I'm new & need High Alt per. WHat config ?

[helicopter mech]

Hello all!
I'm new to Kitfoxes. I usually fly Cessna 150-152's.
I will be relocating to a new home where the elevation is 8000' .
I have plenty of land and would like a fun craft for summer and winter flying.
I only need 2 seats but as you can surmise....the summer temps can hit 90.
Lets say I want to operate in a condition that the field D/A is 10,000'.
Is there a Kitfox model and powerplant configuration that can cut it?

I basically think the widest wingspan is the best advantage. I would like to get an honest 100kts in cruise.

Oh...I desire short field performance as well.

Is this too much to ask in the Kitfox?

Thanks everybody. Let's busta cloud!

Marty

[War Eagle]

The model 5, 6, 7 and SS are all rated at 1550lbs gross and when fitted with a Rotax 914 you could handle the 10K density altitude and have margin to spare.

The 914 will give you lots of performance in take off and cruise, but the powerplant isn't cheap (north side of $30k if you buy a new one). It is also a tad complex when compared to the Rotax 912.

But if you play with rotary wing stuff you already know about complex.

[HighWing]

Smiley Creek is 7100 feet and a group of us have been there numerous times. I don't recall afternoon, in the heat of the day and the normal mountain winds, takeoffs, though. We usually did our mouintain flying in the mornings - more for the smooth air than the density altitude. We were a mix of 80 and 100 hp Rotaxes. One thing to remember about the Kitfox. In any configuration you will get incredible performance compared to any Cessna. For those who have been at Johnson Creek. I have personally seen a Model IV Kitfox make a straight out departure clearing the notch in the ridge withour having to make the left down the canyon turn. Certified aircraft taking off from there will not be at 30% of the altitude needed for the strait out at the same point.

I have always wondered about high performance Kitfoxes with the exact same wing and aircraft ranging in empty weights from the very low 600 lbs. to 900 lbs. or more. If your mission would allow it, I would suggest the Model IV. Easy to get it around 600 lbs, but the fairings you would need to get it to your target cruise speed would take it up to maybe 650 lbs. But then it would still be a much better off the ground performer than the bigger 900 pounder.

Lowell

[Av8r3400]

Excellent advise. I would expect in that mission empty weight is a critical factor for peak high DA performance.

[Newkid]

I don't think Kitfoxes know the meaning of density altitude.:D You get up real high and all of a sudden your taking 500 ft to take off instead of 200. Just build it light.

[helicopter mech]

I really like the idea of a SS with either the radial or the new Lycombing IO-233
http://kitplanes2.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/lycoming-io-233_1-300x225.jpg
...and for the money of a 914....TBO is something to consider. I really don't know too much about Rotax but I love a radial and I am very used to O-200's and O-235's.
http://www.rotecradialengines.com/0JoeMeyeres/005JPaintedKF4.jpg
http://www.rotecradialengines.com/0JoeMeyeres/005JPaintedKF4.htm
I understand the idea of light empty wt. but a little heavier bird is sometimes more comfortable if the power is there, no?

Is anyone flying a fuel injected Kitfox?

I'd like to find a website that showed all the configurations of Kitfoxes flying and maybe owner contact info...
As you can tell....I am...a dreamer.
Dreams are the foundation of progress.

[BigJohn]

Marty,

I havn't flown a 150 or 152 in a lot of years, However Flown a lot of 172's, 182's, cubs and have about 300hrs in a Kitfox S-5. The S-5 with a 912uls outperforms all of these on short field landing or take off from Sea level to Just over 10,000', That is the highest I have taken off in Density Altitude. fully loaded at Sea Level the S-5 can be off the ground in under 200' at 4000' Density it is right at 300' and at 10,000' it is no more than 600'. You won't be disappointed in a Fox, My shortest shortfield landing at 4000' one person not fully loaded is 150' my best in a SuperCub was 170'. Other's may be able to do better but in comparing my skill set the Kitfox still out performs any thing else I have flown. Oh yes My Cruse at 75% is just over 100kts TAS at 5.2 gal hr.

[Newkid]

Nothing will outperform a Rotax 912 in a Kitfox, except for the 914 . If you really want high altitude performance go for the Rotax. All those other engines are good engines but they make the plane considerably heavier. Some, like an IO-240, may have enough power to pull the plane off the ground fairly short but your stall speed will always be higher because of the added weight. What are you expecting out the plane as far as short field performance goes???

[helicopter mech]

Well...assuming I can survive summer thermals. ( I can't promise to ONLY fly in the mornings)
Here is where I want to land in the summers. This red shaded area is 600' long.
http://martymontez.com/mart/photo.asp?i=465&l=900

Now what you don't see is a cabin I built about another 500 ' to the right.
This photo is from that cabin looking toward that red shaded area in the winter.
http://martymontez.com/mart/photo.asp?i=466&l=900

The site elevation is 8000'. It's a clear flightpath but the ground in the summer is not as smooth as it looks.

The Cessna 150 I fly now can give 40degrees of flaps and solo I can land so slow that I can brake and make a u-turn on the runway in under 200 feet. But I'm at sea level ( in fact I can see the ocean on short final).
If I could turbo-normalize that 150, I'd just keep it! An HONEST100 horses on a 1000lb aircraft would be sweet!

Speaking of that...is anyone flying a turbo or fuel injected powerplant in a Kitfox?

Hey Thank you fellow aviators for giving me some perspectives.

Marty

[War Eagle]

I fly a Series 7 with the 914.

The Rotax 914 is a 4 cylinder turbo charged engine. It has a weight of somwhere around 140 lbs. It is rated at 115 hp at take off (maximum 5 minutes at full boost). It will generate a full 100 hp up to a pretty high altitude where as a normally aspirated engine will experience about a 2-3% loss of power for every 1000 foot gain in altitude above sea level.

It is not fuel injected.

[helicopter mech]

Hello War Eagle...(nice handle) ( I'm White Mountain Apache from the Eagle Clan with the family name Quesada)

I have been readin with interest these threads:
http://www.teamkitfox.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=754
http://www.teamkitfox.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=1852&highlight=turbo

THEN I was thrown a curve!!!
http://www.ulpower.com/engines/ul350iS/img/views-dimensions/UL350-view4.jpg

I am very interested in this Fuel Injected 130 hp 173 lb $23K powerplant.

I have a 1972 K5 Chevy Blazer that I installed a 2003 LQ9 Escalade engine into...the turn the key, and go...works every time. No points, no carb adjust, no mixture, no timing to adjust. THAT is modern. I just can't go backward. I get 20 mpg IN TOWN with the 700R4 tranny.

So this UL350i is veeeery exciting and inviting.
No geared prop. and no 5000 rpm and 1500 hr TBO
I'm being fussy I realize....but it will accomplish the mission.
http://www.ulpower.com/engines/ul350iS/img/performance/power-density.gif

If I fly a 900 lb Kitfox at DA 10000, and I can get a solid 80 HP...I think thats huge performance. ( while meeting all my fuss-list items )
How much does a 914 sell for?

take care,
Marty

[Geowitz]

This is the way I'm leaning...

HKS 700T, fuel injected



http://www.greenskyadventures.com/EnginePricing/HKS/700T-vs-912Rotax.html

According to their numbers it out performs the 912ul 80hp all the time and it even out performs the 912uls 100hp from 7000' density alt and up. You can also use a much larger prop than a direct drive which really is the best thing for a more draggy airplane like the kitfox. 130lbs ready to go. Sips 3-4 gallons an hour at cruise. Throw in an IVO in flight adjustable it would be a screamer on a model IV. On a SS it may be too light, but it's worth a look. I have a lot more faith in HKS as they are a very large company and have been around for a long time with what I see as a great reputation. The UL looks like a well designed engine, but atleast for me I think the inability to use a larger prop is the worst issue atleast for a kitfox.

[War Eagle]

The cost for a new 914 is in excess of $32k.

There is a used 914 for sale in the classified section of this forum for $20K.

You can buy a zero timed remaned 914 from Rotec (they are a Rotax dealer in Canada) for a more competitive price than a new 914. I am not sure what their current price is but a phone call to them could answer that question.

Just for the record the TBO on the 914 is currently rated at 2000 hours.

I belive it is true that the geared motor can turn a little larger diameter prop compared to non-geared motor of the same hp. The gear box multiplies the engine torque (not the hp) so a smaller hp engine could conceivably match the torque output of a higher hp non geared engine.

In my case, I swing an Airmaster Constant Speed (72 inch diameter 3 blade) prop.