Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:25 AM - Re: GSC props (JetPilot)
2. 05:02 AM - Re: Re: Kitfox Control Surface Flutter Mitigation (W Duke)
3. 05:53 AM - Re: Re: GSC props (Noel Loveys)
4. 06:33 AM - Re: Kitfox Control Surface Flutter Mitigation (n85ae)
5. 06:38 AM - Re: Re: GSC props (Noel Loveys)
6. 06:39 AM - Re: Re: Kitfox Control Surface Flutter Mitigation (Noel Loveys)
7. 08:17 AM - Re: Re: Kitfox Control Surface Flutter Mitigation (fox5flyer)
8. 09:08 AM - Re: Re: GSC props (Bob Brennan)
9. 10:39 AM - Re: Trip Report (JetPilot)
10. 10:56 AM - Re: Kitfox Control Surface Flutter Mitigation (n85ae)
11. 11:08 AM - Re: Optical Low Fuel Sensor (Eggstaf@aol.com)
12. 11:33 AM - Re: Re: Kitfox Control Surface Flutter Mitigation (Noel Loveys)
13. 11:38 AM - Re: Re: GSC props (Noel Loveys)
14. 01:59 PM - Re: Kitfox Control Surface Flutter Mitigation (Catz631@aol.com)
15. 02:03 PM - Re: Trip Report (Guy Buchanan)
16. 03:01 PM - Re: Ellison Throttle Body Problems (earnestj0)
17. 03:29 PM - Re: Re: Ellison Throttle Body Problems (fox5flyer)
18. 03:34 PM - PolyFiber Reinforcing Tape (cjswa)
19. 05:02 PM - Fw: Re: Ellison Throttle Body Problems (fox5flyer)
20. 05:05 PM - Re: Re: GSC props (Lowell Fitt)
21. 05:44 PM - Re: GSC props (Ken Potter)
22. 05:46 PM - Re: Re: GSC props, was Brake Lines (Marco Menezes)
23. 07:56 PM - Re: PolyFiber Reinforcing Tape (CDE2fly@aol.com)
24. 08:32 PM - Re: Re: Kitfox Control Surface Flutter Mitigation (Randy Daughenbaugh)
25. 09:29 PM - Re: Ellison Throttle Body Problems (earnestj0)
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 |
|
eskflyer wrote:
>
>
> Take care everyone fly safe
>
> JOhn
There are several examples on and posts by people in this forum alone of very small
objects that have caused wood propellers to shatter and come apart. There
are even more examples of many GSC prop failures out there on the Internet.
This alone should be cause enough for anyone considering the purchase of a prop
to go out there and do their research before making a choice. I know some
people don't want to know the truth or hear that they may have made a bad choice
in propellers, but there are just as many that will want this information,
so here it is.
Here is a report where proper installation and inspection still resulted in a GSC
prop throwing a blade
http://www.auf.asn.au/airworthiness/gscbladeshed2.pdf
" The propeller had been removed and refitted some 12 hours before the incident,
had been inspected and assessed taking account of the occurrences mentioned
above and was considered to be in excellent condition. It had operated at 5,800
(engine) RPM for about 2 minutes
immediately before the failure."
http://www.ultralightnews.com/safety_bulletins/gsc_servicebulletin.htm
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?t=23515
http://www.ultralightnews.ca/advisories1/propadvisory.htm
http://www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-reports/aviation/1995/a95q0115/a95q0115.asp
Given this information, those that really do want the safest and best prop possible
will probably do some research for themselves and educate themselves on this
matter before making a purchase. For those that have already bought wood
props and don't want to hear that they may not have made the best choice, that
is fine. I am not trying to change your minds, you have a right to fly with
whatever you like. I am sure there are plenty of people out there that will
appreciate this information.
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=240872#240872
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: Kitfox Control Surface Flutter Mitigation |
I use full flaps to land short.- Full flap has not scared me.- Maybe I
don't know enough to be scared but I use full flaps almost all the time. Ag
ain, I usually do not use any flap until on final.- Try getting slow at a
ltitude to get the feel for it.- (I may not be able afford new gear for y
ou right now.) -There is a change in the feel of the plane that takes a l
ittle getting used to.- Nose is very high and once you get slow enough it
feels almost like you are going down more than forward.- But there is st
ill elevator authority to flare.- Not having that extra speed at flare re
ally shortens the glide and landing distance.
Maxwell Duke
S6/TD/IO240
Dublin, GA
--- On Wed, 4/22/09, n85ae <n85ae@yahoo.com> wrote:
From: n85ae <n85ae@yahoo.com>
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Kitfox Control Surface Flutter Mitigation
Maxwell -
I take it you're doing this with 1 notch of flaperons? Winds permitting I
might work on this tommorrow after work. I generally slip it in around
60, and then start flaring after the slip. 50 seems slow, but still there's
probably about 10 mph left. If I bend the gear, I'll blame you. :)
Definetly don't want to do that if it's gusting at all. Even with my
normal
style landings, I've had some wind shift and pretty dramatic sink at
times.
Regards,
Jeff
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=240836#240836
=0A=0A=0A
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 |
|
All props require attention. Even the certified props that have the
mounting bolts lock wired need to be checked for tracking, cleaning and
leading edge pitting on a regular basis. Wood props are susceptible to
water damage. They are not the first choice for dodging through clouds but
then again you are not supposed to do that.
I would really like to have seen the prop that came apart on you. I suspect
that prop had prior issues that you are not aware of. It is possible the
tap with the plastic had absolutely the square root of 0 to do with the prop
damage. What I'm thinking is a there was a problem with the lamination of
the wood the blades were carved from or you may have had a stone chip you
were unaware of. BTW what make was that prop?
I think if you check the manual on your Warp drive you will find there is
probably some maintenance you should be doing. As for the retorquing every
other day let's face it you, like me like, exaggerate on occasion.
In this country small bush planes which fly hundreds of hours a year, single
operator, have inspections done every 50 hr. These inspections are not
check the ash trays and change the oil. Every 50 hr. All the control
linkages are checked and cables are checked for tension. All the crap is
removed from under the floor boards. All control surfaces are checked and
the hinges are lubricated. I won't go into the details of either the
airframe or the engine suffice it to say there will be measurements taken of
the props and leading edge dressing done on every inspection. What I'm
getting at here is not to think just because you have a particular appliance
on your plane you can slack off your inspections. I know it's so easy to
do that.
Noel
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of JetPilot
Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2009 10:06 PM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: GSC props
Exactly my point about GSC, when a prop needs so much attention, and is so
likely to become out of tolerance to be safe, it is substandard. You can
always use the excuse, " It was not adjusted properly ". There is no
reason to fly with props that have to be constantly checked, and adjusted,
and that are very likely to be out of some unrealistic hard to keep
tolerances when such
Modern, well designed props are trouble free, you set them up properly and
they just work. You don't find people making excuses for Warp Drives and
other props that they came loose because of this or that they were not
torqued every other flight, or that the humidity messed them up. etc. etc.
No excuses for GSC. A modern well designed prop will just work.
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=240832#240832
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: Kitfox Control Surface Flutter Mitigation |
Maxwell -
I'm comfortable with the nose high attitude the plane gets when slow, so
that's no problem.
What I don't like is the full flaperons. I think at full nose up trim I still have
to hold a lot of back stick, plus it really screws up the roll control. I'll let
you be the expert on this subject.
Can we just start calling you Madmax on the forum from now on?
By the way, I think you have the same gear I have, so ... If you're
lacking funds you can just ship me yours.
Regards,
Jeff
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=240893#240893
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 |
|
And the point is???
In each one of those links either the blade had not been properly inspected
or it had been over torqued. One incident was described twice. The one
exception was the strike which hit squarely on the plastic leading edge. A
warp with the nickel edge may have survived but not necessarily . The last
one where the owner of the aircraft actually milled the hub to be able to
put more crush on an already over crushed prop is one for the books.
To answer my own question the point is; refer to GSC manuals. Carefully
do the prop inspections at regular intervals... 50 - 100 hr. I never
thought of it before but it may be an idea to remove the blades to have a
closer look at the collars. That would be a good idea even on the warp
blades. While you are at it you should be checking the hub for any sign of
cracking or wear.
Noel
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of JetPilot
Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 8:55 AM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: GSC props
eskflyer wrote:
>
>
> Take care everyone fly safe
>
> JOhn
There are several examples on and posts by people in this forum alone of
very small objects that have caused wood propellers to shatter and come
apart. There are even more examples of many GSC prop failures out there on
the Internet. This alone should be cause enough for anyone considering the
purchase of a prop to go out there and do their research before making a
choice. I know some people don't want to know the truth or hear that they
may have made a bad choice in propellers, but there are just as many that
will want this information, so here it is.
Here is a report where proper installation and inspection still resulted in
a GSC prop throwing a blade
http://www.auf.asn.au/airworthiness/gscbladeshed2.pdf
" The propeller had been removed and refitted some 12 hours before the
incident, had been inspected and assessed taking account of the occurrences
mentioned above and was considered to be in excellent condition. It had
operated at 5,800 (engine) RPM for about 2 minutes
immediately before the failure."
http://www.ultralightnews.com/safety_bulletins/gsc_servicebulletin.htm
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?t=23515
http://www.ultralightnews.ca/advisories1/propadvisory.htm
http://www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-reports/aviation/1995/a95q0115/a95q0115.as
p
Given this information, those that really do want the safest and best prop
possible will probably do some research for themselves and educate
themselves on this matter before making a purchase. For those that have
already bought wood props and don't want to hear that they may not have made
the best choice, that is fine. I am not trying to change your minds, you
have a right to fly with whatever you like. I am sure there are plenty of
people out there that will appreciate this information.
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=240872#240872
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 Control Surface Flutter Mitigation |
I'm off the water generally in less than 500 ft reasonably calm conditions
full gross. I can "land" in less than 300 ft for sure. 2/3 flap.
Noel
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of W Duke
Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 9:31 AM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Kitfox Control Surface Flutter Mitigation
I use full flaps to land short. Full flap has not scared me. Maybe I don't
know enough to be scared but I use full flaps almost all the time. Again, I
usually do not use any flap until on final. Try getting slow at altitude to
get the feel for it. (I may not be able afford new gear for you right now.)
There is a change in the feel of the plane that takes a little getting used
to. Nose is very high and once you get slow enough it feels almost like you
are going down more than forward. But there is still elevator authority to
flare. Not having that extra speed at flare really shortens the glide and
landing distance.
Maxwell Duke
S6/TD/IO240
Dublin, GA
--- On Wed, 4/22/09, n85ae <n85ae@yahoo.com> wrote:
From: n85ae <n85ae@yahoo.com>
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Kitfox Control Surface Flutter Mitigation
Maxwell -
I take it you're doing this with 1 notch of flaperons? Winds permitting I
might work on this tommorrow after work. I generally slip it in around
60, and then start flaring after the slip. 50 seems slow, but still there's
probably about 10 mph left. If I bend the gear, I'll blame you. :)
Definetly don't want to do that if it's gusting at all. Even with my
normal
style landings, I've had some wind shift and pretty dramatic sink at
times.
Regards,
Jeff
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=240836#240836
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 Control Surface Flutter Mitigation |
Jeff, mine acts the same way. I don't often use the full flaps for the same
reasons. Too squirrely. It feels like the ailerons are blocking out the
rudder in some way because I have to use about twice as much rudder to keep
it straight. If things are calm and I'm on short final I'll pull in full
flaps to slow my landing speed to get in short, but only when I absolutely
need it. Otherwise I always use first notch.
I'll take second dibs on the gear.
Deke Morisse
Mikado Michigan
S5/Subaru/CAP 405+ TT
"The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory, but progress."
- Joseph Joubert
>
> Maxwell -
>
> I'm comfortable with the nose high attitude the plane gets when slow, so
> that's no problem.
>
> What I don't like is the full flaperons. I think at full nose up trim I
> still have
> to hold a lot of back stick, plus it really screws up the roll control.
> I'll let
> you be the expert on this subject.
>
> Can we just start calling you Madmax on the forum from now on?
>
> By the way, I think you have the same gear I have, so ... If you're
> lacking funds you can just ship me yours.
>
> Regards,
> Jeff
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=240893#240893
>
>
>
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 |
|
Noel,
Mike's posts may be badly expressed (alright, sometimes obnoxious (sorry
Mike, but it's true)) but they have made me think a lot more about being
careful and what to check on my old GSC prop, which I had been taking for
granted. Much more so then the "mine works great, never had a problem!"
posts.
I am reassured that all of Mike's links show prop failures due to
negligence, sometimes even stupidity, and if well taken care of they seem to
be a damn good prop.
As I embark on making sure mine is still damn good - I notice the prop roots
are glued into the hub or have some kind of sealant there? I am reluctant to
do too much disassembly on what has been a clean and trouble-free prop, and
maybe be Mike's next link to an accident where "the prop had just been
inspected an hour prior to the fatal accident".
Any recommendations on checking the roots? The plane has always been
hangered and the assembly looks like new, the only thing I have done to the
prop blades is a bit of sanding and a light coat of urethane. But this
thread makes me realise I should do more.
Bob Brennan - N717GB
ELSA Repairman, inspection rated
1991 UK Model 2 ELSA Kitfox taildragger
Rotax 582 with 3 blade GSC prop
Wrightsville Pa
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Noel Loveys
Sent: 23 April 2009 12:06 pm
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Re: GSC props
And the point is???
In each one of those links either the blade had not been properly inspected
or it had been over torqued. One incident was described twice. The one
exception was the strike which hit squarely on the plastic leading edge. A
warp with the nickel edge may have survived but not necessarily . The last
one where the owner of the aircraft actually milled the hub to be able to
put more crush on an already over crushed prop is one for the books.
To answer my own question the point is; refer to GSC manuals. Carefully
do the prop inspections at regular intervals... 50 - 100 hr. I never
thought of it before but it may be an idea to remove the blades to have a
closer look at the collars. That would be a good idea even on the warp
blades. While you are at it you should be checking the hub for any sign of
cracking or wear.
Noel
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of JetPilot
Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 8:55 AM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: GSC props
eskflyer wrote:
>
>
> Take care everyone fly safe
>
> JOhn
There are several examples on and posts by people in this forum alone of
very small objects that have caused wood propellers to shatter and come
apart. There are even more examples of many GSC prop failures out there on
the Internet. This alone should be cause enough for anyone considering the
purchase of a prop to go out there and do their research before making a
choice. I know some people don't want to know the truth or hear that they
may have made a bad choice in propellers, but there are just as many that
will want this information, so here it is.
Here is a report where proper installation and inspection still resulted in
a GSC prop throwing a blade
http://www.auf.asn.au/airworthiness/gscbladeshed2.pdf
" The propeller had been removed and refitted some 12 hours before the
incident, had been inspected and assessed taking account of the occurrences
mentioned above and was considered to be in excellent condition. It had
operated at 5,800 (engine) RPM for about 2 minutes
immediately before the failure."
http://www.ultralightnews.com/safety_bulletins/gsc_servicebulletin.htm
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?t=23515
http://www.ultralightnews.ca/advisories1/propadvisory.htm
http://www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-reports/aviation/1995/a95q0115/a95q0115.as
p
Given this information, those that really do want the safest and best prop
possible will probably do some research for themselves and educate
themselves on this matter before making a purchase. For those that have
already bought wood props and don't want to hear that they may not have made
the best choice, that is fine. I am not trying to change your minds, you
have a right to fly with whatever you like. I am sure there are plenty of
people out there that will appreciate this information.
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=240872#240872
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 |
|
Those are beautiful pictures Guy, it sounds like you had a great time. I wish
I had mountains to fly around, its as flat as a table here in South Florida...
Thermals is something we do get plenty of though ! How does your Kitfox handle
in the strong thermals ? Are the jolts pretty hard, or enough to bank the
airplane much ?
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=240928#240928
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 Control Surface Flutter Mitigation |
Deke -
I flew mine a few times, and played with the second notch, but honestly
I do not like the handling of the plane and it makes me feel distinctly
uncomfortable with them like that. It uses all the trim just to fly it, and
the yaw, and roll control feel's weird, and spooky.
I wouldn't go so far as to safe it's not safe to fly the plane that way
but I sure feel insecure when they are deployed that much.
Regards,
Jeff
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=240930#240930
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: Optical Low Fuel Sensor |
Ethanol laced gasoline melted that optical sensor right out of my header
tank. Fuel in the belly of the plane. I replaced it with a float switch Carlo
Gavazzi # FSH-34 that the distributor thought would hold up in ethanol but
they weren't sure. I tested it by soaking it in auto fuel for 2 weeks.
Seems OK. I now only use avgas with TCP added. Don't want to take a chance
with ethanol! I also had several other problems with ethanol that I posted
here earlier.
Lloyd Eggstaff
Big Island Hawaii
Vixen ECV001
100 HP Rotax
N100VX
**************Access 350+ FREE radio stations anytime from anywhere on the
web. Get the Radio Toolbar!
(http://toolbar.aol.com/aolradio/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000003)
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 Control Surface Flutter Mitigation |
There is a point that I should make. When I got my plane I checked on the
adjustment of the ailerons. I didn't like the idea of a binding in the
mixing box when the ailerons were fully deflected. I decided to set my
adjustment so that there would be no binding. That gives me a degree or two
of reflex of my ailerons. Yes my ailerons are nowhere as deflected as they
were but then again there is also no way I can get my ailerons into reverse
control.
Noel
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of fox5flyer
Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 12:44 PM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Kitfox Control Surface Flutter Mitigation
Jeff, mine acts the same way. I don't often use the full flaps for the same
reasons. Too squirrely. It feels like the ailerons are blocking out the
rudder in some way because I have to use about twice as much rudder to keep
it straight. If things are calm and I'm on short final I'll pull in full
flaps to slow my landing speed to get in short, but only when I absolutely
need it. Otherwise I always use first notch.
I'll take second dibs on the gear.
Deke Morisse
Mikado Michigan
S5/Subaru/CAP 405+ TT
"The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory, but progress."
- Joseph Joubert
>
> Maxwell -
>
> I'm comfortable with the nose high attitude the plane gets when slow, so
> that's no problem.
>
> What I don't like is the full flaperons. I think at full nose up trim I
> still have
> to hold a lot of back stick, plus it really screws up the roll control.
> I'll let
> you be the expert on this subject.
>
> Can we just start calling you Madmax on the forum from now on?
>
> By the way, I think you have the same gear I have, so ... If you're
> lacking funds you can just ship me yours.
>
> Regards,
> Jeff
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=240893#240893
>
>
>
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 |
|
The GSC website and one of the sites Mike was so kind to provide alluded the
roots should be checked for any cracking of that glue. No disassembly
required and can be part of your pre-flight walk around. On an annual basis
I would pull the prop blades and check the through holes for any darkening
of the wood.
My reason for not replacing the old GSC with a new one was the IFA. I
thought it would help get my plane off the water a bit quicker.... I was
right! I found the Ivo to be much smoother but I think that was a factor of
getting the pitch the same on all the blades. I'm glad I didn't find out
about my faulty tachometer until I had the Ivo installed. I think the extra
20 power to the blade could have resulted in a bad day for me.
Noel
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bob Brennan
Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 1:35 PM
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Re: GSC props
<matronics@bob.brennan.name>
Noel,
Mike's posts may be badly expressed (alright, sometimes obnoxious (sorry
Mike, but it's true)) but they have made me think a lot more about being
careful and what to check on my old GSC prop, which I had been taking for
granted. Much more so then the "mine works great, never had a problem!"
posts.
I am reassured that all of Mike's links show prop failures due to
negligence, sometimes even stupidity, and if well taken care of they seem to
be a damn good prop.
As I embark on making sure mine is still damn good - I notice the prop roots
are glued into the hub or have some kind of sealant there? I am reluctant to
do too much disassembly on what has been a clean and trouble-free prop, and
maybe be Mike's next link to an accident where "the prop had just been
inspected an hour prior to the fatal accident".
Any recommendations on checking the roots? The plane has always been
hangered and the assembly looks like new, the only thing I have done to the
prop blades is a bit of sanding and a light coat of urethane. But this
thread makes me realise I should do more.
Bob Brennan - N717GB
ELSA Repairman, inspection rated
1991 UK Model 2 ELSA Kitfox taildragger
Rotax 582 with 3 blade GSC prop
Wrightsville Pa
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Noel Loveys
Sent: 23 April 2009 12:06 pm
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Re: GSC props
And the point is???
In each one of those links either the blade had not been properly inspected
or it had been over torqued. One incident was described twice. The one
exception was the strike which hit squarely on the plastic leading edge. A
warp with the nickel edge may have survived but not necessarily . The last
one where the owner of the aircraft actually milled the hub to be able to
put more crush on an already over crushed prop is one for the books.
To answer my own question the point is; refer to GSC manuals. Carefully
do the prop inspections at regular intervals... 50 - 100 hr. I never
thought of it before but it may be an idea to remove the blades to have a
closer look at the collars. That would be a good idea even on the warp
blades. While you are at it you should be checking the hub for any sign of
cracking or wear.
Noel
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of JetPilot
Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 8:55 AM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: GSC props
eskflyer wrote:
>
>
> Take care everyone fly safe
>
> JOhn
There are several examples on and posts by people in this forum alone of
very small objects that have caused wood propellers to shatter and come
apart. There are even more examples of many GSC prop failures out there on
the Internet. This alone should be cause enough for anyone considering the
purchase of a prop to go out there and do their research before making a
choice. I know some people don't want to know the truth or hear that they
may have made a bad choice in propellers, but there are just as many that
will want this information, so here it is.
Here is a report where proper installation and inspection still resulted in
a GSC prop throwing a blade
http://www.auf.asn.au/airworthiness/gscbladeshed2.pdf
" The propeller had been removed and refitted some 12 hours before the
incident, had been inspected and assessed taking account of the occurrences
mentioned above and was considered to be in excellent condition. It had
operated at 5,800 (engine) RPM for about 2 minutes
immediately before the failure."
http://www.ultralightnews.com/safety_bulletins/gsc_servicebulletin.htm
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?t=23515
http://www.ultralightnews.ca/advisories1/propadvisory.htm
http://www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-reports/aviation/1995/a95q0115/a95q0115.as
p
Given this information, those that really do want the safest and best prop
possible will probably do some research for themselves and educate
themselves on this matter before making a purchase. For those that have
already bought wood props and don't want to hear that they may not have made
the best choice, that is fine. I am not trying to change your minds, you
have a right to fly with whatever you like. I am sure there are plenty of
people out there that will appreciate this information.
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=240872#240872
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 Control Surface Flutter Mitigation |
Speaking of flutter, I just returned from Lakeland. They had a Zenith 650
at the show and the hinges for the ailerons on that plane was the top wing
skin ! There are no hinges ! Now perhaps I am getting the wrong picture here,
but I like hinges. What happens when you bend aluminum sheet over and over
and over. Eventualy it will fracture and break . Yeah ,I know it will take a
while but I could not get close enough to the (crowds) Zenith folks to ask
why they would do that.
I talked to an engineer at another mfg and asked why they would do that
and he made sounds like a baby chicken (with a c)
Dick Maddux
Fox 4-1200
Pensacola,Fl
**************Big savings on Dell XPS Laptops and Desktops!
eclick.net%2Fclk%3B214133440%3B36002254%3Bj)
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 |
|
[quote="JetPilot"]How does your Kitfox handle in the strong thermals ? Are the
jolts pretty hard, or enough to bank the airplane much ?
Well, I seldom get more than a 90 degree bank, or severe dope-slap to the skylight.
Thankfully the controls are so effective it's easy to recover.
--------
Guy Buchanan
K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 350 hours and counting.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=240941#240941
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: Ellison Throttle Body Problems |
The manual for the original NSI engine had the settings at
Initial- 22 BTDC, 1000-26 BTDC, and 3000 - 24 BTDC. That is the settings for
the turbo. I can look up the settings recommended in my manual for the normally
aspirated engine if any one interested.
Since my engine is not the NSI, but a stock Subaru, I have been having to use more
of the standard parameters in the Subaru manual (Chilton)
That is where I found the 8 BTDC initial timing and when set to that it starts
before the second revolution. I spoke to my mechanic this morning about the timing
and since the Subaru manual does not state the timing for higher RPMs, he
told me that above 3000 RPM the advancement should be in the 30 BTDC range and
would give better performance especially at higher elevations. I am going
to try some different settings this weekend and observe the differences. It might
make the difference in climb rates.
As far as the way I did it is with the knobs on the ignition modules but I am going
to try to check it with the timing light. It is quite difficult to see at
those higher RPM settings with that prop at gale force. I'll report back when
I see how it goes.
Ted
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=240946#240946
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: Ellison Throttle Body Problems |
Ted, good info. Thanks. I think my timing is quite a bit higher at 3000,
but I need to go check my manuals again. I couldn't find the settings last
week, but I was in a hurry so I probably missed it. The NSI does not use
the stock cam and the heads are milled, so I suspect that makes a
difference. The turbo is a different breed also. Much lower compression.
Anyway, keep the reports coming in as there is always someone who gleans
some goodies from it.
On mine, I found it best to just remove the prop to time it. Much easier,
quieter, and a whole group safer. Best to avoid wearing long sleeve shirts
too.
Good to see that you're making some progress.
Deke Morisse
Mikado Michigan
S5/Subaru/CAP 405+ TT
"The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory, but progress."
- Joseph Joubert
----- Original Message -----
From: "earnestj0" <earnestj@frontiernet.net>
Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 6:01 PM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Ellison Throttle Body Problems
>
> The manual for the original NSI engine had the settings at
> Initial- 22 BTDC, 1000-26 BTDC, and 3000 - 24 BTDC. That is the settings
> for the turbo. I can look up the settings recommended in my manual for
> the normally aspirated engine if any one interested.
>
> Since my engine is not the NSI, but a stock Subaru, I have been having to
> use more of the standard parameters in the Subaru manual (Chilton)
> That is where I found the 8 BTDC initial timing and when set to that it
> starts before the second revolution. I spoke to my mechanic this morning
> about the timing and since the Subaru manual does not state the timing for
> higher RPMs, he told me that above 3000 RPM the advancement should be in
> the 30 BTDC range and would give better performance especially at higher
> elevations. I am going to try some different settings this weekend and
> observe the differences. It might make the difference in climb rates.
>
> As far as the way I did it is with the knobs on the ignition modules but I
> am going to try to check it with the timing light. It is quite difficult
> to see at those higher RPM settings with that prop at gale force. I'll
> report back when I see how it goes.
> Ted
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=240946#240946
>
>
>
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: | PolyFiber Reinforcing Tape |
I'm in the process of covering my wings and getting ready to put on the
finishing tapes. I'm thinking of using 6 inch wide tape on the leading
edge but am concerned this might be hard to work with because of its
width. Would using two narrower tapes be easier and produce a better
job or is 6 inch tape just as easy to use?
Bill Anderson
Brentwood, NH
Model 4 - 1050
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: Ellison Throttle Body Problems |
Ted, I found my operating limitations in the airplane. Who'd a thunk!
Anyway, here is what it says.
Normal aspirated (deg) Turbo
inital - 23 at 1350rpm 22 at 1350rpm
3000 - 33 at 3000rpm 28 at 3000rpm
8000 - 33 at 5800rpm 24 at 5800rpm
rev limit - 6200 rev limit - 5800
This is for info only and yours may not be the same.
I still might lower my initial a few degrees.
Deke
> Ted, good info. Thanks. I think my timing is quite a bit higher at 3000,
> but I need to go check my manuals again. I couldn't find the settings
> last week, but I was in a hurry so I probably missed it. The NSI does not
> use the stock cam and the heads are milled, so I suspect that makes a
> difference. The turbo is a different breed also. Much lower compression.
> Anyway, keep the reports coming in as there is always someone who gleans
> some goodies from it.
>
> On mine, I found it best to just remove the prop to time it. Much easier,
> quieter, and a whole group safer. Best to avoid wearing long sleeve
> shirts too.
> Good to see that you're making some progress.
>
> Deke Morisse
> Mikado Michigan
> S5/Subaru/CAP 405+ TT
> "The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory, but
> progress."
> - Joseph Joubert
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "earnestj0" <earnestj@frontiernet.net>
> To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 6:01 PM
> Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Ellison Throttle Body Problems
>
>
>>
>> The manual for the original NSI engine had the settings at
>> Initial- 22 BTDC, 1000-26 BTDC, and 3000 - 24 BTDC. That is the
>> settings for the turbo. I can look up the settings recommended in my
>> manual for the normally aspirated engine if any one interested.
>>
>> Since my engine is not the NSI, but a stock Subaru, I have been having to
>> use more of the standard parameters in the Subaru manual (Chilton)
>> That is where I found the 8 BTDC initial timing and when set to that it
>> starts before the second revolution. I spoke to my mechanic this morning
>> about the timing and since the Subaru manual does not state the timing
>> for higher RPMs, he told me that above 3000 RPM the advancement should be
>> in the 30 BTDC range and would give better performance especially at
>> higher elevations. I am going to try some different settings this
>> weekend and observe the differences. It might make the difference in
>> climb rates.
>>
>> As far as the way I did it is with the knobs on the ignition modules but
>> I am going to try to check it with the timing light. It is quite
>> difficult to see at those higher RPM settings with that prop at gale
>> force. I'll report back when I see how it goes.
>> Ted
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=240946#240946
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
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 |
|
This topic has pretty much had it's run with me, but I feel I have to make
one last comment.
Kitfox and Avid have been around since around 1984 as I recall. In the
early days, the GSC prop was standard from the factory and if you were to be
able to get a real good survey of what folks flew with in total, the GSC
prop would be the overwhelming choice - probably in the range of three or
four or more to one vz. the other available props. Also keep in mind that
during the time frame when I bought my first kit (1993), Kitfox was
delivering 40 - read forty - kits a month (that is almost 500 kits a year)
vs. the serious drop of from that in the intervening years (to less than 40
a year when Skystar vanished) and this doesn't account for what Avid sold.
The factory claims 4000 Kitfoxes flying. So if you examined the fleets, you
would find many more Model I through IVs and early Avids than the later
models of both fleets and most flew, at least initially, with the GSC to
many hundreds of thousands of hours.
What does this suggest? If there was a serious problem with the Kitfox or
Avid and this prop, we wouldn't be searching the internet to find five
obscure reports of these props failing and as was suggested, all but one due
to serious neglect - and who really knows for sure about the that one, as
all we have is the word of the guy who broke it. Rather, there would be
numerous reports in the archives and very likely Service Bulletins from both
Kitfox and Avid. We haven't been living in a vacuum. More posts containing
the same arguments don't mean more truth, just more posts and more of the
same arguments. Enough already!
Lowell
----- Original Message -----
From: "JetPilot" <orcabonita@hotmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 4:24 AM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: GSC props
>
>
> eskflyer wrote:
>>
>>
>> Take care everyone fly safe
>>
>> JOhn
>
>
> There are several examples on and posts by people in this forum alone of
> very small objects that have caused wood propellers to shatter and come
> apart. There are even more examples of many GSC prop failures out there
> on the Internet. This alone should be cause enough for anyone
> considering the purchase of a prop to go out there and do their research
> before making a choice. I know some people don't want to know the truth
> or hear that they may have made a bad choice in propellers, but there are
> just as many that will want this information, so here it is.
>
> Here is a report where proper installation and inspection still resulted
> in a GSC prop throwing a blade
>
> http://www.auf.asn.au/airworthiness/gscbladeshed2.pdf
>
> " The propeller had been removed and refitted some 12 hours before the
> incident, had been inspected and assessed taking account of the
> occurrences mentioned above and was considered to be in excellent
> condition. It had operated at 5,800 (engine) RPM for about 2 minutes
> immediately before the failure."
>
> http://www.ultralightnews.com/safety_bulletins/gsc_servicebulletin.htm
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?t=23515
>
> http://www.ultralightnews.ca/advisories1/propadvisory.htm
>
> http://www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-reports/aviation/1995/a95q0115/a95q0115.asp
>
>
> Given this information, those that really do want the safest and best prop
> possible will probably do some research for themselves and educate
> themselves on this matter before making a purchase. For those that have
> already bought wood props and don't want to hear that they may not have
> made the best choice, that is fine. I am not trying to change your minds,
> you have a right to fly with whatever you like. I am sure there are
> plenty of people out there that will appreciate this information.
>
> 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=240872#240872
>
>
>
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 |
|
Noel and others.
I guess I started this thread last week with a question about brakes lines... it
morphed into a GSC prop discussion when Dave inquired about my prop. Firstly,
everyone's answers about the brake lines were really helpful and yesterday
I installed the lines in about 1 1/2 hours... no sweat.
Of greater help to me has been the prop discussion here. I appreciate the "spirited"
discussion and the accumulated wisdom of the list members. But I feel
that the last post by Noel puts it in perspective. I'm an accident investigator
with the Transportation Safety Board of Canada. When we do risk assessments
we look at the total population of the aircraft, ship, or locomotive along with
the failure rate. I agree with Noel, within the Kitfox community of models
1 - IV there are not enough documented failure to condemn the GCS prop and that
safety means constant vigilance, no matter what hardware we fly. I do however
now have a greater respect for tolerances and maintenance of the prop that
I inherited with my previously owned project.
Lets move on.
Cheers
Ken
--------
Ken Potter
Model II, No. 483
Rotax 582, C-Box,
98% Complete
C-FJKP (marks reserved)
Lanark, Ontario
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=240964#240964
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: GSC props, was Brake Lines |
Ken,
-
I had the same situation: GSC prop, delivered 1989 never installed but kept
in heated garage for 15 years. I've got 150 hours on it now without a hitc
h (knock wood). Pitch and torque are checked-annually and it has never lo
osened or varied in pitch. Subject to customary and prudent pre-flight insp
ections, I would not hesitate to fly that prop if it is as you've described
.
-
Marco Menezes N99KX
Model 2 582-90 C-Box 3:1 w/clutch and GSC
-
--- On Wed, 4/22/09, Ken Potter <kjpotter@sympatico.ca> wrote:
From: Ken Potter <kjpotter@sympatico.ca>
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: GSC props, was Brake Lines
I can accept the 500 hr IMO, however I still do not think that it applies i
n my case- ie;- new propellor, as delivered from factory in mid 90's st
ill in box,- blades not attached to hub yet, no torque been applied and s
tored in a heated shop.- Anyways,- you can't put a price on safety and
I'll buy a new prop if I have to and do without something else less critica
l for a while.
Ken
--------
Ken Potter
Model II, No. 483
Rotax 582, C-Box,
98% Complete
C-FJKP (marks reserved)
Lanark, Ontario
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=240725#240725
le, List Admin.
=0A=0A=0A
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: | Re: PolyFiber Reinforcing Tape |
I found the 6 inch tape very easy to use.
**************Big savings on Dell XPS Laptops and Desktops!
eclick.net%2Fclk%3B214133440%3B36002254%3Bj)
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 Control Surface Flutter Mitigation |
Jeff,
I wonder if you have your flaps setup correctly. I use full flaps a lot.
About the only times I don't use full flaps is if there is a lot of wind -
then I use half flaps. I also slip a lot. I need to try Maxwells
technique. I have some, but always chicken out and give a good shot of
power about 30' from ground.
Another item that I really like for getting in short is a lift reserve
instrument. Having this really changed the way I fly. I do not pay
attention to the airspeed gauge much any more and I usually climb out at a
much higher angle than I ever dared to before.
Randy
Series 5/7
912S, WarpDrive taper tip
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of n85ae
Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 11:56 AM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Kitfox Control Surface Flutter Mitigation
Deke -
I flew mine a few times, and played with the second notch, but honestly
I do not like the handling of the plane and it makes me feel distinctly
uncomfortable with them like that. It uses all the trim just to fly it, and
the yaw, and roll control feel's weird, and spooky.
I wouldn't go so far as to safe it's not safe to fly the plane that way
but I sure feel insecure when they are deployed that much.
Regards,
Jeff
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=240930#240930
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: Ellison Throttle Body Problems |
Thanks Deke,
I went back to my manual again, it said the same thing. Shouldn't take anything
from memory.
Found the same settings, i.e.
So my mechanic was pretty close. Sorry for the slight difference. So I will set
mine at those for the higher settings. Taking the prop off is a good idea.
Will do that. Should have thought of that myself!!!
Thanks to all of you for your comments, very helpful.
Ted
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=240999#240999
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! --
|