Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:41 AM - Re: Re: Landing in Treetops (Michel Verheughe)
2. 12:51 AM - Re: Broken tailwheel spring- revelation (Michel Verheughe)
3. 02:35 AM - SV: Broken tailwheel spring- revelation (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Geir_Olav_=D8ien?=)
4. 03:23 AM - Re: Re: Trailing edge reinforcement tubes - recommended. (Dave G.)
5. 04:49 AM - Re: Re: Landing in Treetops (Marwynne Kuhn)
6. 05:18 AM - Re: Re: Landing in Treetops (Paul Seehafer)
7. 05:30 AM - Re: Re: Landing in Treetops (Michel Verheughe)
8. 05:46 AM - Re: Re: Landing in Treetops (Michel Verheughe)
9. 05:46 AM - Re: Re: Light-Sport Pilots license (Paul Seehafer)
10. 07:35 AM - Re: Bunches of stuff (Jim Corner)
11. 07:44 AM - Re: Exhaust parts 582 (dave)
12. 07:45 AM - Re: Bunches of stuff (dave)
13. 08:52 AM - Re: Re: It flys! (Kevin Cozik)
14. 09:05 AM - Re: It flys! (jeff puls)
15. 09:49 AM - Re: Broken tailwheel spring- revelation (Lynn Matteson)
16. 10:15 AM - Re: Re: Landing in Treetops (Marwynne Kuhn)
17. 10:22 AM - Re: Broken tailwheel spring- revelation (Michel Verheughe)
18. 12:16 PM - Re: Re: It flys! (Dan Billingsley)
19. 02:14 PM - Re: Broken tailwheel spring- revelation (dave)
20. 02:43 PM - Re: Re: It flys! (Paul Seehafer)
21. 03:04 PM - Re: Re: It flys! (Fred Shiple)
22. 03:12 PM - Re: Re: Exhaust parts 582 (dwight purdy)
23. 04:44 PM - Re: Re: Landing in Treetops (Paul Seehafer)
24. 04:46 PM - Re: Marvel Oil (Herbert Doud)
25. 05:18 PM - Re: Re: Strut fairing questions. (Andy Fultz)
26. 05:28 PM - Re: Bunches of stuff (Andy Fultz)
27. 05:35 PM - Re: Strut fairing questions. (dave)
28. 08:12 PM - Re: Exhaust parts 582 (dave)
29. 08:19 PM - Re: Marvel Oil (dave)
30. 08:55 PM - Re: --Subject:: Change-Carb Boots - 912 UL (SOURDOSTAN@AOL.COM)
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: Landing in Treetops |
Well, Elbie and Marwynne, it goes to show that the German instructor
knew what he was talking about! :-)
Cheers,
Michel Verheughe
Norway
Kitfox 3 - Jabiru 2200
Do not archive
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Broken tailwheel spring- revelation |
On Sep 15, 2007, at 9:12 PM, Jack L Bell wrote:
> It finally happened- I broke my tailwheel spring
> after a landing.
I did the same thing last year, Jack. My single blade tailwheel spring
gave up after about 950 landings. It was on asphalt and the plane went
in a 270 degrees ground loop. Luckily the speed was so low that it went
well. I have now two blades on my tailwheel spring.
I see your point with the Avid rudder that is more curved and doesn't
rest on the ground in the event of the lost of the tailwheel. I guess
the Kitfox is more squared because Denney and later, Skystar, tried to
increase as much as possible the rudder authority with surface.
Anyway, I also needed some repair to the rudder as it had been shaved
by the asphalt. I repaired it with glassfiber, epoxy, a piece of fabric
and paint. It is not a structural part of the aircraft so I guess it
should be good enough.
Geir-Olav, if you read this: Remember to add a second blade to your
tailwheel spring on your model IV!
Cheers,
Michel Verheughe
Norway
Kitfox 3 - Jabiru 2200
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: | Broken tailwheel spring- revelation |
Geir-Olav, if you read this: Remember to add a second blade to your
tailwheel spring on your model IV!
I ordered a new spring from john, a few days back. Better to be safe
than sorry.
Geir Olav ien
-----Opprinnelig melding-----
Fra: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] P vegne av Michel
Verheughe
Sendt: 16. september 2007 09:52
Til: kitfox-list@matronics.com
Emne: Re: Kitfox-List: Broken tailwheel spring- revelation
On Sep 15, 2007, at 9:12 PM, Jack L Bell wrote:
> It finally happened- I broke my tailwheel spring
> after a landing.
I did the same thing last year, Jack. My single blade tailwheel spring
gave up after about 950 landings. It was on asphalt and the plane went
in a 270 degrees ground loop. Luckily the speed was so low that it went
well. I have now two blades on my tailwheel spring.
I see your point with the Avid rudder that is more curved and doesn't
rest on the ground in the event of the lost of the tailwheel. I guess
the Kitfox is more squared because Denney and later, Skystar, tried to
increase as much as possible the rudder authority with surface.
Anyway, I also needed some repair to the rudder as it had been shaved
by the asphalt. I repaired it with glassfiber, epoxy, a piece of fabric
and paint. It is not a structural part of the aircraft so I guess it
should be good enough.
Geir-Olav, if you read this: Remember to add a second blade to your
tailwheel spring on your model IV!
Cheers,
Michel Verheughe
Norway
Kitfox 3 - Jabiru 2200
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Trailing edge reinforcement tubes - recommended. |
Dave Goddard- Mod IV 1050/582
do not archive
> Dave,
>
> I have not seen the recommendation for the tube but it seems like a great
> idea! I keep looking at my trailing edge and thinking that it would only
> take a misplaced elbow or hand to bend it any direction. I will make the
> mod using your tube dimensions supplied.
>
> About the Hysol...I have been using the 50 ml cartridges for years now
> building model jets and the Kitfox and have never had a problem with the
> mixing nozzles even when I was working in a 40 degree garage in the winter
> (I now have a climate controlled shop to work in). The nozzles I use I
> get from RSHughes and they are square with a green mixer.
>
I'm very pleased with the difference, I'm sure you'll be happy with it. The
tubes are 16" in mine. That leaves a small gap at each end by the rib.
The mixing tube I got was aren't 3/16" inside with small white paddles. It
just proved too much resistance. I didn't know there were other tubes
available. I've had fairly good luck with baggies used like piping bags as
suggested by another lister, by the time my new spars were installed, I had
enough expertise to be royally embarrassed about my early efforts, now hard
as rock. They'll soon be hidden.
Dave Goddard
Do not archive.
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: Landing in Treetops |
Michel
I am not sure what you are talking about. What did the German
instructor say ?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michel Verheughe" <michel@online.no>
Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 2:40 AM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Landing in Treetops
>
> Well, Elbie and Marwynne, it goes to show that the German instructor knew
> what he was talking about! :-)
>
> Cheers,
> Michel Verheughe
> Norway
> Kitfox 3 - Jabiru 2200
>
> Do not archive
>
>
>
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: Landing in Treetops |
All,
I once attended a forum where a military officer talked about surviving
crashes. He was prompted to talk more about this after surviving a
crash in a F-14 (?) due to complete engine failure. The best part was
that it was right after takeoff, at night, and in a mountain range! Oh
yeah, the best part, they went in at 150 knots! It was a very
interesting forum, and I learned a lot about crash survivability from
what he had to say.
Ironically, one of the things discussed was the dispute about whether to
try and land a light airplane in the tree tops or not. According to him
(and a short video clip from Bob Hoover on the same subject), they both
said NOT to land in the tree tops. Rather, fly as far into the crash as
possible. Meaning, maintain as much control of the direction of the
aircraft as long as possible. They said that trying to land in the tree
tops generally indicates stalling just above the tree tops. But doing
so will limit your directional control. So if the airplane doesn't land
softly in the tree tops like you thought it would, you just might hit a
3 foot oak tree trunk head on instead of that nice soft umbrella you
were aiming for. Plus, even if you could land in the umbrella, it is
very likely no one will find you there. And if you are injured, it's
more likely you will bleed to death before anyone can get to you. AND,
if no one saw you go into the tree tops, and you can't wait any longer
for fear of dying of injuries, exposure or thirst, you are just as dead
if you decide to try and climb down, and fall from a 70 foot tall tree.
Not many of us are all that good at climbing (down) trees, especially if
injured.
All that said, if I had NO choice I would put down in the umbrella of
trees. But it would be one of my very last choices. I personally have
had 5 engine failures in airplanes, 3 on takeoff. And I am here to
write about them mostly because I (instictively more than anything else)
flew the airplane to the ground in a controlled glide. And yes, there
were large obstacles I could have hit during those emergency off airport
landings. But because I was able to maintain aircraft directional
control, I was able to avoid hitting any of them. So I am a firm
believer in "Fly The Airplane" as far into the crash as possible.
But that's just my opinion. I do realize that every situation isn't the
same and sometimes you just have to do what you have to do. However,
I'm a firm believer if you just focus all of your attention on "flying
the airplane", you will have the highest chance of survivability.
The ultralight group has a famous saying I like; "You Hav'ta Afta" .
Which means "you have to always fly the airplane". I think that says it
all, and is the best advice any of us can follow.
Paul Seehafer
Kitfox IV 912 ul amphib
ps - I have a wrecked airplane sitting in my hangar that landed in
treetops in a stalled attitude. It now has a 10 inch hole between the
rudder pedals in the firewall where a large branch came into the
cockpit, just missing the pilot. Had it been inches one way or another,
I'd guess it would have been fatal. In this case, after he hit the tops
of the trees it fell tail first backwards, landing against a large tree
trunk. Pilot walked away with only minor injuries. But I think someone
was looking out for this guy that day...
----- Original Message -----
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Landing in Treetops
Attending a flight safety conference in Germany, last year, we were
told
> that light aircraft should rather try to land on tree tops than
attempt to
> make a sharp manoeuvre to reach an open field, at the risk of not
being
> able to do it and end in a wall or another hard surface. Personally,
I
> think that, if the forest is dense enough, a Kitfox would simply
land on
> the top of the trees and rescue would come with a fire brigade
ladder. I
> am not sure but I still feel I stand a better chance to survive a
aircraft
> crash landing if it is a very light one. After all, a 30 feet wide,
900
> pounds heavy object moving at 40 MPH shouldn't need much to come to
a
> stop.
Michel,
I have an example of this in my shop. About 25 years ago a pilot had
fuel contamination and the engine quit in a Funk B-85 C. He ended up
about 100' up in the Cedar tree he landed on. He was rescued by Hook &
Ladder truck from Fire Dept. More damage was done to aircraft removing
from tree with a huge crane than was done in landing there. I'm slowly
restoring that plane. Still has cable marks on door post aluminum cover
where the cable wrapped around to remove. Windshield, all windows &
airframe not damaged except for wings & doors which were totaled by time
aircraft was removed from tree. Two of my friends heard engine quit and
ran to where they heard the noise of crash, couldn't find plane till
pilot yelled at them from above!
Elbie Mendenhall,
Restoring the "Cedar Tree Funk" N-77705
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
Make AOL Your Homepage.
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: Landing in Treetops |
On Sep 16, 2007, at 1:48 PM, Marwynne Kuhn wrote:
> Michel
> I am not sure what you are talking about. What did the German
> instructor say ?
Last year, I was at a fly-in for PocketFMS in Germany. That evening we
had a German instructor/inspector ... sorry, I don't remember all his
qualifications (they were impressive) but he was very friendly and his
safety lecture was very interesting. Anyway, he took the example of an
actual airfield and discussed the possible recoveries of an engine stop
at climb out. In the course of that, he made it clear that in many
cases it would be better to land on the top of the trees in a nearby
park, than trying to do a desperate manoeuvre to get back on the
runway. He said: "Once the proverbial s**t hits the fan, your aircraft
is only a pillow between you and mother earth. Landing on the trees may
be the best alternative to preserve your and your passengers' life."
To be true, his example airfield was close to a town with no open
fields nearby. The alternatives were: back to the runway or airfield
area, in the buildings, or in the park.
Cheers,
Michel Verheughe
Norway
Kitfox 3 - Jabiru 2200
do not archive
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Landing in Treetops |
On Sep 16, 2007, at 2:17 PM, Paul Seehafer wrote:
> So I am a firm believer in "Fly The Airplane" as far into the crash as
> possible.
Of course, Paul, this is also my (and everyone else's, I guess)
opinion. The question is: What are the alternatives? In the Norwegian
mountains there are two: Forest or solid granite rock. I'd go for the
softer one.
Years ago, a Japanese sailor wanted to sail from Japan to the US in a
19 feet sailboat. He had to launch his boat at night, with no
witnesses, because the authorities refused to see him taking the risks.
A few weeks later he was in a bad storm alone in the Pacific. Feeling
depressed, he looked through the porthole and saw ... a light bulb
floating! Probably coming from rubbish thrown overboard by a passing
vessel. Then he thought: My tiny sailboat is fragile but entirely
watertight, just like that light bulb. If it can survive this storm, so
can I! ... and he did since I read his book! :-)
As I have sailed a lot, I kept remembering that water (at least, at
that speed) is too soft to damage a very light boat (mine is 27 feet
long) that will float like a cork. As long as one stays away from the
nasty rocks along the shore, it's just a matter of waiting.
Which brings me back to the beginning of the discussion: I feel that a
light aircraft doing a somewhat soft landing, stands a better chance of
survival than a heavier one.
Cheers,
Michel Verheughe
Norway
Kitfox 3 - Jabiru 2200
Do not archive
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: Light-Sport Pilots license |
I have had an FAA person mention moving the switch on an IVO prop electric
prop so it was accessible only from the ground as being legit under the LSA
rules. But that was somewhat a tongue in cheek response to me asking about
a particular friends airplane. In other words, you may and you may not get
away with that.
I believe the regs state that if ever the plane is equipped with an inflight
prop, it will remove it from Light Sport eligibility. So what you need to do
is check to see if the airplane was certified with an inflight prop, and if
it's written anywhere in the logs or the airworthiness or operating
limitation paperwork. If not, I doubt putting a ground adjustable prop on
it (whatever you want to call a ground adjustable prop) will be a problem.
BUT according to the rules, technically the aircraft is no longer eligible
for Light Sport status if it ever has had an in flight adjustable prop on
it. (fwiw - I think that is stupid, but it is the rule...)
Out of respect for all the FAA has granted us under Sport Pilot, as a group
I think we should try not to "push" the LSA limits by admitting to moving
switches, etc. That could sacrifice the credibility we have as sport pilots
to the FAA. If you really want an inflight prop, just get a private pilot
license. Or, get everyone together to start a letter writing campaign to
request the FAA allow in flight props under light sport rules. I perceive
that if enough people ask for reasonable changes in the rule, the FAA will
actually listen and possibly change them. After all, that's how the Light
Sport Aircraft and Pilot rule got this far.
Just my two cents worth...
Paul Seehafer
Kitfox IV 912ul amphib
----- Original Message -----
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Light-Sport Pilots license
> dcsfoto wrote:
>> the FAA has been ask and agrees that putting the switch in a location
>> that can only be reached on the ground is ok
>>
>> David
>
> I would be interested in seeing a source for that.
>
> The sticking point is in 14 CFR Part 1.1, where it says "Light-sport
> aircraft means an aircraft, other than a helicopter or powered-lift that,
> since its original certification, has continued to meet the
> following:...(7) A fixed or ground-adjustable propeller if a powered
> aircraft other than a powered glider."
>
> It seems pretty clear that the restriction is permanent, even if an
> aircraft is later physically brought back into LSA compliance. However,
> the phrase "since its original certification" seems to indicate that this
> restriction may be intended for certified aircraft only. I would love to
> see an authoritative (FAA) source state emphatically whether or not this
> permanent restriction also applies to amateur built experimentals. There
> are many differing opinions about this on the internet, but I have yet to
> see anything from the FAA that states the case in no uncertain terms.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134202#134202
>
>
>
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: Bunches of stuff |
Herbert.... I am thinking of adding Marvel to my 582 operation, are
you using straight Marvel in the injection system or are you adding
it to your regular injection oil? If so in what percentage?
Jim
Kitfox 2, 582,
1100+ hrs
Calgary AB
On 15-Sep-07, at 3:59 PM, Herbert Doud wrote:
>
> Any way, I changed the 582 over to oil injection and am using the
> Marvel in the oil injection system and quit putting Marvel in the
> ATV. It's been several months now and no more fuel leakage from
> either engine.
>
>
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: Exhaust parts 582 |
Simple mod has turned successful so far .
Added in some the the header that was chopped off by Skystar.
Net results were 200 - 300 RPM increase at idle, static and wide open in level
flight. I can only assume that a few extra ponies have been had.
I have no re-pitched and at the same fuel flow as pre exhaust change I am cruise
3 to 5 mph faster. I just changed props from my seaplane prop ( warp 3 blade
68" wide tip ) to a IVO medium 72" 2 blade. Both seem to be about the same
92 to 93 @ 6000 rpm at 20 liters/hour and this is with the King Fox 21 "
x 12 tires that cost about 2 to 3 mph. Surely will wheel pants and smaller
tires the 582 fox would see over 100 mph. Temps 54F now when i last flew and
was seeing 1200 fpm climb on average.
So if you want the extra HP this is a easy mod to do . I am not done yet either
as I am going to try to lengthen it further but I think the change will be
minimal. But will not know till I try it.
--------
Rotax Dealer, Ontario Canada
Flying Videos and Kitfox Info
http://www.cfisher.com/
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134656#134656
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: Bunches of stuff |
Can i ask why would you want to add it ?
I run easy past 300 hours using Bombardier XPS mineral oil and have no reason to
need it so far ?
--------
Rotax Dealer, Ontario Canada
Flying Videos and Kitfox Info
http://www.cfisher.com/
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134659#134659
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 |
|
Hi all,
Just came back from my second flight in which I had planned to do a
couple stalls and verify the limited information I had gathered the day
before. Today's flight was much more relaxed compared the the initial
flight 1 day earlier. The airplane is a joy to fly and I'm really looking
forward to these next flight tests.
I have a 68" IVO in-flight adjustable prop which I set to 5500 static
rpms before takeoff which gave me about 5700 in the climb. These first 2
takeoffs I climbed out at 70-75 mph and 650 fpm. I have not retracted the
gear yet so it should be capable of a little better climb. CG was about
10.8 and weight was around 1400 lbs. It is cool here today with morning
temps near 40f. I need to do something with the oil temps since I was
unable to get them above 180 even in the climb. I leveled off about 3500
msl with 5000 rpms and 31" MP (75 %) and was showing 82 mph +/-. 65 % was
only 3 mph slower so the plane really needs to be cleaned up. (Gear still
has not been retracted).
I'll post more later but overall the flight characteristics are great and
the landings have been 2 of my best. I notch of flaps on both landings only
because the nose seemed too high without.
Kevin Cozik
series 6-7
rotax 914 turbo
Czech floats
Lansing Michigan
----- Original Message -----
From: "darinh" <gerns25@netscape.net>
Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2007 10:27 PM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: It flys!
>
> That's great Kevin! I have seen pics of his Fox and it is got to be one
> of the best looking I have seen! If you get a chance, post some of your
> preliminary performance numbers as I am sure many would be interested. As
> you know, I am especially interested seeing that I am working on a 7 and
> installing the 914. By the way, I plan on giving you a call one of these
> nights to discuss your engine and avionics installation. Again, way to go
> on the maiden flight!
>
> --------
> Darin Hawkes
> Series 7 (under Construction)
> 914 Turbo
> Ogden, Utah
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134609#134609
>
>
>
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 |
|
Pictures! Pictures! Jeff Classic IV
----- Original Message -----
From: W Duke
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2007 12:40 PM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: It flys!
congrats. Have fun.
Kevin Cozik <Kcozik@cablespeed.com> wrote:
Hello everyone,
Just a quick note to let you know Kitfox series 6, N262SC took to
the air at about 8 am this morning for its maiden flight. It flew great
with no changes needed in rigging! More later.
Kevin Cozik
Series 6-7
Rotax 914 turbo
Czech amphibs
Lansing Michigan
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: Broken tailwheel spring- revelation |
Michel-
When you speak of a "single blade", and later adding a "second
blade", are you counting all the blades/leafs (that's what they call
'em Stateside)? I ask because I also broke the main leaf in my
original 2-leaf spring, and replaced it with a three leaf
spring...that is: two main leafs that have bolt holes in each end,
and a helper leaf that only has a bolt hole where it attaches to the
fuselage. Now understand that I'm talking about the steel leaf
springs that measure 1/4" (~6mm?) each, not the thick aluminum one
piece spring.
With the newer design 3-leaf spring (available from John McBean)
which consists of the aforementioned 2 main leafs and one helper or
booster leaf, breaking a main leaf won't normally cause any dropping
of the fuse on the ground, and subsequent damage to the aircraft,
because normally only one of those main leafs will break at a
time...unless you're having a REALLY bad day. : )
On Sep 16, 2007, at 3:51 AM, Michel Verheughe wrote:
>
> On Sep 15, 2007, at 9:12 PM, Jack L Bell wrote:
>> It finally happened- I broke my tailwheel spring
>> after a landing.
>
> I did the same thing last year, Jack. My single blade tailwheel
> spring gave up after about 950 landings. It was on asphalt and the
> plane went in a 270 degrees ground loop. Luckily the speed was so
> low that it went well. I have now two blades on my tailwheel spring.
>
> I see your point with the Avid rudder that is more curved and
> doesn't rest on the ground in the event of the lost of the
> tailwheel. I guess the Kitfox is more squared because Denney and
> later, Skystar, tried to increase as much as possible the rudder
> authority with surface.
>
> Anyway, I also needed some repair to the rudder as it had been
> shaved by the asphalt. I repaired it with glassfiber, epoxy, a
> piece of fabric and paint. It is not a structural part of the
> aircraft so I guess it should be good enough.
>
> Geir-Olav, if you read this: Remember to add a second blade to your
> tailwheel spring on your model IV!
>
> Cheers,
> Michel Verheughe
> Norway
> Kitfox 3 - Jabiru 2200
>
>
Lynn Matteson
Grass Lake, Michigan
Kitfox IV Speedster w/Jabiru 2200
flying w/400+ hrs
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: Landing in Treetops |
I have to agree with him.. The only alternative I had was to stall the
plane in a tight turn from 300 feet.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michel Verheughe" <michel@online.no>
Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 7:29 AM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Landing in Treetops
>
> On Sep 16, 2007, at 1:48 PM, Marwynne Kuhn wrote:
>> Michel
>> I am not sure what you are talking about. What did the German
>> instructor say ?
>
> Last year, I was at a fly-in for PocketFMS in Germany. That evening we had
> a German instructor/inspector ... sorry, I don't remember all his
> qualifications (they were impressive) but he was very friendly and his
> safety lecture was very interesting. Anyway, he took the example of an
> actual airfield and discussed the possible recoveries of an engine stop at
> climb out. In the course of that, he made it clear that in many cases it
> would be better to land on the top of the trees in a nearby park, than
> trying to do a desperate manoeuvre to get back on the runway. He said:
> "Once the proverbial s**t hits the fan, your aircraft is only a pillow
> between you and mother earth. Landing on the trees may be the best
> alternative to preserve your and your passengers' life."
> To be true, his example airfield was close to a town with no open fields
> nearby. The alternatives were: back to the runway or airfield area, in the
> buildings, or in the park.
>
> Cheers,
> Michel Verheughe
> Norway
> Kitfox 3 - Jabiru 2200
>
> do not archive
>
>
>
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: Broken tailwheel spring- revelation |
Hello Lynn,
On Sep 16, 2007, at 6:53 PM, Lynn Matteson wrote:
> When you speak of a "single blade", and later adding a "second blade",
> are you counting all the blades/leafs (that's what they call 'em
> Stateside)?
Yep, that's what I meant. Speaking foreign languages can sometimes be
very funny. The first price, I think, goes to my Norwegian wife who
said, many years ago: public hair, when she meant: pubic hair! :-)
Yes I was talking about the 1/4" steel leaf. I had only the main one.
Now I have a new main one and a "helper," as you call it. I was also
told that John had three leafs springs. But I figured out that if I
could do 950 landings on a single one, I can do with two leafs for a
while. The think is: when I do the weight and balance on my model 3, I
have only 18 kg (40 pounds) on the tail. Many of the newer models are
much heavier than that.
But you've got a good point there, if I am to break my main leaf now,
the plane will rest on the 'helper' and the rudder will be safe.
Cheers,
Michel Verheughe
Kitfox 3 - Jabiru 2200
Do not archive
Message 18
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Way to go Kevin!! Keep sending the stats and pictures when you get em. Always great
to hear of another birth.
Dan B Mesa, AZ
KF-IV 912s Building
http://www.azshowersolutions.com/Build1.html
Kevin Cozik <Kcozik@cablespeed.com> wrote:
Hi all,
Just came back from my second flight in which I had planned to do a
couple stalls and verify the limited information I had gathered the day
before. Today's flight was much more relaxed compared the the initial
flight 1 day earlier. The airplane is a joy to fly and I'm really looking
forward to these next flight tests.
I have a 68" IVO in-flight adjustable prop which I set to 5500 static
rpms before takeoff which gave me about 5700 in the climb. These first 2
takeoffs I climbed out at 70-75 mph and 650 fpm. I have not retracted the
gear yet so it should be capable of a little better climb. CG was about
10.8 and weight was around 1400 lbs. It is cool here today with morning
temps near 40f. I need to do something with the oil temps since I was
unable to get them above 180 even in the climb. I leveled off about 3500
msl with 5000 rpms and 31" MP (75 %) and was showing 82 mph +/-. 65 % was
only 3 mph slower so the plane really needs to be cleaned up. (Gear still
has not been retracted).
I'll post more later but overall the flight characteristics are great and
the landings have been 2 of my best. I notch of flaps on both landings only
because the nose seemed too high without.
Kevin Cozik
series 6-7
rotax 914 turbo
Czech floats
Lansing Michigan
----- Original Message -----
From: "darinh"
Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2007 10:27 PM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: It flys!
>
> That's great Kevin! I have seen pics of his Fox and it is got to be one
> of the best looking I have seen! If you get a chance, post some of your
> preliminary performance numbers as I am sure many would be interested. As
> you know, I am especially interested seeing that I am working on a 7 and
> installing the 914. By the way, I plan on giving you a call one of these
> nights to discuss your engine and avionics installation. Again, way to go
> on the maiden flight!
>
> --------
> Darin Hawkes
> Series 7 (under Construction)
> 914 Turbo
> Ogden, Utah
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134609#134609
>
>
>
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: Broken tailwheel spring- revelation |
Michel,
Not so, The tailwheel will be bouncing around and likely go through your rudder.
Ask me how i know
I have 3 leafs on mine now and hopefully they will have a good long life. .
> But you've got a good point there, if I am to break my main leaf now,
> the plane will rest on the 'helper' and the rudder will be safe.
>
--------
Rotax Dealer, Ontario Canada
Flying Videos and Kitfox Info
http://www.cfisher.com/
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134714#134714
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 |
|
Congrats Kevin! I know it was a long haul on that project, but it sounds
like all your hard work is paying off now.
Keep us posted on future results and specs. And yes, pictures!!!
Especially once you start doing your water work! I'm very curious how those
1650 floats work out (I'm in the process of building production prototype
1350 and 1500 amphibs for our planes, and am gathering all good info I can
lay my hands on regarding float performance and mods).
Paul Seehafer
Kitfox IV 912ul amphib
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kevin Cozik" <Kcozik@cablespeed.com>
Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 10:52 AM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: It flys!
>
> Hi all,
> Just came back from my second flight in which I had planned to do a
> couple stalls and verify the limited information I had gathered the day
> before. Today's flight was much more relaxed compared the the initial
> flight 1 day earlier. The airplane is a joy to fly and I'm really looking
> forward to these next flight tests.
> I have a 68" IVO in-flight adjustable prop which I set to 5500 static
> rpms before takeoff which gave me about 5700 in the climb. These first 2
> takeoffs I climbed out at 70-75 mph and 650 fpm. I have not retracted the
> gear yet so it should be capable of a little better climb. CG was about
> 10.8 and weight was around 1400 lbs. It is cool here today with morning
> temps near 40f. I need to do something with the oil temps since I was
> unable to get them above 180 even in the climb. I leveled off about 3500
> msl with 5000 rpms and 31" MP (75 %) and was showing 82 mph +/-. 65 %
> was only 3 mph slower so the plane really needs to be cleaned up. (Gear
> still has not been retracted).
> I'll post more later but overall the flight characteristics are great
> and the landings have been 2 of my best. I notch of flaps on both
> landings only because the nose seemed too high without.
> Kevin Cozik
> series 6-7
> rotax 914 turbo
> Czech floats
> Lansing Michigan
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "darinh" <gerns25@netscape.net>
> To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2007 10:27 PM
> Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: It flys!
>
>
>>
>> That's great Kevin! I have seen pics of his Fox and it is got to be one
>> of the best looking I have seen! If you get a chance, post some of your
>> preliminary performance numbers as I am sure many would be interested.
>> As you know, I am especially interested seeing that I am working on a 7
>> and installing the 914. By the way, I plan on giving you a call one of
>> these nights to discuss your engine and avionics installation. Again,
>> way to go on the maiden flight!
>>
>> --------
>> Darin Hawkes
>> Series 7 (under Construction)
>> 914 Turbo
>> Ogden, Utah
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134609#134609
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
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 |
|
Thanks for the report, Kevin and congratulations!
Fred Shiple
Series 6
Bilmar amphibs
Toledo OH
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: Exhaust parts 582 |
Did you leave the elbow bend tight as modified by Kitfox? How about a
picture? I would love a few more ponies.
Dwight Purdy
Model ll (503)
At 07:44 AM 9/16/2007 -0700, you wrote:
>
>Simple mod has turned successful so far .
>Added in some the the header that was chopped off by Skystar.
>
>Net results were 200 - 300 RPM increase at idle, static and wide open in
>level flight. I can only assume that a few extra ponies have been had.
>
>I have no re-pitched and at the same fuel flow as pre exhaust change I am
>cruise 3 to 5 mph faster. I just changed props from my seaplane prop (
>warp 3 blade 68" wide tip ) to a IVO medium 72" 2 blade. Both seem to be
>about the same 92 to 93 @ 6000 rpm at 20 liters/hour and this is with
>the King Fox 21 " x 12 tires that cost about 2 to 3 mph. Surely will
>wheel pants and smaller tires the 582 fox would see over 100
>mph. Temps 54F now when i last flew and was seeing 1200 fpm climb on
>average.
>
>So if you want the extra HP this is a easy mod to do . I am not done
>yet either as I am going to try to lengthen it further but I think the
>change will be minimal. But will not know till I try it.
>
>--------
>Rotax Dealer, Ontario Canada
>Flying Videos and Kitfox Info
>http://www.cfisher.com/
>
>
>Read this topic online here:
>
>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134656#134656
>
>
>--
>9/15/2007 7:54 PM
--
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: Landing in Treetops |
Michel,
One would think it could be assumed everyone will fly the airplane in the
case of an emergency. But unfortunately that isn't the case. The accident
records will prove that many don't fly the airplane as they should in the
event of an inflight emergency. Our FAA reminds us of this at safety
seminars, occasionally showing us pictures of accident scenes where the
pilot lost control before the crash, when there were no obvious reasons he
couldn't have just glided it in.
I don't disagree with you, or the german safety expert. I was just
restating thoughts and opinions from other safety experts that might make
pilots more aware of the potential pitfalls of landing in the tree tops. I
agree your flying environment doesn't provide for many options. But most of
us aren't subjected to terrain like that on a regular basis. So I didn't
want pilots here thinking landing in the trees is pretty much a safe
bet,when they might have other (better?) options possibly.
And fwiw, I agree 100% that a light aircraft has a much higher chance of
survivabilty than would a heavier one. Especially if built out of chromoly
steel like our Kitfoxes are!
Paul Seehafer
Kitfox IV 912ul Amphib
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michel Verheughe" <michel@online.no>
Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 7:45 AM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Landing in Treetops
>
> On Sep 16, 2007, at 2:17 PM, Paul Seehafer wrote:
>> So I am a firm believer in "Fly The Airplane" as far into the crash as
>> possible.
>
> Of course, Paul, this is also my (and everyone else's, I guess) opinion.
> The question is: What are the alternatives? In the Norwegian mountains
> there are two: Forest or solid granite rock. I'd go for the softer one.
>
> Years ago, a Japanese sailor wanted to sail from Japan to the US in a 19
> feet sailboat. He had to launch his boat at night, with no witnesses,
> because the authorities refused to see him taking the risks. A few weeks
> later he was in a bad storm alone in the Pacific. Feeling depressed, he
> looked through the porthole and saw ... a light bulb floating! Probably
> coming from rubbish thrown overboard by a passing vessel. Then he thought:
> My tiny sailboat is fragile but entirely watertight, just like that light
> bulb. If it can survive this storm, so can I! ... and he did since I read
> his book! :-)
> As I have sailed a lot, I kept remembering that water (at least, at that
> speed) is too soft to damage a very light boat (mine is 27 feet long) that
> will float like a cork. As long as one stays away from the nasty rocks
> along the shore, it's just a matter of waiting.
> Which brings me back to the beginning of the discussion: I feel that a
> light aircraft doing a somewhat soft landing, stands a better chance of
> survival than a heavier one.
>
> Cheers,
> Michel Verheughe
> Norway
> Kitfox 3 - Jabiru 2200
>
> Do not archive
>
>
>
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 |
|
Dave:
Plugs were running clean and without carbon at 50 hours. Gap was still
at 18 thousands. Changed them anyway. Using NGK BR8ES plugs.
So far as the combustion chamber being as clean as the plugs, .....I
dunno...I have a 582 bluehead with about 175 hours and haven't felt the
need to tear it down yet. Running smooth at cruise and idles smooth.
Just guessing, at this point, but hope that the chamber and rings are as
clean as the plugs. On my old 582 gray head, the plugs pretty well
matched the condition of the combustion chamber.
Herbert Doud
Kitfox IV/582
New Braunfels, Tx
*************************
Time: 03:07:07 PM PST US
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Bunches of stuff
From: "dave" <dave@cfisher.com>
How many hours do you get out of your 582 plugs by using Marvel oil ?
how do you know your 582 is clean inside ?
Dave
--------
Rotax Dealer, Ontario Canada
Flying Videos and Kitfox Info
http://www.cfisher.com/
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: Strut fairing questions. |
John,
Would you mind sharing what that "aerodynamic rule of thumb" is? I'm
about to start working on my 7/8" struts in the next few weeks and would
like to streamline them as well. I do know that a round tube causes a lot
of drag. Thanks.
Andy F.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of jdmcbean
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2007 11:48 AM
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Re: Strut fairing questions.
Paul,
They are a longer chord... There is an aerodynamic rule of thumb for
streamline shapes and we have tried to stay close to that.
Fly Safe !!
John & Debra McBean
208.337.5111
www.kitfoxaircraft.com
"It's not how Fast... It's how Fun!"
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of paul wilson
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 10:45 PM
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Re: Strut fairing questions.
John,
How close in the balsa compared to the old pine/fir ones used previously?
It looks like it might have a slightly longer chord?
Thanks, Paul
=========================
At 01:35 PM 9/13/2007, you wrote:
>Regarding lift strut fairings...
>
>Some of you will remember the original wood style fairings.. The install
was
>fairly simple and very easy to work with even after the aircraft is flying.
>The PVC Fairings were introduced and while they offered a more true airfoil
>shape they also added significant weight. They are also very time
consuming
>to install nicely as they have a 2 ridges on each side of them that should
>be sanded down. The aluminum cuff on the end also created some challenges.
>That being said we have chosen to look back and re-introduce the wood...
>although a little different. We have chosen Balsa as the medium to use for
>several reasons.. believe it or not strength is one, ease of install and
>sanding, and the other is weight. The 2 lift struts weighed in at
almost
>14 lbs difference from the PVC to the Balsa and the Balsa is stronger.
>Speed differences between the 2 is negligible. The new Balsa fairings
>maintain the correct proportions to the diameter of the tube. We have seen
>and had reported from 8 to 14 mph difference with either style.
>
>The Strut fairings will also include the horizontal lift strut pieces as
>well for the single horizontal support tubes.
>
>We have not introduced these officially yet as we need to develop the
>installation instructions for them.. However, they are ordered and should
be
>in stock hopefully by months end.
>
>Installation is pretty straight forward. Bond, shape, seal, cover &
>paint... :)
>
>
>Fly Safe !!
>John & Debra McBean
>208.337.5111
>www.kitfoxaircraft.com
>"It's not how Fast... It's how Fun!"
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Dave G.
>Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 6:54 AM
>To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Strut fairing questions.
>
>
>I'm sure John M will answer this with the definitve answer but I think they
>now or shortly will have a similar to original wood fairing kit that will
>require glueing and covering as the originals did. I will want them sooner
>or later. The really great thing about this from my perpspective is that
>they can be cut to shorter lengths and shipped. Try that with a one piece
>plastic fairing
>
>Dave Goddard- Mod IV 1050/582
>do not archive
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "arholland" <arholland@bigriver.net>
>To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
>Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 9:04 AM
>Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Strut fairing questions.
>
>
> >
> > I am looking for strut fairings for my kitfox as well. Does Kitfox
> > aircraft have them listed on their website somewhere?
> >
> > One person in the email chain said they just snapped them on, not
> > covering, no paint, nothing. Where did you get the snap on fairings?
> >
> > --------
> > Allen Holland
> > Munford, TN
8:59 AM
8:59 AM
Message 26
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Bunches of stuff |
If the Mystery Oil is causing damage to the needle tips, I can't help but
wonder what it's doing to the inside of your fuel lines and or oil injection
lines?
Andy F.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Herbert Doud
Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2007 4:59 PM
To: Kitfox-List Digest Server
Subject: Kitfox-List: Bunches of stuff
Many thanks to all of you Kitfoxers who responded either to me directly or
to the list concerning my question as to why we Kitfoxers put the firewall
blanket on the engine side, instead of on the cabin side as do GA aircraft
manufacturers. A large number of builders who responded, have eiher done
away with the blanket or have installed it on the cabin side of the
firewall, which makes sense to this old fart.
Now to another subject. I guess everyone who messes with car and
airplane engines have heard of Marvel Mystery Oil. I'v used it off and on
for 50 years.
I bought an ATV sometime back and through short trip useage and many
starts, the spark plug was carboning up and fouling. Most of my use with
Marvel, was in the engine oil, for break-ins and hard useage. On the
container Marvel is also suggested for the fuel, for upper end lube and
cleaning of the cylinders.
I tried it on the ATV and for a coupla weeks, using the recommended amount
in the fuel and it worked super. The plug cleaned up, starts were easier
and it idled better........But, I started getting a gasoline puddle under my
ATV, coming out of the carb overflow.
Bunches of work, but I pulled the carb, looked at the float needle and it
had turned gummy and was leaking. So I installed a new needle and put the
works back together. A week or so later, I started getting a large fuel
puddle under the ATV again.
Earlier, it had worked so well, before getting fuel leakage under the ATV,
I also had put in in my gas for the 582 on my Kitfox. Worked great there
too, keeping clean plugs and smooth idling.
I hadn't had the plane out in a coupla weeks and when I saw the gas puddle
under the ATV, I hobbled out to the folded wing, mini hanger, checked the
carbs for leaking and sure enough, there was a large gas puddle on the floor
under the engine. I was mixing the plane gas with the premix oil and
adding the suggested amount of Marvel Mystery Oil.
I pulled both carbs and checked the rubber tips on the float needles and
they were deteriorating.
Not being a real fast thinker, I guess, I cussed to myself, about the poor
quality of tips on the needle valves and how things just weren't up to the
standards of earlier years.
I replaced the Bing needles, and made no changes in the Marvel oil as it
was sure working good in cleaning up the combustion chanmbers.
A week or so later, I had another gas puddle under the plane and the ATV
was still leaking gas. Finally the gray mater lit up and I drained the
fuel tanks on both the plane and the ATV and again, replaced the float
needles on the 2 engines. After I'd used up all the bad words that I
learned from all the bad people I knew, I hadda start making up a whole lot
of new ones, that I'd like to pass on.... But I can't spell 'em.
Any way, I changed the 582 over to oil injection and am using the Marvel
in the oil injection system and quit putting Marvel in the ATV. It's been
several months now and no more fuel leakage from either engine.
It seems that the Marvel is a good product, if it not used where it can
come in contact with the rubber tips they are now using on the float
needles. (they all used to be brass tips) Marvel sure keeps things
cleaned up and seems to work great in the 4 cycle oil engines, But beware
of mixing with gasoline in the fuel tanks.
My ATV still fouls plugs, so I buy them buy the dozen. If anyon's
interested in some old fouled plugs to play with, I have some real cheap.
Herbert Doud
Kitfox IV/582
New Braunfels, Tx
Message 27
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Strut fairing questions. |
I have to check from Hoerners book but i think it around 4 to 1 ratio
--------
Rotax Dealer, Ontario Canada
Flying Videos and Kitfox Info
http://www.cfisher.com/
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134742#134742
Message 28
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Exhaust parts 582 |
Well the Y pipe is what was cut I think at Skystar as well as the 90 Elbow but
I added mine to the elbow. Your elbow will be near the cowl and might burn
a hole in it but a air outlet could be added there or just a bump. The muffler
will not longer be straight below the engine but on a little angle. I am
sure there is a way to alter more but I have not spent the time on it yet.
Basically I just added 1 1/2 inches to the header directly onto the elbow on the
top of it. I could have added to the y pipe but it seemed easier to do it
this way.
Just out for a 1 hour flight with a friend , I have on the IVO medium right now
and it worked well about 4 mph faster that without the exhaust mod.
Now all we need to do it put a different pipe on it and see another 5 or 10 hp
:)
--------
Rotax Dealer, Ontario Canada
Flying Videos and Kitfox Info
http://www.cfisher.com/
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134777#134777
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/8_174.jpg
Message 29
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Herbert , Thanks for the info.
I have never needed it in over 35 years of 2 strokes.
Did you know it made of Stoddard solvent, Mineral oil and Lard . ?
I get 150 hours out of my 582 on BR8ES solid tips that are pre gapped .018 new. Pics here http://www.cfisher.com/152hournkg.html
--------
Rotax Dealer, Ontario Canada
Flying Videos and Kitfox Info
http://www.cfisher.com/
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134778#134778
Message 30
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: --Subject:: Change-Carb Boots - 912 UL |
The Lockwood number for the new carb boots/sockets is 267 788 (Carb Socket,
912/912S/914, new style w/8mm spacer). Cost from Lockwood is $94.75 each. You
should ask them how often to change.
Stan Specht
Kitfox Model IV Speedster "Columbine"
Denver, Colorado
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! --
|