Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:50 AM - Kitfox on Google Alert (Michel Verheughe)
2. 05:18 AM - Re: Boneyard (Mike)
3. 07:06 AM - Kitfox vs. Van's RV (darinh)
4. 08:14 AM - Kitfox and Floats for sale (fox5flyer)
5. 08:14 AM - Re: Kitfox vs. Van's RV (Tom Jones)
6. 09:33 AM - Re: Kitfox vs. Van's RV (kerrjohna@comcast.net)
7. 09:42 AM - Re: Kitfox on Google Alert (wingnut)
8. 10:05 AM - Re: Kitfox vs. Van's RV (wingnut)
9. 11:22 AM - Re: Kitfox vs. Van's RV (dave)
10. 12:27 PM - Re: Kitfox vs. Van's RV (Lowell Fitt)
11. 12:50 PM - Re: Kitfox vs. Van's RV (wingnut)
12. 01:02 PM - Re: Kitfox vs. Van's RV vs Hatz (kitfoxjunky)
13. 01:32 PM - 1 line drawing (Glenn Horne)
14. 02:06 PM - Re: Kitfox vs. Van's RV (darinh)
15. 03:02 PM - Re: 1 line drawing (kirk hull)
16. 03:34 PM - Re: 1 line drawing (Marin Streeter)
17. 03:46 PM - Re: 1 line drawing (GONER752@AOL.COM)
18. 03:49 PM - Re: Kitfox vs. Van's RV (RRTRACK@aol.com)
19. 04:01 PM - Re: Kitfox with radio full of static (debrun26@juno.com)
20. 04:10 PM - =?UTF-8?Q?Re:_Re:__1_line_drawing? (=?UTF-8?Q?Mario?=)
21. 04:11 PM - =?UTF-8?Q?Re:_Re:__1_line_drawing? (=?UTF-8?Q?Mario?=)
22. 04:13 PM - Re: Kitfox vs. Van's RV (wingnut)
23. 04:15 PM - Re: 1 line drawing (Mike Crutchlow)
24. 04:19 PM - Re: Kitfox vs. Van's RV (wingnut)
25. 05:17 PM - Re: Re: Kitfox vs. Van's RV (RRTRACK@AOL.COM)
26. 05:52 PM - Re: Re: Kitfox vs. Van's RV (Steve Shinabery)
27. 06:22 PM - Re: Re: Kitfox vs. Van's RV, Comment (Noel Loveys)
28. 06:53 PM - Re: Kitfox vs. Van's RV (wingnut)
29. 07:07 PM - Re: Kitfox vs. Van's RV, Comment (wingnut)
30. 09:27 PM - Re: Kitfox vs. Van's RV (Michael Gibbs)
31. 09:33 PM - Re: Re: Kitfox vs. Van's RV (Michael Gibbs)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Kitfox on Google Alert |
For a few years now, I have the keyword 'Kitfox' on Google Alert. Here
is what I received today:
http://www.jacksonville.com/tu-online/stories/102407/met_211603451.shtml
It looks like it went well for the pilot. Note the fact that he landed
between two trees and missed the wings. I always thought that if I had
no other alternative, it would be wise to aim between two trees in
order to remove the wings and the fuel tanks, thus eliminating the
danger of fire. Any thoughts about that, guys?
Cheers,
Michel Verheughe
Norway
Kitfox 3 - Jabiru 2200
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 |
|
Lowell,
As many others, I have been so very glad that the outcome of your
accident was, in the end, as positive as it was. All the prayers
were answered, I would say!
Thought you and others might be interested to know about my KitFox
II. I am in the midst of rebuilding it. The previous owner was
involved in a departure stall, and suffered a very hard landing as a
result. He too walked away from the accident. The front wing spars
were destroyed, and the wing tips as well. The fuselage was actually
bent, and one of the landing gear legs was destroyed. The motor
mount was bent, and the prop strike destroyed the prop, of course.
The ability of the aircraft to absorb the punishment, and yet have
the pilot walk away from the accident was amazing. As I rebuild the
aircraft, I find few opportunities to make it better structurally
(I'm a mechanical engineer). The welded steel tube structure is
without a doubt one of the lightest and strongest structures around,
yet with the ability to absorb crash loads, protecting the occupants.
So, stay with it, and God bless both you and your wife.
Mike
mclayton@rochester.rr.com
Mobile: 585-737-5506
Home: 585-352-1763
8 Adams Trail
Spencerport, NY 14559
N16AF (KF II Rebuild in Progress)
On Oct 23, 2007, at 7:48 PM, Lowell Fitt wrote:
> <lcfitt@sbcglobal.net>
>
> Kay and I finally got to the salvage yard to pick up personal
> belongings and look over the remains of N96KL. I thought some of
> you might be interested in what we saw.
>
> First, though, was what we felt. I had been concerned with what my
> emotions might be when I saw the remains and was surprised to find
> that the reunion was a bit dispassionate. It was not very
> emotional at all. Kay shed a tear as we drove away, maybe because
> the airplane had been, in a sense, a bit of competition with her
> for my time for nearly fifteen years. I took no souvenirs, but
> have numerous pictures taken over those same years and tons of
> video footage taken during the numerous flights. Maybe that is why
> I was not too moved seeing the pile of "junk" We would have liked
> to have lingered longer to just poke around, but the owner of the
> salvage yard seemed to have no interest in us or our interests. I
> guess by agreement, he stood as guardion of the salvage remains as
> an agent of the new owners - the insurance company to see that
> nothing belonging to them ended up in the trunk of our car. On the
> drive out, as we talked about him, I opined that he probably had
> zero personality. Kay suggested that it might be possible to be
> below zero in that area and we both laughed.
>
> And junk it was.
>
> A brief description. The engine and all attached to it including
> the firewall and instrument panel were angled toward the ground so
> the spinner flange was at ground level. The windsheld and all the
> skylight area tubing was just gone as were the doors. The wings
> were folded back against a crumpled fuselage (for trailering) and
> the empennage was moderately damaged. The wings were pretty much
> intact, but the wing spars were damaged as were the flaperons, but
> not severly, yet not salvagable without major work. The empennage
> looked the best of all the structural components - salvageable but
> not without some welding. Interestingly enough, the seats were
> just sitting there as secure as could be with the seat belts piled
> on them with virtually nothing overhead and everything forward
> moved forward which provided for easy egress for us after the dust
> cleared.
>
> The most striking thing I noticed was that the lift struts were
> perfect, including the recently discussed rod end fittings. These
> are probably the only structural members that could be bolted
> directly to another airplane with nothing needed except cleaning up
> the fairings.
>
> For those of you that opted for the Hammerhead landing gear when
> the quiet war was raging between Grove and Hammerhead, the
> following might be of interest. the gear was sheared off
> completely, but the gear showed no signs of being bent or damaged
> in any way. It was my understanding that Hammerhead opted for 7075
> aluminum bent then treated to T6 , which if true, is really tuff
> stuff and might explain the fine appearance of the gear legs. Both
> tires (Mippi style) were still on the gear and the right tire
> deflated. The left tire was still pressurized. I didn't have time
> to examine the tire to see why it deflated, nor much time to
> examine much of any of the engine or engine compartment. I did
> notice that the battery was in position snugly held by the tray and
> the three adel clamps. The ELT was on the seats as it had
> triggered and the emergency folks removed it to shut off the signal.
>
> As to the point of impact? The gear sheared off, the engine was
> angeled down which opened up the cockpit area (absolutely nothing
> above the seats) like breaking a stick over your knee, both
> wingtips were damaged, but not excessively, and the fuselage was
> crumpled. At the site, the bottom ring cowl was under the
> tailwheel. My guess is that we came down hard on the landing gear
> and it didn't absorb as much energy as might be expected and the
> fuselage folded down over it. We had wondered what had caused the
> puncture wound in Kay's calf - there was lots of broken structural
> tubing that might have caused that.
>
> The engine was apparently still running as one prop blade was
> sheared off at the hub and the engine apparently ran for a third of
> a revolution as the sheared blade was in a horizontal position.
>
> One more interesting thing that I noticed. I made a thin aluminum
> enclosure to hold the power supply for the video camera. It was
> about .5"x1.5"x2" in dimension, mounted by adel clamps and the
> circuit board for the supply (the only mass) mounted in the
> opposite side from the adel clamps. The impact distorted this box
> to a parallelogram shape, by maybe 1/8". I don't know how many Gs
> that represents, but we feel pretty fortunate we are doing as well
> as we are, let alone us both being here.
>
> Regards,
>
> Lowell
>
>
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: | Kitfox vs. Van's RV |
I ran into something quite entertaining yesterday. You see, I monitor the vansairforce.com
forums because I would like to builld an RV7 or 8 (maybe even a 10)
after the Kitfox. Anyway, I saw a post on that forum titled "Anyone ever considered
a Kitfox"? I had to bite...as I was reading through the posts, I couldn't
believe what was being said! Almost everyone that replied new almost nothing
about the Kitfox but none the less had a comment along the lines of this:
"Don't build a KitFox until you've flown one and are sure you like it. They don't
fly like RVs"...Brilliant statement!
or
"Another means of consideration is go to fly-ins and count the RVs vs. KitFoxes.
Check the ratio of started vs. completed kits."...I think Van's has around 5500
flying aircraft. This is a shot in the dark but I would bet there are close
to that number of Kitfoxes that have been finished and flown.
I got a chuckle out of the whole thing and in my mind this comparison is about
the same as comparing an RV-7 to a Citation 10! Or, the proverbial apples to
oranges. To their credit, there were a couple of guys and even a kitfox owner
or two that chimed in to state that these airplanes have missions that are 180
degrees of each other and the Kitfox is excellent especially when in its element.
Here is the link if any of you want a laugh!
http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=22780
As for me, I would love to have an RV down the road for my cross country flights
and some light acro but my Kitfox will suit me just fine! Lets see one of the
RV guys take their plane into Fish Lake, Mile Hi, a dirt road, a corn field
or any of the other "real" backcountry strips out there...
--------
Darin Hawkes
Series 7 (under Construction)
914 Turbo
Ogden, Utah
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=141688#141688
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: | Kitfox and Floats for sale |
I have a good friend who has a model 3 Kitfox about 60 percent complete
with engine and prop and ready for fabric.
He also has a set of Avid AMPHIB floats with hydraulic controls and
brakes. Very nice.
He will sell as a complete package or separate. He plans to market it
on Barnstormers and Ebay soon so act quickly if you want to deal with
him.
Located in north central Michigan.
If you have any questions, his email is douglasgeesey@yahoo.com
Deke
S5/Soob
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: Kitfox vs. Van's RV |
> I saw a post on that forum titled "Anyone ever considered a Kitfox"?
My reply to that question is "telling someone what airplane to buy is like telling
them what woman...or man...to marry. It depends on what you want and like."
I wanted a Kitfox and I really like it a lot!
It doesn't fly like a cub either, not to mention the RV.
Do not archive
--------
Tom Jones
Classic IV, Phase one
503 Rotax, 72 inch Two blade Warp
Ellensburg, WA
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=141701#141701
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: Kitfox vs. Van's RV |
For me the comparison is dirt bikes and road bikes. I have a Classic IV and an
RV 9 and match the machine to the task. And now I am building a Hatz Classic
for yet another type of flight. "Just another line on the balance sheet."
John Kerr
-------------- Original message --------------
From: "darinh" <gerns25@netscape.net>
>
> I ran into something quite entertaining yesterday. You see, I monitor the
> vansairforce.com forums because I would like to builld an RV7 or 8 (maybe even
a
> 10) after the Kitfox. Anyway, I saw a post on that forum titled "Anyone ever
> considered a Kitfox"? I had to bite...as I was reading through the posts, I
> couldn't believe what was being said! Almost everyone that replied new almost
> nothing about the Kitfox but none the less had a comment along the lines of
> this:
>
> "Don't build a KitFox until you've flown one and are sure you like it. They
> don't fly like RVs"...Brilliant statement!
>
> or
>
> "Another means of consideration is go to fly-ins and count the RVs vs. KitFoxes.
> Check the ratio of started vs. completed kits."...I think Van's has around 5500
> flying aircraft. This is a shot in the dark but I would bet there are close to
> that number of Kitfoxes that have been finished and flown.
>
> I got a chuckle out of the whole thing and in my mind this comparison is about
> the same as comparing an RV-7 to a Citation 10! Or, the proverbial apples to
> oranges. To their credit, there were a couple of guys and even a kitfox owner
> or two that chimed in to state that these airplanes have missions that are 180
> degrees of each other and the Kitfox is excellent especially when in its
> element. Here is the link if any of you want a laugh!
>
> http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=22780
>
> As for me, I would love to have an RV down the road for my cross country flights
> and some light acro but my Kitfox will suit me just fine! Lets see one of the
> RV guys take their plane into Fish Lake, Mile Hi, a dirt road, a corn field or
> any of the other "real" backcountry strips out there...
>
> --------
> Darin Hawkes
> Series 7 (under Construction)
> 914 Turbo
> Ogden, Utah
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=141688#141688
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
<html><body>
<DIV>For me the comparison is dirt bikes and road bikes. I have a Classic
IV and an RV 9 and match the machine to the task. And now I am building
a Hatz Classic for yet another type of flight. "Just another line on the
balance sheet."</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>John Kerr</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px
solid">-------------- Original message -------------- <BR>From: "darinh" <gerns25@netscape.net>
<BR><BR>> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "darinh"
<GERNS25@NETSCAPE.NET><BR>> <BR>> I ran into something quite entertaining
yesterday. You see, I monitor the <BR>> vansairforce.com forums because
I would like to builld an RV7 or 8 (maybe even a <BR>> 10) after the
Kitfox. Anyway, I saw a post on that forum titled "Anyone ever <BR>> considered
a Kitfox"? I had to bite...as I was reading through the posts, I <BR>>
couldn't believe what was being said! Almost everyone that replied new almost
<BR>> nothing about the Kitfox but none the less had a comment along the
lines of <BR>> this: <BR>> <BR>> "Don't build a KitFox until you've flown
one and are sure you like it. They <BR>> don't fly like RVs"...Brilliant
statement! <BR>> <BR>> or <BR>> <BR>>
"Anoth
er means of consideration is go to fly-ins and count the RVs vs. KitFoxes. <BR>> Check the ratio of started vs. completed kits."...I think Van's has around 5500 <BR>> flying aircraft. This is a shot in the dark but I would bet there are close to <BR>> that number of Kitfoxes that have been finished and flown. <BR>> <BR>> I got a chuckle out of the whole thing and in my mind this comparison is about <BR>> the same as comparing an RV-7 to a Citation 10! Or, the proverbial apples to <BR>> oranges. To their credit, there were a couple of guys and even a kitfox owner <BR>> or two that chimed in to state that these airplanes have missions that are 180 <BR>> degrees of each other and the Kitfox is excellent especially when in its <BR>> element. Here is the link if any of you want a laugh! <BR>> <BR>> http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=22780 <BR>> <BR>> As for me, I would love to have an RV down the road for my cross count
ry fli
s.com/
<pre><b><font size=2 color="#000000" face="courier new,courier">
</b></font></pre></body></html>
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: Kitfox on Google Alert |
I gave this some thought but I could not think of any other option that would pass
up for the sake of ditching my wings that I would choose otherwise. If I where
going to hit a tree line (or anything else as solid), I would certainly aim
between the trunks if I could but I'd do the same even if fuel where not a
factor. I suppose that, with some careful examination, I might be able spot a
situation where squirting between a pair of trees might give me better odds than
getting tangled up in some tall underbrush. But, I figure that, in an emergency
situation where time is limited, I'll probably just opt for whatever looks
softest.
> I always thought that if I had no other alternative, it would be wise to aim
between two trees in order to remove the wings and the fuel tanks, thus eliminating
the danger of fire. Any thoughts about that, guys?
>
--------
Luis Rodriguez
Model IV 1200
Rotax 912UL
Flying Weekly
Laurens, SC (34A)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=141733#141733
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: Kitfox vs. Van's RV |
I may get ostracized for this but... I have to admit that, looking at just the
performance numbers, the RVs (the 9 in particular) looks compelling. One point
that is often raised in favor of the Kitfox is short field performance but factory
quoted landing roll and takeoff numbers look the same to me for both kits.
That's amazing considering how much faster the RV is.
How much fun an airplane is to fly is a subjective thing. When I was comparing
the two it came down to money. In the used market, I could have purchased three
Kitfoxes for the cost of one RV9. Cost of operation seems to follow a similar
formula. No contest there. On the other hand, If I were building, those same
numbers become an argument for the opposite choice. The RV is one of the few
(only?) airplanes on the used experimental market that sell for significantly
more than the cost of the kit..
--------
Luis Rodriguez
Model IV 1200
Rotax 912UL
Flying Weekly
Laurens, SC (34A)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=141738#141738
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: Kitfox vs. Van's RV |
Hahah I just reead the RV forum ,
They are think the Kitfox is hard to fly ?
heck maybe some flying lessons ?
Someone post my videos to them and say here is what your RV cannot do ...... www.cfisher.com
RV flyers are just F1 Rocket wannabees anyhow
2 of the fastest F 1's are within 40 miles of me . one of them came into a flyin
this summer 3 miles from me it was a grassstrip 1800 long. He was out of
ther in under 1000 feet but with 300 HP i guess so and burning 3 to 4 times
a Kitfox.
LOL
--------
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=141765#141765
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: Kitfox vs. Van's RV |
Darin, I reminds me of the time we were returning from Idaho and the six of
us were on the deck chasing coyotes and practicing coordinated turns over
the river. The RV guys were busy talking about manifold pressure, airspeed
and such. I guess they were so high, they couldn't identify anything except
what was on their instrument panels.
Been to Fish Lake and dirt road. Flew over Mile High and no thanks.
Right on regarding mission. RV great airplane for travel. Kitfox great
airplane for flying.
Lowell
----- Original Message -----
From: "darinh" <gerns25@netscape.net>
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 7:05 AM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Kitfox vs. Van's RV
>
> I ran into something quite entertaining yesterday. You see, I monitor the
> vansairforce.com forums because I would like to builld an RV7 or 8 (maybe
> even a 10) after the Kitfox. Anyway, I saw a post on that forum titled
> "Anyone ever considered a Kitfox"? I had to bite...as I was reading
> through the posts, I couldn't believe what was being said! Almost
> everyone that replied new almost nothing about the Kitfox but none the
> less had a comment along the lines of this:
>
> "Don't build a KitFox until you've flown one and are sure you like it.
> They don't fly like RVs"...Brilliant statement!
>
> or
>
> "Another means of consideration is go to fly-ins and count the RVs vs.
> KitFoxes. Check the ratio of started vs. completed kits."...I think Van's
> has around 5500 flying aircraft. This is a shot in the dark but I would
> bet there are close to that number of Kitfoxes that have been finished and
> flown.
>
> I got a chuckle out of the whole thing and in my mind this comparison is
> about the same as comparing an RV-7 to a Citation 10! Or, the proverbial
> apples to oranges. To their credit, there were a couple of guys and even
> a kitfox owner or two that chimed in to state that these airplanes have
> missions that are 180 degrees of each other and the Kitfox is excellent
> especially when in its element. Here is the link if any of you want a
> laugh!
>
> http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=22780
>
> As for me, I would love to have an RV down the road for my cross country
> flights and some light acro but my Kitfox will suit me just fine! Lets
> see one of the RV guys take their plane into Fish Lake, Mile Hi, a dirt
> road, a corn field or any of the other "real" backcountry strips out
> there...
>
> --------
> Darin Hawkes
> Series 7 (under Construction)
> 914 Turbo
> Ogden, Utah
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=141688#141688
>
>
>
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: Kitfox vs. Van's RV |
Why is the RV not a great plane for flying?
> Right on regarding mission. RV great airplane for travel. Kitfox great airplane
for flying.
--------
Luis Rodriguez
Model IV 1200
Rotax 912UL
Flying Weekly
Laurens, SC (34A)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=141788#141788
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: Kitfox vs. Van's RV vs Hatz |
Bit off topic but since John mentioned he is building a Hatz I thought I
would mention that there is a project in my area that is a Hatz with one
of the 150 HP Rotec Radial engines. Nice looking combination.
Gary Walsh
KF IV Anphib 912S
C-GOOT
www.decisionlabs.com/kitfox
do not archive
kerrjohna@comcast.net
Sent by: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
10/25/2007 12:33 PM
Please respond to kitfox-list
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
cc:
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Kitfox vs. Van's RV
For me the comparison is dirt bikes and road bikes. I have a Classic IV
and an RV 9 and match the machine to the task. And now I am building a
Hatz Classic for yet another type of flight. "Just another line on the
balance sheet."
John Kerr
-------------- Original message --------------
From: "darinh" <gerns25@netscape.net>
>
> I ran into something quite entertaining yesterday. You see, I monitor
the
> vansairforce.com forums because I would like to builld an RV7 or 8
(maybe even a
> 10) after the Kitfox. Anyway, I saw a post on that forum titled "Anyone
ever
> considered a Kitfox"? I had to bite...as I was reading through the
posts, I
> couldn't believe what was being said! Almost everyone that replied new
almost
> nothing about the Kitfox but none the less had a comment along the lines
of
> this:
>
> "Don't build a KitFox until you've flown one and are sure you like it.
They
> don't fly like RVs"...Brilliant statement!
>
> or
>
> "Anoth er means of consideration is go to fly-ins and count the RVs vs.
KitFoxes.
> Check the ratio of started vs. completed kits."...I think Van's has
around 5500
> flying aircraft. This is a shot in the dark but I would bet there are
close to
> that number of Kitfoxes that have been finished and flown.
>
> I got a chuckle out of the whole thing and in my mind this comparison is
about
> the same as comparing an RV-7 to a Citation 10! Or, the proverbial
apples to
> oranges. To their credit, there were a couple of guys and even a kitfox
owner
> or two that chimed in to state that these airplanes have missions that
are 180
> degrees of each other and the Kitfox is excellent especially when in its
> element. Here is the link if any of you want a laugh!
>
> http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=22780
>
> As for me, I would love to have an RV down the road for my cross count
ry fli s.com/
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 |
|
Can anyone tell me where I can get a one line drawing of a kitfox model
II.
GLENN HORNE
Kitfox Model II
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: Kitfox vs. Van's RV |
Luis,
You can't simply look at different airplanes only using performance numbers unless
you are only comparing one aspect of the flight regime...such as air speed
or climb, etc.
The RV-9 does have great performance numbers and so does the 6, 7, 8, and 10 but
the entire flight envelope of the RV is completely different than the Kitfox.
For example...my old Model 3 would climb out at around 800 fpm and my buddies
182 will climb out around 1000 fpm...better right? Well, maybe but it depends
on how you look at it. He may be climbing faster but I am off the ground
in 200ft and because of the speed difference, my angle of climb is greater than
his and I can get off the ground and clear obstacles much sooner than he can.
Don't get me wrong, I think the RV's are awesome but for the role the Kitfox is
built for, it is hard to beat! And besides, you may be able to get the RV-9
off the ground in roughly the same take off roll as your Kitfox but not off the
same surface conditions. The RV is made for pavement and well manicured grass
strips...anything somewhat bumpy or rutted is a no go in an RV. Again, different
airplanes, completely different roles...both awesome!!
Lowell,
I also have done Fish Lake and many others but not Mile Hi...that one is one I
will probably enjoy flying over but not actually touching down on but who knows...
--------
Darin Hawkes
Series 7 (under Construction)
914 Turbo
Ogden, Utah
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=141804#141804
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
I have a 3 view of a 4
_____
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Glenn Horne
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 3:26 PM
Subject: Kitfox-List: 1 line drawing
Can anyone tell me where I can get a one line drawing of a kitfox model II.
GLENN HORNE
Kitfox Model II
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 |
|
Will this help
Marin Streeter
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Glenn Horne
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 1:26 PM
Subject: Kitfox-List: 1 line drawing
Can anyone tell me where I can get a one line drawing of a kitfox model II.
GLENN HORNE
Kitfox Model II
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: 1 line drawing |
Glenn,
I've been looking for the same also. A search of the archives provided a
posting that suggested sportflight.com's file share. After pouring over every
category there, I came up empty. Google wasn't helpful either(unless you want
to pay for a line drawing of a IV). I know this doesn't help much, but I can
tell you where not to look.lol I'll be watching the thread.
Cheers,
Greg G.
Macedon, N.Y.
23NK
n375KL
Mod 2
582
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Kitfox vs. Van's RV |
I have been flying Avids and Kitfoxes for 20 years. Last year I bought an
RV-6A with the lycoming 0-360 (180 HP). It is a great flying aircraft and very
well designed. I flew it from Las Vegas to Wisconsin in 10 hours averaging
around 200 MPH. It is a great cross country machine that can handle a
reasonable grass strip.
But I like flying low over rivers and country side and my Kitfox V does
that very well. They are both great airplanes for there missions. I have now
sold the RV because I do not travel far normally and the $50 per hour
operating cost took a lot of the fun out of it. My Kitfox cost about $15 per hour
and I always like the idea that I could land almost anywhere at low speeds if
I
had to (or wanted to). I would recommend the RV's to anyone looking to go
farther then 200 miles regularly. It also was a very good basic aerobatic
airplane. I'll miss that part.
Mark
Kitfox 5 Vixen
912UL IVO
Hartford, Wisconsin
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: Kitfox with radio full of static |
Pete, I'm no mechanic and haven't had my KF long but you should get ahold of
Peter Graechen on the list. He really knows his stuffff!!!! I was having some
technical problems that I was trying to figure out and for some reason they
fixed themselves. I don't know if you can get the NSI EA81 engine anymore since
NSI went out of business years ago. I'm a student pilot learning in my own
kitfox so I don't have much experience. I went up the other day with a supercub
bush pilot and he said my plane out performed his in everything but cargo
capasity. We were crusing at 100mph... 4.5gal/ hr, climbing at 900fpm with full
tanks and 400lbs of people. Did lots of stalls, takeoffs, 60 degree turns
etc... The only thing he didn't like about my plane was that he wanted me to
get rid of the wheel pants and put some 26 inch bush wheels on. Hope this helps...
Layne
_____________________________________________________________
Buying or selling a home? Click here for free info on real estate services.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2111/fc/Ioyw6iie8Wm4UciA66f1P30QygM2rzfTcsMhoQwBdge7b9Z8kK2aAb/
Message 20
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: F-8?Q?Re:_RE:_Kitfox-List:_1_line_drawing? |
Super fotka , jutro wyslke ci moje z ameryki
---- Wiadomo Oryginalna ----
Od: "Marin Streeter" <alderacres@foxinternet.net>
Do: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
Data: 26 padziernika 2007 0:33
Temat: RE: Kitfox-List: 1 line drawing
> Will this help Marin Streeter -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Glenn Horne
> Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 1:26 PM
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Kitfox-List: 1 line drawing Can anyone tell me where I can get a one
line drawing of a kitfoxmodel II. GLENN HORNE
> Kitfox Model II http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-Listhttp://forums.matronics.com
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: F-8?Q?Re:_RE:_Kitfox-List:_1_line_drawing? |
za konto na tlen.pl lub skayp wtedy bedziesz mbnie widzia i sysa
---- Wiadomo Oryginalna ----
Od: "Marin Streeter" <alderacres@foxinternet.net>
Do: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
Data: 26 padziernika 2007 0:33
Temat: RE: Kitfox-List: 1 line drawing
> Will this help Marin Streeter -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Glenn Horne
> Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 1:26 PM
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Kitfox-List: 1 line drawing Can anyone tell me where I can get a one
line drawing of a kitfoxmodel II. GLENN HORNE
> Kitfox Model II http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-Listhttp://forums.matronics.com
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: Kitfox vs. Van's RV |
> The RV-9 does have great performance numbers and so does the 6, 7, 8, and 10
but the entire flight envelope of the RV is completely different than the Kitfox.
For example...my old Model 3 would climb out at around 800 fpm and my buddies
182 will climb out around 1000 fpm...better right? Well, maybe but it depends
on how you look at it. He may be climbing faster but I am off the ground in
200ft and because of the speed difference, my angle of climb is greater than
his and I can get off the ground and clear obstacles much sooner than he can.
I have to agree that you don't see many RVs with balloon tires but I just wonder
if that's really because they can't. I'm looking at all the performance numbers
and when comparing a late model Kitfox to an RV9, they all look pretty close
to me. Landing/takeoff roll, stall, Vx, Vy, rate of climb, they're all within
a few knots (within 50 ft for landing/takeoff). Maybe the Kitfox can get
into that 500ft strip safer than the RV can but how many of us fly into runways
that short? Does the Kitfox poses some ineffable flying quality that the RV
doesn't?
--------
Luis Rodriguez
Model IV 1200
Rotax 912UL
Flying Weekly
Laurens, SC (34A)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=141832#141832
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 |
|
Glenn,
Hope these help.
Mike Crutchlow
Kitfox Model II 582
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Glenn Horne
Sent: October 25, 2007 4:26 PM
Subject: Kitfox-List: 1 line drawing
Can anyone tell me where I can get a one line drawing of a kitfox model
II.
GLENN HORNE
Kitfox Model II
"http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List"http://www.matronics.com
/Navigator?Kitfox-List
"http://forums.matronics.com"http://forums.matronics.com
24/10/2007 2:31 PM
24/10/2007 2:31 PM
Message 24
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Kitfox vs. Van's RV |
> But I like flying low over rivers and country side and my Kitfox V does that
very well.
The difference in cost of operation is certainly huge. That and cost of purchase
is why I fly a kitfox. But was there anything else about the RV that prevented
you from fly it low over rivers and countryside? Are you doing it so slow it
would be dangerous in an RV?
--------
Luis Rodriguez
Model IV 1200
Rotax 912UL
Flying Weekly
Laurens, SC (34A)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=141835#141835
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: Kitfox vs. Van's RV |
I like the high wing for looking around, the RV slow cruise was around 160
MPH, with the Kitfox it is closer to 80 MPH. With the RV I only used the rudder
for take offs and landings, and flew with two fingers on the stick. If I
would have kept it I would have installed an auto pilot. It was a great form of
transportation, in fact I called it the "time machine". My test flight in
the RV was a 100 mile trip down the Colorado River into California and back
form Bolder City Nevada. That is some very unforgiving area to fly in and the
RV
was awesome. I am a big fan of RV's but the Kitfox is just a lot more fun to
fly in Wisconsin and maybe someday I will put floats on it to explore yet
another world.
Mark
Kitfox 5 Vixen
912UL IVO
Hartford, Wisconsin
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: | Re: Kitfox vs. Van's RV |
yea it does.the wings can fold on a Kitfox.and you can take it home each
day if needed to do so.can the Vans do that.and landing in+out of short
fields that is what the kitfox is all about.and what it can do.. even
150 ft long fields if there is a need to do so.can the Vans do that all
so?can a Vans land on a sand bar in the middle of a river?so you can go
fishing where no one else can land?I do not think so. Steve Shinabery
KF2.,N554KF
wingnut wrote:
>
>
>
>> The RV-9 does have great performance numbers and so does the 6, 7, 8, and 10
but the entire flight envelope of the RV is completely different than the Kitfox.
For example...my old Model 3 would climb out at around 800 fpm and my buddies
182 will climb out around 1000 fpm...better right? Well, maybe but it depends
on how you look at it. He may be climbing faster but I am off the ground
in 200ft and because of the speed difference, my angle of climb is greater than
his and I can get off the ground and clear obstacles much sooner than he can.
>>
>
>
> I have to agree that you don't see many RVs with balloon tires but I just wonder
if that's really because they can't. I'm looking at all the performance numbers
and when comparing a late model Kitfox to an RV9, they all look pretty
close to me. Landing/takeoff roll, stall, Vx, Vy, rate of climb, they're all within
a few knots (within 50 ft for landing/takeoff). Maybe the Kitfox can get
into that 500ft strip safer than the RV can but how many of us fly into runways
that short? Does the Kitfox poses some ineffable flying quality that the RV
doesn't?
>
> --------
> Luis Rodriguez
> Model IV 1200
> Rotax 912UL
> Flying Weekly
> Laurens, SC (34A)
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=141832#141832
>
>
>
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: Kitfox vs. Van's RV, Comment |
Love to see an RV on floats..... Or skis!
Noel Loveys, RPP, AME intern
Campbellton, Newfoundland,
Canada
Kitfox Mod III-A, 582, B box, Ivo IFA
Aerocet 1100s
<mailto:noelloveys@yahoo.ca> noelloveys@yahoo.ca
Do not archive
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of wingnut
> Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 2:35 PM
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Kitfox vs. Van's RV
>
>
>
> I may get ostracized for this but... I have to admit that,
> looking at just the performance numbers, the RVs (the 9 in
> particular) looks compelling. One point that is often raised
> in favor of the Kitfox is short field performance but factory
> quoted landing roll and takeoff numbers look the same to me
> for both kits. That's amazing considering how much faster the RV is.
>
> How much fun an airplane is to fly is a subjective thing.
> When I was comparing the two it came down to money. In the
> used market, I could have purchased three Kitfoxes for the
> cost of one RV9. Cost of operation seems to follow a similar
> formula. No contest there. On the other hand, If I were
> building, those same numbers become an argument for the
> opposite choice. The RV is one of the few (only?) airplanes
> on the used experimental market that sell for significantly
> more than the cost of the kit..
>
> --------
> Luis Rodriguez
> Model IV 1200
> Rotax 912UL
> Flying Weekly
> Laurens, SC (34A)
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=141738#141738
>
>
>
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: Kitfox vs. Van's RV |
> I like the high wing for looking around, the RV slow cruise was around 160 MPH,
with the Kitfox it is closer to 80 MPH.
Good point about the high wing. That does make for a nice view when flyign low.
Interesting point on the slow flight though. What would happen in an RV if you
pulled back power even more and let it slow down to 80? Would it fly poorly
at that speed?
No need to get angry Steve. I'm just asking. I've never owned an RV and I love
my Kitfox... But honestly though.. 150 ft landing roll for a model 4? I thought
it was more like 250ft?
--------
Luis Rodriguez
Model IV 1200
Rotax 912UL
Flying Weekly
Laurens, SC (34A)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=141870#141870
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Kitfox vs. Van's RV, Comment |
You mean like this one?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kj2aRT1eaQw
--------
Luis Rodriguez
Model IV 1200
Rotax 912UL
Flying Weekly
Laurens, SC (34A)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=141874#141874
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: Kitfox vs. Van's RV |
Mark sez:
>[RV-6A] also was a very good basic aerobatic airplane. I'll miss that part.
So is a Kitfox. Towards the end of my initial 40 hours of flight
testing I had a local, professional airshow pilot, Tim Weber, take my
Model IV up twice to run it through its paces (I have no aerobatic
experience...yet). He did loops, aileron and barrel rolls,
hammerheads, Immelmanns, a split-S, and both cuban and lazy eights.
Tim said he loved the airplane. He also said that he didn't think
snap rolls were a good idea.
Mike G.
N728KF
Phoenix, AZ
Message 31
| 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: Kitfox vs. Van's RV |
>But honestly though.. 150 ft landing roll for a model 4? I thought
>it was more like 250ft?
Seriously!
I once took off in my tricycle-gear Model IV-1200 Speedster (short
wings) in 125 feet (measured)! This was with 1/2 flaps (10 degrees)
off a paved runway at 1475 feet MSL on a very warm day with full fuel
and me (200 lbs) on board and probably 20 pounds of crap behind the
seat. The airplane was powered by a Rotax 912S (100 HP) with an Ivo
medium in-flight adjustable prop.
Mike G.
N728KF
Phoenix, AZ
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! --
|