Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:54 PM - NIB 0-7000 RPM 2 1/4" Tachometer Micro 1000 Rotax CDI (fox5flyer)
2. 12:54 PM - Re: What a boring list! (dave)
3. 12:55 PM - The FAR Mentality - Avemco (LarryM)
4. 12:55 PM - Re: What a boring list! (dave)
5. 12:55 PM - Re: Show us your finished Kitfox!! (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Geir_Olav_=D8ien?=)
6. 12:55 PM - (OFF TOPIC) Hangar WAS: Show us your finished Kitfox!! (Michel Verheughe)
7. 12:55 PM - Re: Polyester Rib Reinforcement Tape (Lynn Matteson)
8. 12:55 PM - Re: Re: Show us your finished Kitfox!! (Noel Loveys)
9. 01:24 PM - Re: Show us your finished Kitfox!! (n85ae)
10. 01:32 PM - Re: (OFF TOPIC) Hangar WAS: Show us your finished Kitfox!! (Frank Miles)
11. 02:07 PM - Re: Show us your finished Kitfox!! (dave)
12. 02:11 PM - Re: Show us your finished Kitfox!! (Rexinator)
13. 02:24 PM - Re: The FAR Mentality - Avemco (Rexinator)
14. 02:36 PM - Re: (OFF TOPIC) Hangar WAS: Show us your finished Kitfox!! (Pete Christensen)
15. 02:44 PM - Lightweight fabric! (Dave)
16. 02:47 PM - Re: Show us your finished Kitfox!! (dave)
17. 02:50 PM - Re: Show us your finished Kitfox!! (dave)
18. 02:53 PM - Re: Show us your finished Kitfox!! (dave)
19. 02:55 PM - Re: Show us your finished Kitfox!! (darinh)
20. 02:55 PM - Re: Show us your finished Kitfox!! (dave)
21. 03:03 PM - Re: Show us your finished Kitfox!! (darinh)
22. 03:51 PM - Re: The FAR Mentality - Avemco (Noel Loveys)
23. 04:11 PM - Re: Lightweight fabric! (Noel Loveys)
24. 04:51 PM - Re: Show us your finished Kitfox!! (eric)
25. 06:05 PM - Re: Lightweight fabric! (John W. Hart)
26. 07:00 PM - Re: (OFF TOPIC) Hangar WAS: Show us your finished Kitfox!! (akflyer)
27. 10:43 PM - Re: Sport Pilot (John Allen)
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: | NIB 0-7000 RPM 2 1/4" Tachometer Micro 1000 Rotax CDI |
I just ran across this nice little tach on ebay that would be good for
you 582 guys with limited panel space. Might work on others too. FYI
only.
Deke Morisse
Mikado Michigan
S5/Subaru/CAP 355+ TT
"The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory, but
progress."
- Joseph Joubert
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&viewitem=&item
=260228759686
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: What a boring list! |
>
>
> Every day, nothing new and exciting in Kifoxlandia ... Every day I read this
> list hoping for something new, 20+ mph aerodynamic tricks, etc. Nothing.
>
Well I have picked up a few mph here and there. But nothing like I have read before
about rad scoops giving thme 10 mph etc.
I would like to see results on wing struts cuffs at wing and gas cap fairings,
I have neither of them at present but I not sure if they worth the effort.
I think I got a 5 mph gain mod in mind but I won't tell all till i do it and test
it . As discusssed before my videos on youtube sure show what works and I
put it in a video. Cannot ask for more than that now. EH !!
Here is the link again http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=kitfoxflyer and yes I am sure a few who don't send in videos will tell us how sick they are of seing my videos Hell I would lilke to see some others flying too. Come on guys don';t be shy.
--------
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=180020#180020
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: | The FAR Mentality - Avemco |
Thought that this was appropriate. Attached is the article in pdf. if you'd like
to keep it.
THE FAR MENTALITY
By Jim Lauerman
President, Avemco Insurance Company
Why The Rules and Regs Arent Always the Holy Grail
When I give educational forums around the country, I can count on almost always
getting a
question like the one I had at Sun N Fun a few years ago. An obviously agitated
member of
the audience asked, How come you people require me to receive 25 hours dual flight
instruction before I can get insurance in a twin when all the FAA makes me do is
get a multi-
engine rating? My somewhat flippant answer was, Because the FAA isnt putting a
million
dollars on the line every time you go flying.
This pilots question reveals a mindset that
I observe frequently. That is the mindset
that the FARs are the Holy Grail of aviation
safety and that they prescribe acceptable
behavior for all flying situations. Here
are a few more illustrations.
A few years ago a CFI friend of mine sent
his flight school an e-mail regarding the attitude
of one of his students. The CFI
expressed concern about his complacent
attitude about flying and expressing (the
CFIs) concern for (the students) safety
post check ride. None the less, this CFI
endorsed this pilot for the check ride
because he met all of the standards for
the practical test and he passed his Part
141 Graduation ride. Less than a month
later the pilot killed himself and three passengers
in a late model Cessna 182.
One final illustration: when I became
involved with the FAA/Industry Training
Standardization (FITS) initiative a few
years ago as a representative of the insurance
industry I commented that my
desired outcome of the initiative would be
that it would devise some guidelines for
transitioning to Technically Advanced
Aircraft (TAAs) that would be effective, yet
voluntary. I suggested that insurance companies
such as Avemco could then have
the option of writing those standards into
our policies to have a reasonable chance
of knowing that effective transition training
was taking place. I felt that a free market
solution could be offered to the problem
of transition training. That way not
every insurance company would adopt the
standards, giving the consumer the choice
as to whether to insure with a company
that required the training or one who didnt.
Our industry would thus be able to avoid
the cumbersome heavy hand of FAA regulation
on this new technology, regulation
that invariably would be extremely difficult
to keep up with given the amazing technological
developments and advancements
in avionics.
My idea was immediately labeled by individuals
representing pilot associations as
de facto regulation by insurance companies.
The association representative said he
preferred that this regulation be done
through the FAA regulatory process where,
he asserted, it belonged. Interestingly he
admitted that the FAA was ill-equipped to
do this effectively, but that he still preferred
that process to a free market one.
It is my belief that these illustrations represent
a view of the FARs that are both unrealistic
and dangerous. By their very nature,
regulations are minimum standards.
They are designed that way to give the
pilot maximum leeway in making his or her
own decisions. For example, the FARs permit
a newly minted Private Pilot to obtain a
multi-engine rating (and complex endorsement)
in a Seminole and be legal to fly a
brand new Beech Baron. Does anyone really
think that is a safe situation? If you
were an insurer, would you be willing to
risk $2,000,000 on that pilots skill (considering
both hull and liability)?
Was the pilot of the fatal C-182 a safe pilot
simply because he met the FAAs Practical
Test Standards and could pass the check
ride? Did the FARs protect his passengers?
Can you regulate away complacency?
Do we really want the FAA to dictate the
standards for transition training into a TAA?
Doesnt it seem evident that such an
approach would probably be ineffective and
that after a few bad high profile losses the
FAA would be forced to impose stringent
(and non-negotiable) standards that could
damage the TAA market? Whatever one
believes about de facto regulation by insurers,
I strongly suspect that insurance for
expensive TAAs would dry up long before
the FAA had a chance to take action.
My point here is not to denigrate the hard
working people who write and enforce the
FARs. I know many of them and I can
assure you that they want a safe and profitable
General Aviation as much as you and
I do. Instead, it is my intent to help all of us
rise to a higher level of personal responsibility
for aviation safety other than just
meeting the FARs.
Consider this: regulations, by their very
nature, are written to be legally enforceable.
They are black and white attempts to codify
acceptable behavior. Flying an aircraft, however,
is a complex act that involves not only
the mind, but also emotions and values.
Recent efforts by people like John and
Martha King to engage in real world risk
management training recognize this reality
and offer much promise in reducing accidents
(and, might I add, helping to control
insurance costs).
But for our industry to fully engage in serious
risk management we must first get past
the FAR mentality. I encourage each of
you to think about that deeply the next time
you are managing your own risks of flight.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=180007#180007
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/the_far_mentality__avemco_176.pdf
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: What a boring list! |
> I dont know of any kit fox or avid wings departing the airframe inflight.
>
>
> Beaver RX650 lost a wing last week in Alberta Canada due to corrosion.
> Challengers lost a few last year.
>
> Kitfoxes -- zero so far that are talked about anyhow.
> I think the Model 1 in it's early days had a few issues but resolved now .
>
>
--------
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=180019#180019
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: | Show us your finished Kitfox!! |
Trying again since my other URL was faulty.
http://tinyurl.com/6d245z
http://tinyurl.com/5um8ye
-----Opprinnelig melding-----
Fra: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] P vegne av kirk hull
Sendt: 29. april 2008 02:59
Til: kitfox-list@matronics.com
Emne: RE: Kitfox-List: Show us your finished Kitfox!!
205AK
There are more pic's on my EAA chapter website @ roosterville612.org
Then go to the member projects page and then al and kirks Kitfox. There is
also some of her on the trailer from the snake Saturday parade in the events
page
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of jlfernan
Sent: Monday, April 28, 2008 7:42 AM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Show us your finished Kitfox!!
I'm sitting here anxiously waiting for my kit to arrive(Delivery date is
July11). I need inspiration to keep my mind occupied. If you guys could
start posting photos of your finished or even nearly finished planes, I
could entertain myself with those till I start mine. [Laughing]
--------
Jorge Fernandez
Supersport
Waiting on delivery
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179784#179784
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: | (OFF TOPIC) Hangar WAS: Show us your finished Kitfox!! |
> From: Frank Miles [f.miles.tcp.833@clearwire.net]
> The hanger doors were also of interest.
Dear Frank, this is not personal because I notice that nearly everyone does
it but ... it is called 'hangar' and not 'hanger.'
Because I have lived in three different countries and speak four languages,
I have a natural interest for etymology and especially where the Germanic
and Latin languages meet.
A 'hangar' is a French word used in Normandy to call a cattle barn. The his
tory says that it was Louis Bl=E9riot who started using the word as he want
ed such barns to be built to house his planes.
But the word has even an older origin: 'Hangard.' That is an old Germanic n
ame that probably came to Normandy with the Norsemen. The suffix 'gard' pro
bably means place, or farm. It is still found in places like the German tow
n Stuttgart.
The prefix 'han' is not so clear but I wonder if it is not related to the G
erman 'Henne,' Norwegian 'h=F8ne' and English 'hen.'
Incidentally, Bl=E9riot - as you know - flew first over the English Channel
from Cap Gris-Nez to Dover. The former is French writing (litt: Gris Nez
= grey nose) for graaness. The suffix 'ness' being much used in Britain a
s it was introduced by the Anglo-Saxons and Norsemen and means; a cape.
... Okay, totally off-Kitofx-topic and I hope you didn't fall asleep! :-)
Cheers,
Michel Verheughe
Norway
Kitfox 3 - Jabiru 2200
Do not archive
<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: Polyester Rib Reinforcement Tape |
I ran into the same thing, Darin. I only needed about 15 feet, and
Jim and Dondi Miller (Polyfiber sales and reps from Columbus, Oh)
sent me that amount. If you contact whoever you buy your Polyfiber
products from, perhaps they'll do the same. Jim and Dondi told me
they have short rolls or scraps left from doing demonstration shows
and the EAA Weekend Workshops.
Lynn Matteson
Grass Lake, Michigan
Kitfox IV Speedster w/Jabiru 2200
flying w/490+ hrs
On Apr 27, 2008, at 11:53 PM, darinh wrote:
>
> Does anyone have any of the 1/2" rib reinforcement tape for the rib
> stitching left over or that they didn't use (the adhesive backed
> stuff)? The roll supplied with my kit was enough to do only 1 1/2
> wings (I need enough to do the top of my last wing). I don't
> really want to buy a 60 yrd. roll when I only need a third of it.
> I know some people don't rib stitch but use screws or rivets so I
> am hoping someone has some they will part with. Obviously, I am
> happy to purchase so let me know the price.
>
> I need this stuff ASAP so I can get this bird in the air so if no
> bites by tomorrow night, I will bite the bullet and get the whole
> 60 yrds.
>
> Thanks guys!
>
> Do Not Archive
>
> --------
> Darin Hawkes
> Series 7 (Painting)
> 914 Turbo
> Kaysville, Utah
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179746#179746
>
>
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: Show us your finished Kitfox!! |
This is C-FINB
n.l. planes.jpg
Sigtaturea
Noel Loveys
Campbellton, NL, Canada
CDN AME intern, PP-Rec
C-FINB, Kitfox III-A
582 B box, Ivo IFA, Aerocet 1100 floats
noelloveys@yahoo.ca
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: Show us your finished Kitfox!! |
N85AE Interior, and panel.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=180081#180081
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/interior_165.jpg
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: | (OFF TOPIC) Hangar WAS: Show us your finished Kitfox!! |
Dear Michel,
Thank you for pointing out my error, I think. I do know the difference but
at 73 sometimes my brain and fingers sometimes do not consult with one
another.
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michel
Verheughe
Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2008 1:25 AM
Subject: Kitfox-List: (OFF TOPIC) Hangar WAS: Show us your finished Kitfox!!
> From: Frank Miles [f.miles.tcp.833@clearwire.net]
> The hanger doors were also of interest.
Dear Frank, this is not personal because I notice that nearly everyone does
it but ... it is called 'hangar' and not 'hanger.'
Because I have lived in three different countries and speak four languages,
I have a natural interest for etymology and especially where the Germanic
and Latin languages meet.
A 'hangar' is a French word used in Normandy to call a cattle barn. The
history says that it was Louis Blriot who started using the word as he
wanted such barns to be built to house his planes.
But the word has even an older origin: 'Hangard.' That is an old Germanic
name that probably came to Normandy with the Norsemen. The suffix 'gard'
probably means place, or farm. It is still found in places like the German
town Stuttgart.
The prefix 'han' is not so clear but I wonder if it is not related to the
German 'Henne,' Norwegian 'hne' and English 'hen.'
Incidentally, Blriot - as you know - flew first over the English Channel
from Cap Gris-Nez to Dover. The former is French writing (litt: Gris Nez
grey nose) for graaness. The suffix 'ness' being much used in Britain as it
was introduced by the Anglo-Saxons and Norsemen and means; a cape.
... Okay, totally off-Kitofx-topic and I hope you didn't fall asleep! :-)
Cheers,
Michel Verheughe
Norway
Kitfox 3 - Jabiru 2200
Do not archive
<pre><b><font size=2 color=000000" face="courier new,courier">
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List">http://www.matronics.c
om/Navigator?Kitfox-List</a>
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com</a>
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contri
bution</a>
</b></font></pre>
Checked by AVG.
7:26 AM
Checked by AVG.
7:26 AM
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: Show us your finished Kitfox!! |
Jorge,
Here is some inspiration for you, 2 Kitfoxes at my dock :)
Dave
--------
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=180097#180097
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/2planes_sunset_cottage_641.jpg
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: Show us your finished Kitfox!! |
I don't know what you mean Geir, the other URL worked for me.
Rex
Do not archive
Geir Olav ien wrote:
>
>Trying again since my other URL was faulty.
>
>http://tinyurl.com/6d245z
>
>http://tinyurl.com/5um8ye
>
>
>
>
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: The FAR Mentality - Avemco |
Yes very appropriate, Thanks
--
Rex Hefferan
SE Colorado / K-II / 582-C / still waiting repairs
Do not archive
LarryM wrote:
>
>Thought that this was appropriate. Attached is the article in pdf. if you'd like
to keep it.
>
>
>THE FAR MENTALITY
>By Jim Lauerman
>President, Avemco Insurance Company
>
<snip>
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: (OFF TOPIC) Hangar WAS: Show us your finished Kitfox!! |
But, like everything else in this country (USA) "hanger" has come to be
accepted. Many words get changed here. Wasup.
Pete
Model 3 912ul N73BH
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michel Verheughe" <michel@online.no>
Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2008 2:24 AM
Subject: Kitfox-List: (OFF TOPIC) Hangar WAS: Show us your finished Kitfox!!
> From: Frank Miles [f.miles.tcp.833@clearwire.net]
> The hanger doors were also of interest.
Dear Frank, this is not personal because I notice that nearly everyone does
it but ... it is called 'hangar' and not 'hanger.'
Because I have lived in three different countries and speak four languages,
I have a natural interest for etymology and especially where the Germanic
and Latin languages meet.
A 'hangar' is a French word used in Normandy to call a cattle barn. The
history says that it was Louis Blriot who started using the word as he
wanted such barns to be built to house his planes.
But the word has even an older origin: 'Hangard.' That is an old Germanic
name that probably came to Normandy with the Norsemen. The suffix 'gard'
probably means place, or farm. It is still found in places like the German
town Stuttgart.
The prefix 'han' is not so clear but I wonder if it is not related to the
German 'Henne,' Norwegian 'hne' and English 'hen.'
Incidentally, Blriot - as you know - flew first over the English Channel
from Cap Gris-Nez to Dover. The former is French writing (litt: Gris Nez =
grey nose) for graaness. The suffix 'ness' being much used in Britain as it
was introduced by the Anglo-Saxons and Norsemen and means; a cape.
... Okay, totally off-Kitofx-topic and I hope you didn't fall asleep! :-)
Cheers,
Michel Verheughe
Norway
Kitfox 3 - Jabiru 2200
Do not archive
<pre><b><font size=2 color=000000" face="courier new,courier">
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List</a>
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com</a>
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution</a>
</b></font></pre>
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Lightweight fabric! |
My 1992 Mod IV 1050 was originally covered in the lightweight fabric that
was provided by Skystar. It was done extremely well in polyfiber and I had
no doubt about it's state until yesterday. I had given it a fair knock from
time to time and it always responded with the familiar low note. Yesterday I
accidentally bumped it with my elbow and went straight through the fuselage
side! It was right in the area that would have been beside the window in the
shed it was stored in before it was mine. I've patched it but I guess a
fuselage recover is the nest job on the list. There's no indication that the
polyspray is not adequate even with a very strong light. What is the proper
way to check fabric? Besides punching a 6" hole in it!
Message 16
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Show us your finished Kitfox!! |
What would a kitfox be without floats part of the year?
Here is a pic of three of us stopping for fuel in Killarney Ontario
--------
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=180110#180110
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/jim_052_711.jpg
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: Show us your finished Kitfox!! |
Somewhere in the middle of Georgian Bay Ontario we found a little secluded cove
on an island .
--------
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=180111#180111
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/jim_064_167.jpg
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: Show us your finished Kitfox!! |
The benifits of Amphib Gear. Here we are half way across lake Erie on Pelee island
for breakfast
--------
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=180114#180114
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/pelee_028_859.jpg
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: Show us your finished Kitfox!! |
dave wrote:
> What would a kitfox be without floats part of the year?
>
In my part of the woods, a Kitfox on floats is pretty worthless...some big bush
tires is the ticket down here.
I would love to do some float flying with my fox thought...lake hopping and fishing
would be great!
--------
Darin Hawkes
Series 7 (Painting)
914 Turbo
Kaysville, Utah
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=180115#180115
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: Show us your finished Kitfox!! |
AM breakfast. 23 miles out into Lake Erie Ontario is the tip of Long point.
--------
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=180116#180116
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/5_204.jpg
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: Show us your finished Kitfox!! |
Here's a pic of my old Model 3 on the salt flats.
--------
Darin Hawkes
Series 7 (Painting)
914 Turbo
Kaysville, Utah
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=180118#180118
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/salt_flats_large_967.jpg
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: | The FAR Mentality - Avemco |
Government regulations tend to be minimums. Transport category planes seldom,
if ever come close to FAA minimums. That should tell you something.
Noel
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of LarryM
Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2008 10:36 AM
Subject: Kitfox-List: The FAR Mentality - Avemco
Thought that this was appropriate. Attached is the article in pdf. if you'd like
to keep it.
THE FAR MENTALITY
By Jim Lauerman
President, Avemco Insurance Company
Why The Rules and Regs Arent Always the Holy Grail
When I give educational forums around the country, I can count on almost always
getting a
question like the one I had at Sun N Fun a few years ago. An obviously agitated
member of
the audience asked, How come you people require me to receive 25 hours dual flight
instruction before I can get insurance in a twin when all the FAA makes me do is
get a multi-
engine rating? My somewhat flippant answer was, Because the FAA isnt putting a
million
dollars on the line every time you go flying.
This pilots question reveals a mindset that
I observe frequently. That is the mindset
that the FARs are the Holy Grail of aviation
safety and that they prescribe acceptable
behavior for all flying situations. Here
are a few more illustrations.
A few years ago a CFI friend of mine sent
his flight school an e-mail regarding the attitude
of one of his students. The CFI
expressed concern about his complacent
attitude about flying and expressing (the
CFIs) concern for (the students) safety
post check ride. None the less, this CFI
endorsed this pilot for the check ride
because he met all of the standards for
the practical test and he passed his Part
141 Graduation ride. Less than a month
later the pilot killed himself and three passengers
in a late model Cessna 182.
One final illustration: when I became
involved with the FAA/Industry Training
Standardization (FITS) initiative a few
years ago as a representative of the insurance
industry I commented that my
desired outcome of the initiative would be
that it would devise some guidelines for
transitioning to Technically Advanced
Aircraft (TAAs) that would be effective, yet
voluntary. I suggested that insurance companies
such as Avemco could then have
the option of writing those standards into
our policies to have a reasonable chance
of knowing that effective transition training
was taking place. I felt that a free market
solution could be offered to the problem
of transition training. That way not
every insurance company would adopt the
standards, giving the consumer the choice
as to whether to insure with a company
that required the training or one who didnt.
Our industry would thus be able to avoid
the cumbersome heavy hand of FAA regulation
on this new technology, regulation
that invariably would be extremely difficult
to keep up with given the amazing technological
developments and advancements
in avionics.
My idea was immediately labeled by individuals
representing pilot associations as
de facto regulation by insurance companies.
The association representative said he
preferred that this regulation be done
through the FAA regulatory process where,
he asserted, it belonged. Interestingly he
admitted that the FAA was ill-equipped to
do this effectively, but that he still preferred
that process to a free market one.
It is my belief that these illustrations represent
a view of the FARs that are both unrealistic
and dangerous. By their very nature,
regulations are minimum standards.
They are designed that way to give the
pilot maximum leeway in making his or her
own decisions. For example, the FARs permit
a newly minted Private Pilot to obtain a
multi-engine rating (and complex endorsement)
in a Seminole and be legal to fly a
brand new Beech Baron. Does anyone really
think that is a safe situation? If you
were an insurer, would you be willing to
risk $2,000,000 on that pilots skill (considering
both hull and liability)?
Was the pilot of the fatal C-182 a safe pilot
simply because he met the FAAs Practical
Test Standards and could pass the check
ride? Did the FARs protect his passengers?
Can you regulate away complacency?
Do we really want the FAA to dictate the
standards for transition training into a TAA?
Doesnt it seem evident that such an
approach would probably be ineffective and
that after a few bad high profile losses the
FAA would be forced to impose stringent
(and non-negotiable) standards that could
damage the TAA market? Whatever one
believes about de facto regulation by insurers,
I strongly suspect that insurance for
expensive TAAs would dry up long before
the FAA had a chance to take action.
My point here is not to denigrate the hard
working people who write and enforce the
FARs. I know many of them and I can
assure you that they want a safe and profitable
General Aviation as much as you and
I do. Instead, it is my intent to help all of us
rise to a higher level of personal responsibility
for aviation safety other than just
meeting the FARs.
Consider this: regulations, by their very
nature, are written to be legally enforceable.
They are black and white attempts to codify
acceptable behavior. Flying an aircraft, however,
is a complex act that involves not only
the mind, but also emotions and values.
Recent efforts by people like John and
Martha King to engage in real world risk
management training recognize this reality
and offer much promise in reducing accidents
(and, might I add, helping to control
insurance costs).
But for our industry to fully engage in serious
risk management we must first get past
the FAR mentality. I encourage each of
you to think about that deeply the next time
you are managing your own risks of flight.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=180007#180007
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/the_far_mentality__avemco_176.pdf
Message 23
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Lightweight fabric! |
There is a special spring tool for applying pressure to the cloth if it
penetrates it's no good.
To check the bottom of your frame where rust can attack try putting about
twenty pounds of force on an awl if it penetrates the frame was rusty if it
doesn't put a spot of paint where you did the test.
Noel
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dave
Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2008 6:24 PM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Lightweight fabric!
My 1992 Mod IV 1050 was originally covered in the lightweight fabric that
was provided by Skystar. It was done extremely well in polyfiber and I had
no doubt about it's state until yesterday. I had given it a fair knock from
time to time and it always responded with the familiar low note. Yesterday I
accidentally bumped it with my elbow and went straight through the fuselage
side! It was right in the area that would have been beside the window in the
shed it was stored in before it was mine. I've patched it but I guess a
fuselage recover is the nest job on the list. There's no indication that the
polyspray is not adequate even with a very strong light. What is the proper
way to check fabric? Besides punching a 6" hole in it!
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: Show us your finished Kitfox!! |
here is a recently rebuilt and converted to tricycle gear and wide body
Speedster
Mod. IV
Eric N58EW
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: | Lightweight fabric! |
Noel,
AC 43.13-1B, paragraph 2-34 says:
"2-34. FABRIC TESTING. Mechanical devices used to test fabric by pressing
against or piercing the finished fabric are not FAA approved and are used at
the discretion of the mechanic to base an opinion on the general fabric
condition. Punch test accuracy will depend on the individual device
calibration, total coating thickness, brittleness, and types of coatings and
fabric. Mechanical devices are not applicable to glass fiber fabric that
will easily shear and indicate a very low reading regardless of the true
breaking strength. If the fabric tests in the lower breaking strength range
with the mechanical punch tester or if the overall fabric cover conditions
are poor, then more accurate field tests may be made.
Cut a 1-1/4-inch wide by 4-inch long sample from a top exposed surface,
remove all coatings and ravel the edges to a 1-inch width. Clamp each end
between suitable clamps with one clamp anchored to a support structure while
a load is applied (see table 2-1) by adding sand in a suitable container
suspended a few inches above the floor. If the breaking strength is still in
question, a sample should be sent to a qualified testing laboratory and
breaking strength tests made in accordance with American Society of Testing
Materials (ASTM) publication D5035.
AC 43.13-1B 9/8/98
NOTE: ASTM publication D1682 has been discontinued but is still referred to
in some Aerospace Material Specification (AMS). The grab test method
previously listed in ASTM D1682, sections 1 through 16, has been superseded
by ASTM publication D5034.
The strip testing method (most commonly used in aircraft) previously listed
in ASTM D1682, sections 17
through 21, has been superseded by ASTM publication D5035."
It is true that these are experimental aircraft and the builder/repairman
does the work as he/she sees fit, but in my opinion, the punch test is not a
valid indication of fabric condition.
John Hart
KF IV
Wilburton, OK
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Noel Loveys
Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2008 6:09 PM
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Lightweight fabric!
There is a special spring tool for applying pressure to the cloth if it
penetrates it's no good.
To check the bottom of your frame where rust can attack try putting about
twenty pounds of force on an awl if it penetrates the frame was rusty if it
doesn't put a spot of paint where you did the test.
Noel
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dave
Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2008 6:24 PM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Lightweight fabric!
My 1992 Mod IV 1050 was originally covered in the lightweight fabric that
was provided by Skystar. It was done extremely well in polyfiber and I had
no doubt about it's state until yesterday. I had given it a fair knock from
time to time and it always responded with the familiar low note. Yesterday I
accidentally bumped it with my elbow and went straight through the fuselage
side! It was right in the area that would have been beside the window in the
shed it was stored in before it was mine. I've patched it but I guess a
fuselage recover is the nest job on the list. There's no indication that the
polyspray is not adequate even with a very strong light. What is the proper
way to check fabric? Besides punching a 6" hole in it!
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: (OFF TOPIC) Hangar WAS: Show us your finished Kitfox!! |
peteohms wrote:
> But, like everything else in this country (USA) "hanger" has come to be
> accepted. Many words get changed here. Wasup.
>
> Pete
> Model 3 912ul N73BH
>
>
> ---
not quite... a hanger is what you put your clothes on in the closet, a hangar is
what you tuck your plane into. Even in the US this holds true.
--------
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=180158#180158
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 |
|
"akflyer" <akflyer_2000@yahoo.com> said:
"you would never make it up here as a commercial bush pilot... if it will go inside
the plane these guys will try to get it off the ground."
When did they start limiting the loads to the inside of the aircraft in Alaska?
DO NOT ARCHIVE
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
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! --
|