Today's Message Index:
----------------------
0. 12:47 AM - What's My Contribution Used For? (Matt Dralle)
1. 05:48 AM - Re: What's My Contribution Used For? (akflyer)
2. 06:39 AM - Re: Kitfox Engine - 2 Stroke VS 4 Stroke. (Bob Brennan)
3. 08:20 AM - Re: Kitfox Engine - 2 Stroke VS 4 Stroke. (Rexinator)
4. 10:05 AM - Re: Re: What's My Contribution Used For? (Michael Gibbs)
5. 11:02 AM - (Glenn Horne)
6. 02:10 PM - Re: RE kitfox flight simulator (akflyer)
7. 06:29 PM - Re: Kitfox Engine - 2 Stroke VS 4 Stroke. (JetPilot)
8. 07:51 PM - Re: Kitfox Engine - 2 Stroke VS 4 Stroke. (Guy Buchanan)
Message 0
| 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: | What's My Contribution Used For? |
Dear Listers,
Some have asked, "What's my Contribution used for?" and that's a good question.
Here are just a few examples of what your direct List support enables. It provides
for the very expensive, commercial-grade T1 Internet connection used on
the List insuring maximum performance and minimal contention when accessing
List services. It pays for the regular system hardware and software upgrades
enabling the highest performance possible for services such as the Archive Search
Engine, List Browser, and Forums. It pays for 19+ years worth of online archive
data available for instant random search and access. And, it offsets the
many hours spent writing, developing, and maintaining the custom applications
that power this List Service such as the List Browse, Search Engine, Forums,
Wiki and PhotoShare.
But most importantly, your List Contribution enables a forum where you and your
peers can communicate freely in an environment that is free from moderation,
censorship, advertising, commercialism, SPAM, and computer viruses. How many
places on the Internet can you make all those statements these days?
It is YOUR CONTRIBUTION that directly enables these many aspects of these valuable
List services. Please support it today with your List Contribution. Its
one of the best investments you can make in your Sport...
List Contribution Web Site:
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Thank you for your support!
Matt Dralle
Email List Administrator
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: What's My Contribution Used For? |
But most importantly, your List Contribution enables a forum where you and your
peers can communicate freely in an environment that is free from moderation,
censorship, advertising, commercialism, SPAM, and computer viruses. How many places
on the Internet can you make all those statements these days?
run that by me again..... I dont think so...scooter
--------
DO NOT ARCHIVE
Leonard Perry
Soldotna AK
Avid "C" / Mk IV
582 IVO IFA
Full Lotus 1260
As done as any plane will ever be.... cause now the tinkeritis takes over.
hander outer of humorless darwin awards
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=214527#214527
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: | Kitfox Engine - 2 Stroke VS 4 Stroke. |
If we can't agree to go with 2 stroke vs 4 stroke, why not try flying with
Hybrid Power? No more worries about "unexpected" power loss either!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mOvijQ0-6-g
DO NOT ARCHIVE
Bob Brennan - N717GB
1991 UK Model 2 ELSA Kitfox
Rotax 582 with 3 blade prop
Wrightsville Pa
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of JetPilot
Sent: 15 November 2008 11:37 am
Subject: Kitfox-List: Kitfox Engine - 2 Stroke VS 4 Stroke.
A 2 stroke engine is much more likely to suddenly fail than a 4 stroke, this
is FACT, not opinion. There are always cases where guys have been able to
make a 2 stroke engine work for many hours... There are even guys that have
done extraordinary trips with 2 strokes, but this does not change the FACTS
or the REALITY that 2 strokes are much more likely to suddenly fail in
flight than a 4 stroke. In theory the 2 stroke engine is very simple, but
it has a fatal flaw, the 2 stroke engine requires PERFECT delivery of the
fuel air mixture to not overheat in seize. In an airplane, as in most
applications, life happens, and sooner or later the mixture will not be
laboratory perfect for a few moments and the engine suddenly seizes up.
Then there are the additional issues of Cold Seizure, rings sticking,
exhaust failures, and others... So if you think you can make a 2 stroke
engine work under laboratory perfect conditions for 1000 hours, then maybe
you will be successful wit!
h a 2 stroke engine. But most people are not......
Why do you think that NO certified airplane has been made with a 2 stroke
engine for the last 50 years ? In the past fuel was cheap, and 2 stroke
engines were lighter, but NO manufacture would sell a plane with an
unreliable 2 stroke engine. Even small dirt bikes are now being sold with
4 stroke engines now. For manufacturers, and those that know how to
separate FACTS from opinion, 4 stroke engines are the the clear choice, by
about 100 %... It is pretty rare to get 100 percent consensus on anything,
but manufacturers have unanimously chosen 4 stroke engines for planes, cars,
and now for even the smallest and lightest applications. This FACT should
be enough evidence to clue most people in that 2 stroke engines are
problematic.
I fly both a 2 stroke and a 4 stroke engine, but I believe in being honest
and giving the best advice to others possible. The 2 stroke Rotax was the
only choice available for a 103 legal ultralight, so that choice is already
made for me... For my larger plane, I worked overtime and did without a
couple other of things ( new car ) to buy a Rotax 912-S. There is no way I
was going to fly with my friends and family behind a 2 stroke engine in my
Kitfox. Who out there would buy a new car with a 2 stroke engine ???
But then the same people ask if they should put a two stroke engine on their
Kitfox, it is enough to boggle the mind... For a person to give bad advice
to others just because he has been able to make a 2 stroke work without a
failure is nothing short of a disservice. In the end, I would and do fly
behind both a 2 stroke and a 4 stroke, but I never forget the fact that the
2 stroke engine is much more likely to suddenly fail at the worst possible
time and g!
et me hurt...
To top it off, if you do the numbers, with fuel usage and overhauls, the
more reliable 4 stroke is actually CHEAPER in the long run than the 2
stroke. That makes this choice a no brainier....
Mike
--------
"NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you
could have !!!
Kolb MK-III Xtra, 912-S
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=214361#214361
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: | Re: Kitfox Engine - 2 Stroke VS 4 Stroke. |
Heh heh! I looked at some of the others too. Interesting concept to
bring TV commercial style safety messages to the GA masses.
Oh, and what's up with your email address Bob?
Rex
Bob Brennan wrote:
>
>If we can't agree to go with 2 stroke vs 4 stroke, why not try flying with
>Hybrid Power? No more worries about "unexpected" power loss either!
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mOvijQ0-6-g
>
>DO NOT ARCHIVE
>
>Bob Brennan - N717GB
>1991 UK Model 2 ELSA Kitfox
>Rotax 582 with 3 blade prop
>Wrightsville Pa
>
>
--
Rex Hefferan
SE Colorado / K-II / 582-C / still waiting repairs
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's My Contribution Used For? |
Leonard quoted:
>"But most importantly, your List Contribution enables a forum where
>you and your peers can communicate freely in an environment that is
>free from moderation..."
and sez:
>run that by me again..... I dont think so...scooter
I don't know, Leonard, a lot of the conversation on the list is
pretty extreme at times, although there are some posters who exercise
some moderation. :-p
Mike G.
Kitfox List...er...Mom
Just kidding, do not archive.
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
HOLD ALL EMAIL UNTIL 11/22/08
Thank you
GLENN HORNE
Kitfox Model II
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: RE kitfox flight simulator |
can I get a link to your site to download the KF?
Thanks
--------
DO NOT ARCHIVE
Leonard Perry
Soldotna AK
Avid "C" / Mk IV
582 IVO IFA
Full Lotus 1260
As done as any plane will ever be.... cause now the tinkeritis takes over.
hander outer of humorless darwin awards
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=214590#214590
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 Engine - 2 Stroke VS 4 Stroke. |
Hahahaha,
I love the commercial ! The Kitfox glides pretty well, and can be landed in more
fields than a Cessna ever dreamed of, count me in :)
Mike
--------
"NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you could
have !!!
Kolb MK-III Xtra, 912-S
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=214622#214622
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 Engine - 2 Stroke VS 4 Stroke. |
At 08:37 AM 11/15/2008, you wrote:
>but this does not change the FACTS or the REALITY that 2 strokes are
>much more likely to suddenly fail in flight than a 4 stroke.
Since you've decided to use facts in your argument, I'd really like
to see them. Personally I believe you can substantiate your claim,
depending on how you do the numbers, but now I think you owe us the data.
>In theory the 2 stroke engine is very simple, but it has a fatal
>flaw, the 2 stroke engine requires PERFECT delivery of the fuel air
>mixture to not overheat in seize. In an airplane, as in most
>applications, life happens, and sooner or later the mixture will not
>be laboratory perfect for a few moments and the engine suddenly seizes up.
I wouldn't call it quite fatal, as I'm still alive, but you are
correct that mixture is more important in a 2-stroke than four. You
are incorrect in stating that the mixture must be perfect. It will
certainly run rich without difficulty, and it takes time, albeit
seconds not minutes, to melt a piston. Given good warning and
operating with some margin it is possible to fly near that margin
relatively safely. (. . .relative to all the other risks we take
flying experimentals.)
>For a person to give bad advice to others just because he has been
>able to make a 2 stroke work without a failure is nothing short of
>a disservice.
Providing honest information is never a disservice. And I don't think
anybody has suggested a 582 is a better choice than a 912, or any
4-stroke. In the world of experimental aviation it is up to the
builder or buyer to convince themselves one way or another based on
their requirements and what information they can glean. That's why
the list exists, and why we, the moderators, try to keep the list
information based. Yes, we encourage opinions and tolerate anecdotes
and even strenuous assertions, but it all has to work toward the
encouragement of fellow members, and therefore must somehow be
objectively supportable.
So don't think I've forgotten about those facts, Mike. I'm looking
forward to them.
Guy Buchanan, Kitfox List Moderator
San Diego, CA
K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar.
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! --
|