---------------------------------------------------------- Kitfox-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Tue 11/06/07: 20 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 01:41 AM - Hi all Kitfoxers (Steve Shinabery) 2. 04:58 AM - Re: Sport Pilot vs. LSA (was: Aircraft Bill of Sale) (Paul Seehafer) 3. 05:01 AM - Re: Sport Pilot vs. LSA (was: Aircraft Bill of Sale) (Paul Seehafer) 4. 05:03 AM - Re: Time to Fold Wings (Noel Loveys) 5. 05:21 AM - Re: Sport Pilot vs. LSA (was: Aircraft Bill of Sale) (Noel Loveys) 6. 05:47 AM - Re: Sport Pilot vs. LSA (was: Aircraft Bill of Sale) (akflyer) 7. 06:04 AM - Re: Trailering Kitfox WAS: King Fox rims (Tom Jones) 8. 07:55 AM - Re: Re: Sport Pilot vs. LSA (was: Aircraft Bill of Sale) (Michael Gibbs) 9. 08:22 AM - Re: Sport Pilot vs. LSA (was: Aircraft Bill of Sale) (eskflyer) 10. 08:41 AM - Re: Time to Fold Wings (Guy Buchanan) 11. 09:39 AM - Re: Sport Pilot vs. LSA (was: Aircraft Bill of Sale) (RRTRACK@aol.com) 12. 10:20 AM - Fuel flow meter location (Jose M. Toro) 13. 10:40 AM - Re: Re: Trailering Kitfox WAS: King Fox rims (Noel Loveys) 14. 11:59 AM - Trailer. Contains pictures may be a large file. (Noel Loveys) 15. 01:42 PM - Re: Trailer. Contains pictures may be a large file. (Tom Jones) 16. 04:55 PM - Re: Re: Trailer. Contains pictures may be a large file. (Noel Loveys) 17. 05:00 PM - Re: Sport Pilot vs. LSA (was: Aircraft Bill of Sale) (84KF) 18. 05:08 PM - Re: Time to Fold Wings (kirk hull) 19. 07:03 PM - Re: Sport Pilot vs. LSA (was: Aircraft Bill of Sale) (Michael Gibbs) 20. 10:12 PM - KF S5 NSI Inverted? (debrun26@juno.com) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 01:41:20 AM PST US From: Steve Shinabery Subject: Kitfox-List: Hi all Kitfoxers we are having a Hot Dog and Turtle Soup this Sunday at 1:00pm Fly In if weather is good. At Lake Field Airport,,CQA Celina Ohio,,we are located at the south west corner of Grand Lake St.Marys.Sunday Nov.11 th 2007.all are wellcome.This is Home to Steve Shinabery, N554KF KF2 ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 04:58:42 AM PST US From: "Paul Seehafer" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Sport Pilot vs. LSA (was: Aircraft Bill of Sale) Steve, I'm all for what you are saying as that would allow a lot more light aircraft to be flown as LSA's. And that would be really great for a lot of people. But during Oshkosh this year I heard a couple of FAA people talking about this issue, and (fwiw) they were saying it was already in the works to rewrite the LSA rule to further clarify the 1320/1430 lbs as "aircraft gross weight". Personally, I wish they would leave it alone and let us include aircraft like our 1550 lb Kitfoxes, but from what I heard, it appears they are already on this issue. So I hope there aren't any pilots out there buying airplanes with gross weights over the 1320/1430 lb numbers hoping to be able to fly them as a sport pilot. These same FAA people said if the rule as it is written were to be challenged, a board of review would be assigned to interpret the rule, and the FAA would base their enforcement actions on the boards interpretation. But like my retired IRS auditor friend told me, it is a rare case to have a board of review not agree with the government agency, as they will be reminded to interpret the rule as the rule was intended when written. In this case, I think it is more than obvious the FAA intended (or meant to say) "aircraft gross weight" but just slipped up in their final wording. I hope you don't think I'm arguing with you, as I'm not. Technically, from what I heard the FAA is "unofficially" admitting they slipped up. So after hearing that conversation, I know you were right all along. I have been holding back from telling anyone all this as what I heard is really only heresay. But it would be a disservice to my friends here on the list if I didn't tell everyone what I heard. From here on in, everyone can make their own mind up as to whether or not they want to challenge the FAA on this. I know I won't. Paul Seehafer Kitfox IV 912ul amphib Central Wisconsin ----- Original Message ----- From: "84KF" Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2007 12:04 AM Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Sport Pilot vs. LSA (was: Aircraft Bill of Sale) > > Excellent. > And let's not forget, quoted from the same source..... > > " The maximum weight of > a light-sport aircraft is the sum of: > (1) Aircraft empty weight; > (2) Weight of the passenger for each > seat installed; > (3) Baggage allowance for each > passenger; and > (4) Full fuel, including a minimum of > the half-hour fuel reserve required for > day visual flight rules in 91.151(a)(1). > > You won't find the term "Gross weight" used, or implied, anywhere by > the FAA in regards to LSA issues. Period. > > > ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 05:01:12 AM PST US From: "Paul Seehafer" Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Sport Pilot vs. LSA (was: Aircraft Bill of Sale) Steve, I'm all for what you are saying as that would allow a lot more light aircraft to be flown as LSA's. And that would be really great for a lot of people. But during Oshkosh this year I heard a couple of FAA people talking about this issue, and (fwiw) they were saying it was already in the works to rewrite the LSA rule to further clarify the 1320/1430 lbs as "aircraft gross weight". Personally, I wish they would leave it alone and let us include aircraft like our 1550 lb Kitfoxes, but from what I heard, it appears they are already on this issue. So I hope there aren't any pilots out there buying airplanes with gross weights over the 1320/1430 lb numbers hoping to be able to fly them as a sport pilot. These same FAA people said if the rule as it is written were to be challenged, a board of review would be assigned to interpret the rule, and the FAA would base their enforcement actions on the boards interpretation. But like my retired IRS auditor friend told me, it is a rare case to have a board of review not agree with the government agency, as they will be reminded to interpret the rule as the rule was intended when written. In this case, I think it is more than obvious the FAA intended (or meant to say) "aircraft gross weight" but just slipped up in their final wording. I hope you don't think I'm arguing with you, as I'm not. Technically, from what I heard the FAA is "unofficially" admitting they slipped up. So after hearing that conversation, I know you were right all along. I have been holding back from telling anyone all this as what I heard is really only heresay. But it would be a disservice to my friends here on the list if I didn't tell everyone what I heard. From here on in, everyone can make their own mind up as to whether or not they want to challenge the FAA on this. I know I won't. Paul Seehafer Kitfox IV 912ul amphib Central Wisconsin ----- Original Message ----- From: "84KF" Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2007 12:04 AM Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Sport Pilot vs. LSA (was: Aircraft Bill of Sale) > > Excellent. > And let's not forget, quoted from the same source..... > > " The maximum weight of > a light-sport aircraft is the sum of: > (1) Aircraft empty weight; > (2) Weight of the passenger for each > seat installed; > (3) Baggage allowance for each > passenger; and > (4) Full fuel, including a minimum of > the half-hour fuel reserve required for > day visual flight rules in 91.151(a)(1). > > You won't find the term "Gross weight" used, or implied, anywhere by > the FAA in regards to LSA issues. Period. > > > ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 05:03:23 AM PST US From: "Noel Loveys" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Time to Fold Wings Remember that $450 is in your pocket not in the hangar owners. $450 can buy a few gallons of gas or a new instrument every month. If you are regular you probably spend more time than that on the throne everyday. Lets see there are seven days in a week....... Is that wasted (pun intended) time? When I was trained I was trained to do a thorough pre flight and then a full flight plan including a flight W&B and navigation with alternates. Calculating and filling out the W&B, nav charts, headings, fuel consumption, dead reckoning and a flight itinerary chews up quite a bit of time too. I realize all this paper work isn't necessary for every flight but it helps to keep me sharp. Noel Do Not Archive > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of > Guy Buchanan > Sent: Monday, November 05, 2007 10:53 PM > To: kitfox-list@matronics.com > Subject: Kitfox-List: Time to Fold Wings > > > > Today I timed myself as I put the plane into it's folding wing > "hangar". It took just over seven minutes, rather than the twenty > seconds it would have taken to push it into a full size hangar. I'm > guessing the set-up takes about the same time, for a grand total of > 14 minutes of wing folding overhead per flight. If I fly four times a > week, it's costing me almost an hour a week, or four hours a month, > which works out to about $500 per month to fold the wings. Hmmm. > Maybe I should just rent the hangar. ($450 per month, versus the $100 > per month I'm paying for a tie-down now.) My break even is therefore > 12 flights per month. Guess I'm going to have to give this > more thought. > > > Guy Buchanan > San Diego, CA > K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar. > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 05:21:50 AM PST US From: "Noel Loveys" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Sport Pilot vs. LSA (was: Aircraft Bill of Sale) Michael: So, some of the advantages of registering experimental are, you can have; retractable gear, IFA props and night/IFR capability and heavier gross weights. But you must have the proper license to take advantage of those things. Very interesting. Noel > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of > Michael Gibbs > Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2007 1:50 AM > To: kitfox-list@matronics.com > Subject: Kitfox-List: Sport Pilot vs. LSA (was: Aircraft Bill of Sale) > > > > > Scott asks: > > >If you register as an experimental but still fit > >the limits of a LSA can't you still fly it with > >a LSA liscence? > > Yes, Noel and Mark are mistaken, but it's a sport > pilot license not an LSA license. Sport pilots > can fly any experimental, experimental light > sport, or certified aircraft that meets the > restrictions for a light sport aircraft: > > "...as discussed in the section-by-section > preamble discussion for 1.1, Definition of > Light-Sport Aircraft, a sport pilot can operate > an aircraft meeting the light-sport aircraft > definition in 1.1, regardless of the > airworthiness certificate issued." > > --Final Rule, Docket No. FAA-2001-11133; Amendment No. 1-53; > 21-85; 43-39; 45-24; 61-110; 65-45; 91-282 > > The FAA considers any airplane (other rules apply > to helicopters and lighter-than-air vehicles) to > be a "light sport aircraft" if it has met the > following criteria continuously since its > original certification: > > Maximum takeoff weight of 1320 lbs for land planes or 1430 > for float planes. > Maximum airspeed of 120 KCAS. > Maximum stall speed (Vsi) of 45 KCAS at max takeoff weight. > Maximum seating capacity of 2. > Maximum of one engine. > A fixed or ground adjustable prop. > A non-pressurized cabin. > Fixed landing gear (except for float planes). > > For more information, check out: > . Mike G. N728KF Phoenix, AZ ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 05:47:28 AM PST US Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Sport Pilot vs. LSA (was: Aircraft Bill of Sale) From: "akflyer" MichaelGibbs(at)cox.net wrote: > Steve sez: > > > > You won't find the term "Gross weight" used, or implied, anywhere by > > the FAA in regards to LSA issues. Period. > > > > > > What does that have to do with the discussion, Steve? Just want to > beat that dead horse or yours some more? > > Mike G. > N728KF > Phoenix, AZ Take a look at your original post, you pasted it.. Steve was just try to help clarify something YOU posted. Based on Pauls reply... nevermind.... I dont know how many people here deal with code books or have to make interpretations, I know I do every day. I NEVER take someone elses word on a code issue, look it up myself to assure we are performing up par. I am still amazed that people like you have to argue over something they were told, not what is in black and white, in the government publication, right in front of you and about 3rd grade comprehension level. This is the last time I will ever post on this issue so dont get all worked up thinking I want to start a war again. DO NOT ARCHIVE -------- DO NOT ARCHIVE Leonard Perry Soldotna AK Avid "C" / Mk IV 582 IVO IFA Full Lotus 1260 95% complete Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=144118#144118 ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 06:04:07 AM PST US Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Trailering Kitfox WAS: King Fox rims From: "Tom Jones" [quote="Float Flyr"]Loading ramps that are hinged to flip up, reverse and trap the main gear is a real time saver. Noel, can you measure the height of your trailer deck and the length of the ramps? I want to try your idea on the ramps. My trailer is kind of high so my current ramps are eight feet long. I don't want the incline to be too steep. -------- 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=144123#144123 ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 07:55:32 AM PST US From: Michael Gibbs Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Sport Pilot vs. LSA (was: Aircraft Bill of Sale) Steve sed: > > > You won't find the term "Gross weight" used, or implied, anywhere by > > > the FAA in regards to LSA issues. Period. To which I replied: > > What does that have to do with the discussion, Steve? Just want to > > beat that dead horse or yours some more? To which Leonard sez: >Take a look at your original post, you pasted it.. Steve was just >try to help clarify something YOU posted. The original issue was whether or not a sport pilot is limited to operating airplanes certificated as LSAs and the answer is no, they can fly any type of airplane that meets the performance limitations. I listed the performance limitations. I didn't mention "gross weight" and the FAA doesn't mention "gross weight". Why was it necessary for Steve to point out what wasn't mentioned? They also don't mention what type of upholstery the plane has, did you want to bring that up as well? >I am still amazed that people like you have to argue over something >they were told, not what is in black and white, in the government >publication, right in front of you and about 3rd grade comprehension >level. People like me? I quoted the FAA directly from the docket and provided a link to the FAA's web site. I did not argue with anyone nor did I rely on hearsay. Apparently your reading comprehension fell a bit short. I am taking Steve to task simply because he has a long history of harping on the "gross weight" versus "maximum takeoff weight" issue and he decided to hijack this topic to bring up his pet peeve again. I don't care what kind of airplane he flies or what type of license he uses to do so, but if he encourages others to follow his interpretation of the rules and they suffer from the process Paul describes (i.e., "... it is a rare case to have a board of review not agree with the government agency...") he is culpable. Mike G. N728KF Phoenix, AZ ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 08:22:15 AM PST US Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Sport Pilot vs. LSA (was: Aircraft Bill of Sale) From: "eskflyer" Hell im takin the 5th on this one and drinking it to forget all the bull . Yes it is relevant to the subject of LSA aircraft and if you use the directive as written then many more aircraft are available to pilots who fly in the lsa aircraft category. If the Faa wrote it wrong then that is there fault and no one can argue until it is rewritten and made law . Steve has a great point and im stickin to it . DO not archive Sig to follow below -------- FLY FUN FLY LOW FLY SLOW John Perry Kitfox 2 N718PD 582 cbox 2:62-1 IVO IFA Leni's FULL-LOTUS floats on MY plane forever Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=144161#144161 ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 08:41:57 AM PST US From: Guy Buchanan Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Time to Fold Wings At 05:02 AM 11/6/2007, you wrote: >Remember that $450 is in your pocket not in the hangar owners. $450 can buy >a few gallons of gas or a new instrument every month. Lessee now. If it costs $20/hr. in fuel, then the total cost to fly is about $60/hr. So if I don't use the hangar I've got an extra $350 per month to fly so I can fly an additional five or six hours per month! I LOVE YOUR MATH! (Of course, if I fly another five hours per month, it costs me about $150 in set up time. . . Oh I give up. I think I'll go flying.) >If you are regular you probably spend more time than that on the throne >everyday. Lets see there are seven days in a week....... Is that wasted >(pun intended) time? Not at all. All you have to do is install your computer in the bathroom. HAHAHAHAHA! Guy Buchanan San Diego, CA K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar. Do not archive ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 09:39:38 AM PST US From: RRTRACK@aol.com Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Sport Pilot vs. LSA (was: Aircraft Bill of Sale) I never stated a Sport Pilot could not fly an experimental or a certified aircraft if it meets the qualifications for LSA. They sure can, but they would be limited by SP rules for it's use. I just stated there are a lot of pilots out there that are looking for LSA qualified planes. Another advantage of an LSA aircraft is you do not have to be the builder to be able to do the annual of your plane if you take the FAA approved coarse. My favorite time to fly is the last hour of the day when the weather calms down. I usually fly until about 30 minutes after sunset to get a taste of night flying in as well. I would miss that if flying under SP rules. Mark Kitfox 5 Vixen 912UL IVO Hartford, Wisconsin ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 10:20:26 AM PST US From: "Jose M. Toro" Subject: Kitfox-List: Fuel flow meter location Hi all: Where is the right place to locate the fuel flow sensor in the fuel system? My engine is a Jab 2200 and the signal will go to an EIS. Thanks! Jose Toro __________________________________________________ ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 10:40:17 AM PST US From: "Noel Loveys" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Re: Trailering Kitfox WAS: King Fox rims Tom do you have auto cad? If so I can even draw it up for you. Next post will have the measurements Noel > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tom Jones > Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2007 10:34 AM > To: kitfox-list@matronics.com > Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Trailering Kitfox WAS: King Fox rims > > > > [quote="Float Flyr"]Loading ramps that are hinged to flip up, > reverse and trap the main gear is a real time saver. > > Noel, can you measure the height of your trailer deck and the > length of the ramps? I want to try your idea on the ramps. > My trailer is kind of high so my current ramps are eight feet > long. I don't want the incline to be too steep. > > -------- > 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=144123#144123 > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 14 ____________________________________ Time: 11:59:47 AM PST US From: "Noel Loveys" Subject: Kitfox-List: Trailer. Contains pictures may be a large file. I'm back... Last post was sent at 3:05 local it was 3:25 when I got back in the door. What I did in that 20 minutes was; unlock the shed and retrieve one ramp to measure, haul the trailer form the spot I had it parked most of the summer and then change the short tow arm for the long tow arm. I also took pictures of that. To begin the trailer at the rear lip when on my quad is 23.5" high to the top of the platform. If it were on the car it would be around 24" high. The ramps are constructed of 1" X 1" steel with class A crusher screen forming the tire surface. The ramps are 47" long and 10.75" wide. I used small pieces of 1X1 stock welded to the back lip of the trailer to form the hinges for the ramps. Pictures: This picture shows the general construction of the ramps. Each place where the screen touches the frame was mig welded. A close up of the cleats I welded to the trailer. 5/16 bolts hold the ramps to the trailer and form the hinge. I also had a temporary block behind the hinge on the deck for towing the trailer with the ramps in place but without the plane. A close up of where I cut the tow arm... So I'm not too good with a cutting wheel. This picture also shows the 1/2" bolts I use as tow pins. They are held in place with cotter pins only as the load is completely shear. The tow arm is off. Extended tow arm in place. Note the platform (2X6) for the tail wheel to roll in while loading/unloading. Long tow arm installed and locked in place les than 20 min. Tools: ball peen hammer and a bit of chain lube to ease inserting long arm. The elongated arm is a lot heavier stock than the original tow arm. I use an extension cord (four conductor) for the trailer lights. Dimensions for the deck of the trailer are 10ft. long and 8'5" wide. The trailer is designed to carry two full size snowmobiles which can weigh close to 700 lb each. when I set up the trailer for the first time and measured where to put my wheel blocks I rolled the plane back until I had around 50 lb. on the hitch. It towed the plane beautifully. With that long arm backing up is also easy. Hope this post is not too large for the dialup guys. I tried to make the pictures small but legible. Thank god for spell check! Noel > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tom Jones > Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2007 10:34 AM > To: kitfox-list@matronics.com > Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Trailering Kitfox WAS: King Fox rims > > > > [quote="Float Flyr"]Loading ramps that are hinged to flip up, > reverse and trap the main gear is a real time saver. > > Noel, can you measure the height of your trailer deck and the > length of the ramps? I want to try your idea on the ramps. > My trailer is kind of high so my current ramps are eight feet > long. I don't want the incline to be too steep. > > -------- > 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=144123#144123 > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 15 ____________________________________ Time: 01:42:58 PM PST US Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Trailer. Contains pictures may be a large file. From: "Tom Jones" Thanks for the trailer specs Noel! I don't have Auto Cad but the pictures and measurements do give me the information I need. -------- 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=144218#144218 ________________________________ Message 16 ____________________________________ Time: 04:55:26 PM PST US From: "Noel Loveys" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Re: Trailer. Contains pictures may be a large file. Is your trailer around the same height? Noel > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tom Jones > Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2007 6:12 PM > To: kitfox-list@matronics.com > Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Trailer. Contains pictures may be a > large file. > > > > Thanks for the trailer specs Noel! I don't have Auto Cad > but the pictures and measurements do give me the information I need. > > -------- > 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=144218#144218 > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 17 ____________________________________ Time: 05:00:43 PM PST US From: 84KF Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Sport Pilot vs. LSA (was: Aircraft Bill of Sale) Paul, Thank you for your open and honest reply. And no, I don't consider this an argument, but a open exchange of ideas, thoughts and information. And that's good. If I may..... As of today, there is NO 'Notice of Proposed Rule making' on the FAA Docket for any changes to the existing text of the Final Rule. http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/recently_published/ Since the "Final Rule" has been in effect, the only changes to date have been: 1. permit development of lighter-than-air Light Sport Aircraft (LSA), i.e. hot air balloons, and to LTA lighter than air and that provided for an INCREASE in their weight limits. 2. allow retractable landing gear for LSA intended for operation on water. Published April 19, 2007; Changes to the Definition of Certain Light-Sport Aircraft (72 FR 19661). No adverse comments were received. The rule became effective on June 4, 2007. Both of these changes increased the benefits and privileges under the Rule. No attempt was made at that time to reduce privileges or change weight definitions, including "maximum takeoff weight", which remains the same. The FAA continues to state that the provided definition will be used to define "maximum takeoff weight" " In this case, I think it is more than obvious the FAA intended (or meant to say) "aircraft gross weight" but just slipped up in their final wording." I disagree, and would have a hard time believing that that type of oversight would exist. Would you want us to believe that from February 5, 2002, the original NPRM date, to July 27, 2004, a 2+ year consideration period, open for, and receiving 4700 public comments, that they, the DOT and FAA, just 'forgot'. And also, just forgot to 'fix' things during the recent changes? Why didn't they just say 'gross weight' to begin with... ? Because it has no bearing on the intention of the 'maximum inertia' concept they envisioned, and approved. All the bases are covered under the "maximum takeoff weight" definition. From day one I have stated that the Final Rule is fair and objective. On the lighter side: "....during Oshkosh this year I heard a couple of FAA people talking....." Perhaps these were the same ones who "grounded" Bob Hoover", because he didn't "look" right to THEM. Or the ones who put "RedTags" (grounded) on certain aircraft that had the "new" 'Q-Tip' propellers because the "tips were bent". Again, I too am not arguing, I am discussing. Thanks again for your positive input. Steve ________________________________ Message 18 ____________________________________ Time: 05:08:38 PM PST US From: "kirk hull" Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Time to Fold Wings $450 a month for hanger rent!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You need to find a smaller airport. Roosterville/ 0N0 is $70 a month and I keep my boat in the hanger too. Its only 3000 X 20 but that is 5x more then you need for a Kitfox. -----Original Message----- From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Noel Loveys Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2007 7:03 AM Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Time to Fold Wings Remember that $450 is in your pocket not in the hangar owners. $450 can buy a few gallons of gas or a new instrument every month. If you are regular you probably spend more time than that on the throne everyday. Lets see there are seven days in a week....... Is that wasted (pun intended) time? When I was trained I was trained to do a thorough pre flight and then a full flight plan including a flight W&B and navigation with alternates. Calculating and filling out the W&B, nav charts, headings, fuel consumption, dead reckoning and a flight itinerary chews up quite a bit of time too. I realize all this paper work isn't necessary for every flight but it helps to keep me sharp. Noel Do Not Archive > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of > Guy Buchanan > Sent: Monday, November 05, 2007 10:53 PM > To: kitfox-list@matronics.com > Subject: Kitfox-List: Time to Fold Wings > > > > Today I timed myself as I put the plane into it's folding wing > "hangar". It took just over seven minutes, rather than the twenty > seconds it would have taken to push it into a full size hangar. I'm > guessing the set-up takes about the same time, for a grand total of > 14 minutes of wing folding overhead per flight. If I fly four times a > week, it's costing me almost an hour a week, or four hours a month, > which works out to about $500 per month to fold the wings. Hmmm. > Maybe I should just rent the hangar. ($450 per month, versus the $100 > per month I'm paying for a tie-down now.) My break even is therefore > 12 flights per month. Guess I'm going to have to give this > more thought. > > > Guy Buchanan > San Diego, CA > K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar. > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 19 ____________________________________ Time: 07:03:38 PM PST US From: Michael Gibbs Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Sport Pilot vs. LSA (was: Aircraft Bill of Sale) Paul had sed: >" In this case, I think it is more than obvious the FAA intended (or >meant to say) "aircraft gross weight" but just slipped up in their final >wording." To which Steve sez: >I disagree, and would have a hard time believing that that type of >oversight would exist. I think Steve is exactly right. Even given how slowly our federal bureaucracy sometimes moves, if the FAA had intended to refer to max gross weight they would have changed it a long time ago. Mike G. N728KF Phoenix, AZ ________________________________ Message 20 ____________________________________ Time: 10:12:21 PM PST US From: "debrun26@juno.com" Subject: Kitfox-List: KF S5 NSI Inverted? Just wondering~ Can the standard NSI conversion Subaru S5 be flown inve rted? It has the dry sump oil system with the remote oil tank mounted t o the firewall. Thanks, Layne Anch., Ak. S5 NSI Sooby _____________________________________________________________ Click now to choose from thousands of designs for your checks! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2111/fc/Ioyw6iifWiftLJ0jaNjB7Kkssadn ZAcvBa5yIAt9c2B2jnMesWi52r/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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.