Haha! Yeah I am not the guy to make rocket science out of stuff but when I learned (from this video) that those tiny 1/8 wires are causing as much drag as the expensive streamline struts and spreaders I bought then I wondered if there was a simple way to help em "go with the flow" a little better. First though I better tackle my round tube lift struts that are dragging as much as 10" cross sectional streamline would! Then I'm doin the jury struts with R/C aileron balsa... Oh yeah, and then fair that brick of a belly radiator... Then it'll be a Ferrari, damnit!
Ok so what do I do about the cross wires on my floats? How would you get an airfoil shape on a 1/8" wire? I assume something as simple as doubling gorilla tape over it (wire is the leading edge with a "tail" of tape behind) might get a bit of airfoil shape but would probably flutter and cause more problems than it solves?
Yeah it sure has been neat to see how much this group has meant to Ed over the years, and a lot of us have missed him here lately! It has clearly been a real important part of life for him and hopefully it will be again during his recovery. Count me in to chip in if he needs new computer hardware. I can set up a GoFundMe and we'll have it in a flash! Might be good to get a laptop with the "geek squad" type of support package where they deliver the laptop to his house and help him get it set up and online with favorites and everything.
Not sure if you mean my pics? If so then no I'd never use a Mohawk ANYTHING. Mine is a Skytrax with C box. I was friends with Greg at Mohawk early on but have unfortunately gravitated entirely away anything he does. Biggest reason: He builds prortotypes, posts videos of them and advertises them as the next greatest thing... without testing / proving them / working out any issues with them. Greg leaves the testing and R&D up to his customers. That is fine if he were upfront about it because then you could decide if you wanted to be the test pilot of his engineering. But he is most definitely not upfront about it! Quite the contrary.
Welcome! You may have seen my RX-1 build post (link below). It has some info in there. When deciding about the yamaha my main question was also about the c gearbox. Through my research I have found it to be very durable and can point to several examples with over 400 hours on them. FYI There are approximately 120 yamahas with the c gearbox (some flying for over 10 years now) and the only two examples of problems were bearing failures that were tracked back to improper assembly. Those two planes did not suffer powerloss. The pilots noticed excess noise and some play in the pinion shaft on preflight. As with all aircraft engine types, someone flying a yamaha will have a failure out at some point. That is inevitable. I won't tell you that it won't be you or I to be the first to see that happen but so far the gearbox (and the yamaha) have proven out really well with no reports of power loss in the air.
Here are pics of the one I made for my 4 cyl RX-1. It is based off of several other examples of successful Yamaha mounts by other people. The extra cross member on front left is for my oil tank and I needed to canteliver the right support that goes to the bottom mount location in order to clear the crankcase. Angles should be easier on your short 2 cyl Phazer and you wont have to stretch out so far so it should be a cinch.
This is for a KF1 right? I thought I heard that the early model Kitfoxes had a built in angle on the firewall? You should be able to detect it (if it is there) by measuring back to the airframe. Otherwise need to know which direction your prop turns. Some people will angle about 2 to 4 degrees left for a left turning prop and opposite for a right. That to counter P factor. Some people say they mount zero angle and shim the mount later if they need to.
Id sell my complete KF5 bungee type landing gear, brakes and new tires. I think it measures the same as the KF4? Just pulled it off for float install and I'll go with a full gear and tire upgrade if I switch it back.