Activity Stream

Posts Activity Stream

  1. nlappos


    This is a great conversation! To add fuel to the fire, here is a sketch I found that supposedly matches the J3 gear, it is also the EAA Biplane cabane gear.

    Please note that the dimensions are quite close to the gear I am installing, any differences are due to the Avid's much wider side by side fuselage.Eaa_Biplane.thumb.jpg.594510c14890476e0e

     

  2. Barry Cole


    Yes, the weight does NOT include the tail-wheel. My old spring and tail-wheel is 8.6 lbs. I will let you know the total weight after I get the right tail-wheel bolted on. I think it will be the same weight or a bit lighter.

  3. Gunderson


    I went BasicMED as soon as it was available last May.  I've had the same GP for 25 years and told him he had new powers now, which was the first he'd heard of it.  My 3rd class was expired for a couple of years since I didn't need it after trading my PA16 for a SkyRaider LSA, but I needed it back before I could start flying my Cozy last June. Timing was perfect for BasicMED coming on line for me.  The GP was cooperative, the process was easy, and my insurance covered the exam (whereas it would never cover the first class exam with an AME in the past).  Coincidentally I discovered in the hearing test portion that tinnitus had snuck up on me without me noticing but I'm very aware of it now.

  4. Steveirving


    Hi, 

    On post flight I noticed the push pull tube on my nose wheel pedal control was bent.  Upon inspection the tie rod end snapped off in my hand.  

    Looks like the part number is "CLG 20 push-pull tube for nose gear steering" out of my Avid original parts list.

    The threaded portions are AN3 3/16" thread and the entire rod from eye to eye is about 8" with about 1.5" of adjustment in or out.

    The AN3 threads are welded into the tie rod.

    I was hoping this would be as easy as finding a tie rod with 3/16th AN3 threaded ends 6.5" length total and I could just pop the tie rod eye on the ends.

    Looking for GOOD leads to acquire or fabricate this part.

    (I'm aware I can search online.  I know of aircraft spruce. I have a local welder. I plan to email Avid)  :)

    Looking for some good ideas or leads.

    Steve

    Screen Shot 2018-02-18 at 5.51.27 PM.png

    Screen Shot 2018-02-18 at 5.51.21 PM.png

    Screen Shot 2018-02-18 at 5.51.15 PM.png

    IMG_8235.JPG

    IMG_8236.JPG

    IMG_8238.JPG

    IMG_8239.JPG

  5. Avid Randy


    akflyer

    That Sounds Great!!!  #1. I don't need a stretch for the 912 and #2. That the extended speedwing seems to be going well for Joey and your personal results in the great performance.  I was already planning on adding VGs too.  So it sounds like I am starting down the right road with the upgrade to the wings to end up with a Great Bird.  Guess I need to reach out again to Mark at New Avid and get the parts I need to extend my wings before I get started on the wings.

     

    Chris

    Again thanks for all your input regarding the 912.  I really would like to have the 912 as it being a 4 stroke but was leaning back to the 582 obviously for cost reasons.  But after some of your info I definitely would prefer the 912.  Have to see how it all works out.

    No worries about pushing the 912 I appreciate all the info as it helps to prepare for the right decision down the road.  If you do see a good deal out your way please let me know.  I would just have it shipped.

     

    Thanks guys

    Randy

    1 person likes this
  6. Avid Randy


    Sorry I have been wanting to post this for you for a while but just keep forgetting to pull out the belly pan and unwrap it to take a pic.  I just purchased a complete Mark IV kit and this is the belly pan that was in the kit.  Maybe you already made something but I wanted to make sure to get this out to you in case you have not. 

    After unwrapping it seems it was beat up a little through my transfer/transport or during the last 26 years of storage who knows.  I included several photos for your review.  It is 33 1/4" wide x 24 5/8" long.  The 24 5/8" is the length with the bend in the front.  When flattening out the front edge (as much as possible without distorting) it measures 24 3/4".  The bend is 3/4" and I would guess it to be 45 deg.  I did not get the degree but if you really want it I can measure.

    Wishing You The Very Best On Your Build!!!  I'm Looking Forward To Mine!

    Randy from PA

    Belly Pan 2.jpg

    Belly Pan 3.jpg

    Belly Pan 4.jpg

    Belly Pan 5.jpg

    Belly Pan 1.jpg

    2 people like this
  7. EDMO


    Doug,  How many gallons do each of your tanks hold?  I can see a huge twisting stress difference in your short tanks and the long tanks that Avid showed.  The long tanks don't look like a good idea.  I second the motion for short plastic tanks - weight difference should not be a problem - just cost of tooling up to make them.  Somehow, other kit makers have managed to do that. 

    Kitfox and Avid used to buy their tanks from the same maker - Ron's Fiberglass.   EDMO

  8. Av8r3400


    The problem is roto-molded polyurethane is not strong enough for the structural needs.  

    This is why fiberglass is still being used, with an updated resin which is better resistant to modern gasoline additives including ethanol contamination.

  9. marcusofcotton


    I have never seen the original aluminum tanks (that cracked...). The traditional fiberglass tanks are a structural part of the wing. I the aluminum tanks were conceived the same way the flex of the wing could/would crack them.

    But if the tanks are "free floating" within the wing there would be no stress an they would remain intact - but we would loose the structural function of the tank. With no tank installed in the wing there is a diagonal tube in place.

    The only real issue with the original fiberglass tanks is if they are not compatible with ethanol. So if a ethanol resistant resin is used I don't really see the issue with the traditional tanks. 

    The issue with having multiple connected tanks in the same wing isn't so much the fuel flow out as fuel in... unless the connection can manage the flow correctly. 

    Fred

     

    Free floating would be good, unfortunately with the original fiberglass tanks cracks can develop from the stresses even without ethanol. :o(  I like the idea of rotomolded, not sure how much weight gain there would be though.

  10. marcusofcotton


    Without crunching any numbers, you have A drawn in at 45* to horizontal. Any upward wheel movement would be greater than outward movement from that point up, very close at that point. Were you thinking 4" spread between the two wheels? Only 2" upward movement before spring bottoming would be of great concern to me. Better buy bushwheels and keep the pressure low. ;o)

    1 person likes this
  11. EDMO


    I would be totally happy if someone kept good records of their Kitfox performance with either droop trips or the Hoerner tips, and then took them off and put flat plates on - then recorded the new performance.   I think it would be somewhat like shortening the full-length wings to make speed wings.  EDMO

  12. dholly


    Fred is spot on re: free floating alum tank. Here are pics of my Aerotrek wing tanks, notice 'thru-tank' provision for drag tube to maintain structural integrity of wing. Not one reported tank failure in thousands of individual installs and many years of trouble free fleet operations.

    image.jpeg

    image.jpeg

    image.jpeg

  13. marcusofcotton


    True about some balking at the certifying that no issues could ever cause an incident, I wouldn't sign it. But my GP didn't have a problem with it. I brought in the tentative version before it became law for his review. The next year I scheduled an eye exam two weeks before my physical, brought the FAA paperwork for the eye doc so he could specifically address the FAA points of concern. He documented same so their was no issue for the GP that is not prepared for eye exams. GP was glad. You do the online course after the physical.

  14. akflyer


    I am sure you have read  this thread.  Seeing the report and pictures he wrote up really helps to visualize what I am referring to.  Its not just the loads on the fuse, but the way the bending loads are applied to the gear legs that cause the failures.  Many of the reports come from guys who did not have a very hard landing at all and bent the gear or the fuse.  The gear currently on my plane was from one such fellow.  My quick fix was the different springs that wont go metal to metal so quick.  The real fix is to incorporate Bob's findings into the new gear as well as a few other tweaks I have done after running it through the engineers here and having them run the load calcs and bending moments etc.

    :BC: