New kitfox speedster builder, Southwest Missouri

[Geowitz]

Brett - What desertfox4 said....

I'm not sure you caught my explanation about the speed issue. I was saying go with the long wings for STOL AND speed. And as far as the roll rate, it still ain't no cessna with the long wing. Good luck!

[HighWing]

(snip)The only difference is a minor adjustment in where the strut attachment is located for a lower dihedral. (snip)

A note on dihedral. When I started building in 1993, I debated cutting the wings and during the wing rigging, I contacted the factory and asked about the importance on the dihedral as on the Speedster (flatter) vs. on the standard Model IV. I was told there was no difference functionally. I mention this because my long time best kitfox buddy always complained that his Model IV looked like a landing pigeon. My current Model IV's dihedral was set by the guy that started the kit and I wish it was flatter for looks. A year or two old article in Sport Pilot bore this out as it mentioned that dihedral is important aerodynamically in low wing designs, but not so much in high wing designs. The reason I mention this, is you can either use the flatter Speedster dihedral as in that section of the manual or the more pigeon like as on the regular Model IV.

Welcome to the group. I think you have found a treasure. I put all the speedster mods on my 1993 Model IV except the clipped wings and wheel pants.

[Danzer1]

Brett,

Congratulations on the Fox!

Just as a point of reference, in case you haven't seen it, Service letter 27A speeds reduced further from Service Letter 27:

http://www.kitfoxaircraft.com/suppor...ters/sl27a.htm

The 1200 Vno is 95, the Speedster is 108 and states: "Maximum structural cruising speed is the speed that should not be exceeded except in smooth air, and then only with caution. It is indicated at the junction of the green and yellow arcs."

you will see cruise speeds in the 120 mph range

"caution" obviously subject to interpretation!

[bbs428]

Thanks for all the input guys!

I really appreciate all your insights a lot.
So far it makes more sense to keep the wings long, employ all the other speedster mods.
Wheel pants can be added or removed as needed. Seems to me they will get beat up pretty good on unimproved landing sites. My buddies hay field comes to mind...

Danzer1- The 1200 Vno is 95, the Speedster is 108 and states: "Maximum structural cruising speed is the speed that should not be exceeded except in smooth air, and then only with caution. It is indicated at the junction of the green and yellow arcs."

Noted - TY

HighWing - I agree. My thoughts are to employ the speedster dihedral.

DesertFox4 - Great info on the roll rate and the best performance at all altitudes. Just what I needed. Much obliged.

Brett

[cubtractor]

HOLY COW! Another Kitfox in my backyard and I didn't even know about it. Congrats Brett. We really need to get in touch. I live just west of the airport and keep my Kitfox at JLN. Shoot me an email and we'll get in touch.

mikeeeb@gmail.com

[HighWing]

Brett,

Congratulations on the Fox!

Just as a point of reference, in case you haven't seen it, Service letter 27A speeds reduced further from Service Letter 27:

http://www.kitfoxaircraft.com/suppor...ters/sl27a.htm

The 1200 Vno is 95, the Speedster is 108 and states: "Maximum structural cruising speed is the speed that should not be exceeded except in smooth air, and then only with caution. It is indicated at the junction of the green and yellow arcs."



"caution" obviously subject to interpretation!

I guess the interpretation is mostly in the heads of the guys who have flown these early models for 20 years or more without any reported inflight structural failures. Keep in mind that the Service Letter in question was issued within a couple of years of the introduction of the IV-1200. Now with 20 years of fleet testing - My interpretation - very precautionary to be sure, but valid today? Not so sure to absolutely not. Then again, if you are really being bounced around in an airplane with light wing loading, you won't need a book or a letter to tell you to slow down.

[bbs428]

Heja cubtractor, Small world eh?

I'm right down the road, between Webb City and Alba.
When the weather turns a bit warmer we gotta burn some holes in the sky.
I'll do my part and fire up the burn pile outback...

Email on the way.

[bbs428]

"if you are really being bounced around in an airplane with light wing loading, you won't need a book or a letter to tell you to slow down."

Thanks HighWing, good point.

[Danzer1]

I guess the interpretation is mostly in the heads of the guys who have flown these early models for 20 years or more without any reported inflight structural failures. Keep in mind that the Service Letter in question was issued within a couple of years of the introduction of the IV-1200. Now with 20 years of fleet testing - My interpretation - very precautionary to be sure, but valid today? Not so sure to absolutely not.

That may be Lowell, but everyone has a different tolerance and threshold for risk. Part of risk management is assessing ALL of the data available - not just yours and DF4's opinions - to make an informed decision based on that individuals risk tolerance and abilities.

[bbs428]

Talked to John McBean today.
He's shipping me two new wing fuel tank kits and a new aluminum header tank kit.

John sure was a pleasure to do business with.
Stayed on the phone with me longer than he should have tbo and even talked Classic ford mustangs for a bit. (he's a ford guy to)
He asked me some questions on my plane and what tools I might need. So I ordered the ones I did not have.
We talked about what kind of flying I have done and expect to do in the Kitfox. Talked a bit more on what I should and should not do build wise. After business was done we had a few laughs and said our goodbyes.

I shouldn't feel so good spending this kind of money... but I can tell you I felt like he really cared about his product and how to take care of me - his customer.