Activity Stream

Activity Stream



  1. akflyer added a post in a topic Continental in Avid MK-IV?   

    I love my extended baggage and would not trade it for anything.. Other than maybe making it out of kidex instead. Plus a little weight in the tail will help you. A buddy has the c90 in his tcrate and it's a one flip wonder. I don't think I have ever seen him have to flip it more than once. It is a bugger on floats sometimes though. You can get 100 +hp out of it pretty easy.

    I think on a stretched fuse with a climb prop it will perform every bit as good as Randy's fat avid, and that is pretty damn impressive if you ask me.


    • 0


  2. Luked added a post in a topic Empty weights   

     
    This was pretty much my thinking. I put some more details in a new thread here:
     
    http://www.avidfoxflyers.com/index.php?/topic/2807-continental-in-avid-mk-iv/
     
    Chris raised some really good points. I don't think he knew some of the details about my project (that it was stretched, or that I was considering the smaller Continentals for instance). His points are still very valid though. Good food for thought.
    • 0


  3. Luked added a topic in Avidfoxflyers General Hangar   

    Continental in Avid MK-IV?
    I started another thread asking about real world Avid empty weights because I was concerned about my empty weight if I go with a Continental engine that is heavier than the plane was designed for. The question of the trade offs of using a heavier engine came up, so I thought it might be good to start a thread on the subject. It might be interesting to others too, or people searching the archives in the future.
     
    The other thread about empty weight: http://www.avidfoxflyers.com/index.php?/topic/2805-empty-weights/
     
    I don't want to come off sounding too defensive about my plan to use a Continental, but I have put quite a bit of thought into it. Also, everyone's situation is different, and the trade offs that work for one person might not be right for someone else. I know the Continental won't be the most popular choice of engine for most people. I have to decide if I will be happy with the trade offs when all is said and done, and I have a finished airplane.
     
    All that being said, I'm at an early enough stage that I could still change my plan (I'm only part way down the Continental road at this point), so I'm open to other peoples thoughts. If I do put a Continental on the front of my plane, I want to do it with my eyes wide open to all of the potential negative aspects.
     
    I'll give a little background on my thinking. When I bought the partial kit, the previous owner had already lengthened the fuselage by 16". His plane had been to put an O-200 on. In addition, he had added extensive sheet metal to the area behind the seats that extended most of the way back on the tail to make a huge baggage compartment. In addition to this, he had built the wings to be "convertible" from speed wings to long wings with removable tip and flaperon extensions. also, I measured the washout on the wings that he had already built, and they had slightly over 2" of washout on the short wings alone.
     
    This whole thing seemed like a recipe for hugely overweight Avid with poor performance. I basically considered the wings a write off, and decided I would build new ones. Having the stretched tail made me think that a smaller Continental might be a decent fit, and might work with my budget. My first thought was an A-75 with no electrical. This is about the lightest Continental that would be in the right HP range. My thinking was that it should perform like a 582 powered Avid that's carrying some extra weight.
     
    The more I got to thinking about it, I wondered if I would regret not having an electrical system. I am also considering a C-85 with lightweight accessories. I already have a flanged crankshaft that will work for either engine. In any case, I am planning to keep the airframe as light as possible (a tall order I know) because I know I am already going to be suffering from having more weight than what was intended.
     
    Anyway, any additional information would be welcomed and appreciated, and better information leads to better decision making.
     
    Luke D.
     
    Edit: forgot to add that I've already removed all of the extra weight that the previous builder added that was not stock. More weight saving ideas are in the works.
    • 13 replies
    • 1,171 views


  4. akflyer added a post in a topic Empty weights   

    If its stock length then keep it light as possible in the nose.  If its stretched, then subies and other aircraft engines are viable.  I know there are plenty of guys with a subie in a stock frame, but I bet they dont fly as good as a light one.  What is your mission?  low and slow STOL work or ranging out CC ?  what your mission profile is will steer you towards an engine choice.
     
    FWIW, I am trying to talk Bob into stretching his KF IV and putting a tuned up C90 in the nose.  A little work here and there and he will basically have an experimental Tcrate that will fit his mission profile perfectly.
     

    • 0


  5. Luked added a post in a topic Empty weights   

    Hi Chris,   Thanks for such a detailed reply. I didn't post exactly the same thing as before, because I didn't even remember exactly how I asked it the first time. After I re-posted, I remembered a few things I had forgotten, but decided to just leave the simpler post.   I'd like to discuss the pros and cons of certified engines in the lighter Avid and Kitfox type planes. Maybe I should start a thread just about this subject. Quite a few people have listed their empty weights on this thread, and I think it could be a useful thread for the future if people just keep adding empty weight info to it.   No hard feelings at all about your advice. I welcome it. I've agonized over engine choice quite a bit already.   Luke D.
    • 0


  6. ChrisBolkan added a post in a topic Empty weights   

    Based on your question yesterday which was worded slightly differently than today, I wrote the following long winded reply. When I tried to post it, the site was down. I was able to click "back" and copy it to word pad so I could post it when the site came back up. Now that it is back up the question is a bit different (not stating your intended engine any more), but I will past in yesterday's reply anyway:
     
    My MKIV w/582 weighed in empty at 587lb with full oil and no fuel. Empty CG was near the forward limit because the 582 is right at the max engine weight the airframe was designed to accommodate..
     
    One of my friends has a MKIV w/80hp 912. He has kept it pretty light (relatively) at around 635lb, but this or even my 582 MKIV above are not light with respect to the wing loading on the original A, B, and C models (same wing size and shape)
     
    Another friend has a stretched MKIV with 80hp 912 and he falls in the 670 range. That's not due to the stretch. It's due to the fact that he is one of those guys that if a little is good more is better. Everything on his plane is nice but exceedingly robust. He has learned his lesson and is working on a long term diet to bring his empty weight down. It performs well, but you can definitely tell the difference between it and the 635 LB plane.
     
    Luke I know you don't know me and I don't want to start a war or make any enemies or come off as a know it all. However, if its not too late I urge you not to go with a continental or Lycoming engine. They are awesome engines and I understand the draw to use one. Avid designed a plane for these engines, the Magnum. I have one and LOVE it! But it has increased wing area, increased gross weight and different weight distribution to accommodate the larger engine.
     
    The original Avids were just not designed for an engine that heavy. You will end up having to put significant additional weight in the tail of the plane just to counter the heavy engine. The plane you end up with will not perform like the Avid was intended to perform and feel. You will always be flying at gross weight.
     
    Avids will fly at gross weight just like any other plane will. There are plenty of times you will fly at gross weight even in a very light Avid, like when going camping and so forth. But you will never be able to go camping because you and half a tank of fuel will put the plane near gross. If you never knew the difference that might be fine...just the way it is. But if you've flown and gotten used to the plane at gross and then suddenly switched to solo with half a tank of fuel in a plane that has 600LB of useful load, the experience is almost spiritual. You would be blown away and always be flying as light as possible except when carrying baggage to go somewhere.
     
    I helped a good friend build a KF5. He was obsessed with air cooled traditional engines and used a 100hp 0-200. He ended up selling the plane because he was disappointed in the performance. It required something on the order of 20lb in the tail just to make forward limit W&B. While it flew nicely and was quite fast, it was a dog compared to another friend who had the same KF5 with just an 80 HP Rotax. The planes weren't in the same league of fun and overall performance even with the 20 hp difference. The 100 HP plane was faster, but in every other respect there was no comparison.
     
    Please take my comments as input for consideration and please don't take offence. I have no stake in the game other than relaying my experience and wishing everyone end up in the best plane they can for the effort they put in.  
     
    Chris
    • 2


  7. akflyer added a topic in Avidfoxflyers General Hangar   

    The NEW registration process
    When you sign up for a new account, please check the SPAM folder in your email.  The forum software will automatically send you an email when you register that you have to click the link to complete the USER part of the registration.  I get a lot of emails telling me that they can't log in. The forum software will not notify me that I need to approve a new member UNTIL that new member clicks the validation link in the email. I try to look at my control panel every couple of days to see if there are pending registrations, and if they are I will take care of it, but I don't always see the pending registrations until the new user clicks the validation email.
     
    Well guys, thanks to the multiple hackings we have had here, I will now require that when you sign up I will shoot you an email asking why you would like to join the site what you fly etc.  This is to try and keep the hackers out of the site and keep it open for all of you guys.  I know it may seem a little intrusive, but I wont ever email you again asking any personal questions.. well, unless your a smoking hot blond with a nice plane that loves to hunt and fish, if your a bird hunter, I may ask for pictures of your dog and what kennel the dog was trained at.  I take my bird hunting seriously
     
    Please don't be offended by a few simple questions, its for the best for the site.
     
    While it is a pain in the butt for me to approve all new members manually, its the steps that have to be taken to keep the site up and running as I am about done with hacks and the hassles of them.
     

    • 3 replies
    • 10,360 views


  8. akflyer added a post in a topic sorry guys but we got hacked   

    No thanks, I have the site up and running 99% of the time.. I dont need her to knock it down to 25% with only partial functionality 100% of the time
     
    Today sitelock reports that we are 100% free of malware or security issues... just the way I like it.  I hope it stops future attempts at highjacking the site.  I will keep an eye on bandwidth usage as that is normally the first clue that we got highjacked and some camel jockey is using our server to back door other websites.
     

    • 0


  9. dholly added a post in a topic Empty weights   

    I started a thread sometime ago hoping to collect W&B info for Kitfox model 4's.

    My info is there > http://www.avidfoxflyers.com/index.php?/topic/1606-kf-4-1200-wb-comparison/
    • 0


  10. dholly added a post in a topic Storage alternative   

    Denney offered both the smaller, cylindrical cargo pod and the larger cargo container as optional equipment.

    I put a copy of the 1989 options list at: Kitfox General Forum > Kitfox Newsletters > Post #3 'Kitfox Optional Equipment List 1989'. http://www.avidfoxflyers.com/index.php?app=core&module=attach&section=attach&attach_id=1015

    If anyone has a large cargo container for sale, please shoot me a PM.

    [edit] fix link
    • 0


  11. tcj added a post in a topic Empty weights   

    kitfox Classic 4.  503 Rotax.  First weight and balance was 547.  A couple years later I added PVC wing strut fairing so I reweighed and also decided to stop trying to fool myself and included the fire extinguisher, hand held radio, seat upholstery, baggage sack, hand held GPS and head set.  New weight is 573. 
    • 0


  12. dholly added a post in a topic sorry guys but we got hacked   

    P.I.T.A. goat strokers, may their private parts encounter a most horrific and incurable strain of bovine herpes.

    Hmmm, now that she's resigned, perhaps Kathleen Sebelius can do a short stint of site management for Leni before the administration figures out which department and position to promote her to.
    • 2


  13. dynomike added a post in a topic Empty weights   

    740# Subaru ,21" tires , brs parachute
    • 0


  14. akflyer added a post in a topic Storage alternative   

    Bob has one just like it also that came with his moles IV kit... Not sure where it came from, but everyone who has them seems to have gotten it with a model IV kit..


    • 0


  15. Av8r3400 added a post in a topic Storage alternative   

    Kitfox never used this style belly pod. They only used the "bomb" style because of the radiator.

    To use one, the radiator would need too be on or in the cowling.
    • 0


  16. jjbaker added a post in a topic sorry guys but we got hacked   

    You handled it like a champ and I know just about how frustrated you were yesterday having to throw a bunch of mula and hours and hours of work at this again. One can never figure out why these idiots do what they do with hacking and defacing sites (god knows, unless they do it to a bigger outfit barely anyone notices) but I know if I had 5 minutes in a closed room with the smelly diaper-head - camel-driver, I'd squeeze the Kebab out of him.
     

     
    You did good, bubba! Congrats to having the site back on its feet!
    • 0


  17. herman pahls added a post in a topic Storage alternative   

    I have access to the same belly pod as dholly pictured in post #13.
    It came from a Model 4 Kitfox with a Jabiru so there was not a radiator to get in the way.
    I assume the only option is to move the radiator forward.
    How far forward from the belly pod should the radiator be installed so as to not impede airflow through the radiator?
    Any one have a photo showing this pod design in relationship to the radiator?
    Thanks
    Herman
    • 0


  18. marshawk added a post in a topic Empty weights   

    #763 ea 81 soob in a fat avid
    • 0


  19. IFMT added a post in a topic Empty weights   

    726#. Soob ea 81, airdale wide gear. 20 pounds ballast at the tail. Mark4 HH.
    • 0


  20. akflyer added a post in a topic Empty weights   

    571# c model HH with wide gear, aluminum extended baggage, 26" goodyears, Airdale wide gear, too much crap in the panel, c box and Ifa prop. I have since removed the goodyears and lost 36 pounds.


    • 0


  21. Luked added a post in a topic Empty weights   

    That was quick. Excellent! Thanks guys. Any others would be appreciated as well.
    • 0


  22. C5Engineer added a post in a topic Empty weights   

    535lbs 582 blue head side and belly radiators. B model cowling. Very basic interior. No nav lights or pitch trim.
    • 0


  23. Av8r3400 added a post in a topic Empty weights   

    647# empty.
     
    Kitfox IV, 912UL (80 hp), Grove gear, Warp Drive prop, 21x8.00-6 tires, molded windshield and doors
    • 0


  24. Luked added a topic in Avidfoxflyers General Hangar   

    Empty weights
    I guess I'll re-post the question I asked earlier today right before the site went down. Could anyone share some real world empty weights? Any additional information that relates to weight would be helpful too (engine, custom features that affect weight, etc.). I searched for this, but didn't come up with a similar thread.
     
    Now that I'm about ready to start building my Avid, I'd like to set a weight goal. I'm guessing that I'll be somewhere between the 912 guys and the Subaru guys. That's assuming similar airframe to my MK-IV (Avid A-IV, or KF I-IV).
     
    Thanks,
    Luke D.
    • 44 replies
    • 8,282 views


  25. Av8r3400 added a post in a topic sorry guys but we got hacked   

    Dammit!  
     
    I figured out the meaning of life, posted it here, now I've forgotten what it was!
     
     
    Oh, well.  Fuckit.
    • 2