Matronics Email Lists :: View topic - sadly a kitfox is down glide....

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

sadly a kitfox is down glide....
Goto page 1, 2 Next

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Kitfox-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

Aerobatics(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Sun Oct 15, 2006 7:20 pm Post subject: sadly a kitfox is down glide....

re: glide and sink rate....  I have a 582 Blue head with an E box and  IVO 3 blade... this does not windmill hence the better glide......    

  

 Dave

  [quote][b]

wingnut

Joined: 11 Jan 2006
Posts: 356

Posted: Mon Oct 16, 2006 3:56 am Post subject: Re: sadly a kitfox is down glide....

I'm confused. Is a windmilling prop more resistance than one that is motionless or the other way around?



-Luis

Float Flyr

Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 2704
Location: Campbellton, Newfoundland

Posted: Mon Oct 16, 2006 4:57 am Post subject: sadly a kitfox is down glide....

The wind milling prop has more resistance to the air.  The least is a

feathered still prop. An unfeathered still prop is in the middle.



Noel



[quote] --

_________________
Noel Loveys
Kitfox III-A
Aerocet 1100 Floats

Fox5flyer
Guest

Posted: Mon Oct 16, 2006 5:03 am Post subject: sadly a kitfox is down glide....

Wind milling is much worse, especially the clutch type.  Think of it as a

big disk out front.

Deke



---

john(at)leptron.com
Guest

Posted: Mon Oct 16, 2006 5:46 am Post subject: sadly a kitfox is down glide....

Hi Guys,

I was giving my wife a check out in the fox years ago and she asked how far

it would glide without the engine running, we had just received our "cleared

for the option" so I reached out and shut the engine off. We would have over

run our normal spot as it extended our glide much further.



John Oakley



--

RRTRACK(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Mon Oct 16, 2006 6:24 am Post subject: sadly a kitfox is down glide....

I have made many engine out landings both for practice and for real.  And to think you can glide farther than you normally can with engine out sounds  like very dangerous advise. I have practiced many times with different speeds  and stopping the prop from windmilling with good results, but in real emergency  landings at low altitudes the key is to find a landing site that can be "made  for sure" and "watch your airspeed". I will chose a landing spot and slip it in  when absolutely sure I can make it. There's no adding a little power if you  short here!

 Mark

 Wisconsin

  [quote][b]

Michel

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 966
Location: Norway

Posted: Mon Oct 16, 2006 9:35 am Post subject: sadly a kitfox is down glide....

On Oct 16, 2006, at 4:23 PM, RRTRACK(at)aol.com wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   And to think you can glide farther than you normally can with engine 

 out sounds like very dangerous advise.


	


I can confirm that. After I started landing "dead-stick" for practice 

purpose, I enjoy it so much that I do it now, whenever the weather (and 

my eventual passenger) allows me to. With the prop stopped, the sink 

rate is slightly higher than with the engine on and at idle.



Cheers,

Michel

_________________
Kitfox 3 - Jabiru 2200

n981ms(at)yahoo.com
Guest

Posted: Mon Oct 16, 2006 10:27 am Post subject: sadly a kitfox is down glide....

I have heard this argument before but have never really understood.  There is more to it than the prop is a disc.  The prop when wind milling must be "seeking a path of least resistance".  There may very well be more overall resistance to the airframe.  I do not know.  If someone has more of an explanation I would love to hear it.

   

  Thanks

  Maxwell Duke S6/TD/IO240



Michel Verheughe <michel(at)online.no> wrote:

  [quote]--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Michel Verheughe 



On Oct 16, 2006, at 4:23 PM, RRTRACK(at)aol.com wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   And to think you can glide farther than you normally can with engine 

 out sounds like very dangerous advise.


	


I can confirm that. After I started landing "dead-stick" for practice 

purpose, I enjoy it so much [quote][b]

wingsdown(at)comcast.net
Guest

Posted: Mon Oct 16, 2006 11:36 am Post subject: sadly a kitfox is down glide....

It  creates more drag by seeking less resistance due to its design which is to  produce lift. When it has no power of its own to do so, the engine,  it  steals it from the momentum of the aircraft and produces more drag not lift.  That is why a failed engine has its prop feathered.

  

 Rick

 [quote]   

   --

bsmith3163(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Mon Oct 16, 2006 12:15 pm Post subject: sadly a kitfox is down glide....

Here is an excerpt from an article in the AOPA  archives:

  

  Stopping the propStopping the propeller can add some length to your  glide since the drag produced by a wind milling prop attached to the weight of a  now-dead engine will be eliminated. However, this maneuver should be considered  only if you're at an altitude high enough to negate the effects of bringing the  airplane to the brink of a stall to get the propeller to stop wind milling. If  you're below 5,000 feet agl, we see no value in attempting this maneuver (see  "Stopping the Propeller," January 1995 Pilot). Of course, if the engine  seized, then the propeller will already be stopped.  

 

For airplanes equipped with constant-speed propellers more glide distance can  be obtained by simply pulling the prop control to the low-rpm/high-pitch  position to minimize drag. Of course, if the engine has lost oil pressure, the  propeller control probably won't work. Most propellers revert to the  high-rpm/low-pitch setting if oil pressure is lost. This, unfortunately, creates  the most drag. 

  

I flew  the P-3 Orion for a number of years in the US Navy and one of the things that  could happen was a prop that would pitch lock at a high-rpm/low-blade  angle.  It could decouple from the engine and spin at a very high rpm  creating a huge amount of drag and possible lose of control.  A fixed  pitch prop that is spinning creates more drag than a fixed pitch prop that has  stopped.  If I remember correctly it has to do with the "lift" that  is turning the engine.  Any creation of lift is accompanied by an  increase in drag.  In this case the lift does not help us (unless you are  trying for a restart) and the drag most definitely hurts us. 

Brian  Smith.



   From: owner-kitfox-list-server(at)matronics.com  [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of  wingsdown

Sent: Monday, October 16, 2006 2:34 PM

To:  kitfox-list(at)matronics.com

Subject: RE: Re: sadly a kitfox  is down glide....

 

 It  creates more drag by seeking less resistance due to its design which is to  produce lift. When it has no power of its own to do so, the engine,  it  steals it from the momentum of the aircraft and produces more drag not lift.  That is why a failed engine has its prop feathered.

  

 Rick

 [quote]   

   --

Lynn Matteson

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 2778
Location: Grass Lake, Michigan

Posted: Mon Oct 16, 2006 12:23 pm Post subject: sadly a kitfox is down glide....

Strange isn't it, that when it's being powered it's a great thing to 

have out front, but when not powered, it's a real drag...yes, the pun 

was intended...couldn't pass it up. :  )



Lynn

Kitfox IV Speedster...Jabiru 2200

do not archive



On Monday, October 16, 2006, at 09:01  AM, Fox5flyer wrote:



[quote] 



 Wind milling is much worse, especially the clutch type.  Think of it 

 as a

 big disk out front.

 Deke



 ---

_________________
Lynn
Kitfox IV-Jabiru 2200
N369LM

occom

Joined: 26 Aug 2006
Posts: 404

Posted: Mon Oct 16, 2006 12:30 pm Post subject: sadly a kitfox is down glide....

All you ever wanted to know aboutr prop drag.    http://www.goshen.edu/physics/PropellerDrag/thesis.htm

 [quote]   From:    W Duke (n981ms(at)yahoo.com) 

   To: kitfox-list(at)matronics.com (kitfox-list(at)matronics.com) 

   Sent: Monday, October 16, 2006 3:25    PM

   Subject: Re: Re: sadly a    kitfox is down glide....

   I have heard this argument before but have never really understood.     There is more to it than the prop is a disc.  The prop when wind milling    must be "seeking a path of least resistance".  There may very well be    more overall resistance to the airframe.  I do not know.  If someone    has more of an explanation I would love to hear it.

   Thanks

   Maxwell Duke S6/TD/IO240

[b]

wingnut

Joined: 11 Jan 2006
Posts: 356

Posted: Mon Oct 16, 2006 12:34 pm Post subject: Re: sadly a kitfox is down glide....

While executing some extreme maneuver to stop the prop or stoping the prop in expectation of extending the glide may not be advisable, it seems to me that it's just as important just to know what to expect if your prop stops on its own (doesn't that always happen with the 912?). I understood that most missed deadstick landings that occur after an engine failure at altitude are because the runway was overshot.

Last edited by wingnut on Mon Oct 16, 2006 12:35 pm; edited 1 time in total

Ben-PA

Joined: 11 Jan 2006
Posts: 44
Location: Berwick, Pa

Posted: Mon Oct 16, 2006 1:01 pm Post subject: Re: sadly a kitfox is down glide....

[/quote]

I can confirm that. After I started landing "dead-stick" for practice 

purpose, I enjoy it so much that I do it now, whenever the weather (and 

my eventual passenger) allows me to. With the prop stopped, the sink 

rate is slightly higher than with the engine on and at idle.



Cheers,

Michel[/quote]



Michel,

I like the idea of practicing a dead stick landing. I will try that sometime when I have a 5,000 foot runway in front of me.

Have you considered the possibility of doing engine damage because of super cooling? Perhaps you should contact Jabiru and tell them what you do and get their input.

Ben

_________________
Sign up on the Kitfox Frappr Map:
http://www.frappr.com/kitfox
You can see where fellow Kitfoxers live and pictures of their planes. Be sure to post some pictures of you, your plane, or share the scenery of the Kitfox world.

algate(at)attglobal.net
Guest

Posted: Mon Oct 16, 2006 1:14 pm Post subject: sadly a kitfox is down glide....

Michel



The only problem associated with super cooling would be related to a re

start and there is a procedure in the manual for that. I used to practice

mine on a frozen lake and it surprising how far out you are on your initial

attempts.  Mt first few were well short of the runway but I think in the

event of real dead stick the biggest problem might be a overshoot due to the

initial reaction to get to a suitable landing spot. There is no doubt that

practicing side slips will certainly help in this situation.

--

wingsdown(at)comcast.net
Guest

Posted: Mon Oct 16, 2006 2:22 pm Post subject: sadly a kitfox is down glide....

Have  to tell ya. Read the entire paper. Good stuff but inconclusive and not real  world. Some of the thing he points out are, or should be, oblivious to any one  who fly's. If you stick you arm out the window of a moving car and rotate your  hand flat into the wind you get more drag. If you stick your arm out the window  all the way , more drag. Of course we are not capable of spinning our hand like  a blade. But if you stood in the back of a pickup truck, I challenge anyone to  tie a plank on the end of a rope and spin it and tell be which created more  drag, the plank hanging or spinning.  If you drive 2 miles an hour who  cares, we don't land at 2 MPH. 

 What  those that are not convinced that a free wheeling blade creates more drag,  should  simple do their own real world test, on a very long runway. If you  do ,please expect to use greater back pressure on the flair due to increase sink  rate. Hey, been there done that, so I know what is going to happen. I would  suggest a cool day just to edge your bet. 

  

 Rick

 [quote]   

   --

dave

Joined: 22 Sep 2006
Posts: 1382

Posted: Mon Oct 16, 2006 2:33 pm Post subject: sadly a kitfox is down glide....

Ben ,   I  think the super cooling or shock cooling is something to be 

avoided but more important is the sudden surge of  full power after shock 

cooling.  Always keep your temps in their operating range.   On realtime 

forced approach the longer the runway the better but in reality a Kitfox can 

slip into some pretty tight places. I think a 2000 foot runway is plenty.

And like some one else mentioned that is very important to be able to short 

land your Kitfox.   Try practicing  under 1000 foot landing over 75 foot 

trees and stopping in under 1000 feet.  Just do it ten times in a row till 

you feel confident.  Slow flight is a great thing to master and practice.



Dave



Ps...  I just got in from 1.5 hours of slow flight SAR pattern at  200 to 

300 agl  all practice though.......so I got a biased view 

---

_________________
Realtime Kitfox movies to separate the internet chatter from the truth
http://www.youtube.com/user/kitfoxflyer
Hundreds of Kitfox Movies
Most viewed Kitfox on youtube
Most popular on youtube
Highest rated on youtube

occom

Joined: 26 Aug 2006
Posts: 404

Posted: Mon Oct 16, 2006 3:20 pm Post subject: sadly a kitfox is down glide....

My easy answer without much reading or  research is that it takes energy to spin the prop. The only stored energy an  aircraft in glide has is it's height. It spins the prop by coverting height into  work. Well, you could convert speed into work, but that might get you to the  ground quicker yet. 

 [quote]   ---

Aerobatics(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Mon Oct 16, 2006 3:27 pm Post subject: sadly a kitfox is down glide....

In a message dated 10/16/2006 5:35:57 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  dave(at)cfisher.com writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		  On    realtime 

forced approach the longer the runway the better but in reality a    Kitfox can 

slip into some pretty tight places. I think a 2000 foot runway    is plenty.

And like some one else mentioned that is very important to be    able to short 

land your Kitfox.   Try practicing  under    1000 foot landing over 75 foot 

trees and stopping in under 1000    feet.  Just do it ten times in a row till 

you feel confident.     Slow flight is a great thing to master and  practice.



Dave

	


 

 I agree that 2000 feet is plenty.  BUT if you are new and  building experience, choose a field which is comfortable to  you.

  

 My strip is a bit under than 750 feet and I have shut engine off and  landed, with a passenger, almost never using more than 50% of the runway  for practice. Well goodie for me, but man it was not always like that, not even  close. I thought it was simply not possible.

  

 The first time I tried to land my kitfox here (750 feet) I chickened  out and flew it back to my original base with a 3,400 foot paved runway with  grass on the side.

  

 Not thinking I could ever do it, I simply painted "my strip" on the  3,500 grass at Paxton airport.  I just used cheap white aerosol  paint. There I could build, in steps skill sets that was  at a  comfortable rate for me.  In a while, I could land on my painted  "carrier" even though, I used most of it.  350 hours later I rarely use  more than 1/2 in all types of conditions.

  

 The plane is capable, its us humans need to learn how.  I might  add, personally, 10 hours a year is not enough to maintain this type of  proficiency.  It depends on the individual, but I think at least  30....  I am lucky enough to get 80 to 100... it makes a difference.  

  

 OK OK I am a slow learner......

  

 Enjoy the process of becoming better, its one of the most rewarding parts  of this

  

 Just an opinion....

  

 Dave Patrick

  

 KF2

  

  

  

  

  [quote][b]

Float Flyr

Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 2704
Location: Campbellton, Newfoundland

Posted: Mon Oct 16, 2006 4:42 pm Post subject: sadly a kitfox is down glide....

As a kid.... (I'm still the  biggest, oldest kid I know) I noticed that carnival pinwheels held out the  window of the car on the way home would drag a lot more when they were allowed  to spin.  This extra drag and be noticed even when holding a pinwheel in a  stiff breeze.  next time the Carney is in town get a pinwheel and try it  for yourself.

  

 

Noel [quote]   

   --

_________________
Noel Loveys
Kitfox III-A
Aerocet 1100 Floats

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Kitfox-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page 1, 2 Next
Page 1 of 2

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum