Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 03:13 AM - S5 Trim and control forces (skyring)
2. 03:29 AM - Re: S5 Trim and control forces (Lynn Matteson)
3. 07:38 AM - RPM/912 (rtmarshall)
4. 08:38 AM - Re: RPM/912 (Roger Lee)
5. 11:34 AM - Re: S5 Trim and control forces (Michael Gibbs)
6. 12:14 PM - Re: RPM/912 (Av8r3400)
7. 03:50 PM - Re: S5 Trim and control forces (Tom Jones)
8. 04:44 PM - Re: Re: S5 Trim and control forces (Clint Bazzill)
9. 05:41 PM - Re: Re: RPM/912 (Clint Bazzill)
10. 09:44 PM - Re: RPM/912 (Av8r3400)
11. 11:04 PM - Re: S5 Trim and control forces (skyring)
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: | S5 Trim and control forces |
Our inspector is unhappy about the fact that in landing configuration i.e. 22 degree
flaps and about 50 kts on our S5 Outback we still need some back pressure
on the stick. That is, we can't trim out all of the nose down forces. My understanding
is that this is normal on a Kitfox and there is no easy way (when fitted
with the factory electric trim) to remove these forces. I can live with
the very light back pressure required but he's clearly not happy. Is my assumption
correct? Any comments appreciated.
Kerry
S5 912ULS
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=344765#344765
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: S5 Trim and control forces |
My test pilot and (later on) flight instructor had me add about 2"
of length to the elevator trim on my IV. This helped, he said, but
after I got my instruction in the plane and got used to it, I found
that 2" was too much and that it made the trim control too sensitive.
I cut off about 1/4", then further fine-tuned the tab by increasing
the length of the horn on the tab. This allowed the tab to move a
shorter distance for each increment of the servo.
Lynn Matteson
Kitfox IV Speedster, taildragger
Jabiru 2200, #2062
Temporarily w/Sensenich 55.5 x 46 prop while
Prince prop (64 x 30, P-tip) is in for upgrade
Electroair direct-fire ignition system
Rotec TBI-40 injection (sleeved to 36mm)
Status: flying with "Ramcharger" intake manifold...1127 hrs (since
3-27-2006)
On Jul 3, 2011, at 6:10 AM, skyring wrote:
> <kerryskyring@hotmail.com>
>
> Our inspector is unhappy about the fact that in landing
> configuration i.e. 22 degree flaps and about 50 kts on our S5
> Outback we still need some back pressure on the stick. That is, we
> can't trim out all of the nose down forces. My understanding is
> that this is normal on a Kitfox and there is no easy way (when
> fitted with the factory electric trim) to remove these forces. I
> can live with the very light back pressure required but he's
> clearly not happy. Is my assumption correct? Any comments appreciated.
> Kerry
> S5 912ULS
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=344765#344765
>
>
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 |
|
Hello Kitfox flyers, For those of you who have the 912 and 3 Blade 68"
GSC prop, Do you see more than 5K RPM or more on take off from field
elevations of 5K, we typically see 8 to 9 K density alt days up here in
the High Sierras. So from sea level we lose 5" Manifold pressure. Our
kit fox is only able to turn 4500 Rpm static at 5 K field elevation and
stays about the same on climb out, the prop pitch is 15 degrees. Any and
all comments are welcome and we appreciate your input and replies.
Thanks Bob and Toodie
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 |
|
Hi Bob,
You should set the prop pitch to achieve 5500-5550 rpm WOT flat and level at your
normal cruise altitude. This will give you the best all a round performance
for all flight characteristics. To much pitch like yours does equate to loss
of climb, more fuel and higher engine temps. Too little pitch gives you good
climb, but you loose cruise and fuel economy. Balance of all the flight characteristics
is the key for normal flight operations. Don't get hung up on static
it is just a starting point to getting things dialed in. You care more about
WOT during flight.
--------
Roger Lee
Tucson, Az.
Light Sport Repairman - Maintenance Rated
Rotax Repair Center
Home 520-574-1080 TRY HOME FIRST
Cell 520-349-7056
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=344782#344782
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: | Re: S5 Trim and control forces |
Certified airplanes are required to have enough trim authority to hold approach
speed without pilot intervention but, of course, your Kitfox is not a certified
airplane. And yes, this is normal for Kitfoxes.
Mike G.
Phoenix, AZ
Kitfox IV-1200 Speedster, Kitfox Series 6 (& 3/4!)
On Jul 3, 2011, at 3:10 AM, "skyring" <kerryskyring@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Our inspector is unhappy about the fact that in landing configuration i.e. 22
degree flaps and about 50 kts on our S5 Outback we still need some back pressure
on the stick. That is, we can't trim out all of the nose down forces. My understanding
is that this is normal on a Kitfox and there is no easy way (when
fitted with the factory electric trim) to remove these forces. I can live with
the very light back pressure required but he's clearly not happy. Is my assumption
correct? Any comments appreciated.
> Kerry
> S5 912ULS
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=344765#344765
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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 |
|
less than 5200 rpm with full throttle in a 912 leads to excessive cylinder pressure
and could seriously damage your engine.
FYI
--------
Thanks,
Av8r3400
Kitfox Model IV-1200 W/912UL & IVO
Kitfox Model IV-1050 W/912UL & Warp
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=344799#344799
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: S5 Trim and control forces |
Kerry, am I correct in assuming you are not located in the US?
The kitfox is a proven design. A big and important part of the kitfox design is
the flaperons which produce a nose down pitch when deployed as flaps.
Just throwing out some ideas. Do you have authority as the manufacturer of this
plane to write in the operators manual that normal landings are made with zero
flaps, or maybe a placard on the panel to deal with it.
Your plane, with a 912 engine seems to be pretty much built by the book so I am
also assuming its not a nose heavy condition that needs correcting?
--------
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=344819#344819
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: S5 Trim and control forces |
Kerry=2C
I have a Model Iv-1200. I had the same problem when the flaperons were emp
loyed. I flew for almost 500 hours before playing with flaps. I heard so
many stories=2C all negative=2C I didn't go there.
Here is my solution=2C first I put springs on push pull tube to elevator.
That took the heavy weight off the elevator which will allow you to do more
up trim. Then I put gap seal in place. Next I installed vortex generator
s under stabilizer. Then I installed the larger elevator that is used on t
he nose wheel Model IV.
I now slow the airplane in the pattern to 80 MPH indicated. Apply the flap
s=2C mostly full. Use full up trim. The airplane flys at 65 to 70 with ver
y little pressure on stick. If you apply power=2C the nose will pitch up.
Hope this helps.
Clint 912ULS Model IV
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=344819#344819
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
>
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 |
|
Not at5 5000 feet with a MP of 24 inches
Clint
> Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: RPM/912
> From: theav8rweb@yahoo.com
> Date: Sun=2C 3 Jul 2011 12:12:13 -0700
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
>
>
> less than 5200 rpm with full throttle in a 912 leads to excessive cylinde
r pressure and could seriously damage your engine.
>
> FYI
>
> --------
> Thanks=2C
> Av8r3400
>
> Kitfox Model IV-1200 W/912UL &=3B IVO
> Kitfox Model IV-1050 W/912UL &=3B Warp
>
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=344799#344799
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
>
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 |
|
Altitude was never specified during the seminar that I got that information from.
Pressure differential from inside the combustion chamber versus the ambient
pressure surrounding the engine is where the damage would come from, IMO.
--------
Thanks,
Av8r3400
Kitfox Model IV-1200 W/912UL & IVO
Kitfox Model IV-1050 W/912UL & Warp
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=344840#344840
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: S5 Trim and control forces |
Thanks for all the replies and yes I am in Europe. The answers give me the reassurance
I need that what we have is absolutely normal for a kitfox S5 with electric
trim and the movable tail plane.
Tom, yes we have built by the book and the inspector has indicated that a paragraph
in the aircraft flight manual observing that in landing configuration with
full flaps the aircraft will require some back-pressure on the stick could satisfy
him. I would prefer this to one saying "no flaps" for landing as I think
they are very useful at times. And a go-around with full flaps is also no problem
with the S5.
By the way the nose-down trim effect of the flaps was very useful when I had the
trim stick in the full nose-up position (poor earth on switch) during testing.
By using full flap and just enough power for 60 kts the control forces were
quite manageable for a return to the field and problem free landing. So the plane
meets the requirement for controls to overcome a runaway trim.
Thanks again to the list. Kerry.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=344845#344845
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! --
|