings and caught the mid-day flight back. With the
>instruction, I now met the insurance requirements to fly my own
>airplane, which I did twice on the next day.
This is great news. Roger will probably get some business out of this
as it's a continuing problem. And congratulations on your first flights!
> The airplane flew well with regard to rigging and each flight
> was about an hour. The flap handle needs adjusting. It needs a
> forward stop to prevent selecting too much in that direction where
> the effect is diminished roll rate and nose up pitch.
I use this mode sometimes to increase my descent rate. Of course I
have a trim tab on the elevator to counteract the pitch effect.
>It also needs a tightened or redesigned friction lock because it
>does not always stay where it is put.
I had to tighten mine twice in the first few months. Now it seems to
stay tight.
> The winds were light, but the temperature was extremely hot and
> I had to run the heater to keep the engine temp under control and
> pattern work was not possible. I basically hovered above Brainard
> airport and landed each time on the sod.
I had to lower my radiator 1" to get enough cooling on the ground to
handle a 95F day. One I'm airborne I can handle about 105F, though I
have to be careful with the power and climb at 70 MIAS, minimum.
>I changed spark plugs between flights because of an occasional skip
>in the engine. This left the engine running strong for the second
>takeoff, but by the end of the flight, the skip was back. Right now
>I am suspecting fouling due to running 100LL but remain open to
>suggestions about other causes.
What did the spark plugs look like? I've run 100LL exclusively and
have had no plug problems. I use Decalin lead scavenger, but am not
religious about it.
> I am happy to have it in the air. I knew it would be slow and
> it didn't let me down. It was the worst performing Kitfox I have
> been in so far, even compared to the Model I with the same engine.
> My indicated airspeed was less than 70 MPH at 5800 rpm. I suppose
> the airspeed indicator could be out of whack, but that would be
> wishful thinking. Maybe I should sell half to somebody who want to
> log lots of time! Next time I will take my GPS to compare.
Well you didn't expect it to be fast, did you? ;-) Get your GPS up
and then worry about the speed. My ASI is about 10% slow, but no
matter what, you're going slow. That's what Kitfoxes are for. (Or, if
I wanted to go fast, I'd have built a Sonex / Pulsar / Dragonfly, etc.)
Guy Buchanan
San Diego, CA
K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar.
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Model 4 door gas strut parts |
Glenn,
Don't know why I did not think of that. About half my airplane came from there.
LOL The Ball links will be here tomorrow. Now all I need it the bracket!!
Giovanni
--------
_______________________________________
Giovanni Day
Model 4 speedster 912
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=123252#123252
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: | Re: NSI normal asperated oil blowoff |
Hi everyone,
I was discussing this with my friend and he made an interesting point: it's possible
that the lengthened vent line may be in a low-pressure location and is
literally suctioning the oil out of the resevoir. I had this very issue early
on with the vent on my Hirth reduction drive. It was on the front of the redrive
and in a low-pressure zone behind the propeller. It literally vacuumed almost
all the gear oil out of the unit in a short amount of time! I've since
relocated the vent to the top fill port (pointing backwards) to solve that issue.
My $.02 for what it's worth...
Margaret H.
Classic IV with "NSI" EA-81
College Station, TX
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: $100 hamburger Not build related |
Pictures? a great question. I didn't take the still camera and as you would
expect, I had lots of great opportunities. I did get lots of video, but
that takes time to edit. In short, no, sorry.
Lowell
----- Original Message -----
From: "wingnut" <wingnut@spamarrest.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2007 9:21 PM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: $100 hamburger Not build related
>
> Pictures?
>
> --------
> Luis Rodriguez
> Model IV 1200
> Rotax 912UL
> Flying Weekly
> Laurens, SC (34A)
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=123186#123186
>
>
>
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: $100 hamburger Not build related |
Pictures?
Gee's Lowell, you have us on pins and needles, what is taking so long? I
know you don't have anything else to do. :-)
John Oakley
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: Finally, I flew my airplane |
Jeff,
Use a TCP additive if you are going to burn 100LL. Jeff Columbus Ohio
Classic IV
----- Original Message -----
From: 1Dill Family
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2007 3:27 AM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Finally, I flew my airplane
Until recently, my aircraft insurance had a make and model clause
that, in practice, would have restricted me to 2 hours of instruction in
my own airplane, and that had to wait until somebody else flew 5 hours
in it due to phase 1 restrictions in its airworthiness certificate. This
contributed to a quagmire that kept me from flying it myself for the
last six months. Within the last two weeks, I was successful in
convincing my insurance company to include similar models and all I had
to do was shake the bushes for somebody willing and able to instruct in
a different aircraft. On Jul 9th I took a direct flight to San Jose, CA
to take some instruction in a Kitfox IV from Roger Standley, one of the
few people I found with a waiver to instruct commercially in an Kitfox.
I logged 14 landings and caught the mid-day flight back. With the
instruction, I now met the insurance requirements to fly my own
airplane, which I did twice on the next day.
The airplane flew well with regard to rigging and each flight was
about an hour. The flap handle needs adjusting. It needs a forward stop
to prevent selecting too much in that direction where the effect is
diminished roll rate and nose up pitch. It also needs a tightened or
redesigned friction lock because it does not always stay where it is
put.
The winds were light, but the temperature was extremely hot and I
had to run the heater to keep the engine temp under control and pattern
work was not possible. I basically hovered above Brainard airport and
landed each time on the sod. I changed spark plugs between flights
because of an occasional skip in the engine. This left the engine
running strong for the second takeoff, but by the end of the flight, the
skip was back. Right now I am suspecting fouling due to running 100LL
but remain open to suggestions about other causes.
I am happy to have it in the air. I knew it would be slow and it
didn't let me down. It was the worst performing Kitfox I have been in so
far, even compared to the Model I with the same engine. My indicated
airspeed was less than 70 MPH at 5800 rpm. I suppose the airspeed
indicator could be out of whack, but that would be wishful thinking.
Maybe I should sell half to somebody who want to log lots of time! Next
time I will take my GPS to compare.
Thanks to all who helped me get to this point,
Jeff Dill
N767JD, Rebuilt Model II/582
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: | NSI normal asperated oil blowoff |
Kurt,
I had the same engine in my series 5 and had the same problem losing oil. I
ended up doing three things; first I put a screen in the fitting at the top
of the tank where the blow by comes out. Second I put a catch bottle in
that blow by line to catch any residual oil droplets and not let it go out
the line. The catch bottle worked like a separator similar to the M20 that
some put on certificated spam cans. The third and most important thing I
did was to put a downward facing tube onto the return line that goes into
the tank at the front top on the pilots side. I put holes in the tube to
help keep the pressure from foaming the oil. All of these helped me keep a
little more oil in the engine.
I believe I had a bad engine to begin with and it had a lot of blow by
pressure because of poor quality control at NSI at the time. Without the
above modifications, I could not keep more than two quarts in the engine and
it would run very hot and it never had good oil pressure. With the
modifications, I was able to keep about another quart and a half and it
helped with the cooling even though the oil pressure never came up. Not
enough to be truly safe but enough to run in the winter time. I have since
gone to a RAM engine and hope to have it flying again soon.
Mike Logan
Series 5
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of kurt schrader
Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2007 1:58 AM
Subject: Re:Kitfox-List: NSI normal asperated oil blowoff
<smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
Thanks for the help so far on this so far.
Peter G, I think his plane and engine are same as
yours, minus your many mods. Unfortunately he is not
the builder, so his plane is more of a mystery.
I am still worried about this Soob driver's oil
problem. Here is what he said after reading all of
your replies.
"From the full mark on the dipstick to the 90 degree
angle of the outlet line is 5". I am sure I'm not
over filling because when we ran at 4800 RPM it
dropped 2qts out and the oil pressure went down to 20
lbs of pressure. We landed quick and found we had to
put in the 2qts to bring the oil back up to operating
range."
2 qts is a lot and the low oil pressure tells me there
is more to this. But he says it is blowing only out
this vent line and because it was lengthened, the
belly stays clean. I am wondering if he is not seeing
it blow out the exhaust or something at higher power
and that is the reason for the excess loss?
Also why are the top 2 qts so critical? Shouldn't it
hold pressure with the last 2 qts? I would think as
long as the engine, oil lines full, and at least a
little is in the tank he should hold pressure. There
has to be more to this story.
Is there a way to reverse some lines coming from the
oil tank to miss the bottom 2 qts? My impression is
that there are only 3 lines - tank to engine pump,
return to tank, and vent. But he says there is
another line from the bottom of the tank going down
and capped off. I thought this was a convenient drain
line to reduce the mess when changing, but is it
supposed to be the line to the oil pump instead and he
is pulling oil from another line swapped by mistake?
How are your oil hoses set up?
Still doesn't account for the excess loss of 2 qts.
Any ideas?
Kurt Schrader
S-5/NSI turbo
Florida and panama
Be a better Heartthrob. Get better relationship answers from someone who
knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.
http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545433
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: | NSI normal asperated oil blowoff |
Thanks Michael,
I was leaning in about the same direction with him
before I asked you all on the list. Your experience
is the first I heard to match his though.
I thought he could put a section of scrubbie in the
vent line after the connection, but before the 90 down
turn so it would stay there. Blow thru it to make
sure air still goes thru. There is no room to make
this line go verticle up before going down, or he
could get some drain-back.
Second, I though like you and Peter, to add some kind
of air/oil seperator to the line.
Hadn't thought of your third mod though. Sure enough
that return line would be blowing oil all over the
tank's insides and not down only. Makes it a lot
easier for oil to go right out the vent without it.
I agree that you and he must be getting a lot of
blowby due to bad rig arrangement or something. Valve
guides? In any case, nothing so easily fixed for him.
He is not a mechanic. Your mods might do it alone.
Another option I thought of was an expanded tank
volume like a lower tank even with the bottom of the
main, but only 1/2 as high that held an additional 2
qts. But that low oil pressure worries me more than
the blowout. As you said, quality control.
Let us know how the RAM conversion works out. How
exensive a change are you making? The whole
conversion, or only parts? Been thinking about some
mods myself. My engine runs pretty well, but it could
be better and I have a few things in mind. RAM might
play a part in it for me too.
Kurt Schrader
S-5/NSI turbo
Florida and Panama
Now that's room service! Choose from over 150,000 hotels
in 45,000 destinations on Yahoo! Travel to find your fit.
http://farechase.yahoo.com/promo-generic-14795097
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: NSI normal asperated oil blowoff |
Hi Margaret,
Good thought!
It is likely a pressure differential, and the tank
line configuration that allows it to suck or blow the
oil out.
I think the main problem is too high a crankcase
pressure due to excessive blowby, rather than low
pressure at the vent. Almost certainly bad pressure
at one end or the other. In any case, this is
followed by an arrangement that doesn't trap the oil
while letting the air out. If he can fix up a good
trap, let it suck or blow as necessary, but the
venting will not take out his oil.
My friends told me that Soobs break in at about 300
hours. Before that expect hotter runs and more oil
loss. After that it suddenly ups the power and runs
right. My engine isn't there yet for me to say.
But with this much blowby his engine needs some really
good oil trap mechinism and it may take longer to seat
in too. Don't know.
The more expensive, but solid answer is a rebuild to
make things right to begin with. But if he can come
up with a good oil trap, he can fly it until it all
fits properly.
He is now in contact with Peter G for direct
assistance from someone who has the same engine, not
thru me with a different system. That should help
more than my guesswork.
Kurt Schrader
S-5/NSI turbo
--- Margaret Hastedt <hastedt@iodp.tamu.edu> wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I was discussing this with my friend and he made an
> interesting point: it's possible that the
> lengthened vent line may be in a low-pressure
> location and is literally suctioning the oil out of
> the resevoir......
> Margaret H.
> Classic IV with "NSI" EA-81
> College Station, TX
Yahoo! oneSearch: Finally, mobile search
that gives answers, not web links.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/mobileweb/onesearch?refer=1ONXIC
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: VW Kitfox Flyers |
Paul,
I too am looking into the AeroVee:
(http://www.aeroconversions.com/aero_kit.html)
I asked them if their engine would work in a Kitfox Model IV-1200, and this was
their reply:
----- Original Message ----
From: Aeroconversions
Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2007 9:33:36 AM
Hello Kent-
Yes, the AeroVee can and has been installed on a Kitfox IV.
Any aircraft provisioned for a direct-drive VW can be made to work with the AeroVee.
--------
Kent Knudsen
College Station, TX
K-IV 1200 / no engine / 25% done
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=123340#123340
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: VW Kitfox Flyers |
Kent/Paul,
With 4000 max rpm, what prop do they use? Probably a
short prop. Make sure most of the prop blows outside
of the KitFox cowl dimensions to get best performance.
Kurt S.
S-5/NSI turbo
Florida and Panama
--- kentk <kentk25@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Paul,
>
> I too am looking into the AeroVee:
> (http://www.aeroconversions.com/aero_kit.html)
8:00? 8:25? 8:40? Find a flick in no time
with the Yahoo! Search movie showtime shortcut.
http://tools.search.yahoo.com/shortcuts/#news
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: | gascolator question |
Does a gascolator separate water from the fuel when fuel is flowing thru
it, as the engine is running?
tnx,
Clem Wehner
Lawton, OK
KFIV-912
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: | Question on proper list reply protocol |
If you are replying on this list to a previous post, aren't you supposed to hit
the "Post Reply" button, not "New Topic"?
I ask because that's the norm on every other bulletin board I've participated in.
However, it seems that here some people are in the habit of responding by starting
a new post with the same or similar topic. That makes it hard to follow
the thread because subsequent posters don't know whether to respond to the first,
second, third, or thirty-third thread with the same name. And readers can't
be sure they've gotten everything in the thread because there could be more
relevant stuff in other threads that are several days and several pages away.
I ask also because you only have to look back a couple of days for multiple examples
of what I'm talking about. So I'm wondering if there's been a deliberate
effort to establish a different norm here? If so, I'd like to know what the prevailing
rule is so I can post accordingly. If not, then I really think it would
be better for everyone if posters responding to an existing thread made sure
they used the "Post Reply" button and only used the "New Topic" button for
original posts.
Does that sound like a good idea?
Thomas
--------
Kitfox Model IV-1200
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=123357#123357
Message 18
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | barb-tite fittings |
My 912 engine kit came with a brass "Barb-Tite" fitting (hose barb).
>From what I've read these fitting require no hose clamp and just need
the hose pushed up over the barbs. Supposedly good to 250 PSI.
Will these work with fuel injection hose or will they only work with
specially designed hoses? Is it really safe to have a fuel line
without a hose clamp?
Thanks,
Clem Wehner
KFIV-912
Lawton, OK
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: | gascolator question |
> From: clemwehner [clemwehner@sbcglobal.net]
> Does a gascolator separate water from the fuel when fuel is flowing thru
> it, as the engine is running?
It does on my marine diesel engine, Clem, where I get a lot of tank condensation.
But I have never seen a drop of water in my aircraft fuel which is always in
a hangar, so I wouldn't know.
Cheers,
Michel Verheughe
Norway
Kitfox 3 - Jabiru 2200
<pre><b><font size=2 color="#000000" face="courier new,courier">
</b></font></pre></body></html>
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! --
|