Good old number 29

After I did most of my flight training in the Kitfox, it was good to hear that the DPE was willing to do the check ride in it. He came close to calling it off when we had communication issues, but he toughed it out and I walked away with my PPL. My instructor and I have had a finger of an insulated leather glove stuck over our mics since February, and I didn’t remember to suggest that to the examiner on the big day, which meant his mic was picking up a lot of noise. A LOT of noise. I had to back off the throttle significantly to be able to hear him clearly. All’s well that ends well. He did say it wasn’t the best choice for a check ride, but it was a pretty good ride, all things considered. It’s been a long-time ambition of mine to get my license. Onward and upward. 

https://youtu.be/j4JL0QKcWUo

Had some beautiful flying weather today. I got to try out the home strip a little more. It is one to approach with caution, without much room to go around, but it’s a half-decent strip, for sure. I caught a bounce on the first landing, today, because there’s a bit of a bump right where I landed. The second landing was a bit smoother, as I landed just past that bump. I’m rolling out without any brakes, and taking up about 200-300 feet to slow down before the end. Snow under the ice limited braking power, but the drag of the little tires in the snow had sufficient slowing force. Takeoffs were pushing 400 feet.

https://youtu.be/https://youtu.be/j4JL0QKcWUo

First takeoff from the field. I used 300 feet of the 800 foot strip, pulling the flaps down after it just started to take off without them. The ground was still soft from the previous week of rain and windstorms, but it had firmed up a little from the previous night's frost. 
 

https://youtu.be/3XKsxnenNVo

I'm calling my unofficial home strip Lionel's Field, in honor of my grandpa. The field that he made, to prove up on the homestead, is dense with trees that have been growing up there since the sixties, but his legacy lives on. We have a nice, 1/2 mile trail around it, treed on both sides, which passes by the family cemetery. You can see the old field and cemetery in the pics.

Yes, the wing tanks added 27 pounds, but I can live with that. It's closer to 25, considering the parts I removed from the wings to fit the tanks. That's the same weight difference between the 25" tires and the 8.00s. I'm putting the small ones back on, so it will be the same weight as when I last flew it. Until I top off the tanks, anyway. But that extra six hours, or more, added to the range, will be very nice. My next project will be to put it on the skis. But first, finish this and get flying again. 

Old #29 has been good to me. I have about 75 hours on the Hobbs, since getting her back in the air. It was time to reset the point gap, since timing was nearing the lower end of the range. Since I had it in the shop, with the engine off, I decided to install the wing tanks, replace the windshield, and lengthen the tail feathers. Horizontal stabilizer got angled down as much I could. Four inches added to the chord of the rudder and elevator. I made some flapperon end caps to fix up the inside ends, which were torn up a little from folding the wings, and were slightly loose. They are very solid now. 

To clarify, Alaska Air Cargo only shipped freight on combi planes out of Boise. You need the Known Shipper Number to ship freight between states if there are passengers on the flight. They fly cargo flights between Seattle and Anchorage or Fairbanks, so you don't need it then. Things might have changed regarding passengers on those flights from Boise. It's worth looking into, for about $1,000 less for shipping two tanks. 

They weigh 13.5 pounds each. The tanks were $440 each, plus shipping. I paid another $45 for some fittings for the two tanks, plus I just spent another $250 locally for the rest of the fittings, microballoons and epoxy, 5200 adhesive sealant, and acetone for rinsing them out. I already have fabric and paint supplies. As I'm sure you're aware, the shipping cost to Alaska was outrageous, somewhere north of what I paid for the tanks, since they wanted to Fedex them. I had mine sent to Seattle, where they went on one of our boats that was heading up for the summer. Another option is to have Kitfox Fedex them to Alaska Air Cargo, in Boise. Air freight is relatively cheap, but you have to have a Known Shipper Number to ship between states. I paid for my tanks on 9/6 and they emailed me that they were done on 2/13. Expect six months to get them. 

No, not Avid tanks. I bought them new from Kitfox.

When in doubt, figure it out. These tanks are a little weird, like maybe the mold sagged. About 1/2" high at the middle, so the top bulges up, and I'm gluing a cap strip to the bottom, so the fabric will float across it and stay uniform. Not an exact match to the ribs, but with an 1/8  in most places. Plenty more work left to finish it.

I needed to pull the Kitfox back into the shop to do some maintenance, and decided it was finally time to install those wing tanks. The build manual that came with my Model 1 has instructions for installing the old aluminum six gallon wing tank, but not the newer, thirteen gallon, ethanol-resistant ones that I have. Does anyone have installation instructions that they could post, or a link to something I might have missed? I see that some people are gluing dowels to the ribs, and fitting it tight to plywood on the sides of the tank. My plan was to stick them in place with 3M 5200. I already put a couple extra braces in to reinforce the third ribs when I rebuilt the wings. 

I took mine to Anchorage Drag Bike, on 3rd Ave. They did good work. I ordered OEM bearings from Spruce, which took maybe a few months to get here, but the work that they did was done quickly. 

The original numbers had the cg limits at 10-14.something. The slightly heavier tailwheel helps bring it aft a little, but the 25" tires bring it right back to where it was. Since I'm just running the panel tank, and don't have a battery, there's not much I can do to bring it aft, except add dead weight. If I do that, the cg is moving further aft as I burn fuel, so I pretty much left it to be what it is. The way they set the cg limit is a joke, in the first place. 120 pound pilot and full fuel sets the forward limit. Low fuel and two fatties to make it full gross sets the aft limit. 
My comment about stretching the tail and  touching down tail first was intended to say that you could make a slight adjustment to compensate for that, so it didn't get worse. 
Yes, I have been doing full flaps landings. Once you get a feel for how much much much adverse yaw that gives you, it's pretty great if you don't have a crosswind. I've read the comments that some people have made about always keeping the flaps up, that they never use them, but it does get a lot slower with full flaps. Plus, you land a lot flatter. 

For myself, my plan to stretch it is going to start at the tip, lengthening the rudder and elevator. That will give me some more control authority and move the cg aft a bit, in a way that keeps it controllable. 
I had a whole lot of fun the other day, with some strong, steady winds aloft. I backed the rpms down to 4,000 and gave it full flaps, making 15-20 mph, speed over ground. Looking down, I could hardly tell I was moving. These planes are a lot of fun to fly slowly. 

I was thinking about my misuse of terminology on my previous post. Obviously, I meant to say angle of incidence, rather than angle of attack. It seems like my Model 1 could use a bit more angle of incidence, since the angle of attack is such that the tail touches first, even with the bigger tires. I've considered doing what TJay suggested, changing the angle of the little wing, I mean the horizontal stabilizer, to decrease the stick pressure in level flight, I just haven't gotten around to it. I'll probably make that adjustment when the fishing season slows down. I have a whole list of things I want to do to it, still. Like stretching the tail...

I have to hold back pressure and hold the nose up. The flaps are already reflexed a little. Can't pull them up any farther. Pulling them down makes the nose go down more, as noted. I ought to try to take a measurement of where the stick is, in flight, and see where that puts the elevator. We could call it a weight and balance issue. Kitfox is known to be nose heavy, commonly, and mine would be one of the best examples of that, with the panel tank, no wing tanks,  no battery or header tank behind the seat, and heavier landing gear with bigger tires, on the shortest model. On the other hand, the elevator does what it's supposed to. Just a little better angle on the horizontal stabilizer, or a trim tab, and it would be fine. I'm starting to believe that the wings should have had a little more angle of attack built into them, in the first place, since it commonly touches down tail first, even with a fair amount of flaps bringing down the nose, and the 25" tires. The greater wing twist of my early model also decreases the angle of attack of the wings, overall. I should add that stretching the tail back 10" would resolve any issue my Model 1 might have with weight and balance, or trim.

If all these pictures post, you could stitch them into a nice panoramic. I can't complain about the scenery of the 25 mile radius. I have over fifty hours in the plane, now. Need to knock out some of the other requirements for the license before I go for the check ride. For now, just enjoying the view. Sorry I didn't have the camera level, but I had my eyes on the horizon and my hand out the open door. We had a horrific midair collision nearby, the other day, that claimed seven lives. Always keep your eyes open. 

I had been considering the same thing with my model 1. I think 10" sounds about right. My idea was to do that when I put a Phazer motor on it, but then I'd want to stiffen the wings, and then I'd want to strengthen the carry throughs accordingly. Might as well build new wings, with a cleaner airfoil, while I'm doing that. I got to the point that I figured I should probably fresh. Actually, I want to build a clean, composite cruiser. Something to pick up where the Kitfox leaves off, rather than trying to turn it into a Super Cub. Just thinking... But really, I think you have a good idea. Model 2 and later were 7" longer on the fuselage. 10" is probably better. You could try to compensate for the minimal difference in AOA, but it's probably fine, as is. I don't have any trim in mine. It requires constant back pressure on the stick to keep it level. It seems like a little adjustment on the tail, when you lengthen it, would fix that and address the angle of attack issue at the same time. 

I'll have a look, when I get the chance, and see if my intake sockets have that bulge. Either way, no big deal, as long as it has a continuous mating surface to seal. It sandwiches the fan shroud, anyway, so it's not like it ever had perfect alignment on the intake ports. 

Yes, I have the B gearbox with the standard 2.58:1 ratio. My Powerfin prop has the "B" blades. 66" three blade. I'm pretty happy with it. It tracks nicely and seems to be well-balanced. Lightweight, so no concerns about moment of inertia. Pitch is an easy adjustment with no protractor. Their customer service was top notch, too. 

Nice project! I have the original dual carb, single ignition 503 in my Kitfox 1. With full fuel and 200 pounds of people, it climbs at 500 fpm at 57 mph, at 1.5- 2k feet. It cruises 60-65 mph ias at 6,000-6,100 rpm behind a 3 blade 66" Powerfin prop, burning 4 gph. Not a powerhouse, but it feels appropriately powered. No problem flying with 375 pounds of people and full fuel, but I haven't checked the climb rate at gross weight. We probably don't want to know, anyway. I like the simplicity of the air-cooled engine. 

Pics from the last two days. The haze is from the Siberian wildfires. I couldn't smell it in town, but, at altitude, the smoke was quite strong. 

Landing at the grass strip, last night. Besides me, there were also some mosquitos landing at the same time. They got slapped, but the camera got turned sideways in the process. I sure like that smooth grass. 

IMG_2165.mov

Nice way to start the morning. 

It's funny you should mention that, Jim. We were just talking about that, last night. I wonder how many people do give up before they get to fly it. More than half, I'd guess. I definitely want to encourage anyone who's working on one of these planes, or considering it, to go for it and see it through to the end. It's been a challenge, but totally worth it. It was probably a rarer situation for me to finish the project easily enough, but then find the biggest discouragement, for me, was getting the right instructor and the schedule and weather to fly it. It was all worth it.