Your point is well taken.  However, your case is also a hypothetical one.
      It's not that I disbelieve your example case, although I don't agree
      with your part about the FAA hating liars.  They seem to have allowed
      over 10,000 of them (us) to operate under FAR 103 with fat ultralights
      for 13-14 years.  Furthermore, we recently hear of FAA offices letting fat
      (+ 2place,10 gal!)  UL operators go scott free even after being involved
      in an accident!  Of course potential FAA fines are relatively minor if
      you are mortgaging your house (again) to pay for those pesky propellor
      marks on the unfortunate kid's head.  But it is a real policy problem
      created by the FAA and the entire UL community.
      
      I assume most ULers with insurance buy it as a known falsehood and a
      requirement of doing business --- it is likely a requirement for operating
      at their local airport.  I've been pursuing hassle free airport access
      recently and have always been concerned about the insurance issue.
      I asked someone else who won UL access at a popular California airport
      about the insurance issue.  His response was interesting:  many of the
      GA pilots and AC owners don't want it raised in the UL airport policy
      discussions at all.  Why?  Seems a good number of them don't have paid
      up insurance, and don't want the airport management bothering them either.
      
      I'm not sure yet whether I'll buy insurance if that requirment comes
      to be.  What I'd really advocate is for some movement toward various
      rec pilot levels scaled to skill/complexity/weight as was proposed by
      the ARAC what, 4 years ago?
      
      Well, i can see this turning into Chapter 2 ...i'll pause for now, but
      you've got me started! :-).
      
      -Ben
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 05, 1997
Subject: 
Used Twinstar
From: 
mefine1(at)juno.com (Mick Fine)
      
      Dear List,
       
       
      I am happy to anounce that I am the owner of a used (kinda ragged)
      Twinstar. I hope it will feel at home next to my Flyer. 
       
       
      I waited to post this until I got it safely home (by trailer) from
      Albuquerque last Monday. It has been sitting - on an open trailer -
      outside for the last 1.5 years and needs alot of TLC. It has a homemade
      enclosure which looks very functional but UGLY! This will be the first
      thing I hope to replace/improve. If anyone has any advice, I would
      appreciate it!
       
       
      
      -Mick Fine
      Green Country Ultralight Flyer's Organization (UFO)
      Tulsa, Oklahoma
      mefine1(at)juno.com
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 06, 1997
From: 
John Wood <woodjt(at)nosc.mil>
Subject: 
Re: [Fwd: Re: tail heavy]
      
      Hi Ben; 
      I have seen this discussion before on triming the tail boom off by a couple
      of inches. My question is, how is the tail movement more snappier when in
      fact you have changed the tail moment and not the size of the tail? It seems
      to me that the opposite would be the effect, that is the pitch would
      actually be less responsive with a shorter moment. In military aircraft with
      short tail moments the tail is almost as large as the wing. I am building a
      FSII. The information provided by this group is very beneficial to those of
      us who are getting their feet wet on building an airplane. Many thanks to
      all who respond.
      
      John
      
      
      >On Fri, 3 Oct 1997, John Jung wrote:
      >> Ben Ransom wrote:
      >> > FWIW, I cut the fuselage of my FS short by 3.25 inches.  I had estimated
      >> > 
      >
      >> Ben,
      >> You could have accomplished more by 
      >> moving your seat 1/2 inch forward.
      >> That is a very thin pillow.
      >> 3.5 X 20 = 65 / 155 = .452
      >> John Jung
      >
      >Good point.  I had heard of the planes coming out aft CGish, so wanted
      >to keep things in my favor.  (I ended up using a seat cushion as well, this
      >more for comfort however.)  To be honest, the real dumb part of this was
      >that I thought I'd have an easier time with a shorter plane in my garage,
      >forgetting that the wings stick out further anyway. Why do I advertise
      >my stupid mistakes to 300 people, anyway?! :-)  Maybe the best part of
      >cutting off that 3.2" was that I used that piece for my wing rib jig, but I
      >still am glad i did it for the imagined benefit of CG and shorter snappier
      >tail momement arm.
      >
      >-Ben
      >
      >-
      >
      >
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 06, 1997
From: 
"Bill Weber (DVNS)" <bweber(at)micom.com>
Subject: 
Re: [Fwd: Re: tail heavy]
      
      On Thu, 6 Nov 1997, John Wood wrote:
      
      > Hi Ben; 
      > I have seen this discussion before on triming the tail boom off by a couple
      > of inches. My question is, how is the tail movement more snappier when in
      > fact you have changed the tail moment and not the size of the tail? It seems
      > to me that the opposite would be the effect, that is the pitch would
      > actually be less responsive with a shorter moment. In military aircraft with
      > short tail moments the tail is almost as large as the wing. I am building a
      > FSII. The information provided by this group is very beneficial to those of
      > us who are getting their feet wet on building an airplane. Many thanks to
      > all who respond.
      > 
      > John
      
      The plane becomes more squirrely with a shorter tail because the same 
      movement has a larger effect. If the tail moves vertically by one inch, 
      the wing angle of attack will change by a certain amount. A longer tail 
      will have to move further vertically to change the wing AOA by the same 
      amount. Since the longer tail will have to move more to accomplish the 
      same changes, the longer tail is less responsive (more stable).
      
      ***********************************************
      * Bill Weber                 * Keep           *
      * MICOM Communications Corp. *   the shiny    *
      * Simi Valley, CA            *        side up *
      ***********************************************
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
jerryb(at)jmd.ods.com
Date: 
Nov 06, 1997
Subject: 
Re[2]: Insurance - Comprehensive Coverage
      
           Say what you may, but our alphabet organizations (EAA, USUA, AOPA) are 
           not necessarily helping us.  
           
           Why can't we get coverage for simple comprehensive type coverage to 
           protect against loss as result of fire, storm, vandalism, or theft.
           
           Weight has nothing to do with these.  You have a kit worth over 10K 
           in your garage or hangar.  Most home insurance policies exclude 
           motorized vehicles and aircraft parts.    
           
           Even though its an ultralight they still consider it aircraft parts 
           even though once assembled it becomes a vehicle, which is it still not 
           covered because it falls under the category of a vehicle.  
           
           I can obtain this type of coverage for a boat or a motor cycle and 
           they do not require current registration, example a dirt bike or boat 
           you have but are not currently using.  
           
           All I desire is coverage to protect against loss of my initial 
           investment, labor being excluded. 
           
           How do you get around this.  Insure it as a kit like it is under 
           construction forever as intent is to register it as an experimental.  
           Of coarse they will have to force some liability insurance on you in 
           case some one trip over it or it falls on some one.
           
           weight limit thus out side the limits defined in the policy.  How 
           would this impact the comprehensive portion of the policy.
           
           There's a market here for insuring only the kit for the purchase 
           value, no labor, nothing else.  No liability.  
      
      
      ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
      Subject: Kolb-List: Re: Insurance
      Date:    11/5/97 12:28 PM
      
      
      Henry;
         Avemco will gladly sell you liability insurance at a rate of $100 a year
      for 100,000 coverge. You need to clearly understand however, that they are 
      insuring a LEGAL ultralight. If you have an accident and file a claim the 
      FIRST thing they will do is come out with a set of scales an weigh your 
      craft. If it weighs 254.1lbs (without a chute) they will not pay a dime of 
      your claim. They will tell you that you were flying an illegal aircraft, and 
      that your contract specifically says that they were insuring a legal 
      aircraft. I used to buy insurance, and shall we say "stretch the truth" as to 
      the weight of the airctaft. You are only fooling yourself, and throwing away 
      $100.
      If you are flying a legal ultralight, this is one heck of a good deal. I 
      wouldn't be without
       it.
      Tail winds
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 06, 1997
From: 
Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu>
Subject: 
Re: [Fwd: Re: tail heavy]
      
      Hi John,
      Sorry, I've fallen behind on lots of work (work?!!) email, and almost
      didn't see this one to me.  By now I see that Bill Weber has answered
      it the same as I would have.  That is, basic lever/fulcrum concept:
      the short end of a teeter-totter moves the kid on the long end further
      and faster.
      That is true if the kid on the short end weighs enf more than his friend
      on the long end, which is analogous to your thought on whether the tail
      surface is big enf to do the job.  All of it is negligible in the mod'
      i did ...shortening the tail by 3.3" is only ~2%.
      
      
      On Thu, 6 Nov 1997, John Wood wrote:
      > Hi Ben; 
      > I have seen this discussion before on triming the tail boom off by a couple
      > of inches. My question is, how is the tail movement more snappier when in
      > fact you have changed the tail moment and not the size of the tail? It seems
      > to me that the opposite would be the effect, that is the pitch would
      > actually be less responsive with a shorter moment. In military aircraft with
      > short tail moments the tail is almost as large as the wing. I am building a
      > FSII. The information provided by this group is very beneficial to those of
      > us who are getting their feet wet on building an airplane. Many thanks to
      > all who respond.
      > 
      > John
      > 
      > 
      > >On Fri, 3 Oct 1997, John Jung wrote:
      > >> Ben Ransom wrote:
      > >> > FWIW, I cut the fuselage of my FS short by 3.25 inches.  I had estimated
      > >> > 
      > >
      > >> Ben,
      > >> You could have accomplished more by 
      > >> moving your seat 1/2 inch forward.
      > >> That is a very thin pillow.
      > >> 3.5 X 20 = 65 / 155 = .452
      > >> John Jung
      > >
      > >Good point.  I had heard of the planes coming out aft CGish, so wanted
      > >to keep things in my favor.  (I ended up using a seat cushion as well, this
      > >more for comfort however.)  To be honest, the real dumb part of this was
      > >that I thought I'd have an easier time with a shorter plane in my garage,
      > >forgetting that the wings stick out further anyway. Why do I advertise
      > >my stupid mistakes to 300 people, anyway?! :-)  Maybe the best part of
      > >cutting off that 3.2" was that I used that piece for my wing rib jig, but I
      > >still am glad i did it for the imagined benefit of CG and shorter snappier
      > >tail momement arm.
      > >
      > >-Ben
      > >
      > >-
      > >
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
WGrooms511(at)aol.com
Date: 
Nov 06, 1997
Subject: 
Re: Insurance
      
      Lloyd;
      I agree with your advice. After talking with my insurance agent and finding
      out the information I gave you, I went on to get my private, and N number my
      Firestar.
      There are however, a LOT of people flying what are loosly refered to as
      ultralights.
      I would guess that about 95% of those people are " stretching the truth"
      about what they are flying being an ultralight. The information I gave about
      insurance should be of interest to them.
      Tail winds
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 06, 1997
From: 
Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu>
Subject: 
Re: Re[2]: Insurance - Comprehensive Coverage
      
      On Thu, 6 Nov 1997 jerryb(at)jmd.ods.com wrote:
      
      >      Say what you may, but our alphabet organizations (EAA, USUA, AOPA) are 
      >      not necessarily helping us.  
      
      According to John Ballentyne/Pres. USUA (sorry for the spelling?),
      EAA is guilty of latching onto what originally was a USUA proposed
      umbrella certification system.  EAA is trying to ride on the popularity
      of ultralighting, hoping that this will strengthen their cause for
      a good rec pilot license.  What this has done, however, is help drag
      down the process as it is now too big a grouping of AC types.  That is,
      ARAC's "umbrella" is trying to start as a category that includes mildly
      overweight 80mph ultralights as well as 140mph glass speedsters.  I think
      EAA ought to mind their own beeswax; if it is appropriate for a good
      rec pilot license, fine, but don't ruin the UL cause in the process.
      
      OK, i'll be civic minded and write to the ARAC by this weekend.
      
      >      Why can't we get coverage for simple comprehensive type coverage to 
      >      protect against loss as result of fire, storm, vandalism, or theft.
      >      motorized vehicles and aircraft parts.    
      
      I've often thought that if my garage ever burns down, taking my beloved
      Firestar with it, I will sue State Farm for coverage.  Verbally, my agent
      has told me (and I see it in the homeowner policy), that "aircraft" or
      "aircraft" parts are not covered.  Yet, the FAA goes out of their way to
      *disallow* calling them aircraft -- they are "vehicles" -- and I think
      I see no use in pestering State Farm about it; they would most likely
      ignore me, but at worst they might tighten up their policy language to
      also exclude ultralight "vehicles".
      
      -Ben
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
"Russell Duffy" <rad(at)pen.net>
Subject: 
Re: [Fwd: Re: tail heavy]
Date: 
Nov 06, 1997
      
      
      -----Original Message-----
      From: Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu>
      Date: Thursday, November 06, 1997 11:49 AM
      Subject: Kolb-List: Re: [Fwd: Re: tail heavy]
      
      
      >surface is big enf to do the job.  All of it is negligible in the mod'
      >i did ...shortening the tail by 3.3" is only ~2%.
      >
      >
      
      
      FWIW, the SlingShot is way shorter than the FS-II (1.5-2 feet?), and I don't
      know if the tail was enlarged at all.  I can't say it's squirrely in any
      way, though I've never flown a FS for comparison.  I do know there's a lot
      of weight on that skinny tailwheel.  The airport manager hasn't quite
      figured out what's cutting those grooves in the runway yet :-)
      
      Rusty
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 06, 1997
From: 
"Jim Gerken GERKEN(at)RCHVMX.VNET.IBM.COM" <GERKEN(at)RCHVMX.VNET.IBM.COM>
Subject: 
Insurance
      
      >sue State Farm Ins. Co.
        Good one.  They will give you what they feel you deserve and no more.  If
      they want to keep you, they may even be reasonable.  I doubt if you'd get
      anything in court except a huge lawyer bill.
        But guys, have you really talked to Avemco and they won't sell you insurance
      to the extent you wish?  I can't believe this.  Don't decide not to have
      insurance on heresay, call and check out your options (even if you're "fat").
        BTW, there is a Minnesota state law that requires an insurance Co. to pay
      for damage/injury in aircraft even if FAA regs were being broken at the time.
      And I am no lawyer, nor do even play one on TV, so I hope you will take
      the time to research this to prove I'm full of it.
      My motto: Fly safe, Don't crash, Insure to the minimum legal requirement,
      and Take only family members as passengers.
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 06, 1997
From: 
"William ( Bill ) Wixon" <wixon(at)warwick.net>
Subject: 
folding wings on a Firefly
      
      Hey Kolb-ers, 
              My first post to the kolb list.  I have been wondering how long 
      it takes to fold the wings on a Firefly. How long does it take to unfold 
      them and prepare for a flight.  Do the control cables have to be 
      disconnected to fold the wings.  
              I'm wondering about folding the wings because i'm wondering if 
      it is feasible to bring the Firefly to my airport in a trailer, prepare 
      the plane for flight, fly, return, fold the wings, put it in the trailer 
      and either take it home or leave the trailer at the airport.  I'm sure 
      i've heard people tell me this is what they do with their Kolb, just 
      wanted to ask to be sure. 
      thanks,
      bill wixon
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 06, 1997
From: 
John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com>
Subject: 
Re: folding wings on a Firefly
      
      William ( Bill ) Wixon wrote:
      > 
      > Hey Kolb-ers,
      >         My first post to the kolb list.  I have been wondering how long
      > it takes to fold the wings on a Firefly. How long does it take to unfold
      > them and prepare for a flight.  Do the control cables have to be
      > disconnected to fold the wings.
      >         I'm wondering about folding the wings because i'm wondering if
      > it is feasible to bring the Firefly to my airport in a trailer, prepare
      > the plane for flight, fly, return, fold the wings, put it in the trailer
      > and either take it home or leave the trailer at the airport.  I'm sure
      > i've heard people tell me this is what they do with their Kolb, just
      > wanted to ask to be sure.
      > thanks,
      > bill wixon
      > -
      Bill,
         It takes 10 minutes for me to fold or unfold my Firestar. The Firefly
      is suppose to take a little less time. The ailerons need to be
      disconnected on either. A friend used my trailer this last summer to
      take his Firestar back and forth to the airport. It appears to be an
      acceptable method for one that either can't afford a hanger or has none
      available. Don't forget to figure on the time it takes to load and
      unload the trailer and tie down on the trailer. Figure about 10 more
      minutes for unloading the trailer, and 20 minutes to load it again.
      John Jung
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
GeoR38 <GeoR38(at)aol.com>
Date: 
Nov 06, 1997
Subject: 
Re: CHT's
      
      
      << lame, flame,
       flame, erase,erase, erase.]  It's just that your message makes it seem
       you don't take this business very seriously at all.  Am I missing 
       something? >>
      What you are missing is that I'm an old glider pilot who has told so many
      people that I don't expect the engine to keep running anyway as I've heard so
      many horror stories about 2 cycles. I also have flown ultralites since '83
      without any instruments at all except the Ball ASI and have had the Cuyunna
      quit 2 times on takeoff only. But then I switched over in '92 to the Firestar
      w/447 and have never had an engine failure, even after long spells of idle. I
      just put a new EGT/TACH meter in for the first time 5 months ago, saw that it
      was moving around a bit and never looked at it much, at least not in a
      learning mode. But now after seeing all the dialogue on the tube about EGT, my
      interest has been raised. 
      I do intend to check the plugs and watch the EGT with  a more serious eye, and
      maybe even change the jets for hi density air in the winter . 
            Now you know my history so please don't be too mad at me for not paying
      enough attention to something, namely the engine, that you may have been
      trained is the most important part of the plane. I'm happy that they can still
      glide. It is amazing how many people I talk to are dumbfounded by that.
      GeoR38
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
GeoR38 <GeoR38(at)aol.com>
Date: 
Nov 06, 1997
Subject: 
Re: CHT's
      
      
      << Hi George: I'm new to the group but am a well seasoned Firestar
      builder/pilot. Perhaps you don't have enough pitch in your prop. Adding more
      pitch will lower the EGT. I have a 447, run my GSC (GCS?) prop at 13.5
      degrees, and the EGT always runs about 1050 to1100 degrees. Of course it will
      get close to 1200 in a substained climb-out. Take-off RPM is between 6200-6300
      RPM and the plane climbs like a homesick angel. Why run your 477 wide open if
      you don't need to? 
       
       Bill Griffin >>
      Thanks for the input, Bill, I was just getting ready to do just that now that
      I have a 3 blade IVO and Tach. You must be right as I got way more climbing
      power than I really need and "balls to the wall everytime" has already proven
      the helicopter like rise capability of the Firestar. I'm gonna pull out my big
      wrench and make a ground adjustment the next time I have the opportunity.
      GeoR38
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 06, 1997
Subject: 
Re: Used Twinstar
From: 
mefine1(at)juno.com (Mick Fine)
      
      writes:
      >
      >Congratulations on your "new" flying machine (I think). 
      >Now, you need an Ultrastar to round out your stable.  :)
      >
      >Regards,
      >Skip
      >
      >
       
      Thanks to Skip, Mike, Bill and others for the replies!
       
       
      As you might suspect, I missed buying a very nice Ultrastar in Wichita a
      couple years ago. Also flew one for a local guy who bought it used but
      wanted me to show him it would actually fly with the Kawasaki 340 (I
      never ventured out of the pattern though!). I enjoy seeing the evolution
      from one design to the next from the Flyer to Ultrastar to Twinstar to
      Firestar to Mk. II to Mk. III to Firefly and Slingshot. Wow - seems I've
      got a ways to go. Maybe I could found a Kolb museum! If anyone wants to
      make a donation, I will give your bird a good home! :-)
       
       
      
      -Mick Fine
      Green Country Ultralight Flyer's Organization (UFO)
      Tulsa, Oklahoma
      mefine1(at)juno.com
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
GeoR38 <GeoR38(at)aol.com>
Date: 
Nov 06, 1997
Subject: 
Re: CHT's
      
      
      << 2) Where is the EGT sensor located?  It has not been uncommon for some to
      install it at the intersection of the Y in the manifold.  This is very wrong
      and will give very high readings.  It should be installed 100 mm from the face
      of the piston in one leg of the manifold. 
       
       3) The other thing to do is to get someone knowlegeable to inspect you spark
      plugs and try to determine from them if your engine is running hot.  You also
      should pull the exhaust manifold and examine the piston rings and cylinder
      walls.
       
       Good luck ... er, I guess you had plenty of that already!
       
       Dennis >>
      Dennis I appreciate your thread and I think you may have hit right on it as I
      am at the intersection of the Y ,  It seemed like the right place to put it at
      the time and I don't recall any instruction with the meter that said
      otherwise,.....but maybe I overlooked it. Well, now I know, Frank probably
      didn't give me all the instructions when he sold it to me!!!
      Thanks again!!
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
"John Russell" <jr(at)rometool.com>
Subject: 
Re: Covering
Date: 
Nov 07, 1997
      
      
      ----------
      > From: John Russell <jr(at)rometool.com>
      > To: kolb(at)intrig.com
      > Subject: Covering
      > Date: Thursday, November 06, 1997 2:11 PM
      > 
      > I am building a slingshot and I'm ready to cover
      > my cage, but my nose fairing is on backorder.
      > Can I cover the cage without the fairing and then
      > use finishing tapes to blend the fairing in to the
      > cage.
      > Another question, my cage is primed in white with
      > the poly-fiber epoxy primer. Can I spray the cage
      > with aerothane and the fabric still be attached to
      > the cage ?
      >                  Thanks John Russell
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
"Russell Duffy" <rad(at)pen.net>
Subject: 
Re: Covering
Date: 
Nov 07, 1997
      
      >> I am building a slingshot and I'm ready to cover
      >> my cage, but my nose fairing is on backorder.
      >> Can I cover the cage without the fairing and then
      >> use finishing tapes to blend the fairing in to the
      >> cage.
      
      
      John, I can't answer your paint question, but you can certainly cover the
      cage without the nose cone in place.  In fact, it looks like you're supposed
      to do it that way.  Page 30 of the plans shows the cage covering, and you'll
      notice that the covering is shown forward of where the nose cone sits.
      There will be a gap between the fabric and the edges of the nose cone once
      you install it, but I didn't fill with anything.  I thought about taping
      over the gap, but figured it would just make it harder to remove the nose if
      needed.  The factory plane isn't covered over either.  Are you getting the
      longer nose, or the original one?
      
      Russell Duffy
      SlingShot SS-003, N8754K (10.1 hours)
      rad(at)pen.net
      http://www.pen.net/~rad/
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
Cpeterhu(at)aol.com
Date: 
Nov 07, 1997
Subject: 
Re: 912 oil filer
      
      This message is meant for the newsgroup. I would like to find a used or
      partial firefly kit for reasonable price. With or without engine. Would
      consider others. Thanks.
      Enjoy the newsgroup . cpeterhu(at)aol.com. (pete)
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
"John Russell" <jr(at)rometool.com>
Subject: 
Re: Covering
Date: 
Nov 07, 1997
      
      
      ----------
      > From: John Russell <jr(at)rometool.com>
      > To: kolb(at)intrig.com
      > Subject: Re: Covering
      > Date: Friday, November 07, 1997 7:36 AM
      > 
      > 
      > 
      > ----------
      > > From: John Russell <jr(at)rometool.com>
      > > To: kolb(at)intrig.com
      > > Subject: Covering
      > > Date: Thursday, November 06, 1997 2:11 PM
      > > 
      > > I am building a slingshot and I'm ready to cover
      > > my cage, but my nose fairing is on backorder.
      > > Can I cover the cage without the fairing and then
      > > use finishing tapes to blend the fairing in to the
      > > cage.
      > > Another question, my cage is primed in white with
      > > the poly-fiber epoxy primer. Can I spray the cage
      > > with aerothane and the fabric still be attached to
      > > the cage ?
      > >                  Thanks John Russell
      > -Thanks for the responce, I am going to go with
      the long nose for battery storage.
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 07, 1997
From: 
Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu>
Subject: 
Re: CHT's
      
      On Thu, 6 Nov 1997, GeoR38 wrote:
      > 
      > << lame, flame,
      >  flame, erase,erase, erase.]  It's just that your message makes it seem
      >  you don't take this business very seriously at all.  Am I missing 
      >  something? >>
      
      > What you are missing is that I'm an old glider pilot who has told so many
      > people that I don't expect the engine to keep running anyway as I've heard so
      > many horror stories about 2 cycles. I also have flown ultralites since '83
      > without any instruments at all except the Ball ASI and have had the Cuyunna
      
      I'm glad I did the erase erase erase and asked if I was missing
      something.  Your perspective that you are flying a lousy glider, which
      by the way has a strange 80 lbs of ballast that is usually very loud and
      somehow makes location of thermals less important, now makes more sense
      to me.  I will admit that I take a little more confidence in my engine,
      and sometimes take calculated  brief risks where an engine-out would be
      at least somewhat serious to the airplane ...er, glider.  I check EGT/CHTs
      early and often, and always before making a low buzz or a landing approach
      (in anticipation of need to go-around).
      
      Paying more attention to EGT will likely be at least a financial benefit,
      as it should help avoid evils such as unnecessary carbon build-up or
      seizure. 
      
      -Ben
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 07, 1997
From: 
"William ( Bill ) Wixon" <wixon(at)warwick.net>
Subject: 
Wow!
      
      "the plane climbs like a homesick angel",  "way more climbing power than 
      I really need" "balls to the wall everytime"   "helicopter like rise 
      capability" 
      
      Wow!
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 07, 1997
From: 
"William ( Bill ) Wixon" <wixon(at)warwick.net>
Subject: 
soaring in a kolb? (firefly)?
      
      Hey GeoR38,
               You said, "I'm happy that they can still glide. It is amazing 
      how many people I talk to are dumbfounded by that."  Do you mean you can 
      catch thermals and fly in ridge lift in a Kolb?  Is it possible to soar 
      in a Kolb?  I've heard it is possible to soar in a Challenger and in a 
      Pterodactyl, but i didn't think the Kolb's wings are long and thin 
      enough to be able to do soaring in it. 
      thanks,
      bill wixon
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
"Ron  Carroll " <ron.carroll(at)worldnet.att.net>
Subject: 
Re: soaring in a kolb? (firefly)?
Date: 
Nov 07, 1997
      
      GLIDE  not SOAR!
      
      -----Original Message-----
      From: William ( Bill ) Wixon <wixon(at)warwick.net>
      Date: Friday November 07 1997 9:23 AM
      Subject: Kolb-List: soaring in a kolb? (firefly)?
      
      
      >Hey GeoR38,
      > You said, "I'm happy that they can still glide. It is amazing 
      >how many people I talk to are dumbfounded by that."  Do you mean you can 
      >catch thermals and fly in ridge lift in a Kolb?  Is it possible to soar 
      >in a Kolb?  I've heard it is possible to soar in a Challenger and in a 
      >Pterodactyl, but i didn't think the Kolb's wings are long and thin 
      >enough to be able to do soaring in it. 
      >thanks,
      >bill wixon
      >-
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
GeoR38(at)aol.com
Date: 
Nov 07, 1997
Subject: 
Re: soaring in a kolb? (firefly)?
      
      writes:
      
      <<  Do you mean you can 
       >catch thermals and fly in ridge lift in a Kolb?  Is it possible to soar 
       >in a Kolb?  I've heard it is possible to soar in a Challenger and in a 
       >Pterodactyl, but i didn't think the Kolb's wings are long and thin 
       >enough to be able to do soaring in it.  >>
      I already went through my pterodactyl days of soaring and chasing ducks and
      now I soar some in my Firestar KX. I was once attacked by a large  (6ft
      span?) bird cause I was in his gaggle and he came over and winked at me. I
      could actually see the black of his (or her....I didn't check THAT) eye as he
      veered away from me at the last moment.
      As a matter of fact, by seeking a gaggle of birds is about the only way to
      find thermals in Ohio as they seem to happen usually when there are no or few
      clouds (about 3 times a year here in sunny Ohio).
      That's why I have a Firestar how about you?    GeoR38
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
Chm12345(at)aol.com
Date: 
Nov 07, 1997
Subject: 
ELT on Firestar II
      
      Dear Kolb'ers,
      
      I wonder if someone with a registered Firestar II or a Slingshot has figured
      what to do as far as installing an ELT in the airplane. The FAA inspector
      warned me he would not sign the Airworthiness Certificate if the airplane
      doesn't have an ELT (technically, I think you can fly the test period without
      it but you'll eventually need it so why fight it).
      
      In any case, I have decided to go for the Ameri-King AK-450 (cheap, small and
      Duracell batteries) unit installed under the seat but what about the antenna.
      Any sugestions would be appreciated.
      
      Thanks
      Chris.
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
"Ron  Carroll " <ron.carroll(at)worldnet.att.net>
Subject: 
FS I
Date: 
Nov 07, 1997
      
      The end of 'lurking' for this Kolb wannabe.  I finally bought a 1985 FS-I
      kit that was never put together. Now, hopefully, I can start putting to use
      some of the great tips I've been reading for quite some time.
      
      These questions are directed to Dennis, but I would appreciate any comments
      from the guys on the front line..
      
      Since this is a 1985 model, I would imagine there have been a few changes
      made to the FS-I  over the years.  I wonder if there is a list of these
      changes available. Are any of the changes considered mandatory  to meet
      safety requirements?  For that matter, is the 1985 really similar to today's
      model, other than the 377 vs. the 447 ?
      
      Are the plans and building instructions the same?  If not, are current ones
      available, and do they pertain to the 'oldie'?  As for all you actual
      builders and flyers, would you have any tips or suggestions that would help
      with this project?
      
      I've been flying ULs since 1982, but never had to build one. This wil be my
      1st, and I really look forward to not only building, but actually flying
      what appears to be one of the best ULs available.
      
      Thanks,
      
      Ron Carroll - Independence, Oregon
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 07, 1997
From: 
Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com>
Subject: 
Re: Covering
      
      >
      >
      >----------
      >> From: John Russell <jr(at)rometool.com>
      >
      >> Another question, my cage is primed in white with
      >> the poly-fiber epoxy primer. Can I spray the cage
      >> with aerothane and the fabric still be attached to
      >> the cage ?
      >>                  Thanks John Russell
      >-
      >       Aero-thane is a two part (catalysed) polyurethane enamel. The
      question is: will it dissolve or lift when cured if you rub on it with
      lacquer thinner or MEK? If it won't, go for it. If it will, AARRGH!
      Disaster! Why don't you call your local auto paint sale store tomorrow and
      ask them if lacquer thinner will attack cured, catalysed enamel, and tell us
      what they say? Inquiring minds want to know!
              
              Richard Pike
              MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 07, 1997
From: 
Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com>
Subject: 
Re: ELT on Firestar II
      
      >Dear Kolb'ers,
      >
      >I wonder if someone with a registered Firestar II or a Slingshot has figured
      >what to do as far as installing an ELT in the airplane. The FAA inspector
      >warned me he would not sign the Airworthiness Certificate if the airplane
      >doesn't have an ELT (technically, I think you can fly the test period without
      >it but you'll eventually need it so why fight it).
      >
      >In any case, I have decided to go for the Ameri-King AK-450 (cheap, small and
      >Duracell batteries) unit installed under the seat but what about the antenna.
      >Any sugestions would be appreciated.
      >
      >Thanks
      >Chris.
      >-
      >       I put an Ameri-King AK-450 on my MKIII for the same reasons, stuck
      it up  in the upper center section onto the front spar carry-through and a
      diagonal brace and attached the antenna to the gap cover, bent it back at a
      45 degree angle. I have to hook up the antenna coax every time I put the
      cover off and on, but that's not too often. CAUTION: the remote monitor that
      has the little red light and test button is really brittle plastic. I broke
      one of the corners off when I screwed it to the instrument panel cutout.
              
              Richard Pike
              MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
WGrooms511(at)aol.com
Date: 
Nov 08, 1997
Subject: 
Re: folding wings on a Firefly
      
      Bill;
      I am also a flier who uses a trailer as a home for his Firestar. It works
      great, and saves a lot of money, but you must keep one downside in mind.
      You can expect to get a lot of hanger rash by constantly loading, trailering,
      and unloading you fly. This includes holes in the fabric, small dents in the
      leading edge of the wings, and abrasions here and there. --it happens.
      You want to make sure you have a substantially built dolly to keep both the
      tail wheel off the floor, and the weight of the wings off of the support tube
      when trailering.
      Tail winds
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
WillU(at)aol.com
Date: 
Nov 08, 1997
Subject: 
added another FireStar pictures
      
      Hello everyone
      I added a few pictures of Jim Baker's FireStar to my web page.
      
      Will Uribe
      http://members.aol.com/WillU/index.html
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
"Russell Duffy" <rad(at)pen.net>
Subject: 
Re: ELT on Firestar II
Date: 
Nov 08, 1997
      
      >Duracell batteries) unit installed under the seat but what about the
      antenna.
      >Any sugestions would be appreciated.
      
      
      Chris,
      
      I put the same ELT in my Slingshot.  The antenna is mounted inside the
      aircraft, on a bracket attached to the fuel tank floor pan.  I just posted a
      couple pictures in a temporary spot.  they can be viewed at:
      
      http://www.pen.net/~rad/elt_ant1.jpg
      http://www.pen.net/~rad/elt_ant2.jpg
      
      Good luck with the inspection.
      
      Russell Duffy
      SlingShot SS-003, N8754K
      rad(at)pen.net
      http://www.pen.net/~rad/
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 08, 1997
From: 
Cal <cgreen(at)centuryinter.net>
Subject: 
covering
      
         I painted my fuselage with polyurethane paint (Dupont) and 
      then covered it, works great no lifting or dissolving. I talk 
      to several people at oshkosh this year and a lot of them use 
      automotive paints urethane and acrylic enamels. Even the 
      firestar that won grand champion at oshkosh this year used an 
      automotive paint. The only people that didn't recommend it are 
      the ones selling aerothane.                                   
        Cal
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 08, 1997
Subject: 
Re: ELT on Firestar II
From: 
rick106(at)juno.com (RICK M LIBERSAT)
      
      CHRIS
      I HAVE THE AKC    E.L.T. AND  IT TO HAS THE DURACELL BATTERIES  I PUT THE
      ANTENNA ON TOP OF THE GAP SEAL , I HAVE SEEN THEM PUT ON THE BOTTOM OF
      THE FUSE. BETWEEN THE WHEELS , AND ON THE NOSE CONE.
      
          GOOD LUCK
      
      RICK  
      >Dear Kolb'ers,
      >
      >I wonder if someone with a registered Firestar II or a Slingshot has 
      >figured
      >what to do as far as installing an ELT in the airplane. The FAA 
      >inspector
      >warned me he would not sign the Airworthiness Certificate if the 
      >airplane
      >doesn't have an ELT (technically, I think you can fly the test period 
      >without
      >it but you'll eventually need it so why fight it).
      >
      >In any case, I have decided to go for the Ameri-King AK-450 (cheap, 
      >small and
      >Duracell batteries) unit installed under the seat but what about the 
      >antenna.
      >Any sugestions would be appreciated.
      >
      >Thanks
      >Chris.
      >-
      >
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 08, 1997
Subject: 
Re: Covering
From: 
rick106(at)juno.com (RICK M LIBERSAT)
      
      JOHN 
      YES YOU CAN   BUT BEFORE YOU DO ANY MORE SPRAYING ON THE CAGE   YOU
      MUST!!!!!    SKUFF THE PRIMER  IF YOU DON'T DO THIS IT WILL NOT STAY 
      TAKE IT FROM SOMEONE WHO HAD TO LEARN THE HARD WAY!    DO THE SKUFFING
      WITH SCOTCH BRITE PAD, AND DON'T BE  TO GENTLE WHAT YOU ARE TRYING TO DO
      IS GET THE SHEME   ( I THINK I SPELLED THAT RIGHT)  OFF SO THE FINAL COAT
      WILL STICK.
      RICK     
      writes:
      >
      >
      >----------
      >> From: John Russell <jr(at)rometool.com>
      >> To: kolb(at)intrig.com
      >> Subject: Covering
      >> Date: Thursday, November 06, 1997 2:11 PM
      >> 
      >> I am building a slingshot and I'm ready to cover
      >> my cage, but my nose fairing is on backorder.
      >> Can I cover the cage without the fairing and then
      >> use finishing tapes to blend the fairing in to the
      >> cage.
      >> Another question, my cage is primed in white with
      >> the poly-fiber epoxy primer. Can I spray the cage
      >> with aerothane and the fabric still be attached to
      >> the cage ?
      >>                  Thanks John Russell
      >-
      >
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
"Russell Duffy" <rad(at)pen.net>
Subject: 
Oil change
Date: 
Nov 09, 1997
      
      Hi,
      
      I remember reading about Cliff's problems getting off his gear box drain
      plug a few months ago.  Someone advised him to smack the plug with a hammer
      to free it up.  Today I tried to get my plug loose to change the oil and it
      wouldn't budge.  Out came the hammer (truth be told, my favorite tool)-
      whack whack, and it screwed right off.  Sorry I can't remember who to thank
      for this bit of advise, but you probably know who you are. Thanks!
      
      
      Russell Duffy
      SlingShot SS-003, N8754K
      rad(at)pen.net
      http://www.pen.net/~rad/
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
Wayne Welsh <flight(at)mail.on.rogers.wave.ca>
Subject: 
Re: covering
      
      Did you use automotive paint on your fabric also. If you did tell us
      what you used and how it  worked.
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
          10 Nov 97 09:29:34 GMT+6
          10 Nov 97 09:29:22 GMT+6
Date: 
Nov 10, 1997
From: 
morris verlander <morris(at)gulflink.com>
Subject: 
covering
      
      
      >Date: Sat, 08 Nov 97 19:03:11 0800
      >From: Cal <cgreen(at)centuryinter.net>
      
      
      >   I painted my fuselage with polyurethane paint (Dupont) and 
      >then covered it, works great no lifting or dissolving. I talk 
      >to several people at oshkosh this year and a lot of them use 
      >automotive paints urethane and acrylic enamels. Even the 
      >firestar that won grand champion at oshkosh this year used an 
      >automotive paint. The only people that didn't recommend it are 
      >the ones selling aerothane.                                   
      >  Cal
      
      
      the airplane cal speaks of is featured in the Nov '97 EAA 
      'EXPERIMENTER'.  it is gary menzimers' firestar.
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 10, 1997
From: 
Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu>
Subject: 
Re: folding wings on a Firefly
      
      On Sat, 8 Nov 1997 WGrooms511(at)aol.com wrote:
      > Bill;
      > I am also a flier who uses a trailer as a home for his Firestar. It works
      > great, and saves a lot of money, but you must keep one downside in mind.
      > You can expect to get a lot of hanger rash by constantly loading, trailering,
      
      I got one leading edge ding in a retrailering incident when getting my
      plane set up for a show.  It happened from my hurrying because a crane
      had just parked next to my car/trailer, and the Big Ugly foreman said
      he was going to lift a huge air conditioner over where my plane was in
      exactly 5 minutes.  I had nowhere to go but to scurry the plane back
      up the trailer and something slipped.  
      
      Other than that, i've got no wear.  I use an unenclosed trailer.  Brief
      explanation of it and picture at 
           http://mae.engr.ucdavis.edu/~ransom/trailer.html
      
      In spite of no other real rash problems, it would still be nicer to live
      on 5 acres with my own grass strip and hanger.  Someday.  :-)
      
                                                 --------|--------
       Ben Ransom                                       (*)
       Email: bransom(at)ucdavis.edu                      o   o
       http://mae.engr.ucdavis.edu/~ransom
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
"Russell Duffy" <rad(at)pen.net>
Subject: 
Ben's Payback
Date: 
Nov 10, 1997
      
      Hi,
      
      Remember some time ago when Ben renamed one of his pictures for me?  He said
      I owed him one now, and here it is.  Hope you like it.
      
      http://www.pen.net/~rad/flight.htm
      
      Russell Duffy
      SlingShot SS-003, N8754K
      rad(at)pen.net
      http://www.pen.net/~rad/
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
Steve Bennett <sab(at)ma.ultranet.com>
Subject: 
While we're trading pictures...
Date: 
Nov 10, 1997
      
      I've enjoyed seeing the pictures from Ben, Russ, Will, and everyone else. 
       Might as well join the crowd.
      
      I have a page at www.ultranet.com/~sab which is really just a cheesy 
      collection of summer vacation photos, mostly intended for family.  There 
      are 3 links to pictures of my Twinstar, though.
      
      The best of the three is at: http://www.ultranet.com/~sab/willia~1.jpg. 
       You might just want to go right there unless you want to see pix of my 
      daughter, our new kitten, etc!
      
      -Steve
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 10, 1997
From: 
Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu>
Subject: 
Re: Ben's Payback
      
      On Mon, 10 Nov 1997, Russell Duffy wrote:
      > Hi,
      > 
      > Remember some time ago when Ben renamed one of his pictures for me?  He said
      > I owed him one now, and here it is.  Hope you like it.
      
      thanks!  nice to even get "the best" (so far), i'm sure there will be 
      plenty more good ones to come.
      
      And to Steve (www.ultranet.com/~sab), one of the very enviable parts of your
      photo is taking up that kid (William).  The look on his face says a lot!
      
      p.s. i feel way over due for making more flight photos myself.  hope to
      remedy that soon.
      
      -Ben
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 10, 1997
From: 
kmead(at)up.net (Kent  kathy Mead)
Subject: 
CG Specs
      
      Hi All
          Does anyone have the CG specs for a 85 firestar? Measuring points and
      percentages. I would like to check my plane this winter to make sure it is
      within specs. Also I would like to try a wider tail wheel, the skinny one on
      the plane now really digs into the sand. Has anyone tried this? Thanks.
      
                                                                          Kent 
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 10, 1997
From: 
John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com>
Subject: 
Weight & Balance for Firestar II
      
      Group,
         Has anyone published the distances for weight and balance for the
      Firestar II? I just did mine this last weekend and I estimated that the
      pilot CG would be 5" in fron of the leading edge. When I calculated the
      distance by weighing the plane with and without me in it, it came out to
      5" exactly. The distances to the wheels was 8" back and 197" back. I
      estimated the back seat at 13" and the tanks at 30" and 40". It would be
      interesting to know how this compares with what others have measured. My
      results are 36% without the rear tank and my weight of 170. BTW, the
      engine is a 503, recoil start. In order to carry a rear tank, I need to
      have a passenger or add weight to the front, or move my seat forward 2".
      >From what I have hear from others, this is typical.  If there is any
      interest in an Excel program to do weight & balance, let me know, I may
      just write it.
      John Jung
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 10, 1997
From: 
Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com>
Subject: 
Re: CG Specs
      
      A. Also I would like to try a wider tail wheel, the skinny one on
      >the plane now really digs into the sand. Has anyone tried this? Thanks.
      >
      >                                                                    Kent 
      >
      >       A Sorrell Hyperlight tailwheel assembly will bolt right up to the
      end of the tailwheel strut on a Kolb, and it is a very well made item. I
      don't know how much it costs, because I bought a wrecked Hyperlight, and
      that was a desirable part I kept for the MKIII. 
              
              Richard Pike
              MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 10, 1997
From: 
Cal <cgreen(at)centuryinter.net>
Subject: 
covering
      
         Yes they use auto paint on the fabric too, you must poly 
      spray first. I haven't painted my fabric parts yet, but what 
      I've seen it works good. I'm going to use Imron which is a 
      Dupont urethane. Accoring to the EAA Experimenter Gary 
      Menzimer's grand champion firestar was painted with martin 
      senour urethane, which looked super nice.                     
                                                                    
         Speeking of grand champion planes, does anyone know what a 
      person recieves when he/she wins grand champion at oshkosh?   
                                                                    
         Cal
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
jerryb(at)jmd.ods.com
Date: 
Nov 11, 1997
Subject: 
Re[4]: Insurance - Comprehensive Coverage
      
           
      In the past I had looked at my policy.  It specifically excluded vehicles and 
      the nature of the language would make it very questionable if a UL would be 
      covered.  I recall at that time it would cover my boat, but anything equivalent
      
      to motorized vehicle wasn't.  That took care of motor cycles, dune buggies, hot
      
      rods, etc.  Golf carts?
      
      As far as aircraft parts, just because you use them in a UL doesn't change their
      original classification.  An automotive part is still an automotive part even if
      used on an airplane, ask Gates about their position on V-belts.  
      
      I could have a $10K ashtray, fine furniture or things of that nature in my house
      and it would be covered under contents, but not an airplane or UL kit.
      
      Someone took wrong position about liability insurance.  I not saying we should
      
      not have liability insurance, I don't need it while I have a box of parts 
      sitting on the floor.  The problem is the present insurance structure makes it
      
      difficult to obtain this coverage.
      
      
      ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
      Subject: Kolb-List: Re: Re[2]: Insurance - Comprehensive Coverage
      Date:    11/6/97 2:37 PM
      
      
      On Thu, 6 Nov 1997 jerryb(at)jmd.ods.com wrote:
           
      >      Say what you may, but our alphabet organizations (EAA, USUA, AOPA) are 
      >      not necessarily helping us.  
           
      According to John Ballentyne/Pres. USUA (sorry for the spelling?), 
      EAA is guilty of latching onto what originally was a USUA proposed
      umbrella certification system.  EAA is trying to ride on the popularity 
      of ultralighting, hoping that this will strengthen their cause for
      a good rec pilot license.  What this has done, however, is help drag 
      down the process as it is now too big a grouping of AC types.  That is, 
      ARAC's "umbrella" is trying to start as a category that includes mildly
      overweight 80mph ultralights as well as 140mph glass speedsters.  I think 
      EAA ought to mind their own beeswax; if it is appropriate for a good
      rec pilot license, fine, but don't ruin the UL cause in the process.
           
      OK, i'll be civic minded and write to the ARAC by this weekend.
           
      >      Why can't we get coverage for simple comprehensive type coverage to 
      >      protect against loss as result of fire, storm, vandalism, or theft. 
      >      motorized vehicles and aircraft parts.    
           
      I've often thought that if my garage ever burns down, taking my beloved 
      Firestar with it, I will sue State Farm for coverage.  Verbally, my agent 
      has told me (and I see it in the homeowner policy), that "aircraft" or 
      "aircraft" parts are not covered.  Yet, the FAA goes out of their way to 
      *disallow* calling them aircraft -- they are "vehicles" -- and I think 
      I see no use in pestering State Farm about it; they would most likely 
      ignore me, but at worst they might tighten up their policy language to 
      also exclude ultralight "vehicles".
           
      -Ben
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 11, 1997
From: 
Jhann Gestur Jhannsson <johanng(at)ok.is>
Subject: 
High EGT on no:1 cyl.
      
      Hi Kolb flyers.
      
      Finally it is time to test the new aircraft after 14 months of building.
      But I am having problems with the engines temp. on no one cylinder.
      The instrument that I have is the new EIS, and it is giving me a reading
      of 1150 F on number one cyl. and it starts before 4000rpm.
      
      I have a new Rotax 503 DCDI engine, and according to CPS recommended
      jetting for the Bing carburetors I should use a main jet nr. 158,
      Idler: 45, needle jet: 2.70, Jet needle 11K2, Clip in position number 2 
      from top (the needle I have has four slots for the clip????) and the
      airscrew 0.5 turns out.
      
      The engine always starts with one or two pulls.
      I have checked all the fuel lines, which are all new Urethane fuel lines, 
      primer bulb is positioned horizontally and should not leak air.
      I have a primer, and the standard Mikuni fuel pump, and it is installed
      according to the drawings from Kolb factory.
      
      I inspected the carburator rubber socets, which are new, and the arrow is
      on top and pointing towards the engine. The aluminum intake manifold is
      molded together and the joints are on top and bottom. I noticed an uneven
      joint or a burr, on top of the manifold for number one cyl. It could be causing
      an airleak, so I sanded it down, but the weather has not permitted me to
      check if
      this was causing the problem.  
      The only thing I suspect that is causing the high temp is an air leak.
      I tapped lightly on the fuel line from the Mikuni fuel pump, and small air balls
      float up to the carburetor intake, on both carburetors. Is this normal???
      
      The prop is a IVO three blade, and the max rpm on my first runup was 6200 rpm.
      Gearbox is a B 1:2.58.
      
      I hope all these information will help anyone who might be able to assist me in
      
      finding a solution to my problem.
      
      Best regards from Iceland.
      Johann G.
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 11, 1997
From: 
"Harold B. Barrer" <hbbarrer(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: 
Re: Weight & Balance for Firestar II
      
      John Jung wrote:
      
      > Group,
      >  > If there is any interest in an Excel program to do
      > weight & balance, let me know, I may just write it.
      
      > John Jung
      
      >
      
      John, I would like to receive a copy if you write it.
      
      Thanks,
      HBB
      
      > -
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 11, 1997
From: 
Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu>
Subject: 
Re: High EGT on no:1 cyl.
      
      On Tue, 11 Nov 1997, J=F3hann Gestur J=F3hannsson wrote:
      > The instrument that I have is the new EIS, and it is giving me a reading
      > of 1150 F on number one cyl. and it starts before 4000rpm.
      >
      Sounds like you've checked the right things.  I agree with your suspicion
      of an air leak.  Make sure you check for an air leak on the exhaust side
      as well.  That will cause high EGT just the same as if on the intake side,
      which at first may not be intuitive ...but these are 2-strokes.  :-)
      If it were a used engine there are crankcase seals to worry about,
      but i know nothing about them and it seems unlikely for a new engine.
      
      > this was causing the problem. 
      > The only thing I suspect that is causing the high temp is an air leak.
      > I tapped lightly on the fuel line from the Mikuni fuel pump, and small ai=
      r balls
      > float up to the carburetor intake, on both carburetors. Is this normal???
      
      Yes.  you'll see air bubbles pass thru all the time.  Happens in flight too=
      .
      (Reports from front-engined Phantoms --where the pilot can see the fuel
      lines -- confirm big air bubbles go thru all the time w/ no problem.)
      
      If you don't find an air leak, perhaps it would be easy to switch carbs
      front and back ...see if the problem follows the carb or stays with the
      rest.
      
                                                 --------|--------
       Ben Ransom                                       (*)
       Email: bransom(at)ucdavis.edu                      o   o
       http://mae.engr.ucdavis.edu/~ransom
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 11, 1997
From: 
Tom Kuffel <kuffel(at)cyberport.net>
Subject: 
Re: CG Specs
      
      The '85 Firestar plans and builders manual have no CG information I
      could find.  However, the Firefly has essentially the same fuselage cage
      and wing cross section.  Therefor the Firefly specs should be close:
      
      Datum is leading edge of wing.  Level is lower surface of the wing up at
      9 degrees.  (this is leading edge up 7 & 1/2 inches from a horizontal
      line extended forward from the rear edge of the wing itself, not
      including the aileron).  Allowable loaded Center of Gravity is from 16
      to 22.4 inches aft of the datum (leading edge).
      
      Hope this helps.
      
      Tom Kuffel
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 11, 1997
From: 
Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu>
Subject: 
Re: CG Specs
      
      On Tue, 11 Nov 1997, Tom Kuffel wrote:
      > The '85 Firestar plans and builders manual have no CG information I
      > could find.  However, the Firefly has essentially the same fuselage cage
      > and wing cross section.  Therefor the Firefly specs should be close:
      
      I'll scan and make available the CG Calc page for the Firestar KX/KXP.
      The KX/KXP will be closer still to the original Firestar (circa 85).
      The front side tubes (by pilot's legs) on the KX/KXP cage are a little
      higher than the original FS, otherwise they are the same geometry.
      Unless Dennis says otherwise, i think it is a safe bet that the CG calc
      sheet is the same on original FS, KX, and KXP.    On the FS I&II, the 
      cage is stretched lengthwise so calc's could be different there.  also
      i've never seen I&II plans so don't know for sure about other possible
      geometry differences.
      
      Also, Dennis, i'll include your copyright notice on the posted calc page
      and assume you're fine w/ my posting the page, or will look forward to
      your lawsuit. :-)
      
      Geez, now i really better do this. ;-)
      
                                                 --------|--------
       Ben Ransom                                       (*)
       Email: bransom(at)ucdavis.edu                      o   o
       http://mae.engr.ucdavis.edu/~ransom
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: 
Air bubbles in fuel line
From: 
ul15rhb(at)juno.com (Ralph H Burlingame)
Date: 
Nov 11, 1997
      
      
      On Tue, 11 Nov 1997 15:22:34 GMT Jhann Gestur Jhannsson 
      writes:
      >Hi Kolb flyers.
      
      >The only thing I suspect that is causing the high temp is an air leak.
      >I tapped lightly on the fuel line from the Mikuni fuel pump, and small
      air balls
      >float up to the carburetor intake, on both carburetors. Is this
      normal???>
      
      >Johann G.
      
      Johann,
      I've flown my Kolb FireStar for over 10 years now and I've always seen
      air bubbles in the fuel line next to the carburetor. I don't think you
      can get rid of them. At first I was concerned, but since I haven't had
      any engine problems lately I don't worry about them.
      
      Ralph B.
      Minneapolis
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 11, 1997
From: 
Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com>
Subject: 
Re: High EGT on no:1 cyl.
      
      At 03:22 PM 11/11/97 GMT, you wrote:
      >Hi Kolb flyers.
      >
      >Finally it is time to test the new aircraft after 14 months of building.
      >But I am having problems with the engine=B4s temp. on no one cylinder.
      >The instrument that I have is the new EIS, and it is giving me a reading
      >of 1150 F on number one cyl. and it starts before 4000rpm.
      >
              Is it possible to swap EGT probes and verify that it is actually the
      cylinder, and not the EGT giving a false reading?
             
              Richard Pike
              MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: 
Re: ul15rhb: Re: Kolb FireStar
From: 
ul15rhb(at)juno.com (Ralph H Burlingame)
Date: 
Nov 11, 1997
      
      --------- Begin forwarded message ----------
      From: ul15rhb
      Subject: Kolb-List: Re: Kolb FireStar
      Date: Tue, 11 Nov 1997 20:26:46 
      
      
       writes:
      >I saw your e-mail message on the Kolb mail list and couldn't resist 
      writing you.  Actually, I want to pick your brain. I just bought a 1985 
      Firestar kit that has never been assembled.>
      
      Your a lucky man, original FireStars are hard to find, especially one in
      a box.
      
      > I would assume that you are the original builder, right?  What I'm
      looking for is someone that has built and  flown (a lot) a Firestar, and
      who perhaps can offer some helpful information in these areas.>
      
      Yes, I am the original builder. It took 515 hrs over 6 months to build.
      
      >I also must assume that you are satisfied with it, or else you wouldn't
      have stayed with it all these years.  BTW, are you using the 377 Rotax,
      and if so, how about an opinion, since you certainly fly with many other
      types of planes with many different engines.>
      
      The 377 is plenty adequate for the original FireStar, but after flying
      one with a 447, the performance is even better, of course.
      
      When building yours, beef up the wings by using a .035" leading edge tube
      (1-1/2" diam) and put 3 braces(3/8" tube) between the 5" spar and the
      backside of the LE tube (on each wing). This will allow for a sturdier
      wing and you can use the 447 in confidence. I love my FireStar. It's just
      simply the best design out there. The original is even better than the
      recent designed FireStars because of the differential throw ailerons
      which are not in those (plus it's lighter). I've flown the newer
      FireStars and other Quicksilvers and the original FireStars just cannot
      be beat (you did it right the first time, Homer Kolb). I've logged 350
      hrs in it.
      
      Ralph Burlingame
      Minneapolis
      
      PS   If there are other original Firestar builder/pilots out there,
      please don't hesitate to         comment.
      
      --------- End forwarded message ----------
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 12, 1997
From: 
"Jim Gerken GERKEN(at)RCHVMX.VNET.IBM.COM" <GERKEN(at)RCHVMX.IBM.COM>
Subject: 
2-cycle engine pumping
      
        I have a question for the engine "experts":
      With the spark plugs removed, does the crankcase still pump (draw from
      the intake tract)?  I suppose it does, as the rotary valve (582) closes and
      the piston comes down, slightly compressing the mixture in the crankcase, then
      allowing it to transfer up to the combustion chamber.  Do I have this straight?
      So then the vacuum-pulse powered fuel pump DOES work even with the spark plugs
      removed, right?   Thanks guys...
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
" Brad Blackburn" <cave(at)bootheel.net>
Subject: 
Friend looking for Twinstar parts
Date: 
Nov 12, 1997
      
      I have an ultralight buddy who is looking for a "front weldment" for a
      Twinstar. He is also looking for a "motor weldment" for the same plane. He
      was going to buy one from Kolb but the 4 digit price tag scared him off. He
      would even be happy to just have pictures/measurements so he could build
      his own. (he's a welder by trade) E-mailing me direct is ok.
       Brad Blackburn
      cave(at)bootheel.net
                                                 
      
       
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
"Jeremy Casey" <jrcasey(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: 
Memory Lane
Date: 
Nov 12, 1997
      
      
      To Steve...
      I have to agree with Ben.  The look on that kids face reminds me of the
      first ride I got in an airplane that put that 5 day smile on my face. 
      When any kind of flying was awesome!!!! 
      http://www.ultranet.com/~sab/willia~1.jpg
          Back before you knew about weight limits,FAA regulations,weight and
      balance,air leaks,radio reception problems,expenses...etc.
          Flying was just this neat thing you tell your friends you did the
      other day, and they all said "OOOOOO" 
          I know the EAA has a program called Young Eagles that is supposed to
      put as many kids in a plane as possible.  This is a great idea , I hope
      everyone who can legally(and safely) do it ...does!
          I hope my trip down memory lane was as fun for ya'll as it was for
      me!
      Thanks for the pics Steve...
      Jeremy Casey   jrcasey(at)mindspring.com
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
To Steve...
      
I have to agree with Ben.  The look on that
      kids face
      reminds me of the first ride I got in an airplane that put that 5 day
      smile on
      my face.  When any kind of flying was awesome!!!!  http://www.ultranet.co=
      m/~sab/willia~1.jpg
      
      
    Back
      before you knew about weight limits,FAA regulations,weight and
      balance,air
      leaks,radio reception problems,expenses...etc.
      
    Flying was just
      this neat
      thing you tell your friends you did the other day, and they all said
      "OOOOOO"   
      
    I know the EAA
      has a program
      called Young Eagles that is supposed to put as many kids in a plane as
      possible.  This is a great idea , I hope everyone who can
      legally(and
      safely) do it ...does! 
      
    I hope my trip
      down memory
      lane was as fun for ya'll as it was for me!
      
Thanks for the
      pics
      Steve...
      
Jeremy Casey   jrcasey(at)mindspring.com<=
      /DIV>
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 12, 1997
From: 
Jhann Gestur Jhannsson <johanng(at)ok.is>
Subject: 
High EGT solution??
      
      Hi Kolb experts.
      
      I thank you all for a great response to my problem with my "New Rotax engine"
      
      It appears that this engine isnt as new as I was told in the beginning.
      
      I bought the engine in Florida from a ultralight pilot, who told me that this
      engine was bought from Lockwood Aviation last March 1997.
      He gave me the Operators Manual, where I could see when the engine was 
      broken in. The Engine No: is 4068884, but I did not varify at Lockwood, that
      this was a new engine number or the same number as in the manual.
      It had accured to me after I came home to Iceland that this engine was not as
      new as the seller had promised, because some of the parts had a thin rust
      forming.
      
      I rechecked the Operators Manual and compared the engine numbers, which at
      first
      look simular and found out that I had been told a lie when buying this engine.
      The engine number in the manual was 4686686.
      
      But back to my problem with this engine.
      
      After your suggestions to check the exhaust manifold for air leaks, I found out
      
      that the gaskets were not new and they were leaking oil and definetly air.
      
      I replaced the gaskets today, and will be testing the engine as soon as
      weather permits.
      I will keep you posted of the results.
      
      Best regards from KEFLAVIK, ICELAND
      
      Johann G. 
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
Olendorf(at)aol.com
Date: 
Nov 12, 1997
Subject: 
85 Firestar
      
      I love my original model Firestar as well.  Haven't flown any of the newer
      ones.  I also have the 377 engine and can't imagine needing more power than
      that.  Maybe if I had a full enclosure I would like to go faster.
      
      I have just torn off the old fabric from the cage and would like to hear some
      tips on how to remove the old paint from the cage.  I'm sure you will hear
      more from me about my first covering/painting attempt later.  But first I
      gotta strip this thing down.  It's almost like doing the kit but you have to
      disassemble too.
      
      
      Scott Olendorf
       
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
"Jim Baker" <jlbaker(at)telepath.com>
Date: 
Nov 12, 1997
Subject: 
Re: ul15rhb: Re: Kolb FireStar
      
      > The original is even better than the
      > recent designed FireStars because of the differential throw ailerons
      > which are not in those (plus it's lighter). 
      
      Beg to differ but the FS 2 has differential. What the FS2 doesn't 
      have is the more complex aileron linkage of the original, which may 
      have more mechanical advantage than the FS2.
      
      
      Jim Baker
      Pres, USUA Club 104 
      Frontier Ultralight Aviators
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 12, 1997
Subject: 
Re: 85 Firestar
From: 
mefine1(at)juno.com (Mick Fine)
      
      >
      >.... It's almost like doing the kit but you 
      >have to
      >disassemble too.
      >
      >
      >Scott Olendorf
      > 
      >-
       
       
      Scott,
       
       
      I am thinking of doing the same with my Twinstar, the local auto supply
      store has a product called "Aircraft Paint Stripper/Remover". I have used
      it with 'pretty good' success on other things. It is very 'nasty' and
      should be used per the label (thick rubber gloves and lots of fresh air -
      burns your eyes immediately on opening the cap). Guess I will see if it
      lives up to its name on a real aircraft - er, uh vehicle. 
       
       
      
      -Mick Fine
      Green Country Ultralight Flyer's Organization (UFO)
      Tulsa, Oklahoma
      mefine1(at)juno.com
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 13, 1997
From: 
Monte <Monte(at)cyberatl.net>
Subject: 
Thanks for the pictures.
      
      Hi,
      
          Just wanted to say thanks for the pictures that eveyone has put on
      the net.  
           I hope to buy a Mark 3 sometime between now and Sun & Fun.  Does
      anyone know if Kolb offers any good specials at the show?  Also, I saw a
      Mark 3 last year at Sun & Fun that had dual controls.  Does anyone know
      if it is much of a problem to do that?  
      
                                             Thanks alot,
                                             
                                             Monte Evans
                                             Dallas, GA
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
"Russell Duffy" <rad(at)pen.net>
Subject: 
Re: Thanks for the pictures.
Date: 
Nov 13, 1997
      
      >anyone know if Kolb offers any good specials at the show?  Also, I saw a
      
      
      A couple years ago when I bought the SS at SNF, the special was that you get
      pre-built ribs free.  I made them give me a hat too :-)
      
      Rusty
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 13, 1997
From: 
Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu>
Subject: 
Re: 85 Firestar
      
      On Wed, 12 Nov 1997 Olendorf(at)aol.com wrote:
      > I have just torn off the old fabric from the cage and would like to hear some
      > tips on how to remove the old paint from the cage.  I'm sure you will hear
      > more from me about my first covering/painting attempt later.  But first I
      > gotta strip this thing down.  It's almost like doing the kit but you have to
      > disassemble too.
      
      i'm assuming from your description that maybe the cage is not powder
      coated.  If you're going to the trouble of recovering the cage, don't
      waste any elbow grease stripping paint.  This is the perfect time to
      do what should be done to all cages. Powder Coat.  (This will probably
      cost ~$150 and include bead blasting ALL the old junk off.)
      
      i don't know what to recommend if what you have is paint on top
      of powder coat.
      
      -Ben
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 13, 1997
From: 
wood <richard.wood(at)usa.net>
Subject: 
Re: 2-cycle engine pumping
      
      >  I have a question for the engine "experts":
      >With the spark plugs removed, does the crankcase still pump (draw from
      >the intake tract)?  I suppose it does, as the rotary valve (582) closes and
      >the piston comes down, slightly compressing the mixture in the crankcase, then
      >allowing it to transfer up to the combustion chamber.  Do I have this straight?
      >So then the vacuum-pulse powered fuel pump DOES work even with the spark plugs
      >removed, right?   Thanks guys...
      >-
      >
      I am no expert but that does not stop me from offering an opinion. The
      motion of the piston draws air into the crankcase and then pumps it directly
      into the combustion chamber.Nothing is sucked into the combustion chamber as
      it is all done by the pressures on the bottom of the piston. So go ahead and
      remove the sparkplugs there is still pumping in the crankcase.
      
      Woody
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
"Howard G. Penny" <penny(at)rtp.ericsson.se>
Subject: 
RE: covering
Date: 
Nov 13, 1997
      
      DON'T DO IT!!!!!!!  That is use Imron on fabric.  Yea it will look nice
      at first, but it is not meant to flex.  Borrow someone's Stits video and
      see how poorly it works.  I had a '46 Taylorcraft that someone had
      painted with Imron.  The finish was about 6 years old and a slight
      finger press would create "ring worm" cracks and flaking paint.  I
      recommend that you use only Stits products in a Stits process.
      
      Howard G. Penny           EAA # 168877
      Raleigh, NC                    Kolb SlingShot # SS-007 N96969 res.
      penny(at)rtp.ericsson.se   Sonerai IILS # 0010
      http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/hpenny
      /* --------------------------------------------------------- */
      
      
      -----Original Message-----
      From:        Cal [SMTP:cgreen(at)centuryinter.net]
      Sent:        Tuesday, November 11, 1997 12:35 AM
      To:        kolb(at)intrig.com
      Subject: Kolb-List:        covering
      
         Yes they use auto paint on the fabric too, you must poly
      spray first. I haven't painted my fabric parts yet, but what
      I've seen it works good. I'm going to use Imron which is a
      Dupont urethane. Accoring to the EAA Experimenter Gary
      Menzimer's grand champion firestar was painted with martin
      senour urethane, which looked super nice.                    
                                                                   
         Speeking of grand champion planes, does anyone know what a
      person recieves when he/she wins grand champion at oshkosh?  
                                                                   
         Cal
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 13, 1997
From: 
Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com>
Subject: 
Re: Memory Lane
      
      >To Steve...
      >I have to agree with Ben.  The look on that kids face reminds me of the
      first ride I got in an airplane that put that 5 day smile on my face.
      >    I know the EAA has a program called Young Eagles that is supposed to
      put as many kids in a plane as possible.  This is a great idea , I hope
      everyone who can legally(and safely) do it ...does!
      >
              
              Took a bunch of kids flying in the MKIII this summer as part of
      Young Eagles. They all loved it. Flying is even more fun when it makes
      others happy.
              
              Richard Pike
              MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 13, 1997
From: 
Clive Hatcher <CliveHatcher(at)compuserve.com>
Subject: 
High EGT on no:1 cyl.
      
      On 11/11/97 Johann G. wrote :-
      
      >But I am having problems with the engine=B4s temp. on no one cylinder.
      >The instrument that I have is the new EIS, and it is giving me a reading=
      
      >of 1150 F on number one cyl. and it starts before 4000rpm.
      
      Another thing to check is the pulse fuel pump.  If this is connected to t=
      he
      crank case at the number one cylinder end and the other suggestions
      do not cure the problem inspect the pulse line connections and the pump
      
      diaphragms.  I had a similar problem and the fault was found to be a tiny=
      
      
      crack in the outer edge of a diaphragm, any air leak into the pulse line
      will
      weaken the mixture on the one cylinder only.
      
      Happy landings,
      
      Clive Hatcher  G-MYLN
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
"Edward Lubitz" <elubitz(at)ionline.net>
Subject: 
Imron
Date: 
Nov 13, 1997
      
      elubitz@ionline.net      http://www.ionline.net/~elubitz
      
      Used Imron on a Cub, a Pietenpol and a couple of others about 15 to 20
      years ago. Seemed to have lasted OK so far.
      
      Ed Lubitz
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
Jason Omelchuck <jason(at)acuityinc.com>
Subject: 
FW: Imron
Date: 
Nov 13, 1997
      
      I think you will find stories both good and bad about using different
      kinds of paint on fabric.  As with any kind of spray on finish the more
      experienced the applicator the better the finish.  I bet automotive
      finishes work fine when thinned properly and with just the right amount
      of flex additive and who knows what else added.  If you know your stuff
      and are confident in how to apply it, it probably will work.  If you
      don't know squat about it and don't care to become an expert your best
      bet is probably with the stuff you know will work. 
      
      > -----Original Message-----
      > From:        Edward Lubitz [SMTP:elubitz(at)ionline.net@acuityinc.com]
      > Sent:        Thursday, November 13, 1997 8:36 AM
      > To:        kolb ul list
      > Subject:        Imron
      > 
      > elubitz@ionline.net      http://www.ionline.net/~elubitz
      > 
      > Used Imron on a Cub, a Pietenpol and a couple of others about 15 to 20
      > years ago. Seemed to have lasted OK so far.
      > 
      > Ed Lubitz
      > -
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 14, 1997
From: 
Monte <Monte(at)cyberatl.net>
Subject: 
New powerplant.
      
      Does anyone know anything about the 4-stroke engine on page 128 of Nov
      Sport Aviation?  Its the HKS700E.       
      
                            Monte Evans
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 14, 1997
From: 
Charles Henry <chhenry(at)plains.nodak.edu>
Subject: 
Dial a Jet
      
              I am considering the Dial a Jet for my single carb. 447 Rotax and
      would like to know if someone in the group has tried this? I don't want to
      drill a hole in the carb. then find out that it does not give the range of
      adjustment I need from winter to summer. Right now I have to move the needle
      clip from the #2 groove in the summer to the #4 groove in winter
      
                              Thanks  Charles Henry
                                      Hankinson ND
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 14, 1997
From: 
Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com>
Subject: 
Re: Dial a Jet
      
      >        I am considering the Dial a Jet for my single carb. 447 Rotax and
      >would like to know if someone in the group has tried this? I don't want to
      >drill a hole in the carb. then find out that it does not give the range of
      >adjustment I need from winter to summer. Right now I have to move the needle
      >clip from the #2 groove in the summer to the #4 groove in winter
      >
      >                        Thanks  Charles Henry
      >                                Hankinson ND
      >
      >-
      >       Our chapter president has used one on his Rotax 503 for years and is
      very pleased with the results. My buddy Ed and I bought some to put on our
      engines several years ago and never got around to it, if anybody wants them
      you can have them for 20% off, otherwise we will drill the holes and hook
      em' up this winter. 
              
              
              Richard Pike
              MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
              rpike(at)preferred.com
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 14, 1997
From: 
wood <richard.wood(at)usa.net>
Subject: 
auto paint
      
         The HIPEC system is based on an automotive paint with a flex agent added.
      This agent is available where you buy your auto paint.It looks pretty good
      on my Twinstar. No problem with the paint cracking but it is peeling. I made
      the mistake of believing them when they said I didn't have to sand between
      the sun coat and the colour coat. Next time I will know better.Next time I
      think I will skip the sun coat as my TS is allways hangered in my backyard.
      Why is powder coat so great? I have used a good rust paint for years without
      any problems. Of course if you have a bunch of money burning a hole in your
      pocket go for it.If the FS frames paint is in good condition don't worry
      about it.
         Woody
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 14, 1997
From: 
Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu>
Subject: 
Firestar Weight&Balance pages
      
      I said I'd put up the W&B pages from the plans book for the
      Firestar KX/KXP.  This turned into another lesson in humility
      Ben vs. Scanner.   After several rounds, i've got a "good enf"
      scan of those two pages.  They are at:
      
      http://mae.engr.ucdavis.edu/~ransom/build/buildlist.html
       ...last 2 links on that list.
      
      
                                                 --------|--------
       Ben Ransom                                       (*)
       Email: bransom(at)ucdavis.edu                      o   o
       http://mae.engr.ucdavis.edu/~ransom
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 15, 1997
From: 
John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com>
Subject: 
Re: Firestar Weight&Balance pages
      
      Ben,
         Good work on making the W&B pages for the earlier Firestars
      available. It appears to me to be the same as the Firestar I/II. The
      reason that so many people don't have them is that they are dated 1990.
      I hope that if they are not valid for the models before 1990, that
      Dennis will say so.
      John Jung
      
      Ben Ransom wrote:
      > 
      > I said I'd put up the W&B pages from the plans book for the
      > Firestar KX/KXP.  This turned into another lesson in humility
      > Ben vs. Scanner.   After several rounds, i've got a "good enf"
      > scan of those two pages.  They are at:
      > 
      > http://mae.engr.ucdavis.edu/~ransom/build/buildlist.html
      >  ...last 2 links on that list.
      > 
      >                                            --------|--------
      >  Ben Ransom                                       (*)
      >  Email: bransom(at)ucdavis.edu                      o   o
      >  http://mae.engr.ucdavis.edu/~ransom
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 15, 1997
From: 
"Ron Christensen" <SPECTRUMINTERNATIONAL(at)classic.msn.com>
Subject: 
Mk III Dual Controls
      
      Hi Monte:
      
      Regarding your question of dual controls on a Mk III, I have installed dual 
      controls on my Mk III;  it was not too difficult to implement.  I hasten to 
      add that I haven't yet flown the plane;  I'm about 3 weeks away from that 
      event.   If you are interested, and if you'll send an address, I'll send some 
      photographs to you.
      Ron Christensen
      Mk III N313DR
      So. California
      
      ----------
      From:  owner-kolb(at)intrig.com on behalf of Monte
      Sent:  Wednesday, November 12, 1997 9:45 PM
      Subject: Kolb-List:  Thanks for the pictures.
      
      Hi,
      
          Just wanted to say thanks for the pictures that eveyone has put on
      the net.  
           I hope to buy a Mark 3 sometime between now and Sun & Fun.  Does
      anyone know if Kolb offers any good specials at the show?  Also, I saw a
      Mark 3 last year at Sun & Fun that had dual controls.  Does anyone know
      if it is much of a problem to do that?  
      
                                             Thanks alot,
                                             
                                             Monte Evans
                                             Dallas, GA
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 15, 1997
From: 
"W.B.Whitehead,Jr." <behead(at)linknet.net>
Subject: 
96 FIRESTAR II FOR SALE
      
      I HAVE A 1996 KOLB FIRESTAR II FOR SALE.IT HAS A ROTAX 503
      DC,C-BOX(at)3.00:1,68"WARP DRIVE PROP W/TAPER TIP BLADES FULL KOLB PANEL,BRS
      CHUTE,GPS,KUNTZLEMAN POWER SUPPLY,CUSTOM HALF ENCLOSURE,KUNTZLEMAN
      STROBE.THE AIRCRAFT IS N-NUMBERED.IT IS LOCATED NEAR BATON ROUGE,LA
      
      W.B.WHITEHEAD,JR.
      E-MAIL:behead(at)linknet.net
      
      REASON FOR SELLING:BUILDING TITAN TORNADO II
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 15, 1997
From: 
William Hinkelmann <whink(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: 
Poly-Brush
      
          Questions:
      
            How much Poly-Brush is used in building a FS-II?
      
            Has anyone used Poly-Spray, and how much smoother does it make it?
      
            Is there a clear coat to cover Poly-Tone?
      
            Also interested in the empty weight of FS-II.  400 lbs ?? 350 ?? 300?
      
      
                                                     THANKS
      _____________________
      William Hinkelmann
      whink(at)mindspring.com
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 15, 1997
From: 
William Hinkelmann <whink(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: 
Re: 96 FIRESTAR II FOR SALE
      
      
      >I HAVE A 1996 KOLB FIRESTAR II FOR SALE.
      
      
      Message Garbled,  No Bottom Line.
      _____________________
      William Hinkelmann
      whink(at)mindspring.com
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
"Thomas L. King" <kingdome(at)tcac.net>
Subject: 
Re: New powerplant.
Date: 
Nov 15, 1997
      
      ----------
      > From: Monte <Monte(at)cyberatl.net>
      > To: kolb(at)intrig.com
      > Subject: New powerplant.
      > Date: Friday, November 14, 1997 2:46 AM
      > 
      > Does anyone know anything about the 4-stroke engine on page 128 of
      Nov
      > Sport Aviation?  Its the HKS700E.       
      > 
      >                       Monte Evans
      > -
      Monte, I saw the HKS 700E at Oshkosh this past august.  It looks
      good.  As a budding mechanic I was impressed with the finish etc
      internally as well as externally.  It flew daily in a tractor
      configuration and sounded good and seemed to perform well. It looks
      like a good package for the Mark III, etc.  I understand that Dennis
      will be fitting one to one of the factory planes this fall.  I am
      waiting to see what he says.
      
      Tom
      
      Our name is King;  our house is a dome; and it's OUR road.
      124 King Dome Rd.
      kingdome(at)tcac.net
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 15, 1997
From: 
kmead(at)up.net (Kent  kathy Mead)
Subject: 
Kolb CG
      
      Hi Ben 
          Thanks for putting the CG info on your site. I think I may have found
      some great sand tires for my plane. I was looking at my riding mower and the
      rear wheels looked like they might fit on the plane. pulled one off and it
      fit great. They are 17" tall 10 " wide and fit right on the axles. They are
      about 4 pounds each heavier than the stock ones, but it only takes about 2
      minutes to change back and fourth.   
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 15, 1997
From: 
Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com>
Subject: 
It Flies like a Deere (but is it green?)
      
      >Hi Ben 
      >    Thanks for putting the CG info on your site. I think I may have found
      >some great sand tires for my plane. I was looking at my riding mower and the
      >rear wheels looked like they might fit on the plane. pulled one off and it
      >fit great. They are 17" tall 10 " wide and fit right on the axles. They are
      >about 4 pounds each heavier than the stock ones, but it only takes about 2
      >minutes to change back and fourth.   
      >
      >-
      >       Well at least you have no excuse for not keeping the airstrip mowed...
              
              
              Richard Pike
              MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
GeoR38(at)aol.com
Date: 
Nov 16, 1997
Subject: 
Re: ul15rhb: Re: Kolb FireStar
      
      
      <<  I've flown the newer
       FireStars and other Quicksilvers and the original FireStars just cannot
       be beat (you did it right the first time, Homer Kolb). I've logged 350
       hrs in it.
       
       Ralph Burlingame
       Minneapolis
       
       PS   If there are other original Firestar builder/pilots out there,
       please don't hesitate to         comment. >>
      I have the first KX but it is only partial KX because it has the original
      treatment on tail folding as Kolb was going through the transition. I am
      totally happy with the hybrid (just a little bit though) that I have . I have
      Quicksilver, N3 Pup and Pterodactyl experience since '83.
                          GeoR38
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 16, 1997
From: 
Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu>
Subject: 
Re: ul15rhb: Re: Kolb FireStar
      
      On Sun, 16 Nov 1997 GeoR38(at)aol.com wrote:
      >  PS   If there are other original Firestar builder/pilots out there,
      >  please don't hesitate to         comment. >>
      > I have the first KX but it is only partial KX because it has the original
      > treatment on tail folding as Kolb was going through the transition. I am
      > totally happy with the hybrid (just a little bit though) that I have . I have
      > Quicksilver, N3 Pup and Pterodactyl experience since '83.
      >                     GeoR38
      I don't get this.  
      The wing and tail fold scheme is the same on all the Firestars -- orig
      thru current.   Now i'm sure you're going to tell me this somehow has
      something to do with your years as a glider pilot.  ...just having fun
      w/ you here of course. :-) 
      -Ben
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 16, 1997
From: 
Jhann Gestur Jhannsson <johanng(at)ok.is>
Subject: 
Egt problem fixed/first flight 
      
      Hi Kolb Flyers.
      
      My problems with the Egt on one cyl. was fixed today and my friend
      did the first flight test on the Firestar II today.
      
      I did my first solo flight ever today and everything went great.
      First of all I would like to tell you all about the first flight,
      because I can not forget the wonderful feeling to fly in something
      like the Firestar, after spending all that time building and dreaming
      of that one moment of pleasure.
      I dont have to tell you how that feeling is, you know.
      
      My first landing was just perfect, according to witnesses. My adrenalin
      was too hight to notice anything except that I was on the safely on the 
      ground after the first solo flight, without any damage to the plane.
      
      But to the problem with the Egt. After checking everything but the new
      EIS monitor, I decided to try to switch wires from 1 to 2 and YES.
      Problem solved. The no.1 EGT was showing 250F too high when disconnected.
      So my next step is to contact Grand Rapids Technologies.
      The EIS is the greatest instrument, but I am sure that this is just a
      minor problem for them to solve, I hope....
      
      I would like to thank everyone who helped me with their suggestions on how
      to solve the problem. Now it is just fun flying and learning period for me.
      
      Best regards from Keflavik, ICELAND.
      Johann G.
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: 
Re: Kolb FireStar
From: 
ul15rhb(at)juno.com (Ralph H Burlingame)
Date: 
Nov 16, 1997
      
      Ben,
      The tail folding on the original FireStars has the stabilizers riveted to
      the fuselage tube, where the newer models have it bolted so it's easier
      to remove. The way the tail folds up is the same. Maybe you really knew
      this and you're just kidding around?
      
      Ralph B.
      Minneapolis
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 16, 1997
Subject: 
Re: covering
From: 
rick106(at)juno.com (RICK M LIBERSAT)
      
      HOWARD
       YOU ARE RIGHT      DON'T DO IT       I HAVE SEEN THE OUTCOME THE ONLY
      WAY I WOULD USE ANYTHING OTHER THAN  STITTS       IS IF I WERE GOING TO
      PUT MY PLANE UNDER A GLASS DOOM AND NEVER TOUCH IT AGAIN.   
      
      RICK LIBERSAT
       writes:
      >DON'T DO IT!!!!!!!  That is use Imron on fabric.  Yea it will look 
      >nice
      >at first, but it is not meant to flex.  Borrow someone's Stits video 
      >and
      >see how poorly it works.  I had a '46 Taylorcraft that someone had
      >painted with Imron.  The finish was about 6 years old and a slight
      >finger press would create "ring worm" cracks and flaking paint.  I
      >recommend that you use only Stits products in a Stits process.
      >
      >Howard G. Penny           EAA # 168877
      >Raleigh, NC                    Kolb SlingShot # SS-007 N96969 res.
      >penny(at)rtp.ericsson.se   Sonerai IILS # 0010
      >http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/hpenny
      >/* --------------------------------------------------------- */
      >
      >
      >-----Original Message-----
      >From:        Cal [SMTP:cgreen(at)centuryinter.net]
      >Sent:        Tuesday, November 11, 1997 12:35 AM
      >To:        kolb(at)intrig.com
      >Subject:        covering
      >
      >   Yes they use auto paint on the fabric too, you must poly
      >spray first. I haven't painted my fabric parts yet, but what
      >I've seen it works good. I'm going to use Imron which is a
      >Dupont urethane. Accoring to the EAA Experimenter Gary
      >Menzimer's grand champion firestar was painted with martin
      >senour urethane, which looked super nice.                    
      >                                                             
      >   Speeking of grand champion planes, does anyone know what a
      >person recieves when he/she wins grand champion at oshkosh?  
      >                                                             
      >   Cal
      >
      >
      >-
      >
      >-
      >
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
"Russell Duffy" <rad(at)pen.net>
Subject: 
Re: Egt problem fixed/first flight 
Date: 
Nov 16, 1997
      
      >But to the problem with the Egt. After checking everything but the new
      >EIS monitor, I decided to try to switch wires from 1 to 2 and YES.
      >Problem solved. The no.1 EGT was showing 250F too high when >disconnected.
      >So my next step is to contact Grand Rapids Technologies.
      >The EIS is the greatest instrument, but I am sure that this is just a
      >minor problem for them to solve, I hope....
      
      I'm still a little fuzzy on exactly what you swapped, so this may not be
      relevant. There is one well known problem with the EIS package.  If you
      bought your EGT sensors with the unit, they came with the lugs already
      crimped in place.  The crimps are BAD.  Greg has chewed out his supplier for
      this, but it isn't helping much.  The wire fell out of one of my lugs when I
      was hooking it up, and the other one started making bad connections during
      the break-in run.  I re-crimped both and all is well.  Also, I wouldn't
      worry about getting satisfaction from Grand Rapids.  Greg seems like one of
      the most reasonable people you could hope to deal with.  Good luck.
      
      > I did my first solo flight ever today and everything went great.
      
      Congratulations on the first Solo!!!  I promise, you'll never forget the
      feeling.  I'm also happy to hear that you confirmed the problem first.
      
      BTW, I was whining about how cold it was today because it was about 50 F.  I
      bet it's a bit colder in Iceland :-)
      
      Rusty
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
Cavuontop(at)aol.com
Date: 
Nov 17, 1997
Subject: 
Re: CHT's
      
      
      << Dennis I appreciate your thread and I think you may have hit right on it
      as I
       am at the intersection of the Y ,  It seemed like the right place to put it
      at
       the time and I don't recall any instruction with the meter that said
       otherwise, >>
      
           The insructions for placement of the EGT probe are located in the manual
      for the engine, not in the instructions for the guage.  Also, you should know
      that he Rotax people have been plagued by this problem of EGT readings being
      all over the place because of non-standard probe locations.  The current
      rotax exhaust system has welded and threaded bosses intended to accept egt
      probes.  That way they are located in exactly the right place and you can get
      some worthwhile diagnostic information.
      
           The problem is that the bosses are threaded to accept the more expensive
      kind of regular aircraft egt probe.  Anyway, you should also know that the
      current rotax exhaust system has three pieces instead of two.  Consider
      stepping up to the current system, I think it is far superior to the old
      design.
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
Cavuontop(at)aol.com
Date: 
Nov 17, 1997
Subject: 
Re: covering
      
      
      << Did you use automotive paint on your fabric also. If you did tell us
       what you used and how it  worked.
        >>
      
      
      I've been following this thread on car paint and think my two cents might be
      worth-  well-- two cents.  By way of disclaimer I should say that I am a big
      fan of the Stitts process.  Anyway, the reason why no one puts car paint in
      "real "  airplanes is that  it looks great for a couple of years but then it
      gets these things called fish eyes.  The hot sun dries the solvents out of
      the paint and it gets brittle, especially if the plane is stored outside.
       These rings of cracks form where the fabric moves.  I had a friend with a
      firestar who said "Hey, why should I pay the big money for the stitts paint
      when I can get the same thing from the car parts store?"  He didn't listen to
      me.  Or he only listened to me a little.  He said he bought some special
      flexibilizer and mixed that with the car paint.  After he was done painting
      his plane looked great and he sort of rubbed my nose in it a little.  He kept
      his Firestar indoors.  But by the next flying season I noticed little
      spiderweb cracks in the fabric on his fuselage where his knees touched it on
      the inside.  By the end of the season his plane looked like it had been
      painted with crackle finish.  When I pointed this out to him he said that car
      paint was still really ok he just should have used more or a different
      flexibilier.  Beware.
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 17, 1997
From: 
Cliff and Carolyn Stripling <striplic(at)dfw.net>
Subject: 
Testing Extra Weight
      
      To all,
      
      I added 115 lbs in the passenger seat today and this is the result.  I
      realize that with 180 or more lbs that the changes will be greater, but this
      gave me a good idea of what to expect.  It felt so predictable that I doubt
      I will test further with weights until I carry a real passenger.  I used
      flat circle barbell weights that fit fairly well in the seat.  I wrapped
      them in terry cloth and strapped them in.
      
      Impressions:  The plane was a much more stable flying platform (not the
      butterfly it normally is when single place).  There was no noticeable
      tendency to bank left as when flying solo (I did not require any bungee
      trim).  The take off run was hardly any longer nor the climb rate that much
      diminished compared to what I had expected.  It requires a few more rpms and
      a little more speed (est. 5 mph) to hold it just above the runway.  At
      altitude the stalls are maybe 2 mph faster.  I felt more comfortable in the
      pattern, landing and climbing carrying 5 mph more speed than I normally do
      when I fly solo.  The elevator trim tab for 115 lbs. was position 5.  Solo
      it is 0.  Winter flying is back.  I love the full enclosue.  I applied 3
      strips of duct tape on the radiators.  That is keeping the water temp in the
      middle of the green in cruise.  EGT's are reading higher because the ambient
      temp is lower.  The choke (enricher) is coming in handy during engine warm
      up.  I find it useless in the summer.
      
      Later,
      
      --
      Cliff & Carolyn Stripling   Him:  Kolb MKIII - N582CC (34.6 hrs)
      (972)247-9821 Dallas Texas  Her:  Real Estate Broker - Texas
                  Both: 5th Wheel - RV - Travel
       
              ____________________|_____________________
                             ___(+^+)___      
                                 (_)   
                                8   8
                                  
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
Timandjan(at)aol.com
Date: 
Nov 17, 1997
Subject: 
Re: Auto paint, My 2 cents worth
      
      I have learned a lot since building my Firestar, and a good friend builds
      airplanes for a living and has a Grand Champion award from oshkosh to show
      for it. It's great to learn from him and just watch. He produces some really
      awsom paint jobs and some things I have learned are. I used Poly tone on mine
      for ease and ease of repair and although it's not a mirror gloss, I have not
      yet buffed it out, but it all the same looks great.
      His one grand champion, a Piper Pacer was painted with Aerothane and wet
      sanded a bunch, he logged many hundred hours sanding on the finish to produce
      what ended to be a mirror finish, also buffing it. This finish is way too
      heavy for our light planes, (my opinion). He now uses an auto paint sometimes
      with an flex agent added, which produces a great glossy finish. He uses Stits
      fabric and their materials up to Poly Spray and then the auto paint for
      color. He also uses heavier fabric, ours is 1.7 ounce and his on the heavier
      planes such as a Pitts etc,  uses I believe 2.6 oz. fabric. He is also able
      to shrink his tighter because of no fear of bending or breakage of the
      structure, and I wonder if the structure, closer ribs, heavier materials etc.
      allows the fabric to not flex as much allowing the auto paint to have a
      longer life without starring or cracking. He also rib stitches real close
      which adds to less flexing of the fabric. 
      He tried to talk me out of using Poly Tone, but it was just exactly what I
      wanted in a paint. Mine is white, which is less than 50.00 a gallon trimmed
      in Blue, and because of it's ease of application and ease of repair if needed
      in the future it was what I chose. 
      Sorry for the short story, my 2 cents worth.
      tim
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 17, 1997
From: 
Cliff and Carolyn Stripling <striplic(at)dfw.net>
Subject: 
Paint
      
      To all,
      
      I am no paint expert, but after watching the Stits video I am glad I decided
      to use Polytone primarily for two reasons - durability (no ringworm,
      cracking or peel) and less flamable.  I even sponge roller painted the
      fuselage and it looked just as nice as the sprayed flying surfaces.  You
      couldn't tell it was not sprayed.  Sure made painting easy not having to
      worrying about overspray on the interior parts of the fuselage.
      
      Later,
      
      --
      Cliff & Carolyn Stripling   Him:  Kolb MKIII - N582CC (34.6 hrs)
      (972)247-9821 Dallas Texas  Her:  Real Estate Broker - Texas
                  Both: 5th Wheel - RV - Travel
       
              ____________________|_____________________
                             ___(+^+)___      
                                 (_)   
                                8   8
                                  
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 17, 1997
From: 
Frank & Winnie Hodson <fwhodson(at)megalink.net>
Subject: 
Stits covering process
      
      I am building a FS II and am seeking opinions and technical information
      re:
      
        1.  The use of poly spray to prolong fabric life.  The Stits manual
      clearly states that even using U.V. blockers in the poly tone will not
      prevent early fabric deterioration, although this protection is better
      than none.  They emphaticly recommend using poly spray under the finish
      coat.
      
        2.  Which method of attaching the fabric to the airframe is
      preferential; rib stitching vs. riviting?  Is there a significant
      advantage one way or the other?
      
      Please note that I have recovered several certified fabric aircraft
      using the Stits process and would like explanations/opinions relating
      particularly to Kolbs
      
                                           THANKS,
      
                                           Frank Hodson
                                           
                                           Oxford, Maine
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
"Russell Duffy" <rad(at)pen.net>
Subject: 
Re: Stits covering process
Date: 
Nov 17, 1997
      
      >  1.  The use of poly spray to prolong fabric life.  The Stits manual
      >clearly states that even using U.V. blockers in the poly tone will not
      >prevent early fabric deterioration, although this protection is better
      >than none.  They emphaticly recommend using poly spray under the finish
      >coat.
      
      If your plane will be outside all the time (which isn't recommended), you
      might get more life out of the PolySprayed fabric.  The UV blocker is
      supposed to be 80% as effective as the silver.  I used UV blocker in the
      PolyBrush, and the PolyTone for added protection.  The silver is also good
      for sanding out small imperfections, but since I hate to sand, and wasn't
      interested in a show quality finish, that was no benefit to be.  If you use
      UV blocker, and hanger the plane, I bet you never have to worry about the
      fabric.  Keep in mind that the UV blocker does add a bit of yellow tint to
      the paint.
      
      >  2.  Which method of attaching the fabric to the airframe is
      >preferential; rib stitching vs. riviting?  Is there a significant
      >advantage one way or the other?
      
      Riveting was easy, works great, and is recommended by Kolb.  Why do anything
      else?
      
      Rusty
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 17, 1997
From: 
Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com>
Subject: 
Re: Stits covering process
      
      A
      >>  2.  Which method of attaching the fabric to the airframe is
      >>preferential; rib stitching vs. riviting?  Is there a significant
      >>advantage one way or the other?
      >
      >Riveting was easy, works great, and is recommended by Kolb.  Why do anything
      >else?
      >
      >       Holes in the ribs weaken them. One of our local Kolb pilots stalled
      his Twinstar while trying to stretch his glide just 35' more to make it to
      the runway, and cartwheeled it. Walked away without a scratch. (but he was
      sure stiff for a couple days!) Interestingly the wing that hit the ground
      first had all its broken ribs at places where the rivits had gone through
      them. It would probably have broken anyway, but who knows?
      helper, I bet you can ribstitch a wing faster than you can rivit it, and if
      you slip, you don't have a chewed up spot where the drill bit got away.
              Besides, I know why Kolb recommends using rivits. They obviously
      have the world market cornered...
              
              Richard Pike
              MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 18, 1997
From: 
Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com>
Subject: 
Re: Stits covering process
      
      
      >Please note that I have recovered several certified fabric aircraft
      >using the Stits process and would like explanations/opinions relating
      >particularly to Kolbs
      >
      >                                     THANKS,
      >
      >                                     Frank Hodson
      >                                     
      >                                     Oxford, Maine
      >-
      >       I painted my MKIII with Stits, and am satisfied with it. Have used
      Randolph brand aircraft dope on previous aircraft and was very satisfied
      with it. Have used Sears Weatherbeater latex on a couple Hummer ultralights
      and it is a very inexpensive way to go if you are content with a semi-gloss
      finish. Latex can be made somewhat ultraviolet proof if you use a pure black
      base/filler coat to fill the weave. Ed Fisher (I think?) came up with the
      concept back when he started the Fisher 202, 303, etc. ultralights. He said
      that the black absorbed the harmful sun rays before they got to the fabric.
      (???) Anyway it took about two coats to fill the weave and that equaled 3/4
      gallon Weatherbeater diluted 35% with water and sprayed on with a regular
      compressor and gun. Used Randolph fabric cement to attach the fabric and
      shrunk it first. 
              One Hummer was painted with plasticized enamel, and the paint did
      crack after the second season. The enamel stuck to the latex very well, but
      cracked badly. The other Hummer was topcoated with the glossiest yellow we
      could find, (yellow and black fanburst, looked good!) and still looks good.
      If you have to repair it , it is a mess. You have to remove the latex with
      Goof-Off, then you can patch and use the Randolph fabric cement or the Stits
      fabric cement would certainly work just as well. If you use latex, and lay
      one panel or part against another, and there is any pressure, or they are in
      the sun, the paints will bond to each other and pull something loose. I
      would only use it if price was the only criteria, however, if you use real
      good quality latex, it covers well and is very lightweight. DON'T USE
      WAL-MART LATEX! It takes twice as much by the time you thin it enough to spray.
              I always liked aircraft dopes back when I built models, and if I
      ever build another plane, and the EPA hasn't outlawed it, will probably try
      Certified Coatings straight aircraft dope just to see how it does. The price
      is certainly better than the others.
              
              Richard Pike
              Technical Counselor EAA 442
              MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 17, 1997
From: 
"perry j. adams" <perry(at)hcnews.com>
Subject: 
flight instruction
      
      have firefly.
      2500 hr pilot, 350+ in tailwheel, no ultralight.
      need check out, prefer kolb.
      60 miles sw of dallas-fort worth, tx.
      anybody near me ???
      appreciate any and all info.
      thanks, 
      perry(at)hcnews.com
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 18, 1997
From: 
John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com>
Subject: 
Re: Poly-Brush
      
      William Hinkelmann wrote:
      > 
      >       Has anyone used Poly-Spray, and how much smoother does it make it?
      > 
      >       Also interested in the empty weight of FS-II.  400 lbs ?? 350 ?? 300?
      > 
      >                                                THANKS
      
      William,
         I used Poly-Spray on the wings and not on the fuselage, and after
      seeing the difference in finish, I will use poly-spray in the future. My
      Firestar II weighs 360# with a 503, no electric.
      John Jung
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
jerryb(at)jmd.ods.com
Date: 
Nov 19, 1997
Subject: 
Re[2]: Stits covering process
      
           
         The riveting works fine.  Technically yes drilling holes in the tubing 
         will weaken it, but that has been taken into consider during the design. 
          
         
         After having built a FireFly which is smaller and uses lighter weigh 
         stock in some places, the wing when completed is plenty solid.  While 
         the stitching method would result in the ribs retaining greater 
         strength, I believe this is something of people making an issue out of 
         nothing.
         
         There are to many Kolbs out there flying and no problem.  If you bend a 
         wing, it surely wouldn't matter which method you used.  (In fact this 
         might be considered as an energy absorbing crush point.)  The rivets 
         work fine, are easy, quick, and neat.  The most difficult part is 
         drilling the holes in the center of the tubing, that's learning 
         experience we each go through.  The rivets should be flat when set, if 
         there cocked, you need drill them out and repull them.  You'll quickly 
         see which holes you didn't do so well on centering on the tubing, they 
         have a tendency to cock, popping them slowly you can set them straight.  
         
         We started out using a pneumatic puller and switched to the hand puller 
         when the mandrel pops, it has a sharp point sticking out of the rivet 
         gun.  As it pops there is a tendency for the gun to slide off and snag 
         the fabric next to the rivet result in a small hole.  My partner frowned 
         at me when it happen to me.  Not as big deal, a little poly tack to seal 
         the frays and the seam tape covers it but it is upsetting when you do 
         it.  
         
         Stitching comes from the old school, thus some of the "older" builders 
         are more comfortable with it.  Either one will do the job, but I would 
         expect it would take much longer to complete using the stitching method. 
         
         Again Kolbs have a good reputation.  Based upon the unit population if 
         the rivet method were a problem it would be evident at this point in 
         time.  I haven't heard a thing to indicate otherwise.   
         
         Good luck on which ever method you elect to use,
         
         happy building,
         
         Jerry Bidle
         
      
      ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
      Subject: Kolb-List: Re: Stits covering process
      Date:    11/17/97 11:10 PM
      
      
      A
      >>  2.  Which method of attaching the fabric to the airframe is 
      >>preferential; rib stitching vs. riviting?  Is there a significant 
      >>advantage one way or the other?
      >
      >Riveting was easy, works great, and is recommended by Kolb.  Why do anything 
      >else?
      >
      >       Holes in the ribs weaken them. One of our local Kolb pilots stalled 
      his Twinstar while trying to stretch his glide just 35' more to make it to 
      the runway, and cartwheeled it. Walked away without a scratch. (but he was 
      sure stiff for a couple days!) Interestingly the wing that hit the ground 
      first had all its broken ribs at places where the rivits had gone through 
      them. It would probably have broken anyway, but who knows?
      helper, I bet you can ribstitch a wing faster than you can rivit it, and if 
      you slip, you don't have a chewed up spot where the drill bit got away.
              Besides, I know why Kolb recommends using rivits. They obviously
      have the world market cornered...
           
              Richard Pike
              MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
           
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 18, 1997
From: 
Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu>
Subject: 
my funky brakes
      
      I played with a digital camera over the weekend.  Not sure this
      is of general interest (sorry, that won't stop me), but i'm
      posting a couple pics of the brakes and front engine cowling
      I made.  View if you're interested at:
      
      http://mae.engr.ucdavis.edu/~ransom/build/buildlist.html
      
      (bottom of list)
      
      
                                                 --------|--------
       Ben Ransom                                       (*)
       Email: bransom(at)ucdavis.edu                      o   o
       http://mae.engr.ucdavis.edu/~ransom
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 18, 1997
From: 
John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com>
Subject: 
Re: Poly-Brush
      
      William Hinkelmann wrote: 
      >     Questions: 
      >       How much Poly-Brush is used in building a FS-II? 
      
      
      Two gallons is enough for a Firestar II.
      John Jung
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 18, 1997
From: 
Frank & Winnie Hodson <fwhodson(at)megalink.net>
Subject: 
Thanks for the input!
      
      I enjoyed the responses to the Stits/Kolb covering process.  It often is
      very helpful to get the opinions of "many advisors", especially those
      who have hands on experience.  
      
      The pictures and discussions of personal projects, hints, and
      modifications are often very enlightening, please keep them up.
      
      Thanks again for the food for thought and encouragement, as always I
      look foreward to the Kolb related messages in my e-mail
      
                                             Frank Hodson, Oxford Maine
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 18, 1997
From: 
Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com>
Subject: 
Rivits
      
              Now you anti-rib stitchers have got me curious; how long does it
      normally take to rivit the fabric on two Kolb wings?  Rib-stitching takes
      about 2 1/2 to 3 hours a wing.
              
              Richard Pike
              MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
"Edward Lubitz" <elubitz(at)ionline.net>
Subject: 
Fw: Rivits
Date: 
Nov 19, 1997
      
      elubitz@ionline.net      http://www.ionline.net/~elubitz
      your fingers sure do move quickly when tying knots I would guess at least
      twice that with 2 people working per panel.
      Ed Lubitz
      ----------
      > From: Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com>
      > To: kolb(at)www.intrig.com
      > Subject: Rivits
      > Date: Wednesday, November 19, 1997 4:27 AM
      > 
      >         Now you anti-rib stitchers have got me curious; how long does it
      > normally take to rivit the fabric on two Kolb wings?  Rib-stitching takes
      > about 2 1/2 to 3 hours a wing.
      >         
      >         Richard Pike
      >         MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
      > 
      > -
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
"Russell Duffy" <rad(at)pen.net>
Subject: 
Re: Rivits
Date: 
Nov 19, 1997
      
      
      >        Now you anti-rib stitchers have got me curious; how long does it
      >normally take to rivit the fabric on two Kolb wings?  Rib-stitching takes
      >about 2 1/2 to 3 hours a wing.
      
      
      I didn't document the time that closely.  I'm thinking the full process
      takes about the same time as you mentioned for stitching.  Drilling the
      holes is the most time consuming.
      
      Rusty
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 19, 1997
From: 
Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu>
Subject: 
Re: Rivits
      
      On Tue, 18 Nov 1997, Richard Pike wrote:
      >         Now you anti-rib stitchers have got me curious; how long does it
      > normally take to rivit the fabric on two Kolb wings?  Rib-stitching takes
      > about 2 1/2 to 3 hours a wing.
      >         
      I somewhat forget (time heals ;-) ) but if you add the time of
      punching/drilling holes in the ribs, then cutting holes in the fabric,
      aaannd pulling the rivets, 2-3 hours per side seems close.
      
      In building, we obviously look for easy ways to do things.  Everybody
      knows how to drill holes, and most everybody knows it will take 2-3 hours
      just to *learn how* to tie stitching knots.  Just knowing from Richard's
      experience that it is not that big a deal makes it seem like a good way
      to go, at least for traditionalists/purists/nit-picky (anal-retentive?)
      types -- and yes I believe I'm including myself here.
      
      PS:  Some have told me that one of my cowling pics is not viewable.
      I looked on my home pc last night, and with the benefits(?) of
      digital photography, any other copies of these jpgs are now vapor.
      I'll eventually re-do.  (The dig camera is not mine so this will be
      my typical long turn-around time project.)
      
                                                 --------|--------
       Ben Ransom                                       (*)
       Email: bransom(at)ucdavis.edu                      o   o
       http://mae.engr.ucdavis.edu/~ransom
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 19, 1997
From: 
wood <richard.wood(at)usa.net>
Subject: 
rivits
      
        One of the reasons I chose the HIPEC covering system is that the fabric is
      glued to the ribs and rib stitching or riviting is avoided.Havent I read
      that for aircraft going under a hundred and some miles per hour rib
      stitching is not neccessary?
         Woody
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
Mse84(at)aol.com
Date: 
Nov 19, 1997
Subject: 
price list
      
         Hey, i just subscribed to this mailing list this morning and I'm wondering
      if there is anywhere online where i can get a list of prices for kolb
      ultralight kits. I was thinking along the lines of a Slingshot or a Firefly
      2.
      
                                                                             Mike
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 19, 1997
From: 
Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com>
Subject: 
Rib Stitching
      
      >  One of the reasons I chose the HIPEC covering system is that the fabric is
      >glued to the ribs and rib stitching or riviting is avoided.Havent I read
      >that for aircraft going under a hundred and some miles per hour rib
      >stitching is not neccessary?
      >   Woody
      >
      >       Not Totally True! If the rib is wide enough on top and bottom to
      have a sufficient gluing surface it IS true, BUT, the glue must be able to
      hold the fabric to the rib no matter what, this is non-negotiable. On the
      Kolb, the front portion of the upper wing fabric is pulled tight around the
      rib's upper forward curve and can't go anywhere. From the point at which the
      airfoil flattens out, the air has potential to lift the fabric up if the
      glue/rivits/ribstitching fails. If the fabric lifts, your airfoil now has
      it's high point effectively moved to the rear, the center of lift moves to
      the rear, the airplane suddenly becomes more nose heavy. Worse case
      scenario: not enough up elevator to hold the nose up and you start an
      outside loop. This may be what got John Chotia (Weedhopper designer) in his
      "Rocket". That prototype had it's single-surface wing fabric stretched
      tightly across the top of it's airfoil shaped ribs, but not secured to them,
      and it is thought that possibly the airfoil billowed. 
              Having experienced the terror of an uncommanded pitch-over in an
      Easy Riser weightshift that had it's thrust line set wrong, (carefully
      review the blueprints/specs on anything you buy before you fly) I tend to
      avoid aerodynamic squirreliness if at all possible. I am not bad-mouthing
      Hipec: I just don't think the Kolb's skinny 5/16" wide ribs that are rounded
      on top are are a good gluing risk for anybody's product.
              Make a test strip: glue some fabric to a scrap of 5/16" tubing with
      the Hipec, let it dry, and try to pull it off. If it tears before it turns
      loose from the tubing, I was wrong and you save several hours of fabric
      attaching labor. Good Luck!
              
              Richard Pike
              MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
              Technical Counselor EAA 442
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
"Russell Duffy" <rad(at)pen.net>
Subject: 
Re: price list
Date: 
Nov 19, 1997
      
      
      >   Hey, i just subscribed to this mailing list this morning and I'm
      wondering
      >if there is anywhere online where i can get a list of prices for kolb
      >ultralight kits. I was thinking along the lines of a Slingshot or a Firefly
      >2.
      
      
      Mike,
      
      You probably mean the FireStar-II since the FireFly is single place only.  I
      don't know of any pricing info online, but there's other info available.
      You can start with my SlingShot page below, and work back to Kolb's page,
      and other builders pages.
      
      Enjoy,
      
      Russell Duffy
      SlingShot SS-003, N8754K
      rad(at)pen.net
      http://www.pen.net/~rad/
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 19, 1997
From: 
Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu>
Subject: 
Re: Rib Stitching
      
      >         Make a test strip: glue some fabric to a scrap of 5/16" tubing with
      > the Hipec, let it dry, and try to pull it off. If it tears before it turns
      > loose from the tubing, I was wrong and you save several hours of fabric
      > attaching labor. Good Luck!
      
      If by some miracle the above test were even close to good enf, 
      check the test piece again in 1-4 years. 
      In other words, forget it.
      
      Notice how in the Stits covering manual they talk about required overlap of
      polytacked edges?  Something like 1.5" overlap is specified, so any gluing
      to the 5/16 rib would have to include some elaborate overlap scheme from the
      inside.   In other words, forget it.
      -Ben
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 19, 1997
From: 
tswartz(at)prolog.net (Terry Swartz)
Subject: 
Intercom & Headsets
      
      Hi all.
      
      I need some advice on which intercom & Headsets work good in high noise
      environment like the Kolb M III. 
      
       I was planning to get the Hush-A-Com because it seemed to work ok when I
      got my dual time at the Kolb factory.  I ordered it from Aircraft Spruce
      along with a few other things Oct 29 and they said they had it and would
      send it out.  They also said they were homing piegons because of the 30 day
      free trail.  Anyway the other things came but no intercom or headsets.  I
      called them they said they were on backorder till end of Nov. so I called
      the Ray the fellow who makes them.  He said he would send a set right out.
      A week later nothing.  Called him again, said he would check on it and call
      me back the next evening.  I called him that evening, he didn't seem to
      remember much, but said he would send another set right out.  Its another
      week and sill nothing.  I've got 41.6 hrs on my M III and my wife and kids
      are ready for a ride.  Sure would be nice to have a good intercom and headset.
      
      What works?
      
      
      Terry
      
      PS  I have a Icom A22 raido if this makes any difference.
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
me <lloyd(at)vermontel.com>
Subject: 
RE: Rivits
Date: 
Nov 19, 1997
      
      Now Guys, this is a good challenge.  Richard Pike asks "How long does it
      take to rivet the fabric to a Mark III wing.  He did the wings in 5-6
      hours.  The next question is what does the thread weigh vs. rivets?  Any
      input?
      
      Tom Lloyd
      
      -----Original Message-----
      From:        Richard Pike [SMTP:rpike(at)preferred.com]
      Sent:        Tuesday, November 18, 1997 11:28 PM
      To:        kolb(at)www.intrig.com
      Subject: Kolb-List:        Rivits
      
              Now you anti-rib stitchers have got me curious; how long does it
      normally take to rivit the fabric on two Kolb wings?  Rib-stitching
      takes
      about 2 1/2 to 3 hours a wing.
             
              Richard Pike
              MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
WGrooms511(at)aol.com
Date: 
Nov 19, 1997
Subject: 
Imron Paint
________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
      
      
      Gentlemen;
      After reading all the latest mail about the use of Imron
      automotive paint on Stits material rather than Aero-thane,
      I did a little research that poses the question " why
      would anybody want to use Imron on Stits".
      I called the automotive paint supplier in town, and asked
      the price for a gallon of Imron, both in the least 
      expensive color(white), and the most expensive color (red).
      They quoted me $190.00 a gallon for red, and $145.00 a gallon
      for white. That is $10.00 a gallon more that red Aerothane, and $45.00
      a gallon more than white Aerothane.
      Why, in the name of Hillary would anybody pay MORE for paint
      that very well may ringworm crack, than use paint that is
      especially designed, tested and proven itself to work on
      Stits fabric?
      
               (__)  ,---------. NOTE:  The preceding message was sent via Jaek and 
               (oo) | :\/: _  _ \ Jon's WWW mail cow gateway.  That is to say, the 
        /-------\/_/  :  :: :: : ) person who sent this message could in fact be an 
      
       / | MAIL|| \_  '  '`-'`-'/ anonymous prankster.  Even though this message was
      *  ||""  ||   \__________/ mailed to you from the cs.fredonia.edu domain, it 
         ^^    ^^               could have been generated by anyone in the world. 
      Please keep this in mind.  Thank you!  --Jaek (smit2204) and -Jon- (stei0302)
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: 
Re: Rib Stitching
From: 
ul15rhb(at)juno.com (Ralph H Burlingame)
Date: 
Nov 19, 1997
      
      
      writes:
       
      >it's high point effectively moved to the rear, the center of lift 
      >moves to the rear, the airplane suddenly becomes more nose heavy. Worse
      >case scenario: not enough up elevator to hold the nose up and you start
      an
      >outside loop. This may be what got John Chotia (Weedhopper designer) 
      >in his "Rocket". That prototype had it's single-surface wing fabric
      stretched
      >tightly across the top of it's airfoil shaped ribs, but not secured to 
      >them, and it is thought that possibly the airfoil billowed. 
      
      >        
      >        Richard Pike
      >        MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
      >        Technical Counselor EAA 442
      
      Thanks for the info, Richard. Come to think of it, the Cloud Dancer UL
      was the same way (tightened sailcloth on the ribs). I lost a good friend
      of mine in one of those ultralights. It looked as though he "augured-in",
      but he probably just couldn't pull up.
      
      Ralph Burlingame
      Minneapolis
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
Wayne Welsh <flight(at)mail.on.rogers.wave.ca>
              Multiple recipients of list fly-ul 
Subject: 
Muffler Coatings
      
      Does anyone have any experience in muffler coatings. I'm getting a
      little tired of that rustic look and feel the need for a little
      makeover.
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 20, 1997
From: 
"Bill Weber (DVNS)" <bweber(at)micom.com>
Subject: 
Airless Spray Painting
      
      Awhile back we had a discussion on using the High Volume Low Pressure 
      (HVLP) spray systems. Has anyone tried painting a Kolb with one of the 
      airless systems? The Wagner is the most widely advertised, but there are 
      others. How do they compare to the HVLP and standard spray systems? The 
      local Harbor Freight is having a sale on a couple of systems that might 
      be worth investing in for other uses as well.
      
      ***********************************************
      * Bill Weber                 * Keep           *
      * MICOM Communications Corp. *   the shiny    *
      * Simi Valley, CA            *        side up *
      ***********************************************
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 20, 1997
From: 
Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com>
Subject: 
Re: Rib Stitching
      
      >>         Make a test strip: glue some fabric to a scrap of 5/16" tubing with
      >> the Hipec, let it dry, and try to pull it off. If it tears before it turns
      >> loose from the tubing, I was wrong and you save several hours of fabric
      >> attaching labor. Good Luck!
      >
      >If by some miracle the above test were even close to good enf, 
      >check the test piece again in 1-4 years. 
      >In other words, forget it.
      >
      >Notice how in the Stits covering manual they talk about required overlap of
      >polytacked edges?  Something like 1.5" overlap is specified, so any gluing
      >to the 5/16 rib would have to include some elaborate overlap scheme from the
      >inside.   In other words, forget it.
      >-Ben
      >
              
              I like Ben's advice better than I like my own. Disregard the part
      about saving several hours of labor. It's not worth the risk. Forget it.
      Thanks Ben.
              
              Richard Pike
              MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 20, 1997
From: 
Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com>
Subject: 
Re: Rivits
      
      >>         Now you anti-rib stitchers have got me curious; how long does it
      >> normally take to rivit the fabric on two Kolb wings?  Rib-stitching takes
      >> about 2 1/2 to 3 hours a wing.
      >>         
      >>         Richard Pike
      >>         MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
      >
      >Aiiiieeeee! You guys are fast! Sure about that figure? I've done J3s 
      >and PA11s and it always took a lot longer than that. Prep, setup the 
      >spacing, reinforcement, etc....   And it always took two people, 
      >unless you were feeling real frisky and needed to jog that day.
      >
      >If we're talking fully preped...that is holes drilled, reinforcement 
      >laid down, etc....and JUST riveting probably about an hour a side, 
      >due care being taken to feel the rivets into a nice, tight fully 
      >seated condition. The small tubes on the Kolb have the rivet bottomed 
      >on the mandrel inside the rib before setting so you must work the 
      >riveter around a little to get a nice set.
      >
      >
      >Jim Baker
      >Pres, USUA Club 104 
      >Frontier Ultralight Aviators
      >
              Sorry for any confusion, I assumed two people to rib stitch was a
      given. As far as the preliminaries, you have to figure spacing for either
      rivits/stitches, you have to lay down reinforcing tape for either
      rivits/stitches, and then after you get done with either, you glue the 2"
      tape over the top of the rivits/stitches. Two people can do the actual
      stitching of one rib in 15 minutes, and the MKIII has 9 of them, so that is
      2 and 1/4 hours. Then there are 9 half rib bottoms to stitch, each one has 4
      knots, figure ten minutes each for that lot, so that is 90 minutes also.
      Obviously my memory must be going because that doesn't add up the 2 1/2-3
      hours that I remembered, but I had invited various chapter members over to
      learn to rib-stitch, and time flies when you're having fun. So I guess you
      helped me answer my own question, riviting is probably quicker. Thanks for
      the mental exercise.
              
              Richard Pike
              MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
jerryb(at)jmd.ods.com
Date: 
Nov 21, 1997
Subject: 
Urgent - Where to Mount Reg on FireFly
      
           Hope some one sees and replies quickly.
           
           I come to the point of mounting the voltage regular on a FireFLY.
           
           
           Where a good place to mount it.  If I recall were using the Key-West 
           unit, 4 terminals plus tach out put in the center, no cap required.  
           
           Of all the photos we have of airplanes and kolbs, you can't see where 
           the regular is mounted in any of them.  
           
           Your prompt reply will be appreciated.
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 20, 1997
From: 
wood <richard.wood(at)usa.net>
Subject: 
Re: Rib Stitching
      
      >>  One of the reasons I chose the HIPEC covering system is that the fabric is
      >>glued to the ribs and rib stitching or riviting is avoided.Havent I read
      >>that for aircraft going under a hundred and some miles per hour rib
      >>stitching is not neccessary?
      >>   Woody
      >>
      >>       Not Totally True! If the rib is wide enough on top and bottom to
      >have a sufficient gluing surface it IS true, BUT, the glue must be able to
      >hold the fabric to the rib no matter what, this is non-negotiable. On the
      >Kolb, the front portion of the upper wing fabric is pulled tight around the
      >rib's upper forward curve and can't go anywhere. From the point at which the
      >airfoil flattens out, the air has potential to lift the fabric up if the
      >glue/rivits/ribstitching fails. If the fabric lifts, your airfoil now has
      >it's high point effectively moved to the rear, the center of lift moves to
      >the rear, the airplane suddenly becomes more nose heavy. Worse case
      >scenario: not enough up elevator to hold the nose up and you start an
      >outside loop. This may be what got John Chotia (Weedhopper designer) in his
      >"Rocket". That prototype had it's single-surface wing fabric stretched
      >tightly across the top of it's airfoil shaped ribs, but not secured to them,
      >and it is thought that possibly the airfoil billowed. 
      >        Having experienced the terror of an uncommanded pitch-over in an
      >Easy Riser weightshift that had it's thrust line set wrong, (carefully
      >review the blueprints/specs on anything you buy before you fly) I tend to
      >avoid aerodynamic squirreliness if at all possible. I am not bad-mouthing
      >Hipec: I just don't think the Kolb's skinny 5/16" wide ribs that are rounded
      >on top are are a good gluing risk for anybody's product.
      >        Make a test strip: glue some fabric to a scrap of 5/16" tubing with
      >the Hipec, let it dry, and try to pull it off. If it tears before it turns
      >loose from the tubing, I was wrong and you save several hours of fabric
      >attaching labor. Good Luck!
      >        
      >        Richard Pike
      >        MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
      >        Technical Counselor EAA 442
      >
      >-
      >
      
        I did some experimenting before I decided to depend on the glue.The fabric
      did not rip but I would be surprised if it did. As you peel away the fabric
      at the point of contact a sort of lever arm is created giving considerable
      force at the point of attachment. In flight such a condition should not
      present itself. The stresses on the glue joint in actual conditions is quite
      a bit different than by peeling the fabric off a joint.Anyhow the job is
      done I am happy and when it comes time to recover I will examine the bonds
      and if they are still strong I will do the same thing again.
        I had my own theory on why ultralights used to "tuck" as we called it. I
      felt that the aircraft did not have sufficient mass to keep a positive angle
      of attack on the wing. That is the aircraft could be put into a dive
      position while still travelling forward and not at the angle of the dive. A
      negative angle of attack is created.This will violently force the craft into
      a steeper dive. This can be demonstrated by putting your hand out the car
      window as you drive and watch as you change the angle of attack of your hand
      and watch your hand go up and down. If you have too much down angle your
      hand will be slammed downward.This is the negative angle of attack I was
      refering to.This is not so much of a problem with todays heavier ultralights.
        Woody
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 20, 1997
From: 
"perry j. adams" <perry(at)hcnews.com>
Subject: 
which brs750 for firefly???
      
      Fat Sissy wants to put chute on Firefly.  Calories putting us over 500
      lbs gross. Dollars important but, not major to saving old pilot's rear
      end.  Have been told, Softpack takes to much head room (I'm 5'9"-??),
      Canister creates to much drag and VLS is getting into "Major Bucks".
      
              Don't know if this is correct info or not. Any and all input on this
      matter will certainly be appreciated. 
      
              Thanks to All,
      
              Perry
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 20, 1997
From: 
Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu>
Subject: 
Re: Rib Stitching/tuck factor
      
      On Thu, 20 Nov 1997, wood wrote:
      >   I had my own theory on why ultralights used to "tuck" as we called it. I
      > felt that the aircraft did not have sufficient mass to keep a positive angle
      > of attack on the wing. That is the aircraft could be put into a dive
      > position while still travelling forward and not at the angle of the dive. A
      > negative angle of attack is created.This will violently force the craft into
      > a steeper dive. This can be demonstrated by putting your hand out the car
      > window as you drive and watch as you change the angle of attack of your hand
      > and watch your hand go up and down. If you have too much down angle your
      > hand will be slammed downward.This is the negative angle of attack I was
      > refering to.This is not so much of a problem with todays heavier ultralights.
      >   Woody
      
      I don't think the aircraft weight has that much to do with it IMHO.  As a wing
      goes faster the forward pitch forces increase.  But the weight of the plane
      would have little to do with resisting that pitching force.  So, what is
      it that could cause the thing to change from fast normal flight to tucked?
      
      I think tail surface effectiveness, as well as deformation of the wing
      shape -- whether it be billowing on top or caving in from frontal
      pressure -- would be more likely.  As the plane goes faster, angle of
      attack decreases, at least in a sustained high speed mode.  From my days
      blasting around on sailboards we saw this a lot when it got too windy
      for the given sail; the front (luff for you nautical types) of the sail
      would start to rattle and cave in, the forces would move to the rear
      (exact same thing as increased forward pitch), and lift would quit
      big time.  Fortunately, this only gets you wet and dog tired fighting
      it till you can get in to change down to a smaller sail.  Adding weight
      to the sailboard would do nothing.
      
      I even think tucking could happen with the sail/wing not changing shape.
      At least on the sailboard, with a very low angle of attack in high wind
      it is very thin and strenuous line to control the sail/wing between flying
      and tucking.  That is, giving it a slight increase in angle of attack
      and the sail gets ripped out of your hands from too much lift (or you
      get slam-dunked if you're in the harness).  As well, a slight decrease
      in angle of attack and the thing tucks.  This is what makes me think
      tail effectiveness in an airplane, or more generally, pitch stability,
      is a factor too.
      
                                                 --------|--------
       Ben Ransom                                       (*)
       Email: bransom(at)ucdavis.edu                      o   o
       http://mae.engr.ucdavis.edu/~ransom
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 20, 1997
From: 
Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu>
Subject: 
Re: which brs750 for firefly???
      
      On Thu, 20 Nov 1997, perry j. adams wrote:
      > Fat Sissy wants to put chute on Firefly.  Calories putting us over 500
      > lbs gross. Dollars important but, not major to saving old pilot's rear
      > end.  Have been told, Softpack takes to much head room (I'm 5'9"-??),
      > Canister creates to much drag and VLS is getting into "Major Bucks".
      > 
      One angle to consider on this is that even a 500lbs rated BRS will save
      even the fatest sissy's rear end in a FF.  The UL may not look as good
      afterward compared to using a 750, but the fat boy should still be able
      to go get a cheeseburger after the big pull.  Heck buy lotsa burgers w/
      the money saved on the 500 compared to the 750.  :-)   In all seriousness
      I sorta wish i had chosen the 500 for the above reasons, and also because
      i plan on never using it anyway.
      -Ben
      
      ps. a 500 brs weighs ~14.5 lbs compared to 19.5 on the 750, and the 500
      takes less space on the A/C as well. 
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 20, 1997
From: 
John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com>
Subject: 
Re: which brs750 for firefly???
      
      perry j. adams wrote:
      > 
      > Fat Sissy wants to put chute on Firefly.  Calories putting us over 500
      > lbs gross. Dollars important but, not major to saving old pilot's rear
      > end.  Have been told, Softpack takes to much head room (I'm 5'9"-??),
      > Canister creates to much drag and VLS is getting into "Major Bucks".
      > 
      >         Don't know if this is correct info or not. Any and all input on this
      > matter will certainly be appreciated.
      > 
      >         Thanks to All,
      > 
      >         Perry
      > -
      About the headroom: 
          My Firestar II has a 750 softpack located in the gap with no loss of
      headroom. My gap seal is .016 aluminum and it goes completely around the
      chute. In order to accomplish this, I removed the front two nylon
      spacers and replaced them with som washers, just enough to locate the
      chute, including the support angles, between the wings. I am 6', and I
      wear a helmet when flying, so I couldn't give up any headroom.
      John Jung
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
"Russell Duffy" <rad(at)pen.net>
Subject: 
Almost 80 Cruise ????
Date: 
Nov 20, 1997
      
      Hi everyone,
      
      Had a very optimistic day of flight testing today.  It's hard to believe it
      can really be true.  I'm already thinking of adding a 3rd blade, shortening
      the prop,  and adding more pitch.  I won't really believe the speed increase
      until I test some more this weekend, but so far..... :-))))   (log excerpt
      enclosed)
      
      In other news, you'll note that there's a new addition to the signature.  I
      ordered plans for a Sonerai-IIS today.  I'm not sure when, or even if, I'll
      ever get started, but it's on the very short "next project" list.  Single
      rotor Mazda engine ??????
      
      Russell Duffy
      SlingShot SS-003, N8754K (flying)
      Sonerai-IIS (building ?)
      rad(at)pen.net
      http://www.pen.net/~rad/
      
      
      FLIGHT LOG EXCERPT:
      
      (note that the 3 turns I mention adjusting the prop, spans the "null zone".
      It seems to be about 100 rpm per 1/4 turn normally)
      
      First flight was with the pitch as it was after the last
      flight.  This gave 6600 rpm at a climb speed of 65 mph.  The
      rate of climb was 800 fpm at 65, maybe a bit less at 60, and
      about 600 fpm at 55.  Cruise at 6000 rpm was about 70 mph. The
      redline of the engine at 6800 rpm is easily exceeded if not
      careful, and the EGT will exceed 1200 during descent.  Not
      really a good pitch.
      
      Landed and turned the adjustment screw 3 turns CCW, which puts
      it at 1/2 turn more pitch than I originally had.  Climb is at
      6200 rpm @ 65 mph.  Rate was 750 fpm and no other speeds were
      tested.  The surprise was in the cruise.  At 6000 cruise, the
      ASI indicates 86 (CHT=330, EGT=1050).  This is 10 mph higher
      than it was indicating in the earlier test today.  Since the
      ASI is known to be about 6 mph high, this puts cruise around
      80.  It was getting dark, and I only had time for a brief GPS
      test, but made a run into, and with the wind.  The ground
      speeds for these runs were 56 and 102.  This averages to 79
      which confirms the ASI reading. The engine is so much smoother
      during climb that I kept thinking something was wrong.  I still
      can't really believe it though.  More testing at a slightly
      higher pitch is in order.
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
Mse84(at)aol.com
Date: 
Nov 21, 1997
Subject: 
ultalights
      
          Hey, Mike again, The reason I was interested in the firefly is because it
      is an ultralight and i have to stick to ultralights because I dont have my
      certificate  :-(    As where a 2-seater is for training only OR you have to
      have a pilots certificate and tail numbers on it - So says the FAA
      regulations.
      
                                                            Mike
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
Cavuontop(at)aol.com
Date: 
Nov 21, 1997
Subject: 
Re: Intercom & Headsets
      
      
      << Sure would be nice to have a good intercom and headset.
       
       What works? >>
      
      
        I have a Softcom AT-2.  I like it alot because it automatically shuts off
      when you unplug the headsets.  Others I have used always had dead batteries
      because I was too dense to remember to turn it off.   Sound quality is good
      too.
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
WillU(at)aol.com
Date: 
Nov 21, 1997
Subject: 
On the road again
      
      Hi
      I'll be in Wichita Falls, Tx for 3 days the week of Nov. 24, and then in
      Chicago, IL the week of Dec 1.  I would like a chance to look at some Kolb
      airplanes in the area and take some pictures for my web page.  Send me an
      e-mail if your in the area and have time to show me your Kolb.
      
      Thanks
      Will Uribe
      WillU(at)aol.com
      Building a FireStar II
      http://members.aol.com/WillU/index.html
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 21, 1997
From: 
"Richard Neilsen" <neilsenr(at)state.mi.us>
Subject: 
Airworthiness Certificate
      
      I just completed my FAA inspection on my VW powered Kolb MKIII. I guess I
      can say it=27s 100% completed. The inspection took less than an hour which
      included getting the plane out of the hanger warmup time and doing a full
      throttle run up.
      
      After waiting 5 WEEKS for the inspection I think he spent 5 minutes
      looking at my airplane. He spent the majority of the time comparing my
      documentation against the data plate, verifying that the N number was the
      same on both sides of the plane and on all documentation, etc=21=21=21=21=
      
      
      The inspector did have a problem with the factory supplied seat belt
      buckles. He seemed to think they were unacceptable for aircraft use. He
      decided to approve the plane anyway but was going to check on them and get
      back with me. Frankly I don=27t think this guy could find his own butt
      with BOTH hands and the seat belts are ok but ???
      
      Rick Neilsen VW Powered Kolb MKIII COMPLETED=21=21 
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
Jason Omelchuck <jason(at)acuityinc.com>
Subject: 
FW: Airworthiness Certificate
Date: 
Nov 21, 1997
      
      CONGRATULATIONS Richard:  It really does sound like this inspector was
      the type of federal employee that we all make jokes about and give the
      rest a bad name. I don't know how many people you've had look at your
      airplane but if you can find someone to go over it looking for loose
      nuts, no safety wire etc... it might be a good idea.  How much does your
      airplane weigh?
      
      > -----Original Message-----
      > From:        Richard Neilsen [SMTP:neilsenr(at)state.mi.us]
      > Sent:        Friday, November 21, 1997 10:48 AM
      > To:        kolb(at)intrig.com
      > Subject:        Airworthiness Certificate
      > 
      > I just completed my FAA inspection on my VW powered Kolb MKIII. I
      > guess I can say it's 100% completed. The inspection took less than an
      > hour which included getting the plane out of the hanger warmup time
      > and doing a full throttle run up.
      > 
      > After waiting 5 WEEKS for the inspection I think he spent 5 minutes
      > looking at my airplane. He spent the majority of the time comparing my
      > documentation against the data plate, verifying that the N number was
      > the same on both sides of the plane and on all documentation, etc!!!! 
      > 
      > The inspector did have a problem with the factory supplied seat belt
      > buckles. He seemed to think they were unacceptable for aircraft use.
      > He decided to approve the plane anyway but was going to check on them
      > and get back with me. Frankly I don't think this guy could find his
      > own butt with BOTH hands and the seat belts are ok but ??? 
      > 
      > Rick Neilsen VW Powered Kolb MKIII COMPLETED!!  
      > -
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: 
Re: Muffler Coatings
From: 
ul15rhb(at)juno.com (Ralph H Burlingame)
Date: 
Nov 21, 1997
      
      
       writes:
      >Does anyone have any experience in muffler coatings. I'm getting a
      >little tired of that rustic look and feel the need for a little
      >makeover.
      
      Yes, first take your muffler off, sand it down, clean with lacquer
      thinner, then paint it with flat black 1500 degree paint, either
      automotive high temp or barbecue grill spray paint. After two flights and
      every flight thereafter, use some "Armor-all" on it (the white stuff used
      for plastics and rubber products). It will keep your muffler new-looking
      for a long time (5 years).
      
      Ralph Burlingame
      Minneapolis
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 21, 1997
From: 
kmead(at)up.net (Kent  kathy Mead)
Subject: 
Steel tubing
      
      Hi Ben,
           I finished my homemade brakes today and they work great. I made them
      out of odds and ends I had laying around the shop. Cost was under ten
      dollars. They are like the ones you made but I made them out of steel, total
      weight including axles is 26 oz each. The oak brake pads work great, I took
      a piece of sandpaper between the pad and wheel and sanded them to the fit
      the wheel and have about 2.5 inches of contact area. The only difference is
      I don't have a backing plate on the axle so I made a plate and welded them
      to the axle. Got all the hardware off an old 10 speed I had laying around.
      Does anyone happen to know were I can order small dia steel tubing 1/2" -
      3/4"?  I can't find anyone around here that sells it. More upgrades to come. 
                                                                          Kent
       
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
"Ron  Carroll " <ron.carroll(at)worldnet.att.net>
Subject: 
Re: Steel tubing
Date: 
Nov 21, 1997
      
      This sounds like something a lot of us would be very interested in. Thanks
      for telling us about it, but how about some pictures to show how you put the
      bike parts to good use?   As my old friend Tony Confucius once told me, "A
      picture is worth a bunch of talkin' "
      
      Ron Carroll
      Independence, Oregon
      
      >Hi Ben,
      >     I finished my homemade brakes today and they work great. I made them
      >out of odds and ends I had laying around the shop. Cost was under ten
      >dollars. They are like the ones you made but I made them out of steel,
      total
      >weight including axles is 26 oz each. The oak brake pads work great, I took
      >a piece of sandpaper between the pad and wheel and sanded them to the fit
      >the wheel and have about 2.5 inches of contact area. The only difference is
      >I don't have a backing plate on the axle so I made a plate and welded them
      >to the axle. Got all the hardware off an old 10 speed I had laying around.
      >Does anyone happen to know were I can order small dia steel tubing 1/2" -
      >3/4"?  I can't find anyone around here that sells it. More upgrades to
      come.
      >                                                                    Kent
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
"Ron  Carroll " <ron.carroll(at)worldnet.att.net>
Subject: 
Powder coating
Date: 
Nov 21, 1997
      
      
      I finally got my 1985 Firestar kit, and I'm ready to do my 'build
      thing'.   Based on what I've read here in the Kolb Mail, it is a great
      idea to have the cage and other heavy metal parts powder coated, so I
      took it all  the local powder-coat shop and tried to drop them off.  No
      dice!  They wouldn't take the responsibility for possible damage to the
      chrome-moly caused by the necessary heat treatment.
      
      The tech  said that chrome-moly alloys are adversely affected by  the
      400-degree (f) temperature used to cure the powder coating.  He asked if
      I knew if  the alloy used in the Kolbs could tolerate this treatment.  
      I was at a loss for the answer, of course.   I said  that because some
      kits offer this as an option,  I would assume that  the tubing could
      stand it.  He replied  that perhaps the kit maker uses a low temperature
      powder-coating.  I was again at a loss.
      
      My question is this:  Has anyone here looked into this to determine if 
      the chrome-moly used in the Kolb kit can withstand 400-degrees (f) for
      45-minutes without  compromising strength or form, or must it be done
      using the low temperature method?
      
      If I am unable to use my local powder-coat shop (they are only equipped
      for the high-temp method) I may have to settle for plain old primer &
      paint.  Therefore, I'd appreciate it if anyone could  recommend a  paint
      & primer combination that they have used successfully?
      
      Thanks,
      Ron Carroll
      On the left coast
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
I finally got my 1985 Firestar kit,
      and I'm
      ready to do my 'build thing'.   Based on what I've read here
      in the
      Kolb Mail, it is a great idea to have the cage and other heavy metal
      parts
      powder coated, so I took it all  the local powder-coat shop and
      tried to
      drop them off.  No dice!  They wouldn't take the
      responsibility for
      possible damage to the chrome-moly caused by the necessary heat
      treatment.
      
 
      
The tech  said that chrome-moly
      alloys are
      adversely affected by  the 400-degree (f) temperature used to cure
      the
      powder coating.  He asked if I knew if  the alloy used in the
      Kolbs
      could tolerate this treatment.   I was at a loss for the
      answer, of
      course.   I said  that because some kits offer this as an
      
      option,  I would assume that  the tubing could stand it. 
      He
      replied  that perhaps the kit maker uses a low temperature
      powder-coating.  I was again at a loss.
      
 
      
My question is this:  Has anyone here looked
      into this to
      determine if  the chrome-moly used in the Kolb kit can withstand
      400-degrees (f) for 45-minutes without  compromising strength or
      form, or
      must it be done using the low temperature method?
      
 
      
If I am unable to use my local powder-coat shop
      (they are only
      equipped for the high-temp method) I may have to settle for plain old
      primer
      & paint.  Therefore, I'd appreciate it if anyone could 
      recommend
      a  paint & primer combination that they have used
      successfully?
      
 
      
Thanks, 
      
Ron Carroll
      
On the left coast 
      
 
      
 
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 22, 1997
From: 
wood <richard.wood(at)usa.net>
Subject: 
Re: rivits
      
      >Woody
      >
      >If you didn't rivet, I would suggest getting a friend to fly above and
      >behind occasionally to make sure that the rear upper wing surface is not
      >coming loose from the ribs and ballooning up.  I am not familiar with the
      >HIPEC system so my concern may be unfounded.  It must be a very good glue to
      >stick the flat fabric surface to the rounded 5/16th rib.
      >
      >Later,
      
      
         Good idea. I may have a more relaxed attitude towards perfection than a
      lot of writers to this list but I really do value my hide.I've grown quite
      attatched to it over the years.The Twinstar is put away for the winter while
      I build another aircraft but in the spring I will check it out as you suggested.
      
      
      Woody
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
GeoR38(at)aol.com
Date: 
Nov 23, 1997
Subject: 
Re: ul15rhb: Re: Kolb FireStar
      
      
      << > I have the first KX but it is only partial KX because it has the
      original
       > treatment on tail folding as Kolb was going through the transition. I am
       > totally happy with the hybrid (just a little bit though) that I have . I
      have
       > Quicksilver, N3 Pup and Pterodactyl experience since '83.
       >                     GeoR38
       I don't get this.  
       The wing and tail fold scheme is the same on all the Firestars -- orig
       thru current.   Now i'm sure you're going to tell me this somehow has
       something to do with your years as a glider pilot.  ...just having fun
       w/ you here of course. :-) 
       -Ben >>
      I can't vouch for all the Firestars out there, of course, Ben, but when I
      received my kit in '91, I think it was, it had plans for a different fold
      system of the horizontal stab than I had materials for ( if  I can remember
      way back that far - only a decade after my  gliding days-  [:o)  )  I have a
      Cotter pin throught the long pin which goes throught  the  
      2 bent flat fittings retained by the Nicopressed bottom stays.  Wow! what a
      mouthful!
      That probably  is the same,,  but above that is the long pin going through
      the two horns of the elevator ends. This is the part that was somehow changed
      ....but I can't remember exactly how. It seems that the improvement that I
      don't have was to eliminate one of the pins or safety pins or
      something......sorry, that's all my head can sustain at this time!!
                                  GeoR38
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
Steve Bennett <sab(at)ma.ultranet.com>
Subject: 
RE: Kolb FireStar
Date: 
Apr 05, 1997
      
      
      Regarding the tail-folding schemes:
      
      The original Firestars had the same design as my Twinstar Mk II (1987 
      vintage).  Each elevator has a flat L-shaped fitting which nestles into the 
      mating piece which has the elevator cables attached to it.  A clevis pin 
      keeps everything lined up.  To fold the tail, you pull the pin and raise 
      each elevator separately.  There could be a lot of slop in the elevators 
      with this system, and the folding/unfolding was really an acquired skill.
      
      The newer design, which I think came out with the KXP, uses a kind of a 
      universal joint between the elevators.  This really simplifies folding 
      because the elevators don't flop around after you pull the pin.
      
      -Steve
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: 
everybody  mailing list
From: 
flyingjoe(at)juno.com (JOE E. CERQUEIRA,Jr)
Date: 
Nov 23, 1997
      
      I would like to know  who is, in the building stage of a firestar I at
      this time. thank you
       
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
Cavuontop(at)aol.com
Date: 
Nov 23, 1997
Subject: 
Re: Muffler Coatings
      
      After years of anguish on the muffler coating problem I think Jet Hot coating
      is the best thing going.  Their number is 1-800-432-3379.  They did the three
      piece muffler for my Mark III for about $100.00.  They are a pleasure to deal
      with.  JUST DON"T TELL THEM IT IS FOR AN AIRCRAFT.  If you do they won't do
      business with you.  TELL THEM IT IS A MUFFLER FOR A ROTAX SNOWMOBILE ENGINE.
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
Cavuontop(at)aol.com
Date: 
Nov 23, 1997
Subject: 
Re: CHT's
      
      
      << put on some new leads to the single EGT meter that I have, . >>
      
      MY two cents.  Single EGT is not the way to go.  I bought a 582 a few years
      back out of a wrecked Rans that crashed near the Kolb factory.  On inspection
      it became apparent that the rear cylinder had overheated and seized, but that
      the EGT probe was on the front cylinder.  The guy had no idea what got him.
       Dual egt and dual cht are the only way to go in my book.  If you are going
      for the new muffler spend a couple more bucks to get the double probes and a
      double egt guage.
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 23, 1997
From: 
kmead(at)up.net (Kent  kathy Mead)
Subject: 
Kolb stuff
      
      Hi Ron
           The plane that I have was already built when I got it, it had been
      setting ing a garage for 9 years. I just picked it up this late fall, so I
      didn't get a chance to fly it yet. Had to rebuild the motor and fix some
      holes, it will be ready to go in the spring. It only had 80 hours total time
      on the plane , but was not taken care of very well. I will go through the
      whole plane and check everything over this winter when I have some time. I
      am building a runway in my back yard to fly out of. On your cage, if you
      don't want to powder coat it you can use an epoxy primer. I restore old
      fords and I use Ditzler DP 90, you can get it at auto parts stores . Battery
      acid won't even eat through it. Check it out.
      
                                                                           Kent
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
"Ron  Carroll " <ron.carroll(at)worldnet.att.net>
Subject: 
Re: everybody  mailing list
Date: 
Nov 23, 1997
      
      ME !    ME !    ME !
      
      I just bought a 1985 Firestar-I kit  and am just in the starting
      stages of building.  I hope you are also so that we can share ideas
      and problems.
      
      Ron Carroll, Independence, Oregon
      
      
      >I would like to know  who is, in the building stage of a firestar I
      at
      >this time. thank you
      >
      >-
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 23, 1997
From: 
Cliff and Carolyn Stripling <striplic(at)dfw.net>
Subject: 
Re: Muffler Coatings
      
      >After years of anguish on the muffler coating problem I think Jet Hot coating
      >is the best thing going.  Their number is 1-800-432-3379.  They did the three
      >piece muffler for my Mark III for about $100.00.  They are a pleasure to deal
      >with.  JUST DON"T TELL THEM IT IS FOR AN AIRCRAFT.  If you do they won't do
      >business with you.  TELL THEM IT IS A MUFFLER FOR A ROTAX SNOWMOBILE ENGINE.
      
      I'll throw my 2 bits in here too and plug a competitor, HPC (High
      Performance Coatings) with 2 or 3 locations (Oklahoma, upper midwest
      somewhere, and ???) around the US.  It cost me the same ($100) for all 3
      pieces including the two brackets and two bands for 582 mount.  Shipping
      costs were extra.  Sorry I don't have their number, but they have a web site
      with all the particulars.
      
      With either company, be sure to protect your EGT probe threads from being
      coated and caution them (although they know to anyway) to keep the blast
      beads out of the muffler.  I plugged the holes of the muffler and EGT really
      well.  It would be best to plug the EGT holes with bolts.  The muffler was
      rusty and oily when it left and beautiful on return.
      
      I know that HPC does a nice job and I have heard that Jet Hot does too.  I
      think Jet Hot is in Missssisssssipppppiiiii somewhere.
      
      Later,
      
      --
      Cliff & Carolyn Stripling   Him:  Kolb MKIII - N582CC (34.6 hrs)
      (972)247-9821 Dallas Texas  Her:  Real Estate Broker - Texas
                  Both: 5th Wheel - RV - Travel
       
              ____________________|_____________________
                             ___(+^+)___      
                                 (_)   
                                8   8
                                  
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
me <lloyd(at)vermontel.com>
Subject: 
RE: Airworthiness Certificate
Date: 
Nov 23, 1997
      
      Richard,  Please, keep us up to date with your flight testing. 
      
      -----Original Message-----
      From:        Richard Neilsen [SMTP:neilsenr(at)state.mi.us]
      Sent:        Friday, November 21, 1997 1:48 PM
      To:        kolb(at)intrig.com
      Subject: Kolb-List:        Airworthiness Certificate
      
      I just completed my FAA inspection on my VW powered Kolb MKIII. I guess
      I can say it's 100% completed. The inspection took less than an hour
      which included getting the plane out of the hanger warmup time and doing
      a full throttle run up.
      
      After waiting 5 WEEKS for the inspection I think he spent 5 minutes
      looking at my airplane. He spent the majority of the time comparing my
      documentation against the data plate, verifying that the N number was
      the same on both sides of the plane and on all documentation, etc!!!!
      
      The inspector did have a problem with the factory supplied seat belt
      buckles. He seemed to think they were unacceptable for aircraft use. He
      decided to approve the plane anyway but was going to check on them and
      get back with me. Frankly I don't think this guy could find his own butt
      with BOTH hands and the seat belts are ok but ???
      
      Rick Neilsen VW Powered Kolb MKIII COMPLETED!! 
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
"Russell Duffy" <rad(at)pen.net>
Subject: 
not a fluke
Date: 
Nov 23, 1997
      
      Hi again,
      
      Well, I'm happy to report that my increase in cruise isn't a fluke.  I
      increased the pitch by another 1/2 turn today and verified that the cruise
      is 83 mph at 6000 rpm, and 79 mph at 5800.  The plane takes a noticeably
      nose down attitude at higher speeds.  Climb rpm is down to 6050 at 65 mph,
      but the climb rate is still 800 fpm.  I'm not sure how much farther I want
      to take the pitch.  I'm sure I'll push it just a bit more though.
      Eventually, I have to start losing climb performance.
      
      I'm wondering what the next step in cruise optimization will be.  I suspect
      at some point, I'll need to make a change in the prop.  I've considered
      shortening the current 2 blade 66" prop so I can add more pitch (my first
      choice).  Perhaps a third blade and smaller diameter is in order.  Has
      anyone switch from a 2 to 3 blade prop?  What difference did you see?
      
      Also, has anyone measured the descent rate of their planes?  I made the
      first test today at 65 mph.  It came out to a rock-like 880 fpm.  Pity the
      fool who actually deploys the flaperons :-)  Actually, it works out to about
      6 to 1 glide ratio.
      
      
      Russell Duffy
      SlingShot SS-003, N8754K (flying)
      Sonerai-IIS (building ?)
      rad(at)pen.net
      http://www.pen.net/~rad/
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
"Marino, Frank J (Youngstown ARB)" <Frank.Marino(at)yng.afres.af.mil>
Subject: 
Re: RE: ul15rhb: Re: Kolb FireStar
Date: 
Nov 24, 1997
      
      As much as I hate to stick up for George and all his glider time he is
      right on the folding of his Firestar tail. I keep my MKIII in the same
      hanger (Heaven help me) as his.It is different than the other Kolbs I
      seen and a lot different than my MKIII, my tail folding is much easier
      
      FRANK J. MARINO
      Chief Loadmaster 773 AS
      
      >----------
      >From:         GeoR38(at)aol.com[SMTP:GeoR38(at)aol.com]
      >Sent:         Sunday, November 23, 1997 7:21 AM
      >To:         ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu; kolb(at)intrig.com
      >Subject:         Re: ul15rhb: Re: Kolb FireStar
      >
      >
      ><< > I have the first KX but it is only partial KX because it has the
      >original
      > > treatment on tail folding as Kolb was going through the transition. I am
      > > totally happy with the hybrid (just a little bit though) that I have . I
      >have
      > > Quicksilver, N3 Pup and Pterodactyl experience since '83.
      > >                     GeoR38
      > I don't get this.  
      > The wing and tail fold scheme is the same on all the Firestars -- orig
      > thru current.   Now i'm sure you're going to tell me this somehow has
      > something to do with your years as a glider pilot.  ...just having fun
      > w/ you here of course. :-) 
      > -Ben >>
      >I can't vouch for all the Firestars out there, of course, Ben, but when I
      >received my kit in '91, I think it was, it had plans for a different fold
      >system of the horizontal stab than I had materials for ( if  I can remember
      >way back that far - only a decade after my  gliding days-  [:o)  )  I have a
      >Cotter pin throught the long pin which goes throught  the  
      >2 bent flat fittings retained by the Nicopressed bottom stays.  Wow! what a
      >mouthful!
      >That probably  is the same,,  but above that is the long pin going through
      >the two horns of the elevator ends. This is the part that was somehow changed
      >....but I can't remember exactly how. It seems that the improvement that I
      >don't have was to eliminate one of the pins or safety pins or
      >something......sorry, that's all my head can sustain at this time!!
      >                            GeoR38
      >-
      >
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 24, 1997
From: 
Ken(at)www.atfi.com (Ken)
Subject: 
History search
      
           Hello List,
             I've been watching this list for about a week now and I know it's
           mainly about "building" Kolbs but I've got a problem that I'm hoping
           someone out there can help me with. I recently bought a used, already-
           built, fully functional Twinstar from a couple of guys in Indiana.
           What I want to do is get an experimental airworthiness certificate and
           fly it under Part 91. The first obstacle I ran into is that I need to
           track down the original builder. Nope, the guys in Indiana didn't
           build it and the "paper trail" disappears after that. The only thing
           I know about it is that it's a Twinstar, I was told that it is a 1987
           but I couldn't find anything on it that tells me that for sure. The
           engine is a Rotax 503 and has the serial number 36096861.
           If anybody has any ideas on how to track down the history of this
           aircraft I'd really appreciate the information.
           Thanks
           Ken Lea
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
"Ron  Carroll " <ron.carroll(at)worldnet.att.net>
Subject: 
Disappointing
Date: 
Nov 24, 1997
      
      On or about 11/20 I sent the following request for information  to
      the Kolb mail list.  I've seen a lot of small talk on this list
      relating to a lot of subjects, and ate it all up, but I received no
      response to my questions, not even from Souder.  In the event it
      didn't actually get there (however, I got mine back) I'll try one
      more time. I would surely think that with all the talent and
      meticulous builders on the list,  someone would have experience with
      either powder coating, chrome-moly, or primer & paint.
      
      Thanks, Ron
      
      
      Copy
      
      >I finally got my 1985 Firestar kit, and I'm ready to do my 'build
      thing'.   Based on what I've read here in the >Kolb Mail, it is a
      great idea to have the cage and other heavy metal parts powder
      coated, so I took it all  the >local powder-coat shop and tried to
      drop them off.  No dice!  They wouldn't take the responsibility for
      >possible damage to the chrome-moly caused by the necessary heat
      treatment.
      >
      >The tech  said that chrome-moly alloys are adversely affected by
      the 400-degree (f) temperature used to >cure the powder coating.  He
      asked if I knew if  the alloy used in the Kolbs could tolerate this
      treatment.   I >was at a loss for the answer, of course.   I said
      that because some kits offer this as an option,  I would >assume
      that  the tubing could stand it.  He replied  that perhaps the kit
      maker uses a low temperature >powder-coating.  I was again at a
      loss.
      >
      >My question is this:  Has anyone here looked into this to determine
      if  the chrome-moly used in the Kolb kit >can withstand 400-degrees
      (f) for 45-minutes without  compromising strength or form, or must
      it be done >using the low temperature method?
      >
      >If I am unable to use my local powder-coat shop (they are only
      equipped for the high-temp method) I may >have to settle for plain
      old primer & paint.  Therefore, I'd appreciate it if anyone could
      recommend a  paint & >primer combination that they have used
      successfully?
       >
      >Thanks,
      >Ron Carroll
      >On the 'left' coast
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 24, 1997
From: 
jdc6(at)lehigh.edu (John D. Caffrey)
Subject: 
Re: Disappointing
      
      
      >>My question is this:  Has anyone here looked into this to determine
      >if  the chrome-moly used in the Kolb kit >can withstand 400-degrees
      >(f) for 45-minutes without  compromising strength or form, or must
      >it be done >using the low temperature method?
      >>
      
      >>Thanks,
      >>Ron Carroll
      >>On the 'left' coast
      >
      Ron,
      I usually just lurk here since I don't yet own a Kolb but I do weld 4130N and
      I do have my frames powder coated. I've never heard of two different
      temperature processes for powder coating. 400 deg F is nothing to worry about
      and will not cause any metallurgical changes in the chrome moly. After welding
      chrome moly with the TIG process the joints should be "normalized" which is
      done by raising the temp just over the critical temp where the grain structure
      is refined and this happens around 1100 deg F. Now I don't wish to start a war
      here on wether thin walled chrome moly needs normalizing I just wanted to make
      the point that unless you are near the 1100 deg F temperature you will not
      have problems. BTW, Kolb uses the same powder coater that I do for my race car
      frames and that is where I first saw one.
      
      John Caffrey
      http://www.win.net/~letsfly/4stroke/vw.htm
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
jerryb(at)jmd.ods.com
Date: 
Nov 25, 1997
Subject: 
Error FireFly's Plans - Dimensions of Exhaust Mtg Brackets
      
           *** FireFLY builders warning ****
           
           Subject:
           Incorrect dimensions for aluminum angle exhaust mounting brackets
           
           On the FireFly using a 447 Rotax, the plans call for the builder to 
           manufacture the pieces used in attaching the exhaust system to the top 
           of the engine.  
           
           The plans call out two pieces of aluminum angle stock be cut to 7" 
           which attach to the top of the engine.  Further along in the 
           manufacturer and assembly you'll find this to be about 1" too short.  
           They should be cut about 8" in length to place the exhaust systems 
           ball joints in the correct position while maintaining the proper bolt 
           hole edge distances.  
           
           The 8" is approximate - measure and cut to fit - but do not cut to 7" 
           as it is definitely too short.
           
           
           Let's see how does that go again, measure twice cut once.  We did that 
           - oop's my partner did eactly what I told him, he followed the plans.  
            
           
           Jerry Bidle
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 24, 1997
From: 
Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu>
Subject: 
Re: Disappointing
      
      On Mon, 24 Nov 1997, Ron Carroll  wrote:
      > >
      > >If I am unable to use my local powder-coat shop (they are only
      > equipped for the high-temp method) I may >have to settle for plain
      > old primer & paint.  Therefore, I'd appreciate it if anyone could
      > recommend a  paint & >primer combination that they have used
      > successfully?
      
      Ron,
      I don't know the specifics of powder coating treatments, so will defer
      on that.  I think that if you mail specifically to Dennis (dlsouder(at)aol.com)
      he'll reply to you, as opposed to this list for which he generally lets
      builders, fliers, etc blab freely and hopefully take care of each other.
      
      As for priming, I used Randolph epoxy-primer from an auto parts store.  
      This after 30 hours of painstaking scrubbing w/ Metalsol.  This not
      real fun, but the end result is just fine.  I also used a color coat of
      ToughCoat (TM) latex on the frame, which is, like the name implies, very
      very tough and I recommend it for similar applications.  Still, i'd 
      pursue the powder coating for best results and time economy.
      -Ben
      
      PS: don't be dissappointed, just ask again.  Anybody (or everybody) on
      the list might just assume that you got more knowledgable answers not
      cc'd to the list.  And, people not responding to things they aren't sure
      about is a very good thing. :-)
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 24, 1997
From: 
Charles Henry <chhenry(at)plains.nodak.edu>
Subject: 
Re: History search
      
      >     I recently bought a used, already-
      >     built, fully functional Twinstar from a couple of guys in Indiana.
      >     What I want to do is get an experimental airworthiness certificate 
      
      Ken
      My Kolb Firestar has a frame number on the end of the tube under the engine,
      if you could find the frame number I would think Kolb could tell you who was
      the original buyer???
      
                                      Charles Henry
                                      Hankinson ND
      
      
                                      ____________\_/____________
                                                   |
                                                  (*)
                                                 O   O
                              Happy Landings
                              Charles :)
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
jerryb(at)jmd.ods.com
Date: 
Nov 25, 1997
Subject: 
Re[2]: Reply Muffler Coatings
      
           When you send it in be specific and clearly document how you want it 
           returned.  
           
           got hit for $50 shipping for air freight even though we hadn't 
           requested any priority shipment or turn around.  Ouch!
           
           Jerry Bidle
           
           toll call bandwidth saving snip...
           
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 24, 1997
From: 
Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com>
Subject: 
Re: History search
      
      >     Hello List,
      >       I've been watching this list for about a week now and I know it's
      >     mainly about "building" Kolbs but I've got a problem that I'm hoping
      >     someone out there can help me with. I recently bought a used, already-
      >     built, fully functional Twinstar from a couple of guys in Indiana.
      >     What I want to do is get an experimental airworthiness certificate and
      >     fly it under Part 91. The first obstacle I ran into is that I need to
      >     track down the original builder. Nope, the guys in Indiana didn't
      >     build it and the "paper trail" disappears after that. The only thing
      >     I know about it is that it's a Twinstar, I was told that it is a 1987
      >     but I couldn't find anything on it that tells me that for sure. The
      >     engine is a Rotax 503 and has the serial number 36096861.
      >     If anybody has any ideas on how to track down the history of this
      >     aircraft I'd really appreciate the information.
      >     Thanks
      >     Ken Lea
      >-      
              Call EAA at 920-426-4821. That is the # for building/restoring
      aircraft.  If they don't know, they will know who will.
              
              Richard Pike
              MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
"Russell Duffy" <rad(at)pen.net>
Subject: 
responses to list questions
Date: 
Nov 24, 1997
      
      
      Ben touched on a point that I've been meaning to mention regarding responses
      to questions.  On several occasions, I've asked questions to the list, and
      usually receive some high quality replies.  Unfortunately, many of these
      replies are sent to me "off-line" rather than being posted to the list.
      Sometimes I can understand the reason for a private reply, but usually, the
      message could have been posted to the list.  Remember, there are a lot of
      lurkers out there who have the same questions.  When you post to the list,
      they get to see the answers too.  Also, posted responses will end up in the
      archive for future generations of Kolb builders.
      
      This has been a public service announcement :-)
      Rusty
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 24, 1997
From: 
Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com>
Subject: 
Re: Disappointing
      
      >On or about 11/20 I sent the following request for information  to
      >the Kolb mail list.  I've seen a lot of small talk on this list
      >relating to a lot of subjects, and ate it all up, but I received no
      >response to my questions, not even from Souder.  In the event it
      >didn't actually get there (however, I got mine back) I'll try one
      >more time. I would surely think that with all the talent and
      >meticulous builders on the list,  someone would have experience with
      >either powder coating, chrome-moly, or primer & paint.
      >
      >Thanks, Ron
      >
      >--------------------------------------------------------------------
      >-----------------------------------
      >
      >Copy
      >
      >>I finally got my 1985 Firestar kit, and I'm ready to do my 'build
      >thing'.   Based on what I've read here in the >Kolb Mail, it is a
      >great idea to have the cage and other heavy metal parts powder
      >coated, so I took it all  the >local powder-coat shop and tried to
      >drop them off.  No dice!  They wouldn't take the responsibility for
      >>possible damage to the chrome-moly caused by the necessary heat
      >treatment.
      >>
      >>The tech  said that chrome-moly alloys are adversely affected by
      >the 400-degree (f) temperature used to >cure the powder coating.  He
      >asked if I knew if  the alloy used in the Kolbs could tolerate this
      >treatment.   I >was at a loss for the answer, of course.   I said
      >that because some kits offer this as an option,  I would >assume
      >that  the tubing could stand it.  He replied  that perhaps the kit
      >maker uses a low temperature >powder-coating.  I was again at a
      >loss.
      >>
      >>My question is this:  Has anyone here looked into this to determine
      >if  the chrome-moly used in the Kolb kit >can withstand 400-degrees
      >(f) for 45-minutes without  compromising strength or form, or must
      >it be done >using the low temperature method?
      >>
      >>If I am unable to use my local powder-coat shop (they are only
      >equipped for the high-temp method) I may >have to settle for plain
      >old primer & paint.  Therefore, I'd appreciate it if anyone could
      >recommend a  paint & >primer combination that they have used
      >successfully?
      > >
      >>Thanks,
      >>Ron Carroll
      >>On the 'left' coast
      >
      >
              Randolph and Stits both make a good epoxy primer, both cover well
      with lacquer or enamel when scuff sanded, but dope or Stits poly-whatever
      does not adhere well to anything but fabric.
              As far as heating the 4130 to 400 degrees, you need to ask an
      engineer. The only data I could find was in Tony Bingelis' book "The
      Sportplane Builder" and it mentions that tempering of 4130 steel begins at
      212 degrees but the only data anywhere close to the 400 degree figure was
      that at 500 degrees the tensile strength in psi was 500,000.
              This answer may not be adequate for your needs.
              
              
              Richard Pike
              MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
              Technical Counselor EAA 442
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
"Frank Metcalfe" <fmetcalf(at)ix.netcom.com>
Subject: 
Re: Disappointing
Date: 
Nov 24, 1997
      
      Ron, the 400 degree temps will not hurt the 4130 chrome moly, This takes
      temp of 900 degree before warping takes place. If the tubing cools with out
      help the metal will not temper and will be fine. I would powder coat with
      out question. The finish will be great !!
      -----Original Message-----
      From: Ron Carroll <ron.carroll(at)worldnet.att.net>
      Date: Monday, November 24, 1997 11:59 AM
      Subject: Kolb-List: Disappointing
      
      
      >On or about 11/20 I sent the following request for information  to
      >the Kolb mail list.  I've seen a lot of small talk on this list
      >relating to a lot of subjects, and ate it all up, but I received no
      >response to my questions, not even from Souder.  In the event it
      >didn't actually get there (however, I got mine back) I'll try one
      >more time. I would surely think that with all the talent and
      >meticulous builders on the list,  someone would have experience with
      >either powder coating, chrome-moly, or primer & paint.
      >
      >Thanks, Ron
      >
      >--------------------------------------------------------------------
      >-----------------------------------
      >
      >Copy
      >
      >>I finally got my 1985 Firestar kit, and I'm ready to do my 'build
      >thing'.   Based on what I've read here in the >Kolb Mail, it is a
      >great idea to have the cage and other heavy metal parts powder
      >coated, so I took it all  the >local powder-coat shop and tried to
      >drop them off.  No dice!  They wouldn't take the responsibility for
      >>possible damage to the chrome-moly caused by the necessary heat
      >treatment.
      >>
      >>The tech  said that chrome-moly alloys are adversely affected by
      >the 400-degree (f) temperature used to >cure the powder coating.  He
      >asked if I knew if  the alloy used in the Kolbs could tolerate this
      >treatment.   I >was at a loss for the answer, of course.   I said
      >that because some kits offer this as an option,  I would >assume
      >that  the tubing could stand it.  He replied  that perhaps the kit
      >maker uses a low temperature >powder-coating.  I was again at a
      >loss.
      >>
      >>My question is this:  Has anyone here looked into this to determine
      >if  the chrome-moly used in the Kolb kit >can withstand 400-degrees
      >(f) for 45-minutes without  compromising strength or form, or must
      >it be done >using the low temperature method?
      >>
      >>If I am unable to use my local powder-coat shop (they are only
      >equipped for the high-temp method) I may >have to settle for plain
      >old primer & paint.  Therefore, I'd appreciate it if anyone could
      >recommend a  paint & >primer combination that they have used
      >successfully?
      > >
      >>Thanks,
      >>Ron Carroll
      >>On the 'left' coast
      >
      >
      >
      >-
      >
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 24, 1997
From: 
"Bill Weber (DVNS)" <bweber(at)micom.com>
Subject: 
Powder Coating
      
      Regarding the effect of the 400 degrees curing on the Kolb frame. My own 
      personal inclination would be that if the shop you took it to cannot tell 
      you whether or not the steel could stand their curing process, I would 
      look for a shop with more experience. It should be their business to know 
      those things.
      
      ***********************************************
      * Bill Weber                 * Keep           *
      * MICOM Communications Corp. *   the shiny    *
      * Simi Valley, CA            *        side up *
      ***********************************************
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 24, 1997
From: 
Adrio Taucer <adrio(at)capitalnet.com>
Subject: 
Heat treatment
      
      It has been a long time since I took Elements of Engineering Materials
      (and I ended up as an Electrical Engineer) so take this for what it is
      worth.  But this talk of heating 4130 to 400 deg. does remeind me of
      somthing called a Time Temperature Transformation (TTT) curve.  And if
      (BIG IF) I remember, it is not a resiprical funtion and there is a
      region of temperatures within which the time the metal remains at the
      temperature plays a factor.  Above and below this region things are more
      straight forward.
      
      So the caution is to look up the TTT for 4130 and convince yourself
      things are OK for 400 deg for the given time and cooling method.
      
      Again this is more than 17 years ago in a field that was not my
      specialty (but a required cross specialty course).
      
      Happy landings,
      Adrio
      
      PS had it not been for the comments on posting by Russell I would not
      have even made this post, so blame him.
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
"Russell Duffy" <rad(at)pen.net>
Subject: 
Re: Disappointing
Date: 
Nov 24, 1997
      
      I just happened to think of another way to feel better about the powder
      coating process.  I had the factory powder coat mine, and it was the best
      money I ever spent (fortunately, Ben nagged until I got it done ).  Why
      not call Kolb, and get the phone number of the place that does their powder
      coating.  Then you (or your local power coating shop) can confirm the
      process with the place that does the factory work.
      
      Rusty
      
      
      >>On or about 11/20 I sent the following request for information  to
      >>the Kolb mail list.  I've seen a lot of small talk on this list
      >>relating to a lot of subjects, and ate it all up, but I received no
      >>response to my questions, not even from Souder.  In the event it
      >>didn't actually get there (however, I got mine back) I'll try one
      >>more time. I would surely think that with all the talent and
      >>meticulous builders on the list,  someone would have experience with
      >>either powder coating, chrome-moly, or primer & paint.
      >>
      >>Thanks, Ron
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 24, 1997
Subject: 
Re: Disappointing
From: 
rick106(at)juno.com (RICK M LIBERSAT)
      
      RON 
      IF YOU CAN'T USE THE POWER COAT , AND HAVE TO USE PRIMER  USE THE STITTS
      ZINC CHROMATE PRIMER  THIS SURE DID DO A GOOD JOB ON MY  KOLB 
      BUT WHEN YOU GET READY TO PUT THE FINAL COTE ON YOU MUST SKUFF OFF THE
      GLOSS THAT WILL BE ON THE PRIMER , DO THIS WITH A SCOTCH PAD  
        ( GREEN )  IS THE COLOR I USED  AND IT DID A GREAT JOB . I MAY NOT HAVE
      THE SAME AIRPLANE THAT YOU HAVE BUT IF I CAN HELP YOU OUT , LET ME KNOW 
      I MAY NOT HAVE THE ANSWER BUT I WILL KNOW HOW TO GET THE ANSWER!!
         
                      RICK LIBERSAT         N106RL        
       writes:
      >On or about 11/20 I sent the following request for information  to
      >the Kolb mail list.  I've seen a lot of small talk on this list
      >relating to a lot of subjects, and ate it all up, but I received no
      >response to my questions, not even from Souder.  In the event it
      >didn't actually get there (however, I got mine back) I'll try one
      >more time. I would surely think that with all the talent and
      >meticulous builders on the list,  someone would have experience with
      >either powder coating, chrome-moly, or primer & paint.
      >
      >Thanks, Ron
      >
      >--------------------------------------------------------------------
      >-----------------------------------
      >
      >Copy
      >
      >>I finally got my 1985 Firestar kit, and I'm ready to do my 'build
      >thing'.   Based on what I've read here in the >Kolb Mail, it is a
      >great idea to have the cage and other heavy metal parts powder
      >coated, so I took it all  the >local powder-coat shop and tried to
      >drop them off.  No dice!  They wouldn't take the responsibility for
      >>possible damage to the chrome-moly caused by the necessary heat
      >treatment.
      >>
      >>The tech  said that chrome-moly alloys are adversely affected by
      >the 400-degree (f) temperature used to >cure the powder coating.  He
      >asked if I knew if  the alloy used in the Kolbs could tolerate this
      >treatment.   I >was at a loss for the answer, of course.   I said
      >that because some kits offer this as an option,  I would >assume
      >that  the tubing could stand it.  He replied  that perhaps the kit
      >maker uses a low temperature >powder-coating.  I was again at a
      >loss.
      >>
      >>My question is this:  Has anyone here looked into this to determine
      >if  the chrome-moly used in the Kolb kit >can withstand 400-degrees
      >(f) for 45-minutes without  compromising strength or form, or must
      >it be done >using the low temperature method?
      >>
      >>If I am unable to use my local powder-coat shop (they are only
      >equipped for the high-temp method) I may >have to settle for plain
      >old primer & paint.  Therefore, I'd appreciate it if anyone could
      >recommend a  paint & >primer combination that they have used
      >successfully?
      > >
      >>Thanks,
      >>Ron Carroll
      >>On the 'left' coast
      >
      >
      >
      >-
      >
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: 
Re: Muffler Coatings
From: 
ul15rhb(at)juno.com (Ralph H Burlingame)
Date: 
Nov 24, 1997
      
      
       writes:
      >When you sprayed the muffler did you have to fly it right then to cure
      >the paint, or did you let it air dry. I looked at that paint this
      >weekend and the directions say to heat to 400 degrees to cure it or 
      >run
      >the engine until it gets hot. I want to coat the muffler on my MKIII.
      >
      >
      >FRANK J. MARINO
      >Chief Loadmaster 773 AS>
      
      Frank,
      First let it air dry. If the directions say to heat it up right away, you
      could consider putting it in the oven for a few minutes (if the
      "significant other" will let you). Then after you've flown it two or
      three times, then use the "Armor-all" on it. All you have to do is just
      wipe a little on each time.
      
      PS  The "Armor-all" is also good for your composite prop.
      
      Ralph Burlingame
      Minneapolis
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: 
Re: everybody  mailing list
From: 
ul15rhb(at)juno.com (Ralph H Burlingame)
Date: 
Nov 24, 1997
      
      
       writes:
      >ME !    ME !    ME !
      >
      >I just bought a 1985 Firestar-I kit  and am just in the starting
      >stages of building.  I hope you are also so that we can share ideas and
      problems. 
      
      Ron Carroll, Independence, Oregon
      I would like to know  who is, in the building stage of a firestar I at
      this time. thank you
      
      Ron, I'm the guy who wrote you the other day. I have a 1986 FireStar. I
      would say to start with the fin first because they are just 3 tubes in a
      triangle. After that do the stabilizers because they are similar. Don't
      forget to put in the smaller tube on the inside of the trailing edge
      where the elevator hinges go. You'll have to cut out your gussets using
      the template and rivet them in the corners. I drilled one hole and
      riveted, then drilled and riveted the opposite end, then drilled the
      in-between ones. Use permanent marker and ruler for drawing your rivet
      line. I cut all tubes with a hack saw and filed them afterwards. This
      will get you going and it's a confidence builder. Try to make both stabs
      equal in size and remember there is a left stab and a right stab (don't
      build two lefts or two rights). The reason I mention this is because I
      have seen people build two wings the same... not thinking.
      
      Ralph Burlingame
      Minneapolis
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 24, 1997
From: 
John Yates <johny(at)epix.net>
Subject: 
Re: Disappointing
      
      >On or about 11/20 I sent the following request for information  to
      >the Kolb mail list.  I've seen a lot of small talk on this list
      >relating to a lot of subjects, and ate it all up, but I received no
      >response to my questions, not even from Souder.  In the event it
      >didn't actually get there (however, I got mine back) I'll try one
      >more time. I would surely think that with all the talent and
      >meticulous builders on the list,  someone would have experience with
      >either powder coating, chrome-moly, or primer & paint.
      >
      >Thanks, Ron
      >
      >--------------------------------------------------------------------
      >-----------------------------------
      >
      >Copy
      >
      >>I finally got my 1985 Firestar kit, and I'm ready to do my 'build
      >thing'.   Based on what I've read here in the >Kolb Mail, it is a
      >great idea to have the cage and other heavy metal parts powder
      >coated, so I took it all  the >local powder-coat shop and tried to
      >drop them off.  No dice!  They wouldn't take the responsibility for
      >>possible damage to the chrome-moly caused by the necessary heat
      >treatment.
      >>
      >>The tech  said that chrome-moly alloys are adversely affected by
      >the 400-degree (f) temperature used to >cure the powder coating.  He
      >asked if I knew if  the alloy used in the Kolbs could tolerate this
      >treatment.   I >was at a loss for the answer, of course.   I said
      >that because some kits offer this as an option,  I would >assume
      >that  the tubing could stand it.  He replied  that perhaps the kit
      >maker uses a low temperature >powder-coating.  I was again at a
      >loss.
      >>
      >>My question is this:  Has anyone here looked into this to determine
      >if  the chrome-moly used in the Kolb kit >can withstand 400-degrees
      >(f) for 45-minutes without  compromising strength or form, or must
      >it be done >using the low temperature method?
      >>
      >>If I am unable to use my local powder-coat shop (they are only
      >equipped for the high-temp method) I may >have to settle for plain
      >old primer & paint.  Therefore, I'd appreciate it if anyone could
      >recommend a  paint & >primer combination that they have used
      >successfully?
      > 
              Hello Ron
      The 400 degree curing temp will be ok as far as any effect on the strength
      of the chrome-moly. One other note is be sure your powder coater sand
      blasts your cage lightly, or better yet glass bead it.
      John
      
      
      >>Thanks,
      >>Ron Carroll
      >>On the 'left' coast
      >
      >
      >
      >-
      >
      >
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
flyingjoe(at)juno.com (JOE E. CERQUEIRA,Jr)
Date: 
Nov 24, 1997
      
      hi, all you kolb lovers- my name is Joe C. from Brewster, New York.
      I bought my kolb Firestar I kit with the works. about 2 years ago, I
      relly did not put to much time into it . 
      I almost have the tail section done. Do to other projects that i was
      working on at the
      same time that how far i got.  So what i like to now, is who is out there
      that is either at the same stage
      or just starting there kit. I would like to here from you.  (note to Ron
      from Oregon, if
      you read this I did not get your return E-Mail Address)
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 24, 1997
From: 
Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com>
Subject: 
Re: responses to list questions
      
      >
      >
      >Ben touched on a point that I've been meaning to mention regarding responses
      >to questions.  On several occasions, I've asked questions to the list, and
      >usually receive some high quality replies.  Unfortunately, many of these
      >replies are sent to me "off-line" rather than being posted to the list.
      >Sometimes I can understand the reason for a private reply, but usually, the
      >message could have been posted to the list.  Remember, there are a lot of
      >lurkers out there who have the same questions.  When you post to the list,
      >they get to see the answers too.  Also, posted responses will end up in the
      >archive for future generations of Kolb builders.
      >
      >This has been a public service announcement :-)
      >Rusty
      >
      >
      >       Some of us are still so computer illiterate that we forget the  line
      for the Cc: kolb(at)www.intrig.com
              
              Richard Pike
              N420P (42oldpoops)
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
"Ron  Carroll " <ron.carroll(at)worldnet.att.net>
Subject: 
Re: responses to list questions
Date: 
Nov 24, 1997
      
      >
      >Ben touched on a point that I've been meaning to mention regarding
      responses
      >to questions.  On several occasions, I've asked questions to the
      list, and
      >usually receive some high quality replies.  Unfortunately, many of
      these
      >replies are sent to me "off-line" rather than being posted to the
      list.
      >Sometimes I can understand the reason for a private reply, but
      usually, the
      >message could have been posted to the list.  Remember, there are a
      lot of
      >lurkers out there who have the same questions.  When you post to
      the list,
      >they get to see the answers too.  Also, posted responses will end
      up in the
      >archive for future generations of Kolb builders.
      >
      >This has been a public service announcement :-)
      >Rusty
      >
      And a very appropriate announcement, Rusty, thanks.
      
      Ron
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
Scott Bentley <Scott.Bentley(at)Bentley.Com>
Subject: 
Find an N number's builder
Date: 
Nov 25, 1997
      
      
              If the original owners registered it, try www.landings.com, a
      complete URL:
      
      
      http://www1.drive.net/evird.acgi$pass*6254908!_h-www.landings.com/_landi
      ngs/pages/search_nnr.html
      
              to find the current registrant.  I note that my plane, N628SB,
      is in the database, as is Richard Pike's N420P.
      
      >  I recently bought a used, already-
      > >     built, fully functional Twinstar from a couple of guys in
      > Indiana.
      > >     What I want to do is get an experimental airworthiness
      > certificate and
      > >     fly it under Part 91. The first obstacle I ran into is that I
      > need to
      > >     track down the original builder. Nope, the guys in Indiana
      > didn't
      > >     build it and the "paper trail" disappears after that. 
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
Jason Omelchuck <jason(at)acuityinc.com>
Subject: 
FW: Find an N number's builder
Date: 
Nov 25, 1997
      
      If the builders did not register it as an experimental getting it
      registered is nearly impossible.  If I were the original builder and I
      had already sold it to someone a long time ago unregistered there is no
      way I would register it now.  If I do someone a favor and go through
      paper work hassle and time of getting the FAA to come out and sign it
      off I am liable for the life of that aircraft because I am the
      manufacturer.  If I sold it to someone unregistered and they bought it
      knowing its legal status why would I now open myself up to lawsuits from
      the current owner and any one else down the line it gets sold to?  I
      hope that when you bought it you realized it is an illegal airplane
      (unless you are using it for instruction) and will probably have to
      operate it as is and hope you never get caught.  Don't get me wrong, I
      think it is a noble cause to try and get it registered, but if it wasn't
      done at the time it was built I wouldn't get my hopes up.
      
      > -----Original Message-----
      > From:        Scott Bentley [SMTP:Scott.Bentley(at)Bentley.Com]
      > Sent:        Tuesday, November 25, 1997 1:37 PM
      > To:        Ken(at)www.atfi.com
      > Cc:        kolb(at)www.intrig.com
      > Subject:        Find an N number's builder
      > 
      > 
      >         If the original owners registered it, try www.landings.com, a
      > complete URL:
      > 
      > 
      > http://www1.drive.net/evird.acgi$pass*6254908!_h-www.landings.com/_lan
      > di
      > ngs/pages/search_nnr.html
      > 
      >         to find the current registrant.  I note that my plane, N628SB,
      > is in the database, as is Richard Pike's N420P.
      > 
      > >  I recently bought a used, already-
      > > >     built, fully functional Twinstar from a couple of guys in
      > > Indiana.
      > > >     What I want to do is get an experimental airworthiness
      > > certificate and
      > > >     fly it under Part 91. The first obstacle I ran into is that I
      > > need to
      > > >     track down the original builder. Nope, the guys in Indiana
      > > didn't
      > > >     build it and the "paper trail" disappears after that. 
      > -
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 25, 1997
From: 
"Richard Neilsen" <neilsenr(at)state.mi.us>
Subject: 
Airless Spray Painting -Reply
      
      I have a Wagner airless sprayer that I have used for may years to spray
      stain on my house and it works well. I have tried the Wagner for painting
      steel doors were you would want a nice finish and it just doesn=27t work
      well. There seems to be a spitting problem with these sprayers. I tried
      all levels of thinning, starting/stopping the gun away from the work, etc.
      and just didn=27t have any luck. I ended up buying a cheap automotive
      spray gun (a binks copy) and it seemed to be the least expensive way to
      get a good paint job. If you were going to paint a number of airplanes it
      might pay to buy a HVLP sprayer.  As with any painting job if your not an
      pro there will be some trial and error and error.
      
      >>> =22Bill Weber (DVNS)=22  11/20/97 11:32am >>>
      Awhile back we had a discussion on using the High Volume Low Pressure
      (HVLP) spray systems. Has anyone tried painting a Kolb with one of the
      airless systems? The Wagner is the most widely advertised, but there
      are
      others. How do they compare to the HVLP and standard spray systems? The
      local Harbor Freight is having a sale on a couple of systems that might
      be worth investing in for other uses as well.
      
      ***********************************************
      * Bill Weber                 * Keep           *
      * MICOM Communications Corp. *   the shiny    *
      * Simi Valley, CA            *        side up *
      ***********************************************
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
Wayne Welsh <flight(at)mail.on.rogers.wave.ca>
Subject: 
Re: Disappointing
      
      I had a Tundra powder coated. It also has a chrome moly frame. At the
      time temperatures were not even considered. I am no expert but I do know
      that if anything the extra heat will help stress relieve the frame. I
      also had the aluminum boom tube coated. By the way, powder coating is
      absolutely beautiful and very strong. Make sure the chrome moly is rust
      free.
      
      Ron Carroll wrote:
      
      > On or about 11/20 I sent the following request for information  to
      > the Kolb mail list.  I've seen a lot of small talk on this list
      > relating to a lot of subjects, and ate it all up, but I received no
      > response to my questions, not even from Souder.  In the event it
      > didn't actually get there (however, I got mine back) I'll try one
      > more time. I would surely think that with all the talent and
      > meticulous builders on the list,  someone would have experience with
      > either powder coating, chrome-moly, or primer & paint.
      >
      > Thanks, Ron
      >
      > --------------------------------------------------------------------
      > -----------------------------------
      >
      > Copy
      >
      > >I finally got my 1985 Firestar kit, and I'm ready to do my 'build
      > thing'.   Based on what I've read here in the >Kolb Mail, it is a
      > great idea to have the cage and other heavy metal parts powder
      > coated, so I took it all  the >local powder-coat shop and tried to
      > drop them off.  No dice!  They wouldn't take the responsibility for
      > >possible damage to the chrome-moly caused by the necessary heat
      > treatment.
      > >
      > >The tech  said that chrome-moly alloys are adversely affected by
      > the 400-degree (f) temperature used to >cure the powder coating.  He
      > asked if I knew if  the alloy used in the Kolbs could tolerate this
      > treatment.   I >was at a loss for the answer, of course.   I said
      > that because some kits offer this as an option,  I would >assume
      > that  the tubing could stand it.  He replied  that perhaps the kit
      > maker uses a low temperature >powder-coating.  I was again at a
      > loss.
      > >
      > >My question is this:  Has anyone here looked into this to determine
      > if  the chrome-moly used in the Kolb kit >can withstand 400-degrees
      > (f) for 45-minutes without  compromising strength or form, or must
      > it be done >using the low temperature method?
      > >
      > >If I am unable to use my local powder-coat shop (they are only
      > equipped for the high-temp method) I may >have to settle for plain
      > old primer & paint.  Therefore, I'd appreciate it if anyone could
      > recommend a  paint & >primer combination that they have used
      > successfully?
      >  >
      > >Thanks,
      > >Ron Carroll
      > >On the 'left' coast
      >
      > -
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 25, 1997
From: 
wild(at)nwdsrv.nw.lucent.com (Rich Wild - 13f01)
Subject: 
How to N number a plane that was built by someone else.
      
      If I was to buy an airplane from someone. I would buy it as "parts"!!
      
      I would then assemble those "parts" and create a new aircraft following the
      standard homebuilt parts. You are only required to construct 51% of the aircraft
      to quality as the builder.
      
      If you should ever sell the plane. Sell its parts. You can disassemble the
      aircraft to what ever degree you feel comfortable. I would remove all ID
      placards and N-numbers. I would also ask the purchaser of the "parts" to sign
      a form agreeing that he has purchased "parts".
      
      An experimental aircraft does not have to be built from new parts or material.
      
      
      Rich Wild
      
      
      > X-Authentication-Warning: www.intrig.com: bin set sender to 
      owner-kolb(at)intrig.com using -f
      > From: Jason Omelchuck <jason(at)acuityinc.com>
      > To: "'Kolb builders'" 
      > Subject: FW: Find an N number's builder
      > Date: Tue, 25 Nov 1997 13:56:13 -0800
      > X-Priority: 3
      > Mime-Version: 1.0
      > 
      > If the builders did not register it as an experimental getting it
      > registered is nearly impossible.  If I were the original builder and I
      > had already sold it to someone a long time ago unregistered there is no
      > way I would register it now.  If I do someone a favor and go through
      > paper work hassle and time of getting the FAA to come out and sign it
      > off I am liable for the life of that aircraft because I am the
      > manufacturer.  If I sold it to someone unregistered and they bought it
      > knowing its legal status why would I now open myself up to lawsuits from
      > the current owner and any one else down the line it gets sold to?  I
      > hope that when you bought it you realized it is an illegal airplane
      > (unless you are using it for instruction) and will probably have to
      > operate it as is and hope you never get caught.  Don't get me wrong, I
      > think it is a noble cause to try and get it registered, but if it wasn't
      > done at the time it was built I wouldn't get my hopes up.
      > 
      > > -----Original Message-----
      > > From:        Scott Bentley [SMTP:Scott.Bentley(at)Bentley.Com]
      > > Sent:        Tuesday, November 25, 1997 1:37 PM
      > > To:        Ken(at)www.atfi.com
      > > Cc:        kolb(at)www.intrig.com
      > > Subject:        Find an N number's builder
      > > 
      > > 
      > >         If the original owners registered it, try www.landings.com, a
      > > complete URL:
      > > 
      > > 
      > > http://www1.drive.net/evird.acgi$pass*6254908!_h-www.landings.com/_lan
      > > di
      > > ngs/pages/search_nnr.html
      > > 
      > >         to find the current registrant.  I note that my plane, N628SB,
      > > is in the database, as is Richard Pike's N420P.
      > > 
      > > >  I recently bought a used, already-
      > > > >     built, fully functional Twinstar from a couple of guys in
      > > > Indiana.
      > > > >     What I want to do is get an experimental airworthiness
      > > > certificate and
      > > > >     fly it under Part 91. The first obstacle I ran into is that I
      > > > need to
      > > > >     track down the original builder. Nope, the guys in Indiana
      > > > didn't
      > > > >     build it and the "paper trail" disappears after that. 
      > > -
      > -
      > 
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
Jason Omelchuck <jason(at)acuityinc.com>
Subject: 
FW: How to N number a plane that was built by someone else.
Date: 
Nov 25, 1997
      
      This is an approach used by some but you must work closely with the guy
      who is going to sign it off as a home built with respect to what he/she
      feels is "building 51%".  With a Kolb you May have to remove the
      covering and also recover it to qualify as 51%.  Also you would want to
      take the selling a step further and make sure the FAA writes you
      aircraft off of their books as sold for parts and no longer a registered
      airplane.  This approach is very good advice, it may be a little harder
      to sell your airplane but could save you and you family everything you
      own.
      
      > -----Original Message-----
      > From:        wild(at)nwdsrv.nw.lucent.com [SMTP:wild(at)nwdsrv.nw.lucent.com]
      > Sent:        Tuesday, November 25, 1997 2:32 PM
      > To:        kolb(at)intrig.com
      > Subject:        How to N number a plane that was built by someone
      > else.
      > 
      > If I was to buy an airplane from someone. I would buy it as "parts"!!
      > 
      > I would then assemble those "parts" and create a new aircraft
      > following the
      > standard homebuilt parts. You are only required to construct 51% of
      > the aircraft
      > to quality as the builder.
      > 
      > If you should ever sell the plane. Sell its parts. You can disassemble
      > the
      > aircraft to what ever degree you feel comfortable. I would remove all
      > ID
      > placards and N-numbers. I would also ask the purchaser of the "parts"
      > to sign
      > a form agreeing that he has purchased "parts".
      > 
      > An experimental aircraft does not have to be built from new parts or
      > material.
      > 
      > 
      > Rich Wild
      > 
      > 
      > 
      > > X-Authentication-Warning: www.intrig.com: bin set sender to 
      > owner-kolb(at)intrig.com using -f
      > > From: Jason Omelchuck <jason(at)acuityinc.com>
      > > To: "'Kolb builders'" 
      > > Subject: FW: Find an N number's builder
      > > Date: Tue, 25 Nov 1997 13:56:13 -0800
      > > X-Priority: 3
      > > Mime-Version: 1.0
      > > 
      > > If the builders did not register it as an experimental getting it
      > > registered is nearly impossible.  If I were the original builder and
      > I
      > > had already sold it to someone a long time ago unregistered there is
      > no
      > > way I would register it now.  If I do someone a favor and go through
      > > paper work hassle and time of getting the FAA to come out and sign
      > it
      > > off I am liable for the life of that aircraft because I am the
      > > manufacturer.  If I sold it to someone unregistered and they bought
      > it
      > > knowing its legal status why would I now open myself up to lawsuits
      > from
      > > the current owner and any one else down the line it gets sold to?  I
      > > hope that when you bought it you realized it is an illegal airplane
      > > (unless you are using it for instruction) and will probably have to
      > > operate it as is and hope you never get caught.  Don't get me wrong,
      > I
      > > think it is a noble cause to try and get it registered, but if it
      > wasn't
      > > done at the time it was built I wouldn't get my hopes up.
      > > 
      > > > -----Original Message-----
      > > > From:        Scott Bentley [SMTP:Scott.Bentley(at)Bentley.Com]
      > > > Sent:        Tuesday, November 25, 1997 1:37 PM
      > > > To:        Ken(at)www.atfi.com
      > > > Cc:        kolb(at)www.intrig.com
      > > > Subject:        Find an N number's builder
      > > > 
      > > > 
      > > >         If the original owners registered it, try www.landings.com, a
      > > > complete URL:
      > > > 
      > > > 
      > > >
      > http://www1.drive.net/evird.acgi$pass*6254908!_h-www.landings.com/_lan
      > > > di
      > > > ngs/pages/search_nnr.html
      > > > 
      > > >         to find the current registrant.  I note that my plane, N628SB,
      > > > is in the database, as is Richard Pike's N420P.
      > > > 
      > > > >  I recently bought a used, already-
      > > > > >     built, fully functional Twinstar from a couple of guys in
      > > > > Indiana.
      > > > > >     What I want to do is get an experimental airworthiness
      > > > > certificate and
      > > > > >     fly it under Part 91. The first obstacle I ran into is
      > that I
      > > > > need to
      > > > > >     track down the original builder. Nope, the guys in Indiana
      > > > > didn't
      > > > > >     build it and the "paper trail" disappears after that. 
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 25, 1997
From: 
Sandro Bastien <sbastien(at)dsuper.net>
Subject: 
Re: AMSoil
      
      At 02:50 25/11/1997 UT, you wrote:
      >Are you continuing to use AMSoil, and have you determined if it is worth the 
      >difference in price.
      >
      >Ray Hudson
      >ray_hudson(at)msn.com
      >
      >
      I Ray
      I am still using Amsoil.
      I did an light engine overall at 150hrs 
      why :::: I bought my twinstart mark II used 2 years ago and never open the
      engine.
              before summer I wanted to give a refresher to the airplane and I noticed
              when I bought the airplane that the pistons ring had a little bit of carbon
              (I found out during overall that they where stuck in the groove for the
      cylinder near the fan)
              
      Now I know exactly the condition of the engine 0.004" and 0.0045" clearance
      piston/cylinder
              (we are allowed if I can remember 0.0028-0.008)
      
      About AMSOIL :::  I pay 132.00$ can. for 12x 1 liter= 11$/liter
                Bombardier is about 7.00$/liter can.(approx.,  maybe less)
      
      I use AMSOIL at a ratio of 70:1 instead of 50:1 ( this oil stick to
      everything)
      
      so for 25L of fuel I use 357ml of oil  this is about 1/3 of a liter then
      4$of oil
      for bombardier oil you have to use 500 ml for 25L of fuel then 3.50$(approx)
      AMSOIL is supposed to be better than mineral oil , the only problem with
      this oil, (what people say about synthetic oil ---> is it not the best for
      off season RUST prevention for bearing-----> My answer to that is , 2 years
      of AMSOIL and not a little little little bit of rust on my bearing.
      (AMSOIL say it is a very good oil for off season storage)).
      
      About the price there is not a big difference 0.50$ for 25L of fuel (1/2
      airplane fuel tank) and you throw less smoke or oil in the atmosphere (that
      is very very very important, to keep our only earth alive and kicking and
      free of dirt (no earth no fly).
      
      If I have no problem with this oil, I will use it for a while (next time I
      buy oil, it will be 125$/12Liter)
      
      If you have any question say  Hi! again.............I like to answer
      
      Have a good flight all of you Kolb Friends
      
      Sandro Bastien ,  Quebec Canada
      
      
      Sandro Bastien
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
"Mike Sharp" <msharp(at)tgn.net>
Subject: 
Re: Disappointing
Date: 
Nov 25, 1997
      
      Some of us have seen folks get "ripped to shreds" for an opinion that was
      not popular.....................
      
      -----Original Message-----
      From: Ron Carroll <ron.carroll(at)worldnet.att.net>
      Date: Monday, November 24, 1997 11:00 AM
      Subject: Kolb-List: Disappointing
      
      
      >On or about 11/20 I sent the following request for information  to
      >the Kolb mail list.  I've seen a lot of small talk on this list
      >relating to a lot of subjects, and ate it all up, but I received no
      >response to my questions, not even from Souder.  In the event it
      >didn't actually get there (however, I got mine back) I'll try one
      >more time. I would surely think that with all the talent and
      >meticulous builders on the list,  someone would have experience with
      >either powder coating, chrome-moly, or primer & paint.
      >
      >Thanks, Ron
      >
      >--------------------------------------------------------------------
      >-----------------------------------
      >
      >Copy
      >
      >>I finally got my 1985 Firestar kit, and I'm ready to do my 'build
      >thing'.   Based on what I've read here in the >Kolb Mail, it is a
      >great idea to have the cage and other heavy metal parts powder
      >coated, so I took it all  the >local powder-coat shop and tried to
      >drop them off.  No dice!  They wouldn't take the responsibility for
      >>possible damage to the chrome-moly caused by the necessary heat
      >treatment.
      >>
      >>The tech  said that chrome-moly alloys are adversely affected by
      >the 400-degree (f) temperature used to >cure the powder coating.  He
      >asked if I knew if  the alloy used in the Kolbs could tolerate this
      >treatment.   I >was at a loss for the answer, of course.   I said
      >that because some kits offer this as an option,  I would >assume
      >that  the tubing could stand it.  He replied  that perhaps the kit
      >maker uses a low temperature >powder-coating.  I was again at a
      >loss.
      >>
      >>My question is this:  Has anyone here looked into this to determine
      >if  the chrome-moly used in the Kolb kit >can withstand 400-degrees
      >(f) for 45-minutes without  compromising strength or form, or must
      >it be done >using the low temperature method?
      >>
      >>If I am unable to use my local powder-coat shop (they are only
      >equipped for the high-temp method) I may >have to settle for plain
      >old primer & paint.  Therefore, I'd appreciate it if anyone could
      >recommend a  paint & >primer combination that they have used
      >successfully?
      > >
      >>Thanks,
      >>Ron Carroll
      >>On the 'left' coast
      >
      >
      >
      >-
      >
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 26, 1997
              leadfoot(at)axionet.com, geraldw(at)sympatico.ca, hawk(at)caribsurf.com,
              pirrog(at)meena.cc.uregina.ca, ghertz(at)sk.sympatico.ca,
              gcraig(at)eagle.wbm.ca, impact(at)norseman.ca, kzkyz6(at)mpg.gmpt.gmeds.com,
              jcathcart(at)sk.sympatico.ca, kolb(at)intrig.com,
              mastergraph(at)sk.sympatico.ca, bjfearon(at)sprintmail.com,
              pci(at)cadvision.com, signcrft(at)cycor.ca, seasons(at)ihug.co.nz,
              becker(at)lips.net
From: 
Gerry Weninger <gerrywe(at)sk.sympatico.ca>
Subject: 
Virus warning!
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 26, 1997
From: 
"Bill Weber (DVNS)" <bweber(at)micom.com>
Subject: 
Re: Disappointing
      
      On Mon, 24 Nov 1997, RICK M LIBERSAT wrote:
      
      > RON 
      > IF YOU CAN'T USE THE POWER COAT , AND HAVE TO USE PRIMER  USE THE STITTS
      > ZINC CHROMATE PRIMER  THIS SURE DID DO A GOOD JOB ON MY  KOLB 
      > BUT WHEN YOU GET READY TO PUT THE FINAL COTE ON YOU MUST SKUFF OFF THE
      > GLOSS THAT WILL BE ON THE PRIMER , DO THIS WITH A SCOTCH PAD  
      >   ( GREEN )  IS THE COLOR I USED  AND IT DID A GREAT JOB . I MAY NOT HAVE
      > THE SAME AIRPLANE THAT YOU HAVE BUT IF I CAN HELP YOU OUT , LET ME KNOW 
      > I MAY NOT HAVE THE ANSWER BUT I WILL KNOW HOW TO GET THE ANSWER!!
      >    
      >                 RICK LIBERSAT         N106RL        
      
      A better method, if you can do it is to shoot the color coat while the 
      zinc chromate primer is slightly tacky. I have used this method on all my 
      metal parts and the Polytone adheres extremely well this way.
      
      ***********************************************
      * Bill Weber                 * Keep           *
      * MICOM Communications Corp. *   the shiny    *
      * Simi Valley, CA            *        side up *
      ***********************************************
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
"Ron  Carroll " <ron.carroll(at)worldnet.att.net>
Subject: 
The old 'Squeaky Wheel Trick'
Date: 
Nov 26, 1997
      
      The squeaky wheel gets the grease!  This  holds true for requests
      for information from this mail list.
       I shouldn't have been such a crybaby, but I  'squeaked'  about
      getting no response regarding my powder-coat dilemma, and did it
      ever get the feedback.  I want to thank Bill, Frank, Richard,
      Russell, Cliff, Ben, Marino, John, Dennis, Wayne, and Rick, as well
      as a local metallurgist for their helpful comments  on the subject.
      
      The bottom line came to this:  4130 chrome-moly is not adversely
      affected by the 400 deg oven used in the powder-coat process.
      Current Kolb kits with powder-coat use the same process, as do other
      kit makers.  I now feel more comfortable knowing this information
      and have put the parts in the shop for coating.
      
      Thanks again,
      
      Ron Carroll
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
"Russell Duffy" <rad(at)pen.net>
Subject: 
bad fuel day
Date: 
Nov 26, 1997
      
      Greetings,
      
      I tried another 1/4 turn to add more pitch today, and the climb went down to
      about 600 fpm (5960 rpm).  Cruise was tough to measure due to the brutal
      turbulence, but it didn't appear to be as good as I measured the other day.
      I timed the climb twice since I couldn't believe it, then returned and put
      the prop back were it was last flight.  Sure enough, the climb is back to
      almost 800 fpm at 6080 rpm.  Cruise is still at least 80.  I think I've
      decided to be content with this setup for now.  80 mph is plenty fast in the
      average turbulence is seems.  Time to get back to the airspeed calibration
      and my squeaky wheels.
      
      Made my first "other airport" landing today.  It was also my first landing
      on pavement.  There was no problem at all of course.  This is a 3800 foot
      runway that I've flown out of many times in GA aircraft.  I think I finally
      got a feel for just how quickly this plane takes off and climbs when
      compared to the GA stuff that I used to fly there.  The field seems much
      bigger than I remembered it :-)
      
      Now for the bad news.  The method I've used to fill these difficult to reach
      tanks without soaking the interior has worked fairly well....until today.  I
      shot about a pint of fuel directly on the inside of the side window before I
      could stop the flow.  Needless to say, that window is history.  Got fuel on
      the seats, my flight bag, the radio, ELT, and me.  My hanger provider was a
      little less than pleased with the big puddle I made in the floor too.  At
      least I know the drain holes work.  The interior stinks to high heavens, and
      I'm not a happy camper.  Must seek a permanent solution to this problem.  It
      could be worse I guess.  Since I try to always fill the tanks when I get
      done flying, the problem didn't scrub a planned flight.  Is that a "half
      full" attitude or what?
      
      Rusty
      
      
      Russell Duffy
      SlingShot SS-003, N8754K (flying)
      Sonerai-IIS (building ?)
      rad(at)pen.net
      http://www.pen.net/~rad/
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
GeoR38(at)aol.com
Date: 
Nov 26, 1997
Subject: 
Re: History search
      
      
      << Ken
       My Kolb Firestar has a frame number on the end of the tube under the engine,
       if you could find the frame number I would think Kolb could tell you who was
       the original buyer??? >>
      Frame number? Are you saying then that my Firestar also has a Frame Number??
      I guess I'm gonna hafta look!!                       GeoR38
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 26, 1997
From: 
wood <richard.wood(at)usa.net>
Subject: 
limbo
      
        I dont know whats going on but my emails seem to be going into cyberspace
      and not coming back out.Has anyone else had this trouble. Has anyone had
      multiple postings from me that should have gone to the list?
        "Anyhow" about frame painting I have always used a good rust paint without
      problems but I have never had to stick the fabric to the painted frame
      either. Only experimentation will let you know that.
          Woody
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 26, 1997
From: 
wood <richard.wood(at)usa.net>
Subject: 
Re: responses to list questions
      
      >
      >
      >Ben touched on a point that I've been meaning to mention regarding responses
      >to questions.  On several occasions, I've asked questions to the list, and
      >usually receive some high quality replies.  Unfortunately, many of these
      >replies are sent to me "off-line" rather than being posted to the list.
      >Sometimes I can understand the reason for a private reply, but usually, the
      >message could have been posted to the list.  Remember, there are a lot of
      >lurkers out there who have the same questions.  When you post to the list,
      >they get to see the answers too.  Also, posted responses will end up in the
      >archive for future generations of Kolb builders.
      >
      
      
       Other contributers may have the same problem I have. Most emails are
      replied to the list server. However on the Kolb list if I forget,the message
      is sent to the individual. Is there a way around this so my replies will be
      sent directly to the list.   
        Another writer was disappointed about not getting replies to his
      questions.I try to answer anything I have knowledge about. If I dont know I
      keep quiet. I suppose it is the same with most on the list. It dosn't hurt
      to ask again. I usually paint my frames with a good rust paint. My original
      Kolb Flyer was painted white so I could see if any of my welds were cracking
      or if there was any rusting.On a prewelded frame this is less of a
      concern.My Twinstar is painted black with the rust paint and it seems to be
      holding up well. There is no fabric stuck to the painted surfaces so I did
      not have to worry about reactions between paint and adhesives.
        Woody
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 26, 1997
From: 
wood <richard.wood(at)usa.net>
Subject: 
Re: Airless Spray Painting -Reply
      
      >I have a Wagner airless sprayer that I have used for may years to spray 
      
      
          I saw an ad in a tool magazine for a hvlp spray gun that goes on your
      shop vac. Seems reasonable to me. My shop vac can sure move air in a high
      volume low pressure sort of way.This gun was only $67 Canadian that is about
      $10.95 American. A while back some one asked about the alloy for the landing
      gear. It is 7075 and you can buy it in rectangular form a 1.5x3x24 block is
      about $125 Canadian. It should be a lot less in the U.S.
         Woody
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
"pattym" <pattym(at)lushen.com>
Subject: 
Twin engine Kolb
Date: 
Nov 26, 1997
      
      
      Hey. what has happened to the push pull sling shot?  There was a big buzz
      before Sun and Fun and then nothing.  Did Dennis scrap the project or what.
      Just curious. 
      
      
      
Hey. what has happened to the push pull
      sling shot?  There was a big buzz before Sun and Fun and then
      nothing.  Did Dennis scrap the project or what. Just curious. 

      
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 27, 1997
From: 
Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com>
Subject: 
Re: Twin engine Kolb
      
      >Hey. what has happened to the push pull sling shot?  There was a big buzz
      >before Sun and Fun and then nothing.  Did Dennis scrap the project or what.
      >Just curious. 
      >       
              I suspect the reason is that we have not heard any more news about
      the power pack, and I suspect that carburetion is driving them nuts. We know
      that when you are flying at cruise and lower the nose to let the airspeed
      build, the prop unloads the engine,leans it out, and the EGT goes way up. If
      you have one engine hooked to one prop that is just ahead of another prop
      hooked to another engine, I would hate to be the one trying to get the EGT's
      on that rear engine to behave. Every time you change the throttle setting
      you do weird things to the load on the rear engine. Probably fixable with a
      computer sensing load/EGT/rpm on the back engine and hooked to a
      sophisticated carb would work fine, but the whole idea was simplicity, so
      there you go.
              Or it could be working great, and I have just had too much caffeine...
              
              Richard Pike
              MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: 
Re: responses to list questions
From: 
ul15rhb(at)juno.com (Ralph H Burlingame)
Date: 
Nov 27, 1997
      
      
      writes:
      
      .My Twinstar is painted black with the rust paint and it seems 
      >to be holding up well. There is no fabric stuck to the painted surfaces
      so I 
      >did not have to worry about reactions between paint and adhesives.
      >  Woody
      
      Woody,
      My 10 year old FireStar airframe was primed and painted entirely with
      "Rustoleum" spray paint. My fabric is attached over the cockpit frame
      with "Stits Poly-tak" glue. I have never had a problem with it and the
      paint is holding up very well. This, of course, is the inexpensive way to
      go and it protects the chromoly well enough. If I were living on the
      coast close to salt air I would probably have  used the powder-coat
      method or epoxy primer. But yes, you can use polytak on this paint. The
      frame is painted "black" and the fabric is painted "cuby green". I didn't
      see any black paint bleeding through the fabric or any tendency for the
      fabric to loosen up over time (especially on the bottom of the cockpit
      area where it gets lifting force). This is what I did and I doubt that
      anyone else has used this paint on their airframe.
      
      Ralph Burlingame
      Minneapolis
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
WillU(at)aol.com
Date: 
Nov 27, 1997
Subject: 
Re: responses to list questions
      
      With AOL if you click on the "reply to all" icon it will also send a copy of
      your e-mail  to the list
      
      Will Uribe
      WillU(at)aol.com
      building a FireStar II
      http://members.aol.com/WillU/index.html
      
      
      << However on the Kolb list if I forget,the message is sent to the
      individual. Is there a way around this so my replies will be sent directly to
      the list.  >>
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
"Mike Sharp" <msharp(at)tgn.net>
Subject: 
Happy T'Giving,   Apologies.
Date: 
Nov 27, 1997
      
      Hope all are having a wonderful Thanksgiving.  My apologies to all if my
      response to the "disappointment" message was not taken in the spirit given.
      (also I replied to the wrong message :-)  I meant no disrespect, but at
      times we, can be so caught up in our "way" that we can seam intolerant to
      another idea.  (I work in an engineering office,  so I see this on a daily
      basis.)  Remember the Golden rule........
      
      Sorry, I shall now dismount my soap box and discard it with the turkey
      carcass ;-)  Lets get on with building....
      
      The Mark III Kit has been in my Living room for a month now.  I have my shop
      organized and repaired enough to move it out.  I shall endeavor to cut
      tubing starting tomorrow.....with something being built this
      weekend!!!.......
      
      Rick L. I still have your detailed message on the installation of the
      H-section.  Thanks...
      
      Everyone watch the Weight and Balance this weekend. :-)
      
      Peace,
      Mike Sharp
      Kolb Mark III
      Start First Kit 10-97
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
GeoR38(at)aol.com
Date: 
Nov 27, 1997
Subject: 
Re: responses to list questions
      
      
      << .My Twinstar is painted black with the rust paint and it seems 
       >to be holding up well. There is no fabric stuck to the painted surfaces
       so I 
       >did not have to worry about reactions between paint and adhesives.
       >  Woody
       
       Woody,
       My 10 year old FireStar airframe was primed and painted entirely with
       "Rustoleum" spray paint. My fabric is attached over the cockpit frame
       with "Stits Poly-tak" glue. I have never had a problem with it and the
       paint is holding up very well. >>
      WOW! the first part of this thread sounded so much like my experience on my 5
      year old Firestar, I thought I had written it until I did a mental inventory
      and came up with "no I didn't" .  Anyway, I just used Rustoleum Firedamp Red
      as my fish oil base primer on the fuselage and had no problems either. As an
      aside, though, I did the same thing on an old car of mine and had a rough
      time opening my doors as the the finish white coat  never seemed to "cure".
      No such problem on my Firestar though, because my finish coat was polytone.
      by Stits.            GeoR38
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
GeoR38(at)aol.com
Date: 
Nov 27, 1997
Subject: 
Re: Kolb FireStar
      
      
      << To fold the tail, you pull the pin and raise 
       each elevator separately.  There could be a lot of slop in the elevators 
       with this system, and the folding/unfolding was really an acquired skill.
       
       The newer design, which I think came out with the KXP, uses a kind of a 
       universal joint between the elevators.  This really simplifies folding 
       because the elevators don't flop around after you pull the pin.
       
       -Steve >>
      Yes, Steve, you have adequately described my tail folding system with the
      "old" approach even though I have the first KX  kit which I think also had a
      different cockpit to the extent that the high part behind the pilots head was
      no longer expected to be covered.  I don't remember any other changes.
                      GeoR38
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
              (/\##/\ Smail3.1.30.16 #30.216) with smtp for 
Date: 
Nov 27, 1997
From: 
Jerry Bidle <jbidle(at)airmail.net>
Subject: 
Status of the FireFly-Getting Close
      
      It's Turkey weekend.  It should be a hard weekend.  It's painted solid
      white.  (Russ's little brother) On the gear, brakes installed, engines
      mounted, fuel system plumbed, choke & throttle cables in stalled.  Tail
      feathers mounted. 
      
      Remaining things to do:
        rivet nose cone to cage
        trim, drill, & mount wind screen
        install seat fabric, holes and mtg bars drilled
        finish cable connector installation on removable instrument panel
        make cable connections at engine for EGT & CHT probes
        connect the tail strobe
        make the radio antenna
        install prop
        complete engine break-in
        rivet flaperons to the wings
        remount wings
        install gap seals (not looking forward to this)
        complete final safety inspection
        (should be flying by end of next weekend if we decide not to paint the
      trim)  
        Go Fly
      
      Happy Flying
      Jerry Bidle & Gary Hansen  
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 28, 1997
From: 
John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com>
Subject: 
Re: Twin engine Kolb
      
      Richard Pike wrote:
      > 
      > Hey. what has happened to the push pull sling shot?  There was a big buzz
      > before Sun and Fun and then nothing.  Did Dennis scrap the project or what.
      > Just curious.
      > 
              
         I have no knowledge of how Kolb is doing with their testing, but I do
      know about the installation in a Mark III.  I am refering to the 2Si
      Twinpack engine which is not a "push pull", but a twin engine pusher
      with in-line counter-rotating props.  This year 2Si has had
      piston/engine problems. A friend purchased one at Sun&Fun. It took 2Si
      months longer than they promised to ship him the engine, and then he had
      one engine after another seize for the rest of the season. He went
      through eleven pistons. Luckily he never had more than one engine quit
      per flight. The Mark III not only flys on one engine but will even
      take-off with one. By September he had shipped the engines back to 2Si
      and a Rotax back on his Mark III. I suspect that Dennis is waiting until
      2Si can make a reliable engine before he proceeds. If you think that
      this one persons problems was a fluke, two 2Si engines quit at Oshkosh
      this summer on the Aero-Lite 103. And then it gets written up as a good
      design in November's Ultralight Flying. I'll quit now before I get any
      further off the subject.
      John Jung
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
"Russell Duffy" <rad(at)pen.net>
Subject: 
Re: Twin engine Kolb
Date: 
Nov 28, 1997
      
      >and a Rotax back on his Mark III. I suspect that Dennis is waiting until
      >2Si can make a reliable engine before he proceeds. If you think that
      
      
      It might be worth noting that the Slingshot/2SI project isn't really Kolb's
      doing.  I was pretty interested in the TwinPack engine for redundancy, but
      I've heard nothing but bad things about the engine in particular, and 2SI's
      level of customer satisfaction in general.  Hopefully, they'll iron these
      problems out before it's too late for them.
      
      Rusty
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: 
Re: Twin engine Kolb
From: 
ul15rhb(at)juno.com (Ralph H Burlingame)
Date: 
Nov 28, 1997
      
      
      >Richard Pike wrote:
      >If you think that this one persons problems was a fluke, two 2Si engines
      quit at Oshkosh this summer on the Aero-Lite 103. And then it gets
      written up as a 
      >good design in November's Ultralight Flying. I'll quit now before I get
      any
      >further off the subject.
      >John Jung
      
      I noticed they switched to a Rotax 447 instead of the 2si. I can see why.
      
      Ralph B.
      Minneapolis
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 28, 1997
Subject: 
Re: Happy T'Giving,   Apologies.
From: 
rick106(at)juno.com (RICK M LIBERSAT)
      
      MIKE 
      LOAD UP THE CAMERA AND TAKE A SHOT EVERY ONCE IN A WHILE
      
          RICK
      >Hope all are having a wonderful Thanksgiving.  My apologies to all if 
      >my
      >response to the "disappointment" message was not taken in the spirit 
      >given.
      >(also I replied to the wrong message :-)  I meant no disrespect, but 
      >at
      >times we, can be so caught up in our "way" that we can seam intolerant 
      >to
      >another idea.  (I work in an engineering office,  so I see this on a 
      >daily
      >basis.)  Remember the Golden rule........
      >
      >Sorry, I shall now dismount my soap box and discard it with the turkey
      >carcass ;-)  Lets get on with building....
      >
      >The Mark III Kit has been in my Living room for a month now.  I have 
      >my shop
      >organized and repaired enough to move it out.  I shall endeavor to cut
      >tubing starting tomorrow.....with something being built this
      >weekend!!!.......
      >
      >Rick L. I still have your detailed message on the installation of the
      >H-section.  Thanks...
      >
      >Everyone watch the Weight and Balance this weekend. :-)
      >
      >Peace,
      >Mike Sharp
      >Kolb Mark III
      >Start First Kit 10-97
      >
      >-
      >
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 28, 1997
Subject: 
Re: Disappointing
From: 
rick106(at)juno.com (RICK M LIBERSAT)
      
      BILL
      
      YOU ARE RIGHT !  THIS DOSE WORK VERY WELL AND  " RON  "   SHOULD USE THAT
      METHOD OF PAINTING .
      
             RICK 
       writes:
      >On Mon, 24 Nov 1997, RICK M LIBERSAT wrote:
      >
      >> RON 
      >> IF YOU CAN'T USE THE POWER COAT , AND HAVE TO USE PRIMER  USE THE 
      >STITTS
      >> ZINC CHROMATE PRIMER  THIS SURE DID DO A GOOD JOB ON MY  KOLB 
      >> BUT WHEN YOU GET READY TO PUT THE FINAL COTE ON YOU MUST SKUFF OFF 
      >THE
      >> GLOSS THAT WILL BE ON THE PRIMER , DO THIS WITH A SCOTCH PAD  
      >>   ( GREEN )  IS THE COLOR I USED  AND IT DID A GREAT JOB . I MAY NOT 
      >HAVE
      >> THE SAME AIRPLANE THAT YOU HAVE BUT IF I CAN HELP YOU OUT , LET ME 
      >KNOW 
      >> I MAY NOT HAVE THE ANSWER BUT I WILL KNOW HOW TO GET THE ANSWER!!
      >>    
      >>                 RICK LIBERSAT         N106RL        
      >
      >A better method, if you can do it is to shoot the color coat while the 
      >
      >zinc chromate primer is slightly tacky. I have used this method on all 
      >my 
      >metal parts and the Polytone adheres extremely well this way.
      >
      >***********************************************
      >* Bill Weber                 * Keep           *
      >* MICOM Communications Corp. *   the shiny    *
      >* Simi Valley, CA            *        side up *
      >***********************************************
      >
      >-
      >
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 28, 1997
Subject: 
Re: bad fuel day
From: 
rick106(at)juno.com (RICK M LIBERSAT)
      
      RUSTY
      
      I KNOW JUST HOW YOU FEEL  CAUSE I HAVE REPLACED MY LEXAN  3 TIMES  ONCE I
      FORGOT TO PUT  THE GAS CAPS BACK ON THIS WAS ON THE VERY FIRST FLIGHT ,
      THE SECOND WAS THE TRICK YOU DID  ( I DID IT TO )   THE THIRD WAS THE
      HOLES IN THE LEXAN WERE DRILLED TO SMALL  1/8     THIS WILL NOT LAST TO
      LONG. SO NOW  I AM     V E R Y    CAREFUL WHEN I FILL UP. AND ALSO TRY TO
      WATCH OUT FOR STATIC ELECTRICITY
      
                RICK 
      >Greetings,
      >
      >I tried another 1/4 turn to add more pitch today, and the climb went 
      >down to
      >about 600 fpm (5960 rpm).  Cruise was tough to measure due to the 
      >brutal
      >turbulence, but it didn't appear to be as good as I measured the other 
      >day.
      >I timed the climb twice since I couldn't believe it, then returned and 
      >put
      >the prop back were it was last flight.  Sure enough, the climb is back 
      >to
      >almost 800 fpm at 6080 rpm.  Cruise is still at least 80.  I think 
      >I've
      >decided to be content with this setup for now.  80 mph is plenty fast 
      >in the
      >average turbulence is seems.  Time to get back to the airspeed 
      >calibration
      >and my squeaky wheels.
      >
      >Made my first "other airport" landing today.  It was also my first 
      >landing
      >on pavement.  There was no problem at all of course.  This is a 3800 
      >foot
      >runway that I've flown out of many times in GA aircraft.  I think I 
      >finally
      >got a feel for just how quickly this plane takes off and climbs when
      >compared to the GA stuff that I used to fly there.  The field seems 
      >much
      >bigger than I remembered it :-)
      >
      >Now for the bad news.  The method I've used to fill these difficult to 
      >reach
      >tanks without soaking the interior has worked fairly well....until 
      >today.  I
      >shot about a pint of fuel directly on the inside of the side window 
      >before I
      >could stop the flow.  Needless to say, that window is history.  Got 
      >fuel on
      >the seats, my flight bag, the radio, ELT, and me.  My hanger provider 
      >was a
      >little less than pleased with the big puddle I made in the floor too.  
      >At
      >least I know the drain holes work.  The interior stinks to high 
      >heavens, and
      >I'm not a happy camper.  Must seek a permanent solution to this 
      >problem.  It
      >could be worse I guess.  Since I try to always fill the tanks when I 
      >get
      >done flying, the problem didn't scrub a planned flight.  Is that a 
      >"half
      >full" attitude or what?
      >
      >Rusty
      >
      >
      >
      >Russell Duffy
      >SlingShot SS-003, N8754K (flying)
      >Sonerai-IIS (building ?)
      >rad(at)pen.net
      >http://www.pen.net/~rad/
      >
      >
      >-
      >
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 29, 1997
From: 
Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com>
Subject: 
Re: Kolb u/l
      
      >I'm looking for more info on 2 seater pushers. Do you like your u/l, 
      >hows' performance, handling, will it take floats, other comments? 
      >Thanks   Bart
      >
              
              I have a one year old MKIII with a 64HP Rotax 532. I like it fine,
      it is in the garage at the moment getting tweaked, I hope to like it better
      next spring. Performance solo is good, performance two up is average,
      handling is good, but the ailerons are a bit on the heavy side, all controls
      are powerful. If I had floats, I would want 75HP minimum, 80 would be
      better. If you don't plan to have an electric starter, or avionics it would
      fly much better. I set mine up to qualify for class b airspace, day/night,
      and I think it makes a significant difference in performance.
              
              Richard Pike
              MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
"Mike Sharp" <msharp(at)tgn.net>
Subject: 
Internal brace for trailing edge Horz Stab.  Mark III
Date: 
Nov 29, 1997
      
      
      Folks,
      
      I'm in the midst of building the Horizontal Stabilizer for my Mark III,
      and have come across a discrepancy between the plans and the manual. 
      The manual calls for you to cut a piece of tubing 3/4" X .058w 6" long.
      for an internal sleeve at the outboard elevator hinges.  on the plans
      (Page 2) there is a note: "install the 6" sleeve and place one rivet as
      shown to hold the sleeve in position."  In another place a note states:
      " 3/4" OD x .058 x 12" LG slotted AL sleeve". 
      
      Question: 
      
          Is it 6" or 12" ?
      
          If it's 12"  Dennis, I'll need another piece of Tubing............
      
      I saw 2 references for a piece of tube 6" long and cut it.......
      
      Is there any other "Discrepancies" out there?  Inquiring minds would
      like to know. (before we cut the tube.)
      
      
      Peace,
      Mike Sharp
      Kolb Mark III
      Cut First Tubing, 11-28-97
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
Folks,
      
 
      
I'm in the midst of building the Horizontal
      Stabilizer for my
      Mark III, and have come across a discrepancy between the plans and the
      manual.  The manual calls for you to cut a piece of tubing
      3/4" X
      .058w 6" long. for an internal sleeve at the outboard elevator
      hinges.  on the plans (Page 2) there is a note: "install the
      6"
      sleeve and place one rivet as shown to hold the sleeve in
      position." 
      In another place a note states: " 3/4" OD x .058 x 12" LG
      slotted
      AL sleeve".  
      
 
      
Question:  
      
 
      
    Is it 6" or
      12"
      ?
      
 
      
    If it's
      12" 
      Dennis, I'll need another piece of Tubing............
      
 
      
I saw 2 references for a piece of tube 6" long
      and cut
      it.......
      
 
      
Is there any other "Discrepancies" out
      there? 
      Inquiring minds would like to know. (before we cut the
      tube.)
      
 
      
 
      
 
      
Peace,
      
Mike Sharp
      
Kolb Mark III
Cut First Tubing,
      11-28-97 
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 29, 1997
From: 
"william f. davis" <custom_search(at)compuserve.com>
Subject: 
Internal brace for trailing edge Horz Stab.  Mark III
      
      Hi Mike!  I am also building a Mark III and working on the horizontal
      stabilizer.  Your message to the Kolb Mail List did not have any body to
      the message as I received it.
      You may want to retransmit.  I new to the mail list and stil am learning
      th
      commands.
      May I ask if you are using any zinc chromate or other rust inhibitor on
      your plan?  It would seem that Kolb does not recommend it according to th=
      e
      plans book.  As I hope to fly on water womeday with this bird this is of
      particular interest to me.
      
      Thanks.
      
      Bill Davis
      McKeesport, PA
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
"Mike Sharp" <msharp(at)tgn.net>
Subject: 
Internal brace for trailing edge Horz Stab.  Mark III
Date: 
Nov 29, 1997
      
      
      Received a reply that said there was no body to my first message. I am
      resending, Sorry if you get Two.....
      
      *************************************************************************=
      *********************
      
      
      Folks,
      
      I'm in the midst of building the Horizontal Stabilizer for my Mark III,
      and have come across a discrepancy between the plans and the manual. 
      The manual calls for you to cut a piece of tubing 3/4" X .058w 6" long.
      for an internal sleeve at the outboard elevator hinges.  on the plans
      (Page 2) there is a note: "install the 6" sleeve and place one rivet as
      shown to hold the sleeve in position."  In another place a note states:
      " 3/4" OD x .058 x 12" LG slotted AL sleeve". 
      
      Question: 
      
          Is it 6" or 12" ?
      
          If it's 12"  Dennis, I'll need another piece of Tubing............
      
      I saw 2 references for a piece of tube 6" long and cut it.......
      
      Is there any other "Discrepancies" out there?  Inquiring minds would
      like to know. (before we cut the tube.)
      
      
      Peace,
      Mike Sharp
      Kolb Mark III
      Cut First Tubing, 11-28-97
      Peace,
      Mike Sharp
      Kolb Mark III
      Cut First Tubing, 11-28-97
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      

      
Received a
      reply that said
      there was no body to my first message. I am resending, Sorry if you get
      Two.....
      
 
      
****************************************************************=
      ******************************
      
 
      
 
      
Folks,
      
 
      
I'm in the midst of building the Horizontal
      Stabilizer for my
      Mark III, and have come across a discrepancy between the plans and the
      manual.  The manual calls for you to cut a piece of tubing
      3/4" X
      .058w 6" long. for an internal sleeve at the outboard elevator
      hinges.  on the plans (Page 2) there is a note: "install the
      6"
      sleeve and place one rivet as shown to hold the sleeve in
      position." 
      In another place a note states: " 3/4" OD x .058 x 12" LG
      slotted
      AL sleeve".  
      
 
      
Question:  
      
 
      
    Is it 6" or
      12"
      ?
      
 
      
    If it's
      12" 
      Dennis, I'll need another piece of Tubing............
      
 
      
I saw 2 references for a piece of tube 6" long
      and cut
      it.......
      
 
      
Is there any other "Discrepancies" out
      there? 
      Inquiring minds would like to know. (before we cut the
      tube.)
      
 
      
 
      
 
      
Peace,
      
Mike Sharp
      
Kolb Mark III
Cut First Tubing,
      11-28-97 
      
Peace,
      
Mike Sharp
      
Kolb Mark III
Cut First Tubing,
      11-28-97 
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
FSKolbJT(at)aol.com
Date: 
Nov 30, 1997
Subject: 
For Sale - KOLB Firestar ( WILDFIRE )
      
      Rotax 503 DCDCDI ,OIL injectioned, type B gearbox, electric starter, IVO
      ground-adjustable three-blade red prop, full instrument
      panel-altimeter,airspeed,tachometer,dual egt,dual cht,compass,vsi,G meter,
      slip indicator,mag switch,hobbs hour meter,elevator and rudder trim
      indicators,low oil level light,microswitches for wing tip Whelen
      NAV-STROBE-Tail position lights
      Kuntzleman hot-box,26 amp gelcell battery 
      Custom made 2 doorwraparound windscreen ,clear floor,5-point safety harness
      ,pitot and static lines strut mounted,custom throttle-choke quadrant,carpeted
      inside,heel brakes, custom made full swivel tailwheel ,MAC servos for
      inflight elevator and ruder trim , masterswitch , 1/8 -inch stainless steel
       AN swagged ends turnbuckles for all control cables  The Firestar name was
      used  in that the plane is painted in Flames using  Poly Fiber products
      Daytona White, flames in AN yellow, Eagle Orange ending in Tennessee Red,1/8
      inch mahogany seat,all wire throughout plane is shielded and grounded, Ptt
      and servo switch are on a G-7  control stick ,all stainless steel rivets used
      in construction, fabric was rib-stitched on ,polished boom tube.struts and
      landing gear 
      This is a two time winner of the craftmanship award in 96-97 SUN-FUN, 96 EAA
      Reserve Grand Champion at Oshkosh, best ultralight 96 Hagerstown, best
      ultralight 96 Potomac, and 96 Winchester . Airframe serial number FSII-478,
      engine serial number 4488666
      For more info
            John Tritle                                         $ 15,000 offers
      considered
               9895 McClanahan Rd.
               Greencastle,  Pa.   17225
                 (717-597-2212)
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Nov 30, 1997
From: 
Cal <cgreen(at)centuryinter.net>
Subject: 
FS For sale
      
           John,                                                    
          What is the empty weight on your FS? and why are you 
      seeling something that you put so much work into?             
           Cal 
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
"Rinehart, Mark W." <Mark.W.Rinehart(at)Allison.com>
Subject: 
HKE 700E
Date: 
Dec 01, 1997
      
      > Hey. what has happened to the push pull sling shot?  There was a big buzz
      > before Sun and Fun and then nothing.  Did Dennis scrap the project or what.
      > Just curious
      
      I think John Jung hit the nail on the head regarding the 2Si Twinpack
      seizures.  I spoke with a Kolb rep at Oshkosh last summer about the
      engine and got the same story.  
      
      By the way, I understand Kolb is evaluating the HKE 700E (60 hp Japanese
      4-stroke) for possible use.  I flew in the Flightstar IISL at Oshkosh
      that had this engine and was very impressed.  Does anyone know what the
      status of this evaluation is?  Will Kolb be offering this engine with
      kits in the future?  
      
      Mark Rinehart
      Kolb Mk III Wanna-be  
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Dec 01, 1997
From: 
Ron Hoyt <RONALD.R.HOYT(at)cdev.com>
Subject: 
Re: Internal brace for trailing edge Horz Stab.  Mark III
      
      >>>> 
      
      Date: Mon, 01 Dec 1997 10:55:06 -0600
      
      
      From: Ron Hoyt <<RONALD.R.HOYT(at)cdev.com>
      
      Subject: Kolb-List: Re: Internal brace for trailing edge Horz Stab.  Mark 
      III
      
      
      
      >>>>
      
      Folks,
      
        
      
        
      
      Question:  
      
        
      
          Is it 6" or 12" ?
      
      <<<<<<<<
      
      
      I cut mine 6" and dident slot them.  They fit nicely.
      
      >>>>
      
      
      
        
      
          If it's 12"  Dennis, I'll need another piece of
      Tubing............
      
        
      
      I saw 2 references for a piece of tube 6" long and cut
      it.......
      
        
      
      Is there any other "Discrepancies" out there?  Inquiring minds
      would like to know. (before we cut the tube.)
      
      <<<<<<<<
      
      Yes.  I don't know which issue of the instructions you have, however,
      mine are dated June 96 and there are a number of conflicts.  Dennis has
      been very good about answering the few that I couldn't resolve.  
      
      
      In that same section I found a mistake in the length stated for the 7/8"
      x.049 inboard tube.  I cut it at 31-1/8".  
      
      
      I also had trouble bending the tubing after squeezing it. I never
      succeeded, even after multiple calls to the factory.  I discovered that
      the trick is to bend the tube first then flatten the end.  
      
      
      on page 10 of my manual in the 2nd paragraph after "DON"T FORGET TO CRIMP
      HINGE...."
      
      The reference is to the wrong area of the sheet 2 and interchanges the
      rudder with the elevator
      
      
      Enough for now
      
      
      Have fun building
      
      
      Ron
      
      
      <<<<<<<<
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
jerryb(at)jmd.ods.com
Date: 
Dec 02, 1997
Subject: 
Re: Engine choices - are there any besides Rotax
      
           
           I am one of the people that don't like (trust) the two strokes.  (Far 
           too many cases where it was running fine until without warning 
           something inside seizures up, bearing, piston, etc.)  
           
           The HKE (HKS) looks good with exception of price.  It appears there 
           trying to gouge the market for every penny they can get and then some. 
            $7200 for a 2-cylinder seems a might high to me especially for an 
           unproven one at that, no test of numbers over time in the intended 
           application.  What was more interesting is it is being distributed by 
           the Flight Star folks under another company name HPower Ltd.  I tried 
           to get more specific information thru the email address they had 
           listed in an article never got a reply.  Since I have picked up their 
           not shipping the engine yet.  That kind of surprised me.  That was end 
           of August, they may be shipping by today.
           
           Another option if you can tolerate the weight is the Jabiru engine.  
           It's 80 HP at 123# versus 116# for above.  It too has gone price 
           crazy, was around $7500, now it's up around $9500 competing with Rotax 
           912.  And people blame the FAA for killing general aviation, I don't 
           think that's entirely so.     
           
           There been some talk about 2Si.  Interesting I also had emailed them 
           never got anything from them until I pinged them with a land line 
           call.  Prices are good but recent posting tend to indicate they have 
           some problems with the reliability of the their engines.  Not what I 
           looking for when strapping it on to 10K plus airframe.  Too much at 
           risk, decided to move on.
           
           I also looked at Hirth.  Talked with them at Sun & Fun.  Was really 
           thinking about one of their engines (I actually needed two).  When I 
           asked about obtaining parts since it didn't appear any of their repair 
           centers stocked parts, they claimed they could have them to me over 
           night from Canada.  Dealing with international shipments, while it may 
           be possible, I found their story hard to believe.  Also learned from 
           some people there that they were having problems getting parts shipped 
           in a reasonable time frame without having to resort to making numerous 
           calls to get it to happen thus cost.  That kind of killed my interest 
           in them.  Since the show I see there been some changes in names of 
           outfits, question are the same people still involved but outfits have 
           changed their names or are there totally different organizations 
           involved.  
           
           So as it goes 2-stroke, like it or not Rotax seems to be the best 
           choice for now.  If 2Si could get it together soon before they lose 
           the markets trust, they might be an alternative choice for Rotax but 
           their going to have to do it quick, they have already hurt themselves 
           bad.
           
           As 4-strokes go, the best choices seem the be the Jabiru, HKS, and 
           Am-Tech.  Am-Tech is still in development but I liked what I saw, 
           2-cylinder light weight 70# 40-HP engine.  If they can get it refined 
           and out soon they could do some major damage to Rotax.  I like the 
           people and if they can hold the price area they indicated, they would 
           sure have a winner.  
           
           What did we end up doing.  For the FireFly we bought a Rotax 447.  We 
           should be firing it up within the next week for the first time.  For 
           the ThunderGull, for now it looks like it's going to be a Rotax 503.  
           The HKS is to expensive and heavy.  Am-Tech isn't in production.  
           Hirth I would be on my own, not much state side help and I am not an 
           engine mechanic.  Much the same with 2Si although there at least their 
           in the states.  Would still prefer a 4-stroke.
           
           My 2-cents on engine issue.
           
           Jerry Bidle
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Dec 01, 1997
From: 
Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu>
Subject: 
Re: Engine choices - are there any besides Rotax
      
      On Tue, 2 Dec 1997 jerryb(at)jmd.ods.com wrote:
      >      As 4-strokes go, the best choices seem the be the Jabiru, HKS, and 
      >      Am-Tech.  Am-Tech is still in development but I liked what I saw, 
      >      2-cylinder light weight 70# 40-HP engine.  If they can get it refined 
      >      and out soon they could do some major damage to Rotax.  I like the 
      >      people and if they can hold the price area they indicated, they would 
      >      sure have a winner.  
      
      Anybody talk to AmTech recently?  I called them ~Aug/Sep and at that time
      they hoped to be running a "final prototype" by late Nov.  Part of what
      sounds promising about AmTech is, according to them, they already have
      a good amount of other solid business.  That combined with their unique
      technology makes me hopeful they'll come thru.  I'm sure they'll charge us
      for it too tho, e.g. ~$5.5k.  Still, high torque @low rpm, direct drive,
      10 lbs lighter than a 447, no more oil mixing, opposed cyl for smoother
      operation, better fuel economy -- all pretty compelling or at least
      nice to dream about.  As for their technology, i got their brochure but
      still don't understand how this engine really works -- i think they are
      maybe being coy about it for fear of somebody stealing their idea.
      
      BTW, until my 447 quits on me, i'll continue to sing high praises for it.
      However, I have this little outside worry about it cuz the rear cylinder
      CHT runs ~30 deg hotter than front, maybe even 50 deg at full power, but
      it always has.  This worry is probably a healthy thing for me (i.e. No
      Fear = Idiot).  On last flight i decided i'd at least cross the CHT
      probes before next flight to re-verify they are accurate.
      
                                                 --------|--------
       Ben Ransom                                       (*)
       Email: bransom(at)ucdavis.edu                      o   o
       http://mae.engr.ucdavis.edu/~ransom
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
jerryb(at)jmd.ods.com
Date: 
Dec 02, 1997
Subject: 
Re[2]: Disappointing (General Cage Painting)
      
           General Cage Painting for New Bee's
           
           I think the primer being referred to here is the Stits 2-part epoxy 
           primer, available in green or white.  The white almost matches the 
           Insignia white.  It also resist the Poly-Tack and MEK pretty well.  
           
           You'll have to clean the cage well first, get all the oil and rust 
           off.  The epoxy primer is good stuff, not quite as good as power coat 
           but acceptable and less expensive.  
           
           Shoot it with a spray gun.  If you never sprayed tubing before your 
           going to learn something new.  I recommend outside as more paint goes 
           in the air than on what your spraying.  Watch where the over spray 
           will go like neighbors car or airplane parked next door unless you 
           like buying paint jobs and new aircraft wind shields.  
           
           Spray only in a well ventilated area where you have fresh air.  The 
           fumes from the spray are not only toxic but explosive.  Don't do it in 
           a closed up area especially with heaters or etc which could ignite the 
           fumes.  The spark of a light switch or even a thermostat is all it 
           takes.  (The pressure switch which turns the compressor on and off). 
           
           Spray the tight angles of the cluster joints first to assure you get 
           paint into the tight pocket areas.  Good lighting is very important to 
           tell where you have applied adequate coverage.  
           
           Some people get concerned about weight of paint and go over board.  We 
           had a case where a guy had requested the painter to spray his cage with 
           a very light coat.  It was light all right.  With in a couple months, 
           it was starting to rust in spots.  Had to sand down all the thin spots 
           and reshoot it.  In the end it probably weighed more as result due to 
           the required second coat.  Looks good now.
           
           The cost of power coating varies dramatically place to place.  If you 
           have no experience with them it might be wise to see if you can inspect 
           a sample of there work in process.  Kolbs price is a little on the high 
           side but to some it's worth the extra to have them totally handle it.  
           While your power coating they should do all the steel parts and 
           weldments (controls stick and various fittings, wing attachment 
           fittings, lift strut tangs, etc.).  Make sure you tape off all the 
           threaded parts or insides of the rings of the parts which slide on the 
           fuselage tube (tail post bracket).
           
           Good luck and happy building,
           
           Jerry Bidle
           
      ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
      Subject: Kolb-List: Re: Disappointing
      Date:    11/24/97 7:56 PM
           
           
      RON 
      IF YOU CAN'T USE THE POWER COAT , AND HAVE TO USE PRIMER  USE THE STITTS 
      ZINC CHROMATE PRIMER  THIS SURE DID DO A GOOD JOB ON MY  KOLB 
      BUT WHEN YOU GET READY TO PUT THE FINAL COTE ON YOU MUST SKUFF OFF THE 
      GLOSS THAT WILL BE ON THE PRIMER , DO THIS WITH A SCOTCH PAD  
        ( GREEN )  IS THE COLOR I USED  AND IT DID A GREAT JOB . I MAY NOT HAVE
      THE SAME AIRPLANE THAT YOU HAVE BUT IF I CAN HELP YOU OUT , LET ME KNOW 
      I MAY NOT HAVE THE ANSWER BUT I WILL KNOW HOW TO GET THE ANSWER!!
           
                      RICK LIBERSAT         N106RL        
       writes:
      >On or about 11/20 I sent the following request for information  to 
      >the Kolb mail list.  I've seen a lot of small talk on this list 
      >relating to a lot of subjects, and ate it all up, but I received no 
      >response to my questions, not even from Souder.  In the event it 
      >didn't actually get there (however, I got mine back) I'll try one 
      >more time. I would surely think that with all the talent and 
      >meticulous builders on the list,  someone would have experience with 
      >either powder coating, chrome-moly, or primer & paint.
      >
      >Thanks, Ron
      >
      >-------------------------------------------------------------------- 
      >-----------------------------------
      >
      >Copy
      >
      >>I finally got my 1985 Firestar kit, and I'm ready to do my 'build 
      >thing'.   Based on what I've read here in the >Kolb Mail, it is a 
      >great idea to have the cage and other heavy metal parts powder 
      >coated, so I took it all  the >local powder-coat shop and tried to 
      >drop them off.  No dice!  They wouldn't take the responsibility for 
      >>possible damage to the chrome-moly caused by the necessary heat 
      >treatment.
      >>
      >>The tech  said that chrome-moly alloys are adversely affected by 
      >the 400-degree (f) temperature used to >cure the powder coating.  He 
      >asked if I knew if  the alloy used in the Kolbs could tolerate this 
      >treatment.   I >was at a loss for the answer, of course.   I said 
      >that because some kits offer this as an option,  I would >assume 
      >that  the tubing could stand it.  He replied  that perhaps the kit 
      >maker uses a low temperature >powder-coating.  I was again at a 
      >loss.
      >>
      >>My question is this:  Has anyone here looked into this to determine 
      >if  the chrome-moly used in the Kolb kit >can withstand 400-degrees 
      >(f) for 45-minutes without  compromising strength or form, or must 
      >it be done >using the low temperature method?
      >>
      >>If I am unable to use my local powder-coat shop (they are only 
      >equipped for the high-temp method) I may >have to settle for plain 
      >old primer & paint.  Therefore, I'd appreciate it if anyone could 
      >recommend a  paint & >primer combination that they have used 
      >successfully?
      > >
      >>Thanks,
      >>Ron Carroll
      >>On the 'left' coast
      >
      >
      >
      >-
      >
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
jerryb(at)jmd.ods.com
Date: 
Dec 02, 1997
Subject: 
Re: How to N number a plane that was built by someone 
      
           
      But there is another and that is the lack of builder documentation.  How would
      
      that be over come,
      
      ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
      Subject: Kolb-List: How to N number a plane that was built by someone else
      Date:    11/25/97 4:45 PM
      
      
      If I was to buy an airplane from someone. I would buy it as "parts"!!
           
      I would then assemble those "parts" and create a new aircraft following the 
      standard homebuilt parts. You are only required to construct 51% of the aircraft
      to quality as the builder.
           
      If you should ever sell the plane. Sell its parts. You can disassemble the 
      aircraft to what ever degree you feel comfortable. I would remove all ID 
      placards and N-numbers. I would also ask the purchaser of the "parts" to sign 
      a form agreeing that he has purchased "parts".
           
      An experimental aircraft does not have to be built from new parts or material.
           
           
      Rich Wild
           
           
           
      > X-Authentication-Warning: www.intrig.com: bin set sender to 
      owner-kolb(at)intrig.com using -f
      > From: Jason Omelchuck <jason(at)acuityinc.com> 
      > To: "'Kolb builders'" 
      > Subject: FW: Find an N number's builder 
      > Date: Tue, 25 Nov 1997 13:56:13 -0800
      > X-Priority: 3
      > Mime-Version: 1.0
      > 
      > If the builders did not register it as an experimental getting it
      > registered is nearly impossible.  If I were the original builder and I 
      > had already sold it to someone a long time ago unregistered there is no 
      > way I would register it now.  If I do someone a favor and go through
      > paper work hassle and time of getting the FAA to come out and sign it 
      > off I am liable for the life of that aircraft because I am the
      > manufacturer.  If I sold it to someone unregistered and they bought it
      > knowing its legal status why would I now open myself up to lawsuits from 
      > the current owner and any one else down the line it gets sold to?  I
      > hope that when you bought it you realized it is an illegal airplane 
      > (unless you are using it for instruction) and will probably have to
      > operate it as is and hope you never get caught.  Don't get me wrong, I
      > think it is a noble cause to try and get it registered, but if it wasn't 
      > done at the time it was built I wouldn't get my hopes up.
      > 
      > > -----Original Message-----
      > > From: Scott Bentley [SMTP:Scott.Bentley(at)Bentley.Com] 
      > > Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 1997 1:37 PM
      > > To: Ken(at)www.atfi.com
      > > Cc: kolb(at)www.intrig.com
      > > Subject: Find an N number's builder 
      > > 
      > > 
      > >  If the original owners registered it, try www.landings.com, a 
      > > complete URL:
      > > 
      > > 
      > > http://www1.drive.net/evird.acgi$pass*6254908!_h-www.landings.com/_lan 
      > > di
      > > ngs/pages/search_nnr.html
      > > 
      > >  to find the current registrant.  I note that my plane, N628SB, 
      > > is in the database, as is Richard Pike's N420P.
      > > 
      > > >  I recently bought a used, already-
      > > > >     built, fully functional Twinstar from a couple of guys in 
      > > > Indiana.
      > > > >     What I want to do is get an experimental airworthiness 
      > > > certificate and
      > > > >     fly it under Part 91. The first obstacle I ran into is that I 
      > > > need to
      > > > >     track down the original builder. Nope, the guys in Indiana 
      > > > didn't
      > > > >     build it and the "paper trail" disappears after that. 
      > > -
      > -
      > 
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
jerryb(at)jmd.ods.com
Date: 
Dec 02, 1997
Subject: 
Re: Internal brace for trailing edge Horz Stab.  Mark 
      
           If weight is of concern you might consider using Sherwin Williams 
           Vinyl Wash Primer.  It's a two part system.  
           
           The working solution is very thin and you only need to spray a very 
           light coat.  It protects very well and etches into the metal be it 
           aluminum or steel.  The RV builders use it.  Draw back is if you want 
           to paint over it you will need to reshoot a light coat of it on the 
           part then apply top coat within a few hours.  After you use it a bit, 
           you'll find it easy to use and works well.
           
           Worked fine for me and several others I know on the RV kits.
           
           Jerry Bidle
           
            
      
      
      ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
      Subject: Kolb-List: Internal brace for trailing edge Horz Stab.  Mark III
      Date:    11/29/97 6:43 PM
      
      
      Hi Mike!  I am also building a Mark III and working on the horizontal 
      stabilizer.  Your message to the Kolb Mail List did not have any body to 
      the message as I received it.
      You may want to retransmit.  I new to the mail list and stil am learning th 
      commands.
      May I ask if you are using any zinc chromate or other rust inhibitor on 
      your plan?  It would seem that Kolb does not recommend it according to the 
      plans book.  As I hope to fly on water womeday with this bird this is of 
      particular interest to me.
           
      Thanks.
           
      Bill Davis
      McKeesport, PA
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
jerryb(at)jmd.ods.com
Date: 
Dec 02, 1997
Subject: 
Re[2]: Twin engine Kolb
      
           In fairness to the kit manufacturer, was the plane itself good just 
           bad choice of engines or is the design bad including the engine.  
           
           Was the reliability of the engines reported.  Sounds like the press 
           might have let the engine manufacturer off lightly and may have gotten 
           better than deserved press.   
           
           
           
           Jerry Bidle  
      
      
      ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
      Subject: Kolb-List: Re: Twin engine Kolb
      Date:    11/28/97 3:43 PM
      
      
           
      >Richard Pike wrote:
      >If you think that this one persons problems was a fluke, two 2Si engines 
      quit at Oshkosh this summer on the Aero-Lite 103. And then it gets 
      written up as a 
      >good design in November's Ultralight Flying. I'll quit now before I get 
      any
      >further off the subject.
      >John Jung
           
      I noticed they switched to a Rotax 447 instead of the 2si. I can see why.
           
      Ralph B.
      Minneapolis
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
Frank_R_Reynen(at)notes.seagate.com
Date: 
Dec 01, 1997
Subject: 
Re: Primer for Horz Stab. Mark III
      
      You wrote,
      
      May I ask if you are using any zinc chromate or other rust inhibitor on
      your plan?  It would seem that Kolb does not recommend it according to the
      plans book.  As I hope to fly on water womeday with this bird this is of
      particular interest to me.
      Thanks.
      Bill Davis
      McKeesport, PA
      Bill;
      For future waterflying activities, I recommend you use the Stits Epoxy
      primer EP-420 green for all the aluminum and steel parts whether they are
      exposed or covered.
      Before you set the rivets,dunk them in zinc chromate(the yellow stuff) and
      rivet them wet so that they do not rust inside the tube and cover the heads
      later with the epoxy primer
      I used it six years ago when I build my M-III for float operation and it
      holds better than anything I have seen and provides a very good undercoat
      for the Polytone glue and paint. Be very carefull with the epoxy primer
      during application as it can make you very sick when inhaling the vapors.
      The tail section gets very wet every time you take off or land the Kolb on
      floats and this paint has held up for more than a thousand take off and
      landings during this time.
      
      Frank Reynen  Mark-III on Lotus floats @430 hrs.
      http://www.webcom.com/reynen
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Dec 01, 1997
From: 
Cal <cgreen(at)centuryinter.net>
Subject: 
FS for sale
      
       John.. I was asking about John Tritle's FS that he has for 
      sale. I'm curious how much weight an electric start kit adds 
      to the plane. I just got my N-number the other day, it took 
      2-3 weeks.                                                    
           Cal
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Dec 01, 1997
From: 
Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu>
Subject: 
Re: Engine choices - are there any besides Rotax
      
      > >BTW, until my 447 quits on me, i'll continue to sing high praises for it.
      > >However, I have this little outside worry about it cuz the rear cylinder
      > >CHT runs ~30 deg hotter than front, maybe even 50 deg at full power, but
      > >it always has.  This worry is probably a healthy thing for me (i.e. No
      > >Fear = Idiot).  On last flight i decided i'd at least cross the CHT
      > >probes before next flight to re-verify they are accurate.
      > >
      > >                                           --------|--------
      > > Ben Ransom                                       (*)
      > > Email: bransom(at)ucdavis.edu                      o   o
      > > http://mae.engr.ucdavis.edu/~ransom
      > >-
      
      On Mon, 1 Dec 1997, Richard Pike wrote:
      > >       What about putting both CHT sending rings on the same spark plug for
      > a short hop, would that be a good way to see if the gauges are at least
      > consistant with each other?
      
      Now that's what i call a great idea.  thank you!
      
      -ben
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Dec 01, 1997
Subject: 
Re: Internal brace for trailing edge Horz Stab.  Mark III
From: 
rick106(at)juno.com (RICK M LIBERSAT)
      
      MIKE 
      
      I USED  A   6" in. PIECE  ,AND WHEN YOU PUT THE RIVET IN THIS WILL HOLD
      IT IN PLACE TILL YOU DRILL THE HOLE FOR YOUR TANG BOLT UNLESS  KOLB HAS
      CHANGED THINGS I THINK THE 6in . WILL DO.        SOMETHING TO KEEP IN
      MIND IS THE TUBING YOU SAW UP STAIRS , IF YOU NEED  A PICE LET ME KNOW
      YOU ARE WELCOME TO IT
      
      RICK LIBERSAT 
      
      >
      >
      >Folks,
      >
      >I'm in the midst of building the Horizontal Stabilizer for my Mark 
      >III,
      >and have come across a discrepancy between the plans and the manual.  
      >=
      >The manual calls for you to cut a piece of tubing 3/4" X .058w 6" 
      >long.
      >for an internal sleeve at the outboard elevator hinges.  on the plans 
      >=
      >(Page 2) there is a note: "install the 6" sleeve and place one rivet 
      >as
      >shown to hold the sleeve in position."  In another place a note 
      >states:
      >" 3/4" OD x .058 x 12" LG slotted AL sleeve". 
      >
      >Question: 
      >
      >    Is it 6" or 12" ?
      >
      >    If it's 12"  Dennis, I'll need another piece of Tubing............
      >
      >I saw 2 references for a piece of tube 6" long and cut it.......
      >
      >Is there any other "Discrepancies" out there?  Inquiring minds would
      >like to know. (before we cut the tube.)
      >
      >
      >
      >Peace,
      >Mike Sharp
      >Kolb Mark III
      >Cut First Tubing, 11-28-97
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
Folks,
      >
 
      >
I'm in the midst of building the Horizontal
      >Stabilizer for my
      >Mark III, and have come across a discrepancy between the plans and 
      >the
      >manual.  The manual calls for you to cut a piece of tubing
      >3/4" X
      >.058w 6" long. for an internal sleeve at the outboard elevator
      >hinges.  on the plans (Page 2) there is a note: "install the 
      >=
      >6"
      >sleeve and place one rivet as shown to hold the sleeve in
      >position." 
      >In another place a note states: " 3/4" OD x .058 x 12" 
      >LG
      >slotted
      >AL sleeve".  
      >
 
      >
Question:  
      >
 
      >
    Is it 6" 
      >or
      >12"
      >?
      >
 
      >
    If it's
      >12" 
      >Dennis, I'll need another piece of Tubing............
      >
 
      >
I saw 2 references for a piece of tube 6" 
      >long
      >and cut
      >it.......
      >
 
      >
Is there any other "Discrepancies" out
      >there? 
      >Inquiring minds would like to know. (before we cut the
      >tube.)
      >
 
      >
 
      >
 
      >
Peace,
      >
Mike Sharp
      >
Kolb Mark III
Cut First 
      >Tubing,
      >11-28-97 
      >
      >
      >-
      >
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Dec 01, 1997
From: 
Larry Cottrell <lcottrel(at)kfalls.net>
Subject: 
Re: questions and observations
      
      Larry Cottrell wrote:
      > 
      > Hi,
      >   I tried this once before, got a unable to deliver as usual, but have
      > had no response at all so I really am beginning to think that it was
      > indeed undeliverable.
      >   My question was about the full enclosure for the firestar II. Does it
      > effect the ability to fold it up?
      >   We had a discussion about oils some time back. I was unable to get
      > pennsoil so obtained a tw3 oil that had the same label on it as does
      > Pennsoil. After 50 hours the rings were stuck and gave the appearance of
      > uneven wear, perhaps not really seated. It required the replacement of ot
      > the rings. So its synthetic for me.
      > 
      > Larry
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Dec 01, 1997
From: 
Larry Cottrell <lcottrel(at)kfalls.net>
Subject: 
Re: questions and observations
      
      Larry Cottrell wrote:
      > 
      > Hi,
      >   I tried this once before, got a unable to deliver as usual, but have
      > had no response at all so I really am beginning to think that it was
      > indeed undeliverable.
      >   My question was about the full enclosure for the firestar II. Does it
      > effect the ability to fold it up?
      >   We had a discussion about oils some time back. I was unable to get
      > pennsoil so obtained a tw3 oil that had the same label on it as does
      > Pennsoil. After 50 hours the rings were stuck and gave the appearance of
      > uneven wear, perhaps not really seated. It required the replacement of ot
      > the rings. So its synthetic for me.
      > 
      > Larry****
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Dec 02, 1997
From: 
John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com>
Subject: 
Re: questions and observations
      
      Larry Cottrell wrote:
      >
      >   My question was about the full enclosure for the firestar II. Does it
      > effect the ability to fold it up?
      
      No, it doesn't.
      
      John Jung
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Dec 02, 1997
From: 
"Jim Gerken GERKEN(at)RCHVMX.VNET.IBM.COM" <GERKEN(at)RCHVMX.VNET.IBM.COM>
Subject: 
Trailering damage potential alert.
      
       I have been trailering the MKiii for every flight, a distance of 7 miles to
      a friend's airstrip.  Yes, it is a pain and has stopped me a couple times I
      did not have the ambition to set it up and fold it back down and the trailering
      and everything for just a one-hour flight.  Next year I will hangar somewhere.
      BUT, trailering has taught me a few things, as it has forced me to look at the
      plane carefully each time I assemble it.  Like holes that are progressively
      getting looser and sloppier, etc.
        THE POINT OF THIS NOTE:
         I have discovered that one of the two drag-strut fittings, where it exits
      the root rib to attach into the universal joint, is loose.  It turns slightly.
      I assumed the 1/4" bolt was loose and so melted a hole into the root rib and
      put a wrench to it.  That helped for a while.  Now it is turning a little
      again and I don't feel comfortable going any higher on the bolt torque.
        What I think is happening is the fitting is being sharply twisted by the
      force of roadway bumps shaking the wing up and down.  It has probably worn
      the thru-holes egg-shaped (hopefully in the fitting only, not in the root rib
      weldment).  I discovered it by checking for U-joint play, lifting up on the
      wing main tab (when wing is folded) and watching for U-joint play.
        The plane has 13 hours on it and has been trailered about 8 times.
        I would not have this problem if I didn't trailer.  This turning play is
      undetectable when the plane is assembled for flight, but I assume it is placing
      abnormal force on the 1/4" thru-bolt.  My plane is officially retired for the
      Winter, for some time for improvements and maintenance now that it is broke-in.
      You can be sure I will resolve this problem before Spring.
        If you trailer, check it out, and let me know what you find.  BTW, only ONE
      of the two on my plane is loose.  Might have been undersized or undertorqued
      to start with.  I am considering welding in a cross-tube to carry the stress
      over a surface instead of the single-line contact area it has presently.  Or
      just a new fitting, and tightened more carefully.  I will install inspection
      ports in the fabric at this location for the maintenance and continued
      inspection.
        Any comments, history, suggestions from DENNIS @ Kolb ?
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Dec 02, 1997
From: 
Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu>
Subject: 
Re: questions and observations
      
      On Mon, 1 Dec 1997, Larry Cottrell wrote:
      > >   I tried this once before, got a unable to deliver as usual, but have
      > > had no response at all so I really am beginning to think that it was
      > > indeed undeliverable.
      > >   My question was about the full enclosure for the firestar II. Does it
      > > effect the ability to fold it up?
      I have my own style of (almost) full enclosure.  No effect on folding.
      
      > >   We had a discussion about oils some time back. I was unable to get
      > > pennsoil so obtained a tw3 oil that had the same label on it as does
      
      I'm still on the last of a 5 gal jug of DuraLube, and happy with it.
      It is relatively cheap (5 gal =$80) and others i know have many hours
      on it w/ clean engines.  I believe Duralube has changed to partially
      synthetic since I bought mine.
      
                                                 --------|--------
       Ben Ransom                                       (*)
       Email: bransom(at)ucdavis.edu                      o   o
       http://mae.engr.ucdavis.edu/~ransom
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Dec 02, 1997
From: 
Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu>
Subject: 
Re: (General Cage Painting)
      
      On Tue, 2 Dec 1997 jerryb(at)jmd.ods.com wrote:
      >      Shoot it with a spray gun.  If you never sprayed tubing before your 
      >      going to learn something new.  I recommend outside as more paint goes 
      >      in the air than on what your spraying.  Watch where the over spray 
      For spraying a frame I'd recommend a "touch-up" gun.  It only holds ~1.5 
      cups of paint and is therefore small, light and maneuverable in tight
      spots such as a frame.  As well, it puts out a small paint pattern so
      overspray is small.  Required air pressure will still be only ~25 psi.
      An adequate one can be had for $45, and you will likely find other uses
      for it over time. (To help buy mine I told my wife i'd varathane spray
      our kitchen cabinets ...i just didn't when. :-)  )
      
                                                 --------|--------
       Ben Ransom                                       (*)
       Email: bransom(at)ucdavis.edu                      o   o
       http://mae.engr.ucdavis.edu/~ransom
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
Timandjan(at)aol.com
Date: 
Dec 02, 1997
Subject: 
extra seat belts
      
      If any body needs a new set of the Kolb seat belts supplied with the Firestar
      2 kits let me know, I have mine left over which I did not use.
      tim
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
Cavuontop(at)aol.com
Date: 
Dec 02, 1997
Subject: 
Re: Engine choices - are there any besides Rotax
      
      
      << However, I have this little outside worry about it cuz the rear cylinder
       CHT runs ~30 deg hotter than front, maybe even 50 deg at full power, but
       it always has.  This worry is probably a healthy thing for me (i.e. No
       Fear = Idiot). >>
      
      
        I am in agreement with your worry.  When I ran a 503 my egts were always
      very close together and the chts often varied widely.  This is pure snake,
      oil but I have a friend with a chalenger who says that the double aircleaner,
      a opposed to the two single aircleaners is supposed to help this problem.  He
      claims it has something to do with an area of low pressure over the downwind
      aircleaner when you are flying.
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
jerryb(at)jmd.ods.com
Date: 
Dec 03, 1997
Subject: 
Re: Source of Replacement Seat Belts
      
           Speaking of seat belts, we want to replace the ones that come with the 
           FireFly.  After trying them on this weekend we need something with 
           separate control of the tightness of the lap belt and the shoulder 
           straps.  With the lap belt snug, you can't reach the instrument panel, 
           and it doesn't slide easy to loosen it without totally disconnecting 
           it.  Don't like having to do that while in flight.  
           
           The separate shoulder and lap tightening permits loosening the 
           shoulder straps so you can reach the panel without disconnecting or 
           loosening the lap belt.
           
           From what source (company & phone #) are others getting seat belt sets 
           
           I need to get them ordered ASAP, like today if possible.  Thanks for 
           your prompt reply.    
           
           Jerry Bidle
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
"Marino, Frank J (Youngstown ARB)" <Frank.Marino(at)yng.afres.af.mil>
Subject: 
WING FOLDING ON MKIII
Date: 
Dec 02, 1997
      
      Does any one out there with a MKIII have any idea how one person can
      fold and open the wings on a MKIII by ones self with out damaging the
      wings. I tried different ways and always had to have help.
      
      Frank.
      
      
      FRANK J. MARINO
      Chief Loadmaster 773 AS
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Dec 02, 1997
From: 
Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu>
Subject: 
Re: Source of Replacement Seat Belts
      
      On Wed, 3 Dec 1997 jerryb(at)jmd.ods.com wrote:
      >      The separate shoulder and lap tightening permits loosening the 
      >      shoulder straps so you can reach the panel without disconnecting or 
      >      loosening the lap belt.
      >      
      >      From what source (company & phone #) are others getting seat belt sets 
      >      
      >      I need to get them ordered ASAP, like today if possible.  Thanks for 
      >      your prompt reply.    
      It was ~3.5 yrs ago, but I ordered a 4 point harness from AC Spruce.  It is
      the one their catelog says is typically used in LongEZs if i recall.  It
      only cost ~$75 then.  Each belt (left & right lap sides and left and right
      shoulder) is easily adjustable.  If I need to reach way forward in flight
      i just slip a shoulder out of that side.
      Hope you can still get these.
      -Ben Ransom
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Dec 02, 1997
From: 
Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu>
Subject: 
Re: Engine choices - are there any besides Rotax
      
      On Tue, 2 Dec 1997 Cavuontop(at)aol.com wrote:
      
      > 
      > << However, I have this little outside worry about it cuz the rear cylinder
      >  CHT runs ~30 deg hotter than front, maybe even 50 deg at full power, but
      >  it always has.  This worry is probably a healthy thing for me (i.e. No
      >  Fear = Idiot). >>
      > 
      >   I am in agreement with your worry.  When I ran a 503 my egts were always
      > very close together and the chts often varied widely.  This is pure snake,
      > oil but I have a friend with a chalenger who says that the double aircleaner,
      > a opposed to the two single aircleaners is supposed to help this problem.  He
      > claims it has something to do with an area of low pressure over the downwind
      > aircleaner when you are flying.
      
      I would think differences caused by air cleaners and/or carburation in general
      would show up on EGT.  And, in my situtation i have only single carb anyway.
      I use only single EGT at the Y (far from ideal, i know) but checking my plug
      color shows both cylinders to be okay.  Plug color is just a tad hotter on
      the rear cylinder.
      
      One of the things i did ~20 hours ago was I ground off ~3/8" of the fin
      that is on the inside of the upper cylinder shroud.  I just sorta figured
      maybe Rotax was directing too much of the fan air to the front cylinder.
      Surprising to me, this made practically no difference in cht.  This was on
      the final step of having pulled the cylinders and pistons for decarboning,
      at which time I had checked the innards for signs of overheating.
      The only thing noticable was slight discoloration on all the needle
      bearing pins, and that was even among all pins, both pistons.  Even so,
      I wish I had replaced them at the time.  I would recommend anybody just
      order them and plan on replacing them anytime you're that far into the
      engine anyway.
      
                                                 --------|--------
       Ben Ransom                                       (*)
       Email: bransom(at)ucdavis.edu                      o   o
       http://mae.engr.ucdavis.edu/~ransom
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Dec 02, 1997
From: 
Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu>
Subject: 
Re: WING FOLDING ON MKIII
      
      On Tue, 2 Dec 1997, Marino, Frank J (Youngstown ARB) wrote:
      
      > Does any one out there with a MKIII have any idea how one person can
      > fold and open the wings on a MKIII by ones self with out damaging the
      > wings. I tried different ways and always had to have help.
      > 
      > Frank.
      
      Not sure how helpful my Firestar method is, but here it is just in case:
      
      http://mae.engr.ucdavis.edu/~ransom/kolbfaq.html#Trailering 
      
      -Ben
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
jerryb(at)jmd.ods.com
Date: 
Dec 03, 1997
Subject: 
Paint we used on FireFly
      
           When I originally ordered the FireFly I had intended to have it power 
           coated (nice stuff).  The short version of the story goes I bought it, 
           got shipped out of the country, sold it.  The buyer had a painter 
           lightly spray the cage with Stits white epoxy primer.  Bought the kit 
           back.  It started rusting in areas that had been "too lightly coated". 
           The buyer was worrying about weight.  Had to sand down the thin 
           spots, reshoot it with a heavier coat. Looks good now.
           
           The guy had done some test on paint pertaining to it's resistant to 
           MEK and Poly-Tak.  He came up with "Rustoleum Professional" paint in 
           spray cans (White). It's holds up to the poly-tak and MEK fairly well. 
           
           At first I wasn't to happy as he had painted all the controls parts 
           and two ends of the boom tube with it.  Since I have found that is  
           easy to use, covers well, seems to be fairly chip resistant and 
           adheres fairly well.  It also makes touch up easy.  We continued to 
           use it on the remaining portion of the boom tube, nose cone, and the 
           exposed aluminum areas of the ailerons, gear legs, and metal 
           weldments.  I recommend painting the weldments with Stits epoxy primer 
           first before top coating with the Rustoleum.  Note, Home Depot sells 
           the Rustoleum Professional in our area, expect to pay a little over $5 
           per larger than normal can).  It seems to work well in the lower 
           temperatures (50-60's) just takes a little longer to dry.  As with 
           most paints I would not use it on fabric, it could make repairs 
           difficult.  
           
           I would like to compare it to Tuff-Coat that I think it was Ben talked 
           about.  Need to find a source.  Too late for this project but I have 
           another waiting.
           
           
           
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Dec 02, 1997
From: 
Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com>
Subject: 
Re: Source of Replacement Seat Belts
      
      At 03:46 AM 12/3/97 cst, you wrote:
      >     Speaking of seat belts, we want to replace the ones that come with the 
      >     FireFly.  After trying them on this weekend we need something with 
      >     separate control of the tightness of the lap belt and the shoulder 
      >     straps.  With the lap belt snug, you can't reach the instrument panel, 
      >     and it doesn't slide easy to loosen it without totally disconnecting 
      >     it.  Don't like having to do that while in flight.  
      >     
      >     The separate shoulder and lap tightening permits loosening the 
      >     shoulder straps so you can reach the panel without disconnecting or 
      >     loosening the lap belt.
      >     
      >     From what source (company & phone #) are others getting seat belt sets 
      >     
      >     I need to get them ordered ASAP, like today if possible.  Thanks for 
      >     your prompt reply.    
      >     
      >     Jerry Bidle
      >
      >
      >-
      >J.C. Whitney sell 4-point harnesses for $90 in red,blue&black, the #
      312-431-6102
      The best deal is from Summit racing, a 5-point harness is only $59.95 their
      # is 1-800-230-3030, and theirs also come in red, blue, and black. And you
      can have 2" or 3" belt width.
              
              Richard Pike
              MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Dec 02, 1997
From: 
wood <richard.wood(at)usa.net>
Subject: 
Re: WING FOLDING ON MKIII
      
      >Does any one out there with a MKIII have any idea how one person can
      >fold and open the wings on a MKIII by ones self with out damaging the
      >wings. I tried different ways and always had to have help.
      >
      >Frank.
      >
      >
      >FRANK J. MARINO
      >Chief Loadmaster 773 AS
      >-
      >
      
       I have allways done it by myself because it is more awkward to teach
      someone how to do it or let them help you. The secret is to do it on grass
      and to lay the wing tips down gently and pick them straight up so they don't
      drag on the ground.
      
      Woody
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
GeoR38(at)aol.com
Date: 
Dec 02, 1997
Subject: 
Re: Engine choices - are there any besides Rotax
      
      
      << I use only single EGT at the Y (far from ideal, i know) but checking my
      plug
       color shows both cylinders to be okay >>
      Ben! A man of your background and character.....putting the SINGLE egt at
      theY...how could you??...[:-)....just teasin'n pal....but that is the
      intensity of the response I got when I spoke about my high temp readings.
      Please let me know what kind of readings you get there.            All in fun
      GeoR38
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Dec 02, 1997
From: 
Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu>
Subject: 
Re: Engine choices - are there any besides Rotax
      
      On Tue, 2 Dec 1997 GeoR38(at)aol.com wrote:
      
      > 
      > << I use only single EGT at the Y (far from ideal, i know) but checking my
      > plug
      >  color shows both cylinders to be okay >>
      > Ben! A man of your background and character.....putting the SINGLE egt at
      > theY...how could you??...[:-)....just teasin'n pal....but that is the
      > intensity of the response I got when I spoke about my high temp readings.
      
      Yeah, i know, you are right.  Now i guess i've let the cat outa the bag.
      Why the heck did anybody ever even sell single Y probe EGT setups?  I was
      young and foolish when i bought that.  To change to dual EGT i gotta do 
      more than just add another probe:
         - buy a dual EGT guage
         - buy a new tach  (my current gauge is a combo egt/tach)
         - probably make a new instrument panel cuz the new gauge throws off 
           current layout
         - buy 2 new probes ...can't even re-use the single Y probe as those
           are too long for the correct single probe placement.
      
      So there's my whiny excuse for not changing to the right way to do it.
      Well, at least i look at the single egt gauge, on purpose, frequently. :-)
      
      I sit thru watching 1300 F  EGT at full power (even upto 1325 briefly) and
      1050-1200 cruise, usually 1125-ish at 4900.  I'm finally almost getting
      used to the big numbers.  I've run this way for 140 hrs TTSN.
      
      
                                                 --------|--------
       Ben Ransom                                       (*)
       Email: bransom(at)ucdavis.edu                      o   o
       http://mae.engr.ucdavis.edu/~ransom
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: 
Re: questions and observations
From: 
ul15rhb(at)juno.com (Ralph H Burlingame)
Date: 
Dec 02, 1997
      
      
      writes:
      >Larry Cottrell wrote:
      > 
      > Hi,
      > I tried this once before, got a unable to deliver as usual, but have
      >had no response at all so I really am beginning to think that it was
      > indeed undeliverable. My question was about the full enclosure for the
      >firestar II. Does it effect the ability to fold it up?
      > We had a discussion about oils some time back. I was unable to get
      > pennsoil so obtained a tw3 oil that had the same label on it as does
      > Pennsoil. After 50 hours the rings were stuck and gave the appearance
      of
      >uneven wear, perhaps not really seated. It required the replacement of
      the
      >the rings. So its synthetic for me.
      > 
      > Larry
      
      I don't own a FS II but the full enclosure does not affect its wing fold
      capability.
      
      I used a mineral-based oil until I discovered "Klotz", a synthetic
      2-cycle oil that claims to outperform any mineral oil. So far I've had
      very good luck with it and my plugs are the cleanest I've ever seen them.
      They are so clean that I don't bother taking them out anymore. I just
      change them annually. I had stuck rings with the mineral oil, but using
      the "Klotz" oil and putting "Seafoam" in the engine
      occasionally may be the answer to the stuck ring problem. I use a 50:1
      mix and am debating whether to continue using premium unleaded (92
      octane) auto gas vs the regular (87 octane) auto gas.
      
      Ralph Burlingame
      Minneapolis
      original FireStar (serial #49)
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: 
Re: Trailering damage potential alert.
              40,42-43,46,49-51,57-61
From: 
ul15rhb(at)juno.com (Ralph H Burlingame)
Date: 
Dec 02, 1997
      
      
       writes:
      > I have been trailering the MKiii for every flight, a distance of 7
      miles to
      >a friend's airstrip.  Yes, it is a pain and has stopped me a couple
      times I
      >did not have the ambition to set it up and fold it back down and the
      trailering
      >and everything for just a one-hour flight.  Next year I will hangar
      somewhere.
      >BUT, trailering has taught me a few things, as it has forced me to look
      at the
      >plane carefully each time I assemble it.  Like holes that are
      progressively
      >getting looser and sloppier, etc.
      >  THE POINT OF THIS NOTE:
      > I have discovered that one of the two drag-strut fittings, where it
      exits
      >the root rib to attach into the universal joint, is loose.  It turns
      slightly.
      >I assumed the 1/4" bolt was loose and so melted a hole into the root rib
      and >put a wrench to it.That helped for a while.  Now it is turning a
      little again and I >don't feel comfortable going any higher on the bolt
      torque.
      >What I think is happening is the fitting is being sharply twisted by the
      >force of roadway bumps shaking the wing up and down.  It has probably
      worn
      >the thru-holes egg-shaped (hopefully in the fitting only, not in the
      root rib
      >weldment).  I discovered it by checking for U-joint play, lifting up on
      the
      >wing main tab (when wing is folded) and watching for U-joint play.
      >The plane has 13 hours on it and has been trailered about 8 times.
      >I would not have this problem if I didn't trailer.  This turning play is
      >undetectable when the plane is assembled for flight, but I assume it is
      placing
      >abnormal force on the 1/4" thru-bolt.  My plane is officially retired
      for the
      >Winter, for some time for improvements and maintenance now that it >is
      >broke-in.You can be sure I will resolve this problem before Spring.
      >If you trailer, check it out, and let me know what you find.  BTW, only
      ONE
      >of the two on my plane is loose.  Might have been undersized or 
      >undertorqued to start with.  I am considering welding in a cross-tube to
      carry >the stress over a surface instead of the single-line contact area
      it has 
      >presently. Or just a new fitting, and tightened more carefully.  I will
      install >inspection ports in the fabric at this location for the
      maintenance and continued
      >inspection. Any comments, history, suggestions from DENNIS @ Kolb ?
      
      I've been trailering my original FireStar on a 4x8' trailer for 11 years
      now and I don't have that problem you described. The little trailer does
      have shock absorption in the frame, but I fly year-round and mine is
      holding up just fine. I did, however, put a drop of fast-glue on all the
      internal ny-lock nuts inside the wing when I built it. I do check the
      drag strut fitting in my preflights too.
      
      Ralph Burlingame
      Minneapolis
      original FireStar
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Dec 02, 1997
Subject: 
Re: WING FOLDING ON MKIII
From: 
rick106(at)juno.com (RICK M LIBERSAT)
      
      FRANK
       I can not set my M III up alone even if I am on the grass to let the
      wing lay down! One problem is that on one wing the bottom of the inboard
      wing will bump the 3/8 tube that is under the gap seal. If I were to let
      the wing all the way down to the ground it would hit this under the gap
      seal tube I am sure that it would do major damage to the end of the spar
      where the inboard rib attaches to the spar I feel that it would rip the
      rivets out of the ring as well as the toung that is on the inside of the
      spar. The wing was set up exactly like the planes called for . I even
      used monofilament line stretched very tight across the leading edge of
      the wing the line was in the center of the leading from wing tip to wing
      tip and the line was the same distance from the leading edge on both
      wings not more than 1/16 gap. I could go on and on about the set up but
      the wing is on straight and true leading edge as well as trailing edge, 
      to same point on the hroz. stab.  If anyone knows how I can rig something
      up to set  the M III up alone I an all ears. 
      
      RICK LIBERSAT
          
      writes:
      >>Does any one out there with a MKIII have any idea how one person can
      >>fold and open the wings on a MKIII by ones self with out damaging the
      >>wings. I tried different ways and always had to have help.
      >>
      >>Frank.
      >>
      >>
      >>FRANK J. MARINO
      >>Chief Loadmaster 773 AS
      >>-
      >>
      >
      > I have allways done it by myself because it is more awkward to teach
      >someone how to do it or let them help you. The secret is to do it on 
      >grass
      >and to lay the wing tips down gently and pick them straight up so they 
      >don't
      >drag on the ground.
      >
      >Woody
      >
      >-
      >
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Dec 02, 1997
Subject: 
Re: WING FOLDING ON MKIII
From: 
rick106(at)juno.com (RICK M LIBERSAT)
      
      
      >FRANK
      > I can not set my M III up alone even if I am on the grass to let the 
      >wing lay down! One problem is that on one wing the bottom of the 
      >inboard wing will bump the 3/8 tube that is under the gap seal. If I 
      >were to let the wing all the way down to the ground it would hit this 
      >under the gap seal tube I am sure that it would do major damage to the 
      >end of the spar where the inboard rib attaches to the spar I feel that 
      >it would rip the rivets out of the ring as well as the toung that is 
      >on the inside of the spar. The wing was set up exactly like the planes 
      >called for . I even used monofilament line stretched very tight across 
      >the leading edge of the wing the line was in the center of the leading 
      >from wing tip to wing tip and the line was the same distance from the 
      >leading edge on both wings not more than 1/16 gap. I could go on and 
      >on about the set up but the wing is on straight and true leading edge 
      >as well as trailing edge,  to same point on the hroz. stab.  If anyone 
      >knows how I can rig something up to set  the M III up alone I an all 
      >ears. 
      >
      >RICK LIBERSAT
      >    
      >writes:
      >>>Does any one out there with a MKIII have any idea how one person 
      >can
      >>>fold and open the wings on a MKIII by ones self with out damaging 
      >the
      >>>wings. I tried different ways and always had to have help.
      >>>
      >>>Frank.
      >>>
      >>>
      >>>FRANK J. MARINO
      >>>Chief Loadmaster 773 AS
      >>>-
      >>>
      >>
      >> I have allways done it by myself because it is more awkward to 
      >teach
      >>someone how to do it or let them help you. The secret is to do it on 
      >
      >>grass
      >>and to lay the wing tips down gently and pick them straight up so 
      >they 
      >>don't
      >>drag on the ground.
      >>
      >>Woody
      >>
      >>-
      >>
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Dec 02, 1997
From: 
Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com>
Subject: 
Oil N' Folding
      
              I still think the best oil going is Phillips 66 Injex. 500 hours in
      a 277 Rotax, and 350 hours in two different 532's with no troubles, although
      you do need to clean the rings and scrape the piston crown every 100 hours.
      But what do you expect for $1.35 a quart? 
              My wife helps me set up the MKIII, and that works pretty easy. If I
      was to do it alone, I would make a big, tall, padded sawhorse with the top
      angled to match the fuselage attachments. After I swung the wing around by
      the rear spar attachment and laid the outboard end on the sawhorse, I would
      hook up the front spar to the fuselage, then attach the lower lift strut to
      the fuselage. Then I would use my shoulder/neck/head to hold up the wing
      while I attached the upper strut end.  Since I have never needed to do this,
      it is strictly theory. Maybe I can get someone else to try it first and tell
      me why it won't work, so that I won't have to find out the hard way myself. 
              
              Richard Pike
              MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)   
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Dec 02, 1997
From: 
Larry Cottrell <lcottrel(at)kfalls.net>
Subject: 
observations
      
      Hi,
        Thanks for the response, I guess I should have been a little more 
      informative. 
        The problem with the oil probably began showing up at about 40 hours. I 
      just lost poop- the engine sounded just as good but the climb was off. I 
      got a compression guage to check and found that the compression had 
      dropped to 90 - 95 lbs. One of the things that I read somewhere, maybe 
      here, said that if compression dropped to 80 then you had trouble. I 
      think that it starts well before that. The rings were so stuck and gooped 
      up that it was decided to replace them. There was also discoloration on 
      the wrist pins and needle bearings.(blue- so they were getting heat) I'm 
      not sure if that is normal or not. There was never any sign of excessive 
      cht temps. 375 was the highest I can remember. The oil that I was using 
      was Chevron TW3. I just don't believe that there should or needs to be 
      that much unburned junk left in less than 50 hours. I will either use 
      AV-2 or Golden spectro when I get going again. Rick- email 
      bakerv4(at)kfalls.net for the answer to your needle bearing questions. 
        As for wing folding and trailering. I have made some quite lengthy 
      trips with mine in the trailer and the only problem that I have had is 
      the tube in the boom tube that the wing gadget fits into to hold them 
      folded. I lost my original some where over uncharted territory and the 
      replacement is always getting just a little bent out of shape. Really 
      need to make something that the wings will fit into that goes over the 
      boom tube. Some sort of a cradle. I leave my struts attatched to the 
      fuselage and fold them back along the engine with a bungee cord. When I 
      am going to put it together I just lay the struts down, unfold the wings 
      one at a time and lay them on a blanket, pin the wing and then lift up 
      the wing on my shoulder and attatch the struts. A padded saw horse would 
      work good if the wing is binding when it is laid down. ( this is of 
      course a firestar, Mk III's may be more difficult.
      
      Thanks for the help
      Larry
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
"Ron  Carroll " <ron.carroll(at)worldnet.att.net>
Subject: 
Re: Engine choices - are there any besides Rotax
Date: 
Dec 03, 1997
      
      Ben, FWIW, several years ago I converted to dual
      EGT by relocating the single probe, and buying a
      second. I ran the leads to a toggle switch, then
      to the gauge.  I monitored the hottest cylinder,
      but had the capability to switch from one cylinder
      to the other.  This eliminated the chance of
      having two gauges that were not calibrated exactly
      the same.  Worked fine for me, and the price was
      right.
      
      Ron
      
      
      >On Tue, 2 Dec 1997 GeoR38(at)aol.com wrote:
      >
      ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu writes:
      >>
      >> << I use only single EGT at the Y (far from
      ideal, i know) but checking my
      >> plug
      >>  color shows both cylinders to be okay >>
      >> Ben! A man of your background and
      character.....putting the SINGLE egt at
      >> theY...how could you??...[:-)....just teasin'n
      pal....but that is the
      >> intensity of the response I got when I spoke
      about my high temp readings.
      >
      >Yeah, i know, you are right.  Now i guess i've
      let the cat outa the bag.
      >Why the heck did anybody ever even sell single Y
      probe EGT setups?  I was
      >young and foolish when i bought that.  To change
      to dual EGT i gotta do
      >more than just add another probe:
      >   - buy a dual EGT guage
      >   - buy a new tach  (my current gauge is a combo
      egt/tach)
      >   - probably make a new instrument panel cuz the
      new gauge throws off
      >     current layout
      >   - buy 2 new probes ...can't even re-use the
      single Y probe as those
      >     are too long for the correct single probe
      placement.
      >
      >So there's my whiny excuse for not changing to
      the right way to do it.
      >Well, at least i look at the single egt gauge, on
      purpose, frequently. :-)
      >
      >I sit thru watching 1300 F  EGT at full power
      (even upto 1325 briefly) and
      >1050-1200 cruise, usually 1125-ish at 4900.  I'm
      finally almost getting
      >used to the big numbers.  I've run this way for
      140 hrs TTSN.
      >
      >
      >                                           ------
      --|--------
      > Ben Ransom
      (*)
      > Email: bransom(at)ucdavis.edu
      o   o
      > http://mae.engr.ucdavis.edu/~ransom
      >
      >-
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Dec 03, 1997
From: 
"Bill Weber (DVNS)" <bweber(at)micom.com>
Subject: 
Re: Engine choices - are there any besides Rotax
      
      On Tue, 2 Dec 1997, Ben Ransom wrote:
      
      > 
      > I sit thru watching 1300 F  EGT at full power (even upto 1325 briefly) and
      > 1050-1200 cruise, usually 1125-ish at 4900.  I'm finally almost getting
      > used to the big numbers.  I've run this way for 140 hrs TTSN.
      > 
      >  Ben Ransom                                       (*)
      
      I also use a single EGT probe on a single carb 503. Your numbers are in line 
      with what I see. I used to get up to 1400 on climb out with cruise around 
      1200. Since switching to avgas it maxes about 1275 and cruises around 
      1125. Once you determine what normal is, you just have to watch for changes.
      
      ***********************************************
      * Bill Weber                 * Keep           *
      * MICOM Communications Corp. *   the shiny    *
      * Simi Valley, CA            *        side up *
      ***********************************************
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Dec 03, 1997
From: 
"Richard Neilsen" <neilsenr(at)state.mi.us>
Subject: 
Re: How to N number a plane that was built by someone 
              -Reply
      
      I just finished getting my VW powered MKIII inspected. I really don=27t
      think you will have a problem getting a N number and getting the plane
      approved. The only time were the FAA really could find out if you were not
      the real builder is at the time of inspection. My inspector did a paper
      inspection and made some reference about his assumption that I didn=27t
      have a builders log. He was ready to approve it without one but I pushed
      it under his nose. I have heard of many people never being asked to show
      the builders log. I would spend considerable time reviewing the constructio=
      n of the plane and for your own safety removing some of the wing covering
      to inspect the wings. If you are called on the fact that its used airplane
      and they want to see the logs, explain that it was built and used for
      sometime as a training airplane and you now you want to make it legal. The
      process would involve you  certifying documents that among many other
      things indicate that you are the builder. The main concern that the FAA
      has is that they don=27t want you hiring someone to build the plane for
      you which I assume you didn=27t do. There is a real moral issue here but
      if you want to fly the plane this may the best way. I highly recommend
      this way as apposed to flying as a fat/training ultralight and jeopardizing=
       the FAA=27s very generous cooperation in that area.
      
      This is my =24.02 worth
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
WGrooms511(at)aol.com
Date: 
Dec 03, 1997
Subject: 
Re: Re[2]: Disappointing (General Cage Painting)
      
      Gentlemen;
      There is only one way to spray your cage in my opinion. Buy a Pasch brand
      dual action air brush, and use it. It will pay for itself very quickly in
      paint saved as well as the health and safety factors. It comes with a four
      ounce bottle that you should use. You will be AMAZED at how far four ounces
      of paint will go if it all is applied to the surface rather than sprayed into
      the air. This nifty little unit is used by artists to paint the murals on the
      side of those fancy vans you see around. They can be tuned down to paint a
      line as fine as 1/16 inch, or as wide as about three inches. You will use it
      again and again during the construction of you project. I have used mine for
      many many projects, and would not take $500 for it if I couldn't get another.
      Give it a try. You won't be sorry.
      W Grooms
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
"Marino, Frank J (Youngstown ARB)" <Frank.Marino(at)yng.afres.af.mil>
Subject: 
RE: Re[2]: Disappointing (General Cage Painting)
Date: 
Dec 03, 1997
      
      I also used an air brush on my MKIII and your right you hardly use any
      paint and you get good coverage with very little paint loose, it is
      easier to spray in the tight places.
      
      FRANK J. MARINO
      Chief Loadmaster 773 AS
      
      >----------
      >From:         WGrooms511(at)aol.com[SMTP:WGrooms511(at)aol.com]
      >Sent:         Wednesday, December 03, 1997 12:52 PM
      >To:         jerryb(at)jmd.ods.com
      >Cc:         kolb(at)intrig.com
      >Subject:         Re: Re[2]: Disappointing (General Cage Painting)
      >
      >Gentlemen;
      >There is only one way to spray your cage in my opinion. Buy a Pasch brand
      >dual action air brush, and use it. It will pay for itself very quickly in
      >paint saved as well as the health and safety factors. It comes with a four
      >ounce bottle that you should use. You will be AMAZED at how far four ounces
      >of paint will go if it all is applied to the surface rather than sprayed into
      >the air. This nifty little unit is used by artists to paint the murals on the
      >side of those fancy vans you see around. They can be tuned down to paint a
      >line as fine as 1/16 inch, or as wide as about three inches. You will use it
      >again and again during the construction of you project. I have used mine for
      >many many projects, and would not take $500 for it if I couldn't get another.
      >Give it a try. You won't be sorry.
      >W Grooms
      >-
      >
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
jerryb(at)jmd.ods.com
Date: 
Dec 04, 1997
Subject: 
Re: questions and observations
      
           
      Ok, for us newies, what is Seafoam.
      
      ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
      Subject: Kolb-List: Re: questions and observations
      Date:    12/2/97 9:29 PM
      
      
           
      writes:
      >Larry Cottrell wrote:
      > 
      > Hi,
      > I tried this once before, got a unable to deliver as usual, but have 
      >had no response at all so I really am beginning to think that it was
      > indeed undeliverable. My question was about the full enclosure for the 
      >firestar II. Does it effect the ability to fold it up?
      > We had a discussion about oils some time back. I was unable to get
      > pennsoil so obtained a tw3 oil that had the same label on it as does 
      > Pennsoil. After 50 hours the rings were stuck and gave the appearance 
      of
      >uneven wear, perhaps not really seated. It required the replacement of 
      the
      >the rings. So its synthetic for me. 
      > 
      > Larry
           
      I don't own a FS II but the full enclosure does not affect its wing fold 
      capability.
           
      I used a mineral-based oil until I discovered "Klotz", a synthetic 
      2-cycle oil that claims to outperform any mineral oil. So far I've had 
      very good luck with it and my plugs are the cleanest I've ever seen them. 
      They are so clean that I don't bother taking them out anymore. I just 
      change them annually. I had stuck rings with the mineral oil, but using 
      the "Klotz" oil and putting "Seafoam" in the engine
      occasionally may be the answer to the stuck ring problem. I use a 50:1 
      mix and am debating whether to continue using premium unleaded (92 
      octane) auto gas vs the regular (87 octane) auto gas.
           
      Ralph Burlingame
      Minneapolis
      original FireStar (serial #49)
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
"Richard Swiderski" <swidersk(at)digital.net>
Subject: 
Re: Engine choices - are there any besides Rotax
Date: 
Dec 04, 1997
      
      To add a wrinkle: I too added an additional probe, with both at the
      recommended distance from the piston skirt, and used a quality switch to
      toggle between the two probes.  I had an engine seizure at 1200 degres F
      indicated.  After failing to find a cause, I checked the accuracy of my EGT
      with a commercial digital pyrometer and found mine was reading 100 plus
      degrees LOW.  I removed the swittch from the cicuit & it read correctly. 
      The Resistance in that circuit is critical (that is why they insist  on
      using only their wire harness from the probe to the guage).  The switch has
      to add a small amount & in my case, caused a seizure as I jet my carbs by
      the exhaust tempt of its cylinder.  I did not change anything and used that
      system for 200 hrs --I just knew they were indicating 100 degrees lower
      than the true temp. (BTW, the higher the resistance, the lower the voltage,
      & the lower the reading on your meter)
              Another wrinkle:  Years ago I drilled 3 holes in my exhaust manifold. The
      1st was 1" from the piston, the 2nd was 2" & the 3rd hole was 3".  I put
      the same probe into each hole on and found the difference in indicated
      temperature to be almost undedectable.  Maybe I did something that was not
      consistent (but I can't think of a possibility), but according to that
      test, anything in the 2-3" range is a fine spot.  Now I did not test the
      temp. at the Y on that engine, but I can not believe that by going further
      away from the heat source you will find a higher temperature.  Nor does it
      seem possible to increase the temp. of a probe in a tube by feeding another
      tube of the same temperature gas into the 1st tube (as in doubling  the
      flow of gases at the Y).  1100 degrees of gas plus 1100 degrees of gas is
      still 1100 degrees.  There is no additive effect.  I am not saying you are
      not reading a higher temp at the Y  than at the recommended 1" from the
      piston.  I'm just saying if you are, it is a mystery I would love to
      understand!
      ----------
      > From: Ron  Carroll  <ron.carroll(at)worldnet.att.net>
      > To: mail List Kolb ; Ben Ransom
      
      > Subject: Re: Engine choices - are there any besides Rotax
      > Date: Wednesday, December 03, 1997 8:22 AM
      > 
      > Ben, FWIW, several years ago I converted to dual
      > EGT by relocating the single probe, and buying a
      > second. I ran the leads to a toggle switch, then
      > to the gauge.  I monitored the hottest cylinder,
      > but had the capability to switch from one cylinder
      > to the other.  This eliminated the chance of
      > having two gauges that were not calibrated exactly
      > the same.  Worked fine for me, and the price was
      > right.
      > 
      > Ron
      > 
      > 
      > >On Tue, 2 Dec 1997 GeoR38(at)aol.com wrote:
      > >
      > ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu writes:
      > >>
      > >> << I use only single EGT at the Y (far from
      > ideal, i know) but checking my
      > >> plug
      > >>  color shows both cylinders to be okay >>
      > >> Ben! A man of your background and
      > character.....putting the SINGLE egt at
      > >> theY...how could you??...[:-)....just teasin'n
      > pal....but that is the
      > >> intensity of the response I got when I spoke
      > about my high temp readings.
      > >
      > >Yeah, i know, you are right.  Now i guess i've
      > let the cat outa the bag.
      > >Why the heck did anybody ever even sell single Y
      > probe EGT setups?  I was
      > >young and foolish when i bought that.  To change
      > to dual EGT i gotta do
      > >more than just add another probe:
      > >   - buy a dual EGT guage
      > >   - buy a new tach  (my current gauge is a combo
      > egt/tach)
      > >   - probably make a new instrument panel cuz the
      > new gauge throws off
      > >     current layout
      > >   - buy 2 new probes ...can't even re-use the
      > single Y probe as those
      > >     are too long for the correct single probe
      > placement.
      > >
      > >So there's my whiny excuse for not changing to
      > the right way to do it.
      > >Well, at least i look at the single egt gauge, on
      > purpose, frequently. :-)
      > >
      > >I sit thru watching 1300 F  EGT at full power
      > (even upto 1325 briefly) and
      > >1050-1200 cruise, usually 1125-ish at 4900.  I'm
      > finally almost getting
      > >used to the big numbers.  I've run this way for
      > 140 hrs TTSN.
      > >
      > >
      > >                                           ------
      > --|--------
      > > Ben Ransom
      > (*)
      > > Email: bransom(at)ucdavis.edu
      > o   o
      > > http://mae.engr.ucdavis.edu/~ransom
      > >
      > >-
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Dec 03, 1997
From: 
"Bill Weber (DVNS)" <bweber(at)micom.com>
Subject: 
Re: EGT Temps: was Re: Engine choices...
      
      On Thu, 4 Dec 1997, Richard Swiderski wrote:
      
      -snip-
      >  Now I did not test the
      > temp. at the Y on that engine, but I can not believe that by going further
      > away from the heat source you will find a higher temperature.  Nor does it
      > seem possible to increase the temp. of a probe in a tube by feeding another
      > tube of the same temperature gas into the 1st tube (as in doubling  the
      > flow of gases at the Y).  1100 degrees of gas plus 1100 degrees of gas is
      > still 1100 degrees.  There is no additive effect.  I am not saying you are
      > not reading a higher temp at the Y  than at the recommended 1" from the
      > piston.  I'm just saying if you are, it is a mystery I would love to
      > understand!
      
      The exhaust gas coming from a two-stroke engine like the rotax contains a 
      fair amount of unburned fuel. This fuel continues to burn as it passes 
      through the exhaust system. That is why the EGT will actually be higher 
      the further you get from the piston (up to a point, of course).
      
      The effect is the same with a candle. The peak temperature of a candle flame 
      will be just above very tip of the flame rather than at the center of the 
      flame.
      
      ***********************************************
      * Bill Weber                 * Keep           *
      * MICOM Communications Corp. *   the shiny    *
      * Simi Valley, CA            *        side up *
      ***********************************************
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
WGrooms511(at)aol.com
Date: 
Dec 03, 1997
Subject: 
Re: Re[2]: Disappointing (General Cage Painting)
      
      Gentlemen;
      I'm glad to hear several of you have an interest in the Paashe air brush.(I
      had spelled it wrong before; sorry about that) You can buy one at your local
      automotive paint store, or order one from Northern Hydraulics by calling
      1-800-556-7885.
      The double action model costs $64.99 from Northern.
      I primed and painted my entire fuselage as well as painted every tube in my
      wing with zinc chromate with the air brush. I don't remember how much zinc
      chromate I used, but it wasn't much. I had only bought a quart, and I still
      have a bunch left yet today.  It seemed like it took forever to empty that
      four ounce jar.
      You get very little overspray. You should however, still use a resparator.
      You may think that you are not breathing paint fumes with the air brush, and
      you aren't breathing much, but those fumes are DEADLY. A paper mask type
      filter is worthless for this type of painting. Buy a chemical quality
      resparator and USE IT.
      I am ademate about this because I know of a member of a local EAA chapter who
      was painting his kitfox with his brother as his helper. His brother used only
      a paper filter, and they were spraying Isocyanate paint. His brother was dead
      the next morning. 
      So enjoy your air brush, and take precautions to protect your health.
      W. Grooms 
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Dec 03, 1997
From: 
tswartz(at)prolog.net (Terry Swartz)
Subject: 
bad gas day
      
       Swartz wrote:
      > 
      > >
      > > Russell Duffy wrote:
      > > >
      > > > >Get youself a handyfill pump from CPS.  Its a little hand pump you can
      > > > >put in your gas can and pump the fuel in the tanks.  $14.95.  It
      > > > >actually works very well allthough I haven't had mine very long.  Before
      > > > >this I set a gas can on a stepladder and used a siphon.
      > > >
      > > > I looked in my 1997 CPS catalog and can't find the pump you're talking
      > > > about.  There are two that I see- "Petro Pump" on page 247 (#8811, $39.95)
      > > > and "Drum Gasoline Pump" on page 286 (#8869, $29.95).  I must be
      missing it?
      > > > What heading is  under, what page?
      > > >
      > > > Thanks,
      > > > Rusty
      > >
      > > Rusty
      > >
      > > I don't even have a CPS catalogue, but a friend gave me an ad and I
      > > called them.  The item number on my invoice was 8895  Han-D-Pump Kit
      > > 14.95.  As I recall, the ad said something about petro pump and you can
      > > buy it with the can or without. I got it without.  It takes a few
      > > minutes to fill both tanks but you can do it without making a mess.  We
      > > had a great weather today and I ran about 11 gallons through my M III
      > > today.  3.8 hrs for a total of 47.2.  I took my three kids and wife for
      > > nice ride today and they all loved it.  Looks like I'll be in the ride
      > > giving business for some time to come as they all want to go again and
      > > have friends that want to go.  All we need is the weather.
      > >
      > > Later
      > >
      > > Terry
      
      PS. I've tried to seed this several times and it kept bouncing back.  Sorry,
      but I was trying a new e-mail program.
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Dec 03, 1997
From: 
Cliff and Carolyn Stripling <striplic(at)dfw.net>
Subject: 
Re: extra seat belts
      
      >If any body needs a new set of the Kolb seat belts supplied with the Firestar
      >2 kits let me know, I have mine left over which I did not use.
      >tim
      
      To All,
      
      I used an extra set of seat belts to make a four point system.  Someone
      should take Tim up on his offer.
      
      Later,
      
      --
      Cliff & Carolyn Stripling   Him:  Kolb MKIII - N582CC (34.6 hrs)
      (972)247-9821 Dallas Texas  Her:  Real Estate Broker - Texas
                  Both: 5th Wheel - RV - Travel
       
              ____________________|_____________________
                             ___(+^+)___      
                                 (_)   
                                8   8
                                  
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Dec 03, 1997
From: 
Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com>
Subject: 
Re:EGT probes
      
      >)
      >        Another wrinkle:  Years ago I drilled 3 holes in my exhaust manifold.
      The
      >1st was 1" from the piston, the 2nd was 2" & the 3rd hole was 3".  I put
      >the same probe into each hole on and found the difference in indicated
      >temperature to be almost undedectable.  Maybe I did something that was not
      >consistent (but I can't think of a possibility), but according to that
      >test, anything in the 2-3" range is a fine spot.  Now I did not test the
      >temp. at the Y on that engine, but I can not believe that by going further
      >away from the heat source you will find a higher temperature.  Nor does it
      >seem possible to increase the temp. of a probe in a tube by feeding another
      >tube of the same temperature gas into the 1st tube (as in doubling  the
      >flow of gases at the Y).  1100 degrees of gas plus 1100 degrees of gas is
      >still 1100 degrees.  There is no additive effect.  I am not saying you are
      >not reading a higher temp at the Y  than at the recommended 1" from the
      >piston.  I'm just saying if you are, it is a mystery I would love to
      >understand!
      >----------
              One variable to the equation is two stroke pulse waves. Several
      years ago I added a smoke system to my Hummer (Rotax 277) by injecting
      Corvis oil into the exhaust manifold just down from the EGT probe. At the
      time I was using an exhaust paint that would lighten up and flake if the
      temp got too high. After a flight where I had used the smoke for several
      minutes at a constant throttle setting, the pipe would have the paint
      blistered off about every 8", with good paint in between. Obviously the
      exhaust pulse waves were concentrating the heat from the hot oil
      semi-combusting every so often down the pipe. 
              So I guess it could make a difference where you locate the probe
      relative to what the pulse waves were doing.
              
              Richard Pike
              MKIII N420P(42OldPoops)
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: 
Re: questions and observations
From: 
ul15rhb(at)juno.com (Ralph H Burlingame)
Date: 
Dec 03, 1997
      
      
      On Thu, 04 Dec 97 03:06:12 cst jerryb(at)jmd.ods.com writes:
      >     
      >Ok, for us newies, what is Seafoam.
      
      
      I just found out about the stuff myself. If any of you guys know Al Reay,
      who has won ultralight/light-plane awards at Oshkosh, knows a lot about
      the 2-cycle engine. Al has flown his 2-cycle powered planes across the US
      many times and usually flies to Oshkosh. I was talking to him one day
      when I flew out to Winsted, MN where he bases his Ran's S-14 and a few
      others. I told him about the stuck-ring problem. He confessed to me that
      he had been using "Seafoam" in his engines. "Seafoam" is a gasoline
      additive that has been around since 1947. It comes in a small round can
      about the same size of a "Campbell's" soup can. It has red lettering and
      shows pictures of cars, motorcycles, snowmobiles, etc. on the side of the
      can. It is suppose to soften carbon up and clean the engine of it. I
      purchased it at the local auto parts store. I put two capfuls in each
      spark plug hole when the piston is at TDC (otherwise it will leak out the
      transfer port into the crankcase.... which isn't bad for the engine... it
      just won't stay up in the rings where you want it). I had to treat each
      cylinder at different times because you have to let it sit for a few
      days. When time comes to start it up, it will blow out a stream of white
      smoke that will last about 10 minutes. I then took a flight around the
      pattern (for safety), then flew about 60 miles. If this stuff works by
      keeping my rings free, I will be extremely satisfied. I know that my
      rings will be stuck in 200 hrs. with mineral oil as they have in the
      past. Hopefully the synthetic "Klotz" and "Seafoam" will take care of
      this nuisance. Time will tell.
      
      Ralph Burlingame
      original FireStar
      Rotax 377
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: 
Re: questions and observations
From: 
ul15rhb(at)juno.com (Ralph H Burlingame)
Date: 
Dec 03, 1997
      
      On Thu, 04 Dec 97 03:06:12 cst jerryb(at)jmd.ods.com writes:
      >     
      >Ok, for us newies, what is Seafoam.
      
      
      I just found out about the stuff myself. If any of you guys know Al Reay,
      who has won ultralight/light-plane awards at Oshkosh, he knows a lot
      about the 2-cycle engine. Al has flown his 2-cycle powered planes across
      the US many times and usually flies to Oshkosh. I was talking to him one
      day when I flew out to Winsted, MN where he bases his Ran's S-14 and a
      few others. I told him about the stuck-ring problem. He confessed to me
      that he had been using "Seafoam" in his engines. "Seafoam" is a gasoline
      additive that has been around since the '40's. It comes in a small round
      can about the same size of a "Campbell's" soup can. It has red lettering
      and shows pictures of cars, motorcycles, snowmobiles, etc. on the side of
      the can. It is suppose to soften up carbon and clean the engine of it. I
      purchased it at the local auto parts store. I put two capfuls in each
      spark plug hole when the piston is at TDC (otherwise it will leak out the
      transfer port into the crankcase.... which isn't bad for the engine... it
      just won't stay up in the rings where you want it). I had to treat each
      cylinder at different times because you have to let it sit for a few
      days. When time comes to start it up, it will blow out a stream of white
      smoke that will last about 10 minutes. I then took a flight around the
      pattern (for safety), then flew about 60 miles. If this stuff works by
      keeping my rings free, I will be extremely satisfied. I know that my
      rings will be stuck in 200 hrs with mineral oil as they have done  the
      past. Hopefully the synthetic "Klotz" and "Seafoam" will take care of
      this nuisance. Time will tell.
      
      Ralph Burlingame
      Original FireStar
      Rotax 377
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Dec 04, 1997
From: 
tswartz(at)prolog.net (Terry Swartz)
Subject: 
rough running 912
      
      
      This may get a little long, but some of you will find it interesting. 
      I've had some problems with the 912 on my Mark III which have since been
      resolved.  The 912 is running great now.  I'm going to list the symptoms
      some of which I didn't realize were related at the time and I'm curious
      to see who will figure it out.
      
      Symptom 1.  I first flew the plane the end of Oct when temps were in the
      50's.  Everything seemed fine except there was a little vibration from
      3500 rpm to 3900 rpm.  I checked the tracking of the prop and pitch of
      all prop blades and everyhthing checked out fine.  Since this was a new
      plane to me I assumed just a vibration and I tried to avoid that rpm
      range.
      Symptom 2.  As temps got cooler the vibration seemed to get a little
      worse in the rpm range and another problem developed.
      
      Symptom 3.  Engine ran fine on climb out but when I would level off the
      engine would begin to run rough.  The first time it happened I made a
      bee line back to the airport keeping plenty of altitude and airspeed on
      approach and when I throttled back below 3900 rpm the engine almost
      quit.  I was glad to be on the ground.  I tied down the tail and blocked
      the wheels and did some static runs on the ground.  Engine ran fine. Egt
      at full throttle was 1575 which is where it always seemed to be.  Red
      line on 912 is 1650 or so.  Decided to fly it again.  Engine ran fine on
      climb out, egt 1550, rpm normal.  Leveled off, staying in airport
      pattern and engine began to run rough again.  Egt would drop to 1375
      when  I throttled back.  I tried full power and other settings and it
      just ran rough so I landed again and went home to think about it.
      
      I decided to richen the mixture, maybe it was running to lean since
      weather was colder.  Two carb that adjust the mixture for altitude with
      some sort of diaphram, what was I getting into.  It ended up an easy
      job. clips were in slot 3 on the pins so I went to slot 4.  Tied everyting
      down for a static run.  Engine ran great, in fact rpm was a little higher and
      egt's were a little lower.  I then assumed I was running on the lean
      side and the colder temps were enough to put it over the edge.  Went for
      test flight.  Climb out was normal and rpm was the same as always, I
      expected it to be a little higher, and egt's were in the low 1400's.
      (Clue ---  rpm on climb out was actually about 100 rpm's lower then
      static rpm.) Leveled off and it started running rough again but not as
      bad.  What now?
      
      Your turn.
      
      Terry
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Dec 04, 1997
From: 
"Jim Gerken GERKEN(at)RCHVMX.VNET.IBM.COM" <GERKEN(at)RCHVMX.VNET.IBM.COM>
Subject: 
Terry's rough-running 912
      
        Terry, your prop pitch is too high.
      
        What do I win?
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Dec 04, 1997
From: 
Charles Henry <chhenry(at)plains.nodak.edu>
Subject: 
Re: Engine choices - are there any besides Rotax
      
      >Ben, FWIW, several years ago I converted to dual
      >EGT by relocating the single probe, and buying a
      >second. I ran the leads to a toggle switch, then
      >to the gauge.  
      
      Ron
      I would think that the copper wire to the brass switch terminals would cause
      some error in the accuracy of the EGT. Splices or other connections that
      have dissimilar metals will be a cold junction and will create a tiny
      voltage depending on temperature and this will add to or subtract from the
      small voltage the thermocouple puts out . Have you checked the calibration
      of the probes with and without the switch? If the difference is small that
      sounds like a good idea. I wonder how accurate our EGT instruments are to
      start with.
      
      
      Charles Henry
      Hankinson ND
      Firestar I
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
Scott Bentley <Scott.Bentley(at)Bentley.Com>
Subject: 
Radio Controlled Slingshot
Date: 
Dec 04, 1997
      
      This is a page from the January issue of Model Airplane News (used with
      permission)
      
      http://www.bentley.com/scott/rcpix/kolbrc.jpg
      
      If you're interested in the magazine:
      
      http://www.airage.com/man/
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
Cavuontop <Cavuontop(at)aol.com>
Date: 
Dec 04, 1997
Subject: 
Re: Re[2]: Disappointing (General Cage Painting)
      
      
      << You may think that you are not breathing paint fumes with the air brush,
      and
       you aren't breathing much, but those fumes are DEADLY. A paper mask type
       filter is worthless for this type of painting. Buy a chemical quality
       resparator and USE IT. >>
      
      
      A good point.  I took it a step further and made my own supplied air
      respirator.  You know those Hobby-Air devices that cost a bundle?  Hobby air
      will sell you it's mask  for about $60.00, which is all you really need.  Then
      I took an old vacuume cleaner and 50 ft of garden hose and made myself a dandy
      little supplied air respirator.  I subsequently donated it to my EAA chapter
      and other folks have used it with good results.
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
"John Russell" <jr(at)rometool.com>
Subject: 
Re: Re[2]: Disappointing (General Cage Painting)
Date: 
Dec 04, 1997
      
      
      That is a good idea , how do you get in touch with 
      hobby air.
      ----------
      > From: Cavuontop <Cavuontop(at)aol.com>
      > To: WGrooms511(at)aol.com
      > Cc: kolb(at)intrig.com
      > Subject: Re: Re[2]: Disappointing (General Cage Painting)
      > Date: Thursday, December 04, 1997 1:20 PM
      > 
      > 
      > << You may think that you are not breathing paint fumes with the air
      brush,
      > and
      >  you aren't breathing much, but those fumes are DEADLY. A paper mask type
      >  filter is worthless for this type of painting. Buy a chemical quality
      >  resparator and USE IT. >>
      > 
      > 
      > A good point.  I took it a step further and made my own supplied air
      > respirator.  You know those Hobby-Air devices that cost a bundle?  Hobby
      air
      > will sell you it's mask  for about $60.00, which is all you really need. 
      Then
      > I took an old vacuume cleaner and 50 ft of garden hose and made myself a
      dandy
      > little supplied air respirator.  I subsequently donated it to my EAA
      chapter
      > and other folks have used it with good results.
      > -
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
Cavuontop <Cavuontop(at)aol.com>
Date: 
Dec 04, 1997
Subject: 
Re: Re[2]: Disappointing (General Cage Painting)
      
      
      << That is a good idea , how do you get in touch with 
       hobby air. >>
      You can see their ads in kit planes and Sport Aviation.  I used a small sears
      vacuume cleaner and turned the fittings around so it blew air into the
      gardenhose.  The Hobby Air mask has a fitting that accepts the normal threaded
      end of a gardenhose.  I  did this because I was spooked by a story about a guy
      who died shortly after he painted a plane with aerothane while wearing a
      normal respirator, shorts and a teeshirt.  Apparently the skin contact was
      enough to get him, even with a respirator.
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Dec 04, 1997
From: 
jdc6(at)lehigh.edu (John D. Caffrey)
Subject: 
Re: Re[2]: Disappointing (General Cage Painting)
      
      
      >You can see their ads in kit planes and Sport Aviation.  I used a small sears
      >vacuume cleaner and turned the fittings around so it blew air into the
      >gardenhose.  The Hobby Air mask has a fitting that accepts the normal threaded
      >end of a gardenhose.  I  did this because I was spooked by a story about a guy
      >who died shortly after he painted a plane with aerothane while wearing a
      >normal respirator, shorts and a teeshirt.  Apparently the skin contact was
      >enough to get him, even with a respirator.
      >-
      
      Yuch! Just the thought of breathing the air flowing through a vacuum cleaner is
      enough to turn my stomach with all the filth and germs residing there. Also
      the air is heated by passing through the motor in most of the systems I've
      seen. Am I missing something here?
      
      John Caffrey
      http://www.win.net/~letsfly/4stroke/vw.htm
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
jerryb(at)jmd.ods.com
Date: 
Dec 05, 1997
Subject: 
Anybody have a FireFly with a BRS Chute
      
           Need some feed back from the field.  
           
           Please FireFLY only - were down to splitting hairs.
           
           Application - Fire-FLY (only)
           
           Model Chute: BRS-5-750# VSL (Vertical Launch System - the one in a 
           box)
           
           1.  If you have a FIRE-FLY with a BRS chute, especially a VSL system, 
           how long is you rip cord.  The actual length of the cable housing 
           between the bracket on the handle and the connector which screws on to 
           the rocket.
           
           2.  Where and how is your pull handle positioned.
           
           We got a VLS for a FireFly, the rip cord is either to short to place 
           next to the seat or to way long (need 16") to place on the right side 
           up near the top of the seat.  
           
           We were initially shipped a 5 foot cable, now BRS wants to ship us a 8 
           foot.  I feel it will be to long and are going over board.  We like 
           the position above your head to one side.  Our concern is you might 
           not be able to raise your arms that high to activate it needing to 
           over come G forces such as would occur in a spiral.  
           
           So far we had to modify the mounting tray by repositioning (drilling) 
           2 holes not a major problem.  It would install quite like the BRS 
           plans illustrated.  There's a interference problem with a web welded 
           between the square tubing forming the wing attachment and the round 
           tube under the engine mount.  Their drawing shows it in a different 
           location, but it causes an interference problem when trying to utilize 
           the provided (referenced) mounting holes.  Other than this is seems to 
           be a nice install.  We have yet to deal with the wing gap seal.
           
           A little taping and trim paint tonight or this weekend and it's engine 
           break in time.  Then its mount the wings, install the gap seal, run 
           the weight and balance, and then it time to fly.  
           
           Jerry Bidle
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
jerryb(at)jmd.ods.com
Date: 
Dec 05, 1997
Subject: 
Re[4]: Disappointing (General Cage Painting)
      
           
           It's not physical contact that's the problem.  It breathing the  fumes 
           from spraying Isocyanate paints.  Verify this, but I had been told 
           that most respirators DO NOT FILTER OUT Isocyanate fumes.  
           
           This is why the increased use of pressure mask when painting.  If you 
           leave the pump in the same air space with you, your cooked as well 
           since it will just pump the fumes into the mask, then you breath them. 
            The pressure mask also provides a positive pressure so if you have a 
           small seal problem, the air flows out rather than into the mask.  The 
           pump also must be in fresh air, not in a closed area with you.  
           
           This is serious business, take the precautions your OK, don't, get 
           careless and well you go in and have a beer after painting and die 
           sitting in the chair before the football games over. 
      
      
      ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
      Subject: Kolb-List: Re: Re[2]: Disappointing (General Cage Painting)
      Date:    12/4/97 4:10 PM
      
      
           
      << That is a good idea , how do you get in touch with 
       hobby air. >>
      You can see their ads in kit planes and Sport Aviation.  I used a small sears 
      vacuume cleaner and turned the fittings around so it blew air into the 
      gardenhose.  The Hobby Air mask has a fitting that accepts the normal threaded
      
      end of a gardenhose.  I  did this because I was spooked by a story about a guy
      
      who died shortly after he painted a plane with aerothane while wearing a normal
      
      respirator, shorts and a teeshirt.  Apparently the skin contact was enough to 
      get him, even with a respirator.
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Dec 04, 1997
From: 
Cal <cgreen(at)centuryinter.net>
Subject: 
Vacuum cleaner
      
        That vacuum cleaner idea sounds like a good one, but what if 
      you have a vacuum cleaner that has a little more power than 
      the hobby air system, does the mask regulate the pressure? or 
      do you regulate some other way?                               
        Cal
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
GeoR38 <GeoR38(at)aol.com>
Date: 
Dec 04, 1997
Subject: 
Re: Engine choices - are there any besides Rotax
      
      
      << I sit thru watching 1300 F  EGT at full power (even upto 1325 briefly) and
       1050-1200 cruise, usually 1125-ish at 4900.  I'm finally almost getting
       used to the big numbers.  I've run this way for 140 hrs TTSN.
        >>
      I put the probe at the Y because I thought it could monitor 2 cyl average
      instead of one since I only bought  a single meter from  Frank, I can't
      believe you would do this to a friend Frank!!!  :-)~ Just teasin folks, Frank
      is a wonderful guy in spite of his looks. Naw, just teasin agin, there's not
      too much wrong with his looks.
      Anyway, I think if us Y people compared notes we would come up with a data
      base of  temperatures and RPM that are meaningful. At least I suppose it could
      be.
      I intend to make a chart next flying season and post it on here......if of
      course my luck doesn't "run out".                                   GeoR38    
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
GeoR38 <GeoR38(at)aol.com>
Date: 
Dec 05, 1997
Subject: 
Re: Engine choices - are there any besides Rotax
      
      
      <<  I converted to dual
       EGT by relocating the single probe, and buying a
       second. I ran the leads to a toggle switch, then
       to the gauge.  I monitored the hottest cylinder,
       but had the capability to switch from one cylinder
       to the other.  This eliminated the chance of
       having two gauges that were not calibrated exactly
       the same.  Worked fine for me, and the price was
       right. >>
      Ron, that sounds like a great idea, but if my memory serves correctly, the
      weak link of such switchable system would be in the integrity of the toggle
      switch as the signal being switched is in the millivolt range which is in the
      same order of magnitude as the expected voltage drop across most switches. In
      other words the accuracy may be questionable because the switch, unless it is
      a very special one, may drop too much voltage. Do you  get repeatable
      readings? If so what brand switch did you use?
      GeoR38
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
"Ron  Carroll " <ron.carroll(at)worldnet.att.net>
Subject: 
Re: Engine choices - are there any besides Rotax
Date: 
Dec 04, 1997
      
      George, as you can tell, I am no brain surgeon.  I
      didn't even consider such things when I did it (in
      fact, I'm sorry I even submitted it).  All I do
      know is that I noted the reading before the change
      and the reading of the same cylinder under a
      similar condition with the switch installed .   I
      compensated for any variance, and WALLA!, as my
      old pal, Al Einstein once told me, " It's all
      relevant, Ronnie ! "
      
      Ron
      
      
      -----Original Message-----
      From: GeoR38 <GeoR38(at)aol.com>
      ; kolb(at)intrig.com
      ; ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu
      
      Date: Thursday December 04 1997 9:35 PM
      Subject: Kolb-List: Re: Engine choices - are there
      any besides Rotax
      
      
      ron.carroll(at)worldnet.att.net writes:
      >
      ><<  I converted to dual
      > EGT by relocating the single probe, and buying a
      > second. I ran the leads to a toggle switch, then
      > to the gauge.  I monitored the hottest cylinder,
      > but had the capability to switch from one
      cylinder
      > to the other.  This eliminated the chance of
      > having two gauges that were not calibrated
      exactly
      > the same.  Worked fine for me, and the price was
      > right. >>
      >Ron, that sounds like a great idea, but if my
      memory serves correctly, the
      >weak link of such switchable system would be in
      the integrity of the toggle
      >switch as the signal being switched is in the
      millivolt range which is in the
      >same order of magnitude as the expected voltage
      drop across most switches. In
      >other words the accuracy may be questionable
      because the switch, unless it is
      >a very special one, may drop too much voltage. Do
      you  get repeatable
      >readings? If so what brand switch did you use?
      >GeoR38
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
"Marino, Frank J (Youngstown ARB)" <Frank.Marino(at)yng.afres.af.mil>
Subject: 
Re: RE: Re: Engine choices - are there any besides Rotax
Date: 
Dec 05, 1997
      
      Excuse me George but a guy with a 1935 gasoline washing machine motor on
      his Kolb what does he know about EGT's, now if you want to talk about a
      MKIII with a full instrument panel with plenty of power to spare and a
      good looking Kolb we'll talk. Besides if I didn't sell you that RPM/EGT
      gage "exceptional cheap" you would still only have that thermometer tape
      to you muffler.
      
      FRANK J. MARINO
      Chief Loadmaster 773 AS
      
      >----------
      >From:         GeoR38[SMTP:GeoR38(at)aol.com]
      >Sent:         Thursday, December 04, 1997 11:59 PM
      >To:         ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu; kolb(at)intrig.com
      >Subject:         Re: Engine choices - are there any besides Rotax
      >
      >
      ><< I sit thru watching 1300 F  EGT at full power (even upto 1325 briefly) and
      > 1050-1200 cruise, usually 1125-ish at 4900.  I'm finally almost getting
      > used to the big numbers.  I've run this way for 140 hrs TTSN.
      >  >>
      >I put the probe at the Y because I thought it could monitor 2 cyl average
      >instead of one since I only bought  a single meter from  Frank, I can't
      >believe you would do this to a friend Frank!!!  :-)~ Just teasin folks, Frank
      >is a wonderful guy in spite of his looks. Naw, just teasin agin, there's not
      >too much wrong with his looks.
      >Anyway, I think if us Y people compared notes we would come up with a data
      >base of  temperatures and RPM that are meaningful. At least I suppose it
      >could
      >be.
      >I intend to make a chart next flying season and post it on here......if of
      >course my luck doesn't "run out".                                   GeoR38
      >-
      >
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Dec 05, 1997
From: 
T Swartz <Tswartz(at)postoffice.ptd.net>
Subject: 
rough running 912
      
      I've added a few more clues to the end of this, tomorrow the answer. 
      I'm not sure, but this problem may effect 2-strokes also.  BTW, the 912
      has Bing Constant Depression Carburettors Type 63-3.
      
      This may get a little long, but some of you will find it interesting. 
      I've had some problems with the 912 on my Mark III which have since been
      resolved.  The 912 is running great now.  I'm going to list the symptoms
      some of which I didn't realize were related at the time and I'm curious
      to see who will figure it out.
      
      Symptom 1.  I first flew the plane the end of Oct when temps were in the
      50's.  Everything seemed fine except there was a little vibration from
      3500 rpm to 3900 rpm.  I checked the tracking of the prop and pitch of
      all prop blades and everyhthing checked out fine.  Since this was a new
      plane to me I assumed just a vibration and I tried to avoid that rpm
      range.
      Symptom 2.  As temps got cooler the vibration seemed to get a little
      worse in the rpm range and another problem developed.
      
      Symptom 3.  Engine ran fine on climb out but when I would level off the
      engine would begin to run rough.  The first time it happened I made a
      bee line back to the airport keeping plenty of altitude and airspeed on
      approach and when I throttled back below 3900 rpm the engine almost
      quit.  I was glad to be on the ground.  I tied down the tail and blocked
      the wheels and did some static runs on the ground.  Engine ran fine. Egt
      at full throttle was 1575 which is where it always seemed to be.  Red
      line on 912 is 1650 or so.  Decided to fly it again.  Engine ran fine on
      climb out, egt 1550, rpm normal.  Leveled off, staying in airport
      pattern and engine began to run rough again.  Egt would drop to 1375
      when  I throttled back.  I tried full power and other settings and it
      just ran rough so I landed again and went home to think about it.
      
      I decided to richen the mixture, maybe it was running to lean since
      weather was colder.  Two carb that adjust the mixture for altitude with
      some sort of diaphram, what was I getting into.  It ended up an easy
      job. clips were in slot 3 on the pins so I went to slot 4.  Tied
      everyting
      down for a static run.  Engine ran great, in fact rpm was a little
      higher and
      egt's were a little lower.  I then assumed I was running on the lean
      side and the colder temps were enough to put it over the edge.  Went for
      test flight.  Climb out was normal and rpm was the same as always, I
      expected it to be a little higher, and egt's were in the low 1400's.
      (Clue ---  rpm on climb out was actually about 100 rpm's lower then
      static rpm.) Leveled off and it started running rough again but not as
      bad.  What now?
      
      Clue:  Once when flying with and ultrastar and another ultralight I had
      to fly at 45 to 55 mph.  That put me in the rough running rpm range of
      3500 to 3900 but as I actually slowed to 50 the roughness went away and
      the engine ran smooth.
      
      Clue:  I usually go through the 3500 to 3900 rpm range on approach. 
      Airspeed is generally high relative to the rpm.  The time the engine
      almost quit was the first time I expericenced the rough running and I
      was in a hurry to get back to the airport.  Airspeed on approach was
      much higher then usual.
      
      Clue:  After adjusting the carbs one notch richer engine was running
      better.  I flew level at 4500 rpm and engine was running pretty good. 
      Without changing rpm I started to climb and as my airspeed slowed the
      engine began to run smoother.  As I got to stall speed of 35 it was very
      smooth.  Without changing rpm I lowered the nose and began a descent. 
      As airspeed increased engine began to run rough and at 90 mph it was
      very rough.
      
      Tomorrow the answer.  These Bing Constant depression carbs are no longer
      depressing me.
      
      Terry
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
"Russell Duffy" <rad(at)pen.net>
Subject: 
Re: Radio Controlled Slingshot
Date: 
Dec 05, 1997
      
      
      >This is a page from the January issue of Model Airplane News (used with
      >permission)
      >
      >http://www.bentley.com/scott/rcpix/kolbrc.jpg
      
      
      I bet I can have some REAL fun now flying around the RC field :-)
      
      Rusty
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Dec 05, 1997
From: 
"Richard Neilsen" <neilsenr(at)state.mi.us>
Subject: 
Re: Engine choices - are there any besides Rotax -Reply
      
      Surprise I=27m going to talk about engine choices.
      
      Don=27t forget the VW engines. There are 4cyl and 2cyl versions that have
      been in service for a lot of years. They have had a problem with crank
      shaft breakage using cast or welded cranks and with must non wood props.
      Over all they provide reliable power. The problem now is that there
      isn=27t a turn key package for Kolbs. I purchased a Great Plains 2180cc
      long block app 2years ago for =243800.00. I have then had to purchase
      props, carburetors, ignitions systems etc. etc. etc. which I guess I have
      spent =241500.00 additional. I had hopes of giving you guys performance
      data by now but I=27m still sorting out the carburetor jetting before I
      fly it. So far I=27m real happy with the setup I don=27t think it weighs
      much more than the 912 Rotax (the total MKIII weight is 558lbs) it is
      supposed to produce 75HP at 3600 rpm and it sounds like a real airplane
      engine.
      
      Rick Neilsen VW powered Kolb MKIII.
      
      >>>  12/02/97 02:51am >>>
          
           I am one of the people that don=27t like (trust) the two strokes. 
      (Far
           too many cases where it was running fine until without warning
           something inside seizures up, bearing, piston, etc.) 
          
        
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Dec 05, 1997
From: 
"Bill Weber (DVNS)" <bweber(at)shark.micom.com>
Subject: 
Vacuum cleaner
      
      Q2FsIHdyaXRlczoNCiA+ICAgVGhhdCB2YWN1dW0gY2xlYW5lciBpZGVhIHNvdW5kcyBsaWtl
      IGEgZ29vZCBvbmUsIGJ1dCB3aGF0IGlmIA0KID4geW91IGhhdmUgYSB2YWN1dW0gY2xlYW5l
      ciB0aGF0IGhhcyBhIGxpdHRsZSBtb3JlIHBvd2VyIHRoYW4gDQogPiB0aGUgaG9iYnkgYWly
      IHN5c3RlbSwgZG9lcyB0aGUgbWFzayByZWd1bGF0ZSB0aGUgcHJlc3N1cmU/IG9yIA0KID4g
      ZG8geW91IHJlZ3VsYXRlIHNvbWUgb3RoZXIgd2F5PyAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg
      ICAgICAgICANCiA+ICAgQ2FsDQogDQpBbHNvLCBob3cgZG8geW91IGF0dGFjaCBhIGdhcmRl
      biBob3NlIHRvIGEgdmFjdXVtIGNsZWFuZXI/DQoNCioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioq
      KioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqDQ0KKiBCaWxsIFdlYmVyICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg
      ICAqIEtlZXAgICAgICAgICAgICoNDQoqIE1JQ09NIENvbW11bmljYXRpb25zIENvcnAuICog
      ICB0aGUgc2hpbnkgICAgKg0NCiogU2ltaSBWYWxsZXksIENBICAgICAgICAgICAgKiAgICAg
      ICAgc2lkZSB1cCAqDQ0KKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioq
      KioqKioqKioNCg==
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
Jason Omelchuck <jason(at)acuityinc.com>
Subject: 
FW: Vacuum cleaner
Date: 
Dec 05, 1997
      
      I would have the vacuum cleaner blow into a manifold (wood box) and
      have
      the garden hose attached to that manifold.  The manifold could also
      have
      holes that could be plugged to regulate the flow through the hose to
      the
      mask.
      
      > -----Original Message-----
      > From:        Bill Weber (DVNS) [SMTP:bweber(at)shark.micom.com]
      > Sent:        Friday, December 05, 1997 8:44 AM
      > To:        Cal
      > Cc:        kolb(at)intrig.com
      > Subject:        Vacuum cleaner
      >
      > Cal writes:
      >  >   That vacuum cleaner idea sounds like a good one, but what if
      >  > you have a vacuum cleaner that has a little more power than
      >  > the hobby air system, does the mask regulate the pressure? or
      >  > do you regulate some other way?                              
      >  >   Cal
      > 
      > Also, how do you attach a garden hose to a vacuum cleaner?
      >
      > ***********************************************
      >
      > * Bill Weber                 * Keep           *
      >
      > * MICOM Communications Corp. *   the shiny    *
      >
      > * Simi Valley, CA            *        side up *
      >
      > ***********************************************
      >
      N<=A7=B2=E6=ECr=B8>z=C7=A7u=E9sS[h(tm)=A8=E8=DA&=A2)=ED=AE(=1C=A2b'r[=9D=
      z)=ED...=E6=E8w+=A7=B2=E6=ECr=B8>zJ%o*.=AEv=A6{*.=DA&
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
jerryb(at)jmd.ods.com
Date: 
Dec 06, 1997
Subject: 
Status of FireFly - 5-Dec-97
      
           The temp has been dropping this week in Dallas.  This was putting 
           pressure on us since it looked like we wouldn't be able to finish the 
           trim painting this coming weekend.  We wanted to complete the first 
           engine start and break process this weekend.  It was necessary to have 
           the trim painting finished as paint doesn't stick well to oily fabric. 
           My partner was able to take off work early Thursday afternoon and 
           managed to finish the trim painting.  
           
           Last night we cut and mounted the wind screen.  Based upon last 
           weekends try out of getting in and out without the wind screen, I 
           think we may have a little more trimming to do on it. (These fat boys 
           are going to have a hard time clearing their feet on the lower part.  
           The FireFly is a little tighter than the FireStar.)  The next problem 
           we face is how to carry the cement block I need to stand on to get in 
           and out due to my being so short and the cage setting so high.  My 
           partners being much taller has much less difficult time.  One of our 
           "cow boy" airport buddies suggested we make a stirrup to swing over 
           the side for me.  Actually we started to consider it because its going 
           to be almost impossible for me step up into the cage without some 
           thing to assist me.  (Can't imagine what it would be like trying to 
           get into the SlingShot, would need one of those ladders that hook over 
           the side like they use on jet fighters.)
           
           to a defective grommet on the FireFly hammock type seat.  Recommend 
           looking the grommets over to verify they are properly installed 
           (staked).  One on our seat came apart when we were trying the seat out 
           last weekend.  It had not been properly staked during the seat 
           manufacturing process thus was able to separate into two parts when 
           pressure was exerted on it.  Note, Kolb offered us another seat but we 
           had already riveted it in so repair was the preferred solution.  I got 
           a "General" grommet kit but was unhappy with the grade of grommets 
           included with the kit, el-cheapo - very thin and weak.  With a little 
           work I was able to reuse the original grommet and using the kits 
           tools, restate it properly.  It looks as good as the others and should 
           hold.  Two happy campers....
           
           Things on the agenda to complete this weekend:
               Remount the instrument subpanel (for the last time I hope)
               Make the antenna or steal the one off my partners airplane
               Install gap seals on tail feathers    
               First engine start
               Engine break in
           
           Time and weather permitting -
              Mount the wings
              Install the gap seals
              Complete a thorough inspection
                 Verify flight controls 
                  - operate in proper direction
                  - proper amount of deflection 
              Final inspection by a technical counselor   
              Complete the weight and balance
              Complete another inspection
           
              First Flight - My Partners will be the Test Pilot
                  (hope BRS gets us the proper length rip cord before then)
              Fly to local Fly-In Saturday at 1 pm.
                  (not likely, don't think we'll make it this far this weekend    
                   but getting close, - just kidding we need to get a few hours   
                   on it before wondering far from the airport but we would have  
                   like to flown in)
               
           I am having a problem with my partner, he keeps calling it a Fly Baby, 
           no wonder BRS is confused and wants to send us a 8 foot long rip cord. 
             
           
           Jerry & Gary
           FireFly
           
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
Cavuontop <Cavuontop(at)aol.com>
Date: 
Dec 05, 1997
Subject: 
Re: Vacuum cleaner
      
      
      <<  what if 
       you have a vacuum cleaner that has a little more power than 
       the hobby air system, does the mask regulate the pressure? or 
       do you regulate some other way?                                >>
      
      
      The valve on the Hobby air mask is just like the one a respirator but turned
      around.  It is a soft rubber flap that shuts when you lower the pressure on
      the mask by breathing in.
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
jerryb(at)jmd.ods.com
Date: 
Dec 06, 1997
Subject: 
Needed - Lower Rider Gear Option for FireFly
      
           Hey Guys,
           
           I got a problem.  The FireFly is too tall for short little me to get 
           in and out.  Anyone have a low rider gear option for the FireFly as I 
           think I am going to need it.  
           
           Solution I
           Would be two shorter gear legs and a belly skid plate.  Flaw may be 
           over coming the loss of angle of attach of the wing.
           
           Solution II
           Would be electric or hydraulic operated gears legs which compress to 
           lower the cage closer to the ground and extend to raise it to it's 
           normal attitude.
           
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
WGrooms511 <WGrooms511(at)aol.com>
Date: 
Dec 05, 1997
Subject: 
Re: Re[4]: Disappointing (General Cage Painting)
      
      Jerry;
      I have done some research in reference to your statement that MOST respirators
      do not filter out isocyonate fumes, and found out that NO respirators filter
      out those fumes. A chemical grade respirator is made up of several paper type
      filters to filter out the droplets in the air, and a section that contains
      activated charcoal that absorbs the fumes of most paints. Isocyonate type
      paints are THE EXCEPTION. No filter on the market today works for these
      paints. That's why they tell us to use a fresh air supply system. One other
      point I found out. All paint fumes (Including Isocyonates) enter your body as
      readily through your eyes  as they do through your lungs. So using a fresh air
      system that does not force air into a complete head covering hood (with a
      window)  is not something that should be used.
      They also told me that a chemical grade respirator should be stored in an air
      tight container when not in use. The charcoal doesn't last nearly as long as
      most people think it does. They said "leave your respirator out of that
      airtight container for a week, and it becomes worthless." I hope this info
      impresses upon the unknowing, how dangerous these paints really are. It amazes
      me that they will sell them to anybody that walks in off the street, what with
      all the litigation going on in this country.
      Some of you older guys out there might remember the name Bopal India.
      That is a town in India that hosts a chemical plant owned by Union Carbide.
      Well, some number of years ago that plant had a leak of one of its chemicals
      that created a fume cloud that settled over the town late one night. The next
      morning over two thousand Indians didn't wake up. That cloud was created by
      Isocyonates.
      Carefull fellow pilots.
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
PNLSSDDS <PNLSSDDS(at)aol.com>
Date: 
Dec 05, 1997
Subject: 
Fwd: rough running 912
      
      
      To KOLB,
      
      I would like to be removed from the e-mail list for all future KOLB mailings.
      My son started this and has his own e-mail address at this point.  His e-mail
      is:
      highdive 69(at)aol.com
      
      I would again appreciate being removed.
      
      Sincerely,
      
      
      Peter  C. LaBudde
      
      
              owner-kolb(at)intrig.com using -f
              (204.186.30.18)
      Date: Fri, 05 Dec 1997 08:32:58 -0500
      From: T Swartz <Tswartz(at)postoffice.ptd.net>
      Subject: Kolb-List: rough running 912
      
      I've added a few more clues to the end of this, tomorrow the answer. 
      I'm not sure, but this problem may effect 2-strokes also.  BTW, the 912
      has Bing Constant Depression Carburettors Type 63-3.
      
      This may get a little long, but some of you will find it interesting. 
      I've had some problems with the 912 on my Mark III which have since been
      resolved.  The 912 is running great now.  I'm going to list the symptoms
      some of which I didn't realize were related at the time and I'm curious
      to see who will figure it out.
      
      Symptom 1.  I first flew the plane the end of Oct when temps were in the
      50's.  Everything seemed fine except there was a little vibration from
      3500 rpm to 3900 rpm.  I checked the tracking of the prop and pitch of
      all prop blades and everyhthing checked out fine.  Since this was a new
      plane to me I assumed just a vibration and I tried to avoid that rpm
      range.
      Symptom 2.  As temps got cooler the vibration seemed to get a little
      worse in the rpm range and another problem developed.
      
      Symptom 3.  Engine ran fine on climb out but when I would level off the
      engine would begin to run rough.  The first time it happened I made a
      bee line back to the airport keeping plenty of altitude and airspeed on
      approach and when I throttled back below 3900 rpm the engine almost
      quit.  I was glad to be on the ground.  I tied down the tail and blocked
      the wheels and did some static runs on the ground.  Engine ran fine. Egt
      at full throttle was 1575 which is where it always seemed to be.  Red
      line on 912 is 1650 or so.  Decided to fly it again.  Engine ran fine on
      climb out, egt 1550, rpm normal.  Leveled off, staying in airport
      pattern and engine began to run rough again.  Egt would drop to 1375
      when  I throttled back.  I tried full power and other settings and it
      just ran rough so I landed again and went home to think about it.
      
      I decided to richen the mixture, maybe it was running to lean since
      weather was colder.  Two carb that adjust the mixture for altitude with
      some sort of diaphram, what was I getting into.  It ended up an easy
      job. clips were in slot 3 on the pins so I went to slot 4.  Tied
      everyting
      down for a static run.  Engine ran great, in fact rpm was a little
      higher and
      egt's were a little lower.  I then assumed I was running on the lean
      side and the colder temps were enough to put it over the edge.  Went for
      test flight.  Climb out was normal and rpm was the same as always, I
      expected it to be a little higher, and egt's were in the low 1400's.
      (Clue ---  rpm on climb out was actually about 100 rpm's lower then
      static rpm.) Leveled off and it started running rough again but not as
      bad.  What now?
      
      Clue:  Once when flying with and ultrastar and another ultralight I had
      to fly at 45 to 55 mph.  That put me in the rough running rpm range of
      3500 to 3900 but as I actually slowed to 50 the roughness went away and
      the engine ran smooth.
      
      Clue:  I usually go through the 3500 to 3900 rpm range on approach. 
      Airspeed is generally high relative to the rpm.  The time the engine
      almost quit was the first time I expericenced the rough running and I
      was in a hurry to get back to the airport.  Airspeed on approach was
      much higher then usual.
      
      Clue:  After adjusting the carbs one notch richer engine was running
      better.  I flew level at 4500 rpm and engine was running pretty good. 
      Without changing rpm I started to climb and as my airspeed slowed the
      engine began to run smoother.  As I got to stall speed of 35 it was very
      smooth.  Without changing rpm I lowered the nose and began a descent. 
      As airspeed increased engine began to run rough and at 90 mph it was
      very rough.
      
      Tomorrow the answer.  These Bing Constant depression carbs are no longer
      depressing me.
      
      Terry
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
GeoR38 <GeoR38(at)aol.com>
Date: 
Dec 05, 1997
Subject: 
Re: Engine choices - are there any besides Rotax
      
      
      << George, as you can tell, I am no brain surgeon.  I
       didn't even consider such things when I did it (in
       fact, I'm sorry I even submitted it).  All I do
       know is that I noted the reading before the change
       and the reading of the same cylinder under a
       similar condition with the switch installed .   I
       compensated for any variance, and WALLA!, as my
       old pal, Al Einstein once told me, " It's all
       relevant, Ronnie ! " >>
      I think this is in reference to the switch in the EGT circuit and I want to
      assure you . Ron, it is a BEST answer that I had no idea would be forthcoming.
      My pal Al always liked to surround himself with creative people [:-)
      GeoR38
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
GeoR38 <GeoR38(at)aol.com>
Date: 
Dec 05, 1997
              kolb(at)intrig.com
Subject: 
Re: Engine choices - are there any besides Rotax
      
      writes:
      
      << Excuse me George but a guy with a 1935 gasoline washing machine motor on
       his Kolb what does he know about EGT's, now if you want to talk about a
       MKIII with a full instrument panel with plenty of power to spare and a
       good looking Kolb we'll talk. Besides if I didn't sell you that RPM/EGT
       gage "exceptional cheap" you would still only have that thermometer tape
       to you muffler.
       
       FRANK J. MARINO >>
      Sooooo.......what's the point???                            GeoR38
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
"Jim Baker" <jlbaker(at)telepath.com>
Date: 
Dec 05, 1997
Subject: 
Active GPS antenna
      
      For those that have a GPS unit with an MCX or BNC antenna connector 
      and are using a passive (non-amplifed) antenna and have trouble 
      acquiring and holding enough sattelites to navigate by..... have I 
      got a remotely mounted antenna for you.
      
      Found a very nice active antenna from
      
      http://www.commsysin.com/Welcome.html
      
      It's very small ( 2 x 2 in), comes with 18 ft of  RG174 cable (small, 
      flexible stuff), has a non-marring magnet mount or has two screw 
      holes in the base for mounting.
      
      I'd had trouble with the passive antenna as I had mounted it in the 
      lexan  gap seal of a Firestar and the additional cable and connectors 
      it took to make a clean installation swiped a few db from the signal.
      I got the antenna this evening and plugged it up to my KLX100. Man 
      what a difference. Before, I was generally able to track a maximum of 
      four satellites, even with the internal antenna. And the signal 
      strength was marginal. With the active antenna I was able to acquire 
      all eight channels at maximum signal strength including the birds 
      that were close to the horizon. Now it only takes 15-20 seconds from 
      power on to show navigation ready.
      
      How much?  $62.50. A lot better than the $250-300 I'd seen for other 
      active antennas.
      
      
      JB
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Dec 06, 1986
From: 
wood <richard.wood(at)usa.net>
Subject: 
Re: Re[2]: Disappointing (General Cage Painting)
      
      >
      >Yuch! Just the thought of breathing the air flowing through a vacuum
      cleaner is
      >enough to turn my stomach with all the filth and germs residing there. Also
      >the air is heated by passing through the motor in most of the systems I've
      >seen. Am I missing something here?
      >
      >John Caffrey
      >http://www.win.net/~letsfly/4stroke/vw.htm
      >-
      >
      
         I did the same thing painting my Kolb Twinstar. I used my shop vac
      without the drum attatched.Using the handimans secret weapon(duct tape) I
      connected the vacum blower (which was cleaned and the air does not flow
      over the motor anyway)with garden hose.The other end of the hose I duct
      taped to a snorkle. Not very pretty but neither am I. It worked after I got
      the hang of letting most of the air escape out of the side of the
      mouth.Those vacumes are powerfull.If I were doing it more often I would go
      with a good mask but for a one shot deal my hose and snorkle system worked
      great.
        Woody
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
"pattym" <pattym(at)lushen.com>
Subject: 
912 in the rough
Date: 
Dec 05, 1997
      
      
      Terry, I'll take a guess that your chokes were stuck on.
      
      
Terry, I'll take a guess that your
      chokes were stuck on.

      
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
"Thomas L. King" <kingdome(at)tcac.net>
Subject: 
Re: vacuum cleaner use
Date: 
Dec 05, 1997
      
      
      -----Original Message-----
      From: wood <richard.wood(at)usa.net>
      
      
      >
      >Yuch! Just the thought of breathing the air flowing through a vacuum
      >cleaner is
      >enough to turn my stomach with all the filth and germs residing there. Also
      >the air is heated by passing through the motor in most of the systems I've
      >seen. Am I missing something here?
      >
      >John Caffrey
      >http://www.win.net/~letsfly/4stroke/vw.htm
      
      
      I made my own fresh air system-- shop vac head only in the back room of the
      shop, water hose duct taped to the vac, the other end of the hose tied to my
      belt and looped over my head, tied to the mounting hardware  and blowing on
      the face plate.  The face plate was a common flip up face shield used for
      working with a grinder.  That and a large plastic garbage bag and some duct
      tape made a very servicable fresh air hood.  Pull the bag down over the
      sholders and button a shop shirt over it around the neck.  A few strips of
      tape across the back of the head to control bulges helps.
      
      I may have looked like a reject from a martian movie, but it worked fine.
      (I live far enough back in the woods that no neighbors saw or commented!)
      No fogging of the face plate or my glasses in 90 degree weather.
      
      I flushed the hose with water before use, so did not have any problem with
      dust or oder.  The few water drops that came my way were welcome in the
      heat!
      
      Tom
      
      124 King Dome Road
      Our name is King, Our house is a dome, and its OUR road!
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Dec 06, 1997
From: 
Mark Swihart <mswihart(at)tcsn.net>
Subject: 
TwinStar Windshield
      
      
      Does anyone have the dimensions for a TwinStar Windshield? My 
      partner and I restoring a T/S and its instrument pod was in sad
      shape when it was bought.  The pod itself is restored but now 
      we're looking for some idea what shape to cut from lexan for it.
      
      I put a few photo's up on my web page if your interested in the
      project. (More to come next week... :)  
      This link will take you directly to the photos:
      <http://www.tcsn.net/mswihart/twinstar.htm>
      
      
      -Mark Swihart-
      TwinStar List Lurker
      Paso Robles Ultralight Association
      
      
      "Be careful down there on Earth. It's awful close to the ground,
       and somebody could get hurt." 
      
                        -- Astronaut David Wolf 
       
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Dec 06, 1997
From: 
T Swartz <Tswartz(at)postoffice.ptd.net>
Subject: 
Answer rough running 912
      
      I hope you all have not been bored by my ramblings and I must confess I
      did not figure this one out myself.
      When I explained the symptoms to Ed Wilson at Leading Edge, he suggested
      the problem could be ram air.  On the 912 the carb intakes are facing
      forward and mine came with tapered airfilters.  So the higher my
      airspeed the more ram air pressure on the carb intakes which leaned out
      the mixture.  Made sense to me.  I replaced the tapered airfilters with
      round filters that were flat on the front.  I now have a smooth running
      912.  EGT's are lower then they have ever been and rpms are higher on
      climbout.  I don't know if this only affects these 912 carbs where the
      slider and needle are attached and controled to and by a diaphragm which
      is controlled by vacuum instead of a throttle cable, but it would seem
      to me that any installation that would create a difference in ambient
      air pressure between carbs, could also create a difference in air fuel
      mixture between carbs.  Maybe thats why there is a difference in egts
      between front and real cylinders for you 2 strokers.
      
      Later
      
      Terry
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Dec 06, 1997
From: 
Ben Ransom <bransom(at)ucdavis.edu>
Subject: 
Re: Answer rough running 912
      
      >I hope you all have not been bored by my ramblings and I must confess I
      >did not figure this one out myself.
      
      FWIW, i kinda enjoyed this game. Keeps us on our toes.
      
      BTW, i had started that recent bit about higher CHT on rear cylinder of my
      447, and the answer to that is not carb related as I only have 1 carb. (i
      still don't know the answer so don't hold your breath waiting for the right
      answer and a prize.)
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: 
Chm12345 <Chm12345(at)aol.com>
Date: 
Dec 06, 1997
Subject: 
Tail wheel system on the Kolb
      
      Has anyone had experienced a tailwheel control chain or springs ever become
      unhooked.
      
      I had my third inspection by the EAA tech counselor and he mentioned that he
      has seen systems like this (where the springs and chains are just hooked
      together and not actually locked in a way that slack in the chain will not
      cause it to become unhooked) to release if a bumpy ride in the ground or a
      cross wind landing causes one side of the system to stretch and the other to
      slacken.
      
      Just to be safe, we agreed that it would be a good idea to post this question
      in this newsgroup and find out if anyone experienced this before.
      
      Chris
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Dec 07, 1997
From: 
"Ron Christensen" <SPECTRUMINTERNATIONAL(at)classic.msn.com>
Subject: 
VW Powered MK III
      
      Hi Richard:
      
      I know a guy named Larry Bourne from Cathedral City, CA (near Palm Springs)  
      who wants to install a VW on his MK III.  I'm sure he would really enjoy 
      talking or writing to you regarding your experiences.  Will you share your 
      address and 'phone number??  If so, I'll pass the data on to Larry who is not 
      on the net.
      
      Ron Christensen
      MK III, N313DR
      So. California
      
      ----------
      From:  owner-kolb(at)intrig.com on behalf of Richard Neilsen
      Sent:  Wednesday, December 03, 1997 8:39 AM
      Subject: Kolb-List:  Re: How to N number a plane that was built by someone  -Reply
      
      I just finished getting my VW powered MKIII inspected. I really don=27t
      think you will have a problem getting a N number and getting the plane
      approved. The only time were the FAA really could find out if you were not
      the real builder is at the time of inspection. My inspector did a paper
      inspection and made some reference about his assumption that I didn=27t
      have a builders log. He was ready to approve it without one but I pushed
      it under his nose. I have heard of many people never being asked to show
      the builders log. I would spend considerable time reviewing the constructio=
      n of the plane and for your own safety removing some of the wing covering
      to inspect the wings. If you are called on the fact that its used airplane
      and they want to see the logs, explain that it was built and used for
      sometime as a training airplane and you now you want to make it legal. The
      process would involve you  certifying documents that among many other
      things indicate that you are the builder. The main concern that the FAA
      has is that they don=27t want you hiring someone to build the plane for
      you which I assume you didn=27t do. There is a real moral issue here but
      if you want to fly the plane this may the best way. I highly recommend
      this way as apposed to flying as a fat/training ultralight and jeopardizing=
       the FAA=27s very generous cooperation in that area.
      
      This is my =24.02 worth
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Dec 06, 1997
From: 
Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com>
Subject: 
Re: Tail wheel system on the Kolb
      
      >Has anyone had experienced a tailwheel control chain or springs ever become
      >unhooked.
      >
      >I had my third inspection by the EAA tech counselor and he mentioned that he
      >has seen systems like this (where the springs and chains are just hooked
      >together and not actually locked in a way that slack in the chain will not
      >cause it to become unhooked) to release if a bumpy ride in the ground or a
      >cross wind landing causes one side of the system to stretch and the other to
      >slacken.
      >
      >Just to be safe, we agreed that it would be a good idea to post this question
      >in this newsgroup and find out if anyone experienced this before.
      >
      >Chris
      >-
      >       Have not heard of such, but I squeeze my little s-hooks tight enough
      that it can't just flip out, no matter how much slack/bumps. And it is a
      checklist item during preflight.
              
              Richard Pike
              MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
              Technical Counselor EAA 442
      >
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Dec 06, 1997
From: 
Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com>
Subject: 
Re: Answer rough running 912
      
      >Date: Sat, 06 Dec 1997 22:39:15 -0500
      >To: Ben Ransom 
      >From: Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com>
      >Subject: Re: Answer rough running 912
      >
      >>>I hope you all have not been bored by my ramblings and I must confess I
      >>>did not figure this one out myself.
      >>
      >>FWIW, i kinda enjoyed this game. Keeps us on our toes.
      >>
      >>BTW, i had started that recent bit about higher CHT on rear cylinder of my
      >>447, and the answer to that is not carb related as I only have 1 carb. (i
      >>still don't know the answer so don't hold your breath waiting for the right
      >>answer and a prize.)
      >>-
      >>       Here's a possibility to think about: One of our chapter members has
      an older CGS Hawk with a Cuyuna engine, single carb. The CHT's would never
      get even, and I don't remember who came up with the answer, but it was kinda
      like the recent string about the 912 that leaned itself out with high speed
      ram air. Apparently the airflow through the filter, carb, and carb throat
      was affected by the airflow striking the front side of the airfilter, (which
      stuck out 90 deg. to the engine)  and creating a low pressure at the rear.
      He balanced his CHT's by making an airflow deflector and attaching it to the
      inside of the cast aluminum intake manifold just beyond where the carb
      attaches and before the manifold splits. The airflow had been
      angling/swirling through the carb in such a way that one cylinder was
      getting rammed and the other was coming up short.
      >        If you think that such a thing might be possible in your case I
      will get the specific details.
      >        
      >        Richard Pike
      >        MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
      >
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Dec 07, 1997
From: 
skip staub <skips(at)bhip.infi.net>
Subject: 
Re: Answer rough running 912
      
      >>Date: Sat, 06 Dec 1997 22:39:15 -0500
       Here's a possibility to think about: One of our chapter members has
      >an older CGS Hawk with a Cuyuna engine, single carb. 
      >>        If you think that such a thing might be possible in your case I
      >will get the specific details.
      
      I, for one, would be interested in hearing more.  My Cuyuna powered 
      Ultrastar is configured much like the Hawk.  I don't think that I have
      a problem, but more info on the subject certainly can't hurt.
      
      Regards,
      Skip
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 
Dec 07, 1997
From: 
Cliff and Carolyn Stripling <striplic(at)dfw.net>
      
      Rick and all,
      
      I got a FAX from George and Wanda today... I missed talking to them on
      Friday.  If you have not talked to him yourself this is the progress he has
      made on his MKIII so far.  "Have both wings finished, ailerons and flaps and
      all hinged together.  Will start rigging landing gear to cage next and
      getting fuselage tube ready for installation".  Looks like he is making very
      good progress.
      
      I flew for .8 hours yesterday and froze my bippy off.  I don't know if my
      just so-so landing was because of a frozen stiff hand or being rusty for not
      flying for a couple of weeks.  I need to fly more often and start wearing my
      warm coat and gloves. My light weight "down south" windbreaker is not
      adequate anymore.
      
      The Firefly at our airport is almost ready to fly.  Jerry and Gary ran in
      their engine yesterday I think...  I left just as they were beginning to get
      started and it was getting late in the day. The paint job is white with a
      red wedge on the rear fuselage and vert stab (sort of like the company
      Firefly I think).  The panel looks better than "store bought" with an EIS
      plus 5 other instruments.  I really liked the EIS instrument - reported to
      be so accurate with big digital readouts.  I can't get over how different
      the Firefly and the MKIII are internally and yet they are still derivations
      of the same basic design.  I am looking forward to having another "lil
      brother" Kolb to fly around with.
      
      Later,
      
      --
      Cliff & Carolyn Stripling   Him:  Kolb MKIII - N582CC (35.4 hrs)
      (972)247-9821 Dallas Texas  Her:  Real Estate Broker - Texas