---------------------------------------------------------- Kitfox-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Tue 09/25/07: 12 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 09:04 AM - Re: Avid Mk-IV project on Barnstormers (dholly) 2. 01:00 PM - Re: NSI Isolation Module replacement (Peter Graichen) 3. 01:13 PM - Tailwheel bolt went off.... and the rest (Michel Dierick) 4. 01:39 PM - Re: Tailwheel bolt went off.... and the rest (Michel Verheughe) 5. 03:52 PM - Re: Re: East Coast Kitfox Gathering! (RAY Gignac) 6. 04:27 PM - Re: czech floats (Paul Seehafer) 7. 05:49 PM - Re: Tailwheel bolt went off.... and the rest (dave) 8. 07:22 PM - Down wind Float TO (Noel Loveys) 9. 09:26 PM - Re: czech floats (john oakley) 10. 11:06 PM - Re: Re: Tailwheel bolt went off.... and the rest (Michel Verheughe) 11. 11:13 PM - Re: czech floats (Michael Laundy) 12. 11:35 PM - Re: Tailwheel bolt went off.... and the rest (Michel Dierick) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 09:04:22 AM PST US Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Avid Mk-IV project on Barnstormers From: "dholly" An update to this posting... This post/ad generated several dozen inquiries and a handful of offers. However, many, many folks have inquired whether I would sell the project WITH my new-in-crate 85hp Jab2200, Jab/Mk-IV engine mount and Jab cowl. I originally intended to keep these items for another project currently in the works. However, now that I've decided to put that project directly on floats, I have emailed all responding to the ad that I am open to offers on the entire turnkey 'Javid' Mk-IV project. Figured it was only fair to give the heads up to members here before revising the Barnstormers listing or posting up on FleaBay. Contact off list please if interested, thanks. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=136353#136353 ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 01:00:48 PM PST US From: "Peter Graichen" Subject: Kitfox-List: RE: NSI Isolation Module replacement Hello Harold: About a year ago I notified the list that I had developed a direct replacement for the NSI ignition isolation modules, and that I could build a batch of twelve, if there would be enough interest. There was and I did. However they are all sold and I have no more. If there were enough interest to justify building another batch of twelve (or more), I would be willing to do so. I sold them for $ 450.00 each, not including shipping and COD charges. I assume that I can still purchase the necessary required components for the same price as before, but am not certain. Anybody interested, please let me know. Peter Graichen http:/home.neo.rr.com/n10pg/kitfox.htm ________________________________ From: Harold Lanfear [mailto:hlanfear@verizon.net] Sent: Tuesday, 25 September, 2007 14:30 Subject: NSI Isolation Module replacement Peter, I saw a note on the NSI Yahoo group that said you built and sold replacements for the NSI isolation modules. I have an NSI EA-81 in my Kitfox with 775 hours on it and pretty sure I'm having a failure (same symptoms as the first time, just prior to NSI going under). If you are still building them, I would buy at least two and replace both modules. Thanks, Harold Lanfear West Grove, PA ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 01:13:38 PM PST US Subject: Kitfox-List: Tailwheel bolt went off.... and the rest From: "Michel Dierick" Hi everone, When I made my landing sunday, I noticed I could not steer my Kitfox either left or right and was unable to vacate the runway. So, I stopped the engine, looked behind and saw the front bolt of the tailwheelspring had broken. Of course, the rudder rested on the tailwheel, causing some very little damage there. I was horrified when I made a closer inspection with my camera. The picture showed that not only the bolt was broken but a piece of the tubing was also broken off. I have no idea how this tube was exactly, so can anybody send me some good clear pictures of this tail section (before covering) so that I can see how the fuselage should be normally ? Many thanks in advance. -------- Flying, yes, but fly safely Michel "TheDailyFly" Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=136409#136409 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/dscn2024_25percent_417.jpg http://forums.matronics.com//files/dscn2027_25percent_181.jpg http://forums.matronics.com//files/dscn2022_25percent_111.jpg ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 01:39:58 PM PST US From: Michel Verheughe Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Tailwheel bolt went off.... and the rest > From: Michel Dierick [michel.dierick@skynet.be] > So, I stopped the engine, looked behind and saw the front bolt of the > tailwheelspring had broken. Wow! That's really strange, Michel! I can't imagine how that bolt could break. Was it pulled through? Sheared? How about the bracket and the two bolts that hold the spring in place? Do you think it happened by an up-down force or by a side force? Sorry, I can't help you with the inside view, I didn't built my aircraft myself, I am just puzzled but the breaking of that bolt. I didn't think it was possible under normal circumstances. But then ... I still have lot to learn. Cheers, Michel Verheughe Norway Kitfox 3 - Jabiru 2200
________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 03:52:17 PM PST US From: RAY Gignac Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Re: East Coast Kitfox Gathering! I hanger my Kitfox at W00/Freeway airport located in Mitchellville Maryland . Please email me the info. Ray> Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: East Coast Kitfox Gathering!> From: pkelly20 @comcast.net> Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2007 16:59:43 -0700> To: kitfox-list@matron net>> > located at (P96) which is Jersey Shore, PA we have 2 kitfoxers ther e (1) avid and there are a few other guys not far from there that also have kitfoxes.....its a nice over 3000 ft level grass strip kept really good. N orth Central PA> just East of Lock Haven , PA (LHV) the piper cub home.and West of Williamport (IPT) hope this helps , where u located? I can email to o so as not to mess up this site. should be on my signature> > --------> Pi lotpat> Kitfox Classic IV> Jabiru 2200> Williamsport , PA> > > > > Read thi s topic online here:> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=13622 ====================> > > _________________________________________________________________ Capture your memories in an online journal! http://www.reallivemoms.com?ocid=TXT_TAGHM&loc=us ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 04:27:04 PM PST US From: "Paul Seehafer" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: czech floats Greg, I have 25 years of float flying experience, with a total of 2200 hrs in seaplanes. 1300 hours of that seaplane time has been in various light sport type aircraft. I have a bit more than 30 hours in an amphibious Czech float equipped Rans S-7 with a Rotax 100 hp 912s for power. Aircraft empty weight on wheels around 670 lbs, and right close to 900 on floats. The floats are the 4 wheel option 1150/1200a amphibs. The floats work, but lack forward floatation, as well as total floatation for the Rans (note how low the spreader bars are to the water in the attached picture. Also, the rear seat passenger weight is actually is helping keep the front of the floats up. Otherwise the bows would be plowing water over the top when idling). The landing gear has no suspension, and while the main gear does have a down lock, the nosegears are held down purely by hydraulic pressure, consequently causing concerns about gear collapse in the case of hydraulic failure, The hydraulic cyls also tend to leak when sitting with the weight of the airplane on them. The other problem with the floats is that they are approx 15 1/2 ft in length, and that causes you not to be able to rotate well without dragging the heels (which will consequently also keep you from leaving the water). This a a common problem with many older float designs as well. While a long float offers a nice ride and lots of good tracking and stability, they limit your ability to take off short because you can't rotate into a steep attitude. For those reasons I personally would always choose a short float over a long one if the floatation was similar. Oh yeah, a Rans S-7 is longer than my Kitfox IV by almost 5 ft, so the Kitfox would really suffer from not being able to rotate due to the float being so long for the airplane. The Czech floats on this Rans also only have 2 watertight compartments / pump outs. That would never pass muster for a certified float, as it puts the airplane at risk of capsizing if ever one compartment were to leak and fill with water. The good news there is that the later Czech floats are known for not leaking much water. But if you ever hit an underwater obstruction and poke a hole in your float, you have little or no reserve buoyancy with 50% of one float only left watertight. Another thing I don't like about the Czech floats is they are hydrodynamically very draggy. Example, last time I flew this Rans I was doing a downwind takeoff in a 10 mph wind and no matter what I did I couldn't get enough forward water speed to lift off. I tried everything, but finally stopped and turned into the wind and took off no problem. That whole issue is caused by too much reveted skin area causing excess water drag and limiting the ability to accelerate on the step. And being that I fly my Aerocet equipped Kitfox also, I guess I am spoiled as downwind takeoffs are never a problem, even though I have 20 hp less than the Rans, and less wing area. The Aerocets having a smooth fluted bottom have let me acclerate easily for a takeoff at gross weight in a 25+ mph downwind before (ps - don't try this at home - I've been flying floats for a lot of years... Go into the wind like our flight instructors tell us to). I also don't like the fact that there are no storage areas in the czech floats. Ok, so what do I like about the Czech floats? Ground handling is good, and brakes work pretty good or an amphib. Water rudders are sufficiently sized, and the floats will get you off the water relatively quick as they use a pretty flat bottom. Of course, since nothing is ever free, rough water is not the Czech floats forte. I currently am flying my Kitfox 912ul Model IV on Aerocet 1100 amphibs. It weighs 630 lbs on wheels and 776 on amphibs. Those floats too have a lot of issues, with underfloatation being the biggest problem, and a weak landing gear second. But other than that it is hands down the best handling float you will ever fly (I can do a 600-800 foot circular one float takeoff! Yeah, they handle that good...) Because I don't think we have a decent choice out there currently for an amphib float for our planes, I designed my own with all the features I wanted, and felt we need. I am in final design stages and will be going into production soon (has been a MUCH bigger job than I ever expected. Oh well, all good things take time they say...). I expect to have floats available 1st qtr of 2008. Pricing is targeted to compete with the Czech floats. And it will be an attractive float with a real landing gear and nice storage (read as "Not anything weird"). I will let the group know here as I progress with production. The Kitfox is one of my favorite airplanes, so I hope to set up a Kitfox as one of the first airplanes on my new floats. Paul Seehafer ps - did those Avid amphibs not work out for your? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gregory Cronin" Sent: Monday, September 24, 2007 10:46 AM Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: czech floats > > > Is anyone here flying the Czech floats currently? > > If so please let us all know what you think. > > Thanks! > gc > > 1:53 PM > > > ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 05:49:18 PM PST US Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Tailwheel bolt went off.... and the rest From: "dave" looks like it has been repaired before? Rusty too ? whats up with that ? Does not look too healthy . -------- 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=136450#136450 ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 07:22:36 PM PST US From: "Noel Loveys" Subject: Kitfox-List: Down wind Float TO Paul this is just a note on taking off into the wind. I once saw a bush pilot with a lot of experience taking off down wind with a passenger in his Super Cub. Years later I asked him about that take off not really expecting him to remember. I Still don't know if he remembered that particular take off but there was a reason for the down wind take off which I hadn't considered. His take off was in a fijord with the wind coming down the fijord. If he had taken off into the wind he would have ended up close to the walls of the fijord where there is a great possibility of strong downdrafts. I learned that day there are places where down wind take offs are advisable. Now for a question.... Is there a situation that you can think of where a down wind float landing would be advisable?? Noel > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of > Paul Seehafer > Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2007 8:52 PM > To: kitfox-list@matronics.com > Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: czech floats > > > Greg, > > I have 25 years of float flying experience, with a total of > 2200 hrs in > seaplanes. 1300 hours of that seaplane time has been in > various light sport > type aircraft. I have a bit more than 30 hours in an > amphibious Czech float > equipped Rans S-7 with a Rotax 100 hp 912s for power. > Aircraft empty weight > on wheels around 670 lbs, and right close to 900 on floats. > The floats are > the 4 wheel option 1150/1200a amphibs. > > The floats work, but lack forward floatation, as well as > total floatation > for the Rans (note how low the spreader bars are to the water in the > attached picture. Also, the rear seat passenger weight is > actually is > helping keep the front of the floats up. Otherwise the bows would be > plowing water over the top when idling). The landing gear has no > suspension, and while the main gear does have a down lock, > the nosegears are > held down purely by hydraulic pressure, consequently causing > concerns about > gear collapse in the case of hydraulic failure, The hydraulic > cyls also tend > to leak when sitting with the weight of the airplane on them. > The other > problem with the floats is that they are approx 15 1/2 ft in > length, and > that causes you not to be able to rotate well without > dragging the heels > (which will consequently also keep you from leaving the > water). This a a > common problem with many older float designs as well. While > a long float > offers a nice ride and lots of good tracking and stability, > they limit your > ability to take off short because you can't rotate into a > steep attitude. > For those reasons I personally would always choose a short > float over a long > one if the floatation was similar. Oh yeah, a Rans S-7 is > longer than my > Kitfox IV by almost 5 ft, so the Kitfox would really suffer > from not being > able to rotate due to the float being so long for the > airplane. The Czech > floats on this Rans also only have 2 watertight compartments > / pump outs. > That would never pass muster for a certified float, as it > puts the airplane > at risk of capsizing if ever one compartment were to leak and > fill with > water. The good news there is that the later Czech floats > are known for not > leaking much water. But if you ever hit an underwater > obstruction and poke > a hole in your float, you have little or no reserve buoyancy > with 50% of one > float only left watertight. > > Another thing I don't like about the Czech floats is they are > hydrodynamically very draggy. Example, last time I flew this > Rans I was > doing a downwind takeoff in a 10 mph wind and no matter what I did I > couldn't get enough forward water speed to lift off. I tried > everything, > but finally stopped and turned into the wind and took off no > problem. That > whole issue is caused by too much reveted skin area causing > excess water > drag and limiting the ability to accelerate on the step. And > being that I > fly my Aerocet equipped Kitfox also, I guess I am spoiled as downwind > takeoffs are never a problem, even though I have 20 hp less > than the Rans, > and less wing area. The Aerocets having a smooth fluted > bottom have let me > acclerate easily for a takeoff at gross weight in a 25+ mph > downwind before > (ps - don't try this at home - I've been flying floats for a > lot of years... > Go into the wind like our flight instructors tell us to). I > also don't like > the fact that there are no storage areas in the czech floats. > > Ok, so what do I like about the Czech floats? Ground > handling is good, and > brakes work pretty good or an amphib. Water rudders are > sufficiently sized, > and the floats will get you off the water relatively quick as > they use a > pretty flat bottom. Of course, since nothing is ever free, > rough water is > not the Czech floats forte. > > I currently am flying my Kitfox 912ul Model IV on Aerocet > 1100 amphibs. It > weighs 630 lbs on wheels and 776 on amphibs. Those floats too > have a lot of > issues, with underfloatation being the biggest problem, and a > weak landing > gear second. But other than that it is hands down the best > handling float > you will ever fly (I can do a 600-800 foot circular one float > takeoff! > Yeah, they handle that good...) > > Because I don't think we have a decent choice out there > currently for an > amphib float for our planes, I designed my own with all the > features I > wanted, and felt we need. I am in final design stages and > will be going > into production soon (has been a MUCH bigger job than I ever > expected. Oh > well, all good things take time they say...). I expect to > have floats > available 1st qtr of 2008. Pricing is targeted to compete > with the Czech > floats. And it will be an attractive float with a real > landing gear and nice > storage (read as "Not anything weird"). I will let the > group know here as > I progress with production. The Kitfox is one of my favorite > airplanes, so > I hope to set up a Kitfox as one of the first airplanes on my > new floats. > > Paul Seehafer > > ps - did those Avid amphibs not work out for your? > > ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 09:26:12 PM PST US From: "john oakley" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: czech floats Paul, That is the greatest report on floats I have seen. I am thinking you need to quit your job and write for a magazine. :-) Honestly that is what many of us want to hear, One persons experience and feelings. I now believe you are capable of making a great set of floats. I along with many others are waiting for more info on your system. I learned from you about how many compartments there need to be, also the storage area's is a must, I had forgotten the aerocet had them. I actually put my kids in the floats with their heads sticking out and dressed like elfs, me as santa.( they will never forgive me) Any picture of the floats you want to share. Again, thanks John Oakley Fox 4 speedster long and short 912 ul -----Original Message----- From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Paul Seehafer Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2007 5:22 PM Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: czech floats Greg, I have 25 years of float flying experience, with a total of 2200 hrs in seaplanes. 1300 hours of that seaplane time has been in various light sport type aircraft. I have a bit more than 30 hours in an amphibious Czech float equipped Rans S-7 with a Rotax 100 hp 912s for power. Aircraft empty weight on wheels around 670 lbs, and right close to 900 on floats. The floats are the 4 wheel option 1150/1200a amphibs. The floats work, but lack forward floatation, as well as total floatation for the Rans (note how low the spreader bars are to the water in the attached picture. Also, the rear seat passenger weight is actually is helping keep the front of the floats up. Otherwise the bows would be plowing water over the top when idling). The landing gear has no suspension, and while the main gear does have a down lock, the nosegears are held down purely by hydraulic pressure, consequently causing concerns about gear collapse in the case of hydraulic failure, The hydraulic cyls also tend to leak when sitting with the weight of the airplane on them. The other problem with the floats is that they are approx 15 1/2 ft in length, and that causes you not to be able to rotate well without dragging the heels (which will consequently also keep you from leaving the water). This a a common problem with many older float designs as well. While a long float offers a nice ride and lots of good tracking and stability, they limit your ability to take off short because you can't rotate into a steep attitude. For those reasons I personally would always choose a short float over a long one if the floatation was similar. Oh yeah, a Rans S-7 is longer than my Kitfox IV by almost 5 ft, so the Kitfox would really suffer from not being able to rotate due to the float being so long for the airplane. The Czech floats on this Rans also only have 2 watertight compartments / pump outs. That would never pass muster for a certified float, as it puts the airplane at risk of capsizing if ever one compartment were to leak and fill with water. The good news there is that the later Czech floats are known for not leaking much water. But if you ever hit an underwater obstruction and poke a hole in your float, you have little or no reserve buoyancy with 50% of one float only left watertight. Another thing I don't like about the Czech floats is they are hydrodynamically very draggy. Example, last time I flew this Rans I was doing a downwind takeoff in a 10 mph wind and no matter what I did I couldn't get enough forward water speed to lift off. I tried everything, but finally stopped and turned into the wind and took off no problem. That whole issue is caused by too much reveted skin area causing excess water drag and limiting the ability to accelerate on the step. And being that I fly my Aerocet equipped Kitfox also, I guess I am spoiled as downwind takeoffs are never a problem, even though I have 20 hp less than the Rans, and less wing area. The Aerocets having a smooth fluted bottom have let me acclerate easily for a takeoff at gross weight in a 25+ mph downwind before (ps - don't try this at home - I've been flying floats for a lot of years... Go into the wind like our flight instructors tell us to). I also don't like the fact that there are no storage areas in the czech floats. Ok, so what do I like about the Czech floats? Ground handling is good, and brakes work pretty good or an amphib. Water rudders are sufficiently sized, and the floats will get you off the water relatively quick as they use a pretty flat bottom. Of course, since nothing is ever free, rough water is not the Czech floats forte. I currently am flying my Kitfox 912ul Model IV on Aerocet 1100 amphibs. It weighs 630 lbs on wheels and 776 on amphibs. Those floats too have a lot of issues, with underfloatation being the biggest problem, and a weak landing gear second. But other than that it is hands down the best handling float you will ever fly (I can do a 600-800 foot circular one float takeoff! Yeah, they handle that good...) Because I don't think we have a decent choice out there currently for an amphib float for our planes, I designed my own with all the features I wanted, and felt we need. I am in final design stages and will be going into production soon (has been a MUCH bigger job than I ever expected. Oh well, all good things take time they say...). I expect to have floats available 1st qtr of 2008. Pricing is targeted to compete with the Czech floats. And it will be an attractive float with a real landing gear and nice storage (read as "Not anything weird"). I will let the group know here as I progress with production. The Kitfox is one of my favorite airplanes, so I hope to set up a Kitfox as one of the first airplanes on my new floats. Paul Seehafer ps - did those Avid amphibs not work out for your? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gregory Cronin" Sent: Monday, September 24, 2007 10:46 AM Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: czech floats > > > Is anyone here flying the Czech floats currently? > > If so please let us all know what you think. > > Thanks! > gc > > 1:53 PM > > > ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 11:06:50 PM PST US From: Michel Verheughe Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Tailwheel bolt went off.... and the rest On Sep 26, 2007, at 2:48 AM, dave wrote: > looks like it has been repaired before? > Rusty too ? .... Okay, when I read Michel's email yesterday night, it was through my ISP web interface and I didn't see the photos (plain-text-only interface). Today, Dave's answer made me think there was some photos attached. I went to the forum.matronics.com and saw them. Yes, there is a bit of rust there but ... it brought a question to my mind. My Kitfox model 3 was delivered and built with one spring leaf that lasted about 950 landings before breaking. I have now a new main leaf and a 'helper.' I read that most people (and John sells) a three-leafs set. I see that it is what Michel has. Then I wonder. If the plane is designed for one leaf and it is later changed to three ... is it wise? I mean, three leaves doesn't reduce the load on the tail when landing or taxiing on rough surface. If it prevents the spring to break, doesn't it then invite rupture to happen somewhere else? Just wondering. Cheers, Michel Verheughe Norway Kitfox 3 - Jabiru 2200 ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 11:13:19 PM PST US From: Michael Laundy Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: czech floats Paul, That was a very interesting piece you wrote about floats. All the more so as I am planning to fit my KF3 with Aerocet amphibs this winter. If you have any tips about using the Aerocets I would sure appreciate it. Thanks Mike Laundy KF3 582 john oakley wrote: Paul, That is the greatest report on floats I have seen. I am thinking you need to quit your job and write for a magazine. :-) Honestly that is what many of us want to hear, One persons experience and feelings. I now believe you are capable of making a great set of floats. I along with many others are waiting for more info on your system. I learned from you about how many compartments there need to be, also the storage area's is a must, I had forgotten the aerocet had them. I actually put my kids in the floats with their heads sticking out and dressed like elfs, me as santa.( they will never forgive me) Any picture of the floats you want to share. Again, thanks John Oakley Fox 4 speedster long and short 912 ul -----Original Message----- From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Paul Seehafer Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2007 5:22 PM Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: czech floats Greg, I have 25 years of float flying experience, with a total of 2200 hrs in seaplanes. 1300 hours of that seaplane time has been in various light sport type aircraft. I have a bit more than 30 hours in an amphibious Czech float equipped Rans S-7 with a Rotax 100 hp 912s for power. Aircraft empty weight on wheels around 670 lbs, and right close to 900 on floats. The floats are the 4 wheel option 1150/1200a amphibs. The floats work, but lack forward floatation, as well as total floatation for the Rans (note how low the spreader bars are to the water in the attached picture. Also, the rear seat passenger weight is actually is helping keep the front of the floats up. Otherwise the bows would be plowing water over the top when idling). The landing gear has no suspension, and while the main gear does have a down lock, the nosegears are held down purely by hydraulic pressure, consequently causing concerns about gear collapse in the case of hydraulic failure, The hydraulic cyls also tend to leak when sitting with the weight of the airplane on them. The other problem with the floats is that they are approx 15 1/2 ft in length, and that causes you not to be able to rotate well without dragging the heels (which will consequently also keep you from leaving the water). This a a common problem with many older float designs as well. While a long float offers a nice ride and lots of good tracking and stability, they limit your ability to take off short because you can't rotate into a steep attitude. For those reasons I personally would always choose a short float over a long one if the floatation was similar. Oh yeah, a Rans S-7 is longer than my Kitfox IV by almost 5 ft, so the Kitfox would really suffer from not being able to rotate due to the float being so long for the airplane. The Czech floats on this Rans also only have 2 watertight compartments / pump outs. That would never pass muster for a certified float, as it puts the airplane at risk of capsizing if ever one compartment were to leak and fill with water. The good news there is that the later Czech floats are known for not leaking much water. But if you ever hit an underwater obstruction and poke a hole in your float, you have little or no reserve buoyancy with 50% of one float only left watertight. Another thing I don't like about the Czech floats is they are hydrodynamically very draggy. Example, last time I flew this Rans I was doing a downwind takeoff in a 10 mph wind and no matter what I did I couldn't get enough forward water speed to lift off. I tried everything, but finally stopped and turned into the wind and took off no problem. That whole issue is caused by too much reveted skin area causing excess water drag and limiting the ability to accelerate on the step. And being that I fly my Aerocet equipped Kitfox also, I guess I am spoiled as downwind takeoffs are never a problem, even though I have 20 hp less than the Rans, and less wing area. The Aerocets having a smooth fluted bottom have let me acclerate easily for a takeoff at gross weight in a 25+ mph downwind before (ps - don't try this at home - I've been flying floats for a lot of years... Go into the wind like our flight instructors tell us to). I also don't like the fact that there are no storage areas in the czech floats. Ok, so what do I like about the Czech floats? Ground handling is good, and brakes work pretty good or an amphib. Water rudders are sufficiently sized, and the floats will get you off the water relatively quick as they use a pretty flat bottom. Of course, since nothing is ever free, rough water is not the Czech floats forte. I currently am flying my Kitfox 912ul Model IV on Aerocet 1100 amphibs. It weighs 630 lbs on wheels and 776 on amphibs. Those floats too have a lot of issues, with underfloatation being the biggest problem, and a weak landing gear second. But other than that it is hands down the best handling float you will ever fly (I can do a 600-800 foot circular one float takeoff! Yeah, they handle that good...) Because I don't think we have a decent choice out there currently for an amphib float for our planes, I designed my own with all the features I wanted, and felt we need. I am in final design stages and will be going into production soon (has been a MUCH bigger job than I ever expected. Oh well, all good things take time they say...). I expect to have floats available 1st qtr of 2008. Pricing is targeted to compete with the Czech floats. And it will be an attractive float with a real landing gear and nice storage (read as "Not anything weird"). I will let the group know here as I progress with production. The Kitfox is one of my favorite airplanes, so I hope to set up a Kitfox as one of the first airplanes on my new floats. Paul Seehafer ps - did those Avid amphibs not work out for your? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gregory Cronin" Sent: Monday, September 24, 2007 10:46 AM Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: czech floats > > > Is anyone here flying the Czech floats currently? > > If so please let us all know what you think. > > Thanks! > gc > > 1:53 PM > > > --------------------------------- For ideas on reducing your carbon footprint visit Yahoo! For Good this month. ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 11:35:43 PM PST US Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Tailwheel bolt went off.... and the rest From: "Michel Dierick" Michel, You could have a point there. A other piece I want to change is the tail wheel self. This is for the moment one of plain rubber/plastic, anyhow, very hard and absolutely not chock-absorbing at all. I already decided to change this in a air-chamber like the one on my glider, but this is only a minor problem now. I'm afraid I will have to open the rear fuselage for the repair. That's why I'd like to have some pictures of the tail section before covering. Off-topic I'm in Gent next week, I'll send you the pictures of the "Rue des deux ponts - tweebruggenstraat" -------- Flying, yes, but fly safely Michel "TheDailyFly" Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=136495#136495 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Other Matronics Email List Services ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Post A New Message kitfox-list@matronics.com UN/SUBSCRIBE http://www.matronics.com/subscription List FAQ http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/Kitfox-List.htm Web Forum Interface To Lists http://forums.matronics.com Matronics List Wiki http://wiki.matronics.com Full Archive Search Engine http://www.matronics.com/search 7-Day List Browse http://www.matronics.com/browse/kitfox-list Browse Digests http://www.matronics.com/digest/kitfox-list Browse Other Lists http://www.matronics.com/browse Live Online Chat! http://www.matronics.com/chat Archive Downloading http://www.matronics.com/archives Photo Share http://www.matronics.com/photoshare Other Email Lists http://www.matronics.com/emaillists Contributions http://www.matronics.com/contribution ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.