Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:13 AM - Re: IFR KItfox (Michel Verheughe)
2. 03:25 AM - Re: Pancakes - was Rotec TBI success story (Lynn Matteson)
3. 03:44 AM - Re: Re: WING BUILD START (lst)
4. 05:25 AM - Re: Pancakes - was Rotec TBI success story (Lynn Matteson)
5. 07:46 AM - Re: Re: IFR KItfox (Lowell Fitt)
6. 08:36 AM - Re: IFR KItfox (JetPilot)
7. 09:34 AM - Re: IFR KItfox (n85ae)
8. 12:14 PM - Re: Re: IFR KItfox (Noel)
9. 12:15 PM - Re: Re: IFR KItfox (Rick Frederick)
10. 01:19 PM - Re: IFR KItfox (akflyer)
11. 02:19 PM - Re: Re: IFR KItfox (Guy Buchanan)
12. 02:45 PM - Re: IFR KItfox (akflyer)
13. 07:23 PM - Re: Re: IFR KItfox (floran higgins)
14. 11:12 PM - Re: Re: IFR KItfox (Guy Buchanan)
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 |
|
> From: akflyer [akflyer_2000@yahoo.com]
> congrats on the medical! you are a better man than I.
Thank you very much.
> If I lost my medical, I would still have kept on flying.
When I came out of the hospital, I had a letter from the police, saying my driving
license was retrieved for one year. I then decided to stop flying for one
year too; nobody actually retrieved my pilot license. When I went to the doctor
to provide the paperwork needed for the driving license, he said he could see
why I couldn't also fly: I can kill more people on the road than in the air.
That's how I renewed my pilot license for this year.
Regarding the Danish F-16 pilot, I don't know him at all; I guess he found my email
address associated with the word, Kitfox somewhere on the internet. We exchanged
3-4 emails, that's all. But I have no reason to believe he is more a fool
than myself. From what I understand, he must drive his car 140 km to go to
work. He wishes to consider a light aircraft as an alternative. He never said
he want ONLY to fly a plane; perhaps he will drive his car during the winter.
But I understand that having an IFR certified plane would help if e.g. the weather
is nice in the morning but the ceiling falls under 500 ft in the afternoon.
Best regards,
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 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: Pancakes - was Rotec TBI success story |
8 minutes latitude is not like 8 minutes on the clock, nor close to 8
miles, Marco. I didn't look at the mileage difference, but Cadillac
LOOKS quite a bit further north than Sugar Springs.
Lynn Matteson
Kitfox IV Speedster, taildragger
Jabiru 2200, #2062, 724.6 hrs
Sensenich 62"x46" Wood prop
Electroair direct-fire ignition system
Rotec TBI-40 injection
Status: TBI installation done...tests flights underway
do not archive
On Aug 6, 2009, at 6:57 PM, Marco Menezes wrote:
> Hope to see you on Sunday then. BTW, Cadillac ((KCAD) is all of 8
> minutes latitude further North than Sugar Springs (OMI1). :-)
>
> Rain forecast for Saturday anyway. All you other Michigan Kitfox
> drivers, come on up!
>
> Marco Menezes N99KX
> Model 2 582-90 C-Box 3:1 w/clutch
>
> do not archive
>
> --- On Thu, 8/6/09, Lynn Matteson <lynnmatt@jps.net> wrote:
>
> From: Lynn Matteson <lynnmatt@jps.net>
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Rotec TBI success story
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> Date: Thursday, August 6, 2009, 2:23 PM
>
>
> Count me in for Sunday....Cadillac is a bit of a jaunt (geez, ever
> since I bought this Rotec TBI from the blokes in Australia, I've
> adapted their lingo) for me right now, but the Sugar Springs thing
> sounds like my kind of mission. I've been venturing further and
> further away from 'home' each time I fly it since I installed the
> new fuel system, and I don't want to get too far away in case
> something goes bad.
>
> Lynn Matteson
> Kitfox IV Speedster, taildragger
> Jabiru 2200, #2062, 724.6 hrs
> Sensenich 62"x46" Wood prop
> Electroair direct-fire ignition system
> Rotec TBI-40 injection
> Status: TBI installation done...tests flights underway
> do not archive
>
>
> On Aug 6, 2009, at 9:37 AM, Marco Menezes wrote:
>
> > Like I said Lynn, pancakes in Cadillac Saturday and/or at Sugar
> Springs Sunday. Be there or be square.
> >
> > Marco Menezes N99KX
> > Model 2 582-90 C-Box 3:1 w/clutch
> >
> > do not archive
>
> www.matronics.com/contribution _-
> ===========================================================
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: WING BUILD START |
Thanks Bob. I'm grateful for all the expertise and feedback. I plan to
be "stalling cleanly" by next summer.
----- Original Message -----
From: bob noffs
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, August 06, 2009 8:53 PM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: WING BUILD START
lane,
it is easy to reason this out. washout is made so the root end of the
wing quits ''flying'' before the tip. this is so a stall wont make the
airplane roll over. it will make the nose drop. so the wing is twisted
so the root has the most angle of attack and stalls first. the tips have
less angle of attack and are still ''flying'' as the nose drops.
airspeed now picks up and the whole wing is soon generating lift again.
bob noffs
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 7:58 AM, Tom Jones <nahsikhs@elltel.net> wrote:
Lane, you will end up turning that wing over about 500 times before
you finish it. It is very important to have the washout block under the
correct end of the correct spar when you start.
I'll go get my builders log and look at the pictures so I can
remember how I did it.
Okay I am looking at a picture. I started with the wing upside
down. The washout block is under the Front spar tip.[u]
Now before you go beyond the point of no return wait for someone
else on the list to verify this. Just for a double check.
Be sure to build one left wing and one right wing. If you use the
same jig you will need to move the washout block so it is under the
[u]front spar tip when the wing is upside down.
--------
Tom Jones
Classic IV
503 Rotax, 72 inch Two blade Warp
Ellensburg, WA
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=256319#256319
ist Un/Subscription,
www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List
ronics.com/" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
Matt Dralle, List Admin.
====
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: Pancakes - was Rotec TBI success story |
Oooops! My mistake, Marco. I was taking my decision to go to Sugar
Springs rather than Cadillac from a glance at the airport directory
of Michigan, which (on their little thumb-sized map with a star
indicating the approximate location of the airport) shows Cadillac a
LOT further north and west than Gladwin/Sugar Springs. From rough
measurement on the Michigan chart, it is only about a 25-mile
difference in flights....my bad!
Now that I look at the Calendar of Events, I see that Gladwin (GDW)
is also having an event over both Saturday and Sunday, and the Sugar
Springs (OMI1) event is Sunday only, AND there is an
event....breakfast...at Howell (OZW) also on Sunday. So Sunday is
looking even better as I would have the choice of hitting all three
in one day. That sounds like a plan to me...hit Sugar Springs first,
then according to whim, go to Gladwin, and then stop at Howell if
there's either time or room for any more breakfast.
Lynn Matteson
Kitfox IV Speedster, taildragger
Jabiru 2200, #2062, 724.6 hrs
Sensenich 62"x46" Wood prop
Electroair direct-fire ignition system
Rotec TBI-40 injection
Status: TBI installation done...tests flights underway
do not archive
On Aug 6, 2009, at 6:57 PM, Marco Menezes wrote:
> Hope to see you on Sunday then. BTW, Cadillac ((KCAD) is all of 8
> minutes latitude further North than Sugar Springs (OMI1). :-)
>
> Rain forecast for Saturday anyway. All you other Michigan Kitfox
> drivers, come on up!
>
> Marco Menezes N99KX
> Model 2 582-90 C-Box 3:1 w/clutch
>
> do not archive
>
> --- On Thu, 8/6/09, Lynn Matteson <lynnmatt@jps.net> wrote:
>
> From: Lynn Matteson <lynnmatt@jps.net>
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Rotec TBI success story
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> Date: Thursday, August 6, 2009, 2:23 PM
>
>
> Count me in for Sunday....Cadillac is a bit of a jaunt (geez, ever
> since I bought this Rotec TBI from the blokes in Australia, I've
> adapted their lingo) for me right now, but the Sugar Springs thing
> sounds like my kind of mission. I've been venturing further and
> further away from 'home' each time I fly it since I installed the
> new fuel system, and I don't want to get too far away in case
> something goes bad.
>
> Lynn Matteson
> Kitfox IV Speedster, taildragger
> Jabiru 2200, #2062, 724.6 hrs
> Sensenich 62"x46" Wood prop
> Electroair direct-fire ignition system
> Rotec TBI-40 injection
> Status: TBI installation done...tests flights underway
> do not archive
>
>
> On Aug 6, 2009, at 9:37 AM, Marco Menezes wrote:
>
> > Like I said Lynn, pancakes in Cadillac Saturday and/or at Sugar
> Springs Sunday. Be there or be square.
> >
> > Marco Menezes N99KX
> > Model 2 582-90 C-Box 3:1 w/clutch
> >
> > do not archive
>
> www.matronics.com/contribution _-
> ===========================================================
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 |
|
Michel makes an excellent point. I sometimes wonder why we as humans tend
to think in absolute terms. It seems, in most of the discussion, the
presumption was that the F16 pilot has two choices, i.e. drive exclusively
or fly exclusively.
I live in a residential airpark and many residencts fly to the SF Bay Area
to work - airline pilots, silicon valley techies etc. Do they fly
exclusively? No. Occasionally conditions mandate that they leave an hour or
two earlier and drive, or they may find themselves in a hotel over night.
Nothing scary in that.
This also brings to mind the time I was heading to "Factory Town" in Idaho.
I got to Winnemucca, Nevada in heavy rain. Three of us sat in the Pilots
Lounge waiting for things to clear up a bit. Me with my Kitfox, a guy in a
182 and a guy with a Mooney. Guess who left first. There were lots of dirt
roads on the way North that I was perfectly able to land on. The other guys
needed airports. The Kitfox could drfinitely be a bumpy ride in serious
IFR, but a Kitfox certainly gives more alternatives if it is prudent to put
it down. Maybe the F16 guy did his homework better than we are giving him
credit for.
Lowell
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michel Verheughe" <michel@online.no>
Sent: Friday, August 07, 2009 12:06 AM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: IFR KItfox
>> From: akflyer [akflyer_2000@yahoo.com]
>> congrats on the medical! you are a better man than I.
>
> Thank you very much.
>
>> If I lost my medical, I would still have kept on flying.
>
> When I came out of the hospital, I had a letter from the police, saying my
> driving license was retrieved for one year. I then decided to stop flying
> for one year too; nobody actually retrieved my pilot license. When I went
> to the doctor to provide the paperwork needed for the driving license, he
> said he could see why I couldn't also fly: I can kill more people on the
> road than in the air. That's how I renewed my pilot license for this year.
>
> Regarding the Danish F-16 pilot, I don't know him at all; I guess he found
> my email address associated with the word, Kitfox somewhere on the
> internet. We exchanged 3-4 emails, that's all. But I have no reason to
> believe he is more a fool than myself. From what I understand, he must
> drive his car 140 km to go to work. He wishes to consider a light aircraft
> as an alternative. He never said he want ONLY to fly a plane; perhaps he
> will drive his car during the winter. But I understand that having an IFR
> certified plane would help if e.g. the weather is nice in the morning but
> the ceiling falls under 500 ft in the afternoon.
>
>
> Best regards,
> 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 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 |
|
[quote="icubob(at)gmail.com"]jeff, your judgement is very good.
bob noffs
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 6:01 PM, n85ae wrote:
>
> Mine is IFR, with a full panel, not just pseudo IFR but with Vor, glideslope,
> markers, gps, etc. I'm instrument rated, however I don't, and won't fly it
> IFR except for punching layers or very simple stuff.
>
> Jeff
>
I have to agree with Jeff. Its great safety advantage to have all the IFR stuff
in case you need it, but I would not PLAN on flying a Kitfox IFR. From the
original post, it definitely sounded like IFR flying is the plan, not just a
backup, but we will never know for sure as Michael says he is not directly communicating
with the pilot looking for a Kitfox.
I am building my Kitfox with a Glass panel, it will not be a legal IFR, but it
will have better IFR instrumentation than most small GA " Legal " IFR aircraft
out there. With a good Electronic Horizon, GPS, and Flight Director, you can
fly in the weather much more safely, have more situational awareness, and shoot
more accurate approaches than most older non glass equipped aircraft that
are " Certified IFR ".... Again, not something I ever plan on doing, but weather
surprises us at times and it is a great safety advantage to have IFR capability
when it does.
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=256512#256512
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 |
|
Actually I built mine fully intending to fly it IFR, then when I started flying
it I realized I had wasted several thousand dollars on stuff that would never
be used.
I didn't build it IFR as a safety thing, I built it IFR because I'm rated, and
had planned to use it. Just that it's a poor IFR platform, is the reason I
now don't fly it IFR.
Jeff
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=256522#256522
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 |
|
My best guess is it all depends to what extent IFR he wants to use the 'Fox.
Night flights probably OK, Climbing over a little mist also probably Ok.
That's all right to get to work but he also has to get home. Hope his strip
has ILS.
I'd expect any one who makes holes in the sky with an F-16 has his IFR
certification. But there is a world of difference between the reliability
of a turbine engine and any piston unit that will fit in a 'Fox.
Noel
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of JetPilot
Sent: 05 August 2009 15:10
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: IFR KItfox
Michel wrote:
> Hello guys,
> But, because he must fly all days, also in the winter, be must do it IFR.
He has all the licenses he needs for it but ...
>
This guy obviously did not consider Icing flying IFR in winter. Icing
conditions will make a small single engine plane crash very quickly. The
pressure to get home or get to work will assure that this guy will push his
luck and fly in conditions that he should not. This sounds like one of the
worst plans I have heard in a long time.
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=256181#256181
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 |
|
Jeff,
I think you are right. Your personal minimums are just that... "yours".
I am an IFR pilot and I fly IMC (not in a kitfox).
Even though I will not launch without VFR ceilings or launch if the
destination froecasts less than 1000', I know many pilots who have no
problems flying to minimums.
I think no less of these pilots nor judge them as being unsafe.
YMMV...
--Rick Kitfox IV/912
----- Original Message -----
From: "n85ae" <n85ae@yahoo.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 06, 2009 7:01 PM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: IFR KItfox
>
> Mine is IFR, with a full panel, not just pseudo IFR but with Vor,
> glideslope,
> markers, gps, etc. I'm instrument rated, however I don't, and won't fly it
> IFR except for punching layers or very simple stuff. It is simply too much
> a hands on airplane. I think going flying IFR in the soup in a Kitfox, is
> asking for trouble. Even VFR it can be a pain to hold a precise heading
> and altitude. I flew a Diamond DA-20 recently that was considered
> sensitive, and it felt like a school bus as far as sensitivity goes
> compared
> to the Kitfox.
>
> Some might think they could do it, and probably will, but I'm not
> one of them.
>
> Regards,
> Jeff
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=256426#256426
>
>
>
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 |
|
only gonna chime in quick on this one. I see guys that will go IFR to punch though
cloud layers, without filing IFR or using IFR separation. Do you think yo
uare the only one in that cloud doing the same thing? I just a call from a
buddy who has had 2 VERY close midairs in the last week. Both times he stayed
below the soup even though he is IFR rated and the turbine otter is IFR equipt.
He was on the radio talking to a guy that was reported to be behind him by
several miles that was going to descend through the soup. He ended up shooting
right over the top of my bud and missed him by about 15' when the guy thought
he was a couple miles behind him. There is a reason that Mark has made it
11,000+ hours flying hardcore bush work and has not dinged a plane. He will not
push weather as he knows there are too many other operators out there doing
it already and he has no desire to become a 182's hood ornament.
I have done my fair share of scud running, but intensionally going hard IFR in
a plane such as ours is a pretty darn good way to get me to hand out a darwin
award to your widow. I have my flame suit on but I will stand behind it. If
we were in that big of a hurry to get someplace, would you really have bought
a kitfox (or avid) in the first place? Too many mountains to fly into around
here, and way to many idiots that risk it in the clouds not even thinking that
there is someone of equal intelligence doing the same thing.
--------
DO NOT ARCHIVE
Leonard Perry aka SNAKE
Soldotna AK
Avid "C" / Mk IV
582 IVO IFA
Full Lotus 1450
#1 snake oil salesman since 1-22-2009
hander outer of humorless darwin awards
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=256553#256553
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 |
|
At 01:17 PM 8/7/2009, you wrote:
>I have done my fair share of scud running, but intensionally going
>hard IFR in a plane such as ours is a pretty darn good way to get me
>to hand out a darwin award to your widow.
Really Leonard? What's wrong with doing legal IFR in a properly
equipped Kitfox with a properly proficient pilot? I'll admit my plane
wouldn't be the easiest to keep on track, but I know plenty of
Kitfox's with glass cockpits and 2 axis autopilots that would do just
fine. One thing in your favor is that you're going so slow that
you've got lots of time for bookkeeping and decision-making. And any
excursions from "proper course" are going to be minimal. Of course,
you're going to exercise all the good judgement consistent with
weather, icing, communications, and the like.
MOBY CAVEAT: I'm not an IFR pilot.
Guy Buchanan
San Diego, CA
K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 400 hrs. and counting
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 |
|
ya got me... IF you have auto pilot, it will reduce the workload to a manageable
level, however, I still stand by my thoughts on hard IFR. If done properly,
you will probably be OK. but what about the other yahoos you cant see that are
just trying to punch through a layer that you are happy cruising in. I went
through all the IFR training and was ready to take my check ride when I moved
to Hawaii and dropped it. Since returning, I am a little older and alot wiser..
Could I do IFR if I needed to get home, sure, would I EVER intentionally
go IFR, not on your life. Hotel rooms and overnight camping in the plane are
more fun than trying pick you corpse off a mountain side. With the SPOT I can
send out an I am OK message so the other half does not send out the S&R looking
for me in bad weather and putting their butts on the line as I am happily
sitting by a camp fire waiting for weather to clear.
Not saying that it cant be done, but to you really think intentional hard IFR is
your best choice?
--------
DO NOT ARCHIVE
Leonard Perry aka SNAKE
Soldotna AK
Avid "C" / Mk IV
582 IVO IFA
Full Lotus 1450
#1 snake oil salesman since 1-22-2009
hander outer of humorless darwin awards
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=256564#256564
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 |
|
I have many thousand hours IFR in everything from Piper Aztecs to Kingairs
to Air Force jets.
I would not consider going IFR in a Kitfox in our mountains.
Floran Higgins
Helena, Mt.
Speedster
912 ULS
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rick Frederick" <rick@5mike3.com>
Sent: Friday, August 07, 2009 12:40 PM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: IFR KItfox
>
> Jeff,
> I think you are right. Your personal minimums are just that... "yours".
> I am an IFR pilot and I fly IMC (not in a kitfox).
> Even though I will not launch without VFR ceilings or launch if the
> destination froecasts less than 1000', I know many pilots who have no
> problems flying to minimums.
> I think no less of these pilots nor judge them as being unsafe.
>
> YMMV...
> --Rick Kitfox IV/912
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "n85ae" <n85ae@yahoo.com>
> To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Thursday, August 06, 2009 7:01 PM
> Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: IFR KItfox
>
>
>>
>> Mine is IFR, with a full panel, not just pseudo IFR but with Vor,
>> glideslope,
>> markers, gps, etc. I'm instrument rated, however I don't, and won't fly
>> it
>> IFR except for punching layers or very simple stuff. It is simply too
>> much
>> a hands on airplane. I think going flying IFR in the soup in a Kitfox, is
>> asking for trouble. Even VFR it can be a pain to hold a precise heading
>> and altitude. I flew a Diamond DA-20 recently that was considered
>> sensitive, and it felt like a school bus as far as sensitivity goes
>> compared
>> to the Kitfox.
>>
>> Some might think they could do it, and probably will, but I'm not
>> one of them.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Jeff
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=256426#256426
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
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 |
|
At 02:42 PM 8/7/2009, you wrote:
>but what about the other yahoos you cant see that are just trying to
>punch through a layer that you are happy cruising in.
HA. I naively assumed that NOBODY, but NOBODY would be so crazy as to
fly uncontrolled IFR. I should have known better, but it's got to be
a sad thing when one of those idiots takes somebody out.
Guy Buchanan
San Diego, CA
K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 400 hrs. and counting
Do not archive
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! --
|