HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jerryb@jerber.sandiego.sgi.com (Jerry Bransford)
Subject: Re: Kitfox XL
Keywords: Kitfox
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.
Distribution: ?
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 18:37:59 GMT

Denney Aircraft has not announced (as far as I know) any Kitfox XL
version.

The Kitfox Vixen, as announced, is still using the Rotax engine, which is
not yet a certified aircraft engine.  Rotax is, I believe, in the process
of certifying the engine for aircraft use.  

The newest kit airplane that does use a certified (read Lycoming) engine is
the new three-place 'Magnum' from Avid Aircraft (also in located Idaho,
near the Kitfox manufacturing location).
-- 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jerry Bransford			

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.homebuilt
From: richard@agora.rain.com (Richard Johnson)
Subject: Re: Velocity Ride
Followup-To: rec.aviation.homebuilt
Organization: Open Communications Forum
Distribution: w
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 13:41:04 GMT

G. A. Venkatesh ("Venky") tells of his wonderful experience test-driving
the Velcity "Big Orange". Only one question in my mind:

When you and I discussed the Velocity a coupole of months ago, you
expressed some hesitation about having a center stick, and a center
radio stack. (Which hand do you use the change frequencies?)  Do you
still have qualms?  How do you now feel about letting down (assuming
you're going IFR), in turbulence, near minimums, in the mountains, 
near a TCA, and have to change frequencies?  Is the Velocity _that_
stable, that you would remove your hand from the stick for two or three
seconds and change the radio, or would you rather reach across with
your left hand?

And, if you opt to reach over with your outboard hand, how far is it?


....Oh, and thanks for the info and vicarious thrill of losing a prop
on downwind.
-- 
Richard Johnson      richard@agora.rain.com
"When I despair, I remember that all through history the way of truth and love 
has always won.  There have been tyrants and murderers, and for a time they can 
seem invincible.  But in the end they always fail.  Always." --- Mahatma Ghandi
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.homebuilt
From: venky@thelonious.bellcore.com (G A Venkatesh)
Subject: Re: Velocity factory visit report
Reply-To: venky@thelonious.bellcore.com (G A Venkatesh)
Organization: Bellcore, Morristown NJ
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 93 13:47:05 GMT

In article <1993Jan05.213746.24907@microsoft.com> peted@microsoft.com (Peter Duniho) writes:
>>A three bladed prop also has the advantage that the blades pass through the
>>turbulence behind the trailing edge one at a time while in a two bladed prop
>>both go through it at the same time. Apparently this has some effect on the
>>flexing and vibrational characteristics of the props.
>
>If propeller blades produced turbulence at periodic intervals, this
>statement makes sense to me....
>I'm at a loss as to why a propeller blade isn't simply producing
>turbulence continuously, and hence making a two-blade prop better than
>a three-blade, since with a two-blade, the turbulence has had more of
>a chance to dissipate before the next blade comes through.

I should have said turbulence behind the trailing edge OF THE WING. Remember
that in this pusher plane the propeller arc is about a foot behind the
trailing edge of the main wing. It is the split air flow over the wing 
surfaces that creates the turbulence back there. Perhaps some aeronautically
knowledgeable person can tell us the extent of this turbulence.

venky
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.homebuilt
From: steinarb@idt.unit.no (Steinar Bang)
Subject: Fighter Light (Ultralight Me 109 replika)
Organization: Norwegian Inst. of Tech./University of Trondheim, Trondheim,
	Norway
Date: 5 Jan 93 19:33:56

Disclaimer: my German is *really* rusty so misunderstandings and
            errors in this posting can be attributed to this...:-)

The December 1992 issue of the German magazine "Flug Revue" on page 58
carries an article titled "Jger Light" ("J{\"a}ger Light" in TeX-ish
for those who don't get news in ISO8859-1), meaning "Fighter Light".

The article is about a Me 109 replika that is registered as an
Ultralight. 

It was built by a man called Tassilo Bek with the assistance by the
company Technoflug for development and construction. Technoflug is
better known for its motor glider "Piccolo".

The plane was his first homebuilt project, but it captured enough
interest that Tassilo has risked starting a company producing kits for
the plane.

The prototype was finished around the end of 1991 and had its first
flight in January 1992.

Some specs on the Me 109:
 o Manufacturer: Bek Treppenbau GmbH, Daimlerstr. 5, 7940 Riedlingen,
                 Tel. <inside Germany> 0 73 71/39 44, Fax: 1 33 48
 o Registration: Single Seat Ultralight.
 o Engine      : Gbler-Hirth 2704 (40hp)
 o Price       : 18500DM 

 o Span        : 8.00m
 o Length      : 6.30m
 o Height      : 2.00m
 o Weight      : 200kg [empty, including "rettungsgert"(?) ]

 o Cruising speed: 150km/h
 o Max speed     : 190km/h
 o Stall speed   :  45km/h
 o Max climb rate: approx. 4m/s
 o Range         : 400km

It also has a novelty for Ultralights: a retractable landing gear (of
course, for some *really* Ultra Light Ultralights there is the
retractable landing gear nature provided the pilot with...:-)

At 200 kilos and with a top speed of 190 klicks'n hour it is way
above the US ultralight requrements of 254Ib and max speed of 63mph.
But what the hey, it's a nice airplane anyways.

Besides: most European registration rules (including the Norwegian)
are probably more similar to the German.

- Steinar
From: spenny@sw.stratus.com (Steve Pennypacker)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.homebuilt
Subject: Re: Self Propelled
Date: 11 Jan 1993 22:49:56 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: wiley.ts.stratus.com

In article <C0GFv4.1o@zoo.toronto.edu>, henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes:
> In article <1993Jan6.171223.16146@alliant.com> doug@alliant.com (Doug Bloomberg) writes:
> >>Supposedly this ultralight was flown across
> >>the English channel. The whole thing looks like an elaborate joke, but 
> >>I was wondering if it is possible to sustain flight by muscle power 
> >>alone??
> >
> >	Yep, done years ago, mid 80's...
> 
> Do bear in mind, before getting too enthused about such designs, that they
> are on the very edge of workability.  The pilot/engine :-) is usually an
> experienced bicycle racer in top shape at minimum weight, flights are
> planned very carefully for optimum weather conditions, the airframe etc.
> is built as light as humanly possible... and flying them is very strenuous.

Right.  Also you should know that these things fly at a speed roughly an 
order of magnitude *slower* than that blazing bullet, the J-3 Cub!  Also,
range is limited and it takes a long time to "refill the tanks".  Structural
rigidity approximates that of a soap bubble (I believe there's a film of one 
of them, (Deadalus ??), experiencing a spar failure just before reaching the
shoreline), and they aren't much better than a hot-air balloon with respect
to wind penetration.  Unless you're associated with MIT, builder support is
not yet up to the level of Glasair (S-H).  No kits are available.  On the 
other hand, the runup is pretty simple (Pulse....Yup, still beating.  OK, 
ready for takeoff), and you don't have to know how to extract weather
information from an FSS briefer.  If the weather is good VFR at your departure 
point, it is also good VFR where you are going to land (and still will be when
you get there a few minutes later).
-- 
     Steve Pennypacker		     PP-ASEL

     spenny@wiley.ts.stratus.com     Stephen_Pennypacker@vos.stratus.com
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.homebuilt
From: fazio@rtsg.mot.com (Michael F. Fazio)
Subject: Kitfox XL
Keywords: Kitfox
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group
Distribution: ?
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 16:19:23 GMT


    I recieved an advertisement from Skystar regarding the
new(??) Kitfox XL.  So what is the difference between the
Model IV and the XL.  The advertisement did not mention
any new features or gadgets.  Anybody have an idea?
From: dreeves@ese.ogi.edu (Doug Reeves)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.homebuilt
Subject: Re: Kitfox XL
Keywords: Kitfox
Date: 8 Jan 93 22:53:52 GMT
Article-I.D.: ogicse.48264
Distribution: usa
Organization: Oregon Graduate Institute - Department of Env. Science and Eng.

In article <1993Jan8.183759.20925@odin.corp.sgi.com> jerryb@jerber.sandiego.sgi.com (Jerry Bransford) writes:
>Denney Aircraft has not announced (as far as I know) any Kitfox XL
>version.
>

Hmm..
Seems to be somewhat correct, as Denney Aircraft is now SkyStar AC,
but I did also get the mailer for the Kitfox XL for ~$14k...
Couldn't tell anything from the mailer of the picture as to
how it compares with existing designs, but I haven't called them
directly.  If I do, I will post details....

>Jerry Bransford			

D. Reeves

--
|B. Douglas Reeves    Dept. Env. Sci.& Eng.     Oregon Graduate Institute|
|N6XHW on 146.900 in PDX              dreeves@ese.ogi.edu everywhere else|
|"... life itself represents a nonequilibrium condition." - J. F. Pankow |
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.homebuilt
From: peted@microsoft.com (Peter Duniho)
Subject: Re: Velocity factory visit report
Date: 05 Jan 93 21:37:46 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation

A very interesting report, I thought!  However, there was one
part that really confused me, and maybe you or someone else
can help me out here...

In article <1993Jan1.193407.3775@walter.bellcore.com> venky@thelonious.bellcore.com (G A Venkatesh) writes:
>A three bladed prop also has the advantage that the blades pass through the
>turbulence behind the trailing edge one at a time while in a two bladed prop
>both go through it at the same time. Apparently this has some effect on the
>flexing and vibrational characteristics of the props.

If propeller blades produced turbulence at periodic intervals, this
statement makes sense to me.  However, the only thing that I can think
of that would do this is some sort of effect from the cylinders firing
that produces a variation in the rotation of the propeller.  Since it
seems unlikely to me that this would produce _any_ significant effect,
I'm at a loss as to why a propeller blade isn't simply producing
turbulence continuously, and hence making a two-blade prop better than
a three-blade, since with a two-blade, the turbulence has had more of
a chance to dissipate before the next blade comes through.

So, please, if someone could explain why my intuition tells me something
contrary to what Venky has mentioned here, I'd be much obliged!  What
am I missing?
-- 
Pete Duniho         "Give me a fish, or a mountain, to scale..."
peted@microsoft.com              -- Toy Matinee
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.homebuilt
From: zwork@starfighter.den.mmc.com (Michael Corvin)
Subject: Re: Self Propelled
Organization: Martin Marietta Astronautics Group
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 17:39:16 GMT


In article <2776@grivel.une.edu.au>, jhayward@neumann.une.edu.au (Jason Hayward) writes:
|> 
|>   Recently a friend showed me an article on a pedal powered airplane. 
|> Supposedly this ultralight was flown across
|> the English channel. The whole thing looks like an elaborate joke, but 
|> I was wondering if it is possible to sustain flight by muscle power 
|> alone??

No joke at all!  For many years, people were shooting for the Kremer (sp?)
Prize for sustained, human-powered flight.  The first prize was finally
won by a group lead by Paul McCready with their aircraft, the Gossamer
Condor, flying a figure eight course.  There were many articles, including
in National Geographic, about it.  McCready's team was also the first
to cross the English Channel with a human-powered aircraft, the Gossamer
Albatross.  I can't remember the dates (late '70s, early '80s).

A competing team in the "human-powered race" was a bunch of wonderfully
renegade MIT aero/astro students who built a series of aircraft which
culminated in the Daedalus project.  They finally recreated the legendary flight 
of Icarus between two Greek islands ('87).  They also built a "high speed"
human powered aircraft that established a record, flying at Edwards.
Their projects pushed the state of the art in low speed aerodynamics and
posed interesting problems in flight control and structures.  A good
amount of work into human physiology was also involved (engine "design"!)
There is a good book that tells the tale (and it's quite a story!),
"On the Wings of Eagles".  (And if we pester him, Mark Drela, net.contributer
from MIT might relate insider tales of those projects!)

A student project at another university (id?) has also flown a human-powered
helicopter in a large hanger a couple of years ago.  It was an excellent
design demonstration, but even less practical as a vehicle than the
human-powered airplanes.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Corvin 	      PP-ASEL, PP-G		zwork@starfighter.den.mmc.com
just another spaced rocket scientist at    Martin Marietta Astronautics Group
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
===============    My views, not Martin Marietta's   ========================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: donovanh@sptekwv1.wv.tek.com (Donovan Hammer;685-2499;60-850;;sptekwv1)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.homebuilt
Subject: Re: Self Propelled
Date: 6 Jan 93 17:14:28 GMT
Reply-To: user@host.wv.tek.com
Organization: Tektronix Inc, Wilsonville, OR


 Jason Hayward asked:

>   Recently a friend showed me an article on a pedal powered airplane. 
> Supposedly this ultralight was flown across
> the English channel. The whole thing looks like an elaborate joke, but 
> I was wondering if it is possible to sustain flight by muscle power 
> alone??


Please don't take offense, but what hole have you been hiding in???? :^)

You've never heard of Paul McCready's work with the "Gosamer Condor",
the "Gosamer Albatros", et al?  Or the "Daedalus" from MIT?

McCready's aircraft did the 22 mile channel crossing and MIT substantially
beat that distance by flying the same flight described in Greek mythology.
-- 
                                       Don Hammer

 ==================================== ========================
| Donovan Hammer, Principal Engineer |                        |
| Tektronix                          | Glider Pilot's Truism: |
|        / Computer Graphics Group   | ---------------------- |
| PO Box 1000, MS 60-850             | Where there's up air,  |
| Wilsonville, Ore. 97070            |  there's down air.     |
| phone - (503) 685-2499             | Where there's down air,|
| fax   - (503) 682-1500             |  there's more down air.|
| email - donovan.hammer@TEK.COM     |                        |
 ==================================== ========================

Return-Received-To: donovan.hammer@tek.com
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.homebuilt
From: wagner@methusalix.kph.uni-mainz.de (Axel Wagner)
Subject: Re: Rotax Engines (2 cycle)
Organization: Institut fuer Kernphysik, Uni Mainz
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 12:29:09 GMT

In article <1993Jan11.184243.4748@nuchat.sccsi.com> conover@nuchat.sccsi.com (Mark Allen Conover) writes:
>As I recall, two cycle engines are loud as hell -- alot like putting a chain 
>saw next to your ear.  Are the current generation of two cycle engines any 
>quieter?  Many of the kitplanes that I have read about use Rotax engines.


Hi all,

in our club there is a 'Kibitz' ultrtralight-biplane with a 2cykle Rotax.

It is quite powerfull, not so loud (as it is liqiud-cooled) but not
very reliable. That is, beside that it uses a gear, the main dis-
advantage.


	with best regards,
	Axel
	(powered glider mechanics)

 ***************************************************************************
 *no matter how far from home, a climbing sailplane carries a happy pilot !*
 ***************************************************************************
 *   Axel Wagner                   	Institut fuer Kernphysik           *
 *   cosmos/galaxis/sunsystem/earth/europe/germany/Mainz/        	   *
 *   J. J. Becher - Weg 45         	D-6500 Mainz                       *
 *   Tel.:+49-(0)6131 39 5841      	Fax.:+49-(0)6131 39 2964      	   *
 *   electronic mail:              	wagner@a1.kph.uni-mainz.de    	   *
 ***************************************************************************



Newsgroups: rec.aviation.homebuilt
From: conover@nuchat.sccsi.com (Mark Allen Conover)
Subject: Rotax Engines (2 cycle)
Organization: South Coast Computing Services, Inc.
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 18:42:43 GMT

As I recall, two cycle engines are loud as hell -- alot like putting a chain 
saw next to your ear.  Are the current generation of two cycle engines any 
quieter?  Many of the kitplanes that I have read about use Rotax engines.


Any rec.aviators' experiences would be appreciated.

Mark Conover

// conover@nuchat.sccsi.com
From: nikke.gaby@compart.fi (Nikke Gaby) 
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.homebuilt
Subject: PILOTE TRAINING SCHOOL
Date: 5 Jan 93 22:16:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: ComPart BBS, Helsinki-Finland, +358 0 506 3329 (14 lines V.32bis)
Reply-To: nikke.gaby@compart.fi (Nikke Gaby) 

        Hi !

        I'd like to introduce myself : I'm a 25 years old student at the
        Helsinki University of Technology. (Finland)

        I got me Private Pilote Licence last summer in France where I
        was instructed on Robin DR-400, DR-300 and ATL by a former Navy
        Fouga-Magister instructor. Anyway, my interest on flying is
        growing everyday and I will graduate in the next future from the
        University.

        So, I'm looking for me and my brother Patrick a high caliber
        pilote training in a professional environment. We're searching
        full-time training and high quality education. We're certified
        physically fit and drug-free. We both have the Private Pilote
        Licence.

        What we want is that the institute, or academy is an FAA
        approved Part 141 Flight School and provides Certificates of
        Eligibility for Nonimmigrant (M-1 & I-20) Student Status or
        equivalent.

        If you know such a school that will provide us a Professional
        Multi-Engine Turbine Instrument Flight Degree, please live a
        message or send your proposition to the following address :

                                        Nicolas Gabriel-Robez
                                        Alalinnake 1 E 47
                                        02160 ESPOO
                                        Finland
                                        fax : (358-0) 425 940

        Thank you !
---
 . SLMR 2.1a . Backup not found: (A)bort (R)etry (P)anic
                                                                                                                             
----
+--------------------------------------------------+
| ComPart BBS    +358-0-506-3329 (ZyXEL V.32bis)   |
| Helsinki, Finland  -  Number 1 BBS in Finland    |
+--------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.homebuilt
From: smccrory@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Scott McCrory)
Subject: EAA address and hints for a greenie?
Organization: The Ohio State University
Distribution: usa
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 19:11:15 GMT


Hello all,
     Could someone list the address or a resource which would get me in
contact with the EAA or perhaps even the Columbus, Ohio chapter?  I'm new
to this and want to absorb as much info before purchasing my own ultra-
light.
     And on that note, could a few kind souls out there give me their
opinions on what a good, simple untralight aircraft should cost, maybe
even suggesting a few manufacturers and models?  Are used planes avail-
able?  Kits are out of the question since I don't have a shop to construct
them in.  How do you'all store and transport your birds?

	Thanks in advance for helping a very green ground-dweller!
	Scott McCrory
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.homebuilt
From: peted@microsoft.com (Peter Duniho)
Subject: Re: Velocity factory visit report
Date: 06 Jan 93 17:41:11 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation

In article <1993Jan05.213746.24907@microsoft.com> peted@microsoft.com (Peter Duniho) writes:
>A very interesting report, I thought!  However, there was one
>part that really confused me, and maybe you or someone else
>can help me out here...
>
>In article <1993Jan1.193407.3775@walter.bellcore.com> venky@thelonious.bellcore.com (G A Venkatesh) writes:
>>A three bladed prop also has the advantage that the blades pass through the
>>turbulence behind the trailing edge one at a time while in a two bladed prop
>>both go through it at the same time. Apparently this has some effect on the
>>flexing and vibrational characteristics of the props.
>

Okay, someone was kind enough to straighten me out on this...I had
misunderstood and didn't realize that the relevant turbulence was
from the main wing, and not the other propeller blades.  (There's
just too many damn airfoils on an airplane!)  I had missed the part
about the plane having a pusher prop (yes, even with all the talk
about the vibrating coming from the back of the plane instead of
the front!  sigh...).
-- 
Pete Duniho         "Give me a fish, or a mountain, to scale..."
peted@microsoft.com              -- Toy Matinee
Organization: Stanford Linear Accelerator Center
Date: Tuesday, 12 Jan 1993 06:47:26 PST
From: <SHIN@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.homebuilt
Subject: Re: Self Propelled
Distribution: world
 <C0GFv4.1o@zoo.toronto.edu> <1istikINNr4i@transfer.stratus.com>

Regarding the MIT human powered aircraft, Daedelus, some of the
people involved in the construction came to our EAA chapter meeting
a couple of years ago.  They showed off some of the carbon fiber
stuff as well as a video of the flight in Greece.  In the question
and answer session following, I asked them if a "normal" person
(vis-a-vis a bicycle racer/pilot) could fly the aircraft.  They thought
a flight of about 2 miles might be possible, whereas the cyclist
did something like 70 miles. Your mileage may vary...

                       Harry Shin
                       Sonerai I, 'a building
                       Citabria N5064K
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.homebuilt
From: jeffm@mks.com (Jeff Moll)
Subject: Ultralight Bi-Plane Plans
Organization: Mortice Kern Systems Inc., Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 14:44:19 GMT

   Does Anyone know of availible plans for an ultra-light Bi-Plane?

   Perferibly using wood construction ?  Something like the Fisher FP-404 or
   the Fisher Classic?????


         Thanks.....   Jeff


Newsgroups: rec.aviation.homebuilt
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Self Propelled
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 22:59:27 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology

In article <1993Jan6.171223.16146@alliant.com> doug@alliant.com (Doug Bloomberg) writes:
>>Supposedly this ultralight was flown across
>>the English channel. The whole thing looks like an elaborate joke, but 
>>I was wondering if it is possible to sustain flight by muscle power 
>>alone??
>
>	Yep, done years ago, mid 80's...

Do bear in mind, before getting too enthused about such designs, that they
are on the very edge of workability.  The pilot/engine :-) is usually an
experienced bicycle racer in top shape at minimum weight, flights are
planned very carefully for optimum weather conditions, the airframe etc.
is built as light as humanly possible... and flying them is very strenuous.
-- 
"God willing... we shall return."       | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
       -Gene Cernan, the Moon, Dec 1972 |  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.homebuilt